There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

[Audie]

Spiritual progress is learning and understanding others bringing our world closer to love and peace for all humans.

Seeing and talking to a "spirit guide"
etc is likely enough to be progessive,
but it's a condition I definitely do not
want for myself.

 

[Audie]

Showing your faith again I see.
The real question is how did the genetic code become a code that gathers data and stores it and uses it to govern the building and functions life forms?

Two equivocation games in two sentences!
What could be better evidence.

 

[Audie]

A waterfall might support the concept of gravity.

Terrif.
And what does the existence of gravity support?

( do you understand that a waterfall is vastly more complex than dna? I'm wondering why you
choose DNA as your evidence, not waterfalls)

 

[Brian2]

AGAIN. Then please explain why the mortality rates from diseases only improve when medical tech gets better?
"Patients with metastatic (stage 4) non-small cell lung cancer that's spread to distant organs or regions of the body have a five-year relative survival rate of 8 percent, according to ACS. "

On average, 8 percent of those patients survive. As predicted. Every year.
So who exactly is your God healing here?
Just a few as to not sway the mortality rates as they are the same across ALL religions and secular people?
That would be ridiculous.
Uhh....what other choice do you have? How about NONE.

Or does God only heal those without mortality stats, like with the common cold?
Again, ridiculous.

10,000 children die every day from starvation, I gave you a report from the U.N.
Today, 10,000, tomorrow, 10,000. You don't think people, parents, relatives, the world is praying for them?
Still 10,000 every day.

So you now say it ISN'T 100% and God might be healing people? So what he's healing people with colds and leaving starving children alone??? Somehow in this awful mess of suffering religion has twisted your mind so you cannot even admit these people are not being saved at all?
There you go. That is what religion does to minds. When you start denying statistics there is a problem.

Actually it's "more than 10,000 children die every day"

Is that not enough?? Do you need MORE SUFFERING to realize no deity is helping out here? What exactly is it? would 20,000 children be enough?? What the heck are you talking about?

I was not specifically talking about prayer. I was talking about how you make claims about your beliefs as if they have to be 100% correct or to have proven 100% that the Bible God is a fiction.

Actually with prayer I see the role of medicine and doctors and nurses and God and I don't think that any study trying to test God as if He is an it, a subject for testing by science, can be sure of having tested Him and come up with definitive conclusions.

AND EVERY TIME I SAY it's the consensus.
There are no other scholars who disagree because the evidence is so conclusive and vast.

That is not true unless you want only your scholars to be the only real scholars or if you want truth to be governed by a majority vote.

So now God is not definitely not healing people and you cannot allow information to go into your brain that ALL historical scholars believe the vast evidence of some issues I bring up.

You cannot seem to accept this and make up a fiction about scholars all having their own theories. Of course one theory must be some historians who say Jesus died and rose and ascended to heaven?
Yeah, no. The gospels are anon, non-eyewitnesses, written 40 years later as historical fiction and Mark is the only original story but uses the OT, Romulus and other fiction.

Even believing Christian scholars know this. All historical scholars agree on this and many other things.
The differing opinions are was Jesus a real Rabbi or totally made up? Stuff like that.

Christianity is a Jewish version of Greek Hellenism. I'll post the Britannica article on Hellenism, it's clearly all Greek and what happened with Christianity happened with all the older Mesopotamian influenced religions when the Greeks invaded. They all updated their national God to supreme, got a savior for personal salvation. It was salvation for the nation before (like in the OT, Yahweh saves Israel) and Hellenism introduced personal salvation which got souls into an afterlife. Fallen souls that required redemption.
Greek myth.

This article was by

Jonathan Zittell Smith, who was a Harvard Dr in religious history, Greek and Christian. This is consensus information.

So the opinions of your scholars are the only true opinions and we can throw the rest away.
OK that is what you believe and these are the reasons for your beliefs.
Others, real scholars, have their beliefs and their reasons and evidence also and have disagreements with your scholars.
I also have my reasons for not believing your scholars.
In history there is the evidence and there is the conclusions that people have about that evidence.

 

[Audie]

I was not specifically talking about prayer. I was talking about how you make claims about your beliefs as if they have to be 100% correct or to have proven 100% that the Bible God is a fiction.
That is not true unless you want only your scholars to be the only real scholars or if you want truth to be governed by a majority vote.
So the opinions of your scholars are the only true opinions and we can throw the rest away.

the Projection is strong with thee.

 

[PureX]

No I don't have a method the IS A METHOD and it's our best method for knowing what is true.

So you believe. Just as I said. And because you believe this, you work to discredit anyone that believes differently.

The scientific method, rational, skeptical, empirical based epistemology is the best way to know true things.

Again, so you believe. And because you believe it's true, you see it as being true whether it is or not. Because in fact you aren't skeptical or rational at all. You're thoroughly convinced. You're a "true believer" in scientism: science as the fountain of truth.

Demonstrations are not just "seeing", it involves evidence and rational reasons to hold a belief in something.

There are no rational reasons to hold onto "beliefs" of any kind. Belief is what we engage in when we don't actually know something, but we want to pretend to ourselves that we do know it. But you're a "true believer", so you will no longer be able to recognize the difference between what you can actually know to be true and what you believe to be true. "True believers" never can. Tat's the sad result of choosing to be a believer.

The same reason you don't believe the Heavens Gate story where your soul goes to a ufo near Saturn after you drink poison.
It's a ridiculous story with no evidence.

I neither believe nor disbelieve it because I can't know it to be so or not so. And I don't care because I'm not going to drink any poison to find out.

The stories you did buy into also are far-fetched and have no evidence.

What stories did I "buy into"? I am not a true believe like you. I don't "buy into" any stories except as a form of artifice.

Uh, no, not me. How about 1.8 billion Muslims who swear by personal experience that Allah speaks to their heart and tells them the Quran is the word of God. Which also says Christians lie and Jesus stories are pagan nonsense and you all will face a terrible doom unless you go to the true religion.
How about the Mormons who all have a personal relationship with Jesus and have confirmed the updated Mormon Bible is the true updates on Jesus, that you missed and will be punished for.

Strengthening My Relationship with Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ​

10 Ways to Strengthen Relationships​

As I was pondering ways to come closer to Heavenly Father and the Savior, I researched 10 basic relationship tips that are often given by professionals and combined them with prophetic counsel to give them a spiritual focus.

Here are the 10 tips:

1. Communicate honestly, out loud, and with real intent through prayer.2
2. Be a good listener.3
3. Show Them appreciation.4
4. Make sacrifices for Them.5
5. Learn about Them.6
6. Spend quality time with Them.7
7. Serve together.8
8. Show Them trust and commitment.9
9. Admit when you’re wrong.10
10. Learn how They show you love.11

To start out, I chose to learn about my Heavenly Father and the Savior (#5), to spend quality time with Them (#6), and to learn how They offered me love (#10).
They are with us. They are in the details. They stand ready to shower us with strength, comfort, wisdom, guidance, and peace, especially when we make time and room for Them in our lives.

Try out your own methods to grow closer to Them and see what happens! I can testify that as we prioritize these vital relationships and follow Them, we will be able to access the Savior’s healing influence, move forward with faith (see Philippians 4:13), and find greater confidence and joy.

I know I have.

Strengthening My Relationship with Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ

Applying these practical ideas helped me see my relationship with Heavenly Father and the Savior as real, powerful, and precious.

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

The same methods one sect uses to "know they are truly in a relationship with Jesus" is used by all of them. Yet Mormonism says Jesus came to America and all sorts of new material. But it's confirmed to be true once you establish a relationship.
why don't you try it? Oh, you already do????? And it confirms the beliefs you and your church hold?? WOW, what a coincidence??

It's almost like it doesn't matter what supernatural deity you act as if you are speaking with and getting to know, you brain accepts it and creates feelings as if you are in a relationship.
Which means until evidence is produced, this method is simple psychology and in your mind. Oh, it's also NOT EVIDENCE.

Yes, those "true believers" are crazy. I agree with you. That's what happens to us when we start pretending that we know things that we don't. That's why I am not one of them. So why are you?

Well that was easy. "at least for them" and "shown to be reliable enough for them"
Yes, it was reliable enough for Heavens Gate. So they drank the poison and their souls went on the ufo. It's reliable enough for the KKK to continue believing whites are superior. Who needs evidence?

You're still not understanding the difference between faith and belief, because you are a true believer, yourself. True believers don't recognize any difference between faith and belief. But the difference is crucial, and is the reason we should avoid believing things we can't know to be so. Faith is choosing to act on the HOPE that it is so, not on the blind PRETENSE (belief) that it is so. And that is the crucial difference between them. Faith can retain it's skepticism while belief willfully denies it.

If you ever do learn this this difference, and why it's so important, you will finally be able to stop worshipping science as your fountain of truth. And you will finally understand the difference between having faith in God and turning a religious belief into a God. And until you get these things clarified, you aren't going to be able to grasp these kinds of discussions.

Yeah, we know, people believe weird things that are not supported by evidence.

The evidence or lack of it is not the problem. The problem is the blind arrogance of belief.

It's good enough. Well I'm not writing about what's "good enough", I'm interested in knowing what is actually true and the reliable methods to find that.

Then you're chasing fool's gold. Because as a human, you can't have what you think you're chasing after. Science is never going to give you any "truth". All it can ever do is generate theories and see if they function under specific conditions. And that's not truth. That's just relative factuality. Which is all you're ever going to get as a limited human.

These people are willing to forego evidence and rational thought to continue to hold onto a belief they want to be real.

So are you. Perhaps that's why you're so angry about them doing it.

Again, direct experience is used in every religion, equally as much. My Muslim and Hindu friends all have the same level of knowing through personal experience they are in the only correct religion.

I believe evidence and rational thought is the superior way because the evidence demonstrates this. If I'm bias then it's to what evidence presents. I'm bias to an unbias version of truth.

Classic example of confirmation bias. But when you "believe in" it, you won't be able to see it.

 

[PureX]

I never said the fictive metaphors in the Bible do not represent something true. Genesis Eden, for example is a fable (talking animals), with a message. Original sin is not the message. But it has meaning. Jesus ascending after death is a metaphor.

You do know what a fundamentalist is right?

Yes, a fool that doesn't understand artifice. Or nuance. Or paradox. I don't generally concern myself with such fools, though, as I can't really learn anything from them except how to become a fool, myself. And I'm not seeking that goal.

Your ambiguity is muddying the waters here. You started out arguing religion and now seem to be suggesting it's all a metaphor.

I am not religious nor am I arguing about religion. I'm just pointing out that religions are mostly comprised of various forms of artifice. And if we don't or won't undrstand what artifice is, and how it works, we aren't ever really going to understand what religion is, and how it works. Most atheists waste enormous amounts of time and effort arguing endlessly with and about the artifice of religion, BECAUSE IT'S ARTIFICIAL. And they achieve nothing because all they ever do is point out the obvious to people that either aready know, or just don't care.

Finding value has nothing to do with the truth of a supernatural claim.

You need to stop listening to people that don't understand artifice when they make "supernatural claims". And then stop being one of those people. First of all, none of us knows the limitations of what we call "natural", and so none of us knows what can or can't be considered "supernatural". And secondly, those supernatural claims that you get so bent out of shape over are just reiterations of religious artifice as religious "belief". And this hardly constitutes a claim that anyone else should take seriously. And before you start complaining about how these religious believers want to use their beliefs to subjugate you, that is a political issue that shows up with "true believers" of all kinds. Not just the religious ones.

You are moving the goalpost into a different topic. Value is subjective also. A friend may call you and say they found value in following the new Jesus in AU and want to give him all their money and follow him. Doesn't make any of what he is saying true.

You are still suffering from the delusion that we humans can know what is true, and what isn't. That is your "true belief" that you cannot allow yourself to see past. But the fact is that we humans have no idea what the truth is. The best we can ascertain are collections of relative facts, that we then assemble into our own individual conceptions of "truth". Which of course vary, and often oppose each other, and compete.

It's not in question that religious sermons touch on real world wisdom, the question is are the supernatural stories real?

Why are you so obsessed with that possibility? The answer is they might be. Or they might not be. Because we can't know. We just can't. But of course you don't believe that. Because you're a true believer in science as the fountain of truth. As the means of ascertaining the truth that you cannot otherwise know. Like the inerrant Bible, or the special messengers from God, idolized science (scientism) has become the new fountain of truth for the religion haters.

Is a soul real, Heaven? Redeeming a soul through a savior deity. Those are claims. Saying "don't judge" is just basic wisdom, taken from Rabbi Hilell who was preaching before Jesus.

They are not claims, because no human can make such a truth claim and do based on actual knowledge. What they are, are proposed possibilities that some people have chosen to blindly believe, others have chosen to accept as an act of faith, and still ofters have just blindly rejected.

 

[Lekatt]

Seeing and talking to a "spirit guide"
etc is likely enough to be progessive,
but it's a condition I definitely do not
want for my

I understand, it is something that takes time to get use to. Love

 

[Audie]

I understand, it is something that takes time to get use to. Love

You do not remotely begin to understand.
Not me, and not you.

Seeing things, talking to the air etc is not love
and it's not normal, and I nor any still sane person
wants to go that road.

 

[ppp]

@ppp said: But I will ask you straight out. Name a piece of evidence that does not require a pre-existing belief that a god exists, and also exclusively supports your claim that a god exists.

Brian 2 says: I found someone who became a believer in God because of the genetic code. I did not say anything about it also exclusively supporting my claim that a god exists because I was not sure if it did or not.
But now that I have time to think about genetic code, I would say that it exclusively supports my claim that a god exists and supports no other hypothesis.

You are merely declaring that something exclusively supports your claim as your personal fiat. "Because @Brian2 says so" may work with your young children. It doesn't fly with thinking adults. Or adolescents. Is that all you've got?

 

[ppp]

But we are talking about the genetic code. It supports the idea of a designer. Does it support anything else?

chemistry
non-intelligent patterns

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are merely declaring that something exclusively supports your claim as your personal fiat. "Because @Brian2 says so" may work with your young children. It doesn't fly with thinking adults. Or adolescents. Is that all you've got?

Perhaps he has a point, One with a typical false Tu Quoque accusation, but a valid point.

So let's go over the concept of "evidence" in the sciences. The sort of assumption mentioned is not allowed in the sciences. One may based one's initial beliefs upon preconceived ideas, but when one forms evidence itself it has to be done without those preconceived ideas or beliefs. It has to be objective.

In the sciences scientific evidence consists of observations that support or oppose a scientific theory or hypothesis. What does that mean? It means that before even having a shred of evidence one must first form a model of whatever we are trying to explain. And this is extremely important:

That model needs to be testable! One has to be able to find a reasonable test that could refute it based upon the predictions that it makes.

In other words a person that is using the scientific method must strive to refute his or her own idea. And it is in one's best interest to try to do that very hard since once a person's model is released anyone in the world can try to refute it.

This shows that the claims of @Brian2 about others are inaccurate. They appear to be a form of projection. Ideas may have started in a way that is similar to his, where he assumes that God exists. But once one forms a testable model it is no longer a faith based belief. It becomes an evidence based belief and it can be shown to be wrong at any time.

I have never seen believers make a proper model of their belief in God. They often conflating their beliefs with "testing God", and religious books whose authors probably were aware of their weaknesses specifically tell people not to "test God".

 

[Subduction Zone]

But we are talking about the genetic code. It supports the idea of a designer. Does it support anything else?

How does it support the idea of a designer? You have only claimed that. You have never shown how that is to be the case. You only used more logical fallacies to support your position.

I just go done writing a post on the difference between your beliefs and those that oppose you. What is your model of DNA? What reasonable test could possibly refute your model?

 

[Audie]

How does it support the idea of a designer? You have only claimed that. You have never shown how that is to be the case. You only used more logical fallacies to support your position.

I just go done writing a post on the difference between your beliefs and those that oppose you. What is your model of DNA? What reasonable test could possibly refute your model?

Your creo friends who think they are
dreadfully clever thunking up ( usually)
silly shallow whatabouts and whatifs,
in challenging a theory-
A. They don't challenge their own ideas
B. Dont know that a researcher shoots
himself in the foot if he fails to think of
the whatifs, include them in his reearch.

 

[Trailblazer]

I know it's difficult going through life never really knowing what's what. But that is the human condition. And as a result, humility is being called for, not blind belief, or self-deceit, or grand delusions.

Not everyone goes through life 'never really knowing what's what.' That does not mean they lack humility, have blind belief, self-deceit, or grand delusions.

It seems to have been ordained that we humans must choose to live by faith in the absence of knowing the truth of things.

Humans don't have to choose to live by faith alone in the absence of knowing the truth of things. There is something called evidence that allows us to know the truth of things. Anyone can choose to look at that evidence, or not look at it.

But in the end the truth is that all we have are humility and faith to guide us. We don't get to know the truth.

I suggest that you speak for yourself, not for the whole human race. That is hardly a display of humility.
'I believe' that we can know the truth if we search for the truth. The potential to find the truth is there although not everyone will find it.

Matthew 7:13-14 Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.​

Few people find the narrow gate and even fewer people enter through it because it is narrow, so it is difficult to get through...

 

[YoursTrue]

Right, and the cosmic water above heaven, and the firmament and the doors where water pours out to flood the earth and the fact that all scholars know its a reworking of Mesopotamian creation mythology



John Collins, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible 3rd ed.
“Biblical creation stories draw motifs from Mesopotamia, Much of the language and imagery of the Bible was culture specific and deeply embedded in the traditions of the Near East.
2nd ed. The Old Testament, Davies and Rogerson
“We know from the history of the composition of Gilamesh that ancient writers did adapt and re-use older stories……
It is safer to content ourselves with comparing the motifs and themes of Genesis with those of other ancient Near East texts.
In this way we acknowledge our belief that the biblical writers adapted existing stories, while we confess our ignorance about the form and content of the actual stories that the Biblical writers used.”
The Old Testament, A Historical and Literary Introduction to the Hebrew Scriptures, M. Coogan
“Genesis employs and alludes to mythical concepts and phrasing, but at the same time it also adapts transforms and rejected them”
God in Translation, Smith
“…the Bibles authors fashioned whatever they may have inherited of the Mesopotamian literary tradition on their own terms”
THE OT Text and Content, Matthews, Moyer
“….a great deal of material contained in the primeval epics in Genesis is borrowed and adapted from the ancient cultures of that region.”


The Formation of Genesis 1-11, Carr
“The previous discussion has made clear how this story in Genesis represents a complex juxtaposition of multiple traditions often found separately in the Mesopotamian literary world….”
The Priestly Vision of Genesis, Smith
“….storm God and cosmic enemies passed into Israelite tradition. The biblical God is not only generally similar to Baal as a storm god, but God inherited the names of Baal’s cosmic enemies, with names such as Leviathan, Sea, Death and Tanninim.”

and this is taught at Yale Divinity.
Dr Carol Meyers:


Seams and Sources: Genesis 5-11 and the Historical-Critical Method

10:45 snake in Eden is a standard literary device seen in fables of this era


(10:25 - snake not Satan, no Satan in Hebrew Bible)


14:05 acceptance of mortality theme in Eden and Gilamesh story



25:15 Gilgamesh flood story, Sumerian flood story comparisons


26:21 - there are significant contrasts as well between the Mesopotamian flood story and it’s Israelite ADAPTATION. Israelite story is purposely rejecting certain motifs and giving the opposite or an improved version (nicer deity…)


36:20 2 flood stories in Genesis, or contradictions and doublets.


Yahweh/Elohim, rain/cosmic waters flowing,



40:05 two creation stories, very different. Genesis 1 formalized, highly structured


Genesis 2 dramatic. Genesis 1 serious writing style, Genesis 2 uses Hebrew word puns.


Genesis 1/2 use different terms for gender


Genesis 1/2 use different names, description and style for God


Both stories have distinctive styles, vocabulary, themes, placed side by side. Flood stories are interwoven.


Genesis to 2nd Kings entire historical saga is repeated again in Chronicles.

I am referring only to the description of the waters and separating them . Science is now recognizing that the earth was covered with water at the start.

 

[YoursTrue]

Showing your faith again I see.
The real question is how did the genetic code become a code that gathers data and stores it and uses it to govern the building and functions life forms?

Yeah... don't you know?? better yet, don't they know?? They meaning believers in evolution.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes, a fool that doesn't understand artifice. Or nuance. Or paradox. I don't generally concern myself with such fools, though, as I can't really learn anything from them except how to become a fool, myself. And I'm not seeking that goal.

I am not religious nor am I arguing about religion. I'm just pointing out that religions are mostly comprised of various forms of artifice. And if we don't or won't undrstand what artifice is, and how it works, we aren't ever really going to understand what religion is, and how it works. Most atheists waste enormous amounts of time and effort arguing endlessly with and about the artifice of religion, BECAUSE IT'S ARTIFICIAL. And they achieve nothing because all they ever do is point out the obvious to people that either aready know, or just don't care.

You need to stop listening to people that don't understand artifice when they make "supernatural claims". And then stop being one of those people. First of all, none of us knows the limitations of what we call "natural", and so none of us knows what can or can't be considered "supernatural". And secondly, those supernatural claims that you get so bent out of shape over are just reiterations of religious artifice as religious "belief". And this hardly constitutes a claim that anyone else should take seriously. And before you start complaining about how these religious believers want to use their beliefs to subjugate you, that is a political issue that shows up with "true believers" of all kinds. Not just the religious ones.

You are still suffering from the delusion that we humans can know what is true, and what isn't. That is your "true belief" that you cannot allow yourself to see past. But the fact is that we humans have no idea what the truth is. The best we can ascertain are collections of relative facts, that we then assemble into our own individual conceptions of "truth". Which of course vary, and often oppose each other, and compete.

Why are you so obsessed with that possibility? The answer is they might be. Or they might not be. Because we can't know. We just can't. But of course you don't believe that. Because you're a true believer in science as the fountain of truth. As the means of ascertaining the truth that you cannot otherwise know. Like the inerrant Bible, or the special messengers from God, idolized science (scientism) has become the new fountain of truth for the religion haters.

They are not claims, because no human can make such a truth claim and do based on actual knowledge. What they are, are proposed possibilities that some people have chosen to blindly believe, others have chosen to accept as an act of faith, and still ofters have just blindly rejected.

Just to say, a poster told me recently in our little discussion that before I was born I was in oblivion. My reaction was that I wasn't anywhere before I was conceived.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am referring only to the description of the waters and separating them . Science is now recognizing that the earth was covered with water at the start.

And another argument that can be refuted with a:

So what?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yeah... don't you know?? better yet, don't they know?? They meaning believers in evolution.

You used the wrong term. You are a believer. If one studies evolution one can know that it happened.