quote: No. Evidence is a manifestation of the divine. The human need for explanations is reason enough for many cultures to have religions.
You mean the evidence recorded in the records of those civilizations?
quote: Jacare, or it could mean that searching for a greater truth or purpose is instrinsic to human nature. It doesn't necessarily prove the existence of that greater truth.
It doesn't prove the existence, but it proves that for a long time a very large number of people have believed it and some have written evidence of it. To say that no evidence exists is to nullify all of these.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:The human need for explanations is reason enough for many cultures to have religions.
You're probably right about that. I'm still of the opinion that most, if not all religions, are wrong about the facts of how things began, and how exactly things work.
Still...the reason I appreciate religion is because most of it is a good guide to living life right.
Posts: 149 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Doesn't the fact that many civilizations in different places at different times have all worshipped a divine being count as evidence?"
Many civilizations in different places at different times have also known that the world was flat, that there were lots of interrelated divine beings that all had violent tempers and ADD, that women and children were property, that it was okay to keep slaves, and that reality television is good. How does anyone's opinion, widespread though it may be, make something objectively true?
All you have to go on is a record of someone else's beliefs. Thus you conclude that belief in a deity is a compelling one, but it would be sloppy reasoning to conclude that there must therefore be a deity.
[ August 22, 2003, 02:56 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
We do if the eyewitness account cannot be substantiated. No one has ever been convicted because an eyewitness told the objective truth. They were convicted because a jury, made up of fallible people, believed the eyewitness's story to be true. There is a difference, and every lawyer knows that.
Tell me, if 500 people swore up and down that they saw David Copperfield make the Statue of Liberty disappear, does that mean it happened? Or that they all thought it did?
[ August 22, 2003, 03:00 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: All you have to go on is a record of someone else's beliefs. Thus you conclude that belief in a deity is a compelling one, but it would be sloppy reasoning to conclude that there must therefore be a deity.
Perhaps you missed what I was responding to. It was this:
quote: Who cares if we can't disprove a god? There is no need to disprove god because nothing has come forward to ever have proven its existance in the first place. We don't waste time disproving things that haven't been proven to exist first.
I was refuting this idea.
Further, in this list:
quote:Many civilizations in different places at different times have also known that the world was flat, that there were lots of interrelated divine beings that all had violent tempers and ADD, that women and children were property, that it was okay to keep slaves, and that reality television is good.
the only scientifically contradicted point of evidence is the "world is flat" which is a non-starter since educated people in many ancient civilizations (such as Greece, Rome etc) did not believe that such was the case. The rest of your items are cultural. That you list them shows your own cultural bias that the way things are now is the way things should be.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's true of course, Chris. Other people's eye witness accounts, especially those from thousands of years ago, are not a reason to believe in God. But then again, if 500 people swore up and down the the statue of liberty was gone, don't think it would be worth it to look out your window and check?
Surrrrrrre we can...okay, not magic. Harry Potter throws all of my ideas out of whack. But science can explain beauty, right? At least when it comes to the beauty we find in people.
I saw something on TV a while ago, I think it was a Discovery program called The Human Face...or maybe it was TLC program. Anyway, it had Cleese in it, hahaha...he's so funny.
Has anyone else seen it? I can't remember exactly what was said, but it had something to do with the face lining up right...
posted
Point on the cultural bias, although in my defense I should point out that I did throw in belief in deities, which is what was being discussed.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: We do if the eyewitness account cannot be substantiated. No one has ever been convicted because an eyewitness told the objective truth. They were convicted because a jury, made up of fallible people, believed the eyewitness's story to be true. There is a difference, and every lawyer knows that.
Tell me, if 500 people swore up and down that they saw David Copperfield make the Statue of Liberty disappear, does that mean it happened? Or that they all thought it did?
Ah, but what of eyewitness accounts which we do not know the objective truth behind? Isn't the vast majority of our historical knowledge made up of historical accounts which we cannot corroborate? Archaeology can provide supporting evidence, but it certainly is nearly useless in recounting historical occurrence alone.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Point on the cultural bias, although in my defense I should point out that I did throw in belief in deities, which is what was being discussed.
True enough. However, you also state that belief as if it were obviously, demonstrably false, which of course it isn't.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:What evidence would you accept? Miraculous healings? Reports of inspiration? Knowledge beyond the possibility of human source?
honestly. Yes. God would have to appear before me and say, "Hey, Greg, I exist. Now stop being an idiot!" Or something equally convincing.
If I am to believe something I need to either see it for myself, or be able to reason to that conclusion through logical deduction based on factors that *are* provable.
Posts: 251 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
>> You mean the evidence recorded in the records of those civilizations? <<
Right, so because lots of other people over the course of history have believed in god and claimed to have witnessed divine miracles -- many of which have been later refuted, as with Tom's point about the exodus -- I'm supposed to believe in god? And in particular, the god of one specific religion?
Anecdotal evidence is at best a reason to give the subject thought*. It is not a proof.
Edit:
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data.' All courts of law are required to establish is guilt or innocence "beyond a reasonable doubt." That is by no means a proof in the logical sense of the term. ____________________________
quote:But then again, if 500 people swore up and down the the statue of liberty was gone, don't think it would be worth it to look out your window and check?
Probably, but I wouldn't rush
God isn't provable, unless he decides to manifest in an undeniable fashion.
But God isn't disprovable at all. His existence and involvement has been pushed back as science progresses and learns more about the first causes of life, but there is absolutely no way to prove that he didn't start the thing rolling. Maybe lightning did cause life on earth. Accidental or thrown? Short of Douglas Adams logic, proving God's nonexistence can't be done.
Which is why I remain apatheistic.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sho- in my experience it is pretty easy to rationalize almost any experience to fit preconceived notions about how the world works. That blade cuts both ways, as far as this discussion is concerned. Maybe the greatest difference between the religious and the non-religious is what each group will accept as evidence of God.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Tell me, if 500 people swore up and down that they saw David Copperfield make the Statue of Liberty disappear, does that mean it happened? Or that they all thought it did?
So if I see a magical sunset, or I partake in the most wonderful kiss? It's not real unless sceince can prove it?
Posts: 2752 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:However, you also state that belief as if it were obviously, demonstrably false, which of course it isn't.
But it is in contrast to the "one deity" theory being discussed, and is equally impossible to prove or disprove. You pays your money, you takes your choice...
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:But then again, if 500 people swore up and down the the statue of liberty was gone, don't think it would be worth it to look out your window and check?
Damn that was clever. Anyways, yeah that whole symmetry thing made a lot of sense. I've heard that Clinton's face is symmetrical. He's a good lookin' guy, maybe that's why he had such an easy time of being a whore.
You're right though, I can't explain how we find beauty in nature.
Posts: 149 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
>> Maybe the greatest difference between the religious and the non-religious is what each group will accept as evidence of God. <<
I don't even need a physical manifestation. I just need to find that faith in god exists somewhere down at the core of my being. I need to feel it, to feel that this is what I've believed all along without knowing it.
I don't feel that, and without faith in god there can be no belief in god.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:So if I see a magical sunset, or I partake in the most wonderful kiss? It's not real unless sceince can prove it?
Define "real" in this instance.
That you saw a sunset or partook of a kiss is easy to prove. That it was a magical sunset or the most wonderful kiss is purely subjective. Others watching the sunset might not be impressed, the person you were kissing might have been spending the time thinking about the last episode of Smallville. It's your subjective interpretation that adds the meaning, which makes it no less real, but not objectively valid.
[ August 22, 2003, 03:13 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have odd contradictory views on god. One view is that if there is a God then God is the universe itself. Or at least what turns random particles into trees, stars and black holes just as something turns noise into clear speech or music. Two, that there is a possibility that God does not exist, but if god doesn't exist than it does not nessasarily mean that life is meaningless. Plus I like to toy with the notion that human beings are godlike in a lot of ways. Weird, isn't it? Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Right, so because lots of other people over the course of history have believed in god and claimed to have witnessed divine miracles -- many of which have been later refuted, as with Tom's point about the exodus -- I'm supposed to believe in god? And in particular, the god of one specific religion?
Which of the divine miracles have been refuted? The Exodus certainly isn't one of them. At any rate, I didn't say that these evidences should compell you to believe. They should certainly be enough to make you wonder though.
quote:Anecdotal evidence is at best a reason to give the subject thought*. It is not a proof.
That is exactly what I am saying. The evidence which exists is sufficient that God may not simply be dismissed out of hand as having no supporting evidence.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:That is exactly what I am saying. The evidence which exists is sufficient that God may not simply be dismissed out of hand as having no supporting evidence.
i don't think anyone is denying that, or maybe some people are...
But the beginning of this thread contained alot of arguments for the existence of god because of the existence of us and the universe. that it was necessarily created by a creater.
Posts: 251 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I have odd contradictory views on god. One view is that if there is a God then God is the universe itself. Or at least what turns random particles into trees, stars and black holes just as something turns noise into clear speech or music. Two, that there is a possibility that God does not exist, but if god doesn't exist than it does not nessasarily mean that life is meaningless. Plus I like to toy with the notion that human beings are godlike in a lot of ways. Weird, isn't it?
Wow, that's what I basically think about all this, for the most part.
Just because we can't explain the existance of the universe doesn't mean that there is no physical explanation, one that does not require devine intervention. I am also of the opinion, as are some others, that some of us need god and therefore created the idea of god to satisfy our needs.
Posts: 168 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm afraid we'll have to disagree on this point, Jacare. The massive body of evidence adds weight to nothing more or less than the fact that most people in the history of the world have believed in a deity.
That adds not a jot of weight towards the theory that there actually is one.
However, I suspect I should recuse myself from this thread, since it matters to me not a bit whether there is or isn't a god, and I run the risk of seriously annoying people I respect who have a strong belief either way. It's happened before.
[ August 22, 2003, 03:22 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
>> That is exactly what I am saying. The evidence which exists is sufficient that God may not simply be dismissed out of hand as having no supporting evidence. <<
Anecdotal evidence is all that exists. There is no proof. Saying that atheism is unjustified because there is anecdotal evidence for god's existence is just silly. As far as I'm concerned, trying to "prove" (even merely "beyond a reasonable doubt") that god exists is also silly.
As to miracles, I've read fairly compelling archaeological arguments against the Exodus, the Ressurrection, and the collapse of the walls of Jericho in particular.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Chris, that's exactly why I have stayed out of theological threads in the past. I hope this doesn't become another "culture war".
Posts: 2506 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Is the expansion rate of the Universe limited to the speed of light. It's not actually travelling. Information is not being transmitted. Or is it?
Eslaine. No, the expansion rate is not limited to c. The latest Big Bang theories use Guth inflation, a theory that explains patterns in the cosmic background radiation. Guth inflation, named after Alan Guth of MIT, is what [edit:is theorized to have] occured when the Universe expanded tremendously in it's earliest moments (fractions of a second) after the initial Big Bang. The Universe expanded far faster than c during this initial Guth inflation. I think (would have to double check) that relativity's c limit is not involved because it is space-time itself expanding, not a light ray embedded in space-time.
As far as God goes, I am with Sho'nuff: without a personal transcendental experience, I cannot believe in an all-powerful creator God. Musty texts from thousands of years ago are not convincing.
posted
I second twink's sentiment. You have already posted several ideas that I could not have put better myself in this thread. Also you seem to be quicker in responding....
Thanks for being here. Posts: 2506 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
>> Without a personal transcendental experience, I cannot believe in an all-powerful creator God. Musty texts from thousands of years ago are not convincing. <<
Thanks for putting my views so eloquently.
And thanks for clarifying the expansion stuff too.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
AJ
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
Synesthesia
