Has God Ever Given You Inspiration to do something ?

[Dont3verLooseHope]

okay so you dont have to reply , but whatever rocks your boat :L:L

i wrote on Facebook this :
It scares me to think that there are people out there , who think they dont fit in and where there are people who think their "perfect" bully those who might not fit their standards ! and i have been one of those people , where i felt i didn't fit in because of all you "perfect" people and your stupid standards .

let me tell you these people starve themselves and dont eat and get depressed and maybe even contemplate suicide and so much more because you think "perfect" is how you look ! not how you act and feel . But let me tell you there is no such thing as a perfect human being ! so stop being such bitches and stop bringing myself and all these unique people down . because in my eyes every single person who you have brought down is UNIQUE and BEAUTIFUL ! And i dont care what you say because i know i am right . I LOVE YOU ALL DONT EVER THINK YOUR NOT WORTH IT ! xx

now when i wrote this , i felt like God was touching my shoulder , shining his light onto me , giving inspiration to write this , and tbh i feel good <3
its given me the strength to keep on fighting !

has anyone else had this kind of experience ? x

kimbeerly beth

[QuantumModulus]

No. Events that occur around me, my abilities, and my imagination, give me the inspiration to do something that I feel should be done, or that I have the capacity to achieve and do well with.

[Dont3verLooseHope]

sooo not a christian then .. hahaa <3

[QuantumModulus]

Originally Posted by TotaallyWorthless

sooo not a christian then .. hahaa <3

Lol...you're correct.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

As a strong atheist and anti-theist, I've never felt god inspire me to do something. For me, inspiration comes from my abilities, imagination and knowledge, as well as ideas from other people that I try to put a unique spin on.

When one says god has inspired them to do whatever, it instantly implies the person has no capacity for doing such a thing on their own. For example, by saying you were able to write a short rant because god inspired you, it implies without god you have no capacity to do this on your own or to even think this on your own. This begs the question, did you think of the rant on your own but did not have the will to type it out or did god inspire you to have a sudden burst of thoughts, confidence and capacity to type and post it on FaceBook?

In other words, if I asked you to explain some part of it, you couldn't give me an answer. For example, if I asked you what are these standards you mention, you may be unable to answer the question (i.e. god gave you the inspiration to think the rant). On the other hand, if you do answer, then I would ask if god gave you the inspiration to answer my question.

[Xujhan]

Like my compatriots, I'm inspired to do things by my own ideas and by the people around me. I strive to do good things for no other reason than that they are good, and I treat people well because as people they deserve to be treated well.

[Dont3verLooseHope]

hahaaa <3 its okaaay (;
i mean i shoulda expected comments like this really !
i cant really understand what it feels to not believe in a God because my whole life ive been a christian and im proud of it
but thank yhu you non believers for your opinions
love you all x

[BDF]

I don't know where my inspiration comes from sometimes. I'm a wildcard. Anything can happen. I could say that God doesn't inspire me at all, but truthfully there have been occasions when the idea of a God has provoked or inspired a reaction of some sort, expressed whichever way (not necessarily negative).

Inspiration comes from everything around you to be honest, even if it's inspiration towards something negative. So for most people, that will include God, unless they've never in their whole life even been exposed to the idea of God.

Now that I think of it, the idea of God, and a supreme being existing that has a plan for us all, or whatever, has inspired me many times to be the defiant person I am, and figure my own life out without the need of input from other religions or most people. In my opinion it's the best way. Almost any religion is biased, as are many people. I base my beliefs mostly on what I see, on fact. Less on fictional books and fairy tales. So I'd say, in my opinion God inspired something good in me, even though I don't believe in him as such. I learned to make my own mind up about things. I refuse to be streamlined into being a certain type of person so I can "fit in", just because a religion says so, or the media says so, or just because certain people say so.

[Music is my Life]

Hey. Ya I was that kid who didn't fit in with the "it" crowd. All through grade school to Junior High and especially through high school I looked at them in envy. I went to a small private Christian school and there was a clear line between the "cool" people and the not so cool people. But now in college, I don't see it that way. We are all just friends. But its awesome that you are a Christian and believe in this!

[JKmadu619]

You know what, if you believe God inspired you, he probably did. Athesists and Christians both have ideals, you believed that part of your inspiration came from God, and the feeling of moral rightness came from him. Athesist belive it was the hapiness chemicals in your brain making you feel pleased, and that inspiration was a product of your brain alone. Call it what you will. I am Christain, but I don't know if I believe God intervenes with everything we do. I believe he watched us and cares for us, and helps us in time of great need, but I don't know if I believe he just goes around helping people with trivial things like posting an inspirational message on a social network. That's just me, and as a Christian I believe people are free to believe in how God works themselves, and I also believe that if people have other reasons to explain acts of God, good for them. Science is really just a religion itself.

Ideas that help others are inspired by blood flow to the brain (Fact.) however who's saying that God isn't the cause of this? (YOUR personal belief) What if it only happens because he designed us to do that? I mean I honestly believe we all have a right to believe what he want, but in the end we all believe in the same thing. Even if we have differnt words for the same things.

- Justin

[QuantumModulus]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

Science is really just a religion itself.

For once, I was more or less in agreement with what you had said to this point, but to hear this coming from you made me stop dead in my tracks. To be quite honest, this statement annoys me to no end. I am a scientist, and this, in my opinion, is a supreme insult. Science is as much of a religion as is the validity of the notion that the Holocaust never occurred. You'd have to be willfully ignorant to believe that science and religion are synonymous, when by definition (or at least the ones I've seen thus far), they are contradictory.

I'm not going to give you a rant about why science is NOT a religion, and how if you think so then you have paramount misunderstanding of what one (or both) is, because I don't think that this thread should be hijacked by a separate issue. But, I do think it would be wise of you to do a bit more research before making such a bold claim. A bit of caution with your words would suit you well.

[Xujhan]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

Science is really just a religion itself.

Every time you say that, god kills a kitten. Other than both being attempts to understand the world, the two have very little in common.

[Dont3verLooseHope]

well i meant that God didn't like take over my mind and make me write it !
its just i would never do anything like that or say anything like that on Facebook ! so when i had this moment where i honestly believe that God inspired me to write something amazing and good (:

[JKmadu619]

Xujhan: Isn't the really what religion is, an attempt to understand the world? They both have beliefs some which cannot be proven (Evolution, big bang theroy.) they both have followers. To me they are both understandings of how life works. Both have valid points, and to a degree I believe both.

- Justin

[QuantumModulus]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

Isn't the really what religion is, an attempt to understand the world?

No. Religion invokes blind faith, which is not an attempt to "understand the world". In fact, it is an attempt to pass the buck of explaining the world to a book that was written thousands of years ago by men who believed that the earth was flat, and that the sun revolved around it. Religion claims to have absolutely no doubt that its particular deity directly inspired its spiritual text, and thus makes no attempt to explain anything at all -- everything's in the book, so any explanation that contradicts it must be invalid, right? Please, let me know if that's your idea of an honest attempt at understanding anything.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

They both have beliefs some which cannot be proven (Evolution, big bang theory.)

No, religion has beliefs that cannot be proven (and by definition, don't need proof to be believed. Look up what faith means.). Science is built upon the fact that in order to believe that something is true, we need sufficient evidence for that assertion until new evidence that points in a different direction comes along. In that event, we revise the theory to fit the observation, and try to come up with more predictions that may or may not be supported by future PROOF. NOT faith.

The big bang theory is a model of our early universe that attempts to describe the physical conditions of how the universe was formed, and is constantly undergoing revision. It is not something that can be directly observed, but based on the observations of our universe that we've gathered today (which go undisputed by religious people who say that the BBT is bogus), the celestial bodies that we're able to observe indicate that a BB has occurred.

You're in 8th grade, so I won't waste my time finding you evidence of evolution -- evidence upon which the theory was FORMED -- but wait until you take a biology class before you say that evolution cannot be proved, and get back to me. Hell, you know how to use the internet; however, it doesn't seem like you do much research at all before blurting something out. There is a bountiful wealth of evidence supporting the notion that the theory evolution is true, and it is evidence of your own willful ignorance to say that it is unprovable.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

...they both have followers.

No. Religion has followers. Followers, in a religious sense, devote themselves to blind faith and worship toward something that, based on religious scripture, cannot be definitively verified -- or even defined!. Science does not have that in any sense. Science has explorers, and pioneers. The pioneers are those who discover and probe, taking ideas from the past and altering them to fit new data as we become more accurate, while the explorers take the ideas of the pioneers, and try their best to rip them to shreds. There is not one scientist alive worthy of the title who would say that they'd believe the theory of another scientist without seeing evidence that it is true. The pivot of science is reproducibility -- something you should know by now if you're paying attention in school. If a scientific experiment that indicates that a theory is true cannot be reproduced in the same conditions with the exact same result, then the theory is considered flawed, and a better one is sought. Where do you find that in religion? (Look up the many experiments having to do with the effect of prayer on medical patients.)

There is no such thing as blind faith in science. There is no such thing as worship of a high-standing figure simply because some old farts in robes say that he's chosen by an invisible entity, in science.

Granted, there are some religious people who are also scientists -- but they know very well that if they were to let the two sides mix, and bring a religious concept or constituent into their scientific work, they would be laughed out of any serious discussion immediately. They know the boundary between serious, rational investigation, and personal beliefs.

The more you try to bring science to be on par with religion, the more you're setting yourself up to sound like a fool -- to be as gentle as I can. I expected a much more well thought-out argument from you.

[Kira-Kira]

I have helping a friend out saving there life i felt god lead me down that hall to tell someone he was hurting and your right there is no such thing as perfect we are all beautiful and unique u taught me something just because ihave a lazy eye or im partically blind that dosent make me ugly or worthless it makes me unique gives me opprtunity to teach others we are human and for once i am proud to be visually impared and to show others it does not stop me from being who i want to be

[Xujhan]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

Xujhan: Isn't the really what religion is, an attempt to understand the world?

Religion is an attempt to understand the world, yes, but by itself that's not the definition of what a religion is. Here's one definition from dictionary.com:

"A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs."

The only one of thse criteria that science fits is "A set of beliefs concerning the nature of the universe." It would be more correct - although probably still wrong - to say that religion is a very ineffective science.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

They both have beliefs some which cannot be proven (Evolution, big bang theroy.) they both have followers. To me they are both understandings of how life works. Both have valid points, and to a degree I believe both.

I ask that you clarify what you mean by "cannot be proven". Strictly speaking, no scientific theory is proven, including gravity, germ theory, atomic theory, and so on. However, I get the feeling that this is not what you mean. If you mean to say that gravity is proven but evolution is as yet unproven, then you are wrong. If anything, we have a better understanding of evolution than we do of gravity.

So when you say that "evolution isn't proven", I ask that you always make sure to state that the same is true of every theory that even the most stubborn creationist accepts as true. What can be said of evolution is that the evidence for it is so overwhelming that disbelief of it can only reasonably come from a lack of education or a lack of understanding. That sets it rather far apart from any religious hypothesis.

[John 6:29]

depends what your definition of God is and how you even know it was God who "inspired" you.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

Ideas that help others are inspired by blood flow to the brain (Fact.) however who's saying that God isn't the cause of this? (YOUR personal belief) What if it only happens because he designed us to do that? I mean I honestly believe we all have a right to believe what he want, but in the end we all believe in the same thing. Even if we have differnt words for the same things.

Biologically you're making no sense. Blood flow to the brain doesn't create ideas because think of how the blood gets to the brain: cardiac system. In other words, you've just said the cardiac system inspires ideas. Such a belief used to be held a hundred or so years ago. If you instead meant brain activity creates ideas, eh, you're right but you're also so vague for this thread it becomes a useless statement.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

Isn't the really what religion is, an attempt to understand the world? They both have beliefs some which cannot be proven (Evolution, big bang theroy.) they both have followers. To me they are both understandings of how life works. Both have valid points, and to a degree I believe both.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

Science is really just a religion itself.

You're correct in that they both attempt to understand the world but the mechanisms or ways they go about doing this are completely different. Furthermore, they both view information in different paradigms that for the most part negate each other. A clear example of this is the idea of proving something. In science, you cannot truly prove anything, however, most religions (i.e. Christianity) assume things are proven. So even that example you gave is not entirely correct.

Religion is often defined as a set of beliefs involving at least one deity and through it/them, the world is understood. On the other hand, science involves actively testing, re-testing, hypothesizing and falsifying ideas in order to understand the world. The outcome of both is information is produced but the views of understanding the information, views of applying the information and methods of obtaining the information are different.

You mention evolution in particular and although it technically is not proven, there isn't any theory or hypothesis that competes against it. As a result, it is fair to say it is "proven" but not proven. If you have an argument against evolution, then by all means I'm willing to hear it but keep in mind, I'm not in high-school and I specialize in biology, as well as having taken a few evolutionary biology courses that were research-based.

I'm not going to attempt a debate with you on the Big Bang Theory as I'm not as well versed in physics and theoretical physics compared to other users on here, so I'll let them (i.e. QuantumModulus) handle it.

If you're planning on closing the differences between religion and science so they're on the same level, don't bother and spare yourself the ridicule as anyone even partially educated will laugh you out the room.

[JKmadu619]

That was exactly my point, everything in science is a theory. Nothing can be proved in either cases, it is obvious but cannot be proven, and because both are not able to be proven you are somewhat putting faith in the unknown. If she believes God gave her idea, that is what inspired her, the thought of God giving her an idea. Placebo effect to a certain degree.

- Justin

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

That was exactly my point, everything in science is a theory. Nothing can be proved in either cases, it is obvious but cannot be proven, and because both are not able to be proven you are somewhat putting faith in the unknown. If she believes God gave her idea, that is what inspired her, the thought of God giving her an idea. Placebo effect to a certain degree.

- Justin

Not exactly. Science doesn't have the blind faith religion has as although nothing can be proven, one can rely on already accepted information, studies and other theories to accept or reject a given theory. For religion, there are no independent resources to use to formulate one's decision, as in the case of Christianity, it's the bible. In science, each study or theory is a resource so there are many alternative resources so there's no blind faith. In science, you need some reason to speculate something otherwise it's rejected, whereas that's the opposite for religion.

If you look at the bible, the underlying philosophy is everything in it has been proven true and it echoes this in a circular motion.

[QuantumModulus]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

That was exactly my point, everything in science is a theory.

Yes, science is based on theory. Theory is mutable. It changes with incoming new information. It adapts to find what best describes the observations we make, and doesn't rely on old, outdated concepts in order to sustain itself, because if it did, it would collapse. What has religion got going for it? Oh, yes, just that -- relying on primitive mythologies to claim that it's an attempt to "explain the universe", when it is really just saying "God did everything" and stepping aside to criticize something that actually produces results (i.e., science) and is open to change. What may be the best way in which science is preferable to religious belief is that in science, you use evidence to accept a theory (until a better one is found), and anything that contradicts the evidence is rejected, or modified. Now tell me, where do you find that in religion? (By the way: I'm not going to take the time to explain why, but answers to that which originate from the Bible are right out. Good luck.) I'm highly curious.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

...because both are not able to be proven you are somewhat putting faith in the unknown.

I'm getting an ever-clearer picture that you understand very little of the meaning of the word "faith", and even less about "science". Faith is the belief in a claim that has no evidence in its favor. We don't have "faith" in theories, in science. We have theories that are supported by evidence, and the theories that are contradicted by the evidence are tossed. There are no two ways about it. We don't have faith about our claims because, to be blunt, it is impossible to have faith in a theory. We make theories, and test them experimentally, and if the predictions are supported by the observations, we believe them to the extent that the experiment supports them. In religion, you can have "faith" in something that is contradicted by facts, and still believe in it -- on faith. Point me in the direction of a scientific theory that is held true despite evidence to the contrary, and I will humbly resign from this discussion.

On second thought, I'm going to do that now. I've got to learn to stop getting myself worked up over religiously indoctrinated fools who are willfully ignorant and refuse to accept the premises upon which their lives operate. Feel free to criticize science all you want. In doing so, you're only making it clear how little you know about it, and how flawed religion truly is.

[A Lady]

Hi Kimberly, this is so cool!! It is amazing that you could feel Him so close to you in that moment, the Holy Spirit must have been right there I'm sure a lot of people could benefit from the message you posted, He wanted to say that through you.

[Xujhan]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

That was exactly my point, everything in science is a theory. Nothing can be proved in either cases, it is obvious but cannot be proven, and because both are not able to be proven you are somewhat putting faith in the unknown. If she believes God gave her idea, that is what inspired her, the thought of God giving her an idea. Placebo effect to a certain degree.

- Justin

That is very incorrect. Not everything in science is a theory; a thoery, in science, specifically means an explanation for a phenomenon that is very strongly supported by the evidence and is accepted as true. This is not the same as saying that it is 100% certain, but it is very close. This is not 'having faith in the unknown'; quite the opposite. Accepting scientific theories as true is a perfect example of having faith in the known.

[Terry]

No, I've never felt there was a reason to attribute something inspiring me, to god, but moreso the people around me and my own passions/experiences. Also, not to bash anyone, but I find it a bit sad that people have to "feel god guiding them" to help people out as opposed to wanting to help out of their own good will.