• 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!

Very Strong Evidence Against the Existence of the Supernatural

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Problem is we don't know all the physics of the universe yet. Did you know science can only detect about 5% of the matter in the universe (the other 95% being undetectable (dark matter)).
Dark matter is detectable. Indirectly, but detectable. That's how you know about it.

You might want to hold up on publishing your 'very strong evidence' until you understand more than a sliver of the universe.
But anything that lies beyond our knowledge isn't the god anyone is talking about. The gods that people actually believe in are ones that can be - supposedly - deduced or inferred from evidence that we either have right now or used to have.

In fact, I'd go so far as to argue that since a god is an object of human worship, anything that exists beyond human knowledge can't be a god.

Even if we don't go far, your position gets us from "no gods exist at all" to "there may be gods out there somewhere beyond our knowledge, but all the ones that humanity currently believes in are baseless nonsense."
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
I actually do believe water can be turned into wine by forces and abilities not currently understood by science.
But WHY do you believe it? What has ever occurred in the world that you know that has suggested that to you?

And why only water into wine? What's to stop a Freemason being turned into a cabbage, or an earwig into an apartment building?

Just so you understand, I am struggling to understand this business of "belief" in things for which the reasons for belief never rise above zero -- but which are just as seriously held as if they were 100% corroborated. This is something that (so far as we know now) only humans do. And it is often (as we know in these days of religious terrorism) truly bizarre and truly frightening.
 

james bond

Well-Known Member
I would like to make a post regarding the existence of supernatural deities. When discussing the existence of God with theists, particularly Abrahamic monotheists, the point is often raised that it is not possible for me to "disprove" the existence of the God of the Bible or Qu'ran, etc. While this is true, it is still very easy to illustrate why belief in such entities is absurd due to the extreme unlikelihood of their existence. Let's use a simple illustration with Santa Claus. I would wager that most of us on this forum are in agreement that Santa Claus does not exist. But what is our evidence for the nonexistance of Santa Claus?

For me, the answer is simple, but let's take a moment to provide some reasons that the existence of Santa Claus is highly improbable, essentially to the point of certainty: He violates the laws of physics. It is physically impossible for reindeer to fly, and it is also physically impossible for a single human being to visit every household in the world on a single night. Additionally, it is physically impossible for a single bag on a small sleigh to hold all of the presents (presumably millions, if not billions) that Santa will be providing to children around the world. At best, even a very large bag could hold only a few dozen small presents, yet those who affirm the existence of Santa Claus insist that a single bag could hold millions upon millions of wrapped presents. Finally, an obese man (or any adult human being) cannot descend a chimney. At best, he could get his lower calf down the chimney before being forced to retreat. Yet those who affirm the existence of Santa believe that Santa, in all of his extreme obesity, is able to descend a chimney that is likely only a foot or so in diameter.

There are many other reasons that the existence of Santa Claus is extremely improbable, but, I think it is safe to state that I have provided enough that most reasonable people would concur that the evidence against Santa's existence is overwhelming.,

For the second portion of our illustration, I will be referring to the biblical god, with an emphasis on Jesus Christ in the New Testament. However, the same principles apply to Zeus, Allah, Horus, Krishna, Vishnu, etc., and the deities of any other religions which violate the laws of physics.

To start, we know that it is biologically impossible for a virgin to give birth, yet the New Testament claims that Mary violated this simple law of biology by giving birth without receiving sperm. We know that it is physically impossible for water to be transformed into wine, since the chemical compositions of water and wine are distinct. Yet, the New Testament claims that Jesus was able to perform this transformation, even though it violates the laws of physics and chemistry (and hence is physically impossible). Additionally, we know that it is physically impossible for a man (or any other organism larger than a small insect) to walk on the surface of water, yet the New Testament again claims that men were able to violate the laws of physics and walk on water. Additionally, we know that a man cannot die, and be buried, and then physically come back to life days later. Yet believers in the biblical god hold to this as well, even though it is common knowledge that such an action is physically impossible, and that in any other context, a claim such as this would be dismissed without second thought. These are just a few examples. In short, any deity that is alleged to perform miracles cannot exist in the same way that Santa Claus cannot exist, because "miracles" by definition are violations of the laws of physics, and hence, are physically impossible.

By the way, for those of you who swear that paranormal/supernatural events can take place, the James Randi foundation has a million dollar reward for you if you can demonstrate the existence of such a phenomenon. So far, no one has been able to claim this reward. It is doubtful that you will become the first.

What kind of ignorant scrooge are you? Sure, Santa Claus exists. It's an adult playing a role, but it's an important role for young children. And a real life Santa Claus did exist. What was Santa Claus based on?

"...Nicholas, who was born during the third century in the village of Patara. At the time the area was Greek and is now on the southern coast of Turkey. His wealthy parents, who raised him to be a devout Christian, died in an epidemic while Nicholas was still young. Obeying Jesus' words to "sell what you own and give the money to the poor," Nicholas used his whole inheritance to assist the needy, the sick, and the suffering. He dedicated his life to serving God and was made Bishop of Myra while still a young man. Bishop Nicholas became known throughout the land for his generosity to those in need, his love for children, and his concern for sailors and ships.

Under the Roman Emperor Diocletian, who ruthlessly persecuted Christians, Bishop Nicholas suffered for his faith, was exiled and imprisoned. The prisons were so full of bishops, priests, and deacons, there was no room for the real criminals—murderers, thieves and robbers. After his release, Nicholas attended the Council of Nicaea in AD 325. He died December 6, AD 343 in Myra and was buried in his cathedral church, where a unique relic, called manna, formed in his grave. This liquid substance, said to have healing powers, fostered the growth of devotion to Nicholas. The anniversary of his death became a day of celebration, St. Nicholas Day, December 6th (December 19 on the Julian Calendar).

Through the centuries many stories and legends have been told of St. Nicholas' life and deeds. These accounts help us understand his extraordinary character and why he is so beloved and revered as protector and helper of those in need."

St. Nicholas Center ::: Who is St. Nicholas?

Atheists are usually wrong.

As for Jesus, he existed and was resurrected. It should be easy to disprove this if it was just a story. Obviously, you can't because you would've done so in your post instead of talking about things you do not know.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Dark matter is detectable. Indirectly, but detectable. That's how you know about it.
True, that is how physical science knows there is something they can not directly detect. I also know about it through the teachings of Vedic and occult sciences that do detect these things through psychic sensing.
But anything that lies beyond our knowledge isn't the god anyone is talking about. The gods that people actually believe in are ones that can be - supposedly - deduced or inferred from evidence that we either have right now or used to have.

In fact, I'd go so far as to argue that since a god is an object of human worship, anything that exists beyond human knowledge can't be a god.

Even if we don't go far, your position gets us from "no gods exist at all" to "there may be gods out there somewhere beyond our knowledge, but all the ones that humanity currently believes in are baseless nonsense."
I was taking it that our friend Hubert was saying there is strong evidence that there is no such thing as the supernatural/paranormal with their colloquial meanings. You seem to be turning into a question of the existence of god(s) which I wasn't addressing.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
But WHY do you believe it? What has ever occurred in the world that you know that has suggested that to you?
My study of certain advanced masters of the eastern (Indian) tradition is one reason. Siddhis (paranormal abilities) are in their nature.
And why only water into wine? What's to stop a Freemason being turned into a cabbage, or an earwig into an apartment building?

Just so you understand, I am struggling to understand this business of "belief" in things for which the reasons for belief never rise above zero -- but which are just as seriously held as if they were 100% corroborated. This is something that (so far as we know now) only humans do. And it is often (as we know in these days of religious terrorism) truly bizarre and truly frightening.
I also require evidence such as presented in my decades of study of paranormal phenomena. It's not a billiard ball physical universe to me anymore as I have heard too much compelling evidence to the contrary.
 

shawn001

Well-Known Member
How many times has it happened when humans can't explain something, they come up with supernatural explanations? Anyone have an idea on the number of times?
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
True, that is how physical science knows there is something they can not directly detect.
They know more than that. Regardless, your first statement about dark matter was incorrect.

I also know about it through the teachings of Vedic and occult sciences that do detect these things through psychic sensing.
Sure you do.

BTW: it strikes me as strange that you would use terms like "know" to describe this universe after you just argued in that Mandela Effect thread that, effectively, we can't really be sure that anything we remember happened in this universe at all.

Do you no longer believe that, or do you just compartmentalize that separately from your other outlandish claims?

I was taking it that our friend Hubert was saying there is strong evidence that there is no such thing as the supernatural/paranormal with their colloquial meanings. You seem to be turning into a question of the existence of god(s) which I wasn't addressing.
Hubert was addressing the existence of gods, and you were responding to him. My mistake for assuming you were trying to be relevant.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
As for Jesus, he existed and was resurrected. It should be easy to disprove this if it was just a story. Obviously, you can't because you would've done so in your post instead of talking about things you do not know.
How could the resurrection be disproven?

Maybe demonstrate with a similar claim that's made about Muhammad: that he was carried up to Heaven. Can you disprove that claim?
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
As for Jesus, he existed and was resurrected. It should be easy to disprove this if it was just a story. Obviously, you can't because you would've done so in your post instead of talking about things you do not know.

Many things that are overwhelmingly probable to be false are very difficult to disprove. I cannot disprove your beliefs and I will readily admit that. But (to use an illustration original to Christina Rad), I cannot disprove that their are invisible elves living in my behind either. Should I then state that this must certainly be the case because you cannot disprove it? Of course not; this would be utterly absurd. As with all claims, the default position is the null set. The onus is not on me to disprove the existence of the supernatural, rather, it is on those who claim it to exist to provide evidence for its existence, but so far, no one has successfully demonstrated that such phenomena exist.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Many things that are overwhelmingly probable to be false are very difficult to disprove. I cannot disprove your beliefs and I will readily admit that. But (to use an illustration original to Christina Rad), I cannot disprove that their are invisible elves living in my behind either. Should I then state that this must certainly be the case because you cannot disprove it? Of course not; this would be utterly absurd. As with all claims, the default position is the null set. The onus is not on me to disprove the existence of the supernatural, rather, it is on those who claim it to exist to provide evidence for its existence, but so far, no one has successfully demonstrated that such phenomena exist.
Even more to the point (and a problem for @james bond): we can't disprove the possibility that it was clear at the time that Jesus's resurrection didn't happen, but this information has been lost over time.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Sigh. Yet another thread by someone who wants to read scripture literally and superficially.

*Sigh* Yet another post by someone who reads scripture literally and not literally, and superficially and not superficially depending on their need to fit it in with their theology.

This calling the kettle black is hardly convincing.
.
 
Last edited:

Skwim

Veteran Member
Many things that are overwhelmingly probable to be false are very difficult to disprove. I cannot disprove your beliefs and I will readily admit that. But (to use an illustration original to Christina Rad), I cannot disprove that their are invisible elves living in my behind either. Should I then state that this must certainly be the case because you cannot disprove it? Of course not; this would be utterly absurd. As with all claims, the default position is the null set. The onus is not on me to disprove the existence of the supernatural, rather, it is on those who claim it to exist to provide evidence for its existence, but so far, no one has successfully demonstrated that such phenomena exist.
Hang in there Hubert, you're doing a great job what with all the equivocation and other silliness they're throwing at you. :thumbsup:

.
 

shawn001

Well-Known Member
Some ferment by a higher authority;)

Any higher authority if one existed would certainly use grapes.

In those days they drank a lot of fermented beverages.

Not to mention that is really not what that passage in the bible is about in the first place.

This also doesn't sound monotheistic

"John 15:1-5King James Version (KJV)
15 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman."


"Monsters, Ghosts, and Gods: Why We Believe"

Monsters, Ghosts and Gods: Why We Believe
 
Top