Why God?

[Too Few Lions]

technology has everything to do with it.

No no no, TFL. You're mixing two different things. The supernatural cannot be verified as can the sun, moon, etc. That's why I didn't use the rest of your post

??? I'm not sure it's me that's mixing things up! I never said that the supernatural could be verified. My point was that people 5000 years ago didn't have the technology we have today in order to know what the Sun, Moon, stars etc actually are, or even to know that the Earth was round or that it rotates around the Sun, or a million other things we take as common knowledge. Therefore it doesn't seem unreasonable or illogical to me for the heavenly bodies to have been considered gods. Even as an atheist in the 21st century I think the night sky can be quite awe inspiring, particularly if you get away from all the modern light interference. If I'd have lived 5000 years ago I suspect I may well have thought the Sun and stars were gods too.

[Gawen]

TFL,
I went back to reread your initial post - I see the fault and it is mine. Sorry. It's not that you were "mixing" it up, it was a seeming contradiction. You say:

personally I think it's unfair to conclude that 'us humans created God out of ignorance and need'.

To me, it doesn't seem illogical or ignorant for people to have believed in gods thousands of years ago, when people lacked the technology and scientific knowledge we have today.

If a person doesn't have the knowledge of how lightning forms, he is ignorant of the facts and illogical to posit a god forms lightning from that ignorance when there is a plethora of "reasons" lightning may be formed (all of those wrong as well).

It's no different than some Christians believe the big bang started from a god. It is these Christians ignorance of the facts and their need to have it explained and form fit their worldview that makes Tank's assertion stand out. The only intellectually honest answer for the big bang occurring and how in ancient times lightning formed is "I don't know". So, it's not unfair at all to say that ancient man's reasons were born of ignorance when they didn't have the knowledge and needed to explain phenomena they didn't understand.

[Stevil]

Something I have noticed about human behavior is that people like answers. If they don't have enough information, then they make do with what they have got and simply make up the answer as a best guess. This is conditioned into our psych

For example:
MARY'S FATHER HAS FIVE DAUGHTERS:
1.        NANA, 2. NENE, 3. NINI,  4. NONO, AND ???
2.        WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE FIFTH DAUGHTER?

BTW - If you know the answer, please don't post it. We know how smart you are. I just want people to see if they jump to conclusions here. Some people will, some won't.

When my wife and myself answered this, I knew what the answer was, but my wife guessed the answer. I found it interesting that she guessed the answer, I mean, if she didn't know, why didn't she either state that she didn't know or re-read the question and think it through until she did know the answer. Why make a wild guess?

[xSilverPhinx]

My guess would be she either thought she knew the answer or felt that she had nothing to loose if she got it wrong.

Basing it on my own experience, I guess answers all the time, but when there isn't that much to loose. During an exam, for instance, I can easily become paralysed because I'm reluctant to guess, because if I get it wrong, I would have a lot to loose by not gaining anything. During exercises though, I guess like there's no tomorrow...

[Asmodean]

We know how smart you are. I just want people to see if they jump to conclusions here. Some people will, some won't.

I don't get it... The answer is gi...

BTW - If you know the answer, please don't post it.

...Oh. 

[xSilverPhinx]

We know how smart you are. I just want people to see if they jump to conclusions here. Some people will, some won't.

I don't get it... The answer is gi...

BTW - If you know the answer, please don't post it.

...Oh.  

Come on, he put the answer there, it's ???

[Sweetdeath]

I think I know the answer.  I think.

[Asmodean]

Come on, he put the answer there, it's ???

...Yes, that is what I don't get.

[Tank]

Something I have noticed about human behavior is that people like answers. If they don't have enough information, then they make do with what they have got and simply make up the answer as a best guess. This is conditioned into our psych

{snip}

This is so true. For decades I have seen business people substitute common-sense/gut-feel in place of hard data and research. Mainly because it's easier, cheaper and quicker to guess than actually put in the effort to find out. The effect was to create a 'superstition' about the market place, guess after guess based on assumption after assumption all devoid of any reference to reality. Add in an authority figure (the boss) who has to like/approve the consensus and can sack you if you hold a differing opinion and you have a recipe for institutionalised stupidity.  See any similarities with theistic thought processes?

[Too Few Lions]

Something I have noticed about human behavior is that people like answers. If they don't have enough information, then they make do with what they have got and simply make up the answer as a best guess. This is conditioned into our psych

too true, it still goes on even in academic / scientific research. People make theories based on how they see the evidence, which itself may be influenced by their personal beliefs, and then try and find evidence that backs up that model, sometimes choosing to ignore evidence that refutes it. Plus a lot of people have egos, and quite often they're out to make a name for themselves.

The plus side with science or history is that someone else can come along with a better theory and hopefully that replaces the less accurate one. The trouble with something like the Bible or the Quran is that people are basing their beliefs on a book written 1300-2500 years ago when human understanding of the universe was very different to what it is today.

[Stevil]

My guess would be she either thought she knew the answer

I agree with this. She thought she knew the answer. But how could have she known, given the answer that she came up with?
She couldn't have known because there was no evidence to suggest her answer was correct. She made a wild assumption and followed a pattern that she had observed but who is to say that this pattern was not just coincidental. (This is somewhat like the Catholic assumption that Jesus didn't want ordained women, his twelve apostles were men therefore he must have not wanted women to be ordained)
This is deriving knowledge from patterns from very small sample sets.

The dilemma theists find themselves in is that they cannot simply ask their god for clarification. They have been taught not to expect to be able to do this. So instead they look for clues in their scripture. But scriptures are often missing much needed detail, even Catholics agree that scripture is incomplete so they then resort to tradition or simply making stuff up as in the "without sin" nature of their beloved virgin Mary. This is really scraping the bottom of the barrel. I'm sure if they found some lost scriptures that provided clarity then they would take the new scripture over their tradition or made up stuff. If their god all of a sudden started talking to them then they would gladly have that override scripture, so they would understand how weak the knowledge derived from tradition and made up stuff is and also how weak the knowledge derived from scripture is. But they don't have this so they cling life and limb to their tradition and made up stuff, because they are forced to, if they want to continue to believe in their deity.

So my big conclusion here is that they want to believe in a deity.
That's why god. Not to do with fact or knowledge but a want.
The want is likely based on emotion, ego, desire for answers, desire to instil children with a morality, desire for existence to be derived from a universal good.

[Stevil]

The plus side with science or history is that someone else can come along with a better theory

The biggest plus side of the scientific method is that the evidence is documented in all its glory so that others can try to recreate it or try to refute it. Skepticism is extremely important to keep scientific theories honest.

[Too Few Lions]

So my big conclusion here is that they want to believe in a deity.
That's why god. Not to do with fact or knowledge but a want.
The want is likely based on emotion, ego, desire for answers, desire to instil children with a morality, desire for existence to be derived from a universal good.

I think that's definitely a major reason (particularly nowadays). I also would suspect there's something in peoples' genes / brain wiring as to whether they're more likely to be believers or skeptics.

Personally I also think there was a touch of Isaac Newton to religion thousands of years ago. Much as he's considered one of the most famous scientists ever, he was also very religious. Would we consider him ignorant? He said "Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion." which I think was partly at the root of ancient religion. People studied the heavens, saw that the Sun, Moon, planets, stars moved in an orderly and predictable way and assumed there had to be a force moving them and bringing order to the cosmos. This was a world without machines, for something to be put in motion and regulated motion at that, people thought there must have been a prime mover.

[Stevil]

for something to be put in motion and regulated motion at that, people thought there must have been a prime mover.

But of course we now know that if there are two system's in space consisting of mass then they attract each other and will eventually move towards each other, unless of course there is a greater force keeping them apart.

(BTW) Movement is a relative concept as we don't know how to work out what an absolute stationary point is.

[Stevil]

Back to why god.

So if a person tells you that they believe in god because all the evidence points to god then we know that this person is lying to themselves with regards to their reason to believe.
There is no evidence, even theists know this.

If they state they know there is a god because of the complexity of the universe or the infinite regression issue then again this person is lying to themselves.
Theists know that scientists and cosmologists do not have all the answers to the universe, they know there are many great mysteries and that deriving knowledge from the gaps is therefore dishonest.

If they state they know god exists because of answered prayer, again they are lying to themselves. There is no measurable difference with regards to the statistical probability of an event whether prayed for or not. Of course, theists already know this. If you ask them for references to studies on prayer, they will tell you that prayer doesn't work like this. It is never answered in a tangible, measurable way.

If they state they know god exists because of miracles, well, miracles in a lot of ways are highly unprobable outcomes but always possible. Never seen a human grow a limb back have you? In many ways this is an argument of god of the gaps, or a desire to feel blessed by god. I'm not sure if theists know better here but superstition is an intuitive human trait. Ever met sportspeople wearing a particular set of sox, carrying out some ritual or abstaining from sex before the big game?

Really, to me the only honest reason for a theist to believe in a god is with regards to their claim of a "personal experience". To an outsider it seems to be delusional, simply a chemical imbalance or a response to a traumatic event. But to the person experiencing it, it must seem very real.
i never know how they tie this experience into a particular religion or denomination.

But really they are simply looking for reasons to justify their wants. No-one will simply admit to believing in something just because they want to believe in it.