POLL: Is there a God ??

[chroix]

I'm not re-defining anything, no.

My life evidences it to me, clearly and unequivocally, which is a daily strengthening of belief, of faith (trust). I have no reservations and am without doubt.

What doesn't work like that? Debate? I only make bona fide (in good faith) arguments, not mal fide (bad faith) arguments, as is common on the interent and in modern discourse in general, seemingly. I'm not playing with words, and I mean precisely what I say when I say my faith is reason and evidence based. Of course it is. However, His existence is not provable from one person to another via argument or experiment, as I already said, which is what I gather you (pl) meant.

Evidence is inherently something you can present to show a fact. “the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.” What you are presenting is a subjective experience that you refuse to define. It’s the opposite of evidence. It may feel true and real to you, but the idea of evidence is that it can be shown to others to confirm your statement. It’s probably just semantics and it’s cool that you have what you have, but unless you are able to show it to the rest of us it is not evidence. It’s emotion. It’s a feeling. It may feel true but that doesn’t make it true. It also doesn’t make it false. It just makes it something other than evidence.

 

[HymanKaplan]

Like I've been saying for page after page. Atheism requires every bit as much faith as religion. It's just that most of them are not aware of that. Most atheists believe that there is a body of evidence to support abiogenesis. When, in fact there is NONE. As in zero. It is only presented as the alternative to a creator. Really, it's the ONLY altercative to a creator.

 

[chroix]

Like I've been saying for page after page. Atheism requires every bit as much faith as religion. It's just that most of them are not aware of that. Most atheists believe that there is a body of evidence to support abiogenesis. When, in fact there is NONE. As in zero. It is only presented as the alternative to a creator. Really, it's the ONLY altercative to a creator.

No one knows and no one can know is my take. For the religious what made God? For the atheist what existed before the universe started? Both questions show the limitations of man. Fun shit to talk about but in the end we are just dumb animals grunting at each other.

 

[HymanKaplan]

I agree. I would just like some intellectual honesty in the discussion.

 

[SDC888]

Evidence is inherently something you can present to show a fact. “the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.” What you are presenting is a subjective experience that you refuse to define. It’s the opposite of evidence. It may feel true and real to you, but the idea of evidence is that it can be shown to others to confirm your statement. It’s probably just semantics and it’s cool that you have what you have, but unless you are able to show it to the rest of us it is not evidence. It’s emotion. It’s a feeling. It may feel true but that doesn’t make it true. It also doesn’t make it false. It just makes it something other than evidence.

It's not like I don't understand the semantics of it.

Nevertheless, my life evidences my faith for me. I have all the evidence, all the fact and reason, to stay firm in my belief (faith).

No one knows and no one can know is my take

I categorically deny this, in other words. He can be known. He is knowable.

 

[SDC888]

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

Evidence.

2. something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign:

verb (used with object), ev·i·denced, ev·i·denc·ing.
to make evident or clear; show clearly; manifest:

 

[MidseasonTweak]

Ok, but I do.


Well, alright.

I have evidence that Santa exists because I got presents as a kid.

It's not like I don't understand the semantics of it.

Nevertheless, my life evidences my faith for me. I have all the evidence, all the fact and reason, to stay firm in my belief.


I categorically deny this, in other words. He can be known. He is knowable.

Has God talked to you? What does his voice sound like?

 

[SDC888]

I have evidence that Santa exists because I got presents as a kid.

Has God talked to you? What does his voice sound like?

Ok.

No.

 

[WildcatfaninOhio]

Like I've been saying for page after page. Atheism requires every bit as much faith as religion. It's just that most of them are not aware of that. Most atheists believe that there is a body of evidence to support abiogenesis. When, in fact there is NONE. As in zero. It is only presented as the alternative to a creator. Really, it's the ONLY altercative to a creator.

I would argue that there is not a choice between a creator and big bang/evolution. But simply an argument by polyatheists like myself that religions, all of them, are wrong. And I’m not certain that scientific theories of big bang and evolution are right. But the unproven scientific theories make WAY more sense to me that a magical dude that resides up in the sky somewhere, and hasn’t been seen in the era of recording equipment.

In other words, religions (every last one of them) got it wrong. Science came through with a compelling guess. I don’t have faith in the guess. I think they may be onto something. And I’m intrigued!

 

[HymanKaplan]

One more time. There is no proof for the existence of God

There is no proof that life can form from nothing.

 

[HymanKaplan]

No, you have faith that what science says is true.

 

[SDC888]

I would argue that there is not a choice between a creator and big bang/evolution. But simply an argument by polyatheists like myself that religions, all of them, are wrong. And I’m not certain that scientific theories of big bang and evolution are right. But the unproven scientific theories make WAY more sense to me that a magical dude that resides up in the sky somewhere, and hasn’t been seen in the era of recording equipment.

In other words, religions (every last one of them) got it wrong. Science came through with a compelling guess. I don’t have faith in the guess. I think they may be onto something. And I’m intrigued!

People think that science explains why.

It doesn't. It describes how. Those are two entirely different questions, and it is way more limited in the one that it can address than lay people realize.

 

[chroix]

Nevertheless, my life evidences my faith for me. I have all the evidence, all the fact and reason, to stay firm in my belief (faith).

That’s good man. I’m happy for you. Have a great Easter. Thanks for the discussion.

 

[HymanKaplan]

I agree. People, I have found, believe (erroneously) that science has made progress towards validating abiogenesis. In 70 years they haven't moved the needle. They claim they have, but upon examination, they have not.
Over the years, anyone in the science community that has tried to be frank about that has been shunned. I suspect because it places research grants in jeopardy. Which is silly. I fully support their efforts.

 

[SDC888]

For the religious what made God? For the atheist what existed before the universe started?

God doesn't need a creator since he is outside of time. It is time which denotes cause and effect.

The atheist relies on phsycis to explain describe the universe. Physics cannot say anything about what happened before the big bang, it can't even describe what happened right at it, and it has lots of unkowns in what it can say when it can, which is some nano, of a nano, of a nano second right after.

That’s good man. I’m happy for you. Have a great Easter. Thanks for the discussion.

Thanks, you too.

 

[WildcatfaninOhio]

One more time. There is no proof for the existence of God

There is no proof that life can form from nothing.

I certainly am willing to admit that, yes, I put way more “faith” in the opinions of educated scientists that have spent a lifetime studying in their field than I do of the tales from uneducated nomads that scribbled down stories after having spent a lifetime herding goats.

 

[HymanKaplan]

And yet, with all of their education and vast resources, they're still at square one.
In fact, all evidence (fossil) indicates that complex llife on this planet appeared suddenly*, and in abundance. and evolved from there.
*(not saying that this proves God exists, but it does provide evidence that SOMETHING had an outside hand in it.)

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Science helps humans understand things religion tried to explain when primitive people were around.

Believing in God only relies on faith as there is no proof of of His existence. It's much easier to explain things using science and logic than to suggest that a god did this or that.

I'm sure you don't believe in Santa, the tooth fairy, etc, so why put so much faith into a god who is only known through man-made literature thousands of years ago?

This is a very simplistic atheist response. You think your faith better than theists’ faith, but you cannot explain any of the big issues about life and the universe, and you are mistaken about the intent behind the writing of the Bible.

I still read Plato and Socrates. One thing these writings patently reveal is that modern apologists are not smarter than the people who lived over 1,000 years ago. Quite the contrary.

 

[WildcatfaninOhio]

And yet, with all of their education and vast resources, they're still at square one.
In fact, all evidence (fossil) indicates that complex llife on this planet formed suddenly, and in abundance. and evolved from there.

All well and good. But does that prove that the xian god as described in the buybull is real? I would have to say no.

Something happened and we’re not certain what or why, or even how. I choose to reject the opinions of ancient man, and listen intently to the opinions of modern man.

 

[UKBrassowTipIN]

Ppl assume we have all knowledge, we don't. Just bc science doesn't currently have an answer doesn't mean it won't. We don't know everything there is to know. Not even 100 years ago ppl didn't know what penicillin was and we've been here 300,000 years, but ppl demand that the big bang has to be fully understood by now?

I dont believe atheist is a real term...there is only a term bc others believe something. If those believers didn't exist, "atheists" would just be people. I like the term agnostic better as it's more realistic. Nothing has shown me there is anything with any religion, but I don't have all knowledge about everything so there could be something else I don't understand.

 

[HymanKaplan]

All well and good. But does that prove that the xian god as described in the buybull is real? I would have to say no.

Something happened and we’re not certain what or why, or even how. I choose to reject the opinions of ancient man, and listen intently to the opinions of modern man.

I amended my remarks to clarify that. I didn't want my meaning to (understandably) be misconstrued.)

 

[HymanKaplan]

I also think that a LOT of Christians would do well to practice their religion and not be such obnoxious assholes about it.
It comes across as mean-spirited and, frankly, quite stupid. (I'm not speaking about anyone in this thread. I think that the conversation here has remained respectful)

IOW, please quit trying to help.

 

[chroix]

God doesn't need a creator since he is outside of time.

This is a leap I can’t make.

 

[HymanKaplan]

I don't dispute the big bang. I think there actually IS very good evidence to support that. We KNOW, through observable science that the universe is expanding away from a central point.
And I fully support research that explores the origin of life on this planet. Christian or atheist (for lack of a better term), knowledge is always a good thing.
I do believe that some Christians come across as anti-science, but if your faith in God is as strong as you purport, you have nothing to fear from it.

 

[SDC888]

This is a leap I can’t make.

It's a logical necessity.

Even physics, when it gets into the realm of speculating on what may have caused the big bang, posits something eternal, unchanging, and outside of time.

 

[chroix]

It's a logical necessity.

Even physics, when it gets into the realm of speculating on what may have caused the big bang, posits something eternal, unchanging, and outside of time.

But it’s patently illogical and feels contrived. Again, a leap I can not make.

 

[HymanKaplan]

The idea of quantum entanglement (which, to my satisfacation has been proven) intrigues me in particular (pun)

 

[HymanKaplan]

IN the words of Rodney King, "People, I just want to say, can't we all get along? Can't we all get along?"


On a personal note, and this has nothing to do with this thread. I would just like to share.:


My FIL is in the last stages of lung cancer. I'll be surprised if he makes it to Derby weekend. He is a devout Christian, and IMO, has lived his entire life in what I consider to be the most Christ like way imaginable. He has placed the needs of others above his own ALWAYS. A life of true and humble servitude to others, regardless of their views. Nobody can ever say that he turned someone away from Christianity through his actions or words. I think that if every Christian lived his or her life like this great man, the hostile attitude (a lot of which is completely justified) towards Christianity would not exist. And we, as Christians would all do well to follow this man's example and serve w/o judgement. In fact, I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that that is what we are EXPECTED to do.

So, religious or not, I would ask that each of you hold this man (Jackie Ray Covington) in your thoughts and/or prayers. The world is about to lose a great one.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

The story of Genesis is where I would start when questioning the existence of a god. Some of the most ridiculous and non-science based understanding of how things work come from there.

There are millions of planets that exist in a zone where life is possible, by the way. Earth isn't special in that regard.

There isn't anything extraordinary about two sexes. You need a male and a female to reproduce, so what? Genesis' idea of how humans came to be makes zero sense.

The book of Genesis is poetry and was not written as a science book. Judging a book through the lens of ignorance to make your point amounts to a fail.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Unfortunately sin still exists. Nothing was conquered. Of course God could just remove sin as that would be easier than having himself murdered in an attmept to conquer it, but that would make too much sense.

I enjoyed sleeping in today.

Please stop. You are not advancing with atheist perspective well.

 

[WildcatfaninOhio]

IN the words of Rodney King, "People, I just want to say, can't we all get along? Can't we all get along?"

Agreed! I hope I don’t come off as too pompous (just a little bit pompous is OK, right?) and I hope we’re all still cool. I do get riled up over this topic, and have probably spent way too much of my life thinking about it. But I do have strong opinions and I just can’t help myself.

As for now, I’m going to cuddle up on the couch with my hot GF, have one more glass of wine, and watch some mindless entertainment on the TV.

Out! Enjoy your evening.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Because a lot of religious extremism is seeping into politics that affect everyone.

@Nightwish84 - hey, do want to level your redundant parental admonishment here about posters exaggerating for fear and being offended about nothing?

 

[Caveman Catfan]

My Catholic school in 7th grade started teaching us that a lot of the Old Testament was parables. My parents did not like it and pulled me from the school. But that is a slippery slope. So what is a parable and what is real? They then put me in a Christian school where I was bullied lol.

Are you saying the truth found in parables is not real?

 

[Caveman Catfan]

I am certainly not belittling anyone with faith.

Good. Because everyone has faith.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

So you are choosing to define what the word evidence means to fit your feelings. It doesn’t work like that.

Actually, that is not what he said.

 

[HymanKaplan]

As for now, I’m going to cuddle up on the couch with my hot GF, have one more glass of wine, and watch some mindless entertainment on the TV.
.

This reminded me of the Ricky Bobby prayer: (paraphrasing) 'Dear infant Jesus (...) and thank you for my smoking hot wife, who would easily be a 94 on a scale of 100 (John C. Reilly responds "MMMMM-Hmmmm!) LOL

 

[HymanKaplan]

LOL_Man said: "Because nature abhors stupidity."


Respectfully, the evidence says otherwise.

 

[MidseasonTweak]

The book of Genesis is poetry and was not written as a science book. Judging a book through the lens of ignorance to make your point amounts to a fail.

Even more reason to not look to the Bible for any sort of truth.

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."

- Isaac Asimov

 

[LOL_Man]

As for now, I’m going to cuddle up on the couch with my hot GF, have one more glass of wine, and watch some mindless entertainment on the TV.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

It's not like I don't understand the semantics of it.

Nevertheless, my life evidences my faith for me. I have all the evidence, all the fact and reason, to stay firm in my belief (faith).

Life experiences are, in fact evidence, and are not all subjective. Evidence is presented to the fact finder. Chroix is wrong that the fact finder must be some external body. The mistake is in the assumption that you are gathering evidence for them, when you have gathered evidence for yourself.

Praying to God and suddenly having a person placed upon your heart that you have not heard from for a long time, only to have them contact you later that day to express a need in their life is evidence. When such “coincidences,” as the atheist would state, keep happening, it is fair for you ask if there is something more going on. It is factual evidence, whether others find it compelling or not.

Most atheists appear to believe in abiogenesis. What is their evidence? Life exists and, they have concluded, God does not. That seems to be the main thrust of the belief. We have the end product and a theory. Without much evidence at all, the subjective rejections of a designer and the overwhelming truth that life exists, they believe it happened spontaneously.

Even without the Bible, theists have the exact same evidence. A subjective belief in God and the fact that life exists. The fact that life is complex and the universe tends toward chaos actually bends toward design. And, yet, atheists laugh at the ancient belief in God as if ancients were not also atheists.

Have a great day to all here. This thread is tired and redundant. And, some who claim an interest in deep discussions have cut and pasted from some fairly ignorant sites, asking questions, while refusing to answer the tough questions themselves. Not worth the time.