I would like to tell you a bit more about God

[jakee 1,279]

Quote

All that was illustrated to me was your ability to take one part of a post and state it as the end all be all to my beliefs or lack there of.

You must have great creative reading abilities then, because I stated no such thing. I merely demonstrated how ridiculous that particular line of argument was.

Quote

That the idea of a God or Gods has been around for such a long time that it is proof that the idea is enough for many to decide that he does exist.

I'd appreciate it if you could clean up the syntax there a bit. A few to many 'thats' for me to have any idea what you are talking about.

It sounds like you're saying that the popularity of the idea of a god can only ever be proof that people like to believe in a god. in which case I'd agree.

Quote

Had it been proven without a shadow of a doubt that there is nothing more then what we see then it would over time have become accepted. How long will it take them to prove he dont exist? Compare it to other theories that have been turned to fact, how many theories have with stood this much time without being proven one way or the other?

Well see that's your problem right there, a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of science. We can't prove a negative.

Also, in scientific terms God, or religion, fulfills none of the criteria of a theory. It's not even a testable hypothesis.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[SpeedRacer 1]

proving or disproving the existence of God is not the realm of physical science.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[jakee 1,279]

Quote

proving or disproving the existence of God is not the realm of physical science.

I believe that might just about have been what I was saying.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

Quote

Compare it to other theories that have been turned to fact, how many theories have with stood this much time without being proven one way or the other?

Well see that's your problem right there, a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of science. We can't prove a negative.

Also, in scientific terms God, or religion, fulfills none of the criteria of a theory. It's not even a testable hypothesis.

And theories don't turn into facts, either.

I am amazed at how many people don't know the difference between a theory and a fact. Theories are not just fuzzy, uncertain ideas that are a step on the path towards becoming facts. A theory is not a fact, and a fact is not a theory. A fact is an observation, something that can be seen to be true or false with little or no interpretation. A theory is a conceptual framework that explains existing observations and predicts new ones. Theories explain facts. They do not become facts.

[JackC 0]

Quote

proving or disproving the existence of God is not the realm of physical science.

Rubbish, a universe with an active god would be very different from a universe without a god. And that difference is a scientific difference.

If science came up with some evidence for god, every religion under the sun would be all over it. Likewise, if someone came up with a testable hypothesis for god, someone will test it scientifically. Prayer for example is one religious theory that's been tested up the wazoo.

It's not that god isn't the realm of science, it's that science has quite rightly realised that god is a waste of time.

[billvon 2,471]

>I am amazed at how many people don't know the difference between a theory and a fact.

Well, to be fair, many do, but purposeful misunderstanding of that definition helps their cause.

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

Because it always has been...And why is it delusion to believe in something?

To believe in something to the extent of thinking that the entire world around her is being organised and manipulated just for her benefit. That goes waaay beyond normal religious belief, and if it was attributed to anything other than god then I am sure that you and many others would be questioning her mental state.

Central to the paranoid delusional is that their beliefs elevate their perceived status. People are plotting against them, thus they are special or important. In short, it works for them. Their delusions, no matter how bizzare, work for them in a sustintive way.

Not so different with the devoutly religious, I think.

From a cultural anthropological view, we continue to give a pass when these very similar thought processes concern religion. At one time, these commonly held delusions 'explained' the frighteningly unexplainable, elevated status and brought comfort in a world most strange. In short, it significantly contributed to their survival.

Cultural mores and folkways tend to hang around for many, many generations (centuries!) after they have outlived their uses. To use one of my favorites, the folkway (become more) of prostitutes painting their faces to attract business was enculturated to women in general who, having few viable prospects of supporting themselves, dedicated their lives to being 'attractive' to a man (any man, really) who would be put a roof over their heads and food on the table.

Women now have quite viable options (and exercise them!), yet many continue to dedicate significant portions of their life to attempting to maintain their attraction to men as if their survival still depended on it. This is true even when it becomes, to a significant degree, a counter-survival choice with the amount of time, energy and money dedicated to such activities becomes a financial, social and personal drain on resources.

Yeah, I know, I know, I'm just a weird, fucked up woman who doesn't understand much about life and what got us where we are.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[jakee 1,279]

Quote

Quote

proving or disproving the existence of God is not the realm of physical science.

Rubbish, a universe with an active god would be very different from a universe without a god. And that difference is a scientific difference.

But then of course, there is the non-interventionist 'first cause' God. How do you disprove that? Demonstrate that it is not neccesary, sure, but disprove?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,279]

Quote

I am amazed at how many people don't know the difference between a theory and a fact.

Not really surprising, when the people they get their scientific knowledge from bang on endlessly about 'just a theory'

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[JackC 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

proving or disproving the existence of God is not the realm of physical science.

Rubbish, a universe with an active god would be very different from a universe without a god. And that difference is a scientific difference.

But then of course, there is the non-interventionist 'first cause' God. How do you disprove that? Demonstrate that it is not neccesary, sure, but disprove?

Hence my use of the word active. Non-interventionist gods are outside of what we can know, for both scientists and theists alike. It's scientifically meaningless to postulate gods that exist outside of the universe since we can never test anything or know anything about them. Gods that write books are fair game though.

Nevertheless, if evidence for god were made available, science would investigate and religions would jump on it.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

I broke my leg on two places, but it'll heal. It just once again showed me that God looks after his children.

From my limited experience in skydiving I'd say it is very rare and unlucky for an AFF student to broke the leg in two places. If this is a typical example of how your god looks after his children, I'd say it is kinda weird, and I really want to be an orphan.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

it is very rare and unlucky for an AFF student to broke the leg in two places

once at the mockup, and then again in the parking lot

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

once at the mockup, and then again in the parking lot

Wow! Her God will definitely watching for that student :(

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

I believe the earth is round, yet I have not proven it by seeing for myself.

Such an example pops up quite often. The difference, however, is obvious:

1. For vast majority of people it does not affect their lives. The fact most people think the Earth is round (while it is really a sphere) does not affect their lives in any way. You are not told that you are going to scream in pain for your entire ethernal life because your beliefs on that matter were wrong.

2. Unlike the God existense, it could be proven beyond reasonable doubt for any reasonable individual. There is no way to prove the God exist, and all the "evidence" the people bring could as well prove that Flying Spahetti Monster and other imaginagle creatures exists as well.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Quote

Anyone who can say something like your comment above either hasnt read the bible or is so brainwashed they cant see its cruelty.

As Billvon pointed out in another thread, there is a great difference in the message of the Old Testament vs. the message of the New Testament.

Perhaps YOU may wish to do a bit of further reading...

so are you trying to argue it is actually was "a different God" then and now??

if not, then how does that disprove the point that the Christian God is quite guilty of a number of atrocities and outright cruelty as recounted in his 'word'. Ordering Genocide with the Jaw bone of an Ass sound familiar to anyone ?

"Oh that was last year/decade/century. I'm different now" doesnt exactly fly as an excuse or remove the responsibility.

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Quote

Well Im glad you have doubts I wish more religious people would express them.

I'd guess most religious people are willing to express their doubts, in a non-threatening environment. This forum doesn't qualify.

if the belief and doubts you may harbor cannot stand harsh scrutiny and criticism by those who do not share them.. then what value do they (the belief or the doubt) really carry??

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[DSE 3]

Whether you believe in god or not is your own thing.
However, doesn't it seem arrogant to assume that Mr/Mrs XXX became trained as EMT's, doctors, or whatever else, and were at the DZ/your disposal, and all the other aspects of your accident and recovery were placed before you by a god, vs the hard work, training, practice, and experience of those that were available to you? If they're Muslim, agnostic, atheist, pagans, or other 'religion,' does god still have control over them? More to the point, how does god decide who it will look out for and who it won't? Could it be that god was punishing you by breaking your bones, and the 'ungod' was saving you by having its representatives there in the form of scientifically and liberally educated persons to care for you, thus defying gods greater plan of preventing you from skydiving again?
If one theory is believeable, can't another be so?

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Well Im glad you have doubts I wish more religious people would express them.

I'd guess most religious people are willing to express their doubts, in a non-threatening environment. This forum doesn't qualify.

if the belief and doubts you may harbor cannot stand harsh scrutiny and criticism by those who do not share them.. then what value do they (the belief or the doubt) really carry??

Everything in context, Einstein.

[Zenister 0]

nice..both unproductive and insulting.. do you have a point?

If anyone is afraid to air their beliefs or doubts of said beliefs for fear of them being undermined by simple critique then said beliefs cannot be very strong or very persuasive.

"That which cannot withstand close scrutiny is worthless"

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[steveorino 7]

I for one have no problems stating I have had doubts and continue to have questions. I think being a guy that questions doctrine and theology moves us closer to God not farther away. (At least it seemed to work for Martin Luther)

I use to think the original poster's methods were invalid as they tend to polarize people, but experience has revealed there are many methods that work in far as "evangelizing" While some are not my cup of tea, I should not stand in judgment of them or their methods.

However, if one is to follow Christ they would do well to observe how he gave the good news. He typically went to people who were prepared to hear from God. It is interesting to see how that comes about.

For instance in the story were Christ heals the demonic man from the Gaderenes he refuses to let the man follow him, but instructs him to first go home to his people and give his testimony. Christ was aked to leave the region by the former demoniac's people (ticked off by losing pigs no doubt) Christ did leave. Later he returned to that same general area and they were very receptive to him this time. It is there he fed the multitude again (the first was with 12 baskets left over - one for every tribe of Israel -- in this case there were 7 left over, one for every canaanite tribe in that area) I wonder why they were receptive to his message this time? A nice theory is the former demoniac prepared the way by his testimony.

The lesson I learned is -- sometimes you break up the fallow ground for others, sometimes you plant, and at times you harvest -- even what you did not plant yourself.

steveOrino

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

I for one have no problems stating I have had doubts and continue to have questions. I think being a guy that questions doctrine and theology moves us closer to God not farther away. (At least it seemed to work for Martin Luther)

I use to think the original poster's methods were invalid as they tend to polarize people, but experience has revealed there are many methods that work in far as "evangelizing" While some are not my cup of tea, I should not stand in judgment of them or their methods.

However, if one is to follow Christ they would do well to observe how he gave the good news. He typically went to people who were prepared to hear from God. It is interesting to see how that comes about.

For instance in the story were Christ heals the demonic man from the Gaderenes he refuses to let the man follow him, but instructs him to first go home to his people and give his testimony. Christ was aked to leave the region by the former demoniac's people (ticked off by losing pigs no doubt) Christ did leave. Later he returned to that same general area and they were very receptive to him this time. It is there he fed the multitude again (the first was with 12 baskets left over - one for every tribe of Israel -- in this case there were 7 left over, one for every canaanite tribe in that area) I wonder why they were receptive to his message this time? A nice theory is the former demoniac prepared the way by his testimony.

The lesson I learned is -- sometimes you break up the fallow ground for others, sometimes you plant, and at times you harvest -- even what you did not plant yourself.

Thanks for the story. How bout Goldilocks and the Three Bears tomorrow night?

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Thanks for the story. How bout Goldilocks and the Three Bears tomorrow night?

Whatever floats your boat.

steveOrino

[br0k3n 0]

Quote

I for one have no problems stating I have had doubts and continue to have questions

what questions are you asking?

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Quote

I for one have no problems stating I have had doubts and continue to have questions

what questions are you asking?

Presently or in the past?

steveOrino

[br0k3n 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I for one have no problems stating I have had doubts and continue to have questions

what questions are you asking?

Presently or in the past?

dont mind, alright presently then...

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+