I can't get my head round this

My kind of belief (or unbelief) doesn't need any help. I believe the universe exists. That's enough for me. Not knowing why is not a problem for me because I think we probably will never know why. Meanwhile we try to find out what and how and the finding out is fascinating. It doesn't involve anything supernatural from my point of view. Do I feel any lack because of that? Nope.

It is, quite simply, wonder-ful. I am content with that.

A miracle is something which cannot be explained by the knowledge and understanding that is in place at the time or something that is reported to another by someone who does not understand it.

Everyone walks around the streets now talking into mobile phones. A thousand years ago - or much less - they would be burnt at the stake because they conversed with the devil.

I don't think there is a reason for the universe existing - it just does. Try to imagine nothingness and our finite minds come up against a wall.
I can't understand why anybody who doesn't find belief coming naturally would want to seek it. Like Bags, I am totally happy with my lack of belief. I know this life is all there is so I try to be as happy and as useful as I can - not because I fear punishment or expect happiness in an afterlife, but just because I am part of humankind, a social animal.

There doesn't need to be a reason, just be happy that it exists.

But if it did not exist, we would not be around to wonder why it was not there, so perhaps existence fills an existence-shaped hole?

Good one, elegran! I like it

Very witty!

Very Zen.

No existential angst then. Sounds good to me elegran

Very Succinect , Elegran .

Whoops, or even "succinct"

I think believers might be more prone to angst. Once you have decided that there is no god, and life just happens, it is very relaxing!

Going back to the OP I think it must be very hard for those who have a deeply held alleigance to a religion when these awful natural or man made disasters/horrors occur.

Some will find it hard, as J08 is at the moment, of reconciling these atrocities with the view of a loving & all powerful deity. Others will argue that these trials are sent to test faith & that man's free-will is at play but harder to understand with quakes etc. Fundamentalist Christians have been known to say it is God's wrath... as in the case of floods/ark etc.. on the wickedness of 'man'.

In the end I decided I could not reconcile it all and became a humanist. Mostly the world is a wonderful place and most people within it would not deliberately hurt another but we all have the capacity to do bad things. I think it is my responsibility to behave well for the benefit of the wider world/human race. I do not need a god to make me do this.

Thank you for bringing the thread back to the OP nanaej I really could not understand what some of the posters above were wanting to say with their pithy comments ? Were they trying to be funny or just undermining? This is a rhetorical question not in need of an answer .It certainly had the effect of putting me off posting even though not directed at me .

Gorki - many of us enjoy discussing our various beliefs and we do not intend to offend anybody. I am certainly not offended by anybody else wanting to believe, and I don't expect other people to object to my atheism.
It is the nature of forums that people of different points of view will put them forward. Did you not think your posts would generate some discussion?
I cannot see any post which suggests people are making fun or trying to undermine anybody.

OK. It's probably a case of my not understanding when people just write a couple of words with no explanation. Maybe it's just a case of this type of discussion not suiting me. There is no criticism implied and I certainly don't mind people challenging my ideas. I am married to an atheist and have no problem with that at all but I do like to know what people mean. The problem is mine and I take responsibility for my feelings.

Gorki, I hope you keep on reading threads and posting - your views are just as valid as anyone else's. Some of us have been members almost from the inception and we have got used to each other's styles and type of humour. However, new members are always welcome and they bring fresh ideas to the forum. There is no 'hierarchy' in Gransnet, based on length of membership - it just takes a bit of time for new members to get the feel of the forum.

Keep posting Gorki , every person on G/N has a perfect right to have their say .
you make good points .

It is like a conversation in real life, Gorki, sometimes people do say a few words and think that in the context of what has gone before they will make sense. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.

Don't be put off by it, it is not aimed at you personally. That is not what the forum is to be used for.

Nonu - snap!

To return to God allowing bad things to happen.

I think natural disasters are a natural result of the forces at work in the physical environment. The processes that cause them are being understood more and more as data and records and correlations are studied. Perhaps one day we will be able to predict them accurately or even prevent them happening - though that might result in different problems occurring. Blaming them on God's anger really seems to be in the realms of OT ignorance and guilt.

The "inhumanity of man to man" is perpetrated by imperfect humans, not by God. No point railing at him for allowing it.

As for the cures that doctors were not expecting - they cannot explain them at the moment but it is possible that in the future more research and better understanding will find out how they happened.

The causes of more and more illnesses are being made clear all the time. It does not take anything supernatural. For instance, in some families there was a pattern of children being miscarried or stillborn or dying soon after birth for no obvious reason. My own grandmother lost half of her children. Then the rhesus factor in blood was discovered, and the effect on the unborn child of having a blood supply incompatible with the mother's. Now it is very rare for a mother with rhesus negative blood to lose a baby.

So perhaps the cause of an unexpected recovery may be found - the unconscious mind may have an influence. It does not need supernatural intervention.

This -the OP -of course is one of the great questions which has been wrestled with for generations.

Those of us who have a religious belief certainly don't have 'answers', but as I've said before on other threads, the idea of God as the great magician in the sky, playing fast and loose with humanity, is a mediaeval concept.

Many Chrstians see God as being with humanity, suffering with it and being at one with humanity. This is a view described by Bonhoffer.

As for the contingency of the world, if we contemplate the issue of why the world exists, we are acknowledging that there was no need for creation. But in one view, God chose that it should exist and it does. Given that entities exist, and that no entity can bring itself into existence, (which is absurd) then there are two alternative ways of viewing the contingency of the cosmos.

1 that is was created by an everlasting transcendent being which has absolute ontological independence or 'factual necessity' (not logical necessity as its existence can be denied without self contradiction,) as such Divine existence is self existent, incorruptible and Indestructable.

2 it is an everlasting causal sequence or process of temporally overlapping contingent entities which are conditioned, decaying and perishable.

Whether or not this view provides a coherent account or sufficient explanation for the intelligible structure of the cosmos is a subject for ongoing philosophical debate, both here and elsewhere.

It is not a debate which will, or can be resolved either here or elsewhere.

I do not think it is a debate that can be resolved at all; and that is one of the reasons why I have no belief in a deity. If such a being existed why would it choose to make itself so opaque? - unless we assume that this being is simply perverse and enjoys watching people struggle to make sense of things. Now that truly is scary!

It could be that God is not choosing to make him/herself opaque simply that we aren't able to understand a mind that could create galaxies.

And for those of us who are Christians, we do not find Jesus Christ opaque at all.

Philosophy and theology are difficult, so are physics, chemistry or other academic disciplines. That doesn't make them opaque.

The reality of 'Christ with us' is central to the life of a Christian - opacity doesn't enter the margins.

I am intrigued that people should say that the deity is not opaque - why then for thousands of years have people been struggling to decide whether there is a god? - arguing with each other - postulating different gods - philosophers have agonised about this since man first appeared. Definitely totally opaque I would say!

Any deity(should such an entity exist) has a choice as to whether they make themselves clearly known to their creations or whether they stick in the background - I think the choice is clear!

I find the argument about the weakness of humanity and the limitations of our understanding unconvincing. The being that created us (if we assume that is what happened) had/has a choice about how we are. Making the choice to create us so enfeebled in mind that we cannot understand what he/she/it is on about does seem to me to be pretty darned perverse and pointless!