The Debate of God.

[godnotgod]

What you call "having a discussion" I would call "holding court".

You being the District Attorney.

 

[Prophet]

You being the District Attorney.

Was thinking more like a King's court, but I think the role of a DA in a court of law would suit my talents.

 

[Silvercoat]

Of course God is true, however, he may have revealed himself in different ways to different cultures and to different persons. 'God' is just as true as 'Gravity'.

 

[9Westy9]

Of course God is true, however, he may have revealed himself in different ways to different cultures and to different persons. 'God' is just as true as 'Gravity'.

Nice assertion. Any evidence?

edit: Welcome to rf

 

[Silvercoat]

Nice assertion. Any evidence?

edit: Welcome to rf

Evidence for Gravity:
Apple falls to the ground. <-- ('real') effect
The apple would not fall to the ground,
if Gravity did not exist. <-- 'Gravity' itself can't be observed, only its effects

Evidence for God:
There are churchs, mosques and temples all over the world. <-- ('real') effect
These sacred buildings would not have been built,
if God had not revealed himself to anyone at any time. <-- obviously.


So formally both 'Gravity' as well as 'God'/'Hades'/'Quitzacoatl' are nothing else but
arbitrary names for abstract ideas which cannot be observed directly, but only
by looking at the effects these ideas have on the real world.
Both, the apple which falls to the ground, as well as the people who build a religious building, are effects which can be observed.
The former happens because 'Gravity' exists, the latter happens because 'God' exists and has revealed himself to those who build the church/temple/mosque for his honour.

Well, from this point of view, by formally analyzing the reasoning, I came to the conclusion that both, 'Gravity' as well as 'God' are supposed to be equally true.
Either both are wrong, or both are true. Formally/Logically.

Also one could wonder how ANY abstract word happens to exist in a thesaurus of a certain language. Not possibly because the existence of every word is nothing else but a very real effect produced by people who named an equally real object, reason or idea the way they named it?

 

[9Westy9]

Evidence for God:
There are churchs, mosques and temples all over the world. <-- ('real') effect
These sacred buildings would not have been built,
if God had not revealed himself to anyone at any time. <-- obviously.

All this proves is that people believe god to exist

 

[godnotgod]

All this proves is that people believe god to exist

heh...heh...heh...because if you don't, you need to worry about eternal torture in some forgotten hell. If that caveat existed for not believing in gravity, you best believe (no pun) that we would have gravity-worshipping churches all over the world, due to the fear of going to non-belief-in-gravity hell.

"I am the Gravity Way, the Gravity Truth, and the Gravity Life. No man goes to Gravity Heaven except through me"

 

[godnotgod]

The first line drawn in the sand was when God forbade Adam and Eve the eating of the so-called 'Forbidden Fruit', under penalty of certain death. But what must be realized is that these 'drawing the line' incidents are nothing more than part of a Big Act, presented poker-faced style, which the Hindus refer to as maya.

Official GodNotGod Disclaimer:

Please note that this little tidbit is NOT...I repeat, NOT...part of any teachings, feigned or otherwise, about enlightenment. It is merely one more mindlessly conceived, knee-jerk reactive pointing of the proverbial finger at the moon. Therefore, it is strongly suggested that all dyed-in-the-wool, throat-lunging finger attackers refrain, and try, try, try looking at the lovely moon instead, thereby allowing me my escape out the back door, just joshin'....:run:

 

[Silvercoat]

All this proves is that people believe god to exist

Yeah, and scientists also believe that there must exist a 'force' which
causes that sometimes an apple will fall to the ground,
and arbitrarily they named this 'force', which 'must exist', 'Gravity'.

And religious people believe that there must exist a 'force' which
causes that sometimes they will have some kind of a spiritual experience,
and arbitrarily they named this 'force', which 'must exist', 'God'/'Hades'/'Quetzacoatl'

You see the anaolgy?

Both, 'Gravity' as well as 'God' are nothing else but abstract objects which only
exist in the realm of ideas.
Both ideas were born inside of a human mind, because someone was
so certain that they 'must exist' in order to explain some random event/effect
which happened to them or to an apple in reality.
I fail to see why the existence of any of these two ideas should be more or less
justified than the other.
Also, both ideas seem to be sufficiently true such that they cause
observable effects/events in reality (objects falling to the ground, religious
people who build churchs/mosques/temples etc.).

lg

 

[Heathen Hammer]

You don't think gravity exists?

Please do go on....

 

[Silvercoat]

You don't think gravity exists?

Please do go on....

Well, here is my observation:
I see a tall tree with twigs which bear yummy berries.
On the ground I see a finch.
Then I see that the finch flies up to the yummy berries.

Here is my 'scientific' insight:
There must be a 'force' which causes that the finch flies up to
the yummy berries. The finch is attracted by the berries.
Arbitrarily I name this 'force' 'Counter-Gravity'.
If I measured the acceleration and the mass of the finch I could even express
the dimension of this 'force' in numbers/Newton.
Do you believe, that 'Counter-Gravity' is true?

Well, you should, because by reasoning in the very same way scientists invented the
idea of 'Gravity'. Only so they had a term which they could use to name
the (apparent) reason for a specific event which occured in reality (apple falls to the ground):

lg

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Well, here is my observation:
I see a tall tree with twigs which bear yummy berries.
On the ground I see a finch.
Then I see that the finch flies up to the yummy berries.

Here is my 'scientific' insight:
There must be a 'force' which causes that the finch flies up to
the yummy berries. The finch is attracted by the berries.

Which would be completely ridiculous, since you already observed that the process which enabled the bird to move up toward the berries was created by it's wings. All you need to do is understand the concept of "flight".

Arbitrarily I name this 'force' 'Counter-Gravity'.
If I measured the acceleration and the mass of the finch I could even express
the dimensions of this 'force' in numbers/Newton.
Do you believe, that 'Counter-Gravity' is true?

Obviously not, since "counter-gravity" doesn't exist. It is merely resistance to gravity.

Well, you should, because by reasoning in the very same way scientists invented the
idea of 'Gravity'. Only so they had a term which they could use to name
the (apparent) reason for a specific event which occured in reality (apple falls to the ground):

That doesn't mean the force which we give the name "gravity" doesn't exist. We can measure it, test it and even formulate complicated and accurate mathematical models about it. The very fact that a bird has to exert force by flapping its wings in order to move upward demonstrates that there is a force acting upon that bird that pulls it downward.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Well, here is my observation:
I see a tall tree with twigs which bear yummy berries.
On the ground I see a finch.
Then I see that the finch flies up to the yummy berries.

Here is my 'scientific' insight:
There must be a 'force' which causes that the finch flies up to
the yummy berries. The finch is attracted by the berries.
Arbitrarily I name this 'force' 'Counter-Gravity'.
If I measured the acceleration and the mass of the finch I could even express
the dimension of this 'force' in numbers/Newton.
Do you believe, that 'Counter-Gravity' is true?

Well, you should, because by reasoning in the very same way scientists invented the
idea of 'Gravity'. Only so they had a term which they could use to name
the (apparent) reason for a specific event which occured in reality (apple falls to the ground):

lg

What nonsense.

The force driving the finch is hunger.
The ability to counteract gravity is his employment of his own motive force. If he were to stop, gravity would draw him down, and that situation would never vary, ever.

Your understanding of actual science, is less than rudimentary.

 

[godnotgod]

Both, 'Gravity' as well as 'God' are nothing else but abstract objects which only
exist in the realm of ideas.
Both ideas were born inside of a human mind, because someone was
so certain that they 'must exist' in order to explain some random event/effect
which happened to them or to an apple in reality.
I fail to see why the existence of any of these two ideas should be more or less
justified than the other.
Also, both ideas seem to be sufficiently true such that they cause
observable effects/events in reality (objects falling to the ground, religious
people who build churchs/mosques/temples etc.).

lg

The analogy fails because the reason for belief in gravity is supported by physical, testable, repeatable evidence, while the reason for belief in God comes from an entirely different source, and has no hard evidence to support it, though believers claim that the existence of the world is evidence itself for the existence of God. That is not evidence; that is conjecture, based on something going on within the human mind. In effect, man is creating the concept of God to explain the existence of the world.

I am not saying by this that God does not exist, but to try to explain or prove God in rational, logical terms renders only a dead God. You must leave the realm of Reason and Logic before you can even think of approaching the divine nature, though Reason can lead you to a threshold.

 

[Silvercoat]

That doesn't mean the force which we give the name "gravity" doesn't exist ...

Yeah, of course 'gravity' exists, I've never doubted it does.
I've only pointed out that 'gravity' exists in the realm of ideas in pretty much
the same way as God exists only there.
The fact that something exists only as an idea, inside of a human mind, does
not necessarily prevent it from being true or from causing more or less observable
effects in reality.
That's my whole point
Ideas do exist. Hence 'Gravity' exists, 'God' exists, and even 'Lindworms'
do exist, too. All of these things are ideas, right?
lg

 

[Prophet]

You must leave the realm of Reason and Logic before you can even think of approaching the divine nature, though Reason can lead you to a threshold.

I find this sentence very interesting. I believe it is the logical equivalent of a favorite old adage of fundamentalists I know who say, "God works in mysterious ways," or, as I understand it, "God doesn't make sense."

I disagree. The rational mind can be understood with much more ease than the insane mind. The perfectly rational mind of God can be understood perfectly with the aid of reason.

 

[Prophet]

Official GodNotGod Disclaimer:

Please note that this little tidbit is NOT...I repeat, NOT...part of any teachings, feigned or otherwise, about enlightenment. It is merely one more mindlessly conceived, knee-jerk reactive pointing of the proverbial finger at the moon. Therefore, it is strongly suggested that all dyed-in-the-wool, throat-lunging finger attackers refrain, and try, try, try looking at the lovely moon instead, thereby allowing me my escape out the back door, just joshin'....:run:

So, you are admitting that you are speaking from ignorance? This is a very interesting tactic to me.

 

[godnotgod]

So, you are admitting that you are speaking from ignorance? This is a very interesting tactic to me.

One points to something because he sees something and wants someone else to see it also. Seeing is not ignorance. Seeing is seeing.

 

[godnotgod]

I find this sentence very interesting. I believe it is the logical equivalent of a favorite old adage of fundamentalists I know who say, "God works in mysterious ways," or, as I understand it, "God doesn't make sense."

I disagree. The rational mind can be understood with much more ease than the insane mind.

You misunderstand: I am not using the word 'rational' as the opposite of 'irrational', or insane; I am saying that the divine nature is non-rational. It does not think; it just is pure conscious essence, and is beyond the duality of 'rational/irrational', as it is beyond ALL dualities.

The perfectly rational mind of God can be understood perfectly with the aid of reason.

Nyet! What do you suppose? That God 'reasoned' the world into existence? To what end?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yeah, of course 'gravity' exists, I've never doubted it does.
I've only pointed out that 'gravity' exists in the realm of ideas in pretty much
the same way as God exists only there.

Except we can test gravity. It isn't "just" an idea, it's a physical force with actual, testable properties that we can repeatedly test. I don't think your analogy is anywhere near accurate.

The fact that something exists only as an idea, inside of a human mind, does
not necessarily prevent it from being true or from causing more or less observable
effects in reality.
That's my whole point
Ideas do exist. Hence 'Gravity' exists, 'God' exists, and even 'Lindworms'
do exist, too. All of these things are ideas, right?

No, gravity is a physical force. We can test and observe it.