Do you wish you believed in God?

Dan133269

Well, do you?

Basically, I think it can bring some comfort no matter how baseless and irrational that comfort is. What I am mainly talking about is how to deal with the death of a loved one.

On the other hand, it can make people take stupid decisions and leave certain things "for the next life" rather than making the most of here and now. So, if given the choice?

magicbastarder

i think you've phrased the options in an odd way, because i'm an atheist and i chose not to believe in god; i *was* given the choice whether or not to believe.
it might be better to phrase them 'i'm an atheist and i would prefer if god existed', etc.

Dan133269

Yeah I wasn't sure how to phrase it. Basically, I mean if you are born again, but beforehand you can choose whether you will believe or not believe when you grow up.
Kind of like that scene in the Matrix where Joe Pantleano wants to be put back on earth with lots of riches even though they don't really exist. Kind of like, ignorance is bliss.

nozzferrahhtoo

I do not find the question relevant really. Wanting to believe something is entirely independent of whether it is actually true or not and wanting it to be one way or another suggests a bias where one may not actually exist.

There simply is no evidence, arguments, data or reasons that have been presented to me in 18 years of asking for them to lend even a modicum of credence to the notion. I simply dismiss it therefore as being the entirely unsubstantiated claim it actually is.

Looking at some of the opinions however that this entity is claimed to hold, and some of the actions it has been claimed to have performed and in some cases refuses to perform, I do admit to a certain relief that the claims are not true. The character of this god in, for example, the most famous work of fiction of all time the Bible, is decidedly unpleasant.

Cavehill Red

I don't wish that I believe in God. Nor do I wish that there was a magic being who I could relinquish responsibility for my actions to.
Rather I wish that more people copped on and stopped believing in the fairy tale. I think the world would be a better, more compassionate and more efficiently run place if most of those in it didn't waste their time and their emotions on imaginary creatures.

seamus

I would only wish to believe in a God if one existed.

Otherwise you're just kidding yourself.

I don't personally believe the "comfort" argument. In my experience, people who are highly religious have just as much (if not more) difficulty moving on from the death of a loved one than an atheist. An atheist probably sees more finality in death and can therefore move on a lot quicker. That is, you believe your loved one is most likely gone forever with the outside possibility of them existing on some other plane.

Being religious still leaves uncertainty as to what happened - you believe that your loved one is on another plane, but the uncertainty remains that they may be gone forever. Very few people are so staunchly religious that they are 100% confident of the existence of heaven.

Stercus Accidit

<obligatory 'which god?' post>

:pac:

Worshiping one of the hindu gods always had a nice sound to it
and I could see the comfort aspect
but no

smokingman

Once you lack, ain't no going back.

fred252

don't be silly

pH

Dan133269 wrote: »

Basically, I think it can bring some comfort no matter how baseless and irrational that comfort is. What I am mainly talking about is how to deal with the death of a loved one.

I have never understood this mental leap, how does believing in God (and I take it you mean the Christian one) help deal with the death of a loved one? Nearly all Christian religions say that the chances are, they (the loved one) are now burning and being tortured in hell somewhere! That doesn't help anyone deal with their death (except if it was your worst enemy of something).

There is this wide spread belief that Christianity says "once you're dead it's all angels/harps/floaty clouds" and who'd be cruel enough to tell a grieving family different, but it's not what Christianity (nor really any widespread religion I know of) says.

So, can you explain to me how does Christianity and its doctrine of needing to be "saved" to get to heaven, coupled with the threat of eternal damnation in hell, helps anyone "deal with the death of a loved one"

Zillah

Dan133269 wrote: »

What I am mainly talking about is how to deal with the death of a loved one.

"Why him, God? How would you let this happen? He was innocent and kind, he was too young! God must have a plan. I don't understand it, and it seems cruel, but it must be good. God is good. There is a plan, somehow almighty and loving God had a reason to let such a nice young person die."

I honestly don't think I have ever seen someone so conflicted as when they are trying to rationalise death with a loving God. For me it is simply a case of "horrible things happen some times".

As for your original question, no, absolutely not. Faith is the wanton surrender of reason, and there's something disgustingly sychophantic about the whole thing too.

Zombrex

Dan133269 wrote: »

Well, do you?

Basically, I think it can bring some comfort no matter how baseless and irrational that comfort is. What I am mainly talking about is how to deal with the death of a loved one.

On the other hand, it can make people take stupid decisions and leave certain things "for the next life" rather than making the most of here and now. So, if given the choice?

I find the Christian notion of God rather disgusting, so I would answer no if that was what you meant by "God".

If you simply meant a benevolent creator deity who looked after us and provided for life after death, then sure why not. It would be nice to think something like that existed, though how I would square that with all the evidence he doesn't I'm not sure.

That last question raises a good point. I would not wish to believe in a god if it meant that my critical reasoning powers were diminished or if it meant that I compartmentalized reality the way a lot of theists seem to do. That to me is more important than any comfort such a belief might bring.

As a side I certainly plan to turn into a God fearing heaven bound theist in my later life when faced with my own mortality

housetypeb

Zillah wrote: »

"Why him, God? How would you let this happen? He was innocent and kind, he was too young! God must have a plan. I don't understand it, and it seems cruel, but it must be good. God is good. There is a plan, somehow almighty and loving God had a reason to let such a nice young person die."

I honestly don't think I have ever seen someone so conflicted as when they are trying to rationalise death with a loving God. For me it is simply a case of "horrible things happen some times".

As for your original question, no, absolutely not. Faith is the wanton surrender of reason, and there's something disgustingly sychophantic about the whole thing too.

I agree, I lost my wife through suicide two years ago and I dont waste time wondering if she's in heaven or hell or another galaxy or what ever.
She's dead and I miss he and remember the times we had together but i have no expectation that I will ever see her again.
life is short and random,death is final and comes to us all sooner or later one way or another, so enjoy life while you can because this is not a dress rehearsal for heaven.
I lurk in the other forum now and again, and frankly, the rubbish they spiel over there is laughable.

Donal Og O Baelach

It comes back to the agnostic/atheist divide.
To an agnostic, when a loved one dies, there is still a possibility - no matter how minute - that he/she still exists somewhere. This can be quite torturous, since you know it to be almost impossible, yet to discount it can feel like giving up or even abandoning your loved one to whatever fate they are now in. If there is any chance you can still help them ...etc.

An atheist refuses to belive in the possibilty.

seamus

Agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive. Agnostic is a viewpoint on knowability, atheism is a viewpoint on God. Most atheists are agnostic too.

You could sum up the theist/atheist divide on the issue of death as an optimist/pessimist one.

Theists are optimists - "While acknowledging that there may be no afterlife, I believe that my loved one is probably alive somewhere else"

Atheists are pessimists - "While acknowledging that there may be an afterlife, I believe that my loved one is most likely gone forever"

I would suggest that when it comes to death, optimism is the more damaging standpoint because it doesn't allow for closure.

Think along the lines of missing people - while there is hope, the person's family are constantly thinking about it., constantly wondering "what if", and can't move on. Eventually they all say the same thing - "We just want closure".

From the pessimistic atheist's point-of-view they already have closure - the only way is up effectively, if they're wrong they have everything to gain.
From the optimist's point-of-view they have everything to lose by being wrong and so the uncertainty will cause difficulty in getting on with your life.

robindch

Dan133269 wrote: »

I am an atheist and if given the choice, I would choose to believe in God.

What exactly do you mean "if given the choice"?

Are you saying that somebody else decides what you believe, or that you decide yourself what to believe?

Donal Og O Baelach

robindch wrote: »

What exactly do you mean "if given the choice"?

Are you saying that somebody else decides what you believe, or that you decide yourself what to believe?

It would be nice if we could just decide what we want to believe - (then we would all be like Bill - I'm the greatest thing since sliced bread - Cullen), but some can only form deep beliefs on experiences and contemplation of the evidence as we percieve it.

Dades

I do think the wording of the poll is unfortunate, given the notion of "choosing to believe" something is an anathema to intellectual honesty.

What I think you're really positing is a Matrix red pill/blue pill type scenario.

That is, if you could take a pill that would make you actually believe, and you could live your life confident that an afterlife awaited you and your loved ones, could you?

So I would say no - but never say never.

Gregor Samsa

Your question is basically "Do you wish you were deluded?"

A neighbour of mine suffered from dementia before he died. He believed that he was a GAA referee (he wasn't) and seemed quite happy in his delusion. Grand for him, you might say, but there's no way I would wish I was senile.

bnt

Donal Og O Baelach wrote: »

It comes back to the agnostic/atheist divide.
To an agnostic, when a loved one dies, there is still a possibility - no matter how minute - that he/she still exists somewhere. This can be quite torturous, since you know it to be almost impossible, yet to discount it can feel like giving up or even abandoning your loved one to whatever fate they are now in. If there is any chance you can still help them ...etc.

An atheist refuses to belive in the possibilty.

No, your definitions are off. Agnostic doesn't just mean "I don't know", since nobody knows, do they? I'm an atheist because I don't believe, but that doesn't mean I claim to know the answer to the question (the existence of gods) is definitely No.

Agnosticism means you believe you can't know, that the question can't be answered - but I think the question can be answered, so I'm not much of an Agnostic. Which doesn't mean that I think I have the answer(s) today.

There is no atheist/agnostic divide: it's quite possible to be both atheist and agnostic at the same time. You could even say that agnosticism implies atheism; if you think you're never going to find the answer, that means you don't have the answer now i.e. you're not a believer. If you believe in a god, you think you have the answer, don't you?

If I ever found myself wishing for a god, that feeling would only last as long as it took me to ask "OK, now what? What's the god going to do to help me?" A god that doesn't do anything may as well not exist anyway.

CerebralCortex

Would I be wrong in asserting that, rationally speaking, beliefs should never include choice but be based on observable evidence?

Dave!

Nah, I'd like to understand the world as it really is, good or bad, and live my life in that context. Fairytales are for other people.

checkyabadself

Donal Og O Baelach wrote: »

It comes back to the agnostic/atheist divide.
To an agnostic, when a loved one dies, there is still a possibility - no matter how minute - that he/she still exists somewhere. This can be quite torturous, since you know it to be almost impossible, yet to discount it can feel like giving up or even abandoning your loved one to whatever fate they are now in. If there is any chance you can still help them ...etc.

An atheist refuses to belive in the possibilty.

I wouldn`t see how it would seem torturous. We are all comfortably aware that we didnt exist prior to being born and dont invent theories and gods to explain where we might have come from. Surely the prospect of finality is as easy to grasp as the idea that we were created on this planet and will once again cease to exist.

I find the death of loved ones deeply saddening and as you say, torturous precisely because of this assumed finality.
Also, life without an end would be meaningless to me. It would be like groundhog day whereby you could do what you liked as the reprecussions for your actions wouldnt exist.

CerebralCortex

checkyabadself wrote: »

Also, life without an end would be meaningless to me. It would be like groundhog day whereby you could do what you liked as the reprecussions for your actions wouldnt exist.

Yes they would.

checkyabadself

CerebralCortex wrote: »

Yes they would.

Ah, I didnt mean that we`d lose our morality, just that the meaning of life and its preciousness would be devalued if we were immortal.

CerebralCortex

checkyabadself wrote: »

Ah, I didnt mean that we`d lose our morality, just that the meaning of life and its preciousness would be devalued if we were immortal.

That's a fallacy too.

ColmDawson

Time for Agnosticism Correction Hedgehog...

Zillah

checkyabadself wrote: »

Ah, I didnt mean that we`d lose our morality, just that the meaning of life and its preciousness would be devalued if we were immortal.

I've never bought this argument.

If people really bought this logic, then why wouldn't they move to a desert to make water more precious, or work for minimum wage to make money more precious?

Donal Og O Baelach

checkyabadself wrote: »

I wouldn`t see how it would seem torturous. We are all comfortably aware that we didnt exist prior to being born and dont invent theories and gods to explain where we might have come from. Surely the prospect of finality is as easy to grasp as the idea that we were created on this planet and will once again cease to exist.

I find the death of loved ones deeply saddening and as you say, torturous precisely because of this assumed finality.
Also, life without an end would be meaningless to me. It would be like groundhog day whereby you could do what you liked as the reprecussions for your actions wouldnt exist.

I was referring specifically to the possibility that your loved one may still be somewhere, and that you can still help them - the torturous bit is that this possibility goes against all your own intellectual beliefs, but the possibility of it still nags.

El_Duderino 09

housetypeb wrote: »

I agree, I lost my wife through suicide two years ago and I dont waste time wondering if she's in heaven or hell or another galaxy or what ever.
She's dead and I miss he and remember the times we had together but i have no expectation that I will ever see her again.
life is short and random,death is final and comes to us all sooner or later one way or another, so enjoy life while you can because this is not a dress rehearsal for heaven.
I lurk in the other forum now and again, and frankly, the rubbish they spiel over there is laughable.

Hey man i lost my father 2 years ago through suicide and feel much the same as your self about death and the dead. but i was out handing out remembrance cards with my mother at the weekend and one woman met me at the door and said she often talks to my dad. part of me wishes i could believe in all that. more to the point part of me wishes it was true and i could be justified in believing it.

GO_Bear

checkyabadself wrote: »

It would be like groundhog day whereby you could do what you liked as the reprecussions for your actions wouldnt exist.

What about humanity

bnt

bnt wrote: »

No, your definitions are off. Agnostic doesn't just mean "I don't know", since nobody knows, do they? .

Some theists insist they do :rolleyes:
I gave up after the initial attempt at explaning know vs believe

virmilitaris

Wicknight wrote: »

If you simply meant a benevolent creator deity who looked after us and provided for life after death, then sure why not. It would be nice to think something like that existed, though how I would square that with all the evidence he doesn't I'm not sure.

I would have to take the opposite stance. Benevolent or not, such an entity would mean I was a piece of property, an object with no more control over my existence than a character in a novel. It would not explain existence for me, rather it would take away the reason for existence.

I am the master of myself, for myself is all that I truly have.

I work with many North Korean refugees, a surprisingly number of whom come from the upper echelons of the workers paradise. The reasoning many of these people choose to risk death for themselves and their families stems from a desire for freedom, for a sense of control over their own existence as opposed to the majority of escapees whose reasons usually stem from the stomach.

A creator deity, regardless of it's persona, would be a totalitarian dictator, as Mr Hitchens might put it, and I cannot accept that the extent of existence is simply being a prop in some other creatures work.

Regarding the original post. I do not see any comfort in religion in any circumstances. Rather, I see scared and desperate people drowning in the the realities of mortal existence grabbing widely for something to hold on to. Religion is the belief that you should give up swimming and accept the calmness of the depths. Reason is continuing to fight.

A doctor working at a famous insane asylum once noted that many mad people are the happiest on Earth and to cure them would be doing them a disservice.
A mother convinced that the two children she drowned were still alive, a husband who had killed his wife yet spoke to her constantly as if she was perpetually at his side.

Religious belief is no different. I am satisfied to leave well enough alone as long as these delusions are kept private but unfortunately as everyone knows, the religious just like the insane, cannot leave everyone else alone.

When people I know pass away I will rejoice in their existence and not sully their memories with lies and delusions.

Zombrex

virmilitaris wrote: »

I would have to take the opposite stance. Benevolent or not, such an entity would mean I was a piece of property, an object with no more control over my existence than a character in a novel. It would not explain existence for me, rather it would take away the reason for existence.

I am the master of myself, for myself is all that I truly have.

That is a bit of a leap to be honest. I mean you have parents who created you, who love you and looked after you, that didn't mean you were a "piece of property".

I would have no trouble with the idea of a genuine benevolent creator deity. But that is quite different to Christian notions of God, which is why I wanted to clarify with the OP.

virmilitaris

Wicknight wrote: »

That is a bit of a leap to be honest. I mean you have parents who created you, who love you and looked after you, that didn't mean you were a "piece of property".

And when I grew up I became my own master and I lived my own life without anyone looking over my shoulder.

I also don't agree with the usage of the word created in this context. I am the product of the combination of the DNA from two individuals. When you say created as in the sense of a deity it encompasses everything from my persona to my physical state. My parents choose neither.

I would have no trouble with the idea of a genuine benevolent creator deity.

And there unfortunately we'll have to disagree.

A benevolent dictator is still a dictator.

strobe

Can't vote in the pole for reasons pointed out.

But in the meaning of the OP, would it bring me comfort when a loved one dies, first like someone predictably pointed out, which God?

If we are talking Christian God, then no I do not wish I believed in him. It would mean I believed that a significant number of the people I have met and will meet in my life including family and close friends will be tortured for eternity when they die. I do not find that comforting in terms of dealing with the death of a loved one.

If we are just talking about God7X, some creator entity that oversees an afterlife. Yeah it would be nice to think that when I die I will meet up with people I liked who have died. Catch up, find out what they've been doing, chat about old times over a few pints of Ambrosia or whatever they are serving up there.

But as I think that is not the case I don't wish I believed it regardless. I prefer to know the truth in things even if the lie is 'better'. For me it would be along the same lines of "if your girlfriend was cheating on you would you wish you believed she wasn't?" or "if your child wasn't really yours would you like to know the truth or continue believing the lie?". They might not be perfect comparisons but you get what I mean.

Actually a better one might be "if you had terminal cancer would you prefer to believe you didn't?". While believing the lie that I didn't might allow me to skip along in blissful ignorance it would also mean I was squandering the short time I had to a certain extent as I would be unaware that the time I had was as short as it really was.

Basically I find no comfort or advantage in believing a lie. It is always better to know the truth.

Zombrex

virmilitaris wrote: »

And when I grew up I became my own master and I lived my own life without anyone looking over my shoulder.

Yeah but your parents didn't disappear. They still exist. It wasn't necessary that your parents died for you to do this.

I agree that the Christian notion of God continues to look over your shoulder, dictating what you are supposed to do and think. But that isn't a requirement of a deity, its just what the Christians say their god does.

virmilitaris wrote: »

I also don't agree with the usage of the word created in this context. I am the product of the combination of the DNA from two individuals. When you say created as in the sense of a deity it encompasses everything from my persona to my physical state.

It doesn't have to.

virmilitaris wrote: »

A benevolent dictator is still a dictator.

And a deity is not necessarily a dictator. Again I think you are just having trouble imagining a deity other than the Christian one.

antiskeptic

Wicknight wrote: »

I agree that the Christian notion of God continues to look over your shoulder, dictating what you are supposed to do and think.

CORRECTION!!

The Christian position posits a God who leaves it to yourself to decide whether or not to follow his ways. There is no loss of salvation for failing to do this. This is hardly dictatorial.

(what's with the double-sidedness. Over on the Christianity forum you usually display a decent grip of Christian doctrine. Here you're sound like a 2 dollar atheist

GO_Bear

antiskeptic wrote: »

CORRECTION!!

The Christian position posits a God who leaves it to yourself to decide whether or not to follow his ways. There is no loss of salvation for failing to do this. This is hardly dictatorial.

Only pesky eternal torment

antiskeptic

GO_Bear wrote: »

Only pesky eternal torment

That's for unbelievers. I thought Wicknight was addressing the downsides of believing in the Christian God? Believers don't face eternal torment.

Dades

Let's not derail for once, folks?

Kthxbye.

GO_Bear

antiskeptic wrote: »

That's for unbelievers. I thought Wicknight was addressing the downsides of believing in the Christian God? Believers don't face eternal torment.

This Christian believer who refuses to follow the Christan Gods ways does not sound like a Christian

Zombrex

antiskeptic wrote: »

The Christian position posits a God who leaves it to yourself to decide whether or not to follow his ways. There is no loss of salvation for failing to do this. This is hardly dictatorial.

How is winding up in hell because you are being punished for sin "no loss of salvation"?

God says do as I say or I will throw you into the fire. It is basically that simple.

antiskeptic wrote: »

That's for unbelievers. I thought Wicknight was addressing the downsides of believing in the Christian God? Believers don't face eternal torment.

Yes they do. When the Bible says believe in Jesus and be saved a more accurate translation would be commit to Jesus and be saved. Simple rational "I know God exists" is not enough for salvation. Repentance is required for salvation according to Luke 13

I thought you were a Christian

LambsEye

OP I think I understand your question, and the short answer would be no but it's such a grey area that I don't think a short answer can be given.

I genuinely don't think some people choose to believe in God (as we know Him.) I think it's just a given, especially for older people in Ireland. To them it's a reality just as accept breathing oxygen a reality. Whether that's a result of centuries of conditioning or ignorance is up for debate. But for many, many people the thought of God not existing is as unfathomable as the thought of him existing to many on this forum.

However I do look at both my grannies, (traditional Irish grannies,) and at times I envy their complete trust in something greater than themselves. They have both been through hardship but they bear it with grace and strength, which they claim they get from God. Would they be the same people if they hadn't embraced religion from such an early age? I honestly think not.

Now I don't believe in God, and when I am unfortunate enough to lose someone close to me I will deal with it in a secular way, an entirely different way than my grandmothers' would. However I do believe in life and death as perpetuating forces, I think when someone dies their body and energy/soul/spirit/essence/being (my inner hippy is coming out,) is redistributed into the universe, not as the person we knew them as but as an atom or a particle of existence of something. So who's to say that's not my own personal belief in God?

I'm babbling. I think this is too subjective an argument, but OP, I know what you're asking!

fatmammycat

I don't understand the original question. God is either real or it isn't, what has choice got to do with anything? Frankly believing in a god makes absolutely no sense to me, none. Why then would I wish to believe in one? I already have that particular choice, we all have.

Dan133269

I couldn't have phrased the question any better to be honest. I'm not asking any other or similarly related question other than what I posted. We don't have any choice over our beliefs, whether we look at the evidence and reckon there isn't a white bearded creator looking over us or whether we believe Liverpool will get relegated this season. One cannot control their beliefs, my question is, if you could, what would you choose?

fatmammycat

Of course we have choice over our beliefs. I believe no god exists, a Christian believes a god exists. Those are beliefs. I can say the evidence points to a god being improbable, but it does not alter that what I believe cannot be proved or disproved, no more than a Christian can prove or disprove a god exists, but for some reason beyond my ken they find the idea of one probable.

Zillah

fatmammycat wrote: »

Of course we have choice over our beliefs.

Let's test this claim. How about you choose to believe that the sun doesn't exist for a few minutes, and then choose to believe it does again and get back to me and we can compare notes.

LambsEye

Zillah wrote: »

Let's test this claim. How about you choose to believe that the sun doesn't exist for a few minutes, and then choose to believe it does again and get back to me and we can compare notes.

Zing. Like I said earlier:

I genuinely don't think some people choose to believe in God (as we know Him.) I think it's just a given, especially for older people in Ireland. To them it's a reality just as accept breathing oxygen a reality. Whether that's a result of centuries of conditioning or ignorance is up for debate. But for many, many people the thought of God not existing is as unfathomable as the thought of him existing to many on this forum.

I think the OP got too much flak for the question. I took it as, if you could suspend your disbelief, and just accept (and be happy in your acceptance,) to believe in God, would you? Fair question.

virmilitaris

Wicknight wrote: »

Yeah but your parents didn't disappear. They still exist. It wasn't necessary that your parents died for you to do this.

No. But my parents are my equals now. They don't claim any divine right over me, over my existence.

I agree that the Christian notion of God continues to look over your shoulder, dictating what you are supposed to do and think. But that isn't a requirement of a deity, its just what the Christians say their god does.

But when you take away the dictating and only leave the remainder, I still see this as an evil. A deity looking over your shoulder, even one that doesn't issue ultimatums like the Judeo-Christian deity, is still invading your privacy.

It doesn't have to.

Perhaps I don't quite understand what you mean when you say a creator deity then. To me a creator deity would be a deity that created everything and by extension us. By creating us, a deity would in effect have programmed us, just as surely as a character in a novel is written a certain way or a computer program acts a certain way. Of course if you also take out any presumed omnipotence of such a deity then you can allow such concepts as constrained fee will to occur. I say constrained because regardless of paths chosen, the original design will always have influence and the possible paths to choose from will always be limited.

And a deity is not necessarily a dictator. Again I think you are just having trouble imagining a deity other than the Christian one.

A deity no, but your original point was a creator deity. I would contend that a creator deity would be one that created us with all our limits and all our imperfections. That deity would be responsible for the world we live in and all its limits and imperfections.

That same deity could be a complete non-interventionalist but has already dictated our existence through our very creation and the creation of our environment.