Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Reasons
April 14, 2009 at 12:22 pm
(April 14, 2009 at 3:58 am)Giff Wrote: What make you believe in God? Just give me a straight answer Fr0d0. I've given you a precise answer Giff. Go read it again.
@ Kyu: IMO you're post is incredibly childish and I don't need to bother to answer. Make a valid point and I'll answer. Until then.. keep preaching to the converted - I'm sure they appreciate the nonsense.
Posts: 835
Threads: 47
Joined: September 18, 2008
Reputation:
3
RE: Reasons
April 14, 2009 at 12:54 pm
(This post was last modified: April 14, 2009 at 12:55 pm by Giff.)
Quote:All it debunks is the mindless assertion that empirical evidence is required to prove Gods existence when talking about Christian faith
Is this your answer. Then make it more understandble to me then, becuase I don't really know what you mean. You didn't do that last time I asked.
But I find this to not fully answer my question why you believe there is a God and not other gods. Also I don't know what empirical evidence there is also you haven't prestended the theory how God exist.
Anyway this hasn't really to do with the thread. It's about why we are atheists. But if you could give me that "precise answer" mentioned, or repeat once more, would appriciate it so we can end this discussion quickly in this thread. If we should continue should we continue on another thread wich suite this discussion.
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Reasons
April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm
(This post was last modified: April 14, 2009 at 1:19 pm by fr0d0.)
(April 14, 2009 at 8:35 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: (April 14, 2009 at 3:39 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Not empirical evidence. So you're saying that valid reasoning = evidence?
If there's any valid reason to believe in God, that isn't just subjective and for you personally, then how can that not count as evidence? If you are not just speaking of you but saying there are valid reasons to believe that God actually exists in this universe and that that would be true for everyone..?
If you are only speaking of you - then I think that's a contradiction because I swear you said earlier that you are not just saying that 'God' is 'true for you' but that he's also true for everyone else..right? God is only true for me because I believe it to be so. He can't be true for anyone else unless they also believe it. The God I know is the same God as the one other Christians believe in.
Like I've said, there cannot be fact for the affirmative. But then the evidence is more than opinion.
If you could know exactly what I know then you would have REASON to believe that there is a God. Still you wouldn't NEED to believe, you would still need FAITH to believe.
(April 14, 2009 at 8:35 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: But if you say there are valid reasons to believe God actually exists in this universe- for everyone that would be - then those valid reasons would have to count as evidence right? If they were actually valid reasons to believe that God does indeed exist, in reality - and not just on your own head. I think that's a good point. Even though I cannot know, and no one can; what I'm professing faith to is something that is in fact, a hard reality.
Maybe it's like scientific reasoning.. The best reasoning for any individual may construe God's existence and subsidiary details. Any other reasoning may come to light that wouldsupercede this reasoning.
Thoughts of faith are alive in this way and tested to be relevant as time passes.
(April 14, 2009 at 8:35 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: Quote:No. I say that I believe that God exists. I can claim nothing.
All I want is to ask you now is how these reasons are at all valid - if they are not evidence in any shape or form of God's existence then how on earth are they valid? And if they are valid then how don't they count as evidence? Either there is evidence of God or there isn't. If you say there is no evidence then basically it's just another way of saying no valid reasons.
If, as you say, there ARE valid reasons - then that would count as evidence even if it may not be empricial evidence as you say.
If there really ARE valid reasons to believe that God actually exists in reality then THAT'S EVIDENCE.
If there AREN'T then that's obviously not evidence.
So I'd like to hear these 'valid reasons' and if it's not so personal that it only applies to you in your own head. If these reasons are not valid then it's not evidence and if it's not evidence then it's not a valid reason! You now seem to be saying that non empirical evidence would be valid for you. That seems to be a shift for you against your previous stance that only empirical evidence would be acceptable.
As we talk and explore reasoning on here(this forum) I'm telling you my reasoning. You need to quiz me on those specifics rather than being generalist here. Generally I can only tell you the principle, as I've done here.
(April 14, 2009 at 8:35 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: Quote:I can't say objectively (factually) that God exists. No one can, as it's impossible. A ridiculous question.
You can say God exists objectively - you don't have to claim he absolutely definitely exists and that we 'KNOW' this. No I can't. I can say that I believe he exists but I can say nothing factually, unless I had factual proof. I've already established that there can be no factual proof.
(April 14, 2009 at 8:35 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: If you are saying he actually exists objectively in reality - you can say this, but I would ask for your valid reasons to believe this that also applies to others (i.e, your evidence). I'm saying that I believe this to be true, Is this the same as saying that it's true?
(April 14, 2009 at 8:35 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: fr0d0 Wrote:So... not so. Your understanding of my position is still incorrect. What I'm saying isn't rocket science EvF, it's very simple. How can you be an atheist when you don't understand what it is you're not accepting? You say one thing and then another. You say that there can be no evidence of God - but then on the other hand you say there can be - just not emprical. Not on the other hand at all. There can be no empirical evidence. There can be non empirical evidence. You and I have already established that between us, or I really am wasting my time if you don't remember.
(April 14, 2009 at 8:35 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: And you say there are valid reasons to believe God actually exists but that this is NOT evidence. Not 'empirical evidence'. You have to be specific. Dawkins is!
(April 14, 2009 at 8:35 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: I on the other hand am asking for one simple thing evidence you say there can be be no evidence/no empirical evidence...
So I am asking for valid non-emprical evidence - or these valid reasons of yours... - which if actually valid reasons for believing in the actual existence of "God" - then that would count as evidence. If they're invalid then it's NOT evidence. Like I said above.. lets get specific and find out.
(April 14, 2009 at 8:35 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: And by the way - no, I know EXACTLY what I am rejecting. I am rejecting God as in any supernatural creator(s)/designer(s)/ and I am also rejecting any supernatural being/anything supernatural. But you don't understand any of the reasoning. You've planted your flag on one side of the fence before knowing which side you agree with.
Obviously there are drawbacks to that strategy. The big one for me is that you can't now look at the problem objectively. You have to make the evidence fit your answer.
(April 14, 2009 at 12:54 pm)Giff Wrote: Quote:All it debunks is the mindless assertion that empirical evidence is required to prove Gods existence when talking about Christian faith
Is this your answer. Then make it more understandble to me then, becuase I don't really know what you mean. You didn't do that last time I asked.
But I find this to not fully answer my question why you believe there is a God and not other gods. Also I don't know what empirical evidence there is also you haven't prestended the theory how God exist.
Anyway this hasn't really to do with the thread. It's about why we are atheists. But if you could give me that "precise answer" mentioned, or repeat once more, would appriciate it so we can end this discussion quickly in this thread. If we should continue should we continue on another thread wich suite this discussion. I'm sorry Giff I realise you're frustration. I have no magic pill to make it better. I'm repeating myself all the time. If you can't understand what I'm saying then I'm sorry. I don't know how to make it clear to you.
This whole discussion has and is happening over on the evidence thread. Maybe read that and see if that helps.
Posts: 835
Threads: 47
Joined: September 18, 2008
Reputation:
3
RE: Reasons
April 14, 2009 at 1:26 pm
(This post was last modified: April 14, 2009 at 1:27 pm by Giff.)
Quote:I'm sorry Giff I realise you're frustration. I have no magic pill to make it better. I'm repeating myself all the time. If you can't understand what I'm saying then I'm sorry. I don't know how to make it clear to you.
This whole discussion has and is happening over on the evidence thread. Maybe read that and see if that helps.
WHat I mean is that I don't understand the english. I'm not an english speaker so that's why I don't really understand the sentence with words like 'debunks' and 'empirical'. The later one do I know is a term used in scientific theories. So can you make it more understandble in a more easy read english?
Posts: 2721
Threads: 99
Joined: October 8, 2008
Reputation:
17
RE: Reasons
April 14, 2009 at 3:58 pm
(April 14, 2009 at 12:22 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: IMO you're post is incredibly childish and I don't need to bother to answer. Make a valid point and I'll answer. Until then.. keep preaching to the converted - I'm sure they appreciate the nonsense.
No Frodo I'm not and yet again you are dodging and being disingenuous.
Answer the points that were made or be graceful enough to admit you are unable or unwilling to do so.
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: God is only true for me because I believe it to be so. He can't be true for anyone else unless they also believe it. The God I know is the same God as the one other Christians believe in.
In which case your god is a logical contradiction, it either exists or it doesn't ... it CANNOT exist only for some but not for others.
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Like I've said, there cannot be fact for the affirmative. But then the evidence is more than opinion.
What evidence?
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: If you could know exactly what I know then you would have REASON to believe that there is a God. Still you wouldn't NEED to believe, you would still need FAITH to believe.
Again the No True Scotsman argument ... you conveniently forget that many of us have been where you are and have subsequently rejected such childish fairy tales.
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: I think that's a good point. Even though I cannot know, and no one can; what I'm professing faith to is something that is in fact, a hard reality.
I think you twisted what Ev said ... in essence he said exactly what I am saying that god either exists or doesn't and that if the evidence you have for him would exist for everyone.
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Maybe it's like scientific reasoning.. The best reasoning for any individual may construe God's existence and subsidiary details. Any other reasoning may come to light that wouldsupercede this reasoning.
Or maybe you're talking the usual theist twaddle.
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Thoughts of faith are alive in this way and tested to be relevant as time passes.
You don't test your faith, you seek to confirm & bolster it.
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: You now seem to be saying that non empirical evidence would be valid for you. That seems to be a shift for you against your previous stance that only empirical evidence would be acceptable.
Sigh! Once again you twist what was said ... he's quite clearly saying that if there are valid reasons to believe in a god then that is evidence, if there is evidence it can be evaluated.
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: As we talk and explore reasoning on here(this forum) I'm telling you my reasoning. You need to quiz me on those specifics rather than being generalist here. Generally I can only tell you the principle, as I've done here.
And we have repeatedly asked that you provide specifics and you always retreat behind bullshit arguments like there being no evidence for your god (and as I have already asked, does that also apply for every other religion's invisible gods?).
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: No I can't. I can say that I believe he exists but I can say nothing factually, unless I had factual proof. I've already established that there can be no factual proof.
No you have not ESTABLISHED it, you have claimed it ... that's an entirely different thing and is heavily disputed.
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: I'm saying that I believe this to be true, Is this the same as saying that it's true?
Given there is no available validatable evidence it's the same as being deluded.
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Not on the other hand at all. There can be no empirical evidence. There can be non empirical evidence. You and I have already established that between us, or I really am wasting my time if you don't remember.
There's no such thing, at least in principle, as non-empirical evidence unless you are talking about quantum mechanics and whilst that isn't fully understood I believe I am correct in saying that, to date, nothing predicted by QM has been demonstrated as false.
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Not 'empirical evidence'. You have to be specific. Dawkins is! data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/495e7/495e700480836bca117f07126df84337f2465544" alt="Wink Wink"
Oh don't even compare your shit with Dawkins.
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Like I said above.. lets get specific and find out.
Oh yes. Let's be specific ... what evidence do you have for the existence of your god and if no evidence is what we should expect then how do you differentiate between your (Christian) claim and that of other non-Christian religions past & present? IOW there are other people in this world who believe they're (non-Christian) god/s is/are real ... are they and, if not, why does your god deserve any more credence than theirs?
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: But you don't understand any of the reasoning. You've planted your flag on one side of the fence before knowing which side you agree with.
No, he hasn't for the very reason my question above implicitly highlights i.e. lots of people make claims about lots of things (many of them gods) without any supporting (validatable) evidence and he is rejecting your claim for the very same reasons he would reject theirs, the request you just made implicitly demands that he consider your claim above others and I (and I bet he) want to know why we should do that?
(April 14, 2009 at 1:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Obviously there are drawbacks to that strategy. The big one for me is that you can't now look at the problem objectively. You have to make the evidence fit your answer.
Say what? The rational mind DOES NOT make the evidence fit the answer and neither I nor Ev are doing so, we are asking the very same questions of you that we would ask anyone if they claimed something.
Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Reasons
April 14, 2009 at 4:57 pm
@ Kyu: Don't you have your own posts to write? Why do you always jump on everyone else's?
Sorry - I'm not perpetuating that nonsense tit for tat style when it doesn't even concern you personally.
Someone tell me if Kyu makes a good point please.
Posts: 2721
Threads: 99
Joined: October 8, 2008
Reputation:
17
RE: Reasons
April 15, 2009 at 5:52 am
(April 14, 2009 at 4:57 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: @ Kyu: Don't you have your own posts to write? Why do you always jump on everyone else's?
WTF are you on about? Every forum member is able to comment on every other forum member's posting s (except in the debate forum) so I am absolutely 100% on the mark again ... I presume this is just another form of ignoring me (which you were told you couldn't do as I am a moderator) by proxy?
(April 14, 2009 at 4:57 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Sorry - I'm not perpetuating that nonsense tit for tat style when it doesn't even concern you personally.
So, just another dodge then? Well, if you believe you can play dirty so can I!
(April 14, 2009 at 4:57 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Someone tell me if Kyu makes a good point please.
Point summary made (from above):
- Yet again you are dodging and being disingenuous.
- If your god is only true for you because you believe it to be so and can't be true for anyone else your god is a logical contradiction, it either exists or it doesn't ... it CANNOT exist only for some but not for others.
- If "the evidence is more than opinion" what evidence are you referring to?
- To argue that if we know what you know then we would have a reason to believe there is a god is using the No True Scotsman fallacy and conveniently ignores the fact that many of us have been where you are and have subsequently rejected such childish notions.
- EvF is, in essence, saying exactly what I say i.e. that god either exists or doesn't and that if the evidence you have for him exists then it would for everyone (IOW it would be possible to examine it at least potentially)
- You DO NOT test your faith, you seek to confirm & bolster it.
- We have repeatedly asked that you provide specifics and you always retreat behind bullshit arguments like there being no evidence for your god.
- You claim you have established that there can be no factual proof when in actual fact you have not established it (the claim being heavily disputed), you have merely claimed it and that is an entirely different thing.
- Saying that you believe something to be true is not the same as it being true, it is potentially the equivalent of delusion.
- There is no such thing, at least in principle, as non-empirical evidence unless you are talking about quantum mechanics and whilst that isn't fully understood I believe I am correct in saying that, to date, nothing predicted by QM has been demonstrated as false.
- What evidence do you have for the existence of your god and if no evidence is what we should expect then how do you differentiate between your (Christian) claim and that of other non-Christian religions past & present? IOW there are other people in this world who believe they're (non-Christian) god/s is/are real ... are they and, if not, why does your god deserve any more credence than theirs? Note that I am aware of your response to this in another thread but, since it essentially equates to , "because I believe it is" I reject that as a valid answer.
- Lots of people make claims about lots of things (many of them gods) without any supporting (validatable) evidence and, without supporting validatable evidence, it is valid to reject your claim for the very same reasons we would reject theirs and demanding/implying that your claim is somehow different (more valid) is special pleading.
- The rational mind does not make the evidence fit the answer; neither EvF or I are doing so and we are asking the very same questions of you that we would ask anyone if they claimed something.
Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Reasons
April 15, 2009 at 12:40 pm
If you want to talk about you Kyu start another thread and stop spamming the forum with the same questions over and over.
Posts: 2721
Threads: 99
Joined: October 8, 2008
Reputation:
17
RE: Reasons
April 15, 2009 at 3:36 pm
(April 15, 2009 at 12:40 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: If you want to talk about you Kyu start another thread and stop spamming the forum with the same questions over and over.
Alternatively you could try addressing the points made.
Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Reasons
April 15, 2009 at 3:53 pm
I've addressed you directly Kyu and you give up. Now you're hounding me. What's the point Kyu, really?
One moment you give up & the next you ask inane questions over and over. There's nothing I can say to you is there? You won't follow sensible discussion, and you 'hound'. Nice.
|