Approaches to the discovery of God?

[kx000]

Since we know how some people are, we expect the error to continue, somewhat, but also know that church attendance is on the decline.

Faith, and religion are not one in the same. The reason church attendance is slipping is not because of people wising up to a not-God, but wising up to reason, and logic that their church is SCIENTIFICALLY falsifiable.

God is not falsifiable. However, there is no empirical evidence clear to us at this time in cahoots to his existence, we do not need to hold him true, but you may. I do. I believe.

 

[SciWriter]

Faith, and religion are not one in the same. The reason church attendance is slipping is not because of people wising up to a not-God, but wising up to reason, and logic that their church is SCIENTIFICALLY falsifiable.

God is not falsifiable. However, there is no empirical evidence clear to us at this time in cahoots to his existence, we do not need to hold him true, but you may. I do. I believe.

Perhaps it is a comfort to believe, but you are noting that there is no approach to the discovery of 'God'.

 

[kx000]

Perhaps it is a comfort to believe, but you are noting that there is no approach to the discovery of 'God'.

Faith is comforting, yes, but it is also much more than that.

What EXACTLY are we trying to find? God. We don't even know if its out there to be found. We must define the nature of God/ God-would be.

 

[SciWriter]

We must define the nature of God/ God-would be.

This is worse than the cart before the horse, as you have no horse. One can define an imaginary any way they want to, which then settles in as belief.

 

[Jan Ardena]

This is worse than the cart before the horse, as you have no horse. One can define an imaginary any way they want to, which then settles in as belief.

I understand this from your perpective. If your hearing is defective ie, cannot process high frequencies, then for you there is no high frequency.

jan.

 

[kx000]

Can we not come up with a theory to test?

 

[SciWriter]

Can we not come up with a theory to test?

Yes, look for the supernatural over the natural, like a planet suddenly stopping in its orbit and staying there. Science has already looked all over, for its own purposes, finding all to be natural.


There was a study of praying for the ill; it didn't help; the prayed for even came out worse.

Logic and reason looked, even finding that the idea was self-contradictory.

All that would be needed is one counterexample; none have been found.

 

[kx000]

Would you not only find a scientific way to declare why the planet suddenly stopped there? What you said shows me true, if God of great ability were shown, God of great ability would be natural to the universe. God of great ability, would he poses the ability to hide from us all?

 

[SciWriter]

Would you not only find a scientific way to declare why the planet suddenly stopped there? What you said shows me true, if God of great ability were shown, God of great ability would be natural to the universe. God of great ability, would he poses the ability to hide from us all?

If it were to found that there was a natural cause from something natural, like a zero gravity point, then fine; otherwise, not natural.

Work on showing 'God' first, before going on to properties of 'great ability', 'hiding', etc.

 

[kx000]

I have shown God. He is just there, go off that.

 

[SciWriter]

I have shown God. He is just there, go off that.

"He is just there" doesn't show anything; it's just an unsupported declaration.

 

[kx000]

I know. I want support.

 

[SciWriter]

I know. I want support.

Wishes and desires may get you to look, but in and of themselves they are not support, and they will probably only get in the way, as a bias

 

[kx000]

Wishes and desires may get you to look, but in and of themselves they are not support, and they will probably only get in the way, as a bias

So I wish God true? Are you mocking me?

 

[SciWriter]

Are you mocking me?

No, I'm just saying what happens.

If ‘God’ cannot be shown, then there is no true bill of goods, so, retreat to logic and philosophy, which one should use first, anyway, when there is no confirmation, thoroughly undoing all that is against, and replacing it, and then confirm it in nature to show ‘God’.

Do not make outright statements and proclamations, as those have no sale value whatsoever; they are actually negative, as they show that someone is trying to pul something off. Do not use any assumed outputs of the proof as inputs to prove the proof.

If not confirmed in nature, try to sell a reduced bill of goods to the agnostics who wisely use probability judgments, for the ‘God’ and no ‘God’ positions are not necessarily equa-probable.

If there is still nothing to sell, then sell something completely different, such as that belief may bring comfort, but be sure to be honest, by not claiming that the object of the belief is true and proved.

 

[Hoatzin]

How about because there is no god or gods? that's a good reason to be a atheist

 

[Jan Ardena]

How about because there is no god or gods? that's a good reason to be a atheist

There'd be no need to call yourself atheist, if that were the case.
You're atheist because you don't believe in God.

jan.

 

[AliciaFreed]

Almighty is everywhere,His precedence has no other identity to show,His idiosyncrasy tell everything.


swim cap

 

[kx000]

No, I'm just saying what happens.

If ‘God’ cannot be shown, then there is no true bill of goods, so, retreat to logic and philosophy, which one should use first, anyway, when there is no confirmation, thoroughly undoing all that is against, and replacing it, and then confirm it in nature to show ‘God’.

Do not make outright statements and proclamations, as those have no sale value whatsoever; they are actually negative, as they show that someone is trying to pul something off. Do not use any assumed outputs of the proof as inputs to prove the proof.

If not confirmed in nature, try to sell a reduced bill of goods to the agnostics who wisely use probability judgments, for the ‘God’ and no ‘God’ positions are not necessarily equa-probable.

If there is still nothing to sell, then sell something completely different, such as that belief may bring comfort, but be sure to be honest, by not claiming that the object of the belief is true and proved.

Folly. God CAN BE SHOWN. He is all around all of us, right now, as I type. There, boom. Disprove me.

 

[Balerion]

Folly. God CAN BE SHOWN. He is all around all of us, right now, as I type. There, boom. Disprove me.

But you haven't shown him, you've just said he's there and asked us to disprove it. That's not showing, that's claiming.