Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Do you believe in god? and why

  1. May 21, 2003 #1
    ok simple topic my view is that why should i belive in a god just becuase religion says he exists. im the type of person that likes to have proof of something before i belive in it. so if you can prove god exists please do so here and i will start believing.
  2. jcsd
  3. May 21, 2003 #2
    What kind of "proof" you think would make you belief?

    If they say, for instance "god created the universe", and then they state: "see, the universe exist, it was god's work" would you accept that as proof?

    The point is of course, if you start believing based on that argument, then you are an easy believer.

    It does not proof anything. Because the proof would then also have to imply that, if God did not exist, or had not existed, no universe would have been there.

    It is however impossible for the universe, for the material world to fail existence. Because it exists now, it just means that it had existed in the undefinite past, and will continue to exist in the undefinate future. Without any help of God.

    If the existence of the universe thefore can be hold to be not dependend on the existence of God, then no proof for God can be given.

    To assume God does exist, and created the universe, contains the assumption of a negative, namely the assumption that without God's creation, the universe would NOT exist, which is a sharp and profound contradiction. To assume God (as creator of the universe) implies one has to assume that without God, the universe would NOT be existent...
    Last edited: May 21, 2003
  4. May 21, 2003 #3
    I can prove nothing, either one way or the other, sorry...
  5. May 21, 2003 #4
    drdeath - I see you're a new poster here. I don't think you'll need to ask for proof here.

    There is:

    1. No proof to a false claim. Thus no proof to the existant of a mythological character.

    2. All proof to a true claim. Thus all proof shows mythology remains mythology.

    A mythology is a system. It exists only in the exact wording of the mythology. Nothing not mentioned in it exists in that mythological system. It's simply an error over superimposition.

    In reality no such mythological God exists. But in various mythologies, such a creature exists. It's as simple as that.

    I hardly think the burden of proof lies on someone proving MEDUSA doesn't exist. Rather, it is obvious that MEDUSA remains merely a mythological character. There also is no burden of proof to prove she does exist, because so quickly we can see she does not, it takes no time!
  6. May 21, 2003 #5
    Welcome to the PFs, drdeath! :smile:

    Your topic is a good one, but it shouldn't have been posted in the Philosophy Forum. There is a sub-section of this Forum (called the Religion Forum), which is where the Mentors would prefer threads about God to be posted.
  7. May 21, 2003 #6


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Re: Re: do you believe in god? and why

    Indeed. :wink:

    "We appologize for the inconvinience."
    Douglas Adams
  8. May 22, 2003 #7

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Nothing can be proven beyond all doubt.
    One can never prove a negative.

    ->No belief (system) is or ultimately ever can be justified by logic.

    -->To believe or not to believe; each requires a leap of faith

    --->If any belief [including believing in nothing] is a matter of
    faith, then I can never make a logical choice about beliefs.

    -----> therefore I am free to choose my beliefs

    ------->I am compelled by experience to choose belief in God over
    belief in nothing.
  9. May 22, 2003 #8
    Re: Re: do you believe in god? and why

    1. Errors
    2. There indeed an infinite amount of "beliefs" meaning claims, that can be justified by logic.
    3. The leap of faith exists. However, it only makes you look bad when you take a HUGE leap towards a disproven claim, when their is a proven claim which takes so little leap it's barely a visible crack.
    4. If we define a "belief" as simple some state of accepting a claim, there are claims which take no leap of faith. ZERO, not A LITTLE, but zero. Realize this.
    5. You're free to choose beliefs, yes. But when ones poor choices affect other people aside from oneself, others will indeed ridicule you for negatively affecting others. Thus by choosing poor beliefs, you are anti-humanitarian.
    6. To say you are compelled by experience to choose God is simply poor poor brain usage. Experience could only bring about atheism. It's your emotional fixation that brings you to such a conclusion.
    7. Nothing in reality will ever bring someone towards an unrealistic, irrational claim acceptance.
    8. Accept it. Or again choose to belief against fact.
    9. Ivan, to increase the quality of these boards, I am going to put you on my ignore list. Just want you to know that I won't see anything directed at me, unless for a reason I choose to unblock certain posts. Highly unlikely.
  10. May 22, 2003 #9
    I don't think one can prove the existence of God. I don't think one can disprove it either.
  11. May 22, 2003 #10


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Indeed, but even that claim is not absolute, is it ? :wink:
    btw, nor can one disprove pink ellephants
    or the undeniable fact that a billion dollars
    are going to matirialize in front of me momentarily.

    Live long and prosper.
  12. May 22, 2003 #11
    All claims in reality can be properly addressed in reality. It's a fundamental, but no, perhaps not widely accepted.

    I do not know as I do not hear of this often.

    I assert it as such however. But remember what I said about the infinite chance occureance.

    Let us say for a minute that all the gods we know of on earth were all proven to be false.

    Now, remove your god bias (even me) for a minute, or just ten seconds.

    What is the given liklihood that the universe bares the existance of a randomly chosen claim?

    In other words, think of all the possible claims of existance one could propose out of the blue. Nearly all of them are false.

    Thus, with the god bias removed, we see how insanely impossible (almost) it is. Right?

    I mean to say, while the claim can absolutely be addressed. Regardless of what existance claim we're talking about, my Infinite Chance Occurance concept really limits it down doesn't it?
  13. May 22, 2003 #12


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Completly ridiculous !
    According to what "judge" ? What reasoning
    system ? Why THAT system ? What system justifies
    GR and QM and not anything else ?

    Doubt or shout !

    Peace and long life.
  14. May 22, 2003 #13
    Ridiculous? It's merely logic and stats. I hope you weren't serious. I'm too old to explain a claim so easy to understand. If no joke, please research.
  15. May 22, 2003 #14


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Science - observation dictates what we should
    assume (like GR and QM). Without it, as you implied,
    how can you decide anything ?! :wink:
    btw, observation does not lead to absolute
    assumptions(probably, though possibly not,
    probably and so on... ).
    Last edited: May 22, 2003
  16. May 22, 2003 #15


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Hmm... Perhaps I misunderstood what you
    were trying to say, if so - I appologize.
    If you simply meant - propose explanations to
    the Universe WITH observed data in mind, then
    my personal opinion is that "explanation" -
    god or anything else for that matter, does not
    apply. ALL we have is observation, the rest
    as they say is "dust in the wind".

    Live long and prosper.
  17. May 22, 2003 #16
    drag - how come your posts are always shoved over to the left side of the box? Are you hitting return constantly and on a lower resolution?

    They look like poetry in a poetry book. It's annoying! And they become alot longer and harder to read because so many line breaks!
  18. May 22, 2003 #17


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Because otherwise they break in the middle and you
    have single words in between the lines.
    Sorry ! I just thought this is more comfortable than
    the above.
    Last edited: May 22, 2003
  19. May 22, 2003 #18
    Single words in between lines? What? Maybe your computer has a view problem or something....
  20. May 22, 2003 #19
    How can you prove that Atheism exists? Does not Atheism, like Theism, result from the "constructs" of one's mind? If you can prove Atheism exists then I too will start believing!
  21. May 22, 2003 #20
    You are quite confusing here. Why do you want a proof of the existence of Atheism? Isn't it the case that 'Atheism' lends it's existence on the fact that people consider themselves atheists?
    Same as for Theism?
    Second, one can not believe Atheism, or even Theism. Atheism like Theism can be considered to have existence, independend of our beliefs. Philisophy also exists, wether I am familiar with it, or know about it or not. Also, no 'belief' in Philosophy is necessary, for philosophy to exist. Philosophy exists due to the fact that this discipline of thought is practised.

    You are probably confusing these things with the thesis and things which are stated within Atheism (the conviction, that a God does not exist), which is of course something entirely different.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook