Are there any good arguments for God?

[Tiberius]

Please dont give arbitrary answers which make me feel ashamed about my previous statement. Pardon. it was the purpose I illusioned to be mine ... well, Me too was blinded because you asked in illusion. I understand you did.

I am simply pointing out that you are defining God to be something for which there is already a perfectly adequate word, and that we have no need to redefine "god" to be that.

Evidence? For something which has been overgrown by the illusions from "your" heart?

I'm sorry, but if you want me to accept your claim is true, you will have to provide evidence that the claim is true.

Ridiculation can be mumbo jumbo too but is old age.

Let me clarify - your statement seemed to be nothing but a bunch of buzzwords strung together into a sentence that appeared to have meaning but did not.

 

[Tiberius]

"For [God's] invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they [who deny God] are inexcusable." The Bible- Romans 1:20.

Yeah, and if I quoted from Aesop's Fables, would that convince you that a mouse really did once pull a thorn from the paw of a talking lion?

The Bible is not evidence, it is the claim.

 

[Tiberius]

There are definitely a good number of people who have reported experiences of what they describes as God or the divine but what is more important to me is that some of them I trust as honest, intelligent and intellectually curious people.

I'm not making any claims about how reality works.

Completely irrelevant. There are many people who claim they have been abducted by aliens. They are also often honest, intelligent and intellectually curious people. Yet sleep paralysis explains their experiences easily.

So I will not believe something is true just because a lot of people have said they believe it to be true.

 

[Tiberius]

It often does at that, in real practice.

Whether that is its true path or instead abusing it is to a degree a matter of opinion.

In any case, it is nothing to be passively accepted.

Glad we agree.

Certainly not that we should bother to forbid religion by law. I care little about attempts to "improve" society by way of law.

I think society would be much worse off if we had no laws. So laws do play a very important part in improving society.

Instead, I meant exactly what I said. That we shold not allow religion to run unleashed. Religious privilege is something of an odd concept, IMO.

Agreed.

Scripture literalism is, quite simply, stupid. No one should accept it. Ever.

Again, agreed.

 

[Tiberius]

There is none.

That's certainly been my experience.

 

[Tiberius]

How do you take reality apart?

By investigation where we limit the variables as much as possible.

 

[Yerda]

Completely irrelevant.

Other people's experiences have no relevance?

There are many people who claim they have been abducted by aliens. They are also often honest, intelligent and intellectually curious people. Yet sleep paralysis explains their experiences easily.

The experiences of theists (and deists, and pantheists, and mystics) don't seem to me to be so easy to write off.

So I will not believe something is true just because a lot of people have said they believe it to be true.

I'm not asking you to. Relax.

 

[atanu]

That's certainly been my experience.

Yes.

For that matter, is there any evidence of your independent existence? You could be a projected 3D movie where voice-over (and mind-over) is performed by some other entity? Do you exist on your own? Did you give rise to your "I" sense? Are you in control of your "I" sense?

 

[Aiviu]

then ... after i "learnt" how you questioned ...

I am perfectly willing to change my position, but I will need some good evidence.

But what is good enough for you? If you would want then why dont you seek evidence for yourself? Any evidence someone will come up with wont be not more than a subjective speculation to you and far from an evidence you are asking for.

Why not stop asking a question which you even wouldnt ask to yourself?

And its not wrong to put some love in ... pure logic will bring you close but not inside. ... have fun.

 

[rusra02]

Yeah, and if I quoted from Aesop's Fables, would that convince you that a mouse really did once pull a thorn from the paw of a talking lion?

The Bible is not evidence, it is the claim.

I'm not sure you understood the quote. The Bible at Romans 1:20 points to the magnificent wisdom and power seen in the smallest living thing and the boundless galaxies as evidence of our Creator. Scientists and engineers study designs in natural things because they are so brilliantly conceived. It is, I believe, as this quote from "Was Life Created?" says; "How did nature come up with all these brilliant ideas? Many researchers would attribute the seemingly ingenious designs evident in nature to millions of years of evolutionary trial and error. Other researchers, though, arrive at a different conclusion. Microbiologist Michael J. Behe wrote in The New York Times of February 7, 2005: “The strong appearance of design [in nature] allows a disarmingly simple argument: if it looks, walks and quacks like a duck, then, absent compelling evidence to the contrary, we have warrant to conclude it’s a duck.” His opinion? “Design should not be overlooked simply because it’s so obvious.”

 

[ArtieE]

I'm not sure you understood the quote. The Bible at Romans 1:20 points to the magnificent wisdom and power seen in the smallest living thing and the boundless galaxies as evidence of our Creator. Scientists and engineers study designs in natural things because they are so brilliantly conceived. It is, I believe, as this quote from "Was Life Created?" says; "How did nature come up with all these brilliant ideas.

Exactly what was designed and created? There's an estimated 8.7 million species on the planet today and who knows how many are extinct. Did your god design and create all those on an individual basis? There are more than 3,500 species of mosquitoes. Did your god design and create 3,000 and then went "good, only 500 to go..."?

 

[Tiberius]

Other people's experiences have no relevance?

Anecdotal evidence has no relevance.

The experiences of theists (and deists, and pantheists, and mystics) don't seem to me to be so easy to write off.

Why don't you say the same thing about those who believe they have been abducted by aliens? Or harmed by vaccines? Or believe the moon landing was a hoax?

I'm not asking you to. Relax.

You certainly seem to be suggesting that religious belief should be considered on the basis that a lot of people have believed it. Things you have said that show you seem to believe this...

"There are definitely a good number of people who have reported experiences of what they describes as God or the divine but what is more important to me is that some of them I trust as honest, intelligent and intellectually curious people."

"... the experiences of many theists across space, time and culture are enough for me to keep an open mind."​

 

[Tiberius]

Yes.

For that matter, is there any evidence of your independent existence? You could be a projected 3D movie where voice-over (and mind-over) is performed by some other entity? Do you exist on your own? Did you give rise to your "I" sense? Are you in control of your "I" sense?

Only my own personal interpretation, which, I am fully aware, is not demonstrable to anyone else.

But based on all available evidence, we are each individuals that exist.

But this is getting a little off topic...

 

[Tiberius]

But what is good enough for you?

Testable evidence which withstands scrutiny.

If you would want then why dont you seek evidence for yourself?

What makes you think I haven't?

I have looked at the various arguments for and against God for years. I have looked at the responses by each side to the other side's arguments. I have carefully considered both sides.

Any evidence someone will come up with wont be not more than a subjective speculation to you and far from an evidence you are asking for.

And do you think that the evidence for relativity is nothing more than "subjective speculation" because someone else came up with it?

Why not stop asking a question which you even wouldnt ask to yourself?

And what is this question that I haven't even asked myself?

And its not wrong to put some love in ... pure logic will bring you close but not inside. ... have fun.

I don't see how using a subjective emotion is capable of producing an objective truth.

 

[Tiberius]

I'm not sure you understood the quote. The Bible at Romans 1:20 points to the magnificent wisdom and power seen in the smallest living thing and the boundless galaxies as evidence of our Creator. Scientists and engineers study designs in natural things because they are so brilliantly conceived. It is, I believe, as this quote from "Was Life Created?" says; "How did nature come up with all these brilliant ideas? Many researchers would attribute the seemingly ingenious designs evident in nature to millions of years of evolutionary trial and error. Other researchers, though, arrive at a different conclusion. Microbiologist Michael J. Behe wrote in The New York Times of February 7, 2005: “The strong appearance of design [in nature] allows a disarmingly simple argument: if it looks, walks and quacks like a duck, then, absent compelling evidence to the contrary, we have warrant to conclude it’s a duck.” His opinion? “Design should not be overlooked simply because it’s so obvious.”

You are missing the point.

The Bible starts from the assumption that God exists. I will not.

Any argument for God that starts by asking me to assume God exists is a pretty weak argument.

It'd be like me arguing that faster than light travel is possible because I saw an episode of Star Trek where Scotty talked about the warp engines. It only works if you start with the conclusion that Star Trek is true.

In any case, the argument you are putting forward in this post seems to be the argument from incredulity. Also, Behe is an idiot. And evolution is perfectly capable of producing all the "brilliant ideas" we see. Also, we see some crap ideas which seem to be hard to explain if there is a genius creator, but perfectly plausible if evolution is the cause of them.

 

[outhouse]

Other people's experiences have no relevance?

They have no credibility at all.

 

[Yerda]

Anecdotal evidence has no relevance.

I think the experiences of people regarding (among others) are perfectly relevant to what I said originally.

Why don't you say the same thing about those who believe they have been abducted by aliens? Or harmed by vaccines? Or believe the moon landing was a hoax?

I don't know any personally. I don't know of anyone I trust (respect, or admire intellectually) who believes these things. I think the moon landing conspiracies are demonstrably bonkers and the anti-vac crue are horribly misinformed regarding medical science.

You certainly seem to be suggesting that religious belief should be considered on the basis that a lot of people have believed it.

I can't see how you can take that from the quotes you repeated. I never said, suggested or implied anything other than my state of mind regarding certain peoples' experiences. I'm not trying to convince you of anything at all.

 

[Yerda]

They have no credibility at all.

Other people's experiences have no credibility?

 

[Tiberius]

I think the experiences of people regarding (among others) are perfectly relevant to what I said originally.

No. Just no. Anecdotal evidence never has been and never will be reliable in any way whatsoever.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence
http://blog.minitab.com/blog/adventures-in-statistics/why-anecdotal-evidence-is-unreliable
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-anecdotal-evidence-can-undermine-scientific-results/
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-role-of-anecdotes-in-science-based-medicine/

So stop using it.

I don't know any personally. I don't know of anyone I trust (respect, or admire intellectually) who believes these things. I think the moon landing conspiracies are demonstrably bonkers and the anti-vac crue are horribly misinformed regarding medical science.

Ever wonder why they believe that stuff? Because they are convinced by anecdotal evidence. "My grandfather's best friend's cousin's dad worked on the film set with Stanley Kubrick when he faked the moon landings, so I know it was faked." "My little boy had a vaccine and got sick a few days later, but my daughter was never vaccinated and she has never been sick. So vaccines cause illness!"

Anecdotal evidence is worth crap.

I can't see how you can take that from the quotes you repeated. I never said, suggested or implied anything other than my state of mind regarding certain peoples' experiences. I'm not trying to convince you of anything at all.

Then why did you ever bring up the fact that lots of people believe?

 

[Tiberius]

Other people's experiences have no credibility?

No.

If you want credibility, you need a controlled scientific experiment.

Sure, your grandfather might have smoked a pack a day and lived to 97, but you can't use this to show that smoking doesn't harm your health, because you didn't control for other possible causes. One person's experience means nothing more than the fact that they had that experience.