i attended a private school for 1st through 8th grade. every single day of my school life, we had religion class. in 8th grade, i began my questioning of God. over the years since then, i have been studying darwins theory and the like, and i have come to a conclusion.



Did we merely create God to fill a gap we couldn't explain with science?

i have been questioning my belief ,based solely on this question. if anybody has any valid feedback,i'd like to hear it.

quote:Originally posted by YouForgotPoland:





Did we merely create God to fill a gap we couldn't explain with science?



In my opinion, yes; but this is very arguable, and some might say that even if we did create god is doesn't make it any less real.

Cheers,

Lost

My thought is, if there was a god, why would he/she/it create atheists? Godhood automatically means omnicience, so

A. Why would you even bother with creation?

B. Why would you deny your creations knowlege of their creator?

And don't give me the free-will argument, you can't have free will if you were created by a god.

quote:Originally posted by gudis:

My thought is, if there was a god, why would he/she/it create atheists? Godhood automatically means omnicience, so

A. Why would you even bother with creation?

B. Why would you deny your creations knowlege of their creator?

And don't give me the free-will argument, you can't have free will if you were created by a god.

sure you can. explain why you cannot.

God was created by rulers/leaders way back in the day as a way to control peoples behavior. look at the 10 commandments...if everyone obeyed them we would have very few problems in society. so since some people are not afraid of consequences on this world, old rulers wanted to instill fear of what is to come in the next one. that is where religion comes from....as well as giving weak people a crutch to lean on when they are going through a rough time. Karl Marx said it best, "Religion is the opiate of the masses." and it's so true.

quote:Originally posted by YouForgotPoland:

i attended a private school for 1st through 8th grade. every single day of my school life, we had religion class. in 8th grade, i began my questioning of God. over the years since then, i have been studying darwins theory and the like, and i have come to a conclusion.



Did we merely create God to fill a gap we couldn't explain with science?

i have been questioning my belief ,based solely on this question. if anybody has any valid feedback,i'd like to hear it.



gods were around long before the idea of one single and supreme deity. the concept and term god, gods, or goddesses was employed as a very efficient and practical way for people to make some sense of an otherwise completely confusing social structure in pre-monotheistic times.

hunting and gathering societies are by nature very egalitarian. only elders and perhaps people who have proven some extraordinary perceptive abilities (i.e., shaman) are seen as possessing a greater degree of power, wisdom, or destiny, which then affords them greater influence over the direction of the tribe. but it is only marginally more influence than any other member, so they are not thought of as different entities, just more powerful people.

with the dawn of civilization, the increase in complexity of wealth and influence led (and continues to lead) to a stratification of archetypal personalities. among these is the personality type of the deity - a person or a people whose wealth, talent, and/or political influence is so much greater than the vast majority of human society that it is more practical and accurate to consider them as a different kind of entity altogether.

how else would a simple hunter man with no earthly possessions living a nomadic lifestyle in a small family tribe of only a few members understand an ancient emperor or pharaoh who commanded tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of civilians and lived in a massive architectural structure built as a monument to his power (or divinity)?

just a possibility anyways.

As an actual answer, and not a run-on sentence, I'll give you my non-angsty atheist point of view.

God has throughout history been used as a form of exploitation rather than worship. While the layman may have believed in god, the leaders used it as manipulation, and openly, too. Nowadays it's a little more covert, but if you read any history textbook, it is obvious the rampant corruption. And no doubt in 50 years the rampant corruption of our time will be exposed in texts.

Anyway.

The truth of the matter is, not even the leaders believed in what they were preaching. When you had popes with mistresses and even sons (pre-protestant era), extorting money from the people and creating absurd mandates, you can safely say they aren't "following the word of God."

Religion, as I define it, is a character flaw. It doesn't have to be a large one, although it can be, it can be as big a character flaw as "being annoying." The point is if one feels empty because they have no religion, it's not that they're a bad person, it's just that logically speaking, they're wanting something that they dont need, and essentially, don't want, either. The point is that we shouldn't have to fall back on religion in the FIRST place.

So I would obviously say yes, he was created to fill a gap. To me, spirituality, the paranormal, religion; they're all the same: they are all supernatural things created by man and blatantly untrue (I realise I'm being harsh here but I'd rather be truthful than soft). Now that we can explain most of the things God was used to explain, it mystifies me as to why we still latch on to him.

Did man create God? I don't know.

Are many of the descriptions of God man made? Most likely.

Whenever you deal with exclusive Gods, such as the christian view that their description of God is the only correct one. You then must realize that everyone elses God must be man made.

Taking fundementalist christianity as an example. If the fundementalists version of God is true, then that means the liberal christian's God is partially man made, the Muslims God is even more man made, the Hindu's God is even more man made, etc.

Now, if you compare the description of the fundi God and other Gods that must be man made, many similarities arise. If this supposed real God is very similar to the man made Gods, then it could lead to the conclusion that he is man made as well.

Another example that man possibly greated God, is how God acts vs. how is followers act. Often God thinks remarkably like his followers. He has emotions, and supports the actions they take. Using the bible again as an example, in the old testament God is very emotional, orders the slaughter of an entire city because some in it have ticked off his chosen people, etc. then we see in the new testament a different God, one that is less emotional and violent, often supporting peace over violence. God often seems to take the side and attitude of his followers.

And of course, as you mentioned, an explanation for things they didn't understand. As we move further into the future, demon possession, miracles, etc. Seem to have decreased by quite a bit. The more we understand the less it seems like God (and other supernatural powers) are active parts in our lives.

i'd just like to note that i forgot to mention i was talking about solely christianity...it is a common atheist (subconscious) misconception that catholicism/christianity are (is) the only religion(s) worth attacking. i simply was using it as an example, since youforgotpoland seems to be from the judeo-christian background.

The sites that i posted, i believe covers this topic.. ( i have to admit that i have just started listening to part one-- i've been listening to this guy on my way to work, but this series i just started on my way to the gas station today).

each of these parts are windows media files and are about 28 minutes long.

if anyone is interested in listening to more, goto http://www.rzim.org/index.php

Anyway, i think this guy is interesting and he covers some 'tough' subjects that i think many in MGCBtSOoYG will be enjoy (agreeing with may be a different story, but oh well).

in particular, i think Eil, Rust, and maybe Sean would be most equipt to handle this guys level (in my opinion).

http://resources.christianity.com/ministries/rzim/main/talkInfo.jhtml?id=4970&JServSessionIdroot=jr4mj78bb2

http://resources.christianity.com/ministries/rzim/main/talkInfo.jhtml?id=4971&JServSessionIdroot=jr4mj78bb2

http://resources.christianity.com/ministries/rzim/main/talkInfo.jhtml?id=4972&JServSessionIdroot=jr4mj78bb2

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_acid:

As an actual answer, and not a run-on sentence, I'll give you my non-angsty atheist point of view.



is that a knock at my post?

quote:Originally posted by xtreem5150ahm:

The sites that i posted, i believe covers this topic..

cool, thanks, i'll take a listen when i get a chance.

quote:Originally posted by firefighter12:

sure you can. explain why you cannot.



OK if we operate on the assumption that God is both omniscient and omnipotent then:

A.God knows exactly what we will do every second of our lives before we are born.

B.God created us in such a manner that we have to follow his/her/its "plan" as a matter of causality.

If you know everything and control everything, nothing can be spontaneous.

I remember once when I was a kid, standing in the hallway thinking "Is God expecting me to turn left now or turn right?" I turned left and thought "Damn, thats what he was expecting me to do"

haha, that's great... but i think you posted in the wrong thread.

quote:Originally posted by gudis:

OK if we operate on the assumption that God is both omniscient and omnipotent then:

A.God knows exactly what we will do every second of our lives before we are born.

B.God created us in such a manner that we have to follow his/her/its "plan" as a matter of causality.

If you know everything and control everything, nothing can be spontaneous.

I remember once when I was a kid, standing in the hallway thinking "Is God expecting me to turn left now or turn right?" I turned left and thought "Damn, thats what he was expecting me to do"

But what if god's plan is for us to make our own plans? What if he knows what we are going to do but allows it anyways because it fits in to his plan of free will? He may know what you're going to do, but he doesn't necessarily make us do what we do.

quote:OK if we operate on the assumption that God is both omniscient and omnipotent then:

uh...what? you do realise the fallacy of that argument, right? You're defeating the entire purpose of the debate. You're essentially saying "let's assume i'm right. now, do you see how you are wrong?"

the debate is whetehr we should operate on that assumption in the first place.

Since I, in my argument, say that god does not exist, I would obviously follow up with, god isn't omnipotent OR omniscient, since he/it/ethereal-concept-which-our-minds-cannot-grasp does not exist.

he's not defeating the purpose of the debate, he's pointing out a flaw in the logic of the initial claim. he's not giving it credence.

very simply, the premises of the claim are:

1. god exists.

2. god is omnipotent.

3. god is omniscient.

4. god gave us free will.



the conclusion is the necessity of faith, but that's not important.

gudis is saying that the premises contradict, and therefore the conclusion is not proven.

quote:he's not defeating the purpose of the debate, he's pointing out a flaw in the logic of the initial claim. he's not giving it credence.

very simply, the premises of the claim are:

1. god exists.

2. god is omnipotent.

3. god is omniscient.

4. god gave us free will.



I'd just like to note that this splinter of the conversation did not begin as the topic.

You can not create a catch 22 and then wonder why no one can disprove it. God exists...because he's omnipotent. He's omnipotent...because he's omniscient. Ad nauseum.

The point is he's beyond (or seems to be) the stage of using that as an accepted fact or even...piece...of...faith. You can't escape the box by running in circles. You have to break the walls down, and to escape a catch 22 you have to reject it.

thanks for all the feedback.

Did we merely create God to fill a gap we couldn't explain with science?



No, we didnt. We valued the existance of God long before the cuiosity of man even started to try and explain why things occur.

quote:Originally posted by Fear_Itself:



Did we merely create God to fill a gap we couldn't explain with science?



No, we didnt. We valued the existance of God long before the cuiosity of man even started to try and explain why things occur.

Your assume that humans knew of a god before they were even curious. Was this assumption merely created to fill a gap we couldn't explain with science?

quote:Originally posted by Fear_Itself:



Did we merely create God to fill a gap we couldn't explain with science?



No, we didnt. We valued the existance of God long before the cuiosity of man even started to try and explain why things occur.

You've got a good point. I haven't decided to stop believing in God yet,so I'm accepting both sides of the argument.