- Romeo Tabuman
- Toronto
- Canada
This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Does God exist?
Is god that what religions are teaching? or what do you think god looks like? Is human reflection of god?
Topics:
Does god exist
TED Conversations
Sign In
To join or start a conversation, you'll need to sign in. Not a member? Register Now (it's free and fast).
Live Conversations
Live Conversations are hosted by TED speakers and TED Fellows. Ask your questions and participate in the discussions on the following dates and times:
Danie Martin
God does not exist.
Fear exists, at first it is like a fear of the unknown...now it is more fear of telling everyone that everything they hold dear to them and that comforts them is not true.
God has many different parts...like the Santa God...he sees you, knows what you are doing, can tell if you are moral and can punish you for all eternity if not...this makes people fearful of not believing, just incase they meet with Hellfire. There is also the creating God, he made each and everyone of us, on purpose, uniquely...he also cares and loves us all as individuals...The number of people who could be here, in my place, outnumber the sand grains of Sahara. If you think of the ways in which our genes can be permuted, you and I are quite grotesquely lucky to be here. The number of events that had to happen in order for you to exists in order for me to exist, we are privileged to be alive yes...love by an almighty? no.
And the whole eye argument.
Eyes are complex and brilliant and beautiful, it had to be a gift from God...well looking at all these possibilities of mixes of genes as before...how many organs could have been made that just never got made again because the creature with it couldn't see and died before mating?
I find it so obvious that for every single There is a God argument there is a stronger No there isn't.
And i find it so frustrating that people are still so ruled be fear, of neglect, punishment, outcasting, stereotyping, being wrong, of God itself and of letting go...i get that it's hard to admit to being wrong, let alone admit to thousands of years of being wrong but it will be worth it just to feel the fear and get over it.
I find my knowledge so comforting and refreshing, it's life affirming.
My one life, that i'm statistically lucky to have will not be wasted on talking to an ancient comfort blanket
Jordan Trewitt
It all starts with COMET
The Existential Argument
This one doesn't exactly have a structure, but it goes along the lines of Pascal's Wager. Also it goes along the lines of if there was no God, where would humanity be? If there is no God, there is no absolute truth. If there is no truth, then man's endeavors degenerate into absurdity.
The "Kalam" Cosmological Argument
P1:Whatever Begins to exist has a cause.
P2:The Universe began to exist
C:The Universe has a cause
The Teleological(Design) Argument
P1:The fine tuning of the universe is either due to design or chance
P2:It is highly improbable that it resulted from chance.
C:It is highly probable that it resulted from design
The Moral Argument
P1:If God does not exist, then object moral values do not exist.
P2:Objective moral values do exist
C: God exists
The Ontological Argument-proves God's existence by the concept of God (definition)
By Anselm:
God is the greatest conceivable being
If we could conceive anything greater then that would be God.
It is greater to exist in reality, then merely in the mind.
By Descartes:
P1:If something is perfect, it must exist.
P2:God (by definition) is perfect.
C:God must exist.
This is not my own work, I merely paraphrased/quoted this off of some notes off of a teacher of mine, John Steve Lee.
I didn't have enough space to explain the entire aspects of these arguments, but please feel free to comment and question anything, just remember Socrates. Thanks
Note: I don't think I used any holy texts
Austin R 20+
I'd like to refer you to some similar past conversations, if you're interested:
http://www.ted.com/conversations/1599/who_is_god.html
http://www.ted.com/conversations/923/proving_god.html
http://www.ted.com/conversations/3938/proving_disproving_atheism.html
Romeo Tabuman
Romeo Tabuman
Matthieu Miossec 100+
richard moody jr 10+
Harald Jezek 50+
Nobody ever saw a God (as far as I'm aware of). This gives believers the freedom to create any image of God that fits their particular needs.
Matthieu Miossec 100+
Harald Jezek 50+
Peter Law 50+
Christians would say that Jesus is God, & historically was seen by thousands.
:-)
Harald Jezek 50+
Peter Law 50+
That's not surprising, as you are not a 'believer' as such. However Jesus as God is the core belief of Christians. What do we mean by God ? Take the following passage :-
"Hbr 1:2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.
Hbr 1:3 The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven."
It seems clear that Jesus (the Son) made the universe, is the exact representation of God's being & sustains all things (presumably the universe). This may seem a bit 'iffy' by itself, but dozens of passages point to the same thing, so it is generally accepted. We are all entitled to our opinions, but if we believe that the bible is as it claims, then we have little room for maneuver on the identity of God.
:-)
Harald Jezek 50+
Therefore, the bible is meaningless as well to me, because it has something to tell only to believers. For all others it might be a good story book or even give some insight in how people lived and thought 2000 years ago. But that's about all there is to it.
As you correctly say: "....IF we believe...." ....that's the key. For the believer in something, this something will always be the truth..
Peter Law 50+
I agree entirely with your stance; it was mine for the first 30-odd years of life. However I discovered that there was so much real history, archeology, science, etc throughout the bible that I could not ignore it. True it leads on to faith, but hey; abiogenesis is pure faith.
:-)
Matthieu Miossec 100+
Peter Law 50+
I do not consider evolution as a sound scientific idea; & I am not alone. Plate tectonics is entirely in tune with the bible, only the timescale is at odds with mainstream.
The age of the earth & stars is not known, it is surmised.
When I say science, I mean empirical science. That which can be tested; the historical stuff is wide open to opinions & worldview.
While I remember. "What is the difference between a dragon & a dinosaur ?" You were saved by the bell on the other conversation.
:-)
Matthieu Miossec 100+
Harald Jezek 50+
Your point of view and common scientific wisdom already diverge on very basic issues, such as the age of our planet or time life already exists on earth.
Science deals with a lot of theories, relativity and evolution just 2 of them. However, there are theories and theories. The more a theory can be supported by evidence, they higher the likelihood that this theory is actually an accurate representation of reality. Science is objective. Science doesn't care about personal preferences.
Reading an trying to interpret the bible has nothing to do with science. It's not more than reading Dungeon and Dragons and trying to interpret any scientific wisdom into that.
I didn't see your discussion about dragons and dinosaurs......lol.....but the difference is obvious.....one existed and the other is fantasy.....but since you believe in God, I assume you also believe in fire spitting dragons, correct ?
Matthieu Miossec 100+
Peter Law 50+
So then, for the umpteenth time. What is the difference between dragons & dino's ? If it's that obvious, then just answer the question & put us all out of our misery.
I have no reason to doubt the existence of unicorns at some time in the past. The evolution side has postulated all sorts of creatures, surely a horse with a horn is feasible, likewise fire-spitting dino's.
On the dino extinction thing, there have been multiple theories over the years. Current money is on total extinction 65m years ago. Why ? Dino's come in all shapes & sizes, both on land & sea. Why should they go extinct together regardless of size & habitat, but yet other similar creatures survived. Lot's of stuff is just accepted, but no-one asks the common sense questions.
:-)
Harald Jezek 50+
Peter, just get real !!!!
Peter Law 50+
I think I'm pretty real. As I said above, the dino extinction has many theories associated with it. Your KT event is merely the most popular at present & will undoubtedly be overtaken by the next one.
The only point I'm making is that an awful fuss is made over the extinction of dinos, when , in reality we are not at all sure what happened. Some apparently evolved into birds.
It all seems like a big PR exercise to me to sell the idea of millions of years.
I do read a lot of stuff, but have learned that it isn't wise to get taken up with the 'theory of the day' which inevitably gets replaced in the long term.
:-)
Peter Law 50+
Lol. Sometimes your insults are funny. Yea I've probably read a lot of shit; all Von Daniken's stuff seemed to make sense at one time.
Not a very good Christian if I'm knowingly lying to you; what if you got saved & told the boss ?
My criteria is simple enough; is it observable, & testable; or is it an extrapolation or opinion ?
I believe in natural selection as it can be observed & tested. I do not believe species can morph into a different species with different dna, because it cannot be tested, or observed.
I trust the law of biogenesis because it has 100% record in the lab. I do not trust abiogenesis as it has 0% record. It may be that that will change, but then all we will have shown is that it takes intelligence to make life.
2nd law is obvious & well tested. Matter does not spontaneously organise itself, so any theory that states that things are improving as time goes on must come in for some scrutiny.
Still no answer on the scientific/biological difference between a dino & a dragon ?? Go on Matt, I do my best to answer you.
:-)
Danie Martin
Bones of dinosaurs have been recovered, put together and analysed. They have been dated using emprical scientific dating techniques and bones are available for you to see and touch and are therefor very real. no horse with a horn coming from it's skull has been found. not to say it didn't exist just because no one has found it yet similarly no dinosaur has been seen to lead to any such idea that one or more flying species of dinosaur can breath fire. I get that just because you haven't found it doesn't mean it doesn't exist however have you heard of the teapot theory?
I know that no matter what, you cannot prove there isn't something, only that there is, but if you are unable to prove that there is something (like god, unicorns and a toothfairy for example) you have to use your best judgments, and in this case more suggests that these things don't exist, like there being a teapot orbiting mars...it probably isn't there, although i cannot prove it.
I know using probablitiy that there probably was no dragon because the extraodinary findings that date back far further than your book show no signs of it...and if you want to argue that there may have been one before then then go ahead but that would mean you admitting to a time before your God even created earth... it's just very very unlikely.
Scientists don't ever emprically say what there isn't, only what there is.
Harald Jezek 50+
There is nothing wrong with that. We stick with the theories that most properly describe our environment and that coincide with our experiences.
This doesn't mean, that those theories reflect the absolute truth (hint: that's why they are called theories), but as long as there is no better theory than the one we currently use to describe a certain element of our reality, we have to stick to the current one.
IN other words, if one day somebody comes up to an alternative theory to the one we currently use to explain the extinction of dinosaurs, then this new theory most certainly will be embraced , as long as it is properly supported by evidence. Decoding our reality is a work in progress, which means that eventually we will discover new things and discard old ones.
But, what you can't do is discard a theory without having a supported alternative and that's precisely what you are constantly trying to do.
Harald Jezek 50+
Care to explain ?
Peter Law 50+
Don't fret over me, I understand completely both usages of 'theory'.
Harald my choice between god, & materialism is based on weighing up the pros & cons to the best of my ability. I see nothing wrong in different folk reaching different conclusions.
Jim. I thought the speed of light was variable given gravitational forces. the speed of light in a black hole is different to earth for example. I'm sure I read somewhere that the speed of light had been slowed in the lab, & other another hypothesis about the speed degrading over time. Surely it's status as 'universal constant' is under some pressure ?
:-)
Peter Law 50+
My position is that I think I have found the answer to the history of the world in the bible. I did NOT start with the bible, I started with as many facts as I could lay my hands on, & eventually arrived at the bible.
I believe that science proves a young earth, & that is consistent with the bible, so naturally I reject OEC. Of course YEC might be wrong; I'll cross that bridge when I see the proof.
We have a tv prog in the uk at present. Human Body: Ultimate Machine. It uses animation etc to bring out how wonderful our bodies are. They do keep going on about evolution; but when I watch these things I am just overawed by the beauty & complexity. I'm afraid anyone trying to sell me millions of years of evolution would need pretty compelling evidence. In-Your-Face, Obvious, Common-Sense; God exists.
:-)
Salim Solaiman 50+
What I wanted to say already said by Harald :)
Alan Klayman
This is the human (religious) universal explanation for a phenomenon that takes place.
Another explanation of this phenomenon is Science.
Another is Physics.
Another is the 'universe'.
Another is in Pseudo-Spiritual writings like the book 'the Secret'.
Another is Philosophy.
Which is right, which is wrong? Are they all right? Some? Possibly. But one thing is for certain; there are forces greater than we can explain (even inside our own brains).
To say that one explanation is the only answer, or the blind adherence to only one idea, this is the cause of almost every war known to mankind.
Collective learning, and the process to accept differences of opinions, philosophies, sciences, and religion will push the human race forward.
Rafi Amin 20+
Human is never reflection of god.
Scott Armstrong 50+
Matt Lane
The only god you can cling to is the idea of god. People who believe in god do not have any faith because they want something to hold onto. In fact many sermons are exhalations to have more faith, which means that we all recognize that we do not really believe in this. Real faith is when you do not hold onto anything anymore, this is called, in Christian mysticism, the cloud of unknowing.
Matthieu Miossec 100+