Why do people deny or have various doubts about God?

[Iti oj]

I have a poster that says the sun is older then the earth. The quote is attributed to God the poster has a picture of a kitten stuck in a tree evidence enough?:yes:

Tell me what evidence would you expect to see?

 

[Sonofason]

You may get a degree in biology if you want. But presenting your lack of one as even passive evidence that "evolution isn't true" just won't cut it.

At the end of the day, stubborn denial is just stubborn denial.

First of all, I have never suggested that evolution is not true. I have said that I have not accepted it as truth, and that is because I have not seen the evidence that shows that it is true, or I do not understand the evidence that I am seeing. Calling ignorance denial is quite dishonest. I may be ignorant of many truths, but I would never stubbornly deny obvious truth.

A scientist telling me that my genes are the same as a gorilla's genes is like me telling you that I've experienced God. You don't have to understand it, just believe me.

 

[LuisDantas]

First of all, I have never suggested that evolution is not true. I have said that I have not accepted it as truth, and that is because I have not seen the evidence that shows that it is true, or I do not understand the evidence that I am seeing. Calling ignorance denial is quite dishonest.

Depending on the circunstances, it may be. Not here, though.

I may be ignorant of many truths, but I would never stubbornly deny obvious truth.

A scientist telling me that my genes are the same as a gorilla's genes is like me telling you that I've experienced God. You don't have to understand it, just believe me.

There is a crucial difference: one statement is testable, documented, and a legion of people are willing and able to put it to the proof, among other reasons because there is a lot of fame to be made if they disprove it.

The other is not.

 

[Sonofason]

Depending on the circunstances, it may be. Not here, though.




There is a crucial difference: one statement is testable, documented, and a legion of people are willing and able to put it to the proof, among other reasons because there is a lot of fame to be made if they disprove it.

The other is not.

My statement is completely verifiable. I am telling you that if you follow the prescribed procedures of this experiment, you will find the same results as I have. If you wish to experience God follow the following procedures.

Read the scriptures, believe what you read, love and obey God, believe in His Son, and you will experience God.

Now, you tell me what I have to do to believe that the sun predates the earth.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Now, you tell me what I have to do to believe that the sun predates the earth.

Open a 3rd grade science textbook.

 

[Sonofason]

Depending on the circunstances, it may be. Not here, though.




There is a crucial difference: one statement is testable, documented, and a legion of people are willing and able to put it to the proof, among other reasons because there is a lot of fame to be made if they disprove it.

The other is not.

Keep in mind, finding God is testable, and well documented. Millions of people have put the procedures I've outlined to the test, and all of them who were sincere, have experienced God.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Keep in mind, finding God is testable, and well documented. Millions of people have put the procedures I've outlined to the test, and all of them who were sincere, have experienced God.

:clap Best joke I have heard all night long!

 

[Parsimony]

Read the scriptures, believe what you read, love and obey God, believe in His Son, and you will experience God.

If believing in God is required to experience God, wouldn't that kinda make it impossible for an atheist to experience God and therefore find the evidence that they were looking for in order to believe in the first place?

 

[Ouroboros]

If believing in God is required to experience God, wouldn't that kinda make it impossible for an atheist to experience God and therefore find the evidence that they were looking for in order to believe in the first place?

The dilemma: you have to believe before God can give you faith.

It's like placebo. It only works if you believe it does.

 

[LuisDantas]

Keep in mind, finding God is testable, and well documented. Millions of people have put the procedures I've outlined to the test, and all of them who were sincere, have experienced God.

You know, Sonofason, I will not lie to you. I felt very tempted to simply gloss over your posts. I have been over superficially similar exchanges so many times already that I felt "nothing new here".

Then it struck me that it might be a mistake. Your attitude has a subtle yet perhaps very significant attitude. Your words a few posts ago claim that you are not taking the idea that Evolution is false as an a priori premise, and that certainly sets you apart from many.

So I found myself wondering what that might tell me. And I have reached a conclusion that it may be a hint that you, unlike so many other previous posters, may be not so much an anti-evolutionist as a legitimate skeptic. A non-evolutionist skeptic is most rare these days. What does make it possible for you to be one?

Obviously I do not know for certain, but my working hypothesis is that you, unlike me and so many others, have neither an overwhelming need to doubt evolution as a matter of course nor a clear perception that there is little reason for anyone to put much effort into making evolution "appear" true.

A rare combination that is. Something to consider.

As for this specific post of yours, I'm afraid the comparison does not hold. God is not testable in a scientifically meaningful way. It stands, and probably always will, as a strictly personal matter of belief.

 

[Looncall]

My statement is completely verifiable. I am telling you that if you follow the prescribed procedures of this experiment, you will find the same results as I have. If you wish to experience God follow the following procedures.

Read the scriptures, believe what you read, love and obey God, believe in His Son, and you will experience God.

Now, you tell me what I have to do to believe that the sun predates the earth.

Your procedure may very well produce an experience you interpret as being of god. What evidence do you have that that experience is not a delusion?

 

[McBell]

That is a perfect and expected response from you.

I have no doubts your well versed denial has been met with the same refusal to be fed from others.

 

[McBell]

What exactly do you consider evidence to be?

That which convinces someone of something.

 

[McBell]

I believe it's only fair, that when you direct accusations towards someone, that you back them up. At least present the double standard which you claim I have demonstrated, and I will prove to you and "the world" that you are once again wrong.

Any reasonable person will see that my credibility has been maintained.

Your double standards as to when evidence is evidence.

When seriously lacking evidence supports something you already believe, you accept it.
When solid evidence supports something you dislike, you dismiss it out of hand.


Your denial is most comical given you have already demonstrated the above in this very thread.

 

[Iti oj]

How do I read and believe, if I don't believe? And also you assume I haven't already.

 

[Sonofason]

If believing in God is required to experience God, wouldn't that kinda make it impossible for an atheist to experience God and therefore find the evidence that they were looking for in order to believe in the first place?

Yes, of course. It is impossible for an atheist to experience God.

"Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, "
(Romans 9:21-23)

 

[Sonofason]

You know, Sonofason, I will not lie to you. I felt very tempted to simply gloss over your posts. I have been over superficially similar exchanges so many times already that I felt "nothing new here".

Then it struck me that it might be a mistake. Your attitude has a subtle yet perhaps very significant attitude. Your words a few posts ago claim that you are not taking the idea that Evolution is false as an a priori premise, and that certainly sets you apart from many.

So I found myself wondering what that might tell me. And I have reached a conclusion that it may be a hint that you, unlike so many other previous posters, may be not so much an anti-evolutionist as a legitimate skeptic. A non-evolutionist skeptic is most rare these days. What does make it possible for you to be one?

Obviously I do not know for certain, but my working hypothesis is that you, unlike me and so many others, have neither an overwhelming need to doubt evolution as a matter of course nor a clear perception that there is little reason for anyone to put much effort into making evolution "appear" true.

A rare combination that is. Something to consider.

As for this specific post of yours, I'm afraid the comparison does not hold. God is not testable in a scientifically meaningful way. It stands, and probably always will, as a strictly personal matter of belief.

Thank you very much.
You are perhaps the first person on this thread to actually hear me.

Evolution is logical.
There is apparently a great deal of data that has been gathered which causes a great many people to believe that evolution is true. That doesn't guarantee that it is true, but it certainly suggests that people are being convinced that it is true. I, apparently do not have the experience nor the knowledge to understand all the data that is being collected. If I did, perhaps I would be persuaded. But even if I did understand all of the data, there is really no way for me to know, for sure, that the data is even valid, unless of course I were conducting the research for myself, and finding the data for myself, and then analyzing the data for myself, and drawing my own conclusions, whether they confirm the general consensus, or not.

In addition, I am not so overly concerned or even curious with whether or not evolution is true for me to dedicate a great deal of my time to the subject. If it's true, great. If it's not, great. I really don't care if it's true or not. My present belief system does not hinge on whether or not evolution is true.

I believe in God. I believe God created all things. Therefore, if evolution is true, then God created evolution. I'm okay with that. No matter what, I find God to be quite amazing. Perhaps if I should discover that evolution is indeed true, evolution would amaze me as well.

I have come to see that people exhibit faith in most aspects of life, and as well, in their knowledge and understanding. Many people believe things are true because others have made claims that those things are true. And when another claim comes along that weighs more heavily than the previous claim, everyone will jump on that band wagon, and believe that this newest, latest and greatest claim is indeed the true claim.

So yes, I am skeptical of knowledge, especially when it originates from someone else, and is something that I am incapable of determining for myself. Honestly, I know I could dedicate more time to discovering the truth about these things, but I'm busy. I don't have the time to verify everyone's claim. But I'm not going to accept their claims simply because I lack the time and motivation to investigate all of their claims for myself.

Anyhow, Thanks again.

If I've failed to address something in your comment to me, feel free to remind me, and I will try to give you an honest response.

 

[Koldo]

My statement is completely verifiable. I am telling you that if you follow the prescribed procedures of this experiment, you will find the same results as I have. If you wish to experience God follow the following procedures.

Read the scriptures, believe what you read, love and obey God, believe in His Son, and you will experience God.

Now, you tell me what I have to do to believe that the sun predates the earth.

I grant you that if you believe that something exists with all your heart and mind, you can pick anything you wish, you will experience the certainty of its existence.

This is why so many different religious people have religious experiences that confirm/ratify their faith. This procedure is inherently flawed.

 

[Sonofason]

Your procedure may very well produce an experience you interpret as being of god. What evidence do you have that that experience is not a delusion?

My experience is verified by nearly everyone who have followed this procedure. If my experience is a delusion, then there are millions of people having the very same delusion. I highly doubt that is the case. So there is of course an element of faith. My faith is in me. I believe I am not delusional. I know God exists because I believe in me.

 

[Sonofason]

I have no doubts your well versed denial has been met with the same refusal to be fed from others.

Thank you for thinking that I am well versed. I'm just trying to be honest here. I have no intention, nor any desire to deceive anyone. I would never deny anything that I know is true.