Posts: 7155
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: Evidence??
January 9, 2015 at 10:44 pm
(January 8, 2015 at 7:19 am)W.Smith Wrote: If we look past the issue of appearance when talking about God and instead use the word “God” just as a common dominator for all things that exists. What I mean by that is if we just use the word God to describe the existence of all things seem (and unseen, and because it is short) – What kind of proof would we need, to become convinced of the existence of God? ...What kind of proof would we need to convince us that there really is something (call it God!?) that holds everything “in” existence; that holds it all together? In other words, what would we need as evidence that God is real? So if we redefine the term "god" it will mean something else? That's not as earth-shattering a revelation as you might think it is.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
Posts: 9147
Threads: 83
Joined: May 22, 2013
Reputation:
46
RE: Evidence??
January 9, 2015 at 11:31 pm
What kind of evidence would you require to believe in the thing I won't define? If you refuse to answer this, you are disingenuous.
Posts: 13
Threads: 2
Joined: December 29, 2014
Reputation:
2
RE: Evidence??
January 10, 2015 at 1:11 am
(This post was last modified: January 10, 2015 at 1:18 am by W.Smith.)
(January 9, 2015 at 11:31 pm)bennyboy Wrote: What kind of evidence would you require to believe in the thing I won't define? If you refuse to answer this, you are disingenuous.
Interesting!
When I said... " If someone who claimed to know god's existence to be true asked you "what evidence do you need from me to become convinced of god" - what questions would you ask ?" I assume the person claiming to know god's existence probably also would say "I can tell you this much before you even ask your first question. God is not visible as a single person or entity - because if this would be the case, then you would have seen him. So, don't expect to place god under a microscope or to put him/her/it in a test-rig for examination and prodding - please define your questions with that in mind"
Evidently god is not a person - I even think some religions describe god as "Alpha - Omega" meaning that god is everything (or in everything)? So, how can we best define a question that will give us the answer we are looking for in an attempt to find something that assembles evidence of god?
I think that Robvalue had some very valid points in his post http://atheistforums.org/thread-30760.html, but can we define specific questions that we need answers to?
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Evidence??
January 10, 2015 at 1:25 am
(This post was last modified: January 10, 2015 at 1:26 am by robvalue.)
Thank you 
To me, the biggest question is always, "How can we distinguish whatever a God is from nothing at all?" If we have no way to do so, we have no reason to think there is any such thing, until such time as further evidence is presented. Whatever that may be. But there's been nothing new of significance in thousands of years, just more contrived fallacious arguments. Attempts to show the bible "isn't completely wrong" are hardly convincing that it's infallible. Which it clearly isn't.
And if part of God involves being a property of something else, being in everything, or of everything, again how do we distinguish this from this not being the case, and things being no more than what they seem?
The language used to describe a God is almost always negative, saying what it isn't, and why we can't detect it.
We only have this one reality to go by. If this reality is meant to be permeated or created by a God in some way, how do we know what the universe would otherwise have looked like? We have no comparison to make. And science declares the need for supernatural intervention entirely unnecessary almost as far back as the big bang. In other words it's a needless assumption, with no basis.
Posts: 4196
Threads: 60
Joined: September 8, 2011
Reputation:
30
RE: Evidence??
January 10, 2015 at 2:03 am
My definition of a god would be an atemporal intelligence that got bored and decided to create some pets.
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: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Evidence??
January 10, 2015 at 2:06 am
(This post was last modified: January 10, 2015 at 2:08 am by robvalue.)
That sounds pretty good. But how does something atemporal move from not being bored, to bored? I'm interested in how atemporal things "do" anything 
Oh wait, you mean eternal don't you. I got confused, I was thinking of outside of time. Chronophobia!
Posts: 4196
Threads: 60
Joined: September 8, 2011
Reputation:
30
RE: Evidence??
January 10, 2015 at 2:08 am
Best I could come up with to describe an illogical and impossible entity.
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: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Evidence??
January 10, 2015 at 2:09 am
(This post was last modified: January 10, 2015 at 2:11 am by robvalue.)
That is probably the best definition I have ever seen. It's not making heaps of extra assumptions like normal.
Hell, I'd get bored after existing forever on my own. Well, we don't really know what he did in the past do we? Are we to believe he just sat there?
Posts: 4196
Threads: 60
Joined: September 8, 2011
Reputation:
30
RE: Evidence??
January 10, 2015 at 2:19 am
(This post was last modified: January 10, 2015 at 2:21 am by IATIA.)
Actually, if there were a god, it would be dead by now. I mean, how many universes could you create before you just blew your brains out from sheer boredom.
For all intents and purposes, if there were a god, it must think itself in Hell.
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: 23918
Threads: 300
Joined: June 25, 2011
Reputation:
151
RE: Evidence??
January 10, 2015 at 2:29 am
(January 10, 2015 at 1:11 am)W.Smith Wrote: .. some religions describe god as "Alpha - Omega" meaning that god is everything (or in everything)?
How about we concede this much? Do you have any reason to think this undefined god-thing, if not a person, has any influence whatsoever? If god is in everything perhaps god is just energy/matter? Any reason to think this non-person has a plan or a will or significance?
|
