Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Detecting God
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 4 of 271 (567428)
07-01-2010 7:58 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by killinghurts
06-30-2010 11:29 PM


Well, I prayed, and the prayer came true! God influenced reality to make it happen! So, by my prayer coming true, I detected him!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by killinghurts, posted 06-30-2010 11:29 PM killinghurts has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by AZPaul3, posted 07-01-2010 8:57 AM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 7 of 271 (567440)
07-01-2010 9:14 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by AZPaul3
07-01-2010 8:57 AM


AZPaul3 writes:
Whoa! Great Huntard!
I know! Amazing, right?
I could never get that to work. How you do that?
You have to really have faith!
First, I suppose, is exactly who did you prey to?
To god, of course!
Was there any vision of this God in your mind at the time? What did he/she/it look like?
No, I just focussed really hard on what I wanted!
What position did you take? Eyes open/closed? Knees or prostrate?
Eyes closed, and sitting on my couch, laid back and stuff. Notthing too straining.
Details please?
Well, I really wanted this bike see, a really expensive one, like 5,000 Euros. And I can't afford that, so I started praying in this laid back position on my couch with my eyes closed, focussing really hard on that bike. Then 4 months passed, and suddenly I won a bike in the lottery. Ok, it was a really crappy one worth about 500 Euros, but god must've heard my prayers about "a bike", I mean, it's hard to penetrate so many layers of aether to get to him, right, and he made me win that bike in the lottery!
When you think about it, it's obvious, right!
Do some real science here. Keep a journal. Try it again to see if you can get another positive result.
But,t here's nothing I want for myself right now!
BTW, what were you preying for? I hope it wasn't wasted on some namby-pamby stuff like healing a sick friend or help finding your car keys or something.
Of course not! It was about this really awesome state of the art bike!
A hot babe would be excellent! Was it a hot babe? Redhead?
Now there's an idea! I'll try praying again, I'll report back in 4 months or so!
-----
Disclaimer: This is based sorta on a true story a friend of my parents told once. Yes, I laughed at it, very hard.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by AZPaul3, posted 07-01-2010 8:57 AM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 37 of 271 (567778)
07-02-2010 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by sac51495
07-02-2010 2:04 PM


Re: Detection of God
sac51495 writes:
And likewise, the fact that we do not fully understand the exact nature of God is not evidence that we never will.
You'd first need to prove there is a god, before you can even begin to discuss its nature.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by sac51495, posted 07-02-2010 2:04 PM sac51495 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by sac51495, posted 07-02-2010 3:57 PM Huntard has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 39 of 271 (567782)
07-02-2010 2:26 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by sac51495
07-02-2010 2:17 PM


Re: Futile Materialism
sac51495 writes:
My basic argument against materialism is very simple: accounting for the yourself.
Ok, here I am. Now what?
This vs. assumes the existence of a spirit, which is immaterial. Therefore, standing firmly on the Bible and nothing else, I conclude that there must be an immaterial reality.
Let me get this straight. Because an ancient text says there is a spirit, you say there must be a spirit. I've got an ancient text here that says Ra exists. Must he be real as well?
"I am my brain".
Because there is also a body attached to that brain.
Edited by Huntard, : spellings

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by sac51495, posted 07-02-2010 2:17 PM sac51495 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by sac51495, posted 07-02-2010 11:42 PM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 76 of 271 (567902)
07-03-2010 5:08 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by sac51495
07-02-2010 11:42 PM


Re: Futile Materialism
sac51495 writes:
Did you read the following arguments, which were more specific?...Taken out of context, you can make anything mean, ultimately, anything you want.
Well, no. I want this to mean I am your lord and master, as it is with all mankind. I'm having a hard time getting that from your quote though. Dammit!
Correct. I am a Christian, and if I - claiming to be a Christian - were to stand on something other than the word of God, then I would be grossly inconsistent.
Or realistic.
So if I wish to be inconsistent with my beliefs, then I would stand on something other than the Bible. But I care about what God wants me to do infinitely more than what you want me to do, so I'll take my stand on the Bible, despite what you say.
But you don't know what god wants you to do, you are not omniscient. You assume you know what god wants you to do, but you don't.
Besides, your an atheist; you are opposed to my God, so should I listen to Him who I believe to be at the very core of the universe, or him (you) who is opposed to my God?
Since I can actually be shown to be existing, I think I know where I'll place my bets.
"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (II Tim. 3:16-17).
that's one of those clever lies satan put in there.
See, I can assert too. But somehow, my assertions don't pull the same weight with you. I wonder how you keep yourself in such a possition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by sac51495, posted 07-02-2010 11:42 PM sac51495 has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 106 of 271 (569689)
07-23-2010 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by riVeRraT
07-23-2010 8:09 AM


Re: Name these things please
riVeRraT writes:
we all look through a telescope at M101, but is it really there? Can you prove to me that we are not in the Matrix or something?
No. Howeverm that is irrelevant. Even if we are inside the matrix, that's still the reality we know, and we still ahve to use our sense to make sense of it. Whether this is ultimately "real" or an illusion is completely irrelevant. Unless of course it can be shown to be an illusion.
Also I've been taught in these forums (don't know if it is true) that if someone theorizes something, it is not up to us to prove him wrong, it is up to him to prove himself right. (which is weird, because nothing is ever proven??)
Well, not entirely. He is asked to supply supporting evidence.
So trying to prove God doesn't exist is fruitless.
Not to mention completely impossible. Which is why I always ask to supply evidence for the existence of god.
But that is not the point. The statement implies to us, that just because something is not measurable, means it does not exist, and not part of our world. Which is an erroneous statement.
Well, how would we detect it if it leaves absolutely no indication of interaction with the world around us behind?
That is not how you prove something doesn't exist.
Well, with god it's rather impossible to prove he doesn't exist. But until an inkling of evidence can be given of his existence, I view him in the same regard as say, bigfoot or Santa Clause.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by riVeRraT, posted 07-23-2010 8:09 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by riVeRraT, posted 07-23-2010 11:02 PM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 117 of 271 (570338)
07-27-2010 5:24 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by riVeRraT
07-23-2010 11:02 PM


Re: Name these things please
riVeRraT writes:
But it does, it is just subjective.
So, no claim of truth can ever be made about it, since truth is objective, not subjective.
Also, this is another erroneous statement, because you assume we have made every type of detection equipment that we will ever make. so much for making a bigger collider, we don't need it anymore, we can detect everything that is out there already.
Until we detect something, there is no reason to think that it's there (no, I'm not talking about physics and complicated math equations that potentially show things to be there). Do you think bigfoot exists? We never detected that either. How about pixies? Leprechauns? Why should I entertain the thought that they exist, if nothing has ever shown they do?
Thirdly, the God of the bible, says He is everything. So everything we test is God, therefor part of this world. If He exists.
Then he is also nothing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by riVeRraT, posted 07-23-2010 11:02 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by riVeRraT, posted 07-27-2010 9:59 AM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 121 of 271 (570401)
07-27-2010 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by riVeRraT
07-27-2010 9:59 AM


Re: Name these things please
riVeRraT writes:
I think there is a possibility, however small that is. I do not think something does not exist, just because there is no physical evidence of it. I think if you can imagine something, then the possibility of it existing.....exists.
Hmm yes, that's kinda true. Perhaps I should have rephrased the question. Do you take Bigfoot into account when you venture forth into the woods? Any anti-bigfoot things in your backpack when you go out hiking? This is the same way god seems to me. I have no evidence for his existence, so why should I take him into account?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by riVeRraT, posted 07-27-2010 9:59 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by riVeRraT, posted 07-28-2010 9:21 AM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 125 of 271 (570674)
07-28-2010 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by onifre
07-27-2010 1:09 PM


Re: Name these things please
onifre writes:
Think of it this way, what's the difference between a 2D movie and a 3D movie?
The illuion of depth?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by onifre, posted 07-27-2010 1:09 PM onifre has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 127 of 271 (570677)
07-28-2010 9:40 AM
Reply to: Message 124 by riVeRraT
07-28-2010 9:21 AM


Re: Name these things please
riVeRraT writes:
Of course you are correct. That is why I did not know what to believe for so many years.
Fair enough.
Then there is the bible, which is evidence of Jesus's existence.
I disagree. Is a Superman comic evidence for the existence of Superman?
It's one thing if you read a story about Santa Claus, and then once you find out your parents are putting the presents under the tree, you have no reason to believe anymore.
You have no reason to believe in the first place. Of course your critical thinking skills aren't that develloped yet, and when you're young, you're "programmed" to take everything your parents tell you as true, becuase that helps your learning process.
But if you read stories about Jesus, and what he had to say, and those things ring true in your heart, then you have reason to believe, and start taking it into consideration. You start seeking.
Yes, you start seeking, and until you have evidence that anything written about in those stories is true, you don't believe them, nor have reason to, just like you don't believe Superman stories.
Edited by Huntard, : added word for clarity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by riVeRraT, posted 07-28-2010 9:21 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 142 of 271 (572502)
08-06-2010 8:14 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by riVeRraT
08-06-2010 7:59 AM


riVeRraT writes:
(is there a better way of saying this since my English sucks?)
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by riVeRraT, posted 08-06-2010 7:59 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 166 of 271 (573611)
08-12-2010 7:15 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by sac51495
08-12-2010 7:10 AM


Re: Science: objective? Nah.
sac51495 writes:
Give me an example of a scientific proof for the existence of something.
We can't, for the simple reason that science doesn't deal with proof, it deals with evidence.
Edited by Huntard, : typo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by sac51495, posted 08-12-2010 7:10 AM sac51495 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by riVeRraT, posted 08-12-2010 7:49 AM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 170 of 271 (573628)
08-12-2010 7:56 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by riVeRraT
08-12-2010 7:49 AM


Re: Science: objective? Nah.
riVeRraT writes:
Jesus's walk on the earth...
Great, if you would kindly point to where he walks, we could settle this issue once and for all.
...and the miracles He performed are evidence.
Since we don't even know if he even performed any miracles at all, I wouldn't know how they could be.
Also, what has this to do with the fact that science deals in evidence and not proof?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by riVeRraT, posted 08-12-2010 7:49 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 207 of 271 (576855)
08-26-2010 5:01 AM
Reply to: Message 206 by Just being real
08-26-2010 4:28 AM


Re: What counts as detection?
Just being real writes:
You mentioned in your prologue, detecting gravity by its effects on a ball when it is released. So are you saying that you would accept the effects of a God or gods on physical objects, as evidence of His/her/their existence?
If it can be shown it was indeed the god that interacted with the object, yes.
What exactly counts as "god evidence?"
I would say that it depends on the claim, if you claim "God can heal someone with cancer through prayer, I would require the following for evidence:
  1. We would go to a cancer patient
  2. Prayer would be said to the god of choice
  3. The patient is cured
  4. It is shown the god prayed to was responsible for the healing
Here are some other important question that relate to this topic.
Do you agree that the universe is finite? Yes or No?
We don't know. It could be infinite.
Do you agree that something can not come from nothing? Yes or No?
No.
Do you agree that if there was ever a time that there was absolutely nothing, that nothing could exist now? Yes or No?
There never was such a time, and even if there was, then no.
Do you agree that a yes answer to that last question requires something infinite to exist in order for something now to exist?
No.
Do you agree that for something to exist infinitely it must be self sustaining?
No.
What is the best term to give to something that is infinite, self sustaining, and able to produce our universe?
Non-existant.
Edited by Huntard, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by Just being real, posted 08-26-2010 4:28 AM Just being real has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by Just being real, posted 08-26-2010 5:37 AM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 210 of 271 (576858)
08-26-2010 5:08 AM
Reply to: Message 208 by Just being real
08-26-2010 5:01 AM


Re: Correct, but uselessly so
Just being real writes:
My understanding is not that the Hebrew alphabet didn't exist, but only rather that the oldest Hebrew writings found to date are from the tenth century BCE. Would the fact that no older writings have been found to still exist today, truthfully negate the possibility that the Hebrew language could go back much further?
Since there is older writing found, I wouldn't say so. See Wiki:
quote:
The early writing systems of the late 4th millennium BC were not a sudden invention.
Emphasis added.
Oh, and welcome to EvC!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by Just being real, posted 08-26-2010 5:01 AM Just being real has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024