Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   God is good and evil
compmage
Member (Idle past 5153 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 91 of 114 (104964)
05-03-2004 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by One_Charred_Wing
05-01-2004 10:31 PM


Re: It's all in good fun
Born2Preach writes:
Belief doesn't really have evidence but personal experience such as prayer etc. can be kind of a confirmation, or psuedo-evidence if you will.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding belief/faith. From what I know, if you believe (have faith) then you not only don't need evidence, but you don't even need confirmation. The only time evidence is required is when you are willing to admit that you can be wrong, but these are the reasons (evidence, confirmation) that you most likely aren't wrong.
Born2Preach writes:
I asked you to not close your mind to just one kind of evidence; this is exactly what I was talking about.
But there is only one 'kind'. What I was saying was that the only way to split evidence into 'kinds' is if you are going to split evidence into that which strongly supports you position (good evidence) and that which doesn't support you position (bad evidence). My mind is not closed to evidence, I simply realise that sometimes the evidence doesn't offer any support or perhaps even contradicts your position.
Born2Preach writes:
while I agree with this consideration I also feel it is arrogance to dismiss beliefs that are not scientific just because they're not scientific.
Are you arrogant for dismissing Santa Claus (assuming that you do)? There is evidence that he exists, though it is not what you seem to call scientific evidence.

Freedom, morality, and the human dignity of the individual consists precisely in
this; that he does good not because he is forced to do so, but because he freely
conceives it, wants it, and loves it.
- Mikhail Bakunin, God and the State, from The Columbian Dictionary of Quotations

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-01-2004 10:31 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-13-2004 7:03 PM compmage has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 6156 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 92 of 114 (108031)
05-13-2004 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by compmage
05-03-2004 2:55 PM


Back
Sorry it took so long to reply, I've been out awhile and for some reason I'm not receiving notices when people post to me.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding belief/faith. From what I know, if you believe (have faith) then you not only don't need evidence, but you don't even need confirmation. The only time evidence is required is when you are willing to admit that you can be wrong, but these are the reasons (evidence, confirmation) that you most likely aren't wrong.
Faith by definition requires no evidence. Really, I don't believe that there is a such thing as that in its purest image. We all need proof to believe in anything; for some the proof need only to be the Bible etc., but we all need some form of proof. I'm more than willing to admit that my own perception of the Almighty is probably wrong, that's why I look for clues and try to better my understanding.
But there is only one 'kind'(of evidence).
With all due respect, no, there is not. Documented evidence is not the only kind, and personal evidence is not as fallible as you seem to think.
What I was saying was that the only way to split evidence into 'kinds' is if you are going to split evidence into that which strongly supports you position (good evidence) and that which doesn't support you position (bad evidence).
I agree that relevant evidence will always either support or go against your position, but there is still more than one kind of evidence to do either of these.
My mind is not closed to evidence, I simply realise that sometimes the evidence doesn't offer any support or perhaps even contradicts your position.
I agree that evidence can possibly against a position including my own; that's why it's evidence. All I'm arguing is that scientific/materialistic evidence is not the only evidence out there when dealing with the supernatural. I don't understand why people look to physical evidence to understand metaphysical things.
Now, about the Santa Claus thing... The evidence that he exists would be the presents under the Christmas tree, but then when you get older you find yourself putting presents under the tree, so you can conclude either that there is no santa or you are infact santa. But you can't be santa because you don't live in the North Pole etc.
But this is God we're talking about; an omnipotent being that set up the very laws of gravity and cell division that we're just now discovering. It's a slight step up from santa.
This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 05-13-2004 06:06 PM

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by compmage, posted 05-03-2004 2:55 PM compmage has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by compmage, posted 05-14-2004 7:10 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
compmage
Member (Idle past 5153 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 93 of 114 (108268)
05-14-2004 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by One_Charred_Wing
05-13-2004 7:03 PM


Re: Back
Born2Preach writes:
Sorry it took so long to reply, I've been out awhile and for some reason I'm not receiving notices when people post to me.
We all have a life.
Born2Preach writes:
I'm more than willing to admit that my own perception of the Almighty is probably wrong
That is a good place to start. However, being willing to admit that yu are probably wrong, I wonder why you don't seem to seriously consider that your conclussion that he exists is also probably wrong. Why only question his nature and not his existance?
I know you admitted that you can't know that he exists, but you don't seem to give it any serious consideration.
Born2Preach writes:
that's why I look for clues and try to better my understanding.
I thought he was supposed to be unknowable? Earlier in this thread you wrote;
We can't really know anything about Him at all, including whether or not He exists. It's all about faith not knowing, and through that faith you will eventually make a connection with Him, no matter what name you call Him by.
No evidence, or rather any evidence can be made to fit a being whos motives and abilities you don't know. I'm sorry, but you don't seem as if you are being rational. How do you find clues when any evidence you find is compatible with an unknowable God?
Born2Preach writes:
With all due respect, no, there is not. Documented evidence is not the only kind, and personal evidence is not as fallible as you seem to think.
People are mislead, they make themselves believe things that they wish were true, memories get distorted, some people see things that aren't there, etc. Am I supposed to trust personal evidence?
Born2Preach writes:
I agree that relevant evidence will always either support or go against your position, but there is still more than one kind of evidence to do either of these.
Maybe you should just list these kinds, that way we don't end up going in circles. I would be very surprised if these kinds aren't all physical.
Born2Preach writes:
All I'm arguing is that scientific/materialistic evidence is not the only evidence out there when dealing with the supernatural.
If it isn't materialistic (physical) how would I perceive it?
Born2Preach writes:
But this is God we're talking about; an omnipotent being that set up the very laws of gravity and cell division that we're just now discovering. It's a slight step up from santa.
The only reason we treat Santa differenly is because we know that he is fictional. Remove this and I see MORE evidence for Santa than for God. Your assersion that God is omnipotent and created the universe boils down to special pleading, unless ofcourse you have evidence of this?

Freedom, morality, and the human dignity of the individual consists precisely in
this; that he does good not because he is forced to do so, but because he freely
conceives it, wants it, and loves it.
- Mikhail Bakunin, God and the State, from The Columbian Dictionary of Quotations

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-13-2004 7:03 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-15-2004 2:51 AM compmage has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 6156 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 94 of 114 (108350)
05-15-2004 2:51 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by compmage
05-14-2004 7:10 PM


Re: Back
Why only question his nature and not his existance?
I know you admitted that you can't know that he exists, but you don't seem to give it any serious consideration.
It's because I've already looked into it, only to be more convinced of a divine presence. So far I've yet to see any scientific or nonscientific proof that there is not something divine, and what personal proof that I have leans to the notion that he exists, so the scale tips in the way that He must exist.
No evidence, or rather any evidence can be made to fit a being whos motives and abilities you don't know.
Not true. You can know something exists without knowing its exact motives.
People are mislead, they make themselves believe things that they wish were true, memories get distorted, some people see things that aren't there, etc. Am I supposed to trust personal evidence?
Can happen but doesn't as much as you seem to think. Yes, you can trust personal evidence as long as you evaluate it. People are not so prone to convince themselves; I know plenty of examples.
Maybe you should just list these kinds(of evidence), that way we don't end up going in circles. I would be very surprised if these kinds aren't all physical.
Personal experience of whatever kind just to name one. I can provide examples if need be. I think I've said this before.
it isn't materialistic (physical) how would I perceive it?
With your soul/spirit/whatever you wanna call it. And no, it's not materialistic either so don't ask for evidence of it. Think of your soul as an antenna with really bad reception.
Your assersion that God is omnipotent and created the universe boils down to special pleading
How so? You still haven't given me ANY evidence against this. My evidence may not be scientific, it's mostly based upon my own spiritual senses, but some evidence versus no evidence is still a win in my book. If you have ANY evidence of ANY kind refuting divine existence then please present it.

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by compmage, posted 05-14-2004 7:10 PM compmage has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by compmage, posted 05-15-2004 8:35 AM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
compmage
Member (Idle past 5153 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 95 of 114 (108375)
05-15-2004 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by One_Charred_Wing
05-15-2004 2:51 AM


Re: Back
Born2Preach writes:
It's because I've already looked into it, only to be more convinced of a divine presence. So far I've yet to see any scientific or nonscientific proof that there is not something divine, and what personal proof that I have leans to the notion that he exists, so the scale tips in the way that He must exist.
Expecting science to disprove a being that is defined in such a way that he is unfalsifiable and then using its inability to do so as evidence amounts to little more than loading the dice. "Personal proof" amounts to nothing given that other people have "personal proof" that contradicts yours and your God.
Born2Preach writes:
Not true. You can know something exists without knowing its exact motives.
Sure you can, especially when ANY result can be made to fit the idea/being. It is however, meaningless.
Born2Preach writes:
Can happen but doesn't as much as you seem to think. Yes, you can trust personal evidence as long as you evaluate it. People are not so prone to convince themselves; I know plenty of examples.
And how would you evaluate it? See if other people agree with you? You seam to have a problem. Most people think that your God doesn't exist.
Born2Preach writes:
Personal experience of whatever kind just to name one. I can provide examples if need be. I think I've said this before.
And personal experiance is meaningless, especially when other peoples personal experiance contradicts yours.
Born2Preach writes:
With your soul/spirit/whatever you wanna call it. And no, it's not materialistic either so don't ask for evidence of it. Think of your soul as an antenna with really bad reception.
Bad reception? This is supposed to be realiable? You back up your belief of one unknown entity with the 'feelings' you get from a sense we don't know exists and that you say can't be shown to exist. This sense also, according to you, is prone to picking up more junk than 'real image'. I have a TV with really bad reception in my garage. The picture is really snowy, but the great thing about this TV is that it shows events from the future. Care to buy it?
Born2Preach writes:
How so? You still haven't given me ANY evidence against this.
I don't have too. You are making the claim that he exists, you have to provide the evidence. I treat your God the same as I treat every other God and the same as you treat every other God. Without reliable evidence I don't believe. Where is your evidence? And no, personal experiance doesn't count. Even if I accepted personal experiance as evidence, those that have this 'evidence' against your God outnumber those that have it for your God.
Born2Preach writes:
My evidence may not be scientific, it's mostly based upon my own spiritual senses, but some evidence versus no evidence is still a win in my book.
Evidence from senses that can't be shown to exist don't count for anything and even if they did you'd be on the losing side. Remember, most people believe that your God doesn't exist.
Born2Preach writes:
If you have ANY evidence of ANY kind refuting divine existence then please present it.
You are making the claim, you have to present the evidence. Your failure to do so is starting to make it seam that you don't actually have any.

Freedom, morality, and the human dignity of the individual consists precisely in
this; that he does good not because he is forced to do so, but because he freely
conceives it, wants it, and loves it.
- Mikhail Bakunin, God and the State, from The Columbian Dictionary of Quotations

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-15-2004 2:51 AM One_Charred_Wing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-16-2004 1:24 AM compmage has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 6156 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 96 of 114 (108540)
05-16-2004 1:24 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by compmage
05-15-2004 8:35 AM


The circle circles on
Crampy, Crampy, Crampy... what I am gonna do with you?
"Personal proof" amounts to nothing given that other people have "personal proof" that contradicts yours and your God.
Let's hear some.
Sure you can(know something exists without fully understanding its motives), especially when ANY result can be made to fit the idea/being. It is however, meaningless.
I still don't see how this is meaningless.
And how would you evaluate it(Personal proof)? See if other people agree with you? You seam to have a problem. Most people think that your God doesn't exist.
You sure about that, Crampy? The vast majority of the world believes in the existance of a God for starters. You may be hinting that people believe in different gods; that may or may not be true considering they could all be the same misconception of the same being. But most people DO believe in a Creator of some sort, contrary to your statement.
You back up your belief of one unknown entity with the 'feelings' you get from a sense we don't know exists and that you say can't be shown to exist.
We don't KNOW the spiritual sense exists. But remember all the things I said about separating knowledge from faith. You seem to have forgotten again.
This sense also, according to you, is prone to picking up more junk than 'real image'
Maybe I just used a bad analogy. I didn't mean it picks up junk, I mean it doesn't always get the image in clearly. But there's no junk.
I have a TV with really bad reception in my garage. The picture is really snowy, but the great thing about this TV is that it shows events from the future. Care to buy it?
Ha ha ha, silly Crampy! TVs can't see the future!
You are making the claim that he exists, you have to provide the evidence.
I have, it's just not the kind you were asking for. Beggers can't be choosers.
And no, personal experiance doesn't count. Even if I accepted personal experiance as evidence, those that have this 'evidence' against your God outnumber those that have it for your God.
Disagree. Again, you seem to think the world's majority is atheist. It is not.
Evidence from senses that can't be shown to exist don't count for anything and even if they did you'd be on the losing side. Remember, most people believe that your God doesn't exist.
Remember, no matter how many times you repeat that to yourself, it won't come true.
You are making the claim, you have to present the evidence. Your failure to do so is starting to make it seam that you don't actually have any.
You've said the first part before and I answered it so I won't do it again here. I said from the beginning I don't have any scientific evidence. This is basically what you did:
Mr. Preach: I don't have any scientific evidence
Crampy: You're starting to seem like you don't have any scientific evidence.
IN SUMMARY:
You say personal proof doesn't count. I say it does. Standoff/Stalemate.
You say majority of the world doesn't believe in the God you seem to think I believe in. The majority of the world is theistic, so that claim is false. If you want to rephrase it as "The majority of the world believes differently than you do about God" then you have something to work with.
You say I don't have any scientific evidence. You're right, but that's what I've been saying from the beginning.

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by compmage, posted 05-15-2004 8:35 AM compmage has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by crashfrog, posted 05-16-2004 2:28 AM One_Charred_Wing has not replied
 Message 98 by compmage, posted 05-16-2004 5:15 AM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 97 of 114 (108558)
05-16-2004 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by One_Charred_Wing
05-16-2004 1:24 AM


Let's hear some.
Well, I'll jump in with mine: I don't see God. I don't hear God. God never answers any of my prayers, or any of the prayers of anyone I know.
I don't feel the presence of God, and I certainly didn't when everybody was telling me I was doing and believing the stuff that makes you feel God's presence.
Everything that people invoke God to explain, I can explain with much simpler and more accurate explanations that don't require the existence of unexplainable deities whose existence can't be definitively determined.
Everyone I know who's an atheist, including myself, is much happier with themselves and much less dysfunctional now that they're atheists than when they believed in God.
Is any of that definitive proof that God doesn't exist? Obviously not, but it's enough evidence for me, personally. I'm convinced there's no God.
So, if you have "personal proof", and I have "personal proof" of the exact opposite, and we can't both be right, then one thing is known - our "personal proofs" aren't worth a damn in regards to this subject, because they can't prove anything at all. That's all he's trying to say.
But most people DO believe in a Creator of some sort, contrary to your statement.
That's not at all what he said (which would make it a strawman). The God that you believe in - even if you think that's the God that everybody believes in - is not believed in by the majority of persons. They don't believe that the God they believe in is the same as yours. They don't believe that all Gods are actually the same God - they believe that the God they believe in is real, and that the God you believe in is not.
Again, you seem to think the world's majority is atheist. It is not.
Again, that's not at all what he's saying. He's saying that most people believe that the God you believe in doesn't exist. They believe in different gods, and they believe that the God they believe in is different than your God.
You say majority of the world doesn't believe in the God you seem to think I believe in. The majority of the world is theistic, so that claim is false.
Just because they're theistic, doesn't mean they believe in the same God as you. They just believe that there's only one God - all the rest don't exist, like yours.
Just because you root for only one football team, and I only root for one football team (go Vikes!), doesn't mean we root for the same team.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-16-2004 1:24 AM One_Charred_Wing has not replied

  
compmage
Member (Idle past 5153 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 98 of 114 (108581)
05-16-2004 5:15 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by One_Charred_Wing
05-16-2004 1:24 AM


Re: The circle circles on
Born2Preach writes:
Let's hear some.
Well there is crashforg's, there is also mine, which is much the same as his, the there are the Muslims, the Hindu's, etc. However, are you really claiming that you believe that nobody belonging to any other religion has any 'personal experiances'?
Born2Preach writes:
I still don't see how this is meaningless.
It is meaningless because it demonstrates nothing. Both A and ~A give the same result.
Born2Preach writes:
The vast majority of the world believes in the existance of a God for starters. You may be hinting that people believe in different gods; that may or may not be true considering they could all be the same misconception of the same being. But most people DO believe in a Creator of some sort, contrary to your statement.
Yes, most people believe in a God or gods of some sort but they don't believe in your God. If I had to setup a questionair asking if your God existed most people would answer no. If a God actually exists but he doesn't posses the attributes that you (or anyone else) believes he does then you aren't worshipping the right God.
Born2Preach writes:
We don't KNOW the spiritual sense exists. But remember all the things I said about separating knowledge from faith. You seem to have forgotten again.
No, you seam to have forgotten that you said;
Faith by definition requires no evidence. Really, I don't believe that there is a such thing as that in its purest image. We all need proof to believe in anything;
As I have pointed out before, you keep on contradicting yourself. "You don't need evidence, just faith", "you don't accept my personal experiance as evidence of God".
Born2Preach writes:
Ha ha ha, silly Crampy! TVs can't see the future!
Your wrong. I have personal experiance with this TV showing pictures from the future. Since you accept personal experiance as evidence you have to accept that this TV does actually should pictures from the future, or does personal experiance no longer count.
Born2Preach writes:
I have, it's just not the kind you were asking for. Beggers can't be choosers.
If this is the case then I am left to conclude that your God most likely doesn't exist. The evidence you have presented is subjective and contradicted by most of the worlds population. When you have something more conclussive let me know.
Born2Preach writes:
Disagree. Again, you seem to think the world's majority is atheist. It is not.
I don't think most people are atheist, I just realize that they don't believe in your God. Therefore their personal experiance contradicts yours.
Born2Preach writes:
Remember, no matter how many times you repeat that to yourself, it won't come true.
Pot calling the kettle black. Stop attacking a strawman and address my actually argument.
Born2Preach writes:
You say majority of the world doesn't believe in the God you seem to think I believe in. The majority of the world is theistic, so that claim is false. If you want to rephrase it as "The majority of the world believes differently than you do about God" then you have something to work with.
Funny, that is what I have been saying. Now, address that statement and we can move forward.

Freedom, morality, and the human dignity of the individual consists precisely in
this; that he does good not because he is forced to do so, but because he freely
conceives it, wants it, and loves it.
- Mikhail Bakunin, God and the State, from The Columbian Dictionary of Quotations

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-16-2004 1:24 AM One_Charred_Wing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by coffee_addict, posted 05-16-2004 7:10 AM compmage has replied
 Message 100 by NosyNed, posted 05-16-2004 12:11 PM compmage has replied
 Message 103 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-22-2004 6:58 PM compmage has replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 99 of 114 (108585)
05-16-2004 7:10 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by compmage
05-16-2004 5:15 AM


Re: The circle circles on
Welcome back compmage. Still enjyoy nitpicking?

The Laminator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by compmage, posted 05-16-2004 5:15 AM compmage has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by compmage, posted 05-16-2004 12:29 PM coffee_addict has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 100 of 114 (108625)
05-16-2004 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by compmage
05-16-2004 5:15 AM


Which God?
Yes, most people believe in a God or gods of some sort but they don't believe in your God.
You've both repeated this a number of times but I'm not sure that it is true. There are a number of theologians and practitioners in the major religions that would say it is all one God. I don't know the numbers.
However, don't Christians also believe that Jesus is God? This is not believed by a majority of the world's population. Their experience with God has told them that He is not.
In addition, what does this one God (if that is the case) tell everyone? The same thing? No, they are told rather different things about what is wanted of them. So which is correct? Is the one God lying to some and not others?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by compmage, posted 05-16-2004 5:15 AM compmage has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by compmage, posted 05-16-2004 12:32 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
compmage
Member (Idle past 5153 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 101 of 114 (108630)
05-16-2004 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by coffee_addict
05-16-2004 7:10 AM


Re: The circle circles on
Lam, never left. You must just have been missing my nitpi...I mean posts.

Freedom, morality, and the human dignity of the individual consists precisely in
this; that he does good not because he is forced to do so, but because he freely
conceives it, wants it, and loves it.
- Mikhail Bakunin, God and the State, from The Columbian Dictionary of Quotations

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by coffee_addict, posted 05-16-2004 7:10 AM coffee_addict has not replied

  
compmage
Member (Idle past 5153 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 102 of 114 (108631)
05-16-2004 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by NosyNed
05-16-2004 12:11 PM


Re: Which God?
NosyNed writes:
In addition, what does this one God (if that is the case) tell everyone? The same thing? No, they are told rather different things about what is wanted of them. So which is correct? Is the one God lying to some and not others?
Ned, I thought I addressed this point in the last sentence of that paragraph.
If a God actually exists but he doesn't posses the attributes that you (or anyone else) believes he does then you aren't worshipping the right God.

Freedom, morality, and the human dignity of the individual consists precisely in
this; that he does good not because he is forced to do so, but because he freely
conceives it, wants it, and loves it.
- Mikhail Bakunin, God and the State, from The Columbian Dictionary of Quotations

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by NosyNed, posted 05-16-2004 12:11 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 6156 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 103 of 114 (109915)
05-22-2004 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by compmage
05-16-2004 5:15 AM


I get it now!
crampy writes:
Well there is crashforg's(personal experience), there is also mine, which is much the same as his, the there are the Muslims, the Hindu's, etc. However, are you really claiming that you believe that nobody belonging to any other religion has any 'personal experiances'?
Of course not. When I say personal experience I don't mean Jesus jumps out and whacks me in the head with the holy stick. We can all have them because God loves us all despite that we all believe different things about Him.
Yes, most people believe in a God or gods of some sort but they don't believe in your God. If I had to setup a questionair asking if your God existed most people would answer no. If a God actually exists but he doesn't posses the attributes that you (or anyone else) believes he does then you aren't worshipping the right God.
We could very well all believe different, equally wrong things about God. Aren't worshipping the right god? I dunno about that, maybe we're worshipping Him with misconceptions about him. C.S. Lewis suggests in The Screwtape Letters that one should pray to God 'As You are, not as I percieve You'.
As I have pointed out before, you keep on contradicting yourself. "You don't need evidence, just faith", "you don't accept my personal experiance as evidence of God".
But you don't need evidence for faith. Yet, you want evidence to believe(or rather know the existence of) God(s). So I tried by suggesting personal evidence and you weren't convinced. I guess it was my fault for trying that after what I said. I don't remember if you asked for evidence for God or anything, but there isn't any. However as you pointed out there isn't any evidence that He doesn't exist, so then faith comes in.
Your wrong. I have personal experiance with this TV showing pictures from the future. Since you accept personal experiance as evidence you have to accept that this TV does actually should pictures from the future, or does personal experiance no longer count.
But you're the one making the claim using what I claim to be some form of evidence which you don't think is legitimate. So either you're being a smartass(which I didn't give you permission to do, Crampy!) or you agree that personal evidence counts. I think it's the first one, personally.
If this is the case then I am left to conclude that your God most likely doesn't exist. The evidence you have presented is subjective and contradicted by most of the worlds population. When you have something more conclussive let me know.
I'll admit that was stupid of me to take the bait and try to present evidence for something that one must believe in and not know. There won't be any evidence so don't expect any.
I don't think most people are atheist, I just realize that they don't believe in your God. Therefore their personal experiance contradicts yours.
So you're saying you know what these personal experiences are like even though you've never had one? How do you know their experience contradicts mine?
Pot calling the kettle black. Stop attacking a strawman and address my actually argument.
How dare you call me a pot, when have I ever called you names, Crampy?!
I misunderstood your point last time, sorry. But I'm pretty sure this one addresses your point.
Funny, that is what I have been saying. Now, address that statement and we can move forward.
Okay, I misunderstood you last time. This time I have addressed your points, so let's continue.

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by compmage, posted 05-16-2004 5:15 AM compmage has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by compmage, posted 05-25-2004 4:47 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
compmage
Member (Idle past 5153 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 104 of 114 (110461)
05-25-2004 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by One_Charred_Wing
05-22-2004 6:58 PM


Re: I get it now!
Born2Preach writes:
Of course not. When I say personal experience I don't mean Jesus jumps out and whacks me in the head with the holy stick. We can all have them because God loves us all despite that we all believe different things about Him.
Could be, however, given the disparity between the different gods and their natures, the more likely explanation is that they don't exist. You have 100 people all explaining an accident to you, the number of cars involved range from 2 to 8, the car makes represent every manafacturer you have ever heard of and this accident supposedly happened in 12 different cities. Would you believe they are talking about the same event?
Born2Preach writes:
We could very well all believe different, equally wrong things about God. Aren't worshipping the right god? I dunno about that, maybe we're worshipping Him with misconceptions about him. C.S. Lewis suggests in The Screwtape Letters that one should pray to God 'As You are, not as I percieve You'.
That would work great, except ofcourse for a god that gets seriously annoid when you don't use his name in your prayers, or one that gets very upset when people bother her with what she thinks are petty things, etc.
No evidence means no way to know, and if we were talking about anything other than God I'm fairly sure you would agree with me that the chances of this being/event/thing actually existing or having happened is so remote that we should bother waisting our time.
Born2Preach writes:
But you're the one making the claim using what I claim to be some form of evidence which you don't think is legitimate. So either you're being a smartass(which I didn't give you permission to do, Crampy!) or you agree that personal evidence counts. I think it's the first one, personally.
I'm trying to prove my point above. when this standard of evidence is applied to anything besides God you reject it.
Born2Preach writes:
I'll admit that was stupid of me to take the bait and try to present evidence for something that one must believe in and not know. There won't be any evidence so don't expect any.
Good. Now if you could only convince your fellow theists of this so that they can stop trying to force faery tales into classrooms, and stop trying to pass laws that affect people who don't belief as they do, etc.
Born2Preach writes:
So you're saying you know what these personal experiences are like even though you've never had one? How do you know their experience contradicts mine?
Who says I've never had one? I have belonged to more than 1 religion in my life. The evidence later convinced me that there was nothing supernatural behind these personel experiences.

Freedom, morality, and the human dignity of the individual consists precisely in
this; that he does good not because he is forced to do so, but because he freely
conceives it, wants it, and loves it.
- Mikhail Bakunin, God and the State, from The Columbian Dictionary of Quotations

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-22-2004 6:58 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-25-2004 8:24 PM compmage has replied

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 6156 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 105 of 114 (110511)
05-25-2004 8:24 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by compmage
05-25-2004 4:47 PM


Re: I get it now!
You have 100 people all explaining an accident to you, the number of cars involved range from 2 to 8, the car makes represent every manafacturer you have ever heard of and this accident supposedly happened in 12 different cities. Would you believe they are talking about the same event?
I'd probably figure that facts got twisted but all the accounts are based on something that actually happened. Kind of like how all the ideas of God(s) could very well all be 'edited' ideas of Him.
That would work great, except ofcourse for a god that gets seriously annoid when you don't use his name in your prayers, or one that gets very upset when people bother her with what she thinks are petty things, etc.
Well, I guess we won't know till we meet Her/Him, eh?
No evidence means no way to know, and if we were talking about anything other than God I'm fairly sure you would agree with me that the chances of this being/event/thing actually existing or having happened is so remote that we should bother waisting our time.
Of course not. I'm willing to be open minded to the impossible; especially something that is unfalsifiable because you can't prove it's not true.
I'm trying to prove my point above. when this standard of evidence is applied to anything besides God you reject it.
No, I don't. If you were serious about the TV(which you're not) then I'd figure there is some fraction chance that it's possible. However, my wiseguy detector is pretty accurate and it went off like crazy with the TV thing.
Now if you could only convince your fellow theists of this so that they can stop trying to force faery tales into classrooms, and stop trying to pass laws that affect people who don't belief as they do, etc.
Lots of them don't try to force anything, and calling someone's beliefs fairy tales is a little arrogant, don't you think? Don't get me wrong, Massachussetts(Did I spell it correctly?) did the right thing legalizing homosexual marriage despite Biblical disagreements, but please don't call people's beliefs fairy tales; I don't believe some of the events that are depicted in other religions, but I don't call them fairy tales.
Who says I've never had one? I have belonged to more than 1 religion in my life. The evidence later convinced me that there was nothing supernatural behind these personel experiences.
To each his own, I guess. If you don't mind mentioning which religions you've been a part of and what evidence convinced you of their untruths, I'd like to know more about that just out of curiosity.

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by compmage, posted 05-25-2004 4:47 PM compmage has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by compmage, posted 05-27-2004 5:07 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024