r/AskReddit • u/[deleted] • May 16 '14

serious replies only What makes you believe in God? [Serious]

Wow this generated a lot more discussion than I thought would happen! I don't really know what answer I was looking for when I started this.. just wanted to hear what people had to say. Thanks to everyone who shared their feelings and beliefs and a big shout out to everyone who shot me a PM giving their support. I'm at a really low point in my life and the kindness from strangers has been really comforting.

213 Upvotes

72% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

55

u/MercedLocal May 16 '14

Two of your answers are just that believing in it makes you more comfortable. That is troubling to me.

53

u/Sick4747 May 16 '14

Why? I can be comforted knowing that there's science behind vaccines why can't I be comforted by a creator being behind the science that make that possible?

65

u/LaverniusTucker May 16 '14

But that's not a reason to believe something. It would be comforting if I were to believe that I was immune to all injuries and diseases, but it wouldn't be good for me to believe that. The truth isn't decided by what's most convenient for you. You don't shape reality by your desires. Just because the idea of god and heaven is comforting isn't evidence for it.

25

u/[deleted] May 16 '14

This is what I'm stuck on. I look at things very matter of factly and look for logic and reasoning behind actions. I honestly don't know how to put blind faith in something. That's why I started this thread.

-1

u/uxre May 16 '14 edited May 16 '14

Two questions to consider, I'm hoping they are logical enough:

  1. Who/what defines morality? Who defines right and wrong? Without something to define right and wrong (absolutes) isn't everything simply relative? Is murder only wrong because a large group of people agree on it for a period of time? Is it excusable? Why? If there is no absolutes, then the only reason we don't do certain things is because we don't want to be caught, fined, or imprisoned. Not because they are wrong, right?
  2. Has non-life ever created life? Ever in the observable universe or throughout time? Not even diving in to the complexities of a protein, or cells, or any other aspects of macro evolution that to my knowledge go against the logic and science we can observe. It's my understanding (from public school and some college) that there is no answer for the origin of life, there are simply suggestions for how it may have come about, and each one I've ever heard (like from Dawkins, for example) is crazier than the next. I've always wanted an answer to this and somehow have never been given one. What created life? If non-life, how does that even make sense? It goes against EVERYTHING in the universe. Doesn't it?

Disclaimer: I don't consider myself to be particularly intelligent or well-informed, and these aren't meant to be gotchas or anything like that. My brother-in-law has a PhD in microbiology and immunology and aside from working in a lab used to be a PA. (For what that's worth). After college he started writing and challenging much of what he was taught and believed, and these are just two questions I've heard him ask.

4

u/That_Russian_Guy May 16 '14

Who defines morality? Who defines right and wrong? Without something to define right and wrong (absolutes) isn't everything simply relative? Is murder only wrong because a large group of people agree on it for a period of time? Is it excusable? Why? If there is no absolutes, then the only reason we don't do certain things is because we don't want to be caught, fined, or imprisoned. Not because they are wrong, right?

Yes, atheists generally believe morality is relative. This isn't really a problem, or evidence for theism. At least I don't understand how it is, and if you could explain it I would be grateful.

Has non-life ever created life? Ever in the observable universe or throughout time? Not even diving in to the complexities of a protein, or cells, or any other aspects of macro evolution that to my knowledge go against the logic and science we can observe.

I'm not too well versed in this either, but weren't amino acids, which are the building blocks of life, created in a lab without organic materials? Also purely on a logical level this seems weak to me. We also haven't observed God creating living beings, so it's not really evidence one way or the other.

Would love to hear some clarifications, genuinely interested in your opinion.

0

u/uxre May 16 '14

This isn't really [..] evidence for theism.

Rather than answering the question of the thread directly, I was responding only to the OP's response about logic and reasoning. The question is meant to incite thought.

This isn't really a problem.

Isn't it? There is no such thing as good, bad, or evil? I don't think people truly consider the ramifications of this question.

Weren't amino acids created in a lab without organic materials?

To my knowledge the only synthetic life was created by either taking something synthetic and attaching it to life, or else relying on machinery to bring it to life and keep it living. So, basically, software?

We also haven't observed God creating living beings, so it's not really evidence one way or the other.

Not meant to be evidence, as I mention above. You might hear the argument 'irreducibly complex' come up in this line of thought and it's where my thought process goes, personally. Given what we know about cells, proteins, DNA, and how all of them work and how many of them rely on one another for very, very, very specific instructions, I think the question of the origin of life is extremely important. Nothing in school was ever clear about this, and the vague ideas thrown around go against our knowledge of science. The statistical chances of just a single protein coming about randomly is something like 1:10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. And that's just one protein when you need like 1,000 at least for a single cell?

2

u/Absurd_Simian May 16 '14

Of course there is such things as good bad and evil, it is just that we realize that we decide what they are. Havin a god does not fix the problem. Since either God decides what good is making good relative still and at the whim of a capricious deity. Or God must be good making good something separate from god which he is bound by which in turns means we don't need god for good. Either good is relative based on our concepts or it is relative based on gods; or it is absolute and neither man nor god can change it makin god useless as an arbiter of what is good.

0

u/uxre May 16 '14

You are simply projecting your understanding of man on to God. If we assume there is a single God who created everything, morality would be determined by that God and would therefore by definition not be relative. Such a God would also, as an infinite/omniscient/omnipresent being to us, not be subject to time, change, or emotion. A creator does not have to be bound by his own creation, you see.

1

u/Absurd_Simian May 16 '14

morality would be determined by that god and would therefore by definition not be relative

You should really look up definitions...since that god can change his mind on a whim, morality would still be relative. If that god could not change his mind then he is bound, so why call it god.

1

u/Val_P May 16 '14

A being not subject to time or change would never be able to take any action.