God is a major problem for many people.
Either there is evidence for God, or there is not.
But a more important question to consider is:
Can anyone ever be sure that God exists?
Is it logically possible to attain this certainty?
Please discuss.
The whole concept of a deity has evolved* to be unverifiable. Therefore, people who think there should be evidence for something before believing in it generally don't believe in deities, whereas people who think it's OK to believe in something unless there is evidence against it generally do.
[* I nearly wrote "was designed"]
Be skeptical of the things you believe are false, but be very skeptical of the things you believe are true.
People can believe they are sure god exists, although there is no evidence in that direction.Originally Posted by rayback
I personally am sure that I am excessively attractive and all women want to sleep with me (and probably most men as well). Although most people who know me, insist that the evidence seems to go in the other direction.
I seem to have been Will Robinsoned by Trinoc
Evolved through natural selection?The whole concept of a deity has evolved*
______________________________
You need an excuse? Just drink
skbuncks
her cheese slid off her cracker many moons ago
floppit
Of course! All deities that could be proved not to exist went extinct. If anyone had found a deity that could be proved to exist then that would have won hands down*, but for some reason that hasn't happened. That leaves only the deities that can neither be proved not disproved.Evolved through natural selection?
[* Except of course for the Babel Fish paradox ...]
Be skeptical of the things you believe are false, but be very skeptical of the things you believe are true.
Evidence is largely irrelevant when it comes to belief. Evidence either supports your belief, is currently lacking or shall never be available as man is not meant to understand.
The art of medicine consists in amusing the patient while nature cures the disease. Voltaire
Welcome, rayback.
Can you clarify the question? You seem to be drawing a contrast between having evidence for the existence of a god and having certainty. Are you asking whether there are apriori arguments for the existence of a god? If you are, my answer is that there are such arguments, and they are all bad arguments.
The style as we like is the humdrum.
Ah, your post on another thread speculating about my size makes sense now.
I am simply asking if a real God does exist, then whether
it is ever possible to be sure of his existence with complete certainly.
Hi rayback. Are you sure you are at the right place? This is the UK Skeptics Forum.
yes, if Thor existed he could knock on my door, say hello, have a cup of tea and then demonstrate that he had absolute control of thunder and I'd be convinced he existed.
So under a wide definition for what a "God" is the question is a no brainer.
The same can be said of the God of the Bible. Little known non-fact, the band "Genesis" was so named because like God their early work was so much more impressive.
6,000 years ago as far as Adam and Eve were concerned God walked around in the cool of the evening, was an approachable physical being. No need for a crisis of faith for them:
"Hey Eve do you believe in God?"
"You what? He's just over there dude. See for yourself"
This was a God who proved his abilities He asks - "Hey Adam I just want you to name all the animals in the world" and then summons one of everything in the world" I mean how many epic levels do you need for that?
He casts the same spell for Noah so he can put them all on his big boat and when he casts create water it floods the entire sodding planet. I mean create water is only an Orison but it produces 2 gallons of water per level. A world wide flood is literally billions of billions of cubic metres by my calculation that puts him at level 10 million billion. Truly Awesome. Or Alternatively he could have been casting it once per round for 40 days but that still gives him around 14 and a half thousand spell slots and nigh on 18 billion caster levels. That's just massive.
It puts his amusing prank at Babel and his shock and awe at Sodom and Gomorah to real shame.
Only the creation of the entire bleeding universe trumps it, but as he hadn't created any humans up until that point we have to take his word on that one.
But it's at this point that Gabriel left if you know what I mean.
Burning bush (Try Canestan?) not very impressive.
Rain of Frogs isn't bad and slaughtering the firsborn of Egypt flashy but not really up to his previous standards especially as it felt so contrived what with hardening Pharaoh’s heart to stop him caving to the earlier plagues.
Exodus must go down as the difficult second album but where is the triumphant return to form in the long awaited third. Leviticus - Oh my goodness. What a chore. What miracles does he manage there, none that's what. I mean some may say he punished Nadab and Abihu burning them alive but remind us what they were punished for. That's right playing with strange fire. If that's a miracle then bow down and worship before "Charlie Says"
Numbers: barely any better, a few more burnings then playing with Aarons Rod, speaking out of his Ass and other double entendres just make it seem like a self parody.
It really is downhill from there on.
These days we're told that he answers prayers but if you actually look at what happens to people who pray vs people who don't there's no significant difference.
So if your definition of God is someone who offers words of comfort that sound reassuringly like what you want to hear but no one else can hear and if he takes any part in the universe whatsoever restricts his omnipotence to that which can be achieved though undetectable nudges then sure there's just no way to prove of disprove such a being, but that's not the old God of the Bible. That's God after a few thousand years of divine power decay. Sure he could still exist in some impotent form but he might as well be dead.
If I'm ever reduced to such a fraction of my former glory shoot me. Right between the eyes.
Like Matt, I could be sure that a god exists.
Evidence could exist such as if, for instance, the followers of one particular god had their prayers answered. Imagine if it could be shown that Christians were 60% more likely to survive cancer if prayed for, over atheists and other religionists, even if prayed for. That would suggest that something was going on that could be intervention by a deity.
Combine that with some miracles, such as burning bushes, voice of God, etc, no earthquakes in Christian countries, blah and suchlike.
I'd soon be on my knees praying to this God if such evidence were available. I could be sure that a god exists.
However, in our reality, no such evidence is forthcoming. We live in a universe where there is no evidence that a god or gods exist. So even if such a being did exist, there is no point in worrying about it or worshipping it.
"It was all very well going on about pure logic and how the universe was ruled by logic and the harmony of numbers, but the plain fact of the matter was that the Disc was manifestly traversing space on the back of a giant turtle and the gods had a habit of going round to atheists' houses and smashing their windows."
— Terry Pratchett
For most reasonable definitions of God, it's a peice of piss to decide whether they exist or not. It's simple, years when we throw virgins into the volcano we get a good harvest, years when we don't the crops fail. Proof positive QED.
Trouble is when the crops fail after the virgins are undeniably sacrificed and when the next island gets a bumper crop despite their wildy differing religious practices. Then it's not so simple.
Either God doesn't exist or "it's a little bit more complicated than that"
At this stage it's a lot more complicated than that and it looks like the only sort of God that could possibly exist is that rare breed of being which is immune to all testing, probing or analysis. Then you get the question of whether something that has no effect on the universe can be said to exist.
Right, I think I understand your question.
The answer, I fear, is that there will always be doubters. Astonishingly, there are those who remain unconvinced of the existence of the Invisible Pink Unicorn:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_Pink_Unicorn
The style as we like is the humdrum.
I dont know. You tell me.
Am I missing something here?
Do you guys have an innate hatred for things you cannot see, or, you guys are simply more critical on certain days of the week?
Please do tell.
That does not address my question.
That is an answer to the question:
Is it possible for everyone on earth to be sure with full certainly that there is a God?
I know that the inmates of the looney asylum will never be convinced.
Last edited by rayback; 2nd June 2009 at 02:14 PM.
I'll go for option C. I don't hate things I cannot see (but I don't believe in things for which there is no evidence). I'm not more critical on certain days, I'm critical every day.
You will find that, broadly and with obvious exceptions, posters on a skeptics forum will be interested in, but not believers in, the paranormal (ghosts, aliens, gods, etc).
Show me the evidence for ghosts and I'll believe in them, my current lack of belief stems not from 'hate' but absence of evidence. Similarly with gods.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks