Can You Rationalize Your Belief in God?

[scandal]

and just to argue the whole matematics thing, mathematics is something that is decided because it gives things worth. how do we know that 1 actually equals 1 and not 2, what if its worth 2? what does 1 really mean?

 

[scandal]

^^^^I never said they were "EVIL" you are calling them EVIL..
Im just stating reasons why I dont think GOD exists..

Those are some reasons to me. LOVE...theres another reason.

now what?

5000

but you infered that those things were why god doesn't exist so therefore opposite of him, and the opposite of god(good) is the devil(evil)...


...so you are saying u dont think god exist because of love? please explain

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

thats the point I was trying to get across, so now you agree that one day 2+2 could equal 5, right?

No. Forget the symbols an consider the concepts. What we know as '2' added to itself will equal what we know as '4'. Yes, it is possible that these symbols can be changed, and they HAVE been changed in the past. Do you think that in Sanskrit they used these symbols '2' and '4'? They didn't. But this argument is semantics. Even though the symbols change, the concepts the symbols convey are the same. Therefore the mathematical concept of 2 + 2 = 4 will always be the same because it is based on logic, which is understood, not decided.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

and just to argue the whole matematics thing, mathematics is something that is decided because it gives things worth. how do we know that 1 actually equals 1 and not 2, what if its worth 2? what does 1 really mean?

It is just a concept. You can have one apple that is made up of billions of atoms. 1 can be divided infinitesimally, actually. But how does any of this help your point? Remember, you are trying to rationalize God.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

Scandal,

Everything bottom lines to this:

If you negate reality then you negate rationalization of anything. Therefore you have not rationalized the existence of God.

So your answer to XxtraMannish is, "No. I cannot rationalize my belief in God."

 

[JLMACN]

but you infered that those things were why god doesn't exist so therefore opposite of him, and the opposite of god(good) is the devil(evil)...


...so you are saying u dont think god exist because of love? please explain

because people "love" their GOD so much...

they would kill innocent people for their cause.

Love is sometimes the one thing we can do without.

5000

 

[scandal]

I agree, but your reasoning isn't going to help your position. They say, "how do you know God is real?" and you reply, "well, how do you know anything is real? You don't. Therefore God exists." This is foolish. They can simply come back and say, "okay, then unicorns exist". Your reasoning isn't rationalizing the existence of God. Instead you are just negating what we perceive as existence. All concepts are based on our perception of reality. So if you negate our perception of reality as possibly be false, then you consequently negate the concept of God. Because you are conscious and question the fleeting nature of things, you have come to this concept of God. Just try to stay on that track instead of going down the path of complete negation. That will lead you nowhere (obviously).

OK let me clear things up for you since words can never really truly explain what I am trying to say(paradox- lol). anyways basicly what I was trying to prove that without some kind of afterlife, reality couldn't be reality. Obviously I do believe in god and I do believe in the world we live in is a form of reality. but to those who dont, I was just trying to explain that you cant question one thing (god) without questioning the other (non-existant reality).

 

[scandal]

Scandal,

Everything bottom lines to this:

If you negate reality then you negate rationalization of anything. Therefore you have not rationalized the existence of God.

So your answer to XxtraMannish is, "No. I cannot rationalize my belief in God."

exactly, but I still believe.

 

[scandal]

It is just a concept. You can have one apple that is made up of billions of atoms. 1 can be divided infinitesimally, actually. But how does any of this help your point? Remember, you are trying to rationalize God.

first off how can 1 equal one if it can be divided infintly? and as far as rationalzing god this is crucial in my point because I am showing just how I can't know for sure god exist, you cant know for sure what is logical and what is not

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

exactly, but I still believe.

No one is questioning your faith. This thread is about rationalizing your belief in God. All you have done is attempted to rationalize your disbelief in everything.

 

[scandal]

OK let me clear things up for you since words can never really truly explain what I am trying to say(paradox- lol). anyways basicly what I was trying to prove that without some kind of afterlife, reality couldn't be reality. Obviously I do believe in god and I do believe in the world we live in is a form of reality. but to those who dont, I was just trying to explain that you cant question one thing (god) without questioning the other (non-existant reality).

there is my passage again so u can read it, again My point is just how one person can try and irrationalize god, I can Irrationalize reality and everything in it.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

OK let me clear things up for you since words can never really truly explain what I am trying to say(paradox- lol). anyways basicly what I was trying to prove that without some kind of afterlife, reality couldn't be reality. Obviously I do believe in god and I do believe in the world we live in is a form of reality. but to those who dont, I was just trying to explain that you cant question one thing (god) without questioning the other (non-existant reality).

Instead of rationalizing an afterlife, a more direct, clear and easier way to explain your point would be to analyze the nature of the self. If you can show the self to be opposite in nature of the temporal body then you can automatically rationalize the afterlife and you can furthermore reason the existence of God, the Supreme Self. The only catch here is that you must accept a reality. You must accept that people are capable of conceptualizing truths based on the fleeting nature of sense-interaction. Otherwise, if you negate it all, then you have no basis for your rationalization of accepting God. You can't make everything zero and then randomly draw a conclusion about God.

 

[XxtraMannish]

No sir, that was a legitimate challenge to you. Maybe you could try to answer the question instead of making me look like an asshole?

Without using a higher power, please explain to me how you think life started?

I have absolutely no idea how life started, so I wont jump to any conclusions. I wasn't trying to make you look like an asshole either, just trying to redirect you back to the original question.

 

[scandal]

I really dont think you were reading my entry, I do believe in reality. believe is the word of the hour. The point I was trying to make is that just like I cant prove god exist, nobody can prove reality exist anywhere other than in their mind.

 

[scandal]

The whole point of my posts are if you cant rationalize something the next best thing to do is irrationalize everything. cause no matter what anybody tells u nothing can be proven, and thats why I said everything is based off faith not just god, but everything.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

first off how can 1 equal one if it can be divided infintly? and as far as rationalzing god this is crucial in my point because I am showing just how I can't know for sure god exist, you cant know for sure what is logical and what is not

ONCE again, 1 (aka: one) is a concept. It equals what it equals because the concept defines it as such. That 1 can be divided infinitely does not take away from the concept of 1.

Here is your theistic example:

God is ONE, yet His ONENESS does not limit Him from being many or variegated, simultaneously. In other words, God can Personally reside in His eternal spiritual abode and also manifest on earth AT THE SAME TIME, for example. And although He appears to be two, in this case, He remains ONE. Your assumption is that something cannot be one since it can be understood in multiple aspects. This is a mistake. Oneness and variegatedness are not mutually exclusive. Oneness is a concept not to negate variegatedness.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

there is my passage again so u can read it, again My point is just how one person can try and irrationalize god, I can Irrationalize reality and everything in it.

So you are saying, "Since I can irrationalize everything, therefore irrationalization of God is meaningless". Someone could equally state, "Since I can irrationalize everything, therefore irrationalization of unicorns is meaningless". So you haven't actually made a point in regard to rationalizing your belief in God.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

I really dont think you were reading my entry, I do believe in reality. believe is the word of the hour. The point I was trying to make is that just like I cant prove god exist, nobody can prove reality exist anywhere other than in their mind.

What it comes down to is that you are off-topic. The thread asks you if you can rationalize your belief in God. In order to do this you must take observations of your surroundings and form a conclusion based on them. If you observe the non-substantial nature of this material world in order to come to your rationalization of an eternal and substantial reality you call "God", that would be on topic. So far you are only addressing one side of the reasoning.

 

[Formaldehyde Rx]

LOL @ this cat trying to use the Laws of thermodynamics to justify the existance of god when they do the exact opposite talk about master of manipulation. Stop trying to use the ontological pov its a waste and all it is is mental/verbal gymnastics.

@STEALTH the second law of thermodynamics disproves gods existence.
"in all energy exchanges, if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the state will always be less than that of the initial state."
(That bullshit demon has been disproven (hint: he needs light to see)
As for how life started (-) god its not easy its not simple and it starts with a puddle of charged particles which progress over BILLIONS <-(believers can't comprehend this time period) of years to primitive bipolar molecules in water then (insert huge time span)<-(believers can't comprehend this time period)
a primitive mycels are produced containing a collectively huge <-(believers can't comprehend this concept) variety of chemical species one of which may be able to reproduce the mycel. <-thats just the beginning.


It comes down to people dont understand the vastness of what they are arguing against. So out of ignorance they create a fantacy to take the place of events that have transpired in physical reality.

 

[scandal]

ONCE again, 1 (aka: one) is a concept. It equals what it equals because the concept defines it as such. That 1 can be divided infinitely does not take away from the concept of 1.

Here is your theistic example:

God is ONE, yet His ONENESS does not limit Him from being many or variegated, simultaneously. In other words, God can Personally reside in His eternal spiritual abode and also manifest on earth AT THE SAME TIME, for example. And although He appears to be two, in this case, He remains ONE. Your assumption is that something cannot be one since it can be understood in multiple aspects. This is a mistake. Oneness and variegatedness are not mutually exclusive. Oneness is a concept not to negate variegatedness.

I'm not disagreeing with the concept of one. I'm disagreeing with how we use it in our society. I'm actually glad you can understand 1 without outside influences. the concept of 1 is a idea, nothing physical but yet once we translate that Idea into the real world many more factors are calcuated in the equation (weight, size, worth etc...) so again I'm not agruing the concept of 1 but rather how in a real life situation "1" has a whole new meaning, supporting my argument on how people decide what 1 is and not logic.