Believing in G-d is not irrational.

[Ranger2]

Here me out.
I'm not trying to prove that G-d exists; His existence or nonexistence cannot be proven scientifically, and Bible-bashers, please note that none of my arguments will be from the Bible. I'm not even Christian.

People accept G-d's existence not through tangibly experiencing Him in a way that can be proven with empirical evidence. People accept Him through faith: belief without proof.

Why do I believe in G-d? Because I was born Jewish, raised Jewish, went to Sunday School, and was told that G-d exists. I've taught Hebrew school, I've prayed, I believe in Him. If I had been born to a Christian family I would have believed in the holiness of Jesus Christ because I would've been told so. I believe in G-d because of faith that what I've been told is true.

"This sounds ridiculous! How could anyone be so stupid as to believe in something without being given scientific proof! How stupid people are!"

Well, we do it all the time. Believe in things through faith, that is. In fact, that's the way we've always learned: by listening and accepting what other people tell you is the truth.

Some things in this universe you can learn about and believe in through interaction. After all, the only way to truly know if somebody is lying about something or not is by experiencing it for yourself. Take grass, for instance. How do you know grass exists? Because you've seen it, touched it, lied down in it. You have experienced it with your own eyes and know it exists.

But unless you have a teleporter or time machine, you most likely will learn about people, places, and things that you will never be able to experience with your own eyes.

Take Antarctica, for example. Do you believe it exists? Of course you do. You've seen it on maps and your teachers have told you that it exists, it is cold, is home to penguins, and is the southernmost continent. But have you ever experienced it
with your own eyes? Until you travel to Antarctica, you are accepting the fact that Antarctica exists through faith.

"That's a stupid comparison. You can't compare G-d to Antarctica, because scientists have seen Antarctica, been to it, taken soil and water samples, heck there's even photographic evidence! Antarctica can be scientifically proven, but G-d cannot be!"

You're absolutely right that Antarctica's existence can be scientifically proven. And you know what, those scientists truly prove that Antarctica exists because they have experienced it. But have YOU? Unless you yourself have seen Antarctica, taken its soil samples, actually been there, you are accepting its existence because of what you have been told by others.
You are accepting Antarctica's existence through faith-the same way people believe in G-d.

There's still a hole in that argument! If a scientist has seen Antarctica, studied it, experienced it, etc., then there should be no reason to doubt what he says about it to you. He's seen it with his own eyes, it's rational to believe him because he's seen something that was proven.

And if you were that 1% of the population who have spoken to someone who's been to Antarctica, you may be right. But last I checked, in elementary school when learning about the continents, I was taught by a teacher, not a biologist. I accepted what she told me about the continents and took it to be true, just as she took what she read in school to be true too.

And there are things that don't have to be scientifically proven too that are taken as fact. The Roman Empire, for example. Have you spoken to anybody who was alive then? No, the only real proof you have that there was a Roman Empire are artifacts, documents, and tales written down by someone who you assume was telling the truth about what happened thousands of years ago...

...But nobody doubts the existence of the Roman Empire, do they?

"No, because we have artifacts and documents specifically PROVING it exists."

Well so do all the world's major religions.

My main argument is not to prove that G-d exists. I'm not arguing that atheists are wrong or right when they say that there is no G-d.

My main argument is that the way we believe in G-d -- faith -- is the same way we learn about the world around us. We don't experience 99% of what we learn about in school. I've taken classes on the Civil War and WWII, yet I wasn't around for either of them. I've taken chemistry classes and learned about the anatomy of a plant cell-yet I've never used a microscope powerful enough to verify that mitochondria exist. I've read and studied things that can be scientifically proven, but since I myself have never verified them on my own, I accept their validity and truth on faith.

It does not matter that G-d cannot be proven or disproven scientifically. All that matters is why you believe in what you do. I'm not telling you to doubt everything you hear--of course Antarctica and the Roman Empire exist and existed--but the reason you, me, most people in the world believe they do is because they were told so by someone else. They accepted what they were told to be true-on faith.

Is that any different than being told that G-d exists, and believing?

[Sekhem]

i believe in god and i'm a rational person

i know how you feel

[Scintillating]

Not irrational is a double negative that means 'rational'.

If you say it's rational to believe in God, you had better have a good logical argument or physical proof of God, and until then, it's just a matter of faith, not reason.

[Sekhem]

At 4/21/13 10:47 PM, Scintillating wrote: Not irrational is a double negative that means 'rational'.

http://www.bartleby.com/185/45.html

not in american vulgar english - which i might add is equally as grammatical as "proper" english

[Ranger2]

At 4/21/13 10:47 PM, Scintillating wrote: Not irrational is a double negative that means 'rational'.

If you say it's rational to believe in God, you had better have a good logical argument or physical proof of God, and until then, it's just a matter of faith, not reason.

Please read my entire article. I'm arguing that it is all a matter of faith, but everybody believes through faith.

[Lumber-Jax12]

I believe and do not force anyone else to (though I'd prefer it if they did, but again only by persuasion and not force do I hope people come to such a conclusion).

I understand where you're coming from, but you're argument makes it seem like people believe simply because they put faith (blind faith at that) towards their supposed teachers, whether it be actual school educators or our parents.

By this extant I feel like you can make the claim that people who are brainwashed can be excused because this is what they've been taught and know no other alternative. While such a case can be true, If some Jihadist is raised to believe America is the devil, and must be destroyed, the blame may lessen on his part, but it doesn't take away the fault/repercussion of his action.

That being said, the argument here is that people should still be opened minded enough and have enough intelligence to question what they've been taught.

I have done just that in regards to my particular religion (Catholicism) found that the answers I was given to be satisfactory, so I've stuck to the faith.

[Scintillating]

At 4/21/13 10:56 PM, Ranger2 wrote:

At 4/21/13 10:47 PM, Scintillating wrote: Not irrational is a double negative that means 'rational'.

If you say it's rational to believe in God, you had better have a good logical argument or physical proof of God, and until then, it's just a matter of faith, not reason.

Please read my entire article. I'm arguing that it is all a matter of faith, but everybody believes through faith.

It's so funny when people try to change the meaning of a word like 'faith' so that it blankets everything. But it's simply not true. I don't know what else to say.

[Winrar1337]

At 4/21/13 10:56 PM, Ranger2 wrote: Please read my entire article. I'm arguing that it is all a matter of faith, but everybody believes through faith.

I have faith that the sun is made of penicorns who suck each other off every day and ejaculate sunlight.

What do you think of this?

[BasedBubbus]

is god a bad word or something

[Hikky-Dikky]

I'm not going to give any arguments for or against that. Instead, I'm going to ask why the fuck you censored "God".

[JRob]

At 4/21/13 11:05 PM, SwankyVagrant wrote: is god a bad word or something

I'm not entirely sure about this, but I heard multiple people mention something about Jews not fully writing out "God" out of respect to the name being sacred or something like that. I would look it up, but I feel too lazy at the moment.

[Sensationalism]

You don't worship mitochondria and base your whole life around it though.
You don't push your belief of mitochondria upon others because it will be soo terrible and you'll be so sad if they don't beleive in it.

[372]

At 4/21/13 11:53 PM, Sensationalism wrote: You don't worship mitochondria and base your whole life around it though.
You don't push your belief of mitochondria upon others because it will be soo terrible and you'll be so sad if they don't beleive in it.

HEY! I believe in Chloroplasts! I'm waging war on you because you're process of cellular respiration is wrong and mine is correct! Everyone donate to the Church of Chloroplast and obey our leaders!

But you can actually see a picture of a mitochondria with a scanning electron microscope. neato

[Winrar1337]

At 4/22/13 12:05 AM, 372 wrote: HEY! I believe in Chloroplasts! I'm waging war on you because you're process of cellular respiration is wrong and mine is correct! Everyone donate to the Church of Chloroplast and obey our leaders!

But you can actually see a picture of a mitochondria with a scanning electron microscope. neato

That image has clearly been fabricated by those who would prevent you from knowing the glory of the Solar Penicorns.

Save yourself. Repent immediately.

[BasedBubbus]

At 4/22/13 12:05 AM, 372 wrote:

At 4/21/13 11:53 PM, Sensationalism wrote:

.

[Ranger2]

At 4/21/13 11:53 PM, Sensationalism wrote: You don't worship mitochondria and base your whole life around it though.
You don't push your belief of mitochondria upon others because it will be soo terrible and you'll be so sad if they don't beleive in it.

Irrelevant. All that matters is the fact that for either G-d or mitochondria, you believe in them through faith: somebody tells you mitochondria exist and you believe them.

[Ranger2]

At 4/21/13 11:17 PM, Profanity wrote: Belief in God as anything other than a psychological quirk of mentalizing deficits

Being unable to understand that all of religion can be explained through psychology, neuroscience, and sociology means that you are a stupid person.

Profanity, have you yourself done the experiments mentioned in that article? Or are you just parroting that article? If the latter is true, you are no more rational than those who believe in G-d.

[372]

At 4/22/13 12:23 AM, Ranger2 wrote:

At 4/21/13 11:53 PM, Sensationalism wrote: You don't worship mitochondria and base your whole life around it though.
You don't push your belief of mitochondria upon others because it will be soo terrible and you'll be so sad if they don't beleive in it.

Irrelevant. All that matters is the fact that for either G-d or mitochondria, you believe in them through faith: somebody tells you mitochondria exist and you believe them.

Bullshit, I went to stony brook labs and got to look through a SEM and see a mitochondria for myself. Just like I can travel to Antarctica, or study the relics of old civilizations. We don't believe them because of faith, we believe them because people share what they know and how they think they know it. If we don't want to believe them, we do what they have done and see if we come to the same conclusion. Oh wow and this magnificent procedure, well what do you know! It's called the scientific process!
With religion it's "I believe in this because an invisible entity told some guys and he told us. Don't try to prove it, it won't work, but that's only because God it testing you or something like that"

[372]

At 4/22/13 12:39 AM, stevenman36 wrote: Not believing is one thing, being an asshat about it is another.

AKA - easy people to dismiss.

And Atheists are the one with the Superiority Complex?

When people try to shit on you for not believing in magic

[BasedBubbus]

this thread has left me in need of stitches

[HighWay]

believing in a religion is not a measure of one's intelligence.

[372]

At 4/22/13 12:44 AM, stevenman36 wrote:

And Atheists are the one with the Superiority Complex?

I am not religious. I am an atheist myself.

And oh look, according to your profile, you're 17.

Nah man I'm actually 34. I just pretend I'm 17 to pick up 14 year olds on the internet

[Jin]

faith /fÄTH/ Noun
1. Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

In some languages, these 2 definitions are represented by different words. Your whole argument is just trying to blur the definitions, which is silly. Jk, it's actually pretty retarded.

At 4/22/13 12:39 AM, stevenman36 wrote: I generally find atheists that have 'Superior-complex' attitude towards the religious are usually very bitter/angry/depressed about themselves/their life/everything in the real world

I'M A GOD WARRIOR!!!!!!

[yurgenburgen]

At 4/21/13 10:43 PM, Ranger2 wrote: Until you travel to Antarctica, you are accepting the fact that Antarctica exists through faith.

Equating that with having faith in your imaginary god character is a total fallacy for the following reason:

There are no perceived negative consequences for not believing in Antarctica.
There are a lot of perceived negative consequences for not believing in god. E.g., eternal suffering.

If Antarctica didn't exist, but certain people wanted the rest of mankind to believe that it did, then they would resort to using the same techniques as the religious majority do for making people start believing.

Back in the real world: If I didn't believe in Antarctica's existence, for example, the people who have actually been there would stand to gain nothing from convincing me that it is real.
Why should they care if some idiot thinks Antarctica is imaginary?
Just like how scientists and the rational-thinking public don't bother to try and convert people who still believe the earth is flat, the people who have been to Antarctica have no reason to waste their time trying to get me to believe that it is real (if I didn't already believe it were).

The fact that you would make this thread renders your whole "Antarctica" allegory completely void; if there were any evidence to support your faith you wouldn't be this insecure.

[Ceratisa]

At 4/21/13 10:43 PM, Ranger2 wrote: Here me out.

I agree with the title, it isn't irrational.
but I stopped reading at "Here me out"

[Dragen]

Who is G-d?

[372]

At 4/22/13 01:30 AM, Travis wrote:

At 4/22/13 12:42 AM, 372 wrote:

At 4/22/13 12:39 AM, stevenman36 wrote: Not believing is one thing, being an asshat about it is another.

AKA - easy people to dismiss.

And Atheists are the one with the Superiority Complex?

When people try to shit on you for not believing in magic

I'm sorry but on the Internet, anyone who believes in a religion gets constantly shit on by atheists.

It goes both fucking ways and anyone who tries to debate for one side is fucking retarded.

In essence, you are being an elitist asshole, just like the religious people whose views will not be influenced at all by your argument.

What's the lesson here? Religious/nonreligious debate is the king of stupid debate subjects

dude calm down it's just the internet I don't expect to win I just like to talk about stuff

Also this thread reminded me of this song

[Dawnslayer]

At 4/22/13 01:51 AM, Dragen wrote: Who is G-d?

OP is Jewish. Speaking the name of God (or writing in this case) is traditionally among the things followers of the faith consider forbidden or taboo. "G-d" is sort of a loophole, conveying the idea without violating the tenets of the faith.

[GACBassPlayer]

OP is Jewish. Speaking the name of God (or writing in this case) is traditionally among the things followers of the faith consider forbidden or taboo. "G-d" is sort of a loophole, conveying the idea without violating the tenets of the faith.

Why would a supreme being concern itself with something so inconsequential? Shit is so juvenile, it blows my mind.

[Light]

At 4/22/13 02:19 AM, Dawnslayer wrote:

At 4/22/13 01:51 AM, Dragen wrote: Who is G-d?

OP is Jewish. Speaking the name of God (or writing in this case) is traditionally among the things followers of the faith consider forbidden or taboo. "G-d" is sort of a loophole, conveying the idea without violating the tenets of the faith.

"Yahweh."

Anyway, I can't say the OP's reasoning is very good. Faith in God is emblematic of irrational thought in the sense that generally, those who have that faith acknowledge that they have little, if any evidence to believe what they believe, but believe it anyway. Oh, and accepting that Antarctica exists isn't anything at all like believing in God, and frankly, it's saddening that the OP thinks he can make a valid comparison here.

Not that I feel contempt for those who believe in God, but their faith is by definition irrational. Perhaps those who believe in God and feel that they have solid logical evidence for their belief are more rational than other theists, though.