Empirical Evidence of God

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Bowser, Jul 5, 2018.

  1. TheFrogger Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,030
    Whatever.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,600
    The word "reason" implies a thought process. If God was merely a thought, then I would have a reason.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,550
    Any word you type or speak implies a thought process. But "reason" additionally involves a cause or justification for the belief.

    Again, no problems if you don't have one. Just say that.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,600
    Intellectually honest people rely on thought for truth. That's the mind at work. If you were a body builder, doing curls would be truth.
     
  8. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,600
    Have I not defined God in previous posts? If you're looking for something more than the ordinary, I have no reason. For me, God is that pile of bricks on the back patio, my snoozing pup on the couch, the roll of toilet paper on the bathroom counter.
     
  9. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,550
    So do liars. Thinking up lies is what some people do best.

    Intellectually honest people tend to reject lies, even if they were cleverly thought up.
    Well, you could claim that anything is truth, but of course that's not accurate.
    Again, that's fine.
     
  10. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,600
    Perhaps I should ask for your truth/reason, where you see yourself and existence.
     
  11. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,206
    No, not just thought, reason. That's the part you don't yet grasp. How do you determine if your thought is true?
     
    DaveC426913 likes this.
  12. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,550
    That's a very large question. All the truth of existence? Could you narrow that down a bit?
     
  13. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,584
    You didn't ask me but I'll bite. I follow the duck philosophy: swim around, eat stuff and fly south for the winter. That's enough "meaning" for most people to handle.
     
  14. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,449
    I made no claim you were representing any "religion" - I did note somewhere that you, like almost all Abrahamic monotheists on science forums, frequently confuse religion and theism.
    That's not true.
    The question is whether you even know why.
    That's not true either. Those were your misrepresentations, not my allusions. (You shouldn't believe everything you type)

    And that kind of dishonesty is typical - to the point of ubiquity - in posts from overt Abrahamic monotheists on this and other science forums. It is characteristic, almost definitive.
    One might almost classify it as empirical evidence of Abrahamic monotheism.
    Regardless, it's the major content of his posting throughout and at all times here - and increasingly of yours, as a typical Abrahamic monotheist posting on a science forum. The point remains - attributing psychological states to other people doesn't work as argument.
    That's interesting.
    We are told that the nature of the major source of claims of observable effects on the material world from a deity described in scripture, in the US, is not relevant in a thread about "Empirical Evidence of God".
    By an Abrahamic monotheist.
    By an Abrahamic monotheist who a short while before had emphasized the supposed nature of a very minor source of such claims of significance - atheists of some kind - in that very thread.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2018
  15. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,789
    Right. For you, yes.

    But for those of us with whom you are discussing this, what might we use to differentiate between the bricks being a product of a natural universe from that created by this God?

    And please don't say 'All you have to do is believe.'

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2018
  16. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,789
    :confusion:
    Wasn't that kind of the point of saying elsewhere, that 'we should really be talking about the God of Scriptures; there's no point in talking about any other God'?
     
  17. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,039
    That unfortunately seems the only available answer for anyone who chooses make believe over the honest answer that they really have no idea.
    I wonder if Bowsers God is in his smoke ... the smoke that it would seem is responsible for lung cancer.

    Alex
     
  18. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,039
    And yet we dont seem to have any evidence as yet.
    The stand seems to be...why should we offer evidence that we know you will reject.
    OK all that means is what little you have even to you that evidence must seem hopelessly inadequate.
    Yet you hint there is evidence ...perhaps not...but bottom line nothing as to evidence is posted.

    I wish you could take the ranting requests of the atheist for evidence seriously and present something or anything that suggests a hint of God but we all know that wont or rathet cant happen and sadly even your admirable writting style does little to move us away from the most inconvenient fact that you have nothing more than an appealing way to present nothing with a hope we may be swayed by the fact we have an intelligent person advocating these made up stories are real or beneficial or whatever position you fall back to so as to continue with your unsupported claims.

    Alex
     
    Capracus likes this.
  19. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,600
    I don't see a separation between the two. They are one and the same.
    I don't think it's like turning on a faucet. Either it is with you or it is not. And that's not a put-down. Maybe your experience was never to include God. I'm not judging.
     
  20. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,600
    You're asking me to answer the question for you? Actually, you could say it's too large to answer, or you could try narrowing it down to an axiom. It's up for grabs as offered.
     
  21. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,600
    It is thought that defines your perception of the world. Again, nothing has any meaning (reason) than that which we give it.
     
  22. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,495
    I like the proof against God in the "Hitchhikers Guide To The Universe".

    God declares that he isn't going to give proof as he wants believe from his followers. There is something called the Babble Fish in this story that is amazing. It's so amazing that it couldn't have come about naturally so it must have been created but since God offers no proof this disproves God so God promptly vanishes.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. Capracus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,040
    It’s properly conditioned thought that defines a more accurate perception of the world.
    Agreed, meaning depends on what we give it, not we as individuals, but we as an evolved civilization. For your thoughts to have legitimacy, they have to be qualified in regards to their consistency with civilized standards. Just arbitrarily assigning personal meaning defies reason.
     

Share This Page