Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Your post is inconsistent with your topic title. Believing in God could be considered irrational; what you're actually saying is that a lot of our so-called knowledge is also faith-based.

I do find myself wondering if certain things are really 'real' or not; the first time I remember doing so was after reading 1984 and thinking about how there may have never even been a war in Oceania. Of course, people are mostly aware that a SHITLOAD of our history is fictitious. To quote Hitler, "The victor will never be asked if he told the truth." Almost every history book is written with a very specific agenda based off of nationalist pride, private interests, or even simple mistranslations. The only type of history I accept on faith is technical detail about specific battles, since there is no ideological advantage to doctoring such sterile information.

The short answer to why you would be less likely to believe in God than anything else is what you already stated in your post: People have been there and have experienced it. Even though we haven't, it is something that is currently being studied and still exists. You can see photo and video evidence of it, pictures taken from satellite, and you can even see schedules if you want to take a trip there. That, and my father has a friend who was in the navy. He's been to Antarctica. Religious information is almost all in the past. In fact, a lot of modern miracle workers have actually been thrown out of churches because the church simply can't accept the idea that anything supernatural could possibly happen today (I personally believe in a lot of stuff that this forum would tear me limb from limb just for mentioning.)

Of course, I do think that you believing in God is irrational. What you know about divinity is simply a mess of stories put together by people that lived a LONG time ago. Even if the people who wrote the Torah were spoken to by God, do you think they would write down everything he said? Hell no; if I were a prophet I would write down whatever information suited my personal agenda.

One thing I will mention is that taking out the O in God is absolutely ridiculous. Even if there were something wrong with saying his name, or forgetting to capitalize the pronoun when referring to him, God is still only the name that WE gave him. Plus, why remove the O? Are vowels somehow more holy than consonants?

At 4/22/13 11:19 PM, yurgenburgen wrote:

Again, you are blurring the meaning of the word "faith" to try and equate your own nonsensical beliefs with proven fact.
It's common knowledge that religion is completely hostile towards investigation - and your "faith" is no exception.
The truth never fears investigation; I can accept 'beliving' that Antarctica is real without actually going there myself because there is literally nobody stopping me from going there, and the people who have already been there don't benefit one way or the other if I do/don't believe it.

With that logic, you'd also discount any scientific theories. There are plenty of theories (parallel universes, big bang, whether or not black holes are portals) that as of now cannot be fully investigated. Yet you wouldn't call someone who believes that black holes are wormholes to another universe -even if he was just told that by a professor- someone who blindly believes.

My main argument is that we learn almost everything through faith. Unless we actually explore it ourselves (how easy or hard it is to investigate is irrelevant) we choose to accept what we hear through faith.

At 4/21/13 10:43 PM, Ranger2 wrote: Here me out.
I'm not trying to prove that G-d exists; His existence or nonexistence cannot be proven scientifically,

That is correct, it is with philosophy that we can prove or disprove god.

At 4/23/13 10:44 PM, Ganon-Dorf wrote:

At 4/21/13 10:43 PM, Ranger2 wrote: Here me out.
I'm not trying to prove that G-d exists; His existence or nonexistence cannot be proven scientifically,

That is correct, it is with philosophy that we can prove or disprove god.

All I can say about this thread is cool. That's nice and all :<

At 4/23/13 08:23 PM, Kwing wrote:

One thing I will mention is that taking out the O in God is absolutely ridiculous. Even if there were something wrong with saying his name, or forgetting to capitalize the pronoun when referring to him, God is still only the name that WE gave him. Plus, why remove the O? Are vowels somehow more holy than consonants?

It's a sign of respect. Chewing with your mouth closed doesn't prevent stomachaches or make your hamburger any healthier but it's polite.

At 4/24/13 05:48 PM, Ranger2 wrote: It's a sign of respect. Chewing with your mouth closed doesn't prevent stomachaches or make your hamburger any healthier but it's polite.

I think it's presumptuous to think that humans would know anything about divine culture when even within our own culture manners have changed quite a bit. Burping used to be considered polite, as it was a sign that someone was enjoying their meal. Now it's a noisy ordnance. In most places it's polite to finish a meal placed in front of you; in China, it's taken to mean that you're greedy and want more.

At 4/24/13 06:06 PM, Havegum wrote:

My main argument is that we learn almost everything through faith. Unless we actually explore it ourselves (how easy or hard it is to investigate is irrelevant) we choose to accept what we hear through faith.

Somehow I find it easier to trust the evidence of numerous scientific studies, with independent groups being paid to make sure the quality of research conducted is adequate, and that the results are representing reality.

You are proving my point for me. You decide to trust what you are told by scientists rather than spiritual leaders. Overall, you are listening to and accepting what you are told. That's all you need.