Wild idea?

[Daemon Sophic]

Apart from the wonders of creation God has revealed Himself to us through the Jewish history and by sending His Son to save us from the consequences of our sins.

The history of Israel and God showing Himself there is not a wild guess.
At least we should start with something that is real instead of making up stuff from our head.

 

[Brian2]

There is no evidence for a creator, only confirmation bias based on assumption. If evidence existed do you honestly think there would be so many different religions each imagining their own version of god or gods. And so many none believers saying, i see no evidence, show me valid evidence and i will examine it.

All those different religions show humanity's overwhelming thought through the ages that there is a God or Gods. The differences show that most religions are a reaching out by us humans to that God in our own ways and thoughts.
The non believers who want evidence and who assume no God without evidence for no God, but demand evidence for a God while ignoring evidence given?
We all have choices to make and are free to make them.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

All those different religions show humanity's overwhelming thought through the ages that there is a God or Gods. The differences show that most religions are a reaching out by us humans to that God in our own ways and thoughts.
The non believers who want evidence and who assume no God without evidence for no God, but demand evidence for a God while ignoring evidence given?
We all have choices to make and are free to make them.

Nope. History shows humanity and it’s predecessors hope/wishes without ever once finding, presenting, or even reasonably documenting anything remotely close to what might be considered as evidence that there is a God or Gods. The differences show that most religions are desperate grasping at straws by us humans for some sort of reasoning for a “Why” that simply doesn’t exist beyond what we ourselves are capable of determining, through our own actions during our time here on Earth.

 

[Brian2]

No. There's nothing to not know. In other words take me (and those like me). I had no concept of a creator growing up,no hunch, etc.

If someone asked if I believed in a creator Id say no. I have no object of comparison, no description, experience, and no doubts. The idea doesn't make sense in my view.

Kind of like if I asked, not in a rude way, do you believe there are people living on other planets.

More than likely from what you know you'd say no. If you said I don't know, are you leaving a chance there could be life?

Why?

It makes sense that there could be life on other planets if life did not need a creator, life giver but the default position to begin with should be "I don't know", then we might start leaning for or against, depending on what data is found and what other beliefs about life we might have etc.
But yes, if you are brought up without knowledge of a God or faith in a God then the default position should be that you do not believe in a God and I guess that would be the assumption you would take with you as a belief just as someone brought up in a faith would take a belief in God as their initial assumption.
But I would say that what is common for both is the fact that they do not know, what they have is their belief, even if non believers like to call it a lack of belief.

 

[Brian2]

No. And you rapidly disappear into an infinite regress if you start making assumptions like that (unless you indulge in special pleading, that is).

 

[Brian2]

Nope. History shows humanity and it’s predecessors hope/wishes without ever once finding, presenting, or even reasonably documenting anything remotely close to what might be considered as evidence that there is a God or Gods. The differences show that most religions are desperate grasping at straws by us humans for some sort of reasoning for a “Why” that simply doesn’t exist beyond what we ourselves are capable of determining, through our own actions during our time here on Earth.

I would of course disagree about no documentation that there is a God. Whether that is seen as evidence is another question and related to the person involved.

 

[Brian2]

 

[Unveiled Artist]

But yes, if you are brought up without knowledge of a God or faith in a God then the default position should be that you do not believe in a God and I guess that would be the assumption you would take with you as a belief just as someone brought up in a faith would take a belief in God as their initial assumption.

But I would say that what is common for both is the fact that they do not know, what they have is their belief, even if non believers like to call it a lack of belief.

But how would I say I don't know?

God is just a label in my head. We can lear to speak another language to communicate, but without culture and context, it means nothing.

If you took out the label it's asking

Do you believe something exist that you hold no concept in your brain?

How would you not know or leave open there is a concept that had never explained and experienced?

God would have to be defined so I'd have something concrete in order to base my opinions on ..whether it exist or it could.

--

Many nonbelievers have a concept of god thereby they can form opinions from comparing it to fairies to assuming believers think it's a man in the sky.

So they can be skeptical and say don't know....if they finally knew, they'd know what to expect.

Born atheists like myself don't have that. Without RF and My former friend I'd know nothing about god not near what it means personally.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Brian2

It's like opening my empty palm and you tell me I hold a cup. I know I don't but because others believe it, saying no doesn't make sense. It's better to be agnostic you'd say cause it leaves room for a cup to exist if I believe it enough.

To me that's silly.

People have personal attachments to God but regardless the topic, the logic doesn't compute.

 

[Brian2]

@Brian2

It's like opening my empty palm and you tell me I hold a cup. I know I don't but because others believe it, saying no doesn't make sense. It's better to be agnostic you'd say cause it leaves room for a cup to exist if I believe it enough.

To me that's silly.

People have personal attachments to God but regardless the topic, the logic doesn't compute.

I guess I just look at it from a different angle.
To me it is not that anyone knows that God does not exist.
It is not that believers believe what is silly to believe.
It is not that there is obviously no God.
With the palm leaf and the cup analogy you can see that the palm leaf is not a cup, given what you know a cup is.
But maybe you know that God does not exist and so your belief about that is correct.

 

[Brian2]

But how would I say I don't know?

God is just a label in my head. We can lear to speak another language to communicate, but without culture and context, it means nothing.

If you took out the label it's asking ..

Do you believe something exist that you hold no concept in your brain?

How would you not know or leave open there is a concept that had never explained and experienced?

God would have to be defined so I'd have something concrete in order to base my opinions on ..whether it exist or it could.

--

Many nonbelievers have a concept of god thereby they can form opinions from comparing it to fairies to assuming believers think it's a man in the sky.

So they can be skeptical and say don't know....if they finally knew, they'd know what to expect.

Born atheists like myself don't have that. Without RF and Mt former friend I'd know nothing about god not near what it means personally.

It sounds like you are in a similar position as believers are also. None of us have a knowledge of what God is. We might have some sort of an idea in our head but that is pretty superficial and probably mostly wrong.
To test the waters of these concepts, which you probably have some sort of an idea about with your time on RF, there has to be some sort of openness to the possibility at least.

 

[Stevicus]

The history of Israel and God showing Himself there is not a wild guess.
At least we should start with something that is real instead of making up stuff from our head.

So, we should entertain wild guesses from 2000 years ago?

 

[Brian2]

So, we should entertain wild guesses from 2000 years ago?

What the Jews believed about their scriptures is that they happened as reported. What Christians believed 2000 years ago about Jesus is what many of them say Jesus do and what the witnesses to the resurrected Jesus reported.
People believed the reports and saw they fitted with the scriptural prophecies and saw the miracles etc
Where are the wild guesses?

 

[Stevicus]

What the Jews believed about their scriptures is that they happened as reported. What Christians believed 2000 years ago about Jesus is what many of them say Jesus do and what the witnesses to the resurrected Jesus reported.
People believed the reports and saw they fitted with the scriptural prophecies and saw the miracles etc
Where are the wild guesses?

All you're saying here is that some people were convinced to believe the wild guesses of other people. That's been known to happen in human societies, where perceptions can be created and disseminated among large numbers of people and passed from generation to generation. It doesn't mean that they're true, though.

I'm keeping in mind that the topic is not necessarily about whether or not a creator exists (since the OP topic is starting with that assumption), but about humanity's part within that creation. I sometimes think that religion is not so much an exploration of God or the supernatural, as much as it's an affirmation and proclamation that we humans are really something special and wonderful.

The Church couldn't even bear the thought that the Earth wasn't at the center of the Solar System. It implies a belief that we humans are at the center of it all, while God is in orbit around us.

But maybe it's not really like that at all.

 

[ratiocinator]

Apart from the wonders of creation God has revealed Himself to us through the Jewish history and by sending His Son to save us from the consequences of our sins.

No evidence at all, then. Seriously, how in earth do you think there is any evidence in either the 'wonders of creation' or the stories you refer to?

 

[ratiocinator]

To me it is not that anyone knows that God does not exist.

There are countless different version of 'god' that people believe in and at the very least most of them don't exist (because they contradict each other).

It is not that believers believe what is silly to believe.

Some of them do.

It is not that there is obviously no God.

Again, most god-concepts must be wrong. While it's not impossible that some sort of 'god' might exist, there are good reasons to rule out a just, fair, omnipotent, omniscient god with an important message (which covers a lot of theistic beliefs).

 

[Mock Turtle]

I would have thought the default position is "I don't know", not the assumption that there is no creator.

Postulating a creator is a creative proposition (it is not obvious), so surely if there is no evidence (produce such) then there being no such thing is the default, even if 'I don't know' might be the more sensible option.

 

[ChristineM]

All those different religions show humanity's overwhelming thought through the ages that there is a God or Gods. The differences show that most religions are a reaching out by us humans to that God in our own ways and thoughts.
The non believers who want evidence and who assume no God without evidence for no God, but demand evidence for a God while ignoring evidence given?
We all have choices to make and are free to make them.

Wrong. What it shows is that they believed there was a god.

What evidence given? All i see of claimed evidence always has a natural explanation or is currently unknown so the god believers hijack it and claim "we don't know so god musta done it."

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

One problem with creation threads like this one is that what constitutes 'created' is not defined except by Biblical literalists.

And God said "let there be a big bang creating a universe with the following laws that will inevitably lead to people through the laws of evolution".

That's what I believe. Much more fitting with God's majesty than the weird tweezers and magnifying glass micromanaging "creator" some believe in.

 

[Stevicus]

That's what I believe. Much more fitting with God's majesty than the weird tweasers and magnifying glass "creator" some believe in.

Hey, @Kangaroo Feathers, haven't seen you around these parts in a long time. How have you been?