As soon as science can prove that anything beyond the physical realm exists, we'll start believing in the supernatural. Otherwise trees are just as much proof of Demeter as it is for any other deity. We didn't used to believe in germs, and despite them existing without us knowing it was still a rational thing to say microscopic organisms didn't exist. That's why we don't say there definitely isn't a god beyond the physical realm. It's just rational to disbelieve something that has no proof, whether it actually exists or not.

God isn't hiding. He just doesn't know he doesn't exist.

(September 28, 2014 at 2:56 am)snowtracks Wrote:

(September 20, 2014 at 11:16 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Two things:

First why hide?

Second, don't the children playing hide and seek know there is an it? That's rather different than seeking the great pumpkin don't you think?

not hiding. can't establish proof thru the 5 senses. if it's truly not evident to someone, it's spiritual blindness. this would make sense since the atheists believe in the one dimension of physical.

"Spiritual sight" must be strangely inconsistent since you all claim to be seeing the same god yet what you see appears to be almost entirely culturally driven. Muslims, Jews, various brands of Christianity, Hindus, all see very different ones. It's like people who think they've been abducted by aliens, or that they've seen little green men. The experience tends to mirror the last UFO movie. Similarly, how god is viewed changes radically with time and place. You all start talking to the same god and I'll begin to wonder if I'm missing something.

(September 28, 2014 at 2:56 am)snowtracks Wrote: not hiding. can't establish proof thru the 5 senses. if it's truly not evident to someone, it's spiritual blindness. this would make sense since the atheists believe in the one dimension of physical.

Then how can you possibly believe that there's even a 'there' there, never mind make claim statements its nature?

And the "physical" is far more than one-dimensional. Even if it wasn't and had only one dimension, that's one dimension more than your alternative.

Besides which, you only have five senses? Don't you have proprioception? Nociception? Thermoception? Is it comfortable inside your jar?

(September 29, 2014 at 12:58 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Besides which, you only have five senses? Don't you have proprioception? Nociception? Thermoception? Is it comfortable inside your jar?

I don't know what those are Stimbo but I rely most on my sense of humour, sense of proportion and my sense of balance .

(September 28, 2014 at 9:02 am)Chad32 Wrote: As soon as science can prove that anything beyond the physical realm exists, we'll start believing in the supernatural. Otherwise trees are just as much proof of Demeter as it is for any other deity. We didn't used to believe in germs, and despite them existing without us knowing it was still a rational thing to say microscopic organisms didn't exist. That's why we don't say there definitely isn't a god beyond the physical realm. It's just rational to disbelieve something that has no proof, whether it actually exists or not.

deader than a door nail to consciousness does not fit in the purely physical world of naturalism; whereas, in a theistic world, self-conscious awareness would be expected as experienced. Consciousness came from that which is conscious.

---

(September 29, 2014 at 12:58 pm)Stimbo Wrote:

(September 28, 2014 at 2:56 am)snowtracks Wrote: not hiding. can't establish proof thru the 5 senses. if it's truly not evident to someone, it's spiritual blindness. this would make sense since the atheists believe in the one dimension of physical.

Then how can you possibly believe that there's even a 'there' there, never mind make claim statements its nature?

And the "physical" is far more than one-dimensional. Even if it wasn't and had only one dimension, that's one dimension more than your alternative.

Besides which, you only have five senses? Don't you have proprioception? Nociception? Thermoception? Is it comfortable inside your jar?

must have been quite an event in the universe that first thought; and by the way, it's about time you revealed that closely guarded secret. you know, that one that started it all. you have teased us long enough, enough is enough.

Indeed my secret must be so closely guarded that even I haven't got the faintest clue what you're dribbling about.

No change there, then.

(September 29, 2014 at 11:37 pm)snowtracks Wrote: deader than a door nail to consciousness does not fit in the purely physical world of naturalism; whereas, in a theistic world, self-conscious awareness would be expected as experienced. Consciousness came from that which is conscious.

Here's the thing: you can keep asserting that consciousness and naturalism are mutually exclusive, and all it does is make you look like a jackass. Because it's been explained to you that this is not the case, and why it is not the case, in another thread.

Continuing to use an argument that has been addressed as though it hasn't just makes it seem as though you are either profoundly stupid, or dishonest. Couching it in the barely literate language you have here just makes the former a safer bet.

Edited to add: Oh, and incidentally, why would consciousness be expected in a theistic worldview? What reason do you have to expect that a god would create consciousness, and what evidence have you used to derive that conclusion? It's very easy to just say something would be expected, but can you support that claim?

(September 29, 2014 at 11:53 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(September 29, 2014 at 11:37 pm)snowtracks Wrote: deader than a door nail to consciousness does not fit in the purely physical world of naturalism; whereas, in a theistic world, self-conscious awareness would be expected as experienced. Consciousness came from that which is conscious.

Here's the thing: you can keep asserting that consciousness and naturalism are mutually exclusive, and all it does is make you look like a jackass. Because it's been explained to you that this is not the case, and why it is not the case, in another thread.

Continuing to use an argument that has been addressed as though it hasn't just makes it seem as though you are either profoundly stupid, or dishonest. Couching it in the barely literate language you have here just makes the former a safer bet.

Edited to add: Oh, and incidentally, why would consciousness be expected in a theistic worldview? What reason do you have to expect that a god would create consciousness, and what evidence have you used to derive that conclusion? It's very easy to just say something would be expected, but can you support that claim?

i can only give you the facts, not the brains to understand the facts. now, sit down and take notes.

Maybe God is hiding because he doesn't want to give theologians the satisfaction that for once in their professional lives they were right about something.