Is the Concept of God Necessary To Explain Anything?

[Random]

Yeah, cos temp bans happen in some spontaneous fashion that has nothing to do with warnings.

Hi Quoth, yeah, Jay has been temp-banned before (so have I, actually), but the point was that it didn't cause him to rethink his attitude towards other posters, I guess.

 

[Yerda]

Hi Quoth, yeah, Jay has been temp-banned before (so have I, actually), but the point was that it didn't cause him to rethink his attitude towards other posters, I guess.

The ability to read minds gives you an unfair advantage in debate - I propose that you restrict the use of this talent.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You have a bad habit of not only disagreeing with people, but brushing off their arguments as somehow 'not worthy of discussing'. It's pretty rude.

What argument do you feel I brushed off as not worthy of discussing?

 

[Somkid]

It depends which philosophical stand point you take.

Theism: the belief in the existence of one or more divinities or deities, requires the belief in such things.

Deism: the belief that God does exist, but does not interfere with human life and the laws of the universe also requires belief.

Agnosticism: the belief that the existence or nonexistence of deities is currently unknown or unknowable, or that the existence of a God or of god cannot be proven requires the belief of the possibility but not necessarily of the deity.

Atheism: is the rejection of belief, or absence of belief, in deities, (see Panda's reply) obviously this belief requires lack of belief in any supernatural thing.

Nontheism: the absence of belief or disbelief in deities, belief is not required.

These are the top 5 areas discussed in philosophy of religion which get broken down by philosophers who believe it is necessary for belief and who believe it is not necessary for belief.

The most important thing here is all of the philosophers are objective in their thought and don't wave any religious books saying "because the book says so" the debate is quite rationally thought through even as far back as the 14th century which oddly enough the religious philosophers of the 14th century make more sense and a better more objective argument than the fundamentalists of the 21st century do.

 

[Smoke]

You have a bad habit of not only disagreeing with people, but brushing off their arguments as somehow 'not worthy of discussing'. It's pretty rude.

But remarkably accurate.

 

[Nick Soapdish]

The most important thing here is all of the philosophers are objective in their thought and don't wave any religious books saying "because the book says so" the debate is quite rationally thought through even as far back as the 14th century which oddly enough the religious philosophers of the 14th century make more sense and a better more objective argument than the fundamentalists of the 21st century do.

What is wrong with accepting scripture as an authority?

Also, what do you mean by "objective in their thought"?

Finally, why do you believe that 14th century religious philosophers did not hold scripture as authoritative?

 

[Somkid]

What is wrong with accepting scripture as an authority?

Also, what do you mean by "objective in their thought"?

Finally, why do you believe that 14th century religious philosophers did not hold scripture as authoritative?

To be objective we have to ask are the scriptures accurate and if so who's? Yours? Is the Bible true? Is the Koran true? How about the Veda? Well that has been done and they have been found lacking.

Show me empirical evidence in any of these scriptures and I will follow them right down to stoning my children to death when they don't listen to me or when god tells me to as they would suggest as an added bonus I will burn down my village as no one that lives in it believes in or worships god.

To be objective you have to be willing to be proven wrong and be big enough to admit it, I am are you?

As far as 14th century religious philosophers go they did their best with what they had under the threat of death if they were to discover the truth. These philosophers like all philosophers questioned why god was or was not necessary if you look at 14th century technology I'm sure you can understand their reasoning.

 

[Nick Soapdish]

To be objective we have to ask are the scriptures accurate and if so who's? Yours? Is the Bible true? Is the Koran true? How about the Veda? Well that has been done and they have been found lacking.

I believe the Bible is true based on personal experience.

Show me empirical evidence in any of these scriptures and I will follow them right down to stoning my children to death when they don't listen to me or when god tells me to as they would suggest as an added bonus I will burn down my village as no one that lives in it believes in or worships god.

Do you not understand the Christian meaning of faith? There is no empirical evidence because it is possible to doubt God's existence. Furthermore, I have to suggest that your interpretation of Christianity (stoning your Children to death, burning your village) is a bit twisted. Please site in the Christian covenant (the New Testament) where it suggests these behaviors.

To be objective you have to be willing to be proven wrong and be big enough to admit it, I am are you?

Yes I am. If someone discovers irrefutable evidence of Jesus's remains, I would cease being a Christian.

As far as 14th century religious philosophers go they did their best with what they had under the threat of death if they were to discover the truth. These philosophers like all philosophers questioned why god was or was not necessary if you look at 14th century technology I'm sure you can understand their reasoning.

Examples? Which philosophers are you referring to? And what does 14th century technology have to do with anything?

 

[Yerda]

I believe the Bible is true....

What does that mean exactly? Genesis is an event? Jesus is ready to sprout grapes when he says he's 'the vine'?

...based on personal experience.

What experience, if you don't mind answering, could verify the Bible?

 

[Nick Soapdish]

What does that mean exactly? Genesis is an event? Jesus is ready to sprout grapes when he says he's 'the vine'?

Genesis is a series of events. It is a book.

Also, it doesn't require a genius to know when Jesus is talking in allegory.

What experience, if you don't mind answering, could verify the Bible?

Why do you look for irrefutable verification to justify faith?

 

[emiliano]

Is the concept of god necessary to explain anything? If so, what? How is it necessary? If not, why not?

It is necessary to find the answers to the old questions that we philosophy about so often, the why, and how of our existence, what is the purpose of life, scripture says that God reveals Himself to us by the thing made. Humans are the only creature that are endowed with intelligence, humans are the only one that can imagine things, the only ones with a concept of God, human are the only one that can think abstractly. Then the question, Why is it so? To a religious person, the answer is “to have a relation with God his creator and sustainers” other creatures do not have this capacity, they are said to be irrational, they don’t and cannot have a concept of God, actually they don’t have questions, Humans seek answers and developed a way to communicate with other humans and with God.

 

[Yerda]

Why do you look for irrefutable verification to justify faith?

I don't. I wondered what experience could help you determine that 'the Bible is true'. I'm curious.

 

[Rioku]

Without God who will punish all the evil doers who get away with their crimes and reward those who suffer and do good? Is there any real justice if we all have the same fate?

God's punishment is cruel an unusual, a person going to hell just because they were born of a family that believes in a incorrect religion. Or how about the serial murderer who goes to heaven because he asked for forgiveness from god. As it says in the bible all sins can be forgiven. In the end there is only justice when it is served correctly.

 

[rojse]

God's punishment is cruel an unusual, a person going to hell just because they were born of a family that believes in a incorrect religion. Or how about the serial murderer who goes to heaven because he asked for forgiveness from god. As it says in the bible all sins can be forgiven. In the end there is only justice when it is served correctly.

Who is to say when justice is served correctly? The family of the victims? The family of the perpetrator? The perpetrator themselves? You? Me? A group of people? Should some people be given more weighting regarding their opinion in this process?

I am agog to hear some answers.

 

[Willamena]

I don't. I wondered what experience could help you determine that 'the Bible is true'. I'm curious.

An understanding of the the metaphors.

 

[Lorien]

I have come to an understanding I feel like I need to share my personal feelings and observations. I began my search for spirituality and purpose like everyone else. There is a similarity among all other ways of life and beliefs that you don't find in complete christianity. They all lead you away from God. The Devil, and yes I do beleive that he exists, is accomplishing his goals whenever a soul follows the path away from God, whatever form of belief that it may come in the form of. I think the most easy form of this, we as imperfect humans, find easy to swallow is the belief that we are capable of figuring out all the mysteries of the universe. The ego is a powerful instrument of the devil and belief in mankind and their power to save this world, is exactly where the beginning of the end happens. These are my feelings and I want to share. I don't want to debate, I want to share, everyone certainly has the power to take advantage of the most basic of human rights, choice. These are my observations and I think that is why we were given the ability to question and to seek because the lord says whoever searches for the truth will find it in him. Fight the real enemy that tries to infiltrate us.

 

[camanintx]

I don't want to debate, I want to share

Then why are you posting in the "Religious Debates" section?

 

[Yerda]

An understanding of the the metaphors.

Take it all as metaphor and seeing what you can make of it?

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Is the concept of god necessary to explain anything? If so, what? How is it necessary? If not, why not?

All objects are conceptual. This means that consciousness (the observer) cannot be objectified—rather, it is transcendent to all objectification. Its content includes all existence, all absence of existence, all that transcends both existence and non-existence, and both truth and falsehood. Yet, it remains that we would be unable to form the first rational thought pattern were it not for the innate ability to form a universe frame in which to think. "God" is such a "universe frame" and can accomodate modern science. You can say mechanistic science, or scientism, also affords a conceptual frame, but when you get into the science of fundamentals, quantum physics, we find that it's open to interpretation and therefore does not provide a frame in which to think after all. Only the interpretation does that.

The question, then, is whether God or mechanism is more satisfying.

 

[Willamena]

Take it all as metaphor...?

No, just the metaphors...