https://benjamintettu.substack.com/p/abstraction-the-apologists-refuge

I believe god does not exist but still i am not sure about his existence so i need some people in comments who believes in god and who don't believe in god to start a peaceful debate with a goal is come to a conclusion and we will not argue on that conclusion until we found any strong proof against previous conclusion so are you guys in to change the perspective of others.

I am interested in a philosophical question concerning the relationship between emotional attraction and rational belief. Is it possible for someone to feel strongly drawn to a religion, its symbolism, or its conception of the world while simultaneously finding its metaphysical claims unjustified?

More specifically, can a person's emotional response to a religious tradition be understood independently of whether they consider its claims about reality to be true? How have philosophers distinguished emotional attachment, the desire to believe, and the rational justification of belief?

I am particularly interested in philosophical accounts of the relationship between affective states and epistemic justification, rather than personal opinions or religious advice.

Hume states (roughly) the following:

P1: A miracle, m, is defined precisely as a contradiction to laws of nature, L, and one in which no inductive grounds for the belief of can be produced.

P2: we have inductive reason to believe in the uniformity of nature and natural laws.

P3: Inductively, we have more evidence of L than m.

P4: explanations of m may entail unknown facts, other miracles, or naturalistic explanations.

P5: we have far more inductive grounds for naturalistic explanations.

P6: It is always more probable, by induction, that a naturalistic explanation is the case, as opposed to an unknown fact or another miracle.

C: therefore, it is always more likely that a miracle didn't occur than that it did, and that we have no grounds to accept miracles.

Of course, this is, in my opinion, rock solid. Hume only admits that, at times, a naturalistic explanation may be even more miraculaous than the miracle (Say, 500 people have a hallucination of an angel, simultaneously). I'd still like to hear opposing opinions, however.

Hello, I am very interested in how God is perceived. I am religious myself but I am not sure what form God takes, is God apart of everything like in pantheism or is separate from the world like in theism. So I am looking for book recommendations for books that discuss the different conceptions of God and the arguments for or against them. Does anyone know any books like that?

I hope Reddit's auto-translate feature will work (the post is in Russian)

Imagine this, you're a 5 year old child and your parent decides to treat you to ice cream. There's two options, chocolate and strawberry. Your parent tells you if you pick strawberry , they'll take you to Disney land but if you pick chocolate you're getting grounded for a month to reflect on your actions. Your parents brings out for you the two bowls of ice cream but covers them so you can't tell which one is chocolate and which one is strawberry. So, is it really a conscious choice for the child to make?

It’s late at night, and I’m feeling a bit scatterbrained. I want to know if anyone else shares my perspective, or if I’ve genuinely lost my mind. I grew up in a very devout Christian family—to the point where I was physically punished or forced to attend religious gatherings. Despite that, I’d love to draw closer to God, yet I still feel I’m not "fit" for it. Perhaps it’s due to the circumstances of my life, but people often look at me with disgust or confusion when they hear my views on God and my conception of paradise.

To me, paradise sounds like torture—a vast Eden where everyone is eternally happy, condemned to live on forever. In my experience, what makes life beautiful is its fleeting nature and the limited time we have; even if the days drag on, they never return. This very second, as I write this—and as someone reads it—that exact moment is gone forever. Take flowers, for instance: I’ve hardly ever heard anyone say, "I prefer plastic flowers to real ones." That’s clearly because real flowers have a history. They were sown, planted, and watered in a field alongside others—a process that is both distant from and deeply akin to human life. We exist together, in society. Isn’t it death that gives us our value? Just as someone might take something like their health for granted, only to truly appreciate it once it’s lost—this applies to any context, including my own situation right now.

I want to understand what freedom really is. Is paradise truly freedom? And what does it mean to seek the truth in a world like this? I don’t fully grasp it. Since I struggle to process my emotions in a healthy way, I find myself desperately resorting to intellectualization. I keep wondering if, one day, I might be able to "emigrate" to a paradise after death. My ideas and beliefs do not align with any religion I am familiar with. Although time has taken its toll—and I no longer feel that supposed obligation (naturally, given my age)—I still have many questions. Does God exist? Is God a "thing"? An idea? Is it something abstract, or perhaps salvation? I don’t understand.

Does God exist?

Hello im a 15 year old muslim and the last months i really think more deeply about this. If you use common sense does it even make sense that there is a God who gives you rules and if you dont follow them or believe in him you will be thrown in hellfire.as they say god is the most merciful and so on but who would do this. Im still a muslim yes but some question really come across my mind that doesnt make sense. If you think about it every religion is just one book from one guy as you can say of course in islam you say its from god but in the Perspective of a atheist he just sees mohammed or jesus and their book. So this shouldnt sound disrespectful or smth its just my thoughts if someone would come now and tell yeah im a prophet and so on everybody would call him mentally ill or whatever. So what do you guys think.

What if there is no god and the religious books which talk about prophet like Moses Abraham Solomon are those people who unlock 100% or 80% of there body like controlling water, time, & space like the Lucy movie.
And like they were confused and started thinking and decided that its not there body which is power full but something gave them the power and created religion

Preamble:

This is part of my series of arguments concerning Adam and Eve.

In this instalment, I will demonstrate that the idea of the trinity defies human math and logic.
This came up while reading these passages:

Genesis 1:26: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.”

Genesis 3:22: “And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil.”

Genesis 11:7: “Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language.”

You will notice that "US"...

I've been making a case that the bible is very often so ambiguous as to leave itself open to any number of possible interpretations.

I have a few of my own.
Speculations aren't facts.

US could mean that God is talking in the royal "we".. like the queen did.

What did the author(s) really intend by the use of "US"?
Well, after many decades of arguments, the bishops finally decided on a mess of logic and math.

They called it the "Trinity".

Of course, that idea makes no sense at all...

In math, it can't work. 3 just does not equal 1 ... a 5 year old learns that in grade school or even earlier.
In logic, 3=1 defies the law of identity, which is a little more complicated. In logic, the law of identity states that X = X. Therefore, 3X cannot equal 1X when X represents the same entity, including God.
In logic, 3=1 defies the law of identity.

Does that math and logic problem bother billions of Christians?
Of course not.

The two arguments use X as a general statement about anything.

Argument 1: LOGIC

P1: X = God.

P2: In logic, the law of identity states that 3X cannot equal 1X.

C: Therefore, 3 Gods cannot equal 1 God.

Argument 2: MATH

P1: X = God.

P2: In mathematics, the principle of arithmetic equality states that 3X ≠ 1X.

C: Therefore, 3 Gods ≠ 1 God.

मानव चेतना और ब्रह्मांडीय विकास का सिद्धांत: अंधविश्वास से मुक्ति

(The Theory of Human-Centric Cosmic Evolution & The Origin of Belief)

---

### 1. ब्रह्मांड की भौतिक स्वायत्तता (Physical Autonomy of the Universe)

ब्रह्मांड की उत्पत्ति और संचालन के लिए किसी अलौकिक या मानवीय रूप वाले ईश्वर की आवश्यकता नहीं है।

* **ऊर्जा का संकुचन और फैलाव (दबाव सिद्धांत):** आदि-बिंदु (Singularity) में ऊर्जा का घनत्व और दबाव चरम पर पहुँचने के कारण महाविस्तार (Big Bang) हुआ। इस ऊर्जा ने किसी पूर्व-निर्मित स्थान में प्रवेश नहीं किया, बल्कि फैलते हुए स्वयं अपने स्थान (Space) और समय (Time) का निर्माण किया।

* **अदृश्य नियम:** आकाशगंगाओं (जैसे मिल्की वे) का तीव्र घूर्णन और असंख्य तारों का अनुशासन किसी अदृश्य जादुई रिमोट से नहीं, बल्कि गुरुत्वाकर्षण (Gravity) और भौतिकी के मूलभूत नियमों (Laws of Physics) के कारण है।

### 2. कच्चे माल की निरंतरता और क्रमिक विकास (Continuity of Matter & Evolution)

* **तत्वों की प्राचीनता:** पृथ्वी पर मिट्टी, जल और ऑक्सीजन जैसे जीवनदायी तत्व इंसानों से करोड़ों साल पहले, डायनासोर के युग में भी उसी मात्रा में मौजूद थे। प्रकृति केवल अपने कच्चे माल को पुनर्चक्रित (Recycle) करती है।

* **मानव बुद्धि का वर्चस्व:** डायनासोर या अन्य जानवर करोड़ों वर्षों तक इन तत्वों के बीच रहकर भी कोई आविष्कार नहीं कर सके क्योंकि उनके पास जैविक सीमाएं थीं। जानवरों से क्रमिक रूप से विकसित (Evolve) होकर जब मनुष्य का मस्तिष्क विकसित हुआ, तब मनुष्य ने अपनी आवश्यकताओं के लिए आग, वस्त्र, पात्र और तकनीक का आविष्कार किया। पृथ्वी पर मौजूद हर उपयोगी वस्तु केवल मानव श्रम और बुद्धि का परिणाम है।

### 3. ईश्वर और कर्म की अवधारणा का उद्गम (The Anthropomorphic Construct of Deity)

* **मानवरूपी ईश्वर की कल्पना:** चूंकि मनुष्य स्वयं जानवरों से विकसित हुआ है, इसलिए ब्रह्मांड के रचयिता का रूप मनुष्य जैसा होना अतार्किक है। यह इस बात का प्रमाण है कि ईश्वर ने मनुष्य को नहीं, बल्कि मनुष्य ने अपनी छवि में ईश्वर की कल्पना की है।

* **सामाजिक नियंत्रण का साधन (Social Control Tool):** प्राचीन काल में जब कानून, न्यायालय या police जैसी व्यवस्थाएं नहीं थीं, तब आदिम समाज को हिंसक प्रवृत्तियों से बचाने और अनुशासित रखने के लिए 'ईश्वर के भय' और 'कर्म फल' के सिद्धांतों को एक नैतिक कानून (Moral Law) की तरह उपयोग किया गया।

* **आधुनिक युग का संकट (व्यावसायिकरण):** जो विचार कभी समाज को बांधने के लिए उपजा था, आज वह भय और लालच के व्यापार में बदल चुका है। सर्वशक्तिमान चेतना का केवल पत्थरों या मंदिरों की सीमाओं में सीमित होना यह साबित करता है कि यह व्यवस्था अब केवल एक संस्थागत व्यवसाय (Institutionalized Business) बनकर रह गई है।

---

### वैज्ञानिकों और विचारकों के लिए संदेश (Conclusion)

यह सिद्धांत दुनिया के वैज्ञानिकों और स्वतंत्र विचारकों को यह संदेश देता है कि अंधविश्वास को मिटाने के लिए हमें मनुष्यों को यह समझाना होगा कि वे किसी दैवीय खेल की कठपुतली नहीं हैं। प्रकृति ने केवल नियम और कच्चा माल दिया है, इस धरती को रहने लायक और सुंदर केवल मानव जाति की प्रगतिशील सोच ने बनाया है।

Iam and agnostic and i want from the thiests here to give me an argument for the existence of God and we could also debate topics that are related to the subjet such as morals and consciousness, etc

There is this pattern in Abrahamic religions where God and humans share essences. And when the child grows up and is told or deduces or understands that this God was made up, make-believe then he stops believing in this God. But since they share an essence, he stops, believing in this essence as well. So that causes a spiritual trap. Where if you believe in God you believe a lie. And if you don't believe in God, you don't believe in yourself. And if you say, you're God, you're gonna be heretic and punished for it. And if you simply act like you are really are, then people will say, "do you think you're God?" or something like that and will judge you pedantic or smthng. So there's really no way of being explicitly ourselves because of religion without also being an outcast.

Did philosophers cover this aspect of religion? Can you name drop a few so I can start researching this?

Here some examples of what I'm talking about in judaism, christianity and islam.

In Judaism, it is plain. God made us in his image. And he breathed it into us to animate us. Breath is identified with spirit in semetic languages. So basically, if our spirit and our appearances are the same as God, we share essences with God.

Christianity does the same thing but about love. Since a child loves their parenting unconditionally because he imprints on them at birth. It's apparently a survival mechanism because if the child sticks to the parent, he has more chance of survival. And children grow up being told that God is love when he is himself love for his parents. There's a shared essence of love between God and children. I believe we remain of the essence of love all our lives, it's just, we deny it, but that's another question.

In Islam, it is a uniqueness, unicity and being a unit, a one individual that is attributed to God. That is also an essence of humans. We each are our unique individual and each are one unit. There is no one like me, but me.

I feel that whatever essence we give to God will be lost to the children of that religion. That's why people in Christian/Western countries are very cold. And you could die of hunger in the streets and no one will care. Mostly. Whereas in Islamic countries, there are more open-hearted. It's a warmer culture. But it comes at the cost of conformity and not being your own person, not being unique. I'm not sure about Judaism, so I won't talk about it. I don't know their culture that much.

Are you a believer? Why you trust in good, in basics of what? 🤨

I'm an Ex-Christian,

Now i am a freethinker, rationalist and a happy person.