Poll: Who believes in God?

Your beliefs

  • I believe in God

    Votes: 135 13.4%
  • I do not believe in God

    Votes: 445 44.1%
  • I used to believe but have lost my faith

    Votes: 42 4.2%
  • I used to disbelieve but have found my faith

    Votes: 7 0.7%
  • I believe there is "something" but not sure what

    Votes: 200 19.8%
  • I'm Agnostic

    Votes: 167 16.6%
  • I believe in multiple deities

    Votes: 13 1.3%

  • Total voters
    1,009
How can one speak of credibilty on religion,when its all faith?

quite easily tbh.. as I've already pointed out - cargo cults - we know what a plane is yet they have faith in them being sent from the gods - we know that that faith completely lacks any credibility

Agnostic is a faith and no different than having a faith in god.

erm no

I'd agree if you said atheism is a faith i.e. they have faith/believe there isn't a god just as a Christian have faith that there is - agnostics are simply saying we can't prove it either way
 
Last edited:
quite easily tbh.. as I've already pointed out - cargo cults - we know what a plane is yet they have faith in them being sent from the gods - we know that that faith is completely lacks any credibility

why is believing in Jesus Christ anymore credible?


erm no

I'd agree if you said atheism is a belief i.e. they believe there isn't a god just as a Christian believe there is - agnostics are simply saying we can't prove it either way


Being aggorant enough to state "we can't prove it either way" is as much a faith statement as saying "there is a god or there isnt one."
 
God doesn't allow these things.

All the things you mention are Manifestations of man.
I agree completely
and are most of all the manifestation of free will.

What about the benefits to be obtained from the concept of free will: What would we be without it?
 
Hence why its faith.

But it's not a faith it's a fact. It's imposable to prove one way or the other(at the moment). Therefore no faith is required.

Being aggorant enough to state "we can't prove it either way" is as much a faith statement as saying "there is a god or there isnt one."
Again it's not. You come up with a model by which we could test it. At the moment we have no method which can test it, therefore it is untestable and as suuch agnostic is the only one which doesn't require faith.
 
But it's not a faith it's a fact. It's imposable to prove one way or the other(at the moment). Therefore no faith is required.

How can it be fact when ,as you state It's impossible to prove one way or the other.

Thats the point

Its faith in the unknowing.

To have a belief in Atheism shows as much faith as the pure conviction of god.

The eistence of God cannot be proved or disproved.

So an atheist is no where nearer to knowing the truth.

Meaning faith in the non existence of god.
 
Last edited:
How can it be fact when ,as you state It's impossible to prove one way or the other.

Thats the point

Its faith in the unknowing.

To have a belief in Atheism shows as much faith as the pure conviction of god.

You seem to be confusing atheism and agnosticism here. Atheists either explicitly or implicitly say there is not a god (sometimes known as strong and weak atheism respectively), agnostics say they don't know whether there is a god or not - if you'd prefer to call it thus they reserve judgement due to lack of evidence/information and due to its inherant untestability.

Agnosticism is not a faith based position.

As for me, although it isn't an option here I'm probably closest to an apathetic agnostic - I don't know if there is a god and I don't really care, it has next to no impact on my life so I can happily say the question is to all intents and purposes irrelevant to me.
 
I believe we where created by aliens, so I guess my God is in a flying saucer some where :D Probably getting drunk :D
 
Don't know who said this but I think it's apt:

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is He neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
 
Karl Marx said:
Religion is the opiate of the people.

This is why there must be religion, and faith and why people must believe in something. Without it then we have anarchy.

I'm not saying that belief and religion are good, just trying to argue why it is necessary. And yes, it is true, that most of the wars this world has ever had have been based on religion.

However.

If you look at the major religions they all seem to involve the same people. Isn't that funny? Doesn't it make you think that maybe a lot of religions are based upon a history of the world as well as a belief in a deity?

Personally I am atheist. This doesn't mean that I believe in, as was brilliantly stated earlier, 'a nothing', it means that I don't believe that there is a higher power, a higher being, which has shaped not only the world we inhabit, but the world we live in.

From reading this thread I have been amused at how the posters have attacked each other because of their beliefs.

Why?

Just because I disagree with what someone believes, does that make them less than me? More than me? What?

Maybe I'm just too pragmatic, as an atheist, but surely it is up to an individual to believe in what they want, think what they want, and as long as they do not adversely impact upon others then why would you not accept that?

To answer the OP, no, I do not believe in a 'god' or any kind of higher power (certainly not Boris Johnson). To answer everyone else, think before you post.

Fly safe o/
 
imaginaryfriends.png

saved me posting it.
I find religous people very two faced, for example my mate (who moved to texas) has a friend who is 22 and her parents force her to go to church, and yet say they would kick her out if she brought a black man home. I thought christianity was love your neighbour, do not judge etc etc.

OP - No I do not, I mean come on....really:p I have been above the clouds and theres just sky there. People use religion as an excuse for things.

EDIT: Forgot to mention, I dont have anything against relious people, I just dont understand them.
 
When did being an agnostic state the existince of god is untestable?

Being agnostic only exist's through the preception of man.

As in: Its man made through human consciousness .

By this thinking the faith in human testing and the limitations of man make an agnostic faith directed towards his or her perception.
 
Don't know who said this but I think it's apt:

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is He neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Epicurus is the man you are looking for, a Greek philosopher from around the 3rd century BC. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom