Posts: 1473
Threads: 20
Joined: November 12, 2011
Reputation:
26
RE: Why I believe in God.
November 20, 2011 at 1:30 pm
(This post was last modified: November 20, 2011 at 1:32 pm by Norfolk And Chance.)
(November 20, 2011 at 1:26 pm)chadster1976 Wrote: Norfolk. Read the thread. Toro said they are incompatible with God and I want to know how. Don't just disagree for the sake of it.
I read the thread.
You stated before toro spoke that as far as you are concerned, there is no testable scientific theory that is incompatiable with god - you made a positive claim. This obviously includes quantum mechanics and relativity.
So, I'm calling you out on your claim.
I'm just going to get me popcorn...
You are currently experiencing a lucky and very brief window of awareness, sandwiched in between two periods of timeless and utter nothingness. So why not make the most of it, and stop wasting your life away trying to convince other people that there is something else? The reality is obvious.
Posts: 4234
Threads: 42
Joined: June 7, 2011
Reputation:
33
RE: Why I believe in God.
November 20, 2011 at 1:36 pm
You may as well eat that popcorn: All that is going to be on is bad advertising.
Trying to update my sig ...
Posts: 70
Threads: 3
Joined: November 9, 2011
Reputation:
7
RE: Why I believe in God.
November 20, 2011 at 1:45 pm
It is really quite simple. As God isn't factored into any testable scientific theories, his existence or non existence would have no effect on the outcome of any test based on those theories. Therefore they are not incompatible with God existing.
Try this one: there is no method of leaving my bathroom that is incompatible with the existence of Canis Major.
Love 'n' hugz,
Lord Chad
4th Earl of Catsuit
There is nothing more dangerous than a man who knows he is right.
Posts: 4234
Threads: 42
Joined: June 7, 2011
Reputation:
33
RE: Why I believe in God.
November 20, 2011 at 1:47 pm
Which reasoning does any contention he exists zero good.
Strike one.
Trying to update my sig ...
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Why I believe in God.
November 20, 2011 at 2:58 pm
(This post was last modified: November 20, 2011 at 3:12 pm by fr0d0.)
(November 20, 2011 at 1:30 pm)Norfolk And Chance Wrote: You stated before toro spoke that as far as you are concerned, there is no testable scientific theory that is incompatiable with god - you made a positive claim. A positive claim along the same grounds as "there is no empirical evidence for God". A positive claim is one that affirms a something, not a nothing. If you claim there is an actual something... then that is a claim. Claiming "nothing" does not and never can be substantiated.
If you wish to stick with this line of reasoning I think we can all conclude that your arse is where your face should be 
Posts: 4234
Threads: 42
Joined: June 7, 2011
Reputation:
33
RE: Why I believe in God.
November 20, 2011 at 3:29 pm
(This post was last modified: November 20, 2011 at 3:32 pm by Epimethean.)
So by your reckoning, fr0ds, it would be better to claim that all gods must exist, since there is no especial evidence for, say, your god than the Hindi gods, or allah, and, if you want to go along with this line of reasoning exclusively, you will have to get to a hefty negative claim pretty soon.
Trying to update my sig ...
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Why I believe in God.
November 20, 2011 at 4:52 pm
You are attacking the stock rationale for dissmissing theists Epi. A positive claim shoulders the burden of proof. A negative claim has no burden to shoulder. If I say "I know that that God does not exist" then all onlookers can reasonably demand evidence of such, as the claim must be based on such and should presumably be testable. If I say "I don't know if that God exists or not and I assume that he doesn't" then there is no positive claim erge no burden to shoulder.
I only rationalise one God. All others are unproven to me that I've investigated (I find Allah to be internally contradictory, for example). Because I can positively know of one, then there is no room for others in that rationale. The God question is answered satisfactorily. Therefore there is indeed especial evidence for my God.
Posts: 4234
Threads: 42
Joined: June 7, 2011
Reputation:
33
RE: Why I believe in God.
November 20, 2011 at 4:56 pm
Well then, you are acknowledging that those of us who go that one step further in seeing that unproven state are being reasonable in so doing.
Trying to update my sig ...
Posts: 4196
Threads: 60
Joined: September 8, 2011
Reputation:
30
RE: Why I believe in God.
November 20, 2011 at 5:14 pm
(November 20, 2011 at 4:52 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: (I find Allah to be internally contradictory, for example)
And how not the babble-god. I see the babble-god just as contradictory.
You make people miserable and there's nothing they can do about it, just like god.
-- Homer Simpson
God has no place within these walls, just as facts have no place within organized religion.
-- Superintendent Chalmers
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things.
-- Ned Flanders
Once something's been approved by the government, it's no longer immoral.
-- The Rev Lovejoy
Posts: 1473
Threads: 20
Joined: November 12, 2011
Reputation:
26
RE: Why I believe in God.
November 20, 2011 at 5:31 pm
(This post was last modified: November 20, 2011 at 5:34 pm by Norfolk And Chance.)
(November 20, 2011 at 2:58 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: (November 20, 2011 at 1:30 pm)Norfolk And Chance Wrote: You stated before toro spoke that as far as you are concerned, there is no testable scientific theory that is incompatiable with god - you made a positive claim. A positive claim along the same grounds as "there is no empirical evidence for God". A positive claim is one that affirms a something, not a nothing. If you claim there is an actual something... then that is a claim. Claiming "nothing" does not and never can be substantiated.
If you wish to stick with this line of reasoning I think we can all conclude that your arse is where your face should be
Meaningless waffle.
(November 20, 2011 at 1:45 pm)chadster1976 Wrote: It is really quite simple. As God isn't factored into any testable scientific theories, his existence or non existence would have no effect on the outcome of any test based on those theories. Therefore they are not incompatible with God existing.
Try this one: there is no method of leaving my bathroom that is incompatible with the existence of Canis Major.
Whilst it is true that a giant star does not need to be compatiable with you leaving your bathroom, there are enough things attributed to god that may not be compatiable with scientific theory, such as creating the earth in 6 days, Adam and Eve yada, yada, yada.
You are currently experiencing a lucky and very brief window of awareness, sandwiched in between two periods of timeless and utter nothingness. So why not make the most of it, and stop wasting your life away trying to convince other people that there is something else? The reality is obvious.
|
