Single question disturbing me?

65 posts / 0 new
Last post
myrobot's picture
Single question disturbing me?

Appologise if this is stupid question but this question is disturbing me.
From last 1 month and 15 days (total 45 days) i am trying hard to find reality about existence of God. I am researching, contacting to peoples of all types including all religions from whole world on internet and digging day and night to find reality. Even in last 43 days i sleeping in nights only 4 or 5 hours only in 24 hours.
After all this hard struggle if some one asks me "Do you beleive in God?" My answer is i don,t know. I can,t say there is no God but i also can,t say God exists because i don,t know.
But single question which is disturbing me. As we all know "there is no perfect evidence of existence of God but we also don,t have perfect proof which prooves there is no God". In this situation if there is no God in reality then no problem after this life but if there God exists then it shall be great problem for us after life and on judgement day.
What you guys say about this point.

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

myrobot's picture
I am spending my days and

I am spending my days and nights on digging more and more. Please give answer of my above question.

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
Do you pose the same

Do you pose the same questions when thinking about Thor?

Do you need proof that Thor does not exist to not believe in him?

If I come to you and tell you I am god and you should worship me else you would burn for ever after you die.
Do you need proof that I am not god to not believe me?

It is rather obvious that the default position is the lack of beliefs in whoever makes a claim.
If evidence is presented then and only then, one has reasonable reasons to believe it.

myrobot's picture
"If evidence is presented

"If evidence is presented then and only then, one has reasonable reasons to believe it."
I am not beleiving in existence of God, it is just question that this time we don,t have any evidence of existence of God but if in future after hundreds of years existence of God is proved by science with clear evidence then?

Jeff Vella Leone's picture
Sure, I will believe in his

Sure, I will believe in his existence.

That would not mean I would believe everything he says though.

Especially if he claims to be the evil contradictory moral monster of the christian religion.

ImFree's picture
This Pascal's Wager. You

This Pascal's Wager. You might enjoy reading the counter apologetics at Iron Chariots: http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Pascal%27s_Wager

myrobot's picture
ImFree...

ImFree...
Thank you friend first time i came to know about Pasal's Wager. While study this page i noted points which are mentioned in this thread below.

Pitar's picture
I don't let such trivia

I don't let such trivia bother me. Neither should you. Let the question die and go about living your life. Get some sleep while you're at it. Your psyche will always be in conflict because you are a conflicted person. There's nothing this forum or it responses can do to change that so I suggest getting some rest and living as peacefully with yourself as you can.

Ilovequestions's picture
*Disclaimer: I'm a Christian,

*Disclaimer: I'm a Christian, therefore I'm REALLY popular here*

Just kidding, just want you to know where I'm coming from.

For me, it comes down to the Resurrection of Jesus. The Bible's credibility has been debated, the moral character of God has been questioned, and the acts of Christian nations/groups/individuals have been condemned (sometimes rightfully so). So why am I still a Christian?

It's because the Resurrection has never been refuted. I'll get a lot of criticism for saying that here. But there is a reason why the swoon theory and the twin theory and the passover plot and the hallucination theory and many, many more theories have come and gone. They all are trying to explain why Jesus' tomb is empty. But not a single theory (other than Jesus living again) can completely explain ALL the historical facts BOTH Christian and non-Christian scholars agree happened (if anyone wants a list of facts that most scholars agree on, let me know and I'll give it to you). That's why these naturalistic theories come and go with the centuries. You would think by now there would be a non-supernatural theory that would've stuck over thousands of years?

For me, it's this simple: If the Resurrection happened, Christianity is true and Jesus is God. If the Resurrection did not happen, Christianity is false and Jesus was a liar/lunatic. It's that simple.

If you have any questions, feel free to message me :) *The wonderful responses in 3, 2, 1...* haha

Brometheus's picture
You don't think that the

You don't think that the resurrection of Jesus is disproved in the life of Christians. The Bible says that the power of God which raised up Jesus from the dead is in Christians. Christians have historically, as now, acted as bad, or worse than those without him. Therefore the power which raised up Jesus from the dead, cannot be that powerful. Certainly not powerful enough to raise up a man from the dead, if it can't even change a Christian's behaviour.

Ilovequestions's picture
Very good thought :) I know,

Very good thought :) I know, a lot of "Christians" disgrace the name of Jesus with how they live. But surely there have been some good Christians? Not all of us have burned people to the stake. Some of us try to do the right thing, like Jesus did.

myrobot's picture
Hi...

Hi...
I have came to know that there is no clear evidence of existance of God and also we don,t have any clear evidence to prove that there is no God. I read this article and during studying this page points came into my mind and noted those points and my thoughts about those points are also writtend. I am pasting that material below which i noted during studying this link provided by someone in thread.
Link: http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Pascal%27s_Wager
Noted data:

If there is God who exists even we don,t have proper and clear evidence for his/her existence but we are believing God because If he/she exists then after life we shall be punished infinitely. So it is better to believe in God even we do not have any evidence about existence of God.
But there is one more problem relegions tells we should believe in God 100%(Like Islam). And we can,t believe in God 100% because we don,t have any proper evidence of existence of God. Religions tells if we shall not believe in God 100% then we shall also be punished but our punishment shall less than atheists.
As we don,t believe in God 100%, we believe in God only if God exists we can save ourselves from punishment after life. In this case while we don,t believe in God 100% it is not compulsory to follow religion because there are a lot of religions in the world and all are against each other so in this case we don,t know which religion is right. Each religion has strong arguments to prove their religion right. In this case while we don,t believe in God 100%, we are not bound to follow any religion. It means we are still free from religion and we also have faith in God.
If there is really God then on judgement day we can say to God “God we tried to find you but we did not find any evidence of your existence and we failed to find you, it is not our mistake, God if you knew we were treing to find you then why did you not showed your existence with clear and perfect evidence. God as we failed to find you, we did not followed any religion in world because we feel religions are harmfull to humanity so we leave religion but God you know we also don,t have any perfect evidence of your none existence. But we have only choice we believe because if you exists then believing you shall help us but if you don,t exist then there is no problem after life. God if we can,t find any proper and clear evidence of your existence then it is not our fault because you made us, you would put enough mind or brain in us to understand you then this is not our mistake.” After saying above statement to God, God shall forgive us if he/she is exist.
After all we have weak faith in God but now we are free from religion and all boundries of religions.

There is one more point as not believing in God is unfigvenable sin according to religion even I spend my whole life with no bad acts like murdering and theft etc. If I spend honest life then I also not forgivable on judgement day. While on other hand if some one who beleifs religion he is murder , theif or rapist he/she is forgivenable while his/her whole life spent in crimes. Here my point is this standard of justice is not right standard so I shall prefer to free from religion but with very weak faith.

What you say about these points.

maberl's picture
What if you believe in god

What if you believe in god the way your religion taught say islam. What if God says after your death that christians or jews were right.

you have still lost the game. see my points just keep pointing towards the importance of separating god from religion and then dealing with both seperately. =)

myrobot's picture
I am understanding your

I am understanding your points that,s why i am dealing God seperately. I don,t beleive in religion beside this i am talking about creature of this universe only and i am confused only due to design of this univers.

science's picture
This so called God is

This so called God is supposed to LOVE EVERYONE... believe or NOT believe. Remember...turn the other cheek? If this God is going to "punish" anyone for having thier own belief, or non-belief as is their own free will to do, then that is quite a narcicistic God you have there!! There are PLENTY of good people out there that live moral lives, are honest, hard working, caring, and are good to people, that simply choose not to believe in any God. Someone like that is going to be punished? Why would anyone want to be associated with a God like THAT?? There are plenty of religious, God fearing people that have commited murders, and other violent crime, along with cheating and stealing from innocent people, and preying on the defenseless, yet you are saying that those people will NOT be punished because they "believe?" What a bunch of HOGWASH!! What about clergy that have molested children ( there are PLENTY of them) those creeps will NOT be punished?!

Johnny Moronic's picture
I believe in things that are

I believe in things that are supported by evidence. Could I be wrong, and fail to believe in something that is real, but provides insufficient evidence for it's existence? Sure? You are basically asking about Pascal's Wager. "Is it safer to believe, that way if it happens to be right, you're OK." Go for it. But, you should also believe in unicorns, leprechauns, bigfoot, ancient aliens, Russell's Teapot, monsters, dragons, ogres, pixies and socialism. Alright fine, I just added socialism at the end to piss people off. It exists. I just doesn't work.

Travis Hedglin's picture
"From last 1 month and 15

"From last 1 month and 15 days (total 45 days) i am trying hard to find reality about existence of God."

Well, people smarter than I have been trying to definitively answer this with proof for more than a millennia, I doubt I will be able to do it anytime soon.

"I am researching, contacting to peoples of all types including all religions from whole world on internet and digging day and night to find reality. Even in last 43 days i sleeping in nights only 4 or 5 hours only in 24 hours."

Sleep, no matter how much you research, you will never prove nor disprove god.

"After all this hard struggle if some one asks me "Do you beleive in God?" My answer is i don,t know. I can,t say there is no God but i also can,t say God exists because i don,t know."

This isn't actually the important question, the important question is whether belief is justified. In this instance, I would wager that it isn't.

"But single question which is disturbing me. As we all know "there is no perfect evidence of existence of God but we also don,t have perfect proof which prooves there is no God"."

Why on Earth would it be necessary to disprove that which was never proven in the first place? I can't disprove gremlins, that does not mean that it is reasonable to believe in them.

"In this situation if there is no God in reality then no problem after this life but if there God exists then it shall be great problem for us after life and on judgement day."

What you guys say about this point."

I say that it is a false dichotomy, there are more than simply two options. There are actually a plethora of options. What harm if you worship the wrong god? I some cases nothing would happen, but in others you would suffer as much, if not more, than if you had never believed at all! At the end of the day, this is what I think:

If a god exists and really wanted to be worshiped, he would give everyone enough evidence to believe. Since he didn't I can either assume that he doesn't want to be worshiped, doesn't exist, or simply doesn't care whether we actually believe or not. In any case, I am better off not believing, as there is simply no good reason to.

myrobot's picture
"If a god exists and really

"If a god exists and really wanted to be worshiped, he would give everyone enough evidence to believe. Since he didn't I can either assume that he doesn't want to be worshiped, doesn't exist, or simply doesn't care whether we actually believe or not. In any case, I am better off not believing, as there is simply no good reason to."

I am agree with you, thanks for this paragraph it is more supporting to not beleiving in God and i agree with your explained reasons.
I beleive 99.99% that there is no God only remaining confusion is 00.01%.

Travis Hedglin's picture
Don't worry about it, in the

Don't worry about it, in the 0.01%, the greater odds is in the fact that he either doesn't want worship or doesn't care about it. This means even in the tenth of a percent odds you mention, the overwhelming conclusion would be that it is more productive to not believe it.

jimmyslns@yahoo.com's picture
"If a god exists and really

"If a god exists and really wanted to be worshiped, he would give everyone enough evidence to believe. Since he didn't I can either assume that he doesn't want to be worshiped, doesn't exist, or simply doesn't care whether we actually believe or not. In any case, I am better off not believing, as there is simply no good reason to."

This makes me sad if I'm being quite honest. Ita a sentiment shared by many who reject the idea of a God. I could tell you that there are plenty of good reasons to believe in God, and i could provide plenty of evidence for his existence as well. But what good would that do me??? You'll just refute it all and come up with some ridiculous "naturalistic" explanation that some other atheist told you is true.

The truth is, Mr Hedglin, that you dont want there to be a God. This is why would ignore whatevre evidence that exists, and require for yourself to believe, impossible to achieve standards of proof.

Travis Hedglin's picture
"This makes me sad if I'm

"This makes me sad if I'm being quite honest."

I am sorry you had an unreasonable emotional reaction to my personal musings.

"Ita a sentiment shared by many who reject the idea of a God."

I wouldn't know, I am not trying to represent atheism as a whole, only myself.

"I could tell you that there are plenty of good reasons to believe in God, and i could provide plenty of evidence for his existence as well."

You probably would tell me that there are plenty of good reasons to believe in a god, and then utterly fail to provide them. You see "reasons" need to be "reasonable" to be of any value in this context. Likewise, evidence needs to be conclusive and only point to a single reasonable conclusion to be good evidence. Your religion and all of its apologists have had the better part of two millennia to come up with such if they, indeed, existed. Yet have simply failed to provide anything approaching an argument that did not require circular reasoning, post hoc rationalization, and numerous false dichotomies. You are welcome to TRY, but there are ironclad refutations for each and everything you could represent, meaning in the end you have nothing to stand on.

"But what good would that do me??? You'll just refute it all and come up with some ridiculous "naturalistic" explanation that some other atheist told you is true."

A. If it is possible to easily refute it, it isn't a good or compelling argument by any means or stretch of the imagination.

B. Even if tomorrow we decided to toss out all and every naturalistic explanation for nature, which would be idiotic to do, you would still have UTTERLY and COMPLETELY failed to provide any substantive case for your position. It would not make your conclusions any less untrue or improbable, it would just drag everyone else down to your level. Even if we were suddenly at that level, you still could not provide a single shred of anything in your case worth logical consideration.

"The truth is, Mr Hedglin, that you dont want there to be a God."

You presume much about me and know nothing. I could take time to explain how you are wrong, but it would likely be an utter waste of my time and incite you to proselytize.

"This is why would ignore whatevre evidence that exists, and require for yourself to believe, impossible to achieve standards of proof."

Our standards of EVIDENCE are not impossible, people just use that as an excuse when they can't meet them. Your inability to provide rationally conclusive evidence or logical argument for your position, doesn't mean we are being disingenuous or stubborn. It just means that you aren't convincing.

myrobot's picture
"This makes me sad if I'm

"This makes me sad if I'm being quite honest. Ita a sentiment shared by many who reject the idea of a God. I could tell you that there are plenty of good reasons to believe in God, and i could provide plenty of evidence for his existence as well. But what good would that do me??? You'll just refute it all and come up with some ridiculous "naturalistic" explanation that some other atheist told you is true.

The truth is, Mr Hedglin, that you dont want there to be a God. This is why would ignore whatevre evidence that exists, and require for yourself to believe, impossible to achieve standards of proof."

If you can proove existance of God with clear and proper evidence then prove it here.

Brometheus's picture
Neither are knowable things -

Neither are knowable things - since we cannot be everywhere at once. This is the same reason we do not know that Leprechauns and Unicorns do not exist - but we presume they don't because no evidence for them has ever been found.

If a just god exists and was going to punish you for not believing in him, do you not think he would give you enough evidence to know beyond a doubt he exists?

jimmyslns@yahoo.com's picture
"If a just god exists and was

"If a just god exists and was going to punish you for not believing in him, do you not think he would give you enough evidence to know beyond a doubt he exists?"

Mmmmm not necessarily, not if he wanted you to retain your free will. He certainly provides evidence for his existence, but He leaves enough ambiguity so as to not encroach upon anyones free will.

Travis Hedglin's picture
"Mmmmm not necessarily, not

"Mmmmm not necessarily, not if he wanted you to retain your free will. He certainly provides evidence for his existence, but He leaves enough ambiguity so as to not encroach upon anyones free will."

Bullshit, you would still have free will if their was strong evidence, that is just a lame rationalization you use to wave away an utter lack of good evidence. According to your theology, Satan himself KNOWS god exists, and still CHOOSES to reject him. Your argument will retain no water here.

myrobot's picture
I have came to know that

I have came to know that there is no clear evidence of existance of God and also we don,t have any clear evidence to prove that there is no God. I read this article and during studying this page points came into my mind and noted those points and my thoughts about those points are also writtend. I am pasting that material below which i noted during studying this link provided by someone in thread.
Link: http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Pascal%27s_Wager
Noted data:

If there is God who exists even we don,t have proper and clear evidence for his/her existence but we are believing God because If he/she exists then after life we shall be punished infinitely. So it is better to believe in God even we do not have any evidence about existence of God.
But there is one more problem relegions tells we should believe in God 100%(Like Islam). And we can,t believe in God 100% because we don,t have any proper evidence of existence of God. Religions tells if we shall not believe in God 100% then we shall also be punished but our punishment shall less than atheists.
As we don,t believe in God 100%, we believe in God only if God exists we can save ourselves from punishment after life. In this case while we don,t believe in God 100% it is not compulsory to follow religion because there are a lot of religions in the world and all are against each other so in this case we don,t know which religion is right. Each religion has strong arguments to prove their religion right. In this case while we don,t believe in God 100%, we are not bound to follow any religion. It means we are still free from religion and we also have faith in God.
If there is really God then on judgement day we can say to God “God we tried to find you but we did not find any evidence of your existence and we failed to find you, it is not our mistake, God if you knew we were treing to find you then why did you not showed your existence with clear and perfect evidence. God as we failed to find you, we did not followed any religion in world because we feel religions are harmfull to humanity so we leave religion but God you know we also don,t have any perfect evidence of your none existence. But we have only choice we believe because if you exists then believing you shall help us but if you don,t exist then there is no problem after life. God if we can,t find any proper and clear evidence of your existence then it is not our fault because you made us, you would put enough mind or brain in us to understand you then this is not our mistake.” After saying above statement to God, God shall forgive us if he/she is exist.
After all we have weak faith in God but now we are free from religion and all boundries of religions.

There is one more point as not believing in God is unfigvenable sin according to religion even I spend my whole life with no bad acts like murdering and theft etc. If I spend honest life then I also not forgivable on judgement day. While on other hand if some one who beleifs religion he is murder , theif or rapist he/she is forgivenable while his/her whole life spent in crimes. Here my point is this standard of justice is not right standard so I shall prefer to free from religion but with very weak faith.

myrobot's picture
I beleive 99.99% that there

I beleive 99.99% that there is no God but i beleive in God only 00.001% due to punishment after life only. In other words i shall be fine without religion but beleiving in god only 00.001% while not beleiving 99.99%.
What about my this childish logic? :)
but i am feeling myself now free from all religions and feeling great freedom and no fear of God also because if God exists and i can,t find him/her is not my mistake. It is mistake of God who is not giving any evidence of his/her existance. And if i don,t have enough mind to find him is also not my mistake it is also mistake of God if he/she exists he would put enough brain in me to find him.

Fawzi Helou's picture
the question is , is there a

the question is , is there a creator or not for the universe ? if ur wondering about the jew christian and muslim god or "yahweh" i'm sure it doesn't exist, u don't need scientific evidence for that just read the bible or any "holy" book of any religion and as an aware mature logical human being u'll find out yourself that these books doesn't differ at all from other mythical books or fairytales, they're just not logic (maybe to a 5 y o kid) but the question about if there's a creator other than the one described by religions on the globe may be relevant, but in my opinion i agree with Stephen Hawking that there's no need for a god or creator the universe is a natural phenomenon that may had already happened eslsewhere or many times in other dimensions or universes. we still lack the knowledge and the answers to our origins and the universe origins, but i'm sure future generations will solve that as we did with the shape of the earth and it's revolution arround the sun (u know they sought before that earth was flat and fixed and the sun revolves arround it) same thing will happen to the big bang and many other questions or nowadays mysteries.
just follow the logic inside ur head what ur instincts tells u.

myrobot's picture
Fawzi Helou...

Fawzi Helou...

I agree with you, i am talking about creature of this universe only if he/she exists. I shall remember your advise. I am free from all religions now.

If you talk about holy books of religions then i think if we study these books carefully, then we shall come to know some of them proves itself that there is no god for example in quran(holy book of islam) chapter 112 verse 3 translation is here "He neither begets nor is born," It means God is not born from somewhere/someone and if somethins is not born from somewhere/someone then it means it did not born. 2nd nor something/someone born from God it means nothing is born from God means if God did not born from somewhere/someone then how something can born form God which does not exist

This verse is more near to atheism it proves there is no God.

mysticrose's picture
Your disturbing feeling to

Your disturbing feeling to such question simply means that you're thinking logically and it's good for you. Have some relaxation and observe everything around you and the answer will come unto you without even asking for it.

maryam's picture
Robot,

Robot,

Peace be upon you my Brother in Islam or else in Humanity...

Can you show me anything, anything in this world, that was created by itself? Anything, a pen, a book, clothes, even a simple needle?

When even a simple needle cannot create itself, nor can it be created by evolution, and needs someone to design it, and manufacture it then .... How can this whole Universe, this earth, the sun, the moon, you, and I come into existence by itself?

Everything has a creator..

"in quran(holy book of islam) chapter 112 verse 3 translation is here "He neither begets nor is born," It means God is not born from somewhere/someone and if somethins is not born from somewhere/someone then it means it did not born. 2nd nor something/someone born from God it means nothing is born from God means if God did not born from somewhere/someone then how something can born form God which does not exist"

This verse talks about God.. God is one, unique.. He is not born... Which means He existed always

Now you will ask who created God...

God is uncreated.. If God would be created then there would be no purpose of calling God.

I don't understand Why you people Compare God with Human beings..??

We are creation.. so please don't compare Creator with creation..

Reflect on this verse...

"Were they created of nothing, or are they themselves the creators?” 52: 35-36

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.