Is God an Alternative Fact?

[Shad]

The evidence is your very own existence. This is why we all can confirm for ourselves that God is not a fact. God is a false theory.

Our existence is an axiom. There is no way to confirm our existence without presupposing our existence

 

[Robert Landbeck]

The Final Selection Until now, humanity did not have a way to universally refute, without ambiguity, belief of a deity

I would suggest the real target is not God but religion. For it is religious tradition that makes claims it remains unable to demonstrate 'without ambiguity'. That does not deny the potential for God, it does deny the legitimacy of religion, that without the offer of direct, evidence based proof, cannot be called a fact based construct by any enlightenment criteria. Religion may exist but that does not mean, contrary to religious claims, that God is active in the world as we know it. And as the DoomsDay clock is moved closer to midnight that is unlikely.

Does the all too human, theological construct of tradition have anything to do with God is the real question? Ironically it is presumed by both science and religion that the question cannot be answered. For that would require an absolute, irrefutable PROOF of God. And of course such a proof for faith would destroy the very foundations of the existing faith paradigm and expose religion as a fraud.

Yet contrary to all expectations, prejudice and bias, it appears what has been considered impossible for all of known history has become possible!

The first wholly new interpretation for two thousand years of the moral teachings of Christ has been published. Radically different from anything else we know of from theology or history, this new teaching is predicated upon the 'promise' of a precise, predefined, predictable and repeatable experience of transcendent omnipotence and called 'the first Resurrection' in the sense that the Resurrection of Jesus was intended to demonstrate Gods' willingness to reveal Himself and intervene directly into the natural world for those obedient to His Command, paving the way for access to the power of divine Will and ultimate proof as the justification of faith.

Thus 'faith' becomes an act of trust in action, the search along a defined path of strict self discipline, [a test of the human heart] to discover His 'Word' of a direct individual intervention into the natural world by omnipotent power that confirms divine will, law, command and covenant, which at the same time, realigning our moral compass with the Divine, "correcting human nature by a change in natural law, altering biology, consciousness and human ethical perception beyond all natural evolutionary boundaries." Thus is a man 'created' in the image and likeness of his Creator.

So like it or no, and many won't, a new religious teaching, a wisdom not of human intellectual origin, empirical, transcendent, prescient, testable by faith, meeting all Enlightenment criteria of evidence based causation and definitive proof now exists. Trials are underway to confirm the efficacy of this new teaching. Nothing short of an intellectual, moral and religious/spiritual revolution is getting under way. To test or not to test, that is the question? More info at The Final Freedoms

 

[Blastcat]

The Final Selection Thought Experiment enables everyone to prove to themselves if God is an alternative fact or not. If there is a God that governs our existence as believed, then the two acts of selection (direct and indirect selection) cannot govern our existence which means that everyone can conduct the thought experiment in real life and continue their God given existence. However, if no one can continue their existence without the two acts of selection, then the belief of an all powerful deity (God) that created the universe and governs everything in it is not based on the Nature of our reality.

Final Selection Thought Experiment:
Let's say that one morning upon awakening you find yourself completely paralyzed absent of the ability to select. This means you cannot choose to move your body whatsoever. You cannot choose to take in any fluids. You cannot choose to take in any nourishment. You cannot choose to relieve yourself, et cetera. Nor can you have others indirectly choose for you. The outcome is absolute. The effect of a physical system to no longer have the capacity to make direct selections is certain death.​

Until now, humanity did not have a way to universally refute, without ambiguity, belief of a deity or deities governing our existence. Is it too late to correct ourselves in order to advance our humanity now that we have the knowledge to do so, or will we choose to be ignorant of absolute facts in order to maintain our beliefs in alternative facts? - See more at: How The NY Giants Super Bowl Commemorative Series Was Used To Confirm Science Is Based On "Alternative Facts" History

This is an example of "post-truth" thinking.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Interesting, so far 2 votes for "I accept absolute facts over alternative facts." Zero for the rest.

given that you provide nonsense choices based on a nonsense argument, I didn't see a purpose to casting a vote...

 

[TDselector]

Please. Dumb this one down for me, someone.

Either I have lost fifty IQ points, or my chemo brain has betrayed me, but....
I don't get it.

I didn't get the article in the link, either.

How does the inability to make a choice of any sort prove that there is no God?
I mean, really; strict Calvinism already posits this.

Or perhaps I'm totally off the wall here?

Someone, please, tell me how a thought experiment imagining oneself as a corpse proves that there is no deity?

This (thought experiment) actually happens in real life each time someone becomes a quadriplegic or slips into a coma. This thing we do (select) to exist is not an option for our existence.

 

[Riders]

I wouldn't know how to vote on this because the OP is way way over my head. Its too complicated.
It does seem to me theres another argument going here about proof of the existance of God again.

I believe in the Gods and Goddesses and that nature is God. Ima ware tehres no proof but I don't believe proof to anyone else is neccesary for me to be happy.

I'm an addict and when I mentally reach out to a higher power,my issues get better and I feel better. My mental need for a higher power is actually proof to me that there is a God, because I believe the need is in my mind in my body.

The other proof I have is meditation. I use Zen and my body reacts to meditation some times I have visions, and I feel connected to nature and I feel a chemical reaction to becoming at one and at peace with nature.

Therefore I believe there is proof in a higher power in the way our bodys connect to it chemical reaction, calmness, relaxation, spiritual feeling. For some religions its a natural high. But the higher beings put it in me.

Even though I know youll say its not proof, its not to you, but you cant prove its not proof to me.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

There is no such thing as "alternative facts," you do not establish this idea of "selection," and you establish nothing beyond a correlation, which is based on online research, which is just as flawed as research stating those with Asperger's and other forms of Autism are more likely to be atheist, this being based on "research" the researchers did by visiting an online forum for Asperger's. It made an observation, but it actually demonstrated or proved nothing.

 

[dianaiad]

This (thought experiment) actually happens in real life each time someone becomes a quadriplegic or slips into a coma. This thing we do (select) to exist is not an option for our existence.

....which means what, precisely, in terms of the existence of deity?

Or of OURS?

the problem with that thought experiment, over and above it's intended goal, is this: "I think, therefore I am," whether I can prove to anybody ELSE that I'm thinking or not.

I'm sorry, but....I still don't get it.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Of course it is, but unrestrained anger is not useful and doesn't solve any problems. The inability to step back from one's emotions and evaluate a situation rationally is harmful.

Wow, sounds like you just described most Trump supporters.

 

[Bird123]

The Final Selection Thought Experiment enables everyone to prove to themselves if God is an alternative fact or not. If there is a God that governs our existence as believed, then the two acts of selection (direct and indirect selection) cannot govern our existence which means that everyone can conduct the thought experiment in real life and continue their God given existence. However, if no one can continue their existence without the two acts of selection, then the belief of an all powerful deity (God) that created the universe and governs everything in it is not based on the Nature of our reality.

Final Selection Thought Experiment:
Let's say that one morning upon awakening you find yourself completely paralyzed absent of the ability to select. This means you cannot choose to move your body whatsoever. You cannot choose to take in any fluids. You cannot choose to take in any nourishment. You cannot choose to relieve yourself, et cetera. Nor can you have others indirectly choose for you. The outcome is absolute. The effect of a physical system to no longer have the capacity to make direct selections is certain death.​

Until now, humanity did not have a way to universally refute, without ambiguity, belief of a deity or deities governing our existence. Is it too late to correct ourselves in order to advance our humanity now that we have the knowledge to do so, or will we choose to be ignorant of absolute facts in order to maintain our beliefs in alternative facts? - See more at: How The NY Giants Super Bowl Commemorative Series Was Used To Confirm Science Is Based On "Alternative Facts" History

Are you Looking at existence from within a bottle?? Could you be missing layers? When the facts are not known, people patch the gap with Beliefs. Without Beliefs we would all lock up like my old computer. Science, religion and people all use beliefs. Isn't science the one who corrects when the true facts are discovered??

Funny how new knowledge can change the picture. Now is not the time for you to stop searching for new knowledge in a proclamation that you are right.
The rabbit hole is much deeper.

God may not exist in some people's beliefs. That's OK, On the other hand, the picture will change if one actually bumps into God.

 

[whirlingmerc]

I don't agree with the premise: "However, if no one can continue their existence without the two acts of selection,"

 

[TDselector]

Our existence is an axiom. There is no way to confirm our existence without presupposing our existence

Clever proposition Shad, "confirm (cause) our existence (effect) without presupposing (cause) our existence (effect)". Are you familiar with Cartesian product?

 

[TDselector]

I don't agree with the premise: "However, if no one can continue their existence without the two acts of selection,"

In order to disagree you must first select.

 

[TDselector]

Science, religion and people all use beliefs. Isn't science the one who corrects when the true facts are discovered??

Perhaps you might find this article of interest: IN SEARCH OF FIRST CAUSE

 

[TDselector]

....which means what, precisely, in terms of the existence of deity?

Or of OURS?

the problem with that thought experiment, over and above it's intended goal, is this: "I think, therefore I am," whether I can prove to anybody ELSE that I'm thinking or not.

I'm sorry, but....I still don't get it.

The "thought" experiment is a "safe" way to test the reality of your existence. If you were to test the Nature of your reality directly, the outcome has been predetermined.

 

[TDselector]

I wouldn't know how to vote on this because the OP is way way over my head. Its too complicated.
It does seem to me theres another argument going here about proof of the existance of God again.

I believe in the Gods and Goddesses and that nature is God. Ima ware tehres no proof but I don't believe proof to anyone else is neccesary for me to be happy.

I'm an addict and when I mentally reach out to a higher power,my issues get better and I feel better. My mental need for a higher power is actually proof to me that there is a God, because I believe the need is in my mind in my body.

The other proof I have is meditation. I use Zen and my body reacts to meditation some times I have visions, and I feel connected to nature and I feel a chemical reaction to becoming at one and at peace with nature.

Therefore I believe there is proof in a higher power in the way our bodys connect to it chemical reaction, calmness, relaxation, spiritual feeling. For some religions its a natural high. But the higher beings put it in me.

Even though I know youll say its not proof, its not to you, but you cant prove its not proof to me.

If you must believe, then believe. I once believed in God until I had the opportunity to test the theory only to find it was an alternative fact.

 

[whirlingmerc]

In order to disagree you must first select.

I may select, but so what. A rock can't select and that doesn't mean there is no God. A monkey can select a banana and that doesn't mean there is a God.

 

[TDselector]

I may select, but so what. A rock can't select and that doesn't mean there is no God. A monkey can select a banana and that doesn't mean there is a God.

There two, not one, mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive variables of selection that govern our existence. Think about it.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

There two, not one, mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive variables of selection that govern our existence. Think about it.

So you keep saying, although the links you keep providing are THE EXACT SAME ARGUMENT AND TEXT, maybe with slight rewording and formatting differences.

You have claimed, but not yet provided any credible evidence that "There two, not one, mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive variables of selection that govern our existence." You have not defined your terms, nor shown just how these proposed variables govern our existence; instead, you have provided a word salad of physics-sounding terms about a paradox that no one else in physics or philosophy seems to have identified (which is fine by the way; it is entirely possible that you have come up with a new thought--but so far, you haven't developed it well enough to be convincing).

Nor have you demonstrated that these are the only "variables of selection" that might exist.

Thought experiments never prove anything. At best, you have suggested some conditions that could be tested--if you could define your terms carefully enough in an operational manner. So far, you not provided any empirical evidence to support your interpretation. Especially when making the leap from "two...mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive variables" to "therefore God does not exist."

 

[TDselector]

So you keep saying, although the links you keep providing are THE EXACT SAME ARGUMENT AND TEXT, maybe with slight rewording and formatting differences.

You have claimed, but not yet provided any credible evidence that "There two, not one, mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive variables of selection that govern our existence." You have not defined your terms, nor shown just how these proposed variables govern our existence; instead, you have provided a word salad of physics-sounding terms about a paradox that no one else in physics or philosophy seems to have identified (which is fine by the way; it is entirely possible that you have come up with a new thought--but so far, you haven't developed it well enough to be convincing).

Nor have you demonstrated that these are the only "variables of selection" that might exist.

Thought experiments never prove anything. At best, you have suggested some conditions that could be tested--if you could define your terms carefully enough in an operational manner. So far, you not provided any empirical evidence to support your interpretation. Especially when making the leap from "two...mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive variables" to "therefore God does not exist."

You are correct, the "thought" experiment was designed for those who have the capacity to think for themselves. There will always be clever folks that think they are entitled to their own facts in contradiction to the laws that govern our existence. For those who refuse to acknowledge Nature's laws for what they are, they have the option to conduct the thought experiment in real life (not recommended) in order to directly challenge the findings and thus support their opinions to the contrary. - See more at: Manuel Morales Tempt Destiny Research Findings - Home