I Don't Believe

[skepticSikh]

i guess not...religion also holds as its goal contentment, but doesnt give it willy nilly.

whatever it is, in the end its a personal question, like u said....

[Balwinder Singh]

i guess not...religion also holds as its goal contentment, but doesnt give it willy nilly.

whatever it is, in the end its a personal question, like u said....

The way you say things or analyse things is very nice. Atleast you have the courage to challenge......as dancing warrior said "you are not doing what u were programmed for".

My only suggestion is that don't just accumulate arguments against so called "religious" people or their religious beleif system....but search for the real "truth".....search for the "real" light which make everything crystal clear. God (i think u dont beleive in Him...but still if there is some higher spirit) has given you all faculties to know the real truth. As guru ji says:

Gobind milan ki eh teri bariya.

[skepticSikh]

yes, if u keep ur goal to know the real truth, even if u don't get there, its a satisfying journey. But you can't really accumulate evidence against something that is intrinsically a moral question. You can justify and support anything objective (anything scientific) with evidence, but religion is beyond evidence, because truly religious people don't look at it as a scientific question, but as a moral question. So it all works itself out, i guess...

thx for the compliments...

[Guest Guest]

I dunno how to write down what I mean by this but the older I got the more I felt like God was a concept not a substance or thing. I then tried to understand karma - i was told we were born due to the actions we did in our past life - but what made us get born in the first place?

The next bit I am going to explain is rather more complex. I believe people do their own actions and they are responsible for the world. For example I might be born into a rich family who is the minority in a prejudiced country. Then the leader of the country attacks us and my family become poor. People might say this is in my karma and God did it.

I don't see it like that. I am poor because of what the leader of the country did. I therefore see the world as a mixture of people's actions. You basically get lucky cos they might go in your favour or you may have to suffer but thats all down to chance.

I therefore believe that we are collectively responsible for each other's life...and people from the past may play a part depending on how far their doings extend into the future.

I believe when I die thats the end of me. I am no more. There will be no sort of judgement or anything. I believe I am the jusge of my life, I am the judge of if I want to help other people and I am the judge of if I want to cause further damage in the world - all of this is something I do in my everyday life.

I like sikhi alot because it gave me perspective on myself, on the reality of ego, greed etc. On the reason of why its better to burn bodies, keep hair etc. I feel almost like a wise man with all the teachings however I only see God as a concept to prehaps make people realise this unity we all have...

I'm not sure what else to write but I've really really tired hard to think there is a God.

I thought EXACTLY like u before, heres something to think about...Who made the leader of the country do it? when u come to the end of it they say something in the cuontry leaders mind made him have hate, thats wonderfull but why does he have hate? then the replys usually something all technical like he has a brain which sends emotions through nervers or wutever...Well who made the nerves and emotions? When u go through all of it u have to agree that theres some power there that makes EVERYTHING

[Bundha]

Sorry, I caught this thread late.

I think it all begins and ends with Ek-oan-kaar.

It is the first thing Guru Nanak Dev Ji told us – there is one God. If you cannot accept this then you shouldn’t really call yourself a Sikh.

All things are made of matter. But what is matter? How do we know that there are little electrons whizzing about in vast nothingness around a central mass? It is because we have been told, or we have read it. Have we seen it ourselves? No.

Even the teacher has not seen it or the lecturer but we take his word for it. Do we say “ no, we do not believe you”? in which case he will tell you to go read up about it.

We are so ready accept such a theory from a person who is only a little more intellectual then us (I remember in A level physics, the students were sometimes more knowledgeable then the teacher!) yet when Guru Nanak dev Ji tells us anything we are not ready to accept. We question and question and still will not accept.

The thing boils down to this – Do you believe in Guru Nanak Dev Ji. If yes, then accept what he says. Sure, question and find out about the world around you but stick to the basic concept that Guru Nanak Dev Ji is right. If you cannot accept this then, firstly you are not really a Sikh, and you should not pretend to be one, secondly you will live out your life not even knowing that there is a Truth to be known, and when you die you may think that is the end, but you will open your eyes on the other side and realise that a life has been wasted.

One can doggedly question everything. Every argument that one can put for God can be turned around and skepticscised. If you are determined not to believe then you are an Atheist, simple.

[Guest _unknown_]

I started this thread - I think all you people missed out the below......I've quoted it again....it was on page 2..

I NEED TO KNOW WHAT GURU SAYS IS GOD.

Can you please explain to me what I am meant to think about when you say God. I would just like to add one more thing....for a very long time I did go through all the things you all wrote about like how if we are here there must be God, the whole universe concept etc But this is how I see it - I believe these somethings created us and through their domino effect we live and through their domino effect they will end us, the world, the universe etc. So basically its one thing leading to another and we are the product of that.

I believe we will end but just because we end it does not mean there is nothing left...something will be left over so the something is always there. Each time the world ends its down to chance what something survives and what does not...this thing has no beginning or no end....I therefore believe the ending and the start of the univerise etc has no beginning or no end....it was always there....I dunno how to describe this BUT basically each time different things can start us off and different things end up as leftovers ....however nothing is lost since it came from the one thing and it ends still being the same thing...all that changes is the 'roop' but it is all still one..

I hope the above makes sense because I'm finding it hard to write what I mean...but basically there is no beginning to this thing...particles were there and started a domino effect causing us, trees etc. And as we live we experience the domino actions set in place previously and ourselves cause dominos..

This is actually how I see it and so I'm hoping people understand why I don't believe in stuff like when we die something happens to us...cos we are nothing.

This is the only thing I believe in (I hope it makes sense cos I always have difficulty explaining to people what I mean) Anyways I feel if I believe in this then I shouldn't say I believe in God since the vast majority of people think God has powers he can zap at...obviously the thing I believe in also does everything but as you can see it does so in an ENTIRELY different way....

[rimmel]

.

[proactive]

I have a huge problem - I don't believe in God..

You might not believe in God but I'm sure God believes in you!

[Guest Sikhboy]

Waheguru ji ka khalsa

Wahegure ji ki fateh

Hey man I know what you are saying and have been through it myself too. I read about what you said when you explained that you beleived that it was all a domini effect and the matter of the universe acting of it's own accord.

But if you look in Jap JI Sahib Guru ji explains in a few lines that doubt will overtake the mind and it might seem to us that there is no logical way that god can exist. However a few hundred years ago simple laws like gravity and other things were completely out of the grasp of human thought. god will always be outside our grasp. Whether when I will get in a crash or be safe when I run a red light involves systems and chances that I have no way of knowing he orgin of.

There is according to Gurbani a God that transends all human logic and no matter how many years you spend and how wise you are will you ever be able to grasp his true scale.

Hope I helped! Im 17 by the way :WW:

[skepticSikh]

fine way to escape the debate...

let me just list some of the logical fallacies we ought to know:

appeal to authority or argument by authority: a type of argument in logic, consisting on basing the truth value of an assertion on the authority, knowledge or position of the person asserting it. ...a fallacy in regard to logic, because the validity of a claim does not follow from the credibility of the source

argument from personal incredulity, also known as argument from personal belief or argument from personal conviction, refers to an assertion that because one personally finds a premise unlikely or unbelievable, the premise can be assumed not to be true, or alternately that another preferred but unproven premise is true instead.

argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam ("appeal to ignorance") or argument by lack of imagination, is a logical fallacy in which it is claimed that a premise is true only because it has not been proven false or that a premise is false only because it has not been proven true.

and some more food for thought, here's a small part of the argument for the existence of God:

Although there are variations, the basic argument can be stated as follows:

1. @ is too complex, orderly, adaptive, apparently purposeful, or beautiful to have occurred randomly or accidentally.

2. Therefore, @ must have been created by a sentient, intelligent, wise, or purposeful being.

3. God is that sentient, intelligent, wise, or purposeful being.

4. Therefore, God exists.

@ usually stands for the universe, the evolutionary process, humankind, a given animal species, or a particular organ like the eye or capability like language in humans. @ may also stand for the fundamental constants of the universe, like physical constants and physical laws. Sometimes this argument is also based on the anthropic principle that these constants seem tuned specifically to allow intelligent life "as we know it" to evolve.

While most of the classic forms of this argument are linked to monotheism, some versions of the argument may substitute for God a lesser demiurge, multiple gods and/or goddesses, or perhaps extraterrestrials as cause for natural phenomena, although reapplication of the argument might still imply an ultimate cause. One can also leave the question of the attributes of a hypothesized "designer" completely open, yielding the following simple formulation:

1. Complexity implies a designer.

2. The universe is highly complex.

3. Therefore, the universe has a Designer.

A concise and whimsical teleological argument was offered by G. K. Chesterton in 1908: "So one elephant having a trunk was odd; but all elephants having trunks looked like a plot."

all information provided as is, to promote discussion, debate, and dissection of this phenomena...

I personally don't think u can prove or disprove God. But that doesn't mean I reject out-of-hand the domain of science. Science is a verb, a way of knowing, not a fixed noun. And precisely because it can update itself makes it a good model to describe the materialistic world, or in other words, reality.

Also, do you respect evidence? Are you willing to change YOUR mind when you see it? I speak this in relation to pseudo-sciences like homeopathy, and certain magical thinking like ghosts, ufos, ecto-plasms, ESP, and psychics. But it can be broadened for anything at all. A skeptic is not a naysayer. A skeptic is someone that brings phenomena to the test of logic, and to the test of evidence. No matter how honorific a scientist or theologist or man or woman or anyone, if they haven't got proof, you cannot believe them. THIS is logic.