I am no scientist or religious scholar but I've thought long and hard about why people believe
in god or gods and have come to my own theory.
An agnostic is someone that believes that there is nothing known or can ever be known
about god or gods.
In my opinion, people are free to be as spiritual as they like, and to have faith in
whatever god or gods give them personal fulfillment.
They think its either the
christian god or no god, and if you don't believe in the christian god, you are an atheist; simple minded people.
I do not believe any of the proposed gods of mankind exist but I make no claim to know for certain that a
hypothetical god or gods is impossible.
As a last note, I don't consider the more or less scientific truth of evolution to be inconsistent with the existence
of God or God as the creator.
One such strand, obviously, is the theme of anthropomorphism — picturing
God or the gods as personal like ourselves.
Science can not and does not speculate
on God or gods yet alone religion.
those of whom can not prove the existence of
god or any god type creature believes purely on the idea of its existence... the notion of what the idea stands for is great — a supreme being with infinite knowledge and power who is behind it (life) all... truly a fantastic idea indeed....
Atheism makes no distinction on
which god or gods do not exist, it is the lack of belief in any of them.
I marvel at it, but don't think it has anything to do
with god or gods or anything supernatural.
Like I've mentioned a whole lot of times now, I'm an atheist,
god or gods most likely don't exist in any way, shape or form however if presented with em.p.ir.ac.le evidence to the contrary that is repeatable and believable I'd be willing to change my stance on the matter.
Is this the God who slays us or the God who loves us, the
distant God or God among us, the God of vengeance or the God of grace?
Or, to say it in modernity's terms of the turn to the subject, the question is whether we
constitute God or God constitutes us.
By attacking the idea of the nice God, I do not argue for a
mean God or a God of wrath.
The crusades were faught by evil and currupt dictators who wanted to control land, not by
God or God loving people.
= > Correct, but Einstein's and Spinoza's beliefs do not change the nature of
God or Gods purpose for creation any more than yours or the Pope's does.
Don't do it, because whenever you
attack God or God's people you will be judged to your face (openly)!!
Trust me, I can understand logically how Atheist
view God or Gods as being the same as Santa Claus but in the end the statement of non-belief is just as wide of a gorge as belief.
All of them
claim God or gods are still actively involved in the lives of people and events that transpire in this world.
for every claim / @ssertion that has been attributed to
god or gods grand power, science has disproved it all, save what can only be taken on faith - and that goes for the existence of god as well!
If your faith is so weak that you feel threatened or get apoplectic because science doesn't recognize your
pet god or gods, then maybe you should re-evaluate your faith or whatever religion helps you sleep at night.
Good questions Vocal, in fact though, has nothing to do with evolution being a viable doctrine... it is NOT the answer... again,
God or no God aside.
The soul stands apart, and something deeper than the soul, the Real Me or self or spark, thus is made free to be utterly alone with a God who is also quite separate and solitary, that is a
free God or God of freedom.
Reason is the default position so until I can come up with tangible physical evidence that he can
verify God or gods simply do not have meaning other than sociological implications of religion.
You see Mandarax, that «certain percentage» is where the Faithful have
placed God or Gods.
If a person
denies God or God's existence... then the same should not have any concern of such a place, should he.