Does God Exist?

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

It is unjustified to believe everything I can't prove false.

Of course. I never said it was reasonable to believe in gods. But let's keep science out of metaphysics, to thr extent possible.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
It is unjustified to believe everything I can't prove false.

Of course. I never said it was reasonable to believe in gods. But let's keep science out of metaphysics, to thr extent possible.

Christianity and most religions assert that something fundamental about the universe is true, which is, in fact, either true or false, and, therefore, it is not metaphysics. They assert that the universe was deliberately created by and is guided by a being. Since this is an assertion of fact which is either so or not so, logic must be used in deciding whether to believe it or not. I don't see evidence to support this belief.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
It is unjustified to believe everything I can't prove false.

Of course. I never said it was reasonable to believe in gods. But let's keep science out of metaphysics, to thr extent possible.

Science is observational, faith is inspirational.

Science can only take you to the farthest edge of its observational theories.

This is where non observational imagination is invented.

The problem is not in the freedom to imagine. But it is when the imaginations take hold and become laws and try to rule over even the most rudimentary pillars of science. When imagination is pushed on people and sold as if it is observational (but in truth it is only inspirational) the contradiction to even basic scientific truth becomes blindly ignored for some fanciful pie in the sky interpretation of pure imagination.

2 Replies

@RexRed,

RexRed wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
It is unjustified to believe everything I can't prove false.

Of course. I never said it was reasonable to believe in gods. But let's keep science out of metaphysics, to thr extent possible.

Science is observational, faith is inspirational....

Faith is a highly unreliable method of determining facts, propositions which are either true or false.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

Faith is a highly unreliable method of determining facts, propositions which are either true or false.

In 'science' it is done all the time!!

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Quehoniaomath wrote:

Quote:
Faith is a highly unreliable method of determining facts, propositions which are either true or false.

In 'science' it is done all the time!!

Just because you can find flaws in a scientific theory does not mean equal angles aren't equal, a straight line 180 degrees and a point has no width, length or height, parallel lines never meet.

Try and build a house without geometry and numbers.

Try and cure a bad infection without antibiotics.

Try and send an email without technology.

Then tell us science doesn't work.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

God(s) is as metaphysical as you can get... It is a question that science cannot resolve. There is no experiment that could possibly tell if he (they) exists or not. I don't believe they do BTW, but this is not and cannot be a scientific opinion.

1 Reply

@RexRed,

RexRed wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
It is unjustified to believe everything I can't prove false.

Of course. I never said it was reasonable to believe in gods. But let's keep science out of metaphysics, to thr extent possible.

Science is observational, faith is inspirational.

Science can only take you to the farthest edge of its observational theories.

This is where non observational imagination is invented.

The problem is not in the freedom to imagine. But it is when the imaginations take hold and become laws and try to rule over even the most rudimentary pillars of science. When imagination is pushed on people and sold as if it is observational (but in truth it is only inspirational) the contradiction to even basic scientific truth becomes blindly ignored for some fanciful pie in the sky interpretation of pure imagination.

Fair enough.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

God(s) is as metaphysical as you can get... It is a question that science cannot resolve. There is no experiment that could possibly tell if he (they) exists or not. I don't believe they do BTW, but this is not and cannot be a scientific opinion.

The specific assertion is that God exists. Once the word God has been sufficiently defined, then this proposition is either true or false. In searching for the truth or falsehood of an assertion of fact, only logic is reliable. While it absolutely can not be proven that God doesn't exist, it can be argued that there is insufficient evidence that one exists to justify belief that one does.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:

God(s) is as metaphysical as you can get... It is a question that science cannot resolve. There is no experiment that could possibly tell if he (they) exists or not. I don't believe they do BTW, but this is not and cannot be a scientific opinion.

The specific assertion is that God exists. Once the word God has been sufficiently defined, then this proposition is either true or false. In searching for the truth or falsehood of an assertion of fact, only logic is reliable. While it absolutely can not be proven that God doesn't exist, it can be argued that there is insufficient evidence that one exists to justify belief that one does.

Maybe God is hiding, like light particles tend to do when being observed... Smile

0 Replies

https://scontent-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/t1.0-9/10428019_1462780603966300_4285153958307538595_n.jpg

1 Reply

@RexRed,

I don't get this one
However if you see the 'last supper' there are really 'hidden' things that explain what it really is all about.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

There is no evidence of an interventionist god -- whereas there should be, if he intervenes in our world.

(If one except goddess Fortuna. She most certainly exists... Smile

)

As far as a non-intervensionist god is concerned... no evidence can be expected of him.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

There is no evidence of an interventionist god -- whereas there should be, if he intervenes in our world.

(If one except goddess Fortuna. She most certainly exists... )

As far as a non-intervensionist god is concerned... no evidence can be expected of him.

If there is no evidence that something is true, it is illogical to believe that it is true.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:
There is no evidence of an interventionist god -- whereas there should be, if he intervenes in our world.

(If one except goddess Fortuna. She most certainly exists... )

As far as a non-intervensionist god is concerned... no evidence can be expected of him.

If there is no evidence that something is true, it is illogical to believe that it is true.

In the area of "gods" or "REALITY"...just about everything identified as a "belief" is nothing more than a blind guess...wearing the disguise of the word "belief."

I "believe" there is a GOD...is really nothing more than "my blind guess is that there is a GOD." The disguise of "belief" or "believe" is to give the guess integrity it truly does not have or deserve.

I "believe" there are no gods...is really nothing more than "my blind guess is that there are no gods." The disguise of "belief" or "believe" is to give the guess integrity it truly does not have or deserve.

If we were to substitute "blind guess" for the word "believe" in your question, Brandon, it changes things a bit...but a significant bit.

If there is no evidence that something is true, it is illogical to blindly guess that it is true.

Why?

There is no (unambiguous) evidence that there is a GOD...but why would it be illogical to blindly guess that there is one?

There is no (unambiguous) evidence that there are no gods...but why would it be illogical to blindly guess that there are none?

Blind guesses are just blind guesses.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:
There is no evidence of an interventionist god -- whereas there should be, if he intervenes in our world.

(If one except goddess Fortuna. She most certainly exists... )

As far as a non-intervensionist god is concerned... no evidence can be expected of him.

If there is no evidence that something is true, it is illogical to believe that it is true.

In the area of "gods" or "REALITY"...just about everything identified as a "belief" is nothing more than a blind guess...wearing the disguise of the word "belief."

I "believe" there is a GOD...is really nothing more than "my blind guess is that there is a GOD." The disguise of "belief" or "believe" is to give the guess integrity it truly does not have or deserve.

I "believe" there are no gods...is really nothing more than "my blind guess is that there are no gods." The disguise of "belief" or "believe" is to give the guess integrity it truly does not have or deserve.

If we were to substitute "blind guess" for the word "believe" in your question, Brandon, it changes things a bit...but a significant bit.

If there is no evidence that something is true, it is illogical to blindly guess that it is true.

Why?

There is no (unambiguous) evidence that there is a GOD...but why would it be illogical to blindly guess that there is one?

There is no (unambiguous) evidence that there are no gods...but why would it be illogical to blindly guess that there are none?

Blind guesses are just blind guesses.

I do not blind guess that there are none. I have never in any post on this board stated that I have reason to believe that there is no god. I only state that there is little or no evidence to justify a belief that there is one.

There is certainly a reason not to believe things with no evidence. The reason is that if you do that, you end up believing lots of things that are wrong. This can easily be verified experimentally. I put you in a room and ask you to blindly guess ten facts - if you like ten yes or no questions - that you have no possible way of knowing the answer to. What do you think the result will be?

In my opinion, there is little or no evidence to suggest that there is a God and, therefore, it is illogical to believe that there is.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

there is no evidence that something is true, it is illogical to believe that it is true.

Do you have evidence to prove that? Smile

1 Reply

Incidentally Dawkins does seem halfway reasonable sometimes, like when he said- "I cannot know for certain, but I think God is very improbable"

So good for him, he's admitting there still might be a God.. Smile

So he (and all atheists) are playing a dangerous game of russian roulette, like saying "if God is the bullet, the odds are 5 to 1 in my favour that the chamber is empty, so it's very improbable that I'll blow my head off when I pull the trigger.. Smile

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/9595/tfa5.jpg

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:
There is no evidence of an interventionist god -- whereas there should be, if he intervenes in our world.

(If one except goddess Fortuna. She most certainly exists... )

As far as a non-intervensionist god is concerned... no evidence can be expected of him.

If there is no evidence that something is true, it is illogical to believe that it is true.

In the area of "gods" or "REALITY"...just about everything identified as a "belief" is nothing more than a blind guess...wearing the disguise of the word "belief."

I "believe" there is a GOD...is really nothing more than "my blind guess is that there is a GOD." The disguise of "belief" or "believe" is to give the guess integrity it truly does not have or deserve.

I "believe" there are no gods...is really nothing more than "my blind guess is that there are no gods." The disguise of "belief" or "believe" is to give the guess integrity it truly does not have or deserve.

If we were to substitute "blind guess" for the word "believe" in your question, Brandon, it changes things a bit...but a significant bit.

If there is no evidence that something is true, it is illogical to blindly guess that it is true.

Why?

There is no (unambiguous) evidence that there is a GOD...but why would it be illogical to blindly guess that there is one?

There is no (unambiguous) evidence that there are no gods...but why would it be illogical to blindly guess that there are none?

Blind guesses are just blind guesses.

I do not blind guess that there are none. I have never in any post on this board stated that I have reason to believe that there is no god. I only state that there is little or no evidence to justify a belief that there is one.

At no point have I suggested that you blindly guess there are no gods. One does not need evidence to blindly guess anything. I prefer not to do it...FOR THAT REASON.

Quote:

There is certainly a reason not to believe things with no evidence. The reason is that if you do that, you end up believing lots of things that are wrong. This can easily be verified experimentally. I put you in a room and ask you to blindly guess ten facts - if you like ten yes or no questions - that you have no possible way of knowing the answer to. What do you think the result will be?

Couldn't care less. The fact is though that science very often requires blind guesses...in order to proceed toward understanding.

Quote:

In my opinion, there is little or no evidence to suggest that there is a God and, therefore, it is illogical to believe that there is.

A blind guess is not illogical. It is merely a blind guess...and if it is identified as a blind guess...so what?

I can blindly guess there is sentient life on one of the planets circling the nearest 10 stars to Sol...or I can blindly guess there is NO sentient life on any of the planets circling the nearest 10 stars to Sol.

There is nothing illogical about that...they are just blind guesses.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know