An appeal for the logic of religious belief

[Willamena]

It is not evidence if others can not test it.

What makes their word more important to you than yours?

 

[Rioku]

What makes their word more important to you than yours?

I think you mean less important but in either case they are not part of a different world they live by the same information we all come across. Yet for some reason because they believe is the socially accepting God it is ok to act without thinking. There is no difference between someone who believes in god and someone who kills in the name of god, they are both adamant about their beliefs and are convinced that their personal experience is justifiable.

 

[Willamena]

I think you mean less important but in either case they are not part of a different world they live by the same information we all come across. Yet for some reason because they believe is the socially accepting God it is ok to act without thinking. There is no difference between someone who believes in god and someone who kills in the name of god, they are both adamant about their beliefs and are convinced that their personal experience is justifiable.

I was just making a point about evidence, but that seems to be neither here nor there. Tell me: are you adamant in your beliefs, as expressed here, and convinced that the opinion expressed in the last line is justifiable?

 

[Autodidact]

For you to accept that there is a God why does He have to be beyond our conception? Why can we know nothing about Him? Don't you learn something about an artist just by examining His work?

I'm confused. I thought you said

You have to admit that if God created the universe then He greatly exceeds human knowledge and ability.

If he exceeds our knowledge, then we cannot know him.

Why can't others know God? Why do you think the universe is, or should be, entirely fair when it's obvious in daily events that it isn't?

What makes you think that I think the universe either is or should be fair?

The existence of an unknowable God makes no practical difference to your life? Unless God created the universe and life, then it makes all the difference.

Really? What? How would that change my life, if there exists a being about Whom I can know nothing, and cannot, by definition, perceive or experience in any way?

 

[Storm]

Go back and read the series of posts we were not talking about god we were talking about 'divine experiences'. I have verifiable evidence for erroneous nature of the human mind.

Alright, what verifiable evidence do you have that divine experiences are erroneous? You can't just assume that because the mind plays tricks sometimes, it's always worng.

Where there is no verifiable evidence for divine experiences.

What I've been saying all along is that neither position has the support of verifiable evidence.

And by the way, it is moronic to ask someone to prove god does not exist, because no one can prove something false when there is no evidence for it in the first place. Will you please get this in your head.

No, it's not moronic, it's called a challenge. You have a bad habit of making positive claim. As long as you keep making them, I'm going to keep calling you out.

So you see why I did not bother responding before, if you just read a little you would have realize what was going on.

I could say the same for you. I'm not the one who threw a hissy fit.

 

[Storm]

There is no difference between someone who believes in god and someone who kills in the name of god, they are both adamant about their beliefs and are convinced that their personal experience is justifiable.

And you call me moronic....

 

[Super Universe]

If gravity is God then, God must be pretty weak. He can only act on matter, for example, and his influence decreases in proportion of the distance that he is from an object. Certainly, he does not take any active influence, nor does he directly bother himself in people's affairs unless, for example, they happen to jump over a cliff.

If you want to say that God is the universe, you might just as well call God the universe. The universe is everything that is encapsuled inside it - matter, energy, and so forth. By it's very definition, there is nothing outside of the universe, unless you want to go into complex metaphysical speculation.

The difference between the equipment used to detect gravity and that used to detect God is that the equipment for gravity can be used by anyone, and achieve a result, regardless of their original belief. However, the equipment used to detect god depends on all number of nebulous concepts, such as belief, and so forth.

Your analogy about the toy car and the box is quite appropriate, and this is a far better analogy than gravity and god.

For the toy car, I can examine the car, measure it, look at it, and so forth. My seeing it does not depend on what my personal opinion is - it will always be a toy car. As for what is in the box, who knows what it is? Is it a doll? A boat? A car? An electronic game? Indeed, how do you know that there is even anything in the box?

I didn't say that God was only gravity. The universe is much, much, bigger than you think it is. Even so, the universe is only about a seventh of All That Is.

The equipment used to detect God does not depend on nebulous concepts, what concept are you using when you open your eyes or listen, or touch someone, taste, and smell?

How do I know there is even anything in the box? I opened it.

 

[Super Universe]

I'm confused. I thought you said
[/size]

If he exceeds our knowledge, then we cannot know him.
What makes you think that I think the universe either is or should be fair? Really? What? How would that change my life, if there exists a being about Whom I can know nothing, and cannot, by definition, perceive or experience in any way?

But what do you know of an artist, say Michelangelo? Anything? Maybe you've read The Agony and the Exctasy so you think you know him but do you really? You might know 80% of a person, is this enough to say that you really know them? What if one day he shows you that other 20%? It would be like meeting a stranger. How much do you need to know about a person, or being, to say that you know something about them?

We can learn everything there is to know about our universe but this is only 1/7th of All That Is. Still we can and eventually will know all of Him, that's the whole purpose of our existence, learning, ascending, and finding our way home.

What makes me think you think the universe should be fair? I think people don't believe in God because their life isn't quite the way they would want their life to be. It just isn't fair that others are happy, rich, famous, healthy, this, that, whatever... They think, if there was a God then I would be ________ (insert pitiful excuse).

People disbelieve, not because they "see no evidence", instead it's because they feel humans and the earth would have been created perfect if God did create it all. But there is great value in the pursuit of perfection. If it is given, then the value all goes to that which created it perfect. This way, you earn perfection. You are an equal shareholder in it, but you will not be given the keys to it until you earn them.

All of existence is not possible without the Prime Creator. I don't want to go into another endless "Well then where did God come from?" debate because we've been through that and obviously we're not going to agree. I can just as easily ask "Where did the universe come from without God?" to which you have no answer.

 

[crystalonyx]

I didn't say that God was only gravity. The universe is much, much, bigger than you think it is. Even so, the universe is only about a seventh of All That Is.

Ridiculous post, I don't know where you numbers are coming from.

 

[Autodidact]

One of the most annoying things about trying to communicate with you, Super, is your tendency to tell me what I believe and why. You know absolutely nothing about why I believe what I do or don't believe, nor would you believe me if I told you. This is why there is no point in trying to talk to you, even when you present the illusion of making a modicum of sense, if only momentarily. For that reason, I am going to return to my usual policy of ignoring you.

btw, your assertion that all we can know is about 1/7 of all there is is hilarious because, obviously, no, wait for it, really, it's really funny...HOW WOULD YOU KNOW?

 

[Francine]

btw, your assertion that all we can know is about 1/7 of all there is is hilarious because, obviously, no, wait for it, really, it's really funny...HOW WOULD YOU KNOW?

Maybe that assertion is part of the 6/7ths that got away.

 

[Quath]

94% of all statistics are made up.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Including yours?

 

[Super Universe]

Ridiculous post, I don't know where you numbers are coming from.

Ridiculous reply. You don't know where my numbers are coming from? Of course you don't.

Why do you think every person on this planet knows exactly the same things as every other person?

 

[Super Universe]

One of the most annoying things about trying to communicate with you, Super, is your tendency to tell me what I believe and why. You know absolutely nothing about why I believe what I do or don't believe, nor would you believe me if I told you. This is why there is no point in trying to talk to you, even when you present the illusion of making a modicum of sense, if only momentarily. For that reason, I am going to return to my usual policy of ignoring you.

btw, your assertion that all we can know is about 1/7 of all there is is hilarious because, obviously, no, wait for it, really, it's really funny...HOW WOULD YOU KNOW?

You asked a leading question so I answered it.

I know absolutely nothing about you? I know you breathe air, get hungry, frustrated, struggle with making day to day decisions at work and at home, want, hope, fear, laugh, worry, love, fail... but I guess those things must not be very important in your life? I'm sure you think that just because I don't know your name and the street you live on that I know absolutely nothing about you.

Why wouldn't I believe you if you told me? Is that what you are really afraid of, trusting others and being let down? I don't walk around believing that people are liars, I assume they are truthful unless what they say requires that I see some element of proof, a uniform and badge, a firetruck and crew, or city maintenance vehicle. People could very well lie to me but that is a reflection of them, not I. Some may see me as being naive, I just choose to see people in a good light until they prove me wrong. Sometimes, they prove me wrong right from the start.

Anyway, I did not assert that all we can know is 1/7 of All That Is, only that this universe is one part of All That Is. We all will know everything eventually, just not today and probably not tomorrow. Also, I gave you the wrong prime number, this universe is divided into seven parts but the universe is only one of eleven dimensions of All That Is and then heaven is another, separate place.

How would I know? Yes, of course, how could I know something you don't? If you don't know then obviously no one else can possibly know? Right?

 

[yossarian22]

Ridiculous reply. You don't know where my numbers are coming from? Of course you don't.

I personally think you are pulling them out of your ***. Or perhaps recycling them from another person, who is pulling them out of his or her ***.

Why do you think every person on this planet knows exactly the same things as every other person?

How would I know? Yes, of course, how could I know something you don't? If you don't know then obviously no one else can possibly know?

Hmm....
Either you are very poor at writing sarcasm, or you are contradicting yourself.

 

[Super Universe]

I personally think you are pulling them out of your ***. Or perhaps recycling them from another person, who is pulling them out of his or her ***.

Hmm....
Either you are very poor at writing sarcasm, or you are contradicting yourself.

I don't worry about what some know-it-all teenager who's never been anywhere and never done anything thinks.

It's not like you've ever done anything except make it to level 10 in some video game.

 

[Rioku]

Alright, what verifiable evidence do you have that divine experiences are erroneous? You can't just assume that because the mind plays tricks sometimes, it's always worng.

I have no idea why I keep responding to you, but I tell you again go back and read what was posted, you will see.

What I've been saying all along is that neither position has the support of verifiable evidence.

This is simply incorrect, there is vast verifiable evidence for the erroneous nature of the human mind.

No, it's not moronic, it's called a challenge.

Incorrect it is moronic, anyway you look at it a 'challenge' (as you word it) that 'challenges' someone to prove something false when there is no evidence for it in the first place is moronic. I hate saying this because it is so sophomoric but because you clearly do not get it; I ask you to prove Zeus, Thor, or the flying spaghetti monster do not exist.

You have a bad habit of making positive claim. As long as you keep making them, I'm going to keep calling you out.

And that you should keep doing because my peers are laughing at me for responding to you. So if your goal is to demoralize me by waisting my time then you currently succeeding.

 

[Rioku]

And you call me moronic....

Note: I never called you moronic I called your question moronic, it is you who came to the conclusion that a single moronic act makes you a moron, which by the way is not correct.

Also I would like to add that you are correct in calling me on this statement, I should have worded it as such;

There is no difference between the validity of beliefs from someone who believes in god and someone who kills in the name of god, they are both adamant about their beliefs and are convinced that their personal experience is justifiable.

Because there is an obvious difference in the actions but the validity of the beliefs are what I was referring to.

 

[Rioku]

I was just making a point about evidence, but that seems to be neither here nor there. Tell me: are you adamant in your beliefs, as expressed here, and convinced that the opinion expressed in the last line is justifiable?

Adamant in that until evidence comes arrogant to change my mine, I stick to logic.

The reworded version ( see previous post) is justifiable, there is no more evidence for one stance, so yes they are the same and that is why it is justifiable.