If God existed would there be proof?

[lukethethird]

That is very similar to a climate denier who claims there is no evidence, and that "the scientists" are bearing false witness.

It is not that hard for us to convince ourselves to believe one thing or another. That is part of the denial process.

I grant you, that it can work both ways.
i.e. both believer and disbeliever can fool themselves

..but somebody who repeatedly claims that there is no evidence of a supreme being is letting themselves down, imo.
A person who is not particularly religious, is another thing.

There is reams of evidence. It is just that you want to claim that there is reasonable doubt, and please yourselves.

What difference does it make to anything that matters if there is a supreme being or not, I mean, who cares?

 

[Kfox]

That is very similar to a climate denier who claims there is no evidence, and that "the scientists" are bearing false witness.

No; there is empirical evidence of climate change, there has never been any empirical evidence of God.

It is not that hard for us to convince ourselves to believe one thing or another. That is part of the denial process.

Sounds like what you’re doing right now; insisting that if empirical evidence were presented, it would be ignored so why bother. (as if you could if you wanted to)

..but somebody who repeatedly claims that there is no evidence of a supreme being is letting themselves down, imo.
A person who is not particularly religious, is another thing.

That's why I said empirical evidence; what you guys call evidence is a bit of a stretch most of the times; the fact that we exist is evidence to some of you guys.

There is reams of evidence. It is just that you want to claim that there is reasonable doubt, and please yourselves.

Then by all means; present the empirical evidence.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Then by all means; present the empirical evidence.

That's all you can do, you guys..
..ask us to show you "G-d in the flesh", which is impossible.

Empirical evidence, or not empirical evidence, many people still deny climate-change and/or its implications.
You can of course claim that they are ignorant, but now we are just getting into the realm of "tis" .. "tisn't" .. "tis" .. "tisn't".

..and that's pretty uninformative, I would say.

 

[muhammad_isa]

No; there is empirical evidence of climate change, there has never been any empirical evidence of God..

While officials in many countries, including the US, are now expected to raise interest rates to try to rein in price increases, Mr Malpass warned higher borrowing costs could hurt economic activity - especially in weaker economies.

"The problem with rate hikes is it hurts people that need floating rate money... and that's usually new businesses, women-owned businesses, developing country businesses," Mr Malpass said.

Separately, the World Economic Forum (WEF) warned that divergent economic recoveries were making it harder to collaborate on global challenges such as climate change.

"Widening disparities within and between countries will not only make it more difficult to control Covid-19 and its variants, but will also risk stalling, if not reversing, joint action against shared threats that the world cannot afford to overlook," the WEF said in its annual global risks report on Tuesday.
World Bank warns global economy faces grim outlook

As I say, climate-change cannot be solved without a change to the global financial system..

Danny Sriskandarajah, Oxfam GB's chief executive, said the charity timed the report each year to coincide with Davos to attract the attention of economic, business and political elites.

"This year, what's happening is off the scale," he said. "There's been a new billionaire created almost every day during this pandemic, meanwhile 99% of the world's population are worse off because of lockdowns, lower international trade, less international tourism, and as a result of that, 160 million more people have been pushed into poverty."

"Something is deeply flawed with our economic system," he added.
Wealth of world's 10 richest men doubled in pandemic, Oxfam says

 

[muhammad_isa]

What difference does it make to anything that matters if there is a supreme being or not, I mean, who cares?

I care. I care about the future of this planet.
We all have to live here .. at least, for the time being.

 

[Sheldon]

That's all you can do, you guys..
..ask us to show you "G-d in the flesh", which is impossible.

Empirical evidence, or not empirical evidence, many people still deny climate-change and/or its implications.
You can of course claim that they are ignorant, but now we are just getting into the realm of "tis" .. "tisn't" .. "tis" .. "tisn't".

..and that's pretty uninformative, I would say.

If anyone is denying the fact that global temperatures are steadily rising, and have been for decades, and in direct line with the increase in the amount of carbon emissions globally, then I think it has to go beyond ignorance of the empirical evidence. It seems more like wilful denial of the facts to me. Just like those who deny the overwhelming empirical evidence supporting species evolution. though often ignorance is a large factor there.

 

[Sheldon]

As I say, climate-change cannot be solved without a change to the global financial system..

Suitably vague, where you lost me was when you asserted it could only be solved by religion, and that abolishing usury was the answer. Neither of which of course you have been able to remotely demonstrate any evidence for, empirical or otherwise.

 

[setarcos]

So why should I trust you when you go around making claims about everybody, based on your extremely limited interactions with everybody?

My friend, if I may be allowed to call you that, you should learn to pick your battles.
I was using hyperbole. Not being literal to the case.
But, since I enjoy discussing things with others, for the sake of arguing the case....
Here is my reasoning...
1) Given that you and I are both human beings it may be assumed that we have similarly functioning organs. Heart, liver, kidneys, and brain etc.
2) Given the fact that the brain has been studied umpteen times by many different specialists in many different controlled environments it has been generally concluded that they function (normally) in the same manner. A similar ability for rational thought, abstract thinking, similar interpretation of sensory input, similar senses, similar susceptibility for irrational thought, similar locations in the brain for similar functions etc. Human beings for all intents and purposes function similarly. We are human so we may legitimately project from small case studies and self examination our understanding of what it means to be human onto those we haven't even met simply by virtue of their being human. If we couldn't do this, human civilization as we know it would not be possible. Communication would break down to such a point that large scale projects and complex systems requiring cooperation would be impossible. Our health care systems would be impossible and have abominable success rates for cure. Large scale projection from small scale samplings of similar entities is not only possible, it is necessary.
3) Considering the definition of "Worldview" - I took this from dictionary.com - [a particular philosophy of life or conception of the world.] Unless you are in a coma or some sort of automaton who's functions are performed according to some other entities directions, who itself has a worldview and acts according to it, then you must have a worldview. To be conscious is to have a worldview. Even a sea slug - limited as it is - has a worldview. Though it could be argued that we're getting closer to automatons there. The point is....to have any point is to have a worldview. To point out to someone else that you have no worldview is itself your worldview and self defeating as a tenable position.
Your mistaking the specific for the general. Its impossible for someone to know your specific worldview until you express it. But to know that everyone has a worldview in general is very possible.
Balls in your court.

 

[setarcos]

I strongly disagree with much of what you say. but I love your Avatar. That is one of my favorite movies of all time.

Thanks..mine too.
Strongly huh. Well that's why I'm here...to discuss my viewpoints and hopefully learn from others.

 

[ppp]

Thanks..mine too.
Strongly huh. Well that's why I'm here...to discuss my viewpoints and hopefully learn from others.

Not sure if you responded to this. If you didn't want to, don't worry about it
https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/if-god-existed-would-there-be-proof.253769/page-34#post-7515220

 

[muhammad_isa]

..you lost me was when you asserted it could only be solved by religion, and that abolishing usury was the answer. Neither of which of course you have been able to remotely demonstrate any evidence for, empirical or otherwise.

Hmm, like I said .. those that deny climate-change carry on denying until it is affecting their lives.
You can carry on supporting a usurious system, as it suits you, until I am in a position to say "I told you so".
A bit late then, don't you think?

It would be better for you to study economics and the implications of usury. It is no surprise that as the world becomes more in a state of imbalance, calamities will occur at an increasing rate.

When a nation begins to regularly die from poverty, people become more untrustworthy and corrupt. Mental health becomes weak, and people often turn to violence.

It's a bit like a sinking ship .. some turn to G-d, and some turn to fraud and corruption, and some just die.

 

[setarcos]

Not sure if you responded to this. If you didn't want to, don't worry about it
https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/if-god-existed-would-there-be-proof.253769/page-34#post-7515220

Post 34 of this thread? Seems to be about the problem of evil in the world is this correct? What's your viewpoint so I may discuss it with you.?

 

[ppp]

Post 34 of this thread? Seems to be about the problem of evil in the world is this correct? What's your viewpoint so I may discuss it with you.?

Sorry about the link. Post 680 on page 34 of this thread

 

[Kfox]

My friend, if I may be allowed to call you that, you should learn to pick your battles.
I was using hyperbole. Not being literal to the case.
But, since I enjoy discussing things with others, for the sake of arguing the case....
Here is my reasoning...
1) Given that you and I are both human beings it may be assumed that we have similarly functioning organs. Heart, liver, kidneys, and brain etc.
2) Given the fact that the brain has been studied umpteen times by many different specialists in many different controlled environments it has been generally concluded that they function (normally) in the same manner. A similar ability for rational thought, abstract thinking, similar interpretation of sensory input, similar senses, similar susceptibility for irrational thought, similar locations in the brain for similar functions etc. Human beings for all intents and purposes function similarly. We are human so we may legitimately project from small case studies and self examination our understanding of what it means to be human onto those we haven't even met simply by virtue of their being human. If we couldn't do this, human civilization as we know it would not be possible. Communication would break down to such a point that large scale projects and complex systems requiring cooperation would be impossible. Our health care systems would be impossible and have abominable success rates for cure. Large scale projection from small scale samplings of similar entities is not only possible, it is necessary.
3) Considering the definition of "Worldview" - I took this from dictionary.com - [a particular philosophy of life or conception of the world.] Unless you are in a coma or some sort of automaton who's functions are performed according to some other entities directions, who itself has a worldview and acts according to it, then you must have a worldview. To be conscious is to have a worldview. Even a sea slug - limited as it is - has a worldview. Though it could be argued that we're getting closer to automatons there. The point is....to have any point is to have a worldview. To point out to someone else that you have no worldview is itself your worldview and self defeating as a tenable position.
Your mistaking the specific for the general. Its impossible for someone to know your specific worldview until you express it. But to know that everyone has a worldview in general is very possible.
Balls in your court.

So we are understanding each other, perhaps you can give me an example of a "Worldview" a person might have, and is it possible for two different people to have the same worldview?

 

[setarcos]

• Wars...rumors of wars...constantly. Check - trivial prediction. could rightfully substitute 'farts' for 'wars'
• Lovers of self. Check - trivial prediction.
• Increase of morality made "relative". Check - citation needed
• Increase of hatred for each other. Check - how are you measuring this? the news?
• What was once considered abnormal...made normal. Check - trivial prediction.
• Exponential increase in knowledge, ironically making everyone stupider. Check - How is this not a '"Back in my day..."?
• Increasing abuse of the world we were given charge over. Check - trivial prediction.
• Lies made to be truth and truth made to be lies. Check - trivial prediction.
• Check, check, check, its not looking good. I keep checking. - needs more rigor

The key here is not to think locally but globally and collectively. Its hardly worth noting if the signs were localized while the rest of the world keeps ticking away blissfully ignorant of their own immanent demise. I think its correct to say that the signs were to be recognized on a global scale when that time comes. At least to those who take notice.
I think Christ was speaking globally on this subject, not locally and the signs were to be taken collectively not in isolation. However it is also noted that each generation and individual take note of the signs of their own time and be prepared. The end may not come universally for everyone at the same time before it certainly comes for each one individually.
From a Christian perspective the signs given will be of note to those who take notice. There will always be in every generation those who criticize others who act according to their faith driven intuition. The bible says no one will know the time of the universal "end of days", yet in every generation signs are given in that generation to be prepared and those who take notice prepare. Whether the end comes for the entirety of humanity or just for themselves individually at any point in time. Christs main point was to be prepared lest "he come like a thief in the night" and catch you unprepared. That is the religious perspective.
As for each sign...imo
(1) There's always been wars yes. And rumors yes. But only in the last century or so has has these things become of global concern. With our global communications, rumors of wars are a constant background noise for even the remotest outposts in the artic should they care to pay attention. Also wars in our era are on a different scale now. A war resulting in global conflict is a very real possibility now....again, within the past few generations. And such wars have very real possibilities of ending civilization as we know it on a global scale. Countries these days can mobilize their armed forces and begin conflict within a matter of days now, not the months and sometimes years that the participants of centuries past had to have.
Also of note is the fact that global communications such as the internet has exponentially increased the amount of rumor, e.g. false news stories, that can be generated and disseminated resulting in an increased level of anxiety in society. A rumor today can very possibly start a war.
(2) Lovers of self, and increased relative morality....again, on a global scale, the availability of self indulgent perversions, and dissemination of immorality as entertainment via, news, movies, printed material, and the internet has exploded just within my lifetime.
Just a small dip into the pool of celebrity behavior and promotion such as Miley Cyrus touting her pansexuality, RuPaul promoting anything goes as long as you "love yourself", both random picks that crossed my mind, and (pick a contemporary rapper) spouting off about the woes of society and how we all need to change while at the same time happily rapping about their "gansta" lifestyle, cursing their way to the top of the charts as entertainment. All of which testify to their increasing popularity by their continuously sold out concerts, popular shows, and other merchandise producing ever more mountains of cash and popular accolades.
Or how about the relatively new promotion of gender neutrality as a goal and not a product of abnormality, or transgenders and transsexuals transmogrified into a new gender and promoted not as an attempt at a cure for a disease but considered somehow normal.
Consider the alphabet soup of LGBTQ+ descriptions which render any sense of knowing who is what rendering the necessity of the equivalent of a ten page questionnaire be given to each other just to see if your sexually compatible before dating which is making human identity a circus of confusion.
Almost any sadistic, masochistic, hedonistic fetish, drug, ideology, or entertainment that purportedly doesn't knowingly hurt or kill someone else is expanding in their allowance and acceptance as a relativistic normalcy.
(3) Hatred is rampant among people these days. I see this locally via personal experience and globally via various media outlets. Ironically I see an increase in allowance of other peoples relative personal preferences while at the same time an increase in hatred for those same peoples preferences due to a lag between a persons ability to allow for versus acceptance of these preferences resulting in sporadic explosions of violent outbursts. Keep in mind your dealing with peoples behaviors here, one can observe and intuit but it is very hard to accurately quantify.
(4) What about abnormality made normal is trivial?
(5) There is no (back in my day) comparison. Knowledge has been consistently increasing throughout mankind's history but only about the late 18th to early 20th century did our increase in knowledge versus the time we gather that knowledge did we start to do so on a steepening exponential curve.
(6) How is our increasing ability to abuse and even destroy the world on a global scale trivial? Its not a prediction either. Its a real ongoing event in the present.
(7) The advent of digitization and global dissemination via networks has given mankind historically unprecedented abilities to create verisimilitude out of falsehood. This too is not a prediction. It is real and happening daily. We now have the ability to digitize the depiction of almost any event with only the slightest hint of artificiality and then only detectable by sophisticated analysis. How is that trivial?

 

[setarcos]

So we are understanding each other, perhaps you can give me an example of a "Worldview" a person might have, and is it possible for two different people to have the same worldview?

One persons worldview may include an existent God. Another persons worldview may be an approach to existence and consequent behavior as if there is no existent God.
Someone else's worldview may not include any thought on the matter since they've never thought about it nor been made to think about it.
In that case a worldview would be any persons conscious awareness of action due to some known or unknown motivating factor regulated by their evolved conscious preferences and comprehensions.
I see no reason why two different people may ultimately, though not likely, have the same worldview. Such a worldview could be expressed in general agreements however due to inherent communicative barriers of finite creatures it would be impossible to express each others worldviews specifically and definitively
Its not likely to have a specific worldview as someone else since every know and unknown factor causing the development of your specific world view would have to be equal or similar enough to warrant such a thing. This would include similar thinking ability, biological make up, environmental exposures etc. Identical twins raised in identical environments perhaps would come closest. And yet there may be a quantum indeterminacy factor which would render identical thinking impossible.

 

[ppp]

The key here is not to think locally but globally and collectively. Its hardly worth noting if the signs were localized while the rest of the world keeps ticking away blissfully ignorant of their own immanent demise. I think its correct to say that the signs were to be recognized on a global scale when that time comes. At least to those who take notice.

Check. Global thinking cap is on and engaged.

I think Christ was speaking globally on this subject, not locally and the signs were to be taken collectively not in isolation. However it is also noted that each generation and individual take note of the signs of their own time and be prepared. The end may not come universally for everyone at the same time before it certainly comes for each one individually.

All this says is that things are going to end for humanity at some point in time. Maybe as individuals, maybe as small groups. Maybe as a whole. But it is going to happen.


The thing is that this is true whether there is a god or not. It is a trivial statement.

From a Christian perspective the signs given will be of note to those who take notice. There will always be in every generation those who criticize others who act according to their faith driven intuition.

And there will be those who act according to their faith driven intuition who deserve criticism. And sometimes prosecution. Including those whom you might consider to be "real Christians."

The bible says no one will know the time of the universal "end of days", yet in every generation signs are given in that generation to be prepared and those who take notice prepare. Whether the end comes for the entirety of humanity or just for themselves individually at any point in time. Christs main point was to be prepared lest "he come like a thief in the night" and catch you unprepared. That is the religious perspective.

There are thousands of such prediction from Christians alone. At least 100 from my lifetime. Heck, even Jesus claimed that the it was going to happen before all of the people he was talking to had died. Nada.


If you keep predicting the end of the world, then you are going to inevitably be correct...one day.

Again, trivial.

As for each sign...imo

(1) There's always been wars yes. And rumors yes. But only in the last century or so has has these things become of global concern. With our global communications, rumors of wars are a constant background noise for even the remotest outposts in the artic should they care to pay attention. Also wars in our era are on a different scale now. A war resulting in global conflict is a very real possibility now....again, within the past few generations. And such wars have very real possibilities of ending civilization as we know it on a global scale. Countries these days can mobilize their armed forces and begin conflict within a matter of days now, not the months and sometimes years that the participants of centuries past had to have.

Also of note is the fact that global communications such as the internet has exponentially increased the amount of rumor, e.g. false news stories, that can be generated and disseminated resulting in an increased level of anxiety in society. A rumor today can very possibly start a war.

Nah. The original writings just meant everywhere they knew about that people live. That is all that you mean too. If we colonize the moon, the next guy will include that. If we colonize Mars, the guy after will include that. If we colonize Epsilon Eridani, then the guy after that will include that. None of you mean anything different than "where all the humans live".

(2) Lovers of self, and increased relative morality....again, on a global scale, the availability of self indulgent perversions, and dissemination of immorality as entertainment via, news, movies, printed material, and the internet has exploded just within my lifetime.

Do you know what relative morality is?

"Moral relativism is the view that moral judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint (for instance, that of a culture or a historical period) and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others."

Your moral judgements are only true relative to what you claim that a god says.

Just a small dip into the pool of celebrity behavior and promotion such as Miley Cyrus touting her pansexuality, RuPaul promoting anything goes as long as you "love yourself", both random picks that crossed my mind, and (pick a contemporary rapper) spouting off about the woes of society and how we all need to change while at the same time happily rapping about their "gansta" lifestyle, cursing their way to the top of the charts as entertainment. All of which testify to their increasing popularity by their continuously sold out concerts, popular shows, and other merchandise producing ever more mountains of cash and popular accolades.

This is just an "old man yells at clouds" rant. You have yet to demonstrate that any of that is actually immoral, or more fundamentally, that you have a valid standard of morality.

Or how about the relatively new promotion of gender neutrality as a goal and not a product of abnormality, or transgenders and transsexuals transmogrified into a new gender and promoted not as an attempt at a cure for a disease but considered somehow normal.

Consider the alphabet soup of LGBTQ+ descriptions which render any sense of knowing who is what rendering the necessity of the equivalent of a ten page questionnaire be given to each other just to see if your sexually compatible before dating which is making human identity a circus of confusion.

Just because you are confused doesn't mean everyone else is, Have you ever made the effort to understand To suspend your disbelief and make a concerted effort? Or do you do just to this self-righteous spiel? If so, I would argue that what you are doing is the epitome of the "love yourself" attitude that you decry.

Almost any sadistic, masochistic, hedonistic fetish, drug, ideology, or entertainment that purportedly doesn't knowingly hurt or kill someone else is expanding in their allowance and acceptance as a relativistic normalcy.

Okay. See my last comment.

(3) Hatred is rampant among people these days. I see this locally via personal experience and globally via various media outlets. Ironically I see an increase in allowance of other peoples relative personal preferences while at the same time an increase in hatred for those same peoples preferences due to a lag between a persons ability to allow for versus acceptance of these preferences resulting in sporadic explosions of violent outbursts. Keep in mind your dealing with peoples behaviors here, one can observe and intuit but it is very hard to accurately quantify.

I am reading your post and am finding it difficult not to see this as irony. Hatred is certainly rampant among people these days. Your last three paragraphs are slam full of it.

(4) What about abnormality made normal is trivial?

Abnormality. Like what? Blue eyes? Left handed people. Adult lactose tolerance?

You do not mean 'abnormality'. What you mean is people of whom you disapprove who are a low percentage of the population.

(5) There is no (back in my day) comparison. Knowledge has been consistently increasing throughout mankind's history but only about the late 18th to early 20th century did our increase in knowledge versus the time we gather that knowledge did we start to do so on a steepening exponential curve.

You are talking about Future Shock, as per Toffler. Where changes happen so fast that people find it hard to adjust their perception and incorporate those changes into their worldview. I would suggest that your resistance to all the things above that you deplore is at least partially a case of your Future Shock.

(6) How is our increasing ability to abuse and even destroy the world on a global scale trivial? Its not a prediction either. Its a real ongoing event in the present.

If you are talking about global warming or the way that many countries, such as the US, are criminally mishandling the pandemic, then I agree. If you are talking about that Boomer stuff above, then no.

(7) The advent of digitization and global dissemination via networks has given mankind historically unprecedented abilities to create verisimilitude out of falsehood. This too is not a prediction. It is real and happening daily. We now have the ability to digitize the depiction of almost any event with only the slightest hint of artificiality and then only detectable by sophisticated analysis. How is that trivial?

The activity is not trivial. The prediction of it is.

 

[muhammad_isa]

If you are talking about global warming or the way that many countries, such as the US, are criminally mishandling the pandemic, then I agree. If you are talking about that Boomer stuff above, then no.

A lot of people now seem to agree that climate-change is a serious issue.
However, they are still not ready to admit what is the underlying cause, and the situation gets worse year on year, despite warning signs such as covid.

 

[ppp]

A lot of people now seem to agree that climate-change is a serious issue.
However, they are still not ready to admit what is the underlying cause, and the situation gets worse year on year, despite warning signs such as covid.

How is covid a warning sign of climate change? Or is that just a run-on sentence?

 

[Sheldon]

Hmm, like I said .. those that deny climate-change carry on denying until it is affecting their lives.
You can carry on supporting a usurious system, as it suits you, until I am in a position to say "I told you so".
A bit late then, don't you think?

It would be better for you to study economics and the implications of usury. It is no surprise that as the world becomes more in a state of imbalance, calamities will occur at an increasing rate.

When a nation begins to regularly die from poverty, people become more untrustworthy and corrupt. Mental health becomes weak, and people often turn to violence.

It's a bit like a sinking ship .. some turn to G-d, and some turn to fraud and corruption, and some just die.

1. You still haven't said how religion and not science will solve climate change.
2. You still haven't said what economic system you plan to replace capitalism with, after you destroy it by taking away usury?

These were your claims, so challenging me to "go away and learn about economics" is just hilarious. As is your straw man that I have a preference for usury or capitalism. I may dislike planes, but if someone suggest we destroy one when I'm on it, then I can still see the idiocy of that idea.