Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

God is supposed to talk back after three days of isolation

Page 4 of 4 [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Previous topic | Next topic

TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,639

06 Sep 2022, 7:14 pm

AngelRho wrote:
The problem is ALL evidence depends on faith. You have to assume (circular reasoning) that evidence says what it says, or proves what it proves.

Scientific knowledge depends on extensive evidence and proof that has been tested and proven over and over again. Belief in God is about faith because there’s not hard evidence which proves that he exists.

For argument’s sake, if one believes that something must have got the ball rolling with the Big Bang, that doesn’t mean that whatever it was was the Christian god. That seems incredibly unlikely to me given the problems I’ve found with the Bible and Christian theology. People believe in any number of religious ideologies. Some of them seem more plausible than Christianity IMO. If people are basing their beliefs on faith, there’s no reason why they should pick Christianity over some other belief systems.

Faith and proof are not interchangeable concepts. If one has sufficient proof, one does not need faith, except for the basic assumption that our reality is real.

I don’t center my beliefs on personal, subjective observation; it’s about what objective evidence actually says.

My standard position regarding extraordinary, supernatural claims is disbelief. I will change my stance if I’m presented with sufficient evidence.


_________________
“The darkness shall be the light, and the stillness the dancing.”
— from Four Quartets by T.S. Eliot


TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,639

06 Sep 2022, 7:32 pm

Quote:
Trying to prove God using evidence to someone who refuses to believe God exists is like trying to prove to a blind person that the sky is blue. It’s not so much that a blind person lacks a concept of blueness. It’s that the blind person lacks a concept of sky. The blind person can’t use evidence of “blue” and “sky.” What the blind person needs is someone who is trustworthy enough to reveal those concepts. That requires assuming those things are reliable and correct based on her faith that her person is reliable and correct.

People shouldn’t just take anyone’s word for it. They need to find out what the evidence actually says.

It’s a pretty big leap in logic to claim that believing in things which have been proven by science is the same thing as believing in God.

People can have faith, but faith and scientific knowledge are not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination.


_________________
“The darkness shall be the light, and the stillness the dancing.”
— from Four Quartets by T.S. Eliot


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

06 Sep 2022, 9:46 pm

Twilightprincess wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
The problem is ALL evidence depends on faith. You have to assume (circular reasoning) that evidence says what it says, or proves what it proves.

Scientific knowledge depends on extensive evidence and proof that has been tested and proven over and over again. Belief in God is about faith because there’s not hard evidence which proves that he exists.

For argument’s sake, if one believes that something must have got the ball rolling with the Big Bang, that doesn’t mean that whatever it was was the Christian god. That seems incredibly unlikely to me given the problems I’ve found with the Bible and Christian theology. People believe in any number of religious ideologies. Some of them seem more plausible than Christianity IMO. If people are basing their beliefs on faith, there’s no reason why they should pick Christianity over some other belief systems.

Faith and proof are not interchangeable concepts. If one has sufficient proof, one does not need faith, except for the basic assumption that our reality is real.

I don’t center my beliefs on personal, subjective observation; it’s about what objective evidence actually says.

My standard position regarding extraordinary, supernatural claims is disbelief. I will change my stance if I’m presented with sufficient evidence.

But these are all assumptions. Where is the evidence?

And you’ve already been presented with evidence and haven’t changed your stance.



AngloIrishGuy
Butterfly
Butterfly

Joined: 13 Sep 2022
Gender: Male
Posts: 10
Location: Ireland

14 Sep 2022, 8:53 am

Sounds like the atheist went a bit insane himself. I can only talk for myself, but I have a god. Its a god with a lower case g. Its within me. Its not the god of others, its a being made of my subconscious. Sometimes I summon it and get posessed, which can help me. Its all very result based, theres no dogma and im certainly not recruiting. Before I read about chaos magick, i was a lapsed christian with a lot of fear. I got invasive thoughts which I thought were god and the devil. I also kind of knew i was crazy too. Now that I have this god I have created, i dont get the crazy invasive thoughts. I know this all sounds a bit crazy, but i am less crazy than before. I guess i just needed a crazy solution to a crazy problem.