Undertones of Non Belief | INFJ Forum

Undertones of Non Belief

lenina

lenina

Community Member
Jun 25, 2011
299
65
587
MBTI
INFJ
Enneagram
dont know
I have a conundrum:

Why is it that when it comes to the science of nature, people use discoveries as evidence that God doesn't exist, cuz somehow knowing how something is done proves that it's not complicated, and if something isn't as complicated as we thought, well then a greater being may not have created it. I don't see why one conclusion should lead to the next. But anyways it's used as a justification to sin.

But then when it comes to the science of human beheviour, discoveries of the complexities of human psychology are also used as evidence that God doesn't exit, cuz somehow we are just sooo much more complicated than the basics of human nature laid out in religious texts. Again, it's really just justifying all different kinds of sinning.

Hmm, when i lay it out like that, guess it's not that complicated after all.
 
Last edited:
Stop projecting your ideas about sin onto other people.

Also, you do not understand arguments against the existence of god as much as you think you do.

The important thing is that gods are not necessary to explain how the universe works.
 
[MENTION=3667]Meer[/MENTION] no you stop.
 
lenina said:
[...]evidence that God doesn't exist[...]
Click to expand...

failboat2.jpg
 
[MENTION=1425]Korg[/MENTION] i dont get it
 
I am having a hard time understanding the OP.
 
I don't think that people who aren't interested in the idea of God existing are going to think in terms of sinning or consider that whole framework at all, including whether or not they're justifying anything.
 
lenina said:
@Korg i dont get it
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised.

Look, I have to run out in five minutes, so I don't have a lot of time to help you quit looking ridiculous. But let me throw this out there real quick: there is no evidence that God doesn't exist. There is only a lack of evidence that he does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SealHammer and Odyne
Why is everyone being so mean to this chick? Does she have prior history of jesus freaking people to death?

I didn't see anything that bad with what she wrote.
 
chulo said:
Why is everyone being so mean to this chick? Does she have prior history of jesus freaking people to death?

I didn't see anything that bad with what she wrote.
Click to expand...

Hey man, dont you realize this isnt one of the approved discussion topics? We can only talk about abortion, guns, or high schoolish drama.
 
this is my first post where i spoke of God directly or sins at all. in real life and online, they are not a welcomed topics. i posted it under Religion in the hopes of finding others that share my views or have knowledge that I do not.

i think human nature is simple. I think we all seek God, His Infinity, His Power, just the joy of being one with Him. But those things are difficult to attain, so we seek these pleasures through denying Him because it's faster or easier, but the pleasure is short lived as well.

i think by making people out to be really complicated, of having all these undefinable needs and all these complicated problems, we're just, at some level, trying to prove that we need more than God. But more than anything, that is based on a limited view of God. The more complicated the creation, the greater the Creator no?

i think science is the study of His creation. any Truth in science, is just about Him.
 
lenina said:
Why is it that when it comes to the science of nature,
people use discoveries as evidence that God doesn't exist,
cuz somehow knowing how something is done proves that it's not complicated,
and if something isn't as complicated as we thought,
well then a greater being may not have created it.
Click to expand...

This is certainly the generally accepted notion of what the schism between science and religion boils down to.

It is also an example of the difference between extraverted and introverted thinking.

In extraverted thinking, the exterior facts provide the criteria upon which judgements are made.

as more facts come to light showing the scientifically understood mechanisms that drive the natural world
it is reasonable to assume that the mystery of these natural events is therefor gone.

In introverted thinking, the facts are always judged by how the resonate with the inner self.
So if more and more of the natural mechanisms become scientifically understood.
But this in no way remove the mystery of how these mechanisms come into existence.
 
You seem to have misunderstood how science works. A scientist would not try to prove that God does not exist, because that's not how the scientific method works. The scientific approach is to construct a hypothesis and then try to falsify it. In other words, a scientist would actually try to prove that God exists, and the reason most (if not all) scientists are atheists is that God's existence is easily falsifiable. I've dug up artefacts that predate the Genesis by several thousand years.

I've never understood the theory of "intelligent design" or whatever it's called. To my knowledge, there's nothing about human behaviour that can't be explained through neuroscience and evolutionary psychology. Even if there was, it wouldn't prove that your God exists. Where I live, people used to believe that a giant called Ymir and a cow called Auðhumla were created from fire and ice, and that the cow licked some ice and created a guy called Búri who had somehow managed to have a son called Borr, who then went on to have a son called Óðinn who, along with his brothers Vili and Vé, killed Ymir and used his dead body to create the world. I don't see how that's any less plausible than the Genesis, and it's certainly more entertaining.

I personally don't give a shit what people believe in as long as they don't insist on shoving their beliefs down other people's throats, which is exactly what you seem to be doing when you talk about "sinning". This is exactly why dogmatic religion doesn't appeal to me. I've never seen an atheist use science to promote the idea that women should be subservient to men, or that homosexuality is an abomination.
 
chulo said:
Until we know how the universe works I don't think we can conclude that.
Click to expand...

I don't understand how the Judeo-Christian deity ties into such cosmic quandaries as the existence of black holes and the physical limits of the known universe - you know, the only kinds of things that we don't really understand, considering we have a pretty firm grasp on most terrestrial phenomena at present. Maybe you could find the pages in the New Test that talked about Hawking radiation for me?

lenina said:
i think human nature is simple. I think we all seek God, His Infinity, His Power, just the joy of being one with Him. But those things are difficult to attain, so we seek these pleasures through denying Him because it's faster or easier, but the pleasure is short lived as well.
Click to expand...
Expound upon this so it can become an arguable point and not just a subjective statement.

i think by making people out to be really complicated, of having all these undefinable needs and all these complicated problems, we're just, at some level, trying to prove that we need more than God. But more than anything, that is based on a limited view of God. The more complicated the creation, the greater the Creator no?.
Click to expand...
You're falling prey to the most common argument for the existence of a higher entity: the "god of the gaps" theory. It's a logical fallacy; you are claiming that because we do not know one or more things about the universe, that it is the proof for your Abrahamic deity. It isn't. Funny enough, the term "god of the gaps" was coined by Christian theologians just to point out the absurdity of teleological arguments.

i think science is the study of His creation. any Truth in science, is just about Him
Click to expand...
The word "science" is well-defined by scientists past and present, and this is not science. At all. Science is about building and organizing knowledge using observation and testable analyses. Your being ignorant about the meaning of an entire field of study does not mean that you are correct when you make claims about its purpose.
 
Last edited:
why does finding old things mean God doesn't exist? i dont doubt that you found things that are thousands of years old. But why does that mean God doesnt exist?

To my knowledge, there's nothing about human behaviour that can't be explained through neuroscience and evolutionary psychology. Even if there was, it wouldn't prove that your God exists.
Click to expand...

the point of my post was to say, why does proving how something works negate the existence of God. We're just figuring out how He did it.

i think in the present sins are not called sins anymore. instead it's referred to as illegal. to me doing illegal things is "sinning" against secular laws. if i don't follow secular law, i can go to jail. and that's how atheists use their dogma to impose their beliefs on me.
 
lenina said:
i think in the present sins are not called sins anymore. instead it's referred to as illegal. to me doing illegal things is "sinning" against secular laws. if i don't follow secular law, i can go to jail. and that's how atheists use their dogma to impose their beliefs on me.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. What is it you want to do that atheists are preventing you from doing through secular law?
 
[MENTION=6650]SealHammer[/MENTION]

first off, im not Christian. BUT i do think that a primary aim of the Judeo-Christian Bible is to teach moral laws and how to live, not every single secret of the universe. That's like me being like where in the constitution does it talk about Hawking radiation?

second, and this is to everyone reading, humans haven't even figured out how to stop global warming, cancers, depression. our knowledge and ability to act on knowledge is limited. it will improve in time. but we're really not that great. but even if we did solve all that, why does that mean God doesn't exist?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back