• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

God created or naturally arised

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Back during my search one of my root questioning chains started with "either life has intrinsic meaning or it does not". If it has no intrinsic meaning, than any goals I set are ultimately meaningless. If life has intrinsic meaning, there has to be a source for that meaning.

And I went from there.
If something has a source, it is not intrinsic.

Ciao

- viole
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Sure. That's compatible with the contingency argument. One may believe in the Big Bang and evolution, but the question of why the physical world exists rather than nothing still arises. So, that's one possible way the theist might say God is still needed.
Are we sure that the physical world is contingent?

Ciao

- viole
 

Marcion

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma
I don't see God as the "One between the gaps", God is there all the time, at the Big Bang and inside every particle imagining the unfolding of the whole universe.

What convinces me that God is doing this is the fact that there is life and that consciousness increases in an ever increasing amount of life and life forms (species).
Spiritual practices prove to me that this increase in consciousness can also be sped up on an individual level and the bliss that results from those practices is enough proof for me that there is a God (who is pure love or bliss) behind everything, including my self.

I trust the great Guru's when They teach me how this works. They were born liberated which they prove through their actions and lives and I have experienced in person Their spiritual powers over and unconditional love for the created world.
 
Last edited:

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Every tribe, group, etc had a god. It may have been the lighting god, the thunder god, the wind god, the sun god, the rain god, etc.
To each they are equally valid but to each the other isn't valid. How does one choose?


We are all free to choose our own conception of God.

When you enter a relationship with another human being, you probably have an idealised conception in your mind, of what you consider their nature to be. Over time, you begin to know the real person behind the idealised conception. Your old ideas about the person change, you become more familiar, and hopefully more comfortable, with their true nature.

As with humans, so with God. If you choose to believe in a God.
 

Hermit Philosopher

Selflessly here for you
I see some here that believe in a god and that a god created things but yet in the same breath argue for abiogenesis, evolution and the big bang.

So my question is if you accept everything happened naturally, why do you believe in a god? Why is a god needed in your belief of things?


Because, much as there is merely probability prior to physical experience and interpretation; without divine consciousness, potential is all there could be.

Humbly
Hermit
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
I see some here that believe in a god and that a god created things but yet in the same breath argue for abiogenesis, evolution and the big bang.

So my question is if you accept everything happened naturally, why do you believe in a god? Why is a god needed in your belief of things?
A God is just a type of person. I don’t believe that they are supernatural. Clearly they have limitations.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Thats a misrepresentation of theology. I appreciate your sentiment, but consider where did anything natural came to be, that's the position. There maybe some people who believe that things just came up to be like a magicians work. But I would think you should address the more advance ideas. Lets say Abiogenesis is proven fact, where did the lifeless matter come from?

Ive made the same arguement before along the line of "if eveything is natural, where did nature come from.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Causality is definitely a feature of our universe. That's not even in question. You can't cause the principle which governs causal chains anymore that you could build the process of building things or concepts. It would be a fallacy of stolen concept. We can't speculate if it's also a feature of other universes or if there are even such a thing like other universes. That's pure speculative science-fiction there, at least for the moment.

It sounds like you are saying that nothing caused God (the first cause) to exist. :)
You might not say that is God but what do you think might have caused causality in the universe?
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Well, your question assumes God is somehow only necessary to explain stuff. But as @sun rise pointed out, there may be other reasons for believing in God, such as the desire to have ultimate meaning in life.
It seems strange that one can't find one's own meaning or purpose in life.

Perhaps a deep fear of insignificance is a factor in theism.
Perhaps a longing for the security of a strong-father figure.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
my experience is that life has intrinsic meaning and purpose.
So, you say this, but then imply that this requires a "Sense of the divine":
Without a sense of the Divine, life would have no intrinsic meaning and purpose
Does this mean that if somehow it were determined that this physical existence were all there was to be had, and that "the divine" simply was not a thing, would that suddenly undermine your experience that informs you that "life has intrinsic meaning and purpose?" If it is based in "experience," then how could a bit of knowledge about the state of things you were already experiencing change that?

Because, to be quite frank, I am not sure you can claim to know with 100% certainty that there is a "divine." And that idea existing in such a state within your mind necessarily means that you are informed of "intrinsic meaning and purpose" to your life regardless.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
The big bang and evolution are not against the Bible imo since they do not speak to creation, unless one is a young earth creationist, it is only abiogenesis which is a problem, the giving of life.
So a God is needed for the creation and the giving of life and for the laws of physics and for holding everything together and keeping it going, and for the salvation of humans so we don't just die and stay dead, and for having told us how to live and for giving us what we need to live and etc etc.

That there is creator god doesn't mean, that you won't die.
A creator god is not the same as God.
 

Magical Wand

Active Member
Are we sure that the physical world is contingent?

Ciao

- viole

I'm not sure it is. But I particularly don't think this argument is correct. I merely mentioned it to make my point about why some people might still think God is needed, even though they accept the Big Bang theory and evolution by natural selection.
 

epronovost

Well-Known Member
what do you think might have caused causality in the universe?

That question is fractally wrong. It's akin to asking what color is music or what was before time. Time is what allows you to make temporal inference. Causality is what allows you to make causal inference and chains. If something could cause causality it would imply that causality existed before itself which is of course impossible. Things exist or they don't. Causal chains and relationship exist because causality exist. Causality is, by necessity, uncaused, as are several other fundamental characteristics of the universe like spacetime and some of its phenomenon like radioactive decay. These are spontaneously appearing characteristics and events not caused ones. Causality is a property of things that happen in a universe with spacetime and energy.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member

I'm not sure what I can say beyond my statement about my internal experience.

So, you say this, but then imply that this requires a "Sense of the divine":Does this mean that if somehow it were determined that this physical existence were all there was to be had, and that "the divine" simply was not a thing, would that suddenly undermine your experience that informs you that "life has intrinsic meaning and purpose?" If it is based in "experience," then how could a bit of knowledge about the state of things you were already experiencing change that?

Because, to be quite frank, I am not sure you can claim to know with 100% certainty that there is a "divine." And that idea existing in such a state within your mind necessarily means that you are informed of "intrinsic meaning and purpose" to your life regardless.

Some have speculated we're living in a simulation. How do I prove with 100% certainty that I'm a human being and not part of a simulation? I can't be 100% certain and neither can anyone else be certain they are real human beings.

All I can really claim is that I have a personal conviction that truth and love have intrinsic meaning and that there's a source for that meaning.

And along with that to acknowledge that people will disagree and that's fine with me partly based on my former atheism. And that includes applauding anyone who dedicates him- or her-self to truth.
 

alypius

Active Member
I see some here that believe in a god and that a god created things but yet in the same breath argue for abiogenesis, evolution and the big bang.

So my question is if you accept everything happened naturally, why do you believe in a god? Why is a god needed in your belief of things?

Is there a difference between accounting for change (which evolution and big bang do) and accounting for the existence of anything at all?
 
Top