64
submitted 3 days ago by sloppysol@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

As simple as possible to summarize the best way you can, first, please. Feel free to expand after, or just say whatever you want lol. Honest question.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Jayb151@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago

In short, yes because you lose nothing by trying to emulate Jesus.

That said, the church be crazy af

[-] runiq@feddit.org 5 points 2 days ago

I may not believe in God, but I can definitely respect the man. ✊

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Lyra_Lycan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 29 points 3 days ago

Upvoting the actual answers here, as some who were not the target audience and haven't read the question have answered.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 day ago

For most, it's indoctrination.

[-] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Because of Nick Cave.

[-] RedCarCastle@aussie.zone 24 points 3 days ago

In some sort of greater being yes, in any kind of church or following no.

I find I have my own belief in some unknown cosmic entitys, something along the lines of energy is always in a state of flow, life and death, rocks to dust, consciousness to the sprawling reaches of the universe a bit of new age spirituality stuff,

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] waterbird@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 3 days ago

Makes me feel more assured and will reduce my suffering until I die. After my death, regardless of if I am right or wrong, the net positive of having had the soothing idea of a larger meaning can’t and won’t be retroactively undone. So why the hell not?

[-] OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

I think most people think like this at their core regardless of class, status, label.

load more comments (17 replies)
[-] iasmina2007@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago

It provides hope and comfort. Christianity and Romanian culture are deeply intertwined, and I’m a fan of our traditions.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You cannot have a painting without an artist. A sculpture without a sculpture. A tool will never use itself, it takes a user.

Imagine a blank and static universe. Someone had to add or move something to start the initial reaction even if they never play a part in the events after.

In some sense there is a creator. I just don't know in what capacity.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago

If you zoom out on the universe it's almost pure noise. Does that resemble what you'd expect from a designer? I guess it could be designed, but there's also no reason to indicate that if pure randomness is also expect to create the same things.

[-] OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

I am unsure of the capacity of a designer, constructor, what label you want to call an input. To have noise there must be an initial force to create it regardless of its structure, randomness, pattern, form. A big bang, literally anything we may never know. But if the universe was static and blank with no energy or anything just a black sand box. There would be no noise until a reaction happened.

I have never seen something come from nothing. I don't think anyone has ever or this question wouldn't have been asked or even be in our consciousness.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

I have never seen something come from nothing. I don't think anyone has ever or this question wouldn't have been asked or even be in our consciousness.

Well, particle and anti-particle pairs come into existence from nothing all the time actually. They typically annihilate though.

[-] OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

But they don't come into existence without an outside force. Those are first and second parties reacting. Who's the 3rd, 4th, 5th, END/START? Edit: Who spurs them into existence? Even if these pairs form and the sum is zero once the +1 and - 1 clash and the game zero sums. Who started or what started the spark something cannot come from nothing, this just means science must not have discovered the root cause of your equation. That is/was my only point. If things in the beginning were static, no movement, no input or output, someone/something adding an object, or kick off to start all of the events after whether they were involved or not. Just speaking on the OPs creator terms and not digressing into free will vs destiny.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Manmoth@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 days ago

Can anyone make sense of this post? It looks like unintelligible symbols crammed together to me.

[-] Zenith@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago

Why someone? Why not something? Physics say a monopole magnet is mathematically possible, something like that would absolutely cause a disturbance because it doesn’t conform to the laws of physics we have defined like every action has an equal and opposite reaction… I think you’re right, something happened but I don’t know why it would be someone and not simply probability and the natural world conforming to that probability

[-] OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

I can't answer every question especially pertaining to evolving science. I wouldn't even try.. I'm not religious either. To have something, someone or something had to create it that's all I can muster on the subject. Can you create anything without touching, moving, manipulating by some outside force?

I don't know how it happened, why, person or thing. All I can figure is if the universe was a blank sheet of paper, something had to add, kickstart, etc a reaction for things to unfold regardless of size, time or scale. I don't really believe the universe at its utmost basic, blank canvas form voided form, simply has energy. It doesnt make sense. Energy requires input from some outside source.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 days ago

Hmm. I think you can't have those things without an observer. Art, beauty and utility are in the eye (or hand) of the beholder, and apt to appear anywhere.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] sebsch@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

For me "God" isn't some person with wits and thoughts.

It is just the circumstances in where we live. The time the physics the vibration and energy filling the matter and thoughts.

There is no need in praying to it (except for you self). We're in a happy stream full of energy filled with feeling "souls" going into the same direction in time and filling this strange place where we feel energy as matter, waves and colors.

[-] ArsonButCute@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

Gods, plural. But believe is a weird word.

I commune with the ancient gods of my ancestors, whether I believe in them is complicated though. I spent most of my life atheist after the christian church failed to grab me. I learned of my ancestral religion from my great grandmother and my great aunt. Grandma was Catholic on paper but still recognized the old gods. My aunt called herself a druid.

I choose to commune with the old gods because I have to believe in something. I've felt the call of spirit, the gaping void in my heart where spirituality was meant to be, but I do not trust organized religion. I don't trust the churches. I don't trust those who would hold power, enforced by faith, over those who do not know better.

[-] HexesofVexes@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Truth is proof - I can neither prove the number of gods is >0, nor prove it is =0.

Thus cautious agnosticism (since the evidence suggests, if there is at least one god, then they really hate us).

[-] OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

They may not hate us. They could be totally agnostic too. Like a rain drop that dropped in our pond, they may be passing by having no idea the ripple it left behind. That's the wildness of all the options for GODS capacity. But hate requires human input from stimulus.

[-] dbug13@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

We seek tangible proofs, of intangible things, in a tangible world, using intangible consciousness, thoughts, mind and reason, called the "Self" or "I Am", in order to determine if an intangible being could possibly exist. You are your own proof of such things, amongst 8 billion other proofs. We are the intangible being we may or may not believe in. All of us are.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
64 points (81.4% liked)

Asklemmy

48153 readers
568 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS