The Student Room Group

Do you believe in God?

Scroll to see replies

Yes indeed I do! This world is way too complex and way to astonishing to be an accident..


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Simes
You brought it up by trying to claim that because Newton invented gravity in the 17th century (snigger) and you think nobody had noticed it before then, that there must be a god or gods because there is no evidence now for a god or gods, but presumably because someone will find some in the future because that is what happened to gravity.

An interesting thought experiment.

Try switching to decaff.


I never said Newton invented gravity (L2 read). Newton may not have been the first one to observe gravity; but his is the theory most accepted until the early 20th century, the rest are just not relevant except for historical curiosity.

Conclusion.

L2 logic (two terms lmao)
L2 read
Reply 62
Original post by dead sheep eater
Newton may not have been the first one to observe gravity; but his is the theory most accepted until the early 20th century, the rest are just not relevant except for historical curiosity.
So do you now accept there is evidence for gravity? Are you OK with that?

But there's still no evidence for there being a god or gods.
Original post by dead sheep eater
There is no evidence for gravity.
Therefore, there is no gravity.

It's not even a valid form of argument it only has two terms lol.

So this would have worked before the 17th century?


There is plenty of evidence for gravity, from the equations to the fact that the moon is orbiting us, we were orbiting the sun, and the sun is circling the centre of the galaxy, in the Orion arm of the Milky Way.

There is no evidence for God, but there is evidence for gravity. Therefore "There is no evidence for gravity. Therefore, there is no gravity." Is not a valid point against "There is no evidence for God. Therefore, there is no God.". This kind of logic may not be solid, this is arguable.

For example:

Do you believe that everything around you, the people and this planet is real? Do you think you can trust your five main senses to tell really from a fake construction of it? Prove it.

You can't prove anything is real, but that doesn't necessarily mean that nothing is.

It isn't about what worked before the 17th century, it's about what works now.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Username unknown
There is plenty of evidence for gravity, from the equations to the fact that the moon is orbiting us, we were orbiting the sun, and the sun is circling the centre of the galaxy, in the Orion arm of the Milky Way.

There is no evidence for God, but there is evidence for gravity. Therefore "There is no evidence for gravity. Therefore, there is no gravity." Is not a valid point against "There is no evidence for God. Therefore, there is no God.". This kind of logic may not be solid, this is arguable.

For example:

Do you believe that everything around you, the people and this planet is real? Do you think you can trust your five main senses to tell really from a fake construction of it? Prove it.

You can't prove anything is real, but that doesn't necessarily mean that nothing is.

It isn't about what worked before the 17th century, it's about what works now.


Posted from TSR Mobile


Why do people find this concept difficult to understand? I am not a ****ing idiot I know about the evidence we have for gravity; and lets not pretend its easy anyway quantum physics and relativity has made that one even more complicated.

To clarify,

His argument was this.

We have no evidence for God.
Therefore there is no God.

How is that sound? We had no evidence for relativity and quantum physics until the 20th century, does that mean they did not exist? No.
A rather simple question asking for a PERSONAL opinion. Yet certain people can't comment on it without insulting other peoples belief in a god, or lack of belief in a god.
I was a "catholic" when I was younger but am now an atheist.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile

We care said no one.
No. All my issues with religion aside, I don't be believe in God (any creator, regardless of his/her/its personal traits, or lack thereof) simply due to the lack of empirical evidence of a divine being.
Original post by The_Lonely_Goatherd
People at/offer holders for Oxbridge CAN believe in God, you know :tongue:


I would be amazed if any did, doing science, perhaps divinity though
Yes I do believe there is a God.
Original post by Gott der Zweite
I would be amazed if any did, doing science, perhaps divinity though


There were science students and professors who believed in God, when I was at Oxford :yep:
Original post by dead sheep eater
Why do people find this concept difficult to understand? I am not a ****ing idiot I know about the evidence we have for gravity; and lets not pretend its easy anyway quantum physics and relativity has made that one even more complicated.

To clarify,

His argument was this.

We have no evidence for God.
Therefore there is no God.

How is that sound? We had no evidence for relativity and quantum physics until the 20th century, does that mean they did not exist? No.


That was more or less my point... Although I don't believe in God. I was saying that the way you first illustrated this wasn't the best way to get your point across because there is proof for gravity's existence.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by The_Lonely_Goatherd
There were science students and professors who believed in God, when I was at Oxford :yep:


Did they say in any detail their stance on religion with science or were they just brought up Christian?
Original post by Gott der Zweite
Did they say in any detail their stance on religion with science or were they just brought up Christian?


They are actively Christian :yep:
Original post by The_Lonely_Goatherd
They are actively Christian :yep:


Fair enough then
Define "God". I assume due to the capitalisation you mean the typical deity purported to exist by the Abrahamic religions? If so no. But I still need a definition to answer.
Original post by Gott der Zweite
I would be amazed if any did, doing science, perhaps divinity though


80% of analytic philosophers are atheist though. Pretty sure statistically western scientists are similar. Philosophers would of course be the ones one should trust here more so than the scientists though. Science tends not to lend itself very well to answering such questions. Although it does, of course, aid in answering them.
Original post by TheWiseSalmon
Nope. The God of any and every religion is quite clearly a human construct and there's nothing that has ever convinced me that a God of any kind exists.
Does the God of Christianity/Islam/any other religion exist? Almost certainly not. All religion is incoherent nonsense which could have been made up by a toddler.
Could a God like the one of Deism exist? Maybe, but I have no reason to believe in one because I'm not in the habit of believing in anything without good reason to do so.

So for all intents and purposes, I'm an atheist.


Pastafarianism is not incoherent nonsense. It's coherent.
Original post by Hayley Williams
I was a "catholic" when I was younger but am now an atheist.


Posted from TSR Mobile


Why?

Quick Reply

Latest