RE: Evidence for a god. Do you have any ?
December 30, 2018 at 4:37 pm
(This post was last modified: December 30, 2018 at 5:28 pm by vulcanlogician.)
(December 30, 2018 at 4:01 pm)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: I think "evidence" is a difficulty, but "no evidence" is not a rule. Part of the problem is within determining what is objectively considered to be evidence. If the requirement is a "supernatural stick", then it becomes difficult because I don't know what a supernatural stick is. You indicated the Rod of Aaron would qualify as such, but admittedly, I would know where to find it. At best, I can consider presenting it if I were ever to find it.
Well, I mean, God might appear before me and tell me he exists. He could also confirm that his only begotten son, Jesus, died for my sins, the Bible is his inerrant word, etc., etc., etc. If he did that, it would save us all a lot of trouble. Why doesn't he just do that?
God can create the wide and majestic cosmos, but can't be bothered to confirm his own existence except through (highly questionable) ancient texts. Look... he could write it on the moon for everyone to see: "Hey guys, I exist." It would save us all a great deal of trouble figuring it out. But that ain't gonna happen!
What we're left to do is to try to parse through the myriads of religious literature, each text claiming different god(s) are the rulers of the universe. Consider how many religions there are in the world. They can't ALL be true, can they? At least SOME of those cosmic beings described in ancient texts are pure fiction, right? Isn't it reasonable to assume that they ALL are pure fiction?
That's where I'm at right now. And until God makes that personal appearance, I can't see my position changing.
Quote:I know faith can be a difficult concept, but interestingly faith is one of he things in the bible that is cleanly and intentionally defined. As such it can be used as a foundation for understanding.
Faith is actually a good thing, IMO. I don't begrudge anyone for having faith in something. It's almost necessary for life.
But (by the same token) the faithful would be wise not to treat faith like genuine knowledge. It would be honest for those who have faith to recognize that faith isn't knowledge. If you get the two mixed up (faith and knowledge) difficulties ensue.
PS: What did you mean by "no evidence is not a rule"?
