Is there a god?

Posted on by Opher

Is there a god?

Let us follow this back to see the logic of it. I don’t believe in god but let’s make that assumption.

In the beginning was god.

Now we can say there was no beginning and god was always there.

Or we can say that god had a beginning.

If god had a beginning how was he formed and where did he come from?

If god was always there where was he? In the midst of nothing? What as? A discorporate mind?

Now if god was always there living in his kingdom – what kingdom? Where did that come from? Was it created by god? What was there before he created the kingdom? Did it always exist? Who created it?

Then god created the entire universe out of nothing.

Why?

He created the entire universe for the benefit of tiny conscious being that he created on a tiny planet that he placed in an insignificant galaxy. Why?

Now the standard answer is that we cannot understand the unfathomable wonder of god and his plan.

Why go to all the bother?

You see once you start delving and thinking about it none of this is coherent or making any sense.

All we are told is don’t bother your head. It is faith not logic. God knows what he is doing. It’s beyond human comprehension.

 

Science traces the universe back to a singularity from which everything emerged – all energy, matter, time and space. They call it the Big Bang.

It makes little sense in terms of my comprehension. It is awesome. It has no purpose. But then why should it?

At least it does not saddle us with false answers.

I like questions.

I am not so keen on answers but I like thinking.

 

So what is the evidence for god?

Well we have a bunch of medieval texts describing miracles and people who have purportedly talked to god while alone up mountains, in wildernesses or in caves.

Can I give these any credence? No. They are unvalidated.

 

There is a wondrous universe of unbelievable proportion and complexity that people cite as evidence of god’s work.

Is it evidence? No. It exists and we do not know how but that does not mean that it was created by a supernatural being. It is wondrous but that does not mean it was purposefully created.

 

We have our consciousness. That is indeed incredible but does it mean that we are created in god’s image. No. It means we have an incredible consciousness that we don’t yet understand.

 

Everything has a beginning end and purpose. That means god has a purpose for us. Evidence for god? No. Just a very human way of looking at things. That’s how we see it. Why should everything have a beginning, an end or purpose. It just is.

 

God rescues people in need. Is that evidence? No. Some people get lucky. The gunman who killed twenty six people in the church the other day killed babies. Why didn’t god intervene then? No I’ve have seen no signs of intervention just luck.

 

People have supernatural experiences. Evidence? Not for me. Things happen to people that they can’t explain. There is a lot we can’t explain. Human psychology is complex. Most of our cerebral operations are subliminal. There is much still to be discovered. Just because we can’t explain something doesn’t automatically mean it is supernatural.

 

I see no evidence for god.

 

It seems to me that the concept of god or gods was created to explain the things we don’t understand – the universe, life, consciousness, and death – to give a purpose to life, to comfort us with the prospect of the inevitability of death, to give us a promise of something better sometime in the future where everything will be alright, to give us a promise that the nasty ones will get their comeuppance. It is psychologically satisfying. It is comforting. It explains things. It’s a nice story. But is it true?

 

It does not explain anything for me. I see no evidence. I do not believe that replacing one set of unknowables with a bigger set of unknowables explains anything.

54 thoughts on “Is there a god?”

  1. Wow! So many of the questions you asked I wondered myself but never allowed due to having to explain them. All of what you said makes so much sense. I’m a person of psychology and I believe that there will always be things that doesn’t make sense but it’s just the way things are. This was definitely a great read and now has me thinking.

    1. Glad it made you think. That was the intent. I love exploring these kind of questions. There are always things that don’t make sense. That is one of the great wonders of life. Thinking, talking and picking at the mysteries is a joy isn’t it?

  2. This might seem trivial, but in this day and age why do we still assign the male gender to God? It is said that humans are made in his image. If I was a woman, I’d disagree.

    I’d rather rely on science to provide some answers since the holy books and religious leaders have none – except the stories they make up.

    Would the universe lose its luster and wonder if we knew all the answers?

    1. I reckon that comes straight out of patriarchal Abrahamic tradition. Other cultures have matriarchal goddesses and would put a different slant on it I bet. Seems to me that it is a goddess who is more likely to give birth than a god.
      I like the stories. It is when people start believing them and taking them literally that we get problems.
      I don’t think so. But we never will, will we?

      1. I understand that patriarchal societies assigned the male gender to their gods – Judaism, Islam, Christianity, etc. Here in western societies where women have struggled for and achieved a great deal of equality with men – how do they participate in a religion that repudiates that equality? It blows my mind.

      2. Historically, due to the misogyny of those Arab tribes, women have been treated dreadfully. I don’t know how religious women square that circle.

    2. Hello! So your comments caught my attention and I just wanted to point out a few things that you might not have considered? Before I get into it I just want to be clear that I am speaking from a Bible/Christian worldview. I’m not trying to prove the existence of God with what I’m saying here, but rather give an alternate view on some of the things talked about here.
      First off, I am a woman who agrees that man (mankind) was created in the image of God. Not just the male gender, but mankind. Genesis 1:27 “So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.” In this verse ‘man’ is clearly referring to humanity.
      Second, the issue of equality. You might of already heard the part about Eve being created after God took a rib out of Adam, pretty popular story (literal or not, I don’t know. But the massage in the idea is what I’m looking at). So you could say that the man was split into two parts. Genesis 2:23 “And Adam said, This is now bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh: She shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man.” They were originally one being. Nothing about that says women are beneath men. The idea of one sex being better than the other originates from us, not God. ‘How do women participate in a religion that repudiates that equality?’ While it is in the majority of religion, it is not a part of the original message of Christianity. If you look at the first Christians, I believe they could be seen as what would be considered feminists. Jesus never treated women the way they were treated in that day (horrible. Would not want to live in that time!), and Paul, in Galatians 3:28 declared that there should be no difference between men and women.
      Finally, why do we assign the male gender to God? He is known as the father of creation. But if you look at nature you will see things associated with both masculinity and femininity. Art reflects the artist right? And Just like Adam, before Eve he was technically both masculine and feminine, so it would seem it is with God. However, He is known as the Father.
      Looking at the first comment that mentioned science. I don’t believe science and God are at odds as you appear to believe. What brought you to that conclusion? Also, have you studied these ‘holy books’ and their stories enough to be sure that there are no answers there? Science holds a lot of the answers, definitely, but maybe we should look at all areas regardless of the garbage that’s been projected unto it (religion). If there is truth there, wouldn’t you want to know it?
      Anyway, my two cents. Don’t want to start an argument, not why I commented on you’re post. Like I said, these comments caught my eye and I just wanted to point out a few things that someone might want to consider.
      Good day!

      1. Katarina – thank you for your thoughts. Much appreciated.
        Yes I have studied many religions in great depth. I went through a mystical phase in my youth where I was searching for answers and meanings.
        It was a quest that abandoned when I began to see all the ambiguity, contradictions and flaws in the writings. I find those ancient writings interesting but not the words of any god.
        My journey took me to believe that all the holy books were written by men and reflect the culture and spiritual understanding of their day. Some of the writing in the Koran and Old Testament is really quite violently unpleasant while other parts are beautiful. It reflects the nature of humans to me.
        The Abrahamic tradition started in a region that would later be call Arabic, among nomadic tribes. The misogyny of those tribes lives on in the writing.
        I do not take any of those writings seriously.
        As for God? Well I do not think so. Whatever there is would be more akin to atomic energy than a man in the sky in my view. But I do not believe in any spirit that is at all concerned with human beings or any creator. I believe the idea was a primitive attempt to explain the mysteries around us. Falls short for me.

      2. That’s quite a claim to be making concerning “studied many religions in great depth”.
        Arabic is a creed of people, a culture of people and a language of people – it is not a region.
        There are many nomadic tribes in the very same region that are not Abrahamic, therefore, it is not exclusive.

      3. I’m a little obsessive. When I go into something I like to do a job on it. In my youth it was an area of great interest to me.
        Yes, I am aware that the term Arab is a loose term that wasn’t around at the time of the early Biblical times. But it is a generic term for the peoples of that region – not all of which follow Abrahamic traditions – but it is sufficient, I believe, to include all the people who live there As you say – it is cultural..

      4. Your obsessiveness is probably due to a lack of Serotonin, which is curable with a proper diet of foodstuffs containing Tryptophan, an amino acid, of which high amounts are present in Pork. One of the main side effects is clinical depression – see the majority of Muslims – but that’s another kettle of fish, isn’t it.

      5. I’ll steer clear of pork then. I quite like being obsessive. Haven’t noticed a great deal of depression and I love bacon.
        I’m not sure you can blame a lack of pork for mass depression in Muslims. Are they depressed?

      6. It’s possible you haven’t noticed due to being otherwise engaged with obsessive issues.
        Yes, many Muslims do suffer from clinical depression due to diet. Saudi Arabia has three times the proportionate number than that of developed countries and other Muslim counties in Asia and Oceania due to a lack of fish containing the Serotonin Omega-3. I’m sure you’re familiar with the phrase “you are what you eat” and it exists for very good reason.

      7. Ha – you are probably right. My obsessive activities narrow my vision.
        I did not know those statistics. I’m sure diet plays some part but I bet there are other reasons too.

  3. A powerful trumpet-blast of reason, Opher! Just been going through my old posts and have found quite a few things which could serve as psalms in a psecular psongbook. Did you see what I did there? (Why is another question entirely!) I’ll bung them in a new post, pour encourager les autres …

    1. That would be an excellent title for a book. Perhaps we could pull enough together to make a whole book????

      The PSECULAR PSONGBOOK of PSALMS

      I like it.

  4. I must say the atmosphere has been much warmer and far more congenial since you stopped your unpleasant trolling. The lack of humour must be a Scottish trait. You claim to laugh but I’ve seen no evidence of any sense of humour. Just another of your unpleasantries? The two of you make a nice pair from the sound of it.

  5. I usually need a lot of evidence to believe something and I find science more realistic and rational so I can totally see what you mean.

      3. What is the connection between man-made religious doctrine and quantum physics?
        Is “weirder” an applicable term to use because you don’t understand advanced physics? Honestly, it’s not that weird at all once one understands the mechanics of equations, but it’s not something very easily self-taught and requires a great deal of undivided attention during the learning process.

        SmoothStones said “The very idea that we are aware of the God of the Bible suggests that He exists.” And you replied “Mr Stones – thanks for your comments. It is always good to have intelligent discussion.”
        Intelligent? Surely you must be joking?
        Surely all your replies towards all these believers in god are a deflection from you true reaction. Given the content of your replies it’s evident that you never had any intention of conducting any discussion and you were basically goading these weaker-minded individuals towards a premeditated set-up where you can play your superiority card against their innocent (albeit debatable) belief that (for them at least) god does exist.
        That’s too easily done and somewhat unnecessary as all you will do is attract the confused and disparate. There’s an element in conceited cruelty with such an action.

      4. Of course it is weird. Equations do not work in the quantum world and it is not easily explained. Beams of photons behave differently when observed. Particles arrive before they are produced. I am only aware of a little of it and it is extremely weird.

      6. Yes, and don’t we all live in one as t’s not an exclusive deal favoring one over another.
        But why do I get the impression that you aren’t any kind of physicist?
        Quantum physics is governed by equations and without them we wouldn’t have anything like the constructive understanding as measured during the last hundred years or so.

      7. Ivor – equations have their place. I wouldn’t even call Schrödinger’s equation a real equation. But there are many aspects that have no explanation. They are just weird.

      8. Now I really don’t know what to make of you.
        Your last comment has completely confirmed that you’re talking out your false teeth.
        You just haven’t any knowledge of physics equations at all.
        Why play this charade? Isn’t it better just to come clean and say you haven’t actually got any idea about physics and certainly not anything of Schrödinger?
        His equation is a physics masterpiece and the benchmark for everything since.
        It’s on a similar scale to the Periodic Table in Chemistry, if that means anything at all to you.

      9. Ivor – do you really think that Schrödinger was where it stopped? I’m no physicist but I sure read a lot about quantum physics. As a sci-fi writer I like to keep my hand in.

      10. That’s not what I stated at all. What I did say was that he was the benchmark for everything since. Which in no way is any indication as you have mistakenly surmised to mean that anything stopped. What stopped? Further discovery? Advanced understanding? No, nothing like it. We continuously advance and it would be damned silly to think that Schrödinger wasn’t a major contributor to such advanced study. It’s all too obvious that you are no physicist because if you were I very doubt that you’d ever make such a clot of yourself by grossly undermining the importance of his extremely important work.
        The undeniable fact is that his equation predicts the future behavior of a dynamic system. It is a wave equation in terms of the wavefunction which predicts analytically and precisely the probability of events or outcome. The detailed outcome is not strictly determined, but given a large number of events, the Schroedinger equation will predict the distribution of results.
        The kinetic and potential energies are transformed into the Hamiltonian (the user name applied to the operator of energy) which acts upon the wavefunction to generate the evolution of the wavefunction in time and space. The Schroedinger equation gives the quantized energies of the system and gives the form of the wavefunction so that other properties may be calculated, such as zero-point vibration.
        Basically, this is how we are guided towards looking for and finding new galaxy’s that were previously unknown. We instantly have an advantage with probability.

        In case you didn’t know his equation can be directly applied to calculating Particle Confinement, Alpha Emission, Proton Fusion, and when applied to the Hydrogen Atom yields no less than three Quantum numbers. Yet, you wouldn’t, quote, “call it a real equation.” Huh? You might want to re-think something there.

        Isaac Asimov was a science fiction writer and a very good one due to his science qualifications as a professor of biochemistry and his unbounded scientific intelligence.
        You claim that you are some kind of science fiction writer, but how could you be with such an incredibly non-developed physics background, coupled with that deeply unintelligent write-off of the Schroedinger equation? I’m absolutely dumbfounded over that. I can’t even begin to tell you the extent of my deep shock over that. Never in my life have I ever heard such dreadful unthinking garbage.
        Why is it that I’ve never remotely heard of yourself. Who publishes you?

    2. Equations do not work I hear you say?
      What’s this then….Scotch mist?…. Time-dependent Schrödinger equation!
      For an introduction for beginners you may read all about it in Wikipedia.

  6. Strongest evidence of God’s existence? That belief in a supernatural being or realm is a universal archetype. Can 50 million Frenchmen all be wrong? Answer: Oui

      2. Maybe Aksanna – but maybe he’s just a human creation like all the religions we keep dreaming up.

  11. I would note that on both sides of the issue there are “unknowables” resting at the very foundations of each worldview. Now the question becomes which champions the most reasonable presuppositions of the two in light of the knowable reality that we exist within; and so on. I would contend that there are answers provided from a theistic position as well as evidence to support it. I write on many of these topics and would love to know your thoughts! My blog is jakebyrd.wordpress.com

    1. Jake – I would be interested to hear the theistic position. There are many unknowables but I contend that religion is manmade and that all the holy books are culturally laced with archaic stances that are unacceptable in this modern world. Religions do not hold water.
      Now whether there is an underlying spiritual force. There is a debate.
      I will check your blog.

  12. Hey Opher, Namaste 🙂

    Perhaps the problem lies in the fact that as humans we always start from a point of separation from something we regard as ‘other’, when in actuality we are seamless with the universe, there is no point of division between ‘me’ and the universe. It is human perception that removes us from an origin and invents reasons why we are then subordinate or submissive to, or in supplication of. Without ever actually knowing the truth all is supposition, however, I a in agreement in that if there is one common origin for us all, then She must be one hell of a Goddess. Woof woof 😀

    Namaste 🙂

    DN

  13. The very idea that we are aware of the God of the Bible suggests that He exists.

    As C. S. Lewis said, if man created God, why would we create one that expects something of us that we cannot give? If it were up to us, why not create one that has no claim on us?

    That seems more reasonable. That’s what I would do.

    Additionally, the God of the Bible’s message of love and unconditional acceptance seems welcoming, but one wonders why it is so welcoming.

    Grateful for this dialogue.

    1. Mr Stones – thanks for your comments. It is always good to have intelligent discussion.
      Personally I do not think we are ‘aware’ of God. I certainly am not. Hundreds of thousands of gods have come and gone – all having different needs and giving their instructions. To have the bible with its version is no proof to me. The fact that humans need, and create, gods seems to suggest more of a psychological need to me.
      I think we create the gods we create because they fulfil our needs – some are exploited by an elite for personal and political means – power – and some for psychological needs. If the gods we create were not demanding we would not find them plausible.
      I like the message of love and unconditional acceptance but would point out that one can easily pick out the verses that promote exactly the opposite. There are sections that promote ridiculous large families and ecological destruction, misuse of animals and smashing babies heads on rocks. It is the ambiguity and contradictions that enable fundamentalists to do violent and destructive things.

Comments are closed.