There are a number of ways of looking at this (assuming for a moment that there is a god) - a) one of the religions has described god correctly...b) none of them have... c) some of their theology describes aspects of God, who presents himself differently to each group.
Religions don't have to all be valid - and some cannot be(eg Jesus was God/ Jesus was a prophet and not God)- but the God can (indeed has to be) the same God, even if none of the religions have it right because the concept of there being a God is a binary one... there either is, or there isn't.
Think of religions as windows all looking at the same thing. Everyone thinks their window is best and that the view is part of the window itself.
You have made up your mind that there is no God. That's a pretty confident statement giving that there are many variations of what constitutes a God. Hardly open minded if your not open to countless possibilities. Your viewpoint is no different to acknowledging that our universe is filled with stars and planets yet only believing in other life forms when presented with evidence. Not being open to limitless possibilities is in itself closed minded, if you don't know, your not sure, that should be the answer.
Personally, I think half the problem is our own definition of God, culture molds and shapes it till its pigeon holed and the question ends up being irrelevent. If the answer to the question was 'yes', those who believe in a religion would be none the wiser. A No answer would beg more questions, more so on what technically defines what a God is. If the question was a God as described in the Bible, to the letter, I would be confident to answer No.
There may be a family of giant pink elephants living on the roof of my house. I do not believe there is, because of lack of evidence. There may be a God, in any one of several million forms, but until I see some evidence that one of these is the real thing, then I'll treat all of them equally.
I have lack of belief. That is all. It may change if evidence appears. There's no way that this is a closed mind. Just because you wish to define that as being closed minded doesn't mean that it is.
Think of religions as windows all looking at the same thing. Everyone thinks their window is best and that the view is part of the window itself.
That's the old thing about the elephant behind the curtain. Of course it doesn't mean all are right... but as no-one knows the truth they are all just beliefs.
There may be a family of giant pink elephants living on the roof of my house. I do not believe there is, because of lack of evidence. There may be a God, in any one of several million forms, but until I see some evidence that one of these is the real thing, then I'll treat all of them equally.
I have lack of belief. That is all. It may change if evidence appears. There's no way that this is a closed mind. Just because you wish to define that as being closed minded doesn't mean that it is.
Have you ever quietly asked for enlightenment? It's as simple as that.
It's quite funny how things change I voted yes in the poll, but I still think we needed people like Darwin. The atheists who spout certainty in his wake now remind me of the old world Christians who once mocked him. I guess blind faith goes around
Think of religions as windows all looking at the same thing. Everyone thinks their window is best and that the view is part of the window itself.
But the thing is, none of them are the same - and none are looking at the same thing - they are all different windows looking out at different things - vishnu, thor, wotan, the christian god, etc.
Think of religions as windows all looking at the same thing. Everyone thinks their window is best and that the view is part of the window itself.
Why should I assume they all look on the same thing? They're just fallible human constructs. Let's modernise the analogy. Instead of windows, they're TV channels. It's frankly ludicrous in its implications.
Why should I assume they all look on the same thing? They're just fallible human constructs. Let's modernise the analogy. Instead of windows, they're TV channels. It's frankly ludicrous in its implications.
Ok, so they are TV channels - they can report the same event in many different ways, slanted by their own prejudices and history etc. As I said before, God either exists or not - all religions do is a) believe God exists and then b) create the theology of what God is like/wants/does based on their own prejudices and history etc.
But the thing is, none of them are the same - and none are looking at the same thing - they are all different windows looking out at different things - vishnu, thor, wotan, the christian god, etc.
Then you don't think they are windows do you? They are just 2 dimensional pictures to you that reveal nothing.
Why should I assume they all look on the same thing? They're just fallible human constructs. Let's modernise the analogy. Instead of windows, they're TV channels. It's frankly ludicrous in its implications.
That feels like a totally different analogy - actually it doesn't feel like much of an analogy at all.
It's quite funny how things change I voted yes in the poll, but I still think we needed people like Darwin. The atheists who spout certainty in his wake now remind me of the old world Christians who once mocked him. I guess blind faith goes around
You voted Yes yet you speak of others as spouting certainty?
Well someone would have to "Believe" as that is what it is. Something made up that the practitioner has to imagine to be a real thing.
As opposed to normal people who don't require imaginary friends to cope with life.
Good to see by the Poll that this epidemic is dying out and that there are more right thinking people than the imaginary friend group. Won't be long before it is seen as about as socially acceptable as smoking.
Some relish their pretend world and think that make believe is OK and normal. They love their wooly thinking.
Then some idiot puts people who think like that in charge. That's when it becomes dangerous.
The world is run by people who have woolly thinking, whether they think it's sharp or not.
Most people think their lives are normal in one way or another, even if they are in 'reaction' to 'normality', they think they are real or at least understandable.
We are all driven by all sorts of 'beliefs' whether they are religious or not.
Well someone would have to "Believe" as that is what it is. Something made up that the practitioner has to imagine to be a real thing.
As opposed to normal people who don't require imaginary friends to cope with life.
Good to see by the Poll that this epidemic is dying out and that there are more right thinking people than the imaginary friend group. Won't be long before it is seen as about as socially acceptable as smoking.
No offense but remarks like those really don't further any decent debate.
BTW What makes anyone normal? Why is it a good thing?
Well someone would have to "Believe" as that is what it is. Something made up that the practitioner has to imagine to be a real thing.
]As opposed to normal people who don't require imaginary friends to cope with life.
Good to see by the Poll that this epidemic is dying out and that there are more right thinking people than the imaginary friend group. Won't be long before it is seen as about as socially acceptable as smoking.
On the contrary - normal people use their imagination all the time. We all daydream. Psychology encourages imagined situations as relaxation techniques. Most people believe that a 'positive attitude' to life is a good thing.
We make up things and imagine them to be real all the time.
No - I'm afraid you're on your own with this one - you'll have to put yourself up against your own wall.
You voted Yes yet you speak of others as spouting certainty?
Briefly clicking on something isn't spouting. I also specified in an earlier post that I don't use the term 'God' normally. Voting yes was being honest from someone whose certainty comes from personal experience.
Comments
Think of religions as windows all looking at the same thing. Everyone thinks their window is best and that the view is part of the window itself.
There may be a family of giant pink elephants living on the roof of my house. I do not believe there is, because of lack of evidence. There may be a God, in any one of several million forms, but until I see some evidence that one of these is the real thing, then I'll treat all of them equally.
I have lack of belief. That is all. It may change if evidence appears. There's no way that this is a closed mind. Just because you wish to define that as being closed minded doesn't mean that it is.
That's the old thing about the elephant behind the curtain. Of course it doesn't mean all are right... but as no-one knows the truth they are all just beliefs.
Have you ever quietly asked for enlightenment? It's as simple as that.
If there was any evidence for god I'd re consider my position - but in all my years of being an atheist I've yet the receive any (besides anecdotal).
But the thing is, none of them are the same - and none are looking at the same thing - they are all different windows looking out at different things - vishnu, thor, wotan, the christian god, etc.
Why should I assume they all look on the same thing? They're just fallible human constructs. Let's modernise the analogy. Instead of windows, they're TV channels. It's frankly ludicrous in its implications.
Palace 1 Norwich 1
Ok, so they are TV channels - they can report the same event in many different ways, slanted by their own prejudices and history etc. As I said before, God either exists or not - all religions do is a) believe God exists and then b) create the theology of what God is like/wants/does based on their own prejudices and history etc.
Then you don't think they are windows do you? They are just 2 dimensional pictures to you that reveal nothing.
That feels like a totally different analogy - actually it doesn't feel like much of an analogy at all.
You voted Yes yet you speak of others as spouting certainty?
As opposed to normal people who don't require imaginary friends to cope with life.
Good to see by the Poll that this epidemic is dying out and that there are more right thinking people than the imaginary friend group. Won't be long before it is seen as about as socially acceptable as smoking.
Who should I ask?
Some relish their pretend world and think that make believe is OK and normal. They love their wooly thinking.
Then some idiot puts people who think like that in charge. That's when it becomes dangerous.
I think that this feeling is common, and has often been misinterpreted and distorted by man over time.
The world is run by people who have woolly thinking, whether they think it's sharp or not.
Most people think their lives are normal in one way or another, even if they are in 'reaction' to 'normality', they think they are real or at least understandable.
We are all driven by all sorts of 'beliefs' whether they are religious or not.
No offense but remarks like those really don't further any decent debate.
BTW What makes anyone normal? Why is it a good thing?
On the contrary - normal people use their imagination all the time. We all daydream. Psychology encourages imagined situations as relaxation techniques. Most people believe that a 'positive attitude' to life is a good thing.
We make up things and imagine them to be real all the time.
No - I'm afraid you're on your own with this one - you'll have to put yourself up against your own wall.