Do You Know Why You Don't Believe? (beliefs, experience, atheist)

[Super Universe]

If someone tells you that your neighbor just got a cat, you choose to believe it because it is of no concern to you. You do not need to change to believe it.

If suddenly you were to believe in God. Well, that would just change everything now wouldn't it?

What would it change?

[Buttercup]

Originally Posted by Super Universe

Why are you upset? Why are you afraid? Why do you feel that God has not done enough for you?

I've already answered these questions twice. Please quit trying to sound like my mother. You needn't worry about my emotional well being, thank you.

Give me your top three impossible questions, then we'll work on your next three impossible questions afterwards.

1. How many teaspoons of water in the Pacific Ocean?
2. How many pounds of salt in the Mediterranean Sea?
3. How many fish in all the oceans?

I don't know how the universe formed? I wasn't there, no. But then, neither were your scientists yet they don't just say "I don't know" and give up pondering. Still, they are quite the role models for you, aren't they? They are your god.

What exactly is your point with the above statement? That science should not investigate mysteries of the universe?

[Super Universe]

Originally Posted by Ozzie

I'm suggesting that using ego as a support for the proposition "God exists" might be motivated by self-preservation.
I suppose you might like to ask the audience how they define "death".

I believe you misunderstood the OP. I did not use ego as a support for the proposition that "God exists".

In the last sentence of the OP, I said that ego was the main reason for not believing.

[Super Universe]

Originally Posted by Buttercup

I've already answered these questions twice. Please quit trying to sound like my mother. You needn't worry about my emotional well being, thank you.

1. How many teaspoons of water in the Pacific Ocean?
2. How many pounds of salt in the Mediterranean Sea?
3. How many fish in all the oceans?

What exactly is your point with the above statement? That science should not investigate mysteries of the universe?

[/size]

I'm not worried one bit about your emotional well being. It's not like you live next to me. Uh, you don't, do you?

1. A lot
2. More than a bucketfull
3. One multiplied by X.

I'm saying that you look for your scientists to explain everything for you but even your scientists admit that they don't know many things. On the other side, religious people look to their religious leaders to explain their own religious books yet even they do not understand it all.

How come no one tries to figure things out for themselves?

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Super Universe

You know what Jay, how about joining a debate ...

I will gladly 'join the debate' as soon as you prove capable of a cogent argument. So, tell me, what is your criteria for claiming a result to be the product of 'intelligent design'?

[Nanda]

Originally Posted by Super Universe

Then don't.

Not a problem.

[Buttercup]

Originally Posted by Super Universe

I'm not worried one bit about your emotional well being. It's not like you live next to me. Uh, you don't, do you?

Trick or Treat!

1. A lot

2. More than a bucketfull
3. One multiplied by X.

Thank you for your profoundly astute answers. I think I'll skip the next three impossible questions.

I'm saying that you look for your scientists to explain everything for you but even your scientists admit that they don't know many things. On the other side, religious people look to their religious leaders to explain their own religious books yet even they do not understand it all

How come no one tries to figure things out for themselves?

Contrary to what you might believe, since becoming agnostic I've discovered that atheists/agnostics ask more questions and do more introspection about the universe than any other group of people I've known so far. They know they don't have all the answers so they keep their ears and eyes open just in case something good stops by.

[Fluffy]

Originally Posted by Super Universe

Cause and effect particles do not have sentience, thus, they cannot form that which they cannot imagine. They cannot become more than they are.

I don't know what the difference is between "cause and effect" particles and particles that cannot be described as "cause and effect". However, I agree that any sort of particle is not sentient.

However, there are many examples of particles forming things that they cannot imagine (since they have no imagination). For example, water is formed from 2 hydrogen atoms and 1 oxygen atom. This happens despite the individual atoms being unable to imagine water. Another example would be the development of a zygote into a human being.

Originally Posted by Super Universe

Evolution, while true, does not explain the origin of life. Evolution of energy/matter does not explain the origin of physical laws that control cause and effect particles.

Inferring from the lack of an explanation is committing to an argument from ignorance which is a fallacy.

The correct response to not knowing how life formed would be agnosticism not theism or atheism (before you ask, my atheism is not a response to this).