Science explains the existence of God.

Rav, Greatest I am, et al,

I think I agree with this.


(COMMENT)

The concept of a Supreme Being is, at this time, in the realm of the supernatural. It is beyond science, for the moment. So (at least for me) the existence of such a being is difficult at best, since it is "undefined." Humanity often attempts to assign a variety of attributes to this conceptual supernatural being; and attempting to establish some sort of theoretical relationships to man. I think (personal opinion) the phrase "anthropomorphization of the unknown" is exactly right.


(COMMENT)

In a way, I have to agree with "Rav" that the use of the terms "lie or lying" is a misrepresentation of the acceptance - or - conviction in the existence of a Supreme Being. We are not in a position to suggest that "faith" in a Supreme Being is a "lie;" any more then we are able to condemn the acceptance - and - conviction in String Theory as a "lie." Each are equally untestable hypothesis at the present time. In both questions of "theological concepts" and "theoretical concepts" under study, we have to maintain a dispassionate air about us.

Most Respectfully,
R

Then I guess that believers should shut up when non-believers say there is no God.

We then will all live comfortably with logical fallacies.
What a nice world you want. Yuk.

Truth and precise language be damned.
Opinion and knowledge now are equal.
Plato will not be pleased.

Regards
DL
 
I don't know what you are on about, but I talk to God on allmost daily basis thru prayer and as not believable it might seem God answers me in words or acts. So there. God might answer to you too if you just pray and thank him. You know God likes thanks. :)

Wow. If you have such a pipeline to God, let him know that 10 million children below the age of 10 die yearly while he is busy talking to you. Talking to you must be more important to him than saving those many lives.

Ask him what his excuse is and if he says it is all up to us, then ask for a workable formula that you and I can implement.

Regards
DL
 
Feathers... Hmm... That reminds me a thing I said in other thread. You can also ask your Guardian Angel to give you a sign. Ask that you find a feather ot that someone gives you a flower. You can also sit still and ask your Guardian Angel to touch your hand. In a moment you will feel a touch I promise. And in an instant you have proof that God and angels exist.

That's no understatement, I'm quite sure I associated feathers with horsefeathers.

I'm assuming you're presenting Guardian Angels from the Catholic perspective as opposed to, say, the local Harley Davidson Association.

If so, kudos, Catholicism has a lot going for it. Here I'm referring to the general knowledge base within the Church, its history, its affinity for education and science, its aversion to most fundamentalism and the pro-evolution/Big Bang pronouncements by various popes and Church officials. In other words, if you're a Catholic, odds are you won't be pressing the local school board to interfere with the teaching of science. Hope not, anyway.

I think Kabbalists have a sense of Guardian Angels, but you don't come across as one of them.

In any case, there can be no tactile sensation without the application of a force across a unit area. Only then do the afferent pathways to the brain produce a signal representing actual tactile experience.

Anything else would represent a physical or mental disorder and should be referred to a physician. Psychoses, such as certain stages of schizophenia, are known to produce auditory, visual and tactile hallucinations. Always report the paranormal to your doctor.

The reason that Guardian Angels do not exist is the same that angels do not exist which is the same that God does not exist. First and foremost, these are merely fantasies placed in the minds of (usually) young and impressionable (naive) people who are often highly suggestible.

It's hard to get past the fact these are mere inventions. What else would we be talking about? Fairies, volcano gods, or the astral projection of the Buddha's semi consciousness into the supernal mind? All fabrications.

The proof that all supernatural beliefs are ignoring is that the laws of nature can not be repealed.

Hence, I say "horsefeathers," although "balderdash" will do. ;)
 
Greatest I am, et al,

Not necessarily.

Then I guess that believers should shut up when non-believers say there is no God.
(COMMENT)

This is the case of "believers having a position" versus "nonbelievers having a position." It is a faith based argument on both sides, since science can not study or prove the existence or nonexistence.

The claim that "there is no God" is no more valid than the claim "there is a God." Niether claim is a "lie" because the truth cannot be established. The term "lie" implies the opposite; that there is a substantiated "truth" revealed.

Faith, one way or the other, is neither good - nor - bad; it is neither right - nor - wrong. Faith is either founded or unfounded. (If you believe, then it is founded in your reality.)

Truth and precise language be damned. Opinion and knowledge now are equal. Plato will not be pleased.
(COMMENT)

Under Plato's rules, truth is "objective" based on the individual ability to perceive reality.

Plato said:
What is truth? Truth is all around you and it is objective. It is everything you see, hear, feel, taste, touch, sense, believe. It is what you perceive as your reality. It is love. Whatever you think, say, feel, do – all is truth, of course, from your personal perspective.
SOURCE: http://www.vibrani.com/platotruth.htm

Opinion and knowledge are not the same thing, but they (at times) can be equal. Example:

  • It is my opinion (but I'm color blind) that the leaves on the tree in my front yard are green.
  • You may look at the leaves on the tree and know they are green.
  • And science can sample the spectral reflection and prove they are green.

Opinion, knowledge, and proof are all entirely different things, yet (at times) can be equal. Since I cannot see green, I have to take it on faith that my scientific test is true and objective; or have faith in your assessment that the leaves are green is true and objective. If I assimilate both findings, I have confirmation that increases the confidence level in both your assessment and the scientific methed. This gives me greater knowledge on the color of the leaves than either of the single evaluations alone.

Now, Nietzsche* may have a bone to pick with me.

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy said:
His early essay 'Truth and Lie' did use the impossibility of disinterested knowledge to devalue empirical knowledge, arguing that the latter was only a perspective and an illusion. But the point of the Genealogy's claim that there is 'only a perspective knowing' is quite the reverse: to guard against using the idea of 'pure' knowing to devalue the kind of knowledge we have.
*SOURCE: edward craig; Craig, Edward (2007-03-20). Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (p. 731). Taylor & Francis. Kindle Edition.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
Wow. If you have such a pipeline to God, let him know that 10 million children below the age of 10 die yearly while he is busy talking to you. Talking to you must be more important to him than saving those many lives.

Ask him what his excuse is and if he says it is all up to us, then ask for a workable formula that you and I can implement.

Regards
DL

Prolonging life is a human endeavour. God wants all souls back to him and as such dying young is really a blessing as the world hasn't contaminated them yet. However humans can learn to cure deseases even by just moving energy from one place of body to the other to fix deseases. Also praying for help and energy from angels and God helps.

God is omnipotent. If he's talking to someone he can also do something else too. God has many energies he gives to this world and he does it simultaneously.
 
Back
Top