How can we be sure that all religions are wrong?

@fresco,

Ultimately, I can only speak for myself, but it was the examination of the evidence (History of the Bible class in a secular university) that changed me from a prospective seminary student into an agnostic (freshly stuck with trying to figure out how to use a Philosophy degree).

I'll concede that the mainstream of my society at that time had driven me away, but I thought I'd found the one place where it was done right: the Episcopal Church. So, while I still was immersed in a parochial religious tradition, albeit a pretty liberal one, it was nevertheless a detailed investigation into the evidence that convinced me that the likelihood of the answer being an invisible sky being was swamped by the probability that it was all just a manmade set of myths, designed to wrest from and maintain political power over the gullible masses.

Again, this is just my story. The numbers may favor your hypothesis in a larger sample population.

1 Reply

@FBM,

Just goes t show you cant jump into faith with a philosophy degree. Because it a philosophy degree is a worldy thing.

1 Reply

@martinies,

Really what is not a wordily thing ? And even if such a thing was possible which is not because it contradicts itself, how would it make any difference ? That which is not wordily is not of you or for that purpose of anything but itself.
I don't need to have faith in God to have it. Just accept reality around me. I am in GOD whatever my wording in favour or against is !
Again funny enough I would say many atheists are closer to God then most of God believers...understanding the rationality of the world around you "enamorates" you with "God", the Master Set.

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Ha. Funny enough I agree. In diffining god we are lost. And in praise of god we are found.

1 Reply

@fresco,

Quote:

Those, like me, who call themselves 'atheists' are making a social statement with respect to the conditioning of their group. They are saying that such parochial conditioning is either useless or dysfunctional are far as they are concerned.

Good (for rejecting conditioning, that is). I'm doing the same thing in stating my understanding of God. I keep getting thrown back into the box labeled 'Christian or other religious believers)' just as you probably get thrown into the box of atheists who accept only 'hard evidence'.

IDK, how do you escape being identified with all these socially conditioned structures? They come in all flavors and people are apparently conditioned to stick you in one of them.

1 Reply

@martinies,

In my limited perspective, there has to be sufficient definition, for the praise to carry any substance and meaning.

To me, praising the absolutely undefined, is attaching one's self to high quality dumbness.

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Unless you can understand that the verb 'to create' is an anthropomorphism, you will be stuck with some axiom regarding 'an intelligent creative agent'. The escape clause usually attempted from this circular reasoning is that 'Man is created in the image of God', but scientific considerations clearly indicate that the opposite is the case. Thus scientific 'theists' who appreciated that anthropomorphic trap, like Einstein, could only go as far as accepting 'a depersonalized uncaring God' (as suggested by Spinoza), or like Polkinghorne (physicist turned Anglican priest) only as far as attempting to account for 'morality'. As it turns out, later developments (quantum theory) undermined Einstein's view, and behavioral genetics undermined that of Polkinghorne.

In short, scientifically speaking, not only is the concept of 'creation' vacuous, but that of 'morality' is accountable by evolutionary benefits. And neither of these 'nails in the coffin' even involve the 16th century philosophical deconstruction of 'causality' itself which would transcend the very structure of axiomatic reasoning.

2 Replies

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

Unless you can understand that the verb 'to create' is an anthropomorphism, you will be stuck with some axiom regarding 'an intelligent creative agent'. The escape clause usually attempted from this circular reasoning is that 'Man is created in the image of God', but scientific considerations clearly indicate that the opposite is the case. Thus scientific 'theists' who appreciated that anthropomorphic trap, like Einstein, could only go as far as accepting 'a depersonalized uncaring God' (as suggested by Spinoza), or like Polkinghorne (physicist turned Anglican priest) only as far as attempting to account for 'morality'. As it turns out, later developments (quantum theory) undermined Einstein's view, and behavioral genetics undermined that of Polkinghorne.

In short, scientifically speaking, not only is the concept of 'creation' vacuous, but that of 'morality' is accountable by evolutionary benefits. And neither of these 'nails in the coffin' even involve the 16th century philosophical deconstruction of 'causality' itself which would transcend the very structure of axiomatic reasoning.

Where did quantum theory specially the sad Copenhagen interpretation disproved Einstein's or Spinoza's "god", eh ? You assert but you do not clarify...if you are preparing yourself to start on "random fluctuations" or indeterminism to oppose a Cosmos with order be aware that latest of late developments in quantum physics start to admit these fluctuations might well be pseudo random and a step back in a bunch load of careless claims is under way including fully deterministic explanations...you talk about disproving at the same time you claim there is no truth...funny that...aaah frescky, Fresco...you have yet to learn to shut up...uncover yourself !

0 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

As it turns out, later developments (quantum theory) undermined Einstein's view, and behavioral genetics undermined that of Polkinghorne.

Got to go along with Fil A. on quantum theory. It is in such a flux that physicists far more qualified than you or I say of it " If you think you understand it, you don't."

As far as 'behavioral genetics' goes, it just makes me laugh out loud when they tell me that I bought that shiny red Ferrari because I am genetically driven to spread my genes and it will work because that foxy fertile female will go for it to insure the welfare of her offspring.

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

You have sidestepped the issue of 'creation' being an anthropomorphism. This holds irrespective of your views on my reporting of the standard accounts of the demise of Einstein's or Polkinghorne's 'Gods' which can be found in the literature.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

(EDIT for clarity)
I am well along with you on the first half but not on the second...I am a fierce proponent of Darwinism at all scales not just Biology...economy, language, social structure, etc...

...what is interesting is that behavioural genetics makes a good case for my kind of "god" where morality is imbibed in the very structure of the world through evolution...nowadays they call it Neo-Darwinism.

Now there is something to be said about compatibility between Darwinism and "creationism" which is socially ignored resulting from a cultural misunderstanding on the use of both words with distinct frames of reference for context...

Darwinism is a theory that looks at nature within spacetime...it looks at activity and process...creationism on the other hand is more of a holistic take on the Rubik's cube Universe where time is not fundamental...in that sense, all that it is possible, already exists...it is "created" from the potential of the whole itself.
..now common belief in a personal agent conscious god attribute literally a meaning to the word creation in the sense that this agent invents stuff out of nothing when in a logical layout the correct interpretation is that this Logos in the whole of reality, in its timelessness requires that which is true to BE ! In that vague sense it "creates"...

...needless to say I don't expect either side of this forum in its mundane group warfare to concede to a reconciling view...they are in for their usual sharpening of teeth looking for the usual bite party they so much enjoy...

...seeing it all from afar, its entertaining at best, and boring at its worst...couldn't care less.

2 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

It often comes to my mind an extra terrestrial intelligent species, unlike ours, watching the debate of Darwinism vs Creationism in a sort of galactic TV show would laugh without end on both sides quibbling...it smells all over pre historic ranting !

0 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

You have sidestepped the issue of 'creation' being an anthropomorphism.

Unpack that a little for me. Extrapolating from your statement, the meaning of it seems to be that because WE are capable of 'creation', it is unreasonable to think that a God would be capable of that too. What am I missing?

Edit: Why should I not believe that if a God exists, he would be capable of creation? Or are you of the school of thought that WE created the universe? Those people do exist.

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

I am well along with you on the first half but not on the second...I am a fierce proponent of Darwinism at all scales not just Biology...economy, language, social structure, etc...

I guess I'm looking at the counter examples of Darwinism. Now more than ever, there are so many examples of behavior that is counter to survival of the individual as well as society that natural selection does not explain them. If natural selection drives behavior, Teenage mutant ninja turtles look more likely to occure than many behavior patterns seen today.

Still on the second half of that post, I swear to god, I bought the Ferrari because I like the way it drives, not in hopes of ******* that chick.

0 Replies

@think rethink,

Yeah I know what you are saying but by praising god you join god . Or your rekativity joins god as relativity. Its the easy way a short cut people that sing praises in sincerity are one with god by relativity. Hard to believe but its true.

0 Replies

@think rethink,

Yeah I know what you are saying but by praising god you join god . Or your relativity joins god as relativity. Its the easy way a short cut people that sing praises in sincerity are one with god by relativity. Hard to believe but its true. Being dumb is the way to go. Local smartness passes away but by being dumb you become more at one with nonlocality or nothing. Id rather be dumb n in heaven that smart n in hell. Smartness relates to locality. Be good and dumb n you will go to heaven.

0 Replies

@ThereIsNoGod,

ThereIsNoGod wrote:

we know that a god does not exist simply because there is no evidence of one existing.

You are just joking here...right?

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

What you are missing is that scientists do not need to use the term 'creation' to talk about the evolution of the universe.The term 'evolve' requires no directive agent and encompasses all the randomness that would be called 'wastefulness' in the hands of a 'creative agent'. Shakespeare's phrase 'a tale told by an idiot' seems to hit the nail on the hand if you critically start to think that the universe has some'purposeful design' behind it.

Of course it is in the nature of humans to resist that 'idiots tale'. We clutch at alternative tales that might give our cosmically insignificant lives 'meaning', especially those that might promise an escape from the 'oblivion' of death.

So what is there to unpack ? That humans are predisposed to invent an anthropomorphic 'creator' as a prerequisite for 'human creation' and to secure 'an afterlife' ?.......that they need to discount the criminal wastage of their invention by brushing it under the carpet of 'God's mysterious ways' ?
There's really nothing much in the suitcase is there ?

2 Replies

@fresco,

The oblivion of death exists for the nonbeliever. But it does exist.

1 Reply

@martinies,

Beond the physical there is the spirit which is no thing the spirit is nonlocal. The you exists as consciousness beond the realms of physics. As on earth so shall it be in heaven. The nonmoving thing is the exact same indistinguishable thing in all circumstances.

1 Reply

How can we be sure that all religions are wrong?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know