If God exists, why doesn't he come right out and show us?
- Thread starter Medicine*Woman
- Start date
lightgigantic said:
To see the light go on or the toaster toast does not require levels of knowledge, but only the ability to observe.
I didn't have to - the atheists did
- its a response to the argument "this scripture says god is like this and that scripture says god is like that - obviously they are both wrong"
The analogy of the fire indicates the premise for that logic is wrong, since even with fire you can say one person says it is hot and another says it is smokey.
That is a fallacious argument. With fire, you are talking about two completely different properties; heat and smoke. With scriptures, the argument is over the same properties of gods. For example, Christians claim their god is an entity while Muslims claim he is not.
Disingenuous. Having the knowledge to split the atom without ever having done so is not a logical flaw, especially when it has already been demonstrated. In that, there is no need to turf out science based on the repeatable demonstrative event of atom splitting.
That is where the so-called knowledge of religion fails.
Simple. You could demonstrate that knowledge, just like I could flick on the light switch or toast a slice of bread or split the atom.
As well, like the knowledge of the electron, the knowledge imparted to you should equate to knowledge imparted to everyone else. However, that is not the case as we have a myriad of religious knowledges, all competing for dominance, all without a single demonstrative event to support them.
You're really grasping at straws here, LG. To put up quotes from 1935 and make claims of controversy about an area of science that offers such precise and accurate descriptions of physical phenomenae only shows how desperate you've become in trying to support your argument. Quantum mechanics is one of the most successful theories science has ever encountered.
Perhaps you haven't noticed the incredible religious knowledge base here at sciforums amongst the atheists. Some of those atheists used to be theists who could literally "drink you under the table" with their knowledge of religion.
What you refer to is belief, not knowledge. Anyone can sit down and read scriptures, consult and endless line of theologians in order to attain a variety of interpretations and simply reject it all as nonsense, not for lack of knowledge, but for suspension of disbelief. Don't confuse the two.
Exactly the same amount as any other god, zero or infinite, only the imagination can decide.
That is exactly opposite to what I consider the saintly process and those who administer it to be, hence your analogy is bass ackwards.
With that last statement, you sank your own boat. You've just admitted that ignorance leads to belief in gods.
superluminal said:
Ah, now we're getting somewhere. I also propose a bible scale on how they interpret the scripture...
1 - 95% metaphorical, even when clearly describing facts
5 - Only accurate when convenient.
10 - God's words, all literal despite scientific evidence to the contrary.
KennyJC said:
I disagree. These examples demonstrate how from ignorance any bigot can dismiss a legitimate area of knowledge that they don't understand. That is what you are doing with religion. Most universities regard religion as a legitimate area of study, and have faculties for the study of theology. You think it's bollocks. No-one can persuade you otherwise.
I'd be surprised if many atheists read religious scriptures, other than to prove them wrong. However, you can read them and find useful stuff in them. Jesus physical resurrection was a one-off event, with a very special meaning i.e. death is not the end. Because of it, the power of tyrants - who rule by fear of death - can be challenged. Having faith in that is not blindness, but a special kind of insight.
Evidence for the truth of the claims of christianity are the many accounts by people who's lives changed significantly for the better. Read "Surprised by Joy", or accounts by some of the astronauts who have returned and embraced christianity or other spiritual beliefs.
Most alien encounters, belief in ghosts, goblins, fairies, FSMs, IPUs or astrology do not enhance people's lives, or make them more loving, mindful, peaceful or happy.
Religion supplies a basic human spiritual need. It may also be a truer description of reality. One thing science reveals is the strangeness of reality. It is arrogance to think the universe is limited to what we know - we do it at our peril.
Diogenes' Dog said:
You forgot to add the link. But you need not bother because I know what a bigot is and how dangerous they can be. But dismissal of superstitious practices does not make me a bigot. I am not endorsing one superstition and rejecting the rest, I am mearly following rational enquiry. If people around the world want to take religion literally then they must expect to be called up on their blind faith and face the fact that faith is superstition.
I would agree that religion is a legitimate area of study. This isn't the same as faith. The stupidity of faith is far-reaching.
No. It is a question of belief in a myth. It really is that simple.
I'm only surprised that astronaut's were not already devoutly religious since they were demanded to be all-american. But really, emotional highs and depressing lows have always moved people towards superstition, it's no news to me.
They get an emotional kick out of believing in these things. Religion is the same thing... except religion of course doesn't turn everyone into loving people does it? I think secularism effectively shows how considerate a society is likely to become. Religion causes clear alienation and intolerance of those of other faiths as is demonstrated by the US and the Middle East.
Accepting we know nothing is one thing, to make grand claims from nothing is another thing.
Plunkies said:
Its called a strawman, Plunkies. LG is just one big strawman. The guy probably read a book on philosophy recently and is using that to make shit up for argument. None of his arguments are reality based, the "evidence" for them seems to exist only in his head. This "epistemology thread" he keeps going on about doesn't have them either. The first post can be summed up thus: "god is real because scripture says so; scripture is real because god wrote it."
Pure bollocks.
But rather than discuss his points and defend his assertions, LG continues with his strawman fallacies (among many others) and demands that atheists and skeptical theists defend their assertions. Their assertions are that LG is bullshitting us all with some post-modernist poppycock philosophy mixed with the pseudo-epistemology of theology. The burden of proof lies with LG not those skeptical of his wild claims.
A burden he seems all too happy to avoid and dodge.
battig1370
Registered Senior Member
M*W: I believe that if a god existed, he would be obvious, and there would be no doubt in believing in him. For those of you who believe in him without any proof, why is he not showing himself to each and everyone of us? We all can't be that bad.
What's your theory?
"why is he not showing himself to each and everyone of us?"
--- Freewill to believe or not to believe. If the existence of God is to be proven by showing himself to each and everyone of us, he would be obvious and we would no longer have this debate about God. What church or religion is of God would a non-issue.
Who on this forum wants the existence of God to be proven?
For those who believe, it is written --- When will Jesus our Lord be seen again?
According to what is written, Jesus said, "I say to you, you shall not see Me until the time comes when you say, Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord." > Luke 13:35. Also the same is written in Matt 23:39.
--- How Jesus will return is also written?
"They will see the Son of Man coming on the cloud of heaven with power and great glory" > Matt. 24:30
"--- they will see the Son of Man in a cloud with power and great glory. > Luke 21:27
"--- they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. > Mark 13:26
Jesus will be seen again when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory which cloud of heaven with power and great glory, and all the nations will be gathered before Him and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides His sheep from the goats. And He will set sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left, Matt. 25:31- 46, which will be The Day of the Lord.
For what is written, those who believe and love their neighbor as they love themselves are on the right track.
May you be blessed, Paul
What's your theory?
"why is he not showing himself to each and everyone of us?"
--- Freewill to believe or not to believe. If the existence of God is to be proven by showing himself to each and everyone of us, he would be obvious and we would no longer have this debate about God. What church or religion is of God would a non-issue.
Who on this forum wants the existence of God to be proven?
For those who believe, it is written --- When will Jesus our Lord be seen again?
According to what is written, Jesus said, "I say to you, you shall not see Me until the time comes when you say, Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord." > Luke 13:35. Also the same is written in Matt 23:39.
--- How Jesus will return is also written?
"They will see the Son of Man coming on the cloud of heaven with power and great glory" > Matt. 24:30
"--- they will see the Son of Man in a cloud with power and great glory. > Luke 21:27
"--- they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. > Mark 13:26
Jesus will be seen again when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory which cloud of heaven with power and great glory, and all the nations will be gathered before Him and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides His sheep from the goats. And He will set sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left, Matt. 25:31- 46, which will be The Day of the Lord.
For what is written, those who believe and love their neighbor as they love themselves are on the right track.
May you be blessed, Paul
More tautology. The word is true because it's divine; it's divine because it's true.
The amazing thing is that religious fanatics think that by quoting a bunch of mythology they're actually making a point.
The amazing thing is that religious fanatics think that by quoting a bunch of mythology they're actually making a point.
SkinWalker said:
Which, of course is called a π x 2r or x<sup>2</sup> + y<sup>2</sup> = 1 argument by the more mathemetically inclined.
Diogenes' Dog said:
Nah, making the world more interesting than it really is makes people happy. Conspiracies, aliens, ghosts, goblins, psychics, magic...It's an escape from their boring reality and their boring lives. Take JFK, to think that the government could conspire to kill a president is fascinating and exciting. To think that some random nutcase with a rifle did it is just unsatisfying and depressing. It doesn't matter what the unsubstantiated belief is, they wouldn't senselessly believe it if they didn't get something out of it.
Plunkies said:
The purpose of analogy is to establish something that is unknown (to the person hearing) with something known (to the hearer)
Otherwise the speaker will be just talking about unknown things (like for instance if I was to suddenly start talking about the backbone of sugar phosphate I would be wasting both my time and your time
But time is also wasted if the hearer doesn't hear, mainly because there is no discussion
When you state things like
“ What the hell are you even talking about at this point? I don't have to believe I can learn something new to actually learn something new.
Earlier someone told me the croc hunter Steve Irwin was dead. I didn't immediately believe him, so I check the evidence. I found a few articles saying he was, in fact, dead...Crikey! I just learned something new and I didn't have to believe it before I figured it out. ”
it is somehow irrational to establish the fallacy of your general principles by replying .....
So in other words you believed that you could determine whether the news was true by checking out some related news articles - if a person did not believe that the news articles were a good indication of truth what then?
????
Last edited:
Q
And in the vedic scriptures it says that both views are correct - god has one absolute potency in a form and he has another absolute potency that is an energy.
(BTW there is even a are further mentions of other potencies of god too which you haven't bothered to mention yet)
What then?
“ Exactly - thus your suggesion that a pyramid system of knowledge is intrinsic to religion because has no sound basis is another logical flaw, unless you also want to turf out science on the same grounds ”
On the contrary - non need to turf out religion either since it operates on the same principles - demonstration is demonstarted to the qualified
obviously you didn't read all the links
A high school drop out also went to high school before they dropped out
One can understand Me as I am, as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, only by devotional service. And when one is in full consciousness of Me by such devotion, he can enter into the kingdom of God.
Other considerations are there
BG 7.28
Persons who have acted piously in previous lives and in this life and whose sinful actions are completely eradicated are freed from the dualities of delusion, and they engage themselves in My service with determination.
at the very least they fell short of
Bg 4.35
Having obtained real knowledge from a self-realized soul, you will never fall again into such illusion, for by this knowledge you will see that all living beings are but part of the Supreme, or, in other words, that they are Mine.
The most common cause is
bg 2.44
In the minds of those who are too attached to sense enjoyment and material opulence, and who are bewildered by such things, the resolute determination for devotional service to the Supreme Lord does not take place.
Then maybe you should be more introspectie with your "considerations"
Actually I was saying that from the platform of ignorance any notions of discrimination are not valid
The problem is that they draw no connection between their obserations and an electron - it requires a physics professor to come on the scene and explain things, at which point the drop out cuts him short by calling him an egg head etcetc
And in the vedic scriptures it says that both views are correct - god has one absolute potency in a form and he has another absolute potency that is an energy.
(BTW there is even a are further mentions of other potencies of god too which you haven't bothered to mention yet)
What then?
“ Exactly - thus your suggesion that a pyramid system of knowledge is intrinsic to religion because has no sound basis is another logical flaw, unless you also want to turf out science on the same grounds ”
This raises th epistemological question "demonstrated to who?" - it hasn't been demonstarted to you at least - in the same way the conclusions of scripture have been demonstarted to people, but probably not you.
On the contrary - non need to turf out religion either since it operates on the same principles - demonstration is demonstarted to the qualified
I could similarly point to the sun and say "there you go sunrise every day in the east - evidence of god" - obviously what is missing is a foundation of theoretical knowledge in these "exhibitions of evidence"
Assuming that I don't have an attitude of adversity to the imparting of knowledge - don't forget, this highschool drop out has quite a chip on his shoulders towards physics professors and their text books
The variety of scientific disciplines appear equally bewildering to the high school drop out
obviously you didn't read all the links
A high school drop out also went to high school before they dropped out
Then you have to establish that book knowledge is the sole determining factor of success in theistic endeavour - there evidence to suggest otherwise BG 18.55
One can understand Me as I am, as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, only by devotional service. And when one is in full consciousness of Me by such devotion, he can enter into the kingdom of God.
Other considerations are there
BG 7.28
Persons who have acted piously in previous lives and in this life and whose sinful actions are completely eradicated are freed from the dualities of delusion, and they engage themselves in My service with determination.
at the very least they fell short of
Bg 4.35
Having obtained real knowledge from a self-realized soul, you will never fall again into such illusion, for by this knowledge you will see that all living beings are but part of the Supreme, or, in other words, that they are Mine.
The most common cause is
bg 2.44
In the minds of those who are too attached to sense enjoyment and material opulence, and who are bewildered by such things, the resolute determination for devotional service to the Supreme Lord does not take place.
Therefore the next important stage is to put in practice what you hear and thus directly perceive the nature of what one is hearing about
Then maybe you should be more introspectie with your "considerations"
Actually I was saying that from the platform of ignorance any notions of discrimination are not valid
Superliminial
Ok lets examine the general principles of this statement.
But before we do that lets ask you to clarify what your argument actually is.
Are you saying that if there are varied claims about the nature of an object, then this indicates the object is false and/or the claims are false?
Ok lets examine the general principles of this statement.
But before we do that lets ask you to clarify what your argument actually is.
Are you saying that if there are varied claims about the nature of an object, then this indicates the object is false and/or the claims are false?
Medicine Woman said:
Actually God (if he exists) probably has better things to do right now other than making personal appearances down here on Earth, considering there must be a billion plus other planets out there in the universe that have just as many 'crazies' on board as the earth has, that need some kind of devine intervention or some God-like reminder to square them away.
Last edited:
Plunkies said:
I think you are probably right... but should reality be boring?
Novacane said:
Yeah, you'd think God would have appeared on at least one chat show or maybe on reality TV! He could sing like Ziggy Stardust....
"Theres a starman waiting in the sky
Hed like to come and meet us
But he thinks he'd blow our minds
Theres a starman waiting in the sky
Hes told us not to blow it
Cause he knows its all worthwhile..."
lightgigantic said:
Blah blah blah blah blah. DO YOU HAVE EVIDENCE? This is all irrelevant until you present your evidence that you claim to possess. And if you have no evidence then the argument is just plain pointless. Until then stop trying to bullshit your way out of it.
You say people have to believe in God to even have the "theistic knowledge" to argue with you. They have to already agree with you to disagree with you? WTF?
No. He's saying we need to establish what we're disproving before we try to disprove it. I presented Cris' thread as proof of god's non-existence, and then you move the goalposts and say that's not the attributes of the particular god you believe in. It's like playing battleship with a cheater.
Novacane said:Actually God (if he exists) probably has better things to do right now other than making personal appearances down here on Earth, considering there must be a billion plus other planets out there in the universe that have just as many 'crazies' on board as the earth has, that need some kind of devine intervention or some God-like reminder to square them away.
So he isn't omnipotent? He can create the universe but he's so impotent he can't make an appearence in 2000 years? And what's with the aliens? Is your god cheating on you with other creations? God is such a whore....
Diogenes' Dog said:
Apparently it's so boring that 70% of America has to invent imaginary sky beings to get through their miserable day.
Don't be rediculous. I don't even want to discuss this. Why don't you address my other post?lightgigantic said:
Medicine Woman said:
God does come right out and show us that He does exist. William Shakespeare attempted to educate us in the English language that to be or not to be is how we convey our diametric thoughts of existence. Neither thought may exist without the other. God's proof is embodied in our written or spoken language. Each language has its own verb infinitive of be to logically connote that existence is eternal.
God has fabricated our spoken languages by virtue of the atom. The atom is a diametric axiom of energy. Each matter within our solar system is a component of atoms.
Thus, it constitutes an intellectual handicap to rationalize that it is possible to have a none existence of God, without having an existence to be none existent to.