I think we're still putting God into a box here. We're using preconceived notions about God to argue whether He exists, but His existence doesn't depend on those things.
A being calling itself God is inherently egotistical. As for giving us no proof, perhaps he wants us to focus on the 'help one another' part, not him being there or not. (plus, I think it may stem from 'owning' or controling something you know about, hence the Jewish/Christian God having no 'real' name)
We're the ones calling it God. That's a title we have for that which created us, that which is above us. I don't think God thinks in those terms.
No it isn't. There are FAR more important questions in this world that actually matter than whether an invisible man in the sky exists or not.
Worrying about whether what could possibly be an imaginary character exists or not is among the same lines as wondering if Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny exist.
People who get too caught up in their religious beliefs end up becoming nutcases. Especially if all you do is worry about whether you're sinning or not and if some person human beings came up with as a means to bring order to others and attempt to explain the mysteries of the world from the early ages (back before people realized science was a more logical approach) exists or not.
Yes, it is. What we believe about God impacts so much of our philosophy. If you're talking God vs. material reality, then it's definitely the most important question you can ask. I mean, if this is all there is, we have no purpose for living. Sure, you can find things that you enjoy, but we would only enjoy those things because they help our species survive in some way.
Some say that our purpose is to have children and pass on our learning to them, but frankly, that's a load of crap. Our children will die, as will their children and their children, as will the human race and the universe itself. In the end, it's all lost. Besides, the things we learn would only help our children survive a little longer. In the end, their lives would be just as meaningless as our own. As philosopher Viktor Frankl said, "Something purposeless does not gain purpose by its continuation." Love, joy, goodness- all the things that give us meaning would all just be traits that help us survive. They wouldn't give a purpose to life but serve a purpose to live.
Then there's moral law. It can't exist in a material reality. It would just be an evolutionary by-product. Some say that we've reached a point in intelligence where we have responsibility, but that doesn't work. We couldn't have responsibility because our actions would be totally controlled by our genes and what we've learnt from experiences. There would be no free will at all, and therefore, no responsibility.
Some people say that they don't care either way, but it's something we all have to face. You could live believing that way, as long as you avoid thinking about death, but I don't think you can be fulfilled. How can you be, knowing that all your actions and work for the future only serve to make you a little more comfortable? It doesn't change your fate at all. Whereas if we're immortal, the things we do to improve ourselves here last forever.
Can we separate God and religion here? It's one thing to get legalistic and wonder what God wants, but it's quite another to wonder about God itself. Actually, that's what led me to break from religious thinking. I used to go along with what I felt I was supposed to believe, but when I seriously questioned the existance of God, I had to admit that I didn't believe a lot of those things. I had to figure out God in a way that made sense to me. Which is not to say that you can say any old thing and it's true, but you have to use your own experiences and thoughts. No one can tell you what God is. Well, someone
can, but it won't mean as much to you. Figuring out what I think about it has been really exciting.
