Evidence

[Trailblazer]

Because communication is a physical process.

No, not communication between God and the Messengers...
God communicates to the Messengers through the Holy Spirit, which is not physical.

 

[Trailblazer]

Awwww! How about we take a stroll along the beach and you can tell me about your cats and I'll tell about my dog, and NO discussion of religion?

I might take you up on that if you lived closer to me.... I have a house on the beach, but right now it's a rental.
And NO, there would be no discussion of religion. That gets boring really fast.

Careful, you'll get me kicked out of the Atheist Guild!

I like a man with a sense of humor.... There is too much seriousness around here.
Lol, we wouldn't want that to happen, now would we?
Warning! I have converted two atheists to believers on another forum!

 

[Subduction Zone]

The same of what I think about the majority of Muslims, who are indifferent to it.


There's plenty of data showing what is happening in the world due to usury.
The distribution of wealth in the world is getting worse all the time.
Do you deny that the increase in global emmissions coincides with the industrial revolution?
Do you deny how it was financed?

So what? Do you think that ending credit would cure that? Well it probably would since it would undoubtedly cause a massive worldwide economic crash. Like it or not humanity as we know it is dependent upon credit. It seems that you want to go back to the days before any modern conveniences. The world cannot support 8 billion people that way. I doubt if it could support half that population. I don't know about you, but I believe that massive genocide is a bad idea.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, not communication between God and the Messengers...
God communicates to the Messengers through the Holy Spirit, which is not physical.

You just contradicted yourself again. One more time, communication is a physical process. That is rather clear. A non-physical entity, no matter what silly label you put on it cannot communicate with the physical.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Messengers know God by direct experience through the Holy Spirit, but obviously that is not the same kind of empirical evidence that is used in science and law.

Since direct experience with the Holy Spirit can never be verified, whether Baha'u'llah had that or not is either believed or not believed, based upon evidence that indicates that He was who He claimed to be, a Messenger of God.

Holy Spirit is not evidence. I rember the feeling of warmth in heart and "inspired" good thouths. Holy Spirit doesn't tell you directly and clearly it's God. It's a learned religious interpretation.

 

[F1fan]

The same of what I think about the majority of Muslims, who are indifferent to it.

Thats bad luck. It probably makes you question your own interpretation and beliefs since the vast majority aren’t as afraid as you are.

There's plenty of data showing what is happening in the world due to usury.
The distribution of wealth in the world is getting worse all the time.

It sounds like you are critical of poor reasoning by those who get too deep in debt, and capitalism that has no ethical basis for limiting credit as if they are parents. Let’s note the liability of poor reasoning, something that religious belief exploits.

Do you deny that the increase in global emmissions coincides with the industrial revolution?
Do you deny how it was financed?

Two different issues. Pollution was understood to be a huge problem back in the 1970s. However politics and greed has been able to push back on policies that would curb emissions. This is still happening today with more conservative Christians being less rational in dealing with facts, data, and experts in science. I argue this denial is related to how evangelical Christians deny evolution and have contempt for science across the board. Here again religion spoils the capacity for reason by teaching bad and destructive cognitive habits.

Me as an atheist i value and accept what experts in science report. This includes climate science experts.

 

[muhammad_isa]

You really need to stop constantly jumping to black and white fallacies. it makes you far too easy to refute.

It is easy to refute anything, if you so desire.
The fact that most people would rather steer clear of such a topic just makes it even easier to criticise.

It is not "economically necessary" .. I doubt those at the bottom of the ladder would think so.

Some examples..

UK mean is $290,754 and median is $131,522

I won't tell you my worth, other than it is well below the median.

USA mean is $505,421 and median is $79,274

Hmm, that distribution is very skewed .. care to explain?
and finally..

Haiti mean is $767 and median is $193

Tell them that it is "economically necessary"

 

[Exaltist Ethan]

Honestly, religion shouldn't be about evidence anyway, it should be concerned on how to improve society. Whether or not the Baha'i prophets are manifestations doesn't change the fact that the Baha'i Faith is a very progressive Islamic-inspired religion that is trying to improve the world in many ways. Honestly, the Baha'i Faith is doing more to create God than even Earthseed, evidence of which is all around us. The fact that the prophet of your religion is humble enough to say that one day there will be another, to continue the progression of humanity, is rather remarkable. I call myself as someone part of Earthseed because of my associated theologies, pantheism and syntheism, but as organized religion goes, the Baha'i Faith does almost everything right -- but not to affirm but to create the God we're all looking forwards to. This is why before settling on Earthseed I called myself post-Baha'i, as I see much of my theology influenced by the religion, but I'm also more than that, and incorporate theologies that are foreign to the Baha'is. I believe very much so that Baha'u'llah experienced God on his conquest for divinity, but I reject that he was the only person, among a succession of prophets, who can do this. I see all people are doing the same, most of which just doesn't call it God.

 

[PearlSeeker]

No, not communication between God and the Messengers...
God communicates to the Messengers through the Holy Spirit, which is not physical.

According to Messengers God can (and did) make changes in physical world. He is supposed to communicate through physical manifestations: audible voice, angels, pillar of cloud, pillar of fire...

 

[muhammad_isa]

So what? Do you think that ending credit would cure that? Well it probably would since it would undoubtedly cause a massive worldwide economic crash. Like it or not humanity as we know it is dependent upon credit. It seems that you want to go back to the days before any modern conveniences..

I haven't discussed what the solution to our problems might be..
..other than mankind remembering God more often, of course.

I am pointing out how we got here.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

you will not find more happy and optimistic people

That rings hollow after seeing so much negativity from several of you. Also, see below for what happy and optimistic looks like from my side. I'm not looking to trade life for one that considers material pleasure a fault.

That one does not want much to do with the materialism, that is the cancer of humanity, does not mean we are not loyal, loving and happy citizens promoting the good of all humanity.

Is this you being happy and optimistic calling the only reality we'll ever know or experience cancer? Your loss. The world is a pretty nice place. Who told you otherwise and why did you believe them? Have you heard of joie de vivre?

Do you really know what the world has to offer? Did you explore it yourself ever? Was it an unpleasant experience if you did? Seems like it. We saw the auroras in Iceland and watched the Leonids from a rooftop in Tunisia in the desert, where I also enjoyed a hookah with some local gentlemen when the sun went down (It was Ramadan, and believe it or not, there was a crescent moon in the sky beside Venus as the sun set). Have you ever seen the stupas in Borobudur or the clock in the square in Prague? The pyramids at Tulum? Have you ever celebrated Chinese New Year in China? I found that form of materialism to be quite spiritual. By the way, do you know what they call Chinese food in China? Food.

Have you ever been to a concert? Have you ever learned to play an instrument or to sing? This is my wife and me playing an old Temptations song you might know in a restaurant and serenading diners. She's on bass and vocals, and I'm on guitar; the "drummer is electronic." This is my materialistic world as you describe it. I find it to be quite spiritual, as I hope you can hear in this. As I said, spirituality for me is a sense of connection and belonging, a warm feeling, often admixed with a sense of mystery, awe, and gratitude. Does it get any better than improvising musically with your wife for a crowd of appreciative diners? Or playing our acoustic instruments on a beach in Tahiti for other tourists at an all-inclusive there, where we made friends with a couple from your country, who came to mine to marry in Vegas (we were their witnesses), and whose kids we watched grow up in pictures? I just wanted to show you what you are turning your back on, what you dismiss with the wave of a hand and a sniff:

God does not exist because God does not act like Superman

Correct. Neither exist because neither have any of the three requirements for existence, namely, to exist in some time and some place and affect and be affected by the other things that exist, the collection of which can be called reality or nature.

God does not exist because God is not physical..... God does not exist because God is not evident to the senses..... You call that logical?

Yes. If your deity is not physical and doesn't interact with the physical, it has all of the same characteristics as the things you agree don't exist. This is how we decide such matters. Incidentally, you claim that your god is evident to the senses when you point to a book that you say channeled it. If it actually did that, then you might have evidence for it in black and white, but then it could no longer be said to have never modified reality at any time or in any place. It did it in 19th century Persia.

If you knew what God is you would know that is not logical

But I *DO* know what your god is. You don't.

I am completely confused.

I know. You contradict yourself a lot. But that can happen if one holds a false belief about reality that is contradicted by evidence and one is making up things as they go along. The creationists have the same problem - defending a position that is contradicted by evidence.

Things that are real in the material world require different standards of evidence than things that do not exist in the material world.

There is nothing else but the things in nature. If a god is among them, then it too is part of nature.

As the scriptures say, "this too shall pass." So enjoy it while it lasts, since soon it will be no more.

Thanks. What a long strange trip it's been.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Two different issues. Pollution was understood to be a huge problem back in the 1970s. However politics and greed has been able to push back on policies that would curb emissions..

That is not answering my questions..

Do you deny that the increase in global emissions coincides with the industrial revolution?
Do you deny how it was financed?

Me as an atheist i value and accept what experts in science report. This includes climate science experts.

Yes, I am aware of that .. I also value experts opinions.

 

[Trailblazer]

One more time, communication is a physical process. That is rather clear. A non-physical entity, no matter what silly label you put on it cannot communicate with the physical.

That is simply what you believe....My beliefs differ.
A non-physical entity, God, can communicate to a physical entity, the Messenger, through the Holy Spirit, and since the Messenger is both human and divine, He can understand that communication and relay it to other humans in writing so that they can understand it.

 

[Trailblazer]

Holy Spirit is not evidence. I rember the feeling of warmth in heart and "inspired" good thouths. Holy Spirit doesn't tell you directly and clearly it's God. It's a learned religious interpretation.

The Holy Spirit is not evidence to us humans, but it is evidence to the Messengers since they know it is God speaking to them.

 

[Valjean]

The context of my comment was this:

Valjean said: Yet people do agree that germs cause disease and the Earth is round. How did this common data come about? I'd say evidence.
If there is evidence for God, why does a similar consensus not obtain?

Trailblazer said: Regarding the consensus, even though the existence of God cannot be proven, most people in the world believe in God, around 93% of people. The fact that all these people don't have the same conceptions of God is irrelevant to the point. The point is that they believe in a God or gods, so they are not atheists or agnostics. Only 7% of the world population is atheists and agnostics.

So, my only point was that there is a ''consensus' among most of the people in the world that God exists. I never said "God exists" is true because many or most people believe that God exists since that would be the fallacy of ad populum.

OK. You've restated what I initially asked about. To clarify, I'm asking what the significance of their belief in God/s is. We all agree that theism is and has been widespread, but how does this relate to the thread's subject: Evidence.

Faith is necessary for belief when something cannot be proven. God cannot be proven to exist so we can have faith that God exists in the absence of proof or we choose not to believe.

That's a very broad definition, unworkably broad. It would render faith-based my belief in a heliocentric Earth the germ theory. My take:
Faith is poorly evidenced or unevidenced belief.
Knowledge is well evidenced belief.
Proof is the percentage of alcohol in a beverage, or a solution in mathematics.

Although there is no proof that God exists, when we have faith coupled with good evidence we know that God exists.
I know that God exists.

And I agree with this. The rub lies in the "good evidence." Thus far, the only evidence I've seen cited is subjective evidence; or logically or factually flawed evidence. This subjective evidence may be very clear and convincing to the individual, but it's epistemically useless. It can't be used in a thread to support or refute God or religion.

What we're asking for is Objective evidence, which can be examined, tested and evaluated. Your subjective evidence is like trying to grasp water.

 

[Valjean]

What would be 'proper evidence' for God is only your personal opinion. I have a different personal opinion.
In my opinion religion is the proper evidence for God. In fact, religion is the only evidence for God!
Take it or leave it.

OK, then. Pastafarianism is legitimate evidence of God. And I suppose hallucinations are legitimate evidence of flying pink elephants, as well.
How is a belief actual evidence of the thing believed?

Again, objective evidence consists of tangible facts that can be examined and evaluated. God is not a tangible fact, and can't be examined, tested, confirmed or refuted. Like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, he can be discussed, claims can be made about him and testimony cited, but it leads nowhere, epistemically.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is simply what you believe....My beliefs differ.
A non-physical entity, God, can communicate to a physical entity, the Messenger, through the Holy Spirit, and since the Messenger is both human and divine, He can understand that communication and relay it to other humans in writing so that they can understand it.

No, it is what we can determine. There is strong evidence that shows that thought is just a physical process. Evidence to the contrary does not seem to exist. Can you think of any reliable evidence that shows otherwise?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I haven't discussed what the solution to our problems might be..
..other than mankind remembering God more often, of course.

I am pointing out how we got here.

That means that your argument is rather pointless.

Can you make a proper argument for your beliefs at all?

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

Such a claim could possibly be tested by genetics. All that you would need to do is to tell the world what you expect to see if your claim was true, and even more important what you would to see if your claims are false. Publishing these criteria before you did the tests would lend your test more credibility and also allow others to offer corrections and tweaks ahead of time. Then once it has been discussed among the appropriate experts in the fields you could go ahead and run your study.

Aristotle believed that the Jews came from India: “These Jews are derived from the Indian philosophers,” The RM-124 gene may provide evidence of such a link. This gene is found widely among the Indian Yadava community; and also among 2 percent of Ashkenazi Jews. A possibility is that the original home of the Hebrews was in the Indus Valley. That would resolve many a question on the historicity of the Exodus: (1) The parting of the Yam Suf could be the Indus River; (2) The Sinai volcano could be Taftan; (3) Paran could be the place of this name near Isfahan; (4) the second Yam Suf could be the Shatt al-Arab. Moses may have led the Exodus from the Indus Valley and carried the RM-124 gene that is found among the Ashkenazi Jews.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Honestly, religion shouldn't be about evidence anyway, it should be concerned on how to improve society. Whether or not the Baha'i prophets are manifestations doesn't change the fact that the Baha'i Faith is a very progressive Islamic-inspired religion that is trying to improve the world in many ways. Honestly, the Baha'i Faith is doing more to create God than even Earthseed, evidence of which is all around us. The fact that the prophet of your religion is humble enough to say that one day there will be another, to continue the progression of humanity, is rather remarkable. I call myself as someone part of Earthseed because of my associated theologies, pantheism and syntheism, but as organized religion goes, the Baha'i Faith does almost everything right -- but not to affirm but to create the God we're all looking forwards to. This is why before settling on Earthseed I called myself post-Baha'i, as I see much of my theology influenced by the religion, but I'm also more than that, and incorporate theologies that are foreign to the Baha'is. I believe very much so that Baha'u'llah experienced God on his conquest for divinity, but I reject that he was the only person, among a succession of prophets, who can do this. I see all people are doing the same, most of which just doesn't call it God.

I agree. But it is the OP that started the "I have evidence" claims and then failed to demonstrate any. He still seems to think that dogma is evidence.

Simply say "I believe . . . " and people are likely to leave you alone. Claim to have evidence and then use that as an excuse to apply the immoral teachings of one's religion to others and there will be demands for the claimed evidence. So far: