No, that’s not correct at all.  God is a specific term used by most deists to refer to their specific omnipotent deity deserving of worship.  Christians believe that word specifically refers to Jesus Christ of Nazareth, who was born 2000 years ago and died around 1975 years ago.

It’s really easy to try to divest all of the inherent meaning of a word and shift the goal posts to argue a broader point.  I mean, if God is the begining and source of all things, then can an atheist really deny his reality?  Is God the Big Bang?

No Christian really actually thinks of God as a single event that happened billions of years ago, but rather as a conscious, aware, and powerful invisible and supernatural being.

Words matter, and the definitions of words matter.  “God” is not and has never been reasonably defined in the way that you suggest, and it cheapens and devalues the debate to suggest so because it confuses the matter at hand.  It obfuscates what people actually believe and what they say about it.

What is at stake is a specific, defined being, not some vague “we don’t know what that is” philosophical concept.

The sort of universalist assimilation you’re floating is flatly incompatible with most religions, especially exclusivist monotheisms like Christianity and Islam. Don’t let uplift get in the way of reality.

What is verifible is that there is a way in which we can live that leads to our happiness, joy, and peace as well as the happiness, joy, and peace of others.  That way is the way of love.  Why do we sit around and argue over what to call the Ultimate?  All sides say the same thing:

“I am right!!!  You are wrong!”

The message from many religions and philosophies is essentially the same:

Seek the Truth with all of your heart, that is love wisdom–philosophy.

Love one another.

Secular Humanists believe this.  So do Muslims.  So do Buddhists.  So do Christians.

Those who believe in God: remember any image or idea you have of God is not God.  God must transcend that.  “He who seeks God under settled form lays hold of the form, while missing the God concealed in it.”–Meister Eckhart, a 13 century german mystic theologian.

Those who don’t believe in God: He who seeks Truth under settled form lays hold of the form (theory), while missing the Reality concealed in it.

It is good to have discussions of what is true, but I think being able to respect each other’s views and listen to them and love the people we are talking to is more important then that.

Let us not sacrifice our love for our brothers and sisters in all of humanity on the alter of “Being Right”.

The simplest explanation is that the Earth/ Universe is vast and individual humans are small and we just happen to get in the way of the indifferent forces of nature.  Volcanos, hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, asteroids… these are all just going about their own way oblivious to any of the destruction that they cause or lives that they ruin.  Plague, disease, inherited afflictions, these are just other organisms trying to feed their little tiny families or unlucky mistakes in genetic shuffling in our daddy’s testicles.  (A good reason for wearing boxers!)

Some people choose to ascribe many or all of these things to supernatural powers, mainly because of the oral and written traditions passed onto them by their ancestors.  Because they have no tangible evidence, they claim that there is value in faith, believing in things which one cannot possibly prove.  Unfortunately, faith can be used to justify virtually anything – any imaginable permutation of Christianity, every religion that has ever existed, from Wicca to Roman pantheism to Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Judiasm,  to Flying Sphaghetti monsters… to David Koresh and dreams of aliens hiding behind comets waiting to beam us up if we’re wearing the right sneakers.  It can be used to justify astrology, homeopathy, Conservatism, Liberalism, Communism, Nazism, UFOlogy, conspiracy theories, and any kind of philosophical persuasion imaginable.

I require tangible evidence.  Science requires tangible evidence.  Ellison requires tangible evidence.  And what do you have to offer me?  Tangible evidence?  Without tangible evidence, how am I to decide which of the 1,545,932,431 versions of faith I should follow? 

This if my favorite quote of all–a microcosm of the hypocrisy and lack of understanding with which believers practice their faith.  Have you read the bible?  The idea that the bible supports the inherent value of human rights and dignity would be laughable if it weren’t for the fact that it’s christian supporters actually believe does.  Its absurd and gulling.  The bible is disturbing and vicious.  Of course, modern day christians excuse the misogyny, bigotry and hate by renaming its lessons as “parables”.  But any person who can read the bible then profess that they are a follower of it’s religion–the mental gymnastics are as impressive as they are disturbing.  

I know that belief in God could very well be based in biology. It could be the “God gene” doing the talking. All I know is that I don’t know anything for certain. I do think that as time goes on, science is going to open doors to new dimensions and really turn what we think we know on its ear. I think that what we know now is a tiny fraction of what there is to know. I’m not trying to be wishy-washy, I’m just pretty sure that what I don’t know far, far outweighs what I do know.

And Dave2, those statistics are mind boggling. 

SQT said on December 10th: “I have no problem giving God credit for my accomplishments. It’s not that I have some self-centered idea that He’s taking a direct hand in my life. But perhaps he gave me the ability to reason and make moral decisions. Yes, I’m responsible if I don’t use those gifts as they were intended, but do I deserve credit because I was given the abilities in the first place? My cognitive abilities are not something I earned, they were a gift.”

SQT, I would love to know what you think about people who are less fortunate than you are. Does god also get credit for their misfortunes and disabilities?

I don’t mean this to be mean or arrogant, I’m just curious. Seriously.

Barry said on December 10th: “And when a football player kneels in the endzone to thank God, he’s doing it as a personal communication to God, thankful for his athletic ability. And YES, it IS possible that God just might favor one team over another.”

A footballer thanks god for his athletic ability… he is on top of the spectrum of this specific ability, at the other end are people who can not take part in sports at all… if this footballer believes god has created the circumstances for him to develop this ability, or given that ability directly to him, what does he believe about the less fortunate people at the other end of the spectrum?

It seems to me that he has only two choices there… either god has made the decision to give these people poor athletic abilities, or god has simply not cared about these people, he let their abilities develop naturally or at random. In either case, the footballer believes he is chosen by god, whereas other people are not.

It would be the same if people thank god for a lucky event in their lives. If they truly believe in god’s involvement with that event, what do they think about a tragic event, such as when a child looses a limb in an accident? It seems to me that they must think god has decided for this accident to happen or at least not cared about it, whereas god has chosen and selected them specifically for their lucky event. That would be incredibly arrogant and cruel, in my eyes.

It would even seem that people of such mindset can not logically believe in the germ theory of disease, they must believe illnesses are wished by god upon the sufferers. Why help sufferers then? Why did Jesus heal sick people? It seems god wanted them to suffer.

Am I making a logical error here? Or are these people really that cruel and arrogant? Or do not they see the flaw in their reasoning?

____________________________________________________
wait, wait…

I forgot something…

you little shits even talk about me….

GOATS ON FIRE….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssFaIhJkLsk

LIBERATION!

Sing from the rooftops:

“Atheism is dead!”

http://www.conspiracycafe.net/forum/index.php?/topic/25104-atheist-apocalypse/page__pid__117856_

It might surprise you to know just how common young-earth creationism is in the US.

About 45% of Americans think that “God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so”. And of course, the percentage of YECers would presumably rise a good deal if the poll were restricted to the 76% of Americans who subscribe to Christianity.

Gallup has asked this question for some 26 years: the results are 44%, 43%, 46%, 45%, 45%, 47%, 44%, 47%, 44%. Newsweek delivers 48% in 2007, CBS gets 48% in 2005 and 44% in 2006.

You can see these polls here.

I mean, I’m guessing your beef with ‘believe’ is that you think beliefs come from the heart, not from the head (or something like that). But that’s not fair at all. That’s doing a disservice to a perfectly legitimate English word, the best single word we have for when you think something is true.