mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
My answer is that the deep questions are a case of how you or I individual choose to answer. But that you claim you can answer for us all. I can't do that, so I answer as me.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?
- Thread starter an anarchist
- Start date
My answer is that the deep questions are a case of how you or I individual choose to answer. But that you claim you can answer for us all. I can't do that, so I answer as me.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
I don't claim I can answer for all, but that God does.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, you do, because you claim to know the correct God.
Sheldon
Veteran Member
Noooooo true Scotsman fallacy....
and personal bias or wishful thinking are not sound ways to reason. what one wants to know, has little relevance to what one can demonstrate sufficient objective evidence for.
ElishaElijah
Return
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
We don't know. You have your faith and I have a different one.
Sheldon
Veteran Member
I see no objective difference, only a subjective belief.
Sheldon
Veteran Member
It is an objective fact the physical world and universe exists, as much as anything can be objectively verified.
<CITATION>
NASA using cosmology and astronomy explain the origins of our world.
"Our solar system formed about 4.5 billion years ago from a dense cloud of interstellar gas and dust. The cloud collapsed, possibly due to the shockwave of a nearby exploding star, called a supernova. When this dust cloud collapsed, it formed a solar nebula – a spinning, swirling disk of material.
At the center, gravity pulled more and more material in. Eventually, the pressure in the core was so great that hydrogen atoms began to combine and form helium, releasing a tremendous amount of energy. With that, our Sun was born, and it eventually amassed more than 99% of the available matter.
Matter farther out in the disk was also clumping together. These clumps smashed into one another, forming larger and larger objects. Some of them grew big enough for their gravity to shape them into spheres, becoming planets, dwarf planets, and large moons. In other cases, planets did not form: the asteroid belt is made of bits and pieces of the early solar system that could never quite come together into a planet. Other smaller leftover pieces became asteroids, comets, meteoroids, and small, irregular moons."
Last edited:
Sheldon
Veteran Member
Can you demonstrate anything to support this claim beyond your subjective unevidenced anecdote here? As has been explained, other religions make identical claims to have experienced other very different deities, two contrary claims cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time, so the method seems irrational wouldn't you agree?
ElishaElijah
Return
Well, your diagnostics are wrong and that’s your only answer when people share their testimonies about how they came to know and experience God.
I don’t believe in demons, I do know they’re unclean spirits that torment people and are expelled in the name of Jesus.
ElishaElijah
Return
This is what an unevidenced claims is.
ElishaElijah
Return
Explain the evidence you’re looking for, I’m not really into being lab tested.
ElishaElijah
Return
This is true, I can only tell you how God tells me how to test these things by the fruit produced in a persons life. For example in Church meetings when God would move in a mighty way and deliver people, set people free from what they were being afflicted with by laying on of hands, I wanted to know if it was genuine or not. So I would observe if their lives changed or they were the same old person. Because that’s the test.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
So you just contradicted yourself. ..Noooooo true Scotsman fallacy....
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
If you can't trust your own experiences you can't trust anyone else's either. We all trust what we experience or we would be considered insane.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
Every belief is subjective.
OK. I'm not sure why you posted this passage. I had mentioned that a part of it sounded like an alternative to theism. What Einstein is describing for himself is not what I would call a god belief, even if he uses that word. This is not different from any atheist's spiritual experience of his world. Maybe you saw my comment on the topic a few pages back: "The authentic spiritual experience arises from the mindful experience of daily life. Think about it. Think about which activities actually generate truths, by which I mean ideas that accurately predict outcomes in a way that facilitates navigating life."
I've seen this discussion of what Einstein meant by God a dozen times over the years. If it were clear what he meant, we would not be discussing what he meant now. I mentioned to you that as soon as one redefines God without personhood, confusion ensues regarding what is meant by the word. It happens a lot. It's why I avoid the use of the word entirely unless referring to the kind of God most theists describe - he loves you, he has a message for you, etc..
They're questions most ask, but nobody gets an answer - not from examining nature (not yet, anyway), and not by faith. Some recognize and accept this fact, and say that these questions are unanswered and unanswerable at this time. Some invent comforting answers. It's a normal human proclivity, but one we can outgrow. You ask why we are here, and get a causal response - the chain of events that led to the formation of the universe, the solar system and earth, life on earth and its evolution, and finally, answers about parents and conception and gestation, all of which led to us being here now.
Then you say no good, that's not a why answer at all. You meant intention: "Why did somebody put us here?" and you get a different set of responses. There may be no intention involved.
Your answer is likely that we are here because an intelligent designer called God willed it for his purposes. I'm agnostic. I neither believe that nor consider it disproven. The idea can neither be ruled in nor out. Likewise with naturalistic explanation, which seem more likely, but once again, to be logically rigorous, we must not commit ourselves to either possibility until we can rule it in or the alternative out.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
There isn't one. Only "you don't know."
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
Nonsense. Most people are theists and have an answer. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it untrue. It's just your opinion.
Sheldon
Veteran Member
Testimonies that arrive at contradictory beliefs in very different deities and religions. The law of non contradiction suggests then that logically this is poor methodology.
You know something about them, but don't believe in them?
What knowledge can you demonstrate for this claim to know something btw? Only I suspect you only believe it to be the case.