Question to those who do or do not doubt Christianity

@igm,

Quote:

I'd like to see someone go from the notion that there are 'no gods' (the logical starting position) to a position that evidence or logic shows that there might be a god or gods i.e. the agnostic position.

Why is the notion that there are no gods...the logical starting (or default) position?

Are there any carbon-based life forms that are reasonably shaped like an Earthly horse on any planet circling the nearest 5 stars to Sol?

Would you actually suggest that the most logical default position should be "NO?"

Wouldn't "I do not know" be a better, more logical default position?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Sorry but the theory of the atom could be tested and gave useful results when apply to the real world.

An animal living on some extra solar planet does not break any law of nature and the very idea of a god or gods is that they are above the very nature of the universe and can change any aspect of the universe at his/it or their whims.

1 Reply

@igm,

Sorry if is not the lack of faith that keep us from believing in fairy tales as I had cheerfully jumped out of a plane at 5,000 feet with complete faith that the laws of nature would result in my safe landing as it in fact did.

As far as there might be gods that is just not being able to disprove a negative no matter how unlikely and there might be a being call the tooth fairy also.

From any common and logical day to day living the assuming that there are no gods IE beings who can change the laws of nature at whim seem as solid as any assume that it is possible to have.

That go even more for the details of the gods mankind had dream up over history.

The tooth fairy have the same standing as Zeus or the Christian three in on god.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Why is the notion that there are no gods...the logical starting (or default) position?

The theory of gods had never produce any useful results as far as dealing with the universe unlike the theory of the atom.

In fact my desktop computer is now being power by the results of nuclear theory in the form of a nuclear power plant.

Nor is there any evidence of such beings existing and therefore Occam's Razor give all possible reasons to have the no gods as the default position.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

Sorry but the theory of the atom could be tested and gave useful results when apply to the real world.

Couldn't be tested 100 years ago. So...would your default have been "they do not exist?"

Quote:

An animal living on some extra solar planet does not break any law of nature and the very idea of a god or gods is that they are above the very nature of the universe and can change any aspect of the universe at his/it or their whims.

Once again, you are merely asserting that nothing can defy the nature of the universe...without actually knowing the nature of the universe. Perhaps the nature of the universe is that there are gods.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

Sorry if is not the lack of faith that keep us from believing in fairy tales as I had cheerfully jumped out of a plane at 5,000 feet with complete faith that the laws of nature would result in my safe landing as it in fact did.

As far as there might be gods that is just not being able to disprove a negative no matter how unlikely and there might be a being call the tooth fairy also.

From any common and logical day to day living the assuming that there are no gods IE beings who can change the laws of nature at whim seem as solid as any assume that it is possible to have.

That go even more for the details of the gods mankind had dream up over history.

The tooth fairy have the same standing as Zeus or the Christian three in on god.

So when are you going to get to the part where you substantiate the assertion that the likelihood of gods is near zero?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

The theory of gods had never produce any useful results as far as dealing with the universe unlike the theory of the atom.

In fact my desktop computer is now being power by the results of nuclear theory in the form of a nuclear power plant.

Nor is there any evidence of such beings existing and therefore Occam's Razor give all possible reasons to have the no gods as the default position.

Please! Occam's Razor is a joke.

The default is "I do not know."

But it has become apparent that you are unable to acknowledge that.

So...live with your guess. That is what the theists do...and no harm comes to them.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Couldn't be tested 100 years ago. So...would your default have been "they do not exist?"

Sure the theory could be tested a hundred years ago!!!!!

You need to update your knowledge of the history of science as atom theory relate to far more then having the ability to created atom bombs.

In fact it is the foundation of chemistry for one thing with the Periodic Table base on atom theory dating to 1864.

1 Reply

Example: start with the notion that the Earth is not flat. Explore to see if this is the case. Evidence starts to accumulate that the Earth is not flat. Conclusion after much exploring and accumulating evidence the Earth is round.

Example: someone says the Earth is both a sphere and a cube at the same time. Starting point: I don't know if this is the case but I can never get evidence that it isn't so I will be agnostic about it.

Alternative: when there is no evidence you can either have faith or no-faith you can be a theist type person or an atheist type person. Occam's razor removes all other superfluous viewpoints.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

You seems not to have a very good mathematical background any more then your science background in relating to atom theory,

When you approach zero as a limit that is reaching zero for any practice real life meaning of reaching zero is concern.

See any book on calculus and look at the chapter dealing with the concept of numbers series approaching zero as a limit.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Quote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Your suggested way IS simpler.

Sometimes the simpler answer is not the correct one.

Izzy wrote
It also fundamentally misinterpretes the concept of many gods.

Very good Izzy you are now trying to add value, while you are at it please tell us the fundamentally correct interpretation of the "many Gods" concept.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Okay...make it 200. Make it 500 if you have to. At some point my comment holds.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Bill,

As to whether or not there are carbon-based life forms on any planet circling the nearest 5 stars to Sol…

…we have absolutely no evidence there is such life there and we have absolutely no evidence such life does not exist there.

There is absolutely no need for carbon-based life to be there.

The best comment that could be made at this point is: We do not know if carbon-based life exists on any of those planets or not.

To suggest that we default to “there is no carbon-based life there” or “there is carbon-based life there” or “it is more likely that there is carbon-based life there than that there is not” or “it is more likely there is no carbon-based life there than that there is”…makes no sense. It simply is illogical.

The same thing holds for the existence of gods.

But the question still remaining is: What is the basis for your assertion that the chances of the existence of gods is near to zero?

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Sorry no matter what the time period the theory of the atom where created as a means to deal/explain known facts repeat known facts of how matter interacted and do allow better predictions of such interactions.

The Bohr atom model was put together and tested almost at once and gave useful results from the beginning.

No god or gods theory had given any such useful results and none of them had successfully explain any known facts or had allow any useful predictions.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

Sorry no matter what the time period the theory of the atom where created as a means to deal/explain known facts repeat known facts of how matter interacted and do allow better predictions of such interactions.

The Bohr atom model was put together and tested almost at once and gave useful results from the beginning.

No god or gods theory had given any such useful results and none of them had successfully explain any known facts or had allow any useful predictions.

But the question still remaining is: What is the basis for your assertion that the chances of the existence of gods is near to zero?

C'mon, Bill. Just acknowledge that you simply blindly guess there are no gods...and you want it to sound like you are making a logical, scientific analysis, so you put that estimate in there.

Look, theists do it all the time. They are sure there is a GOD...and they insist their guess is more than a guess.

You can do it! No one will think bad of you for it.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Sorry from what we do know about life on earth and the laws of nature that relate to life anywhere we have every reason to think that the likelihood of extra solar system life is very high.

What we do know about the idea of gods, we know that such beings that can change the fix laws of nature at whim is even more unlikely then extra solar system life is likely.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

No repeat no indication of any kind that any law of nature had been change or repeal since the the big bang.

That would not at all likely to be the case if the universe was under the control of a god or gods who have such powers to change the laws at whim.

Not indication that the Christian god had stop the planet rotation for example as is claimed in the bible.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

Sorry from what we do know about life on earth and the laws of nature that relate to life anywhere we have every reason to think that the likelihood of extra solar system life is very high.

Not asking about the likelihood of extra solar life. I am asking about carbon-based life on the nearest 5 stars to Sol.

HINT: The answer is "I do not know."

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

No repeat no indication of any kind that any law of nature had been change or repeal since the the big bang.

That would not at all likely to be the case if the universe was under the control of a god or gods who have such powers to change the laws at whim.

Not indication that the Christian god had stop the planet rotation for example as is claimed in the bible.

So...you might (MIGHT) be able to make a case for the god of the Bible...but your statement was that the likelihood of gods is near to zero.

What do you base that assertion on.

HINT: It is based on nothing but belief.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

C'mon, Bill. I am giving you all this help with my useful hints.

You can come up with the answer if you think about it.

HINT: Read the hints again!

0 Replies

Question to those who do or do not doubt Christianity

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know