Does people really need to believe in GOD? Every religion has different story about "GOD" why?If God exits then where is it?

  • According to me , A God is person who has more knowledge about world, more advance in technology than us and so kind that it helped our ancestor. Therefore our ancestor end-up with different story and given a particular name in different religion. A human being, from his birth get brain-washed by parents, relative and society. Hence it result in developing one-mighty feeling which help us in bad time. So we pray for "GOD" for help us in current and future.

    Now question arises what is the real name of god and who they are?
    According to me, it is very simple question. As we all now in this universe many unknown creature exit which we call aliens. Therefore they are more advanced from us and in the past decay time when human species are under-development phase. Those good kind hearted aliens helped us and ruined way or extinct from earth due to an unknown reason or mystery.

  • Global Veteran

    I think that relegions are archaic texts of teachings and guidelines created to invoke fear and discipline in people to behave themselves. God doesnt exist, except for our conscience and our takes on morality and humanity!

  • I believe this is a quite genuine post and so I would like to share my ideologies on the entity named "God". I think "God" is a myth created to answer someone's question of 'How does this world exist?' and "Where did we come from?". Its a belief... A belief created and then spread. Now, its obvious that this question will not have been evoked in only one person's mind and the answer to the questions evoked in different people's mind will not be the same. And hence, came the concept of "God"- Someone who did it all, who knows it all and who is everywhere. The regional and cultural differences led to the belief in different entities and different versions of belief, thus creating the concept of "Religion".

    However, to take inferences from popular cultures aka Movies.... I would say that the interpretations of "John Carter" and "Interstellar" comes the closest to matching my view of the question "How did life begin?". In Interstellar, we are shown a conversation at the end where the titular character says while watching the tesseract portal close-

    "People could not build this yet. But one day. Not you and me. But a people. A civilization that’s evolved past the four dimensions that we know."

    I think that defines my idea of "God". Advanced human beings from the future coming back in time to build the life-form or advanced being from other planets aka the earlier civilisation of human beings who habituate a planet with their own life-forms. Also, since we see many people and cultures from earlier civilisation referring to the planets and galaxies, we could infer that those were not "Aliens", but rather our "true ancestors" as shown in John Carter.

  • Banter Warriors Hella Assassins Fake Moderators GSP Patrol - The Proofreaders

    @Barton yes i agree u r right

  • This article is written by me if anyone like then ping me up and please share your reviews.

  • @Barton, not only is that senseless BS, you're also trying to prove a negative, I'd like to see you prove that God doesn't exist. Since you've made such a claim, the burden of proof is on you to prove it as such.
    You're probably not educated on how natural theology works, or any form of theology or philosophy for that matter, better to develop some degree of understanding of the matter, rather than bicker about what is a "possibility"

  • @Psjjxidjendindne, the question of how this world exists is a genuine question, to dismiss it as a mere consequence that should not be taken into consideration is by far the most ignorant stance I can think of, the philosopher John Leslie put it quite clearly, that the odds were astronomical, that is not a matter of belief, but a fact.
    As John Leslie said, imagine you are blindfolded and put before a firing squad, and you are to be killed, these are expert marksmen, and they are about to shoot you. You hear the sound of gunshots coming from their direction, but you notice that you are not dead, or injured for that matter. Given this situation, do you simply say, oh, it just happened, no matter. Or would you be intrigued to find the cause?"

    Athiest philosophers like Nieztsche, have steady cases for the need for the existence of the concept of God not merely because of the concept's importance, but because it helps answer most of the questions that mankind has, if you're trying to prove God doesn't exist, good luck proving a negative, the burden of proof is again, on you.

  • That only answers the point of why we cannot measure God, or detect him as we would physical substances, yes the fact that God is immaterial does mean that he will be beyond the grasp of human resources. A better response would be to quote a philosophical argument as a case for the possiblity of God, or probability of God

  • @Psjjxidjendindne, and if you're making the claim of "Future human beings" or "advanced" beings, then you also have made a metaphysical claim, one that cannot be ruled out as a possibility, just like solipsism, and yes, the claim of God.

  • You seem to be highly confused on what constitutes as a proper metaphysical description of God, or of a possible God.

    To begin with, religion may or may not be true, but the concept of God can probably be true despite religion being completely wrong on some ends. Søren Kiekegaard, and other theistic philosophers alike, had proper respect for the concept of God, even Nietzsche an Atheist philosopher, respected the role that God played in the life of individuals, giving them a feeling of an essence or meaning.

    Now since you're disputing the validity of certain claims, I'd like you to consider the fact that, can you prove God doesn't exist? Even as an agnostic, I've found this to be a tedious question, what is the criteria for existence? If you're going for an absolute, science cannot answer you, so there is no absolute truth that science can offer, not one. This is not to say that science is wrong, far from that, the method of reasoning that science uses, is known philosophically as Modus Ponens, mode of denying, which aims at disproving the possible causes of an incident, although this can make something less wrong, it never makes something absolutely true. There are a lot of questions that science can never prove, like, is the method of measurement science uses correct? (To prove this science would have to use the same method of measurement, to prove itself, this is circular reasoning). Hence we turn to philosophy, especially ontology and metaphysics, which deal with the problems of existence. You can easily dismiss certain arguments for God, like the Teleological argument, or the arguments of Intelligent design by some method of reasoning which can disprove premises of said argument.

    The one reason I advocate for a good degree of religious, and spiritual thought is mainly because of the comfort one finds in the concept of God, what is it to you or any other person what someone believes in so long as it gives them comfort?

By using TalkWithStranger, you are accepting our privacy and usage terms . You must be 18+ or 13+ with parental permission to use our online chatting site.