Does God exist? (16 Viewers)

[Iron]

Anyone catch the Dawkins thing on Compass tonight?
I like how he attacked relativism as self-centred and anti-intellectual, but I dont agree that science/reason is ABOVE relativism AND absolutism. He seemed shocked that society has given up on the enlightenment, but failed to realise that the very same enlightenment carried the seeds of its own destruction: the 'discovery' of meaninglessness.
I think him a fool for believing and arguing on national tv that humans can/should be satisfied with the cold, material 'facts' offered by science, and nothing else.
THIS WILL LEAD TO OUR DOWNFALL

 

[Enteebee]

Anyone catch the Dawkins thing on Compass tonight?
I like how he attacked relativism as self-centred and anti-intellectual, but I dont agree that science/reason is ABOVE relativism AND absolutism. He seemed shocked that society has given up on the enlightenment, but failed to realise that the very same enlightenment carried the seeds of its own destruction: the 'discovery' of meaninglessness.
I think him a fool for believing and arguing on national tv that humans can/should be satisfied with the cold, material 'facts' offered by science, and nothing else.
THIS WILL LEAD TO OUR DOWNFALL

You still really don't get it imho Iron, I'm not sure if it's because you don't like the answer or whatever... but much like dawkins I can accept relativism and still come to very important 'truths' about my reality as best I know it.

 

[Iron]

Well sure, but your definition of 'truths' there is not truth at all. You put it in quotations because all truth is to you is utility - something we agree on for the sake of argument, for efficiency, for survival.
This may be the best truth on offer, but I find it half-arsed

 

[KFunk]

I think him a fool for believing and arguing on national tv that humans can/should be satisfied with the cold, material 'facts' offered by science, and nothing else.

You should check out a book by Owen Flanagan called The Really Hard Problem in which he provides "the naturalist's response to those who say that science has robbed the world of the meaning that fantastical, wishful stories once provided."

 

[*TRUE*]

Oh..Im so annoyed! I just typed a reply and lost it , Grrr.

It is going to take faith to believe that God exists. And it is going to take faith to believe that he does not.

This choice of belief transcends the physical and all earthly knowledge and arguement.This is because it is a spiritual issue. The God of the bible is not limited by anything or this earth. What else do u know that is without beginning or end?
You can choose to believe in spirituality or not.
In the end , all philosophy ends up where it started, with the same questions.
In the end , all people must CHOOSE to have faith in their philosophy/belief.
And one day , we will know if we were right.
I hope no one here is becoming discouraged.
We know so little. Our knowledge is so limited. Just think of the vast vast scope of the universe. And think of us. With our limited knowledge and flawed reasoning... You must choose to have faith in something. Or faith in nothing.
It will take faith and not argument alone to decide.
Dont be discouraged.
And yes , i know without a shadow of a doubt what I believe

 

[Iron]

KFunk, youre a smart guy, what would Plato make of Dawkins?
I think, in light of Socrates blowing his mouth off about religion and traditions being silly, he realised that you have to conform to the wishful stories you speak of, not only to survive, but to prevent total anarchy, death and destruction on a level of totality. This stupid stupid idea that there is no meaning and everyone needs to know about it will DOOM US ALL. I mean, HITLER came pretty close dont you reckon!? What with our WMDs we CANT AFFORD THE AWFUL TRUTH TO GET OUT. We dont have any foundation to stop another Hitler, we're totally bare-faced nude.
Haha.
Dangly bits.

 

[KFunk]

This choice of belief transcends the physical and all earthly knowledge and arguement.This is because it is a spiritual issue. The God of the bible is not limited by anything or this earth. What else do u know that is without beginning or end?
You can choose to believe in spirituality or not.
In the end , all philosophy ends up where it started, with the same questions.
In the end , all people must CHOOSE to have faith in their philosophy/belief.
And one day , we will know if we were right.

This isn't simply a matter of transcendental beliefs with no bearing on, or relation to, our earthly existence. Firstly, experience can contradict transcendental claims. Yes, you can 'have faith' that the "mere appearances" provided to us by phenomenal experience are false and must fall before your more divine beliefs. But what impact will this have on the way you live your life? This then brings me to my second point: the danger of false belief. As an illustration I want to direct you to this well worn parable from William Clifford (which begins an essay of his called 'The Ethics of Belief'):

"A shipowner was about to send to sea an emigrant-ship. He knew that she was old, and not overwell built at the first; that she had seen many seas and climes, and often had needed repairs. Doubts had been suggested to him that possibly she was not seaworthy. These doubts preyed upon his mind, and made him unhappy; he thought that perhaps he ought to have her thoroughly overhauled and and refitted, even though this should put him at great expense. Before the ship sailed, however, he succeeded in overcoming these melancholy reflections. He said to himself that she had gone safely through so many voyages and weathered so many storms that it was idle to suppose she would not come safely home from this trip also. He would put his trust in Providence, which could hardly fail to protect all these unhappy families that were leaving their fatherland to seek for better times elsewhere. He would dismiss from his mind all ungenerous suspicions about the honesty of builders and contractors. In such ways he acquired a sincere and comfortable conviction that his vessel was thoroughly safe and seaworthy; he watched her departure with a light heart, and benevolent wishes for the success of the exiles in their strange new home that was to be; and he got his insurance-money when she went down in mid-ocean and told no tales. "

 

[KFunk]

Simply put, if we do not have free will, then God is wholly responsible for where we end up (hell or heaven). This leaves me with three conclusions. In order for me to maintain my christian faith I need either:

a) a new definition of free will,
b) a drastically different view of hell
c) or a drastically different view of Gods character

Brad, on all of these counts I think you may get a lot from a dialogue written by the logician/philosopher/magician Raymond Smullyan called Is God a Taoist? (<-- link).

 

[KFunk]

Iron, I don't know Dawkins well enough to really comment - I haven't actually read any of his work. I think that there are suitable substitutes for the wishful stories of objective morality and religion, it just takes a little bit of existential courage to embrace them. You might even say that I advocate a kind of constructive nihilism (deny the absolute, but construct the relative for pragmatic reasons). Claims of meaninglessness don't have to be destructive, so long as the relevant pill is provided concurrently.

 

[*TRUE*]

This isn't simply a matter of transcendental beliefs with no bearing on, or relation to, our earthly existence. Firstly, experience can contradict transcendental claims. Yes, you can 'have faith' that the "mere appearances" provided to us by phenomenal experience are false and must fall before your more divine beliefs. But what impact will this have on the way you live your life? This then brings me to my second point: the danger of false belief. As an illustration I want to direct you to this well worn parable from William Clifford (which begins an essay of his called 'The Ethics of Belief'):

"A shipowner was about to send to sea an emigrant-ship. He knew that she was old, and not overwell built at the first; that she had seen many seas and climes, and often had needed repairs. Doubts had been suggested to him that possibly she was not seaworthy. These doubts preyed upon his mind, and made him unhappy; he thought that perhaps he ought to have her thoroughly overhauled and and refitted, even though this should put him at great expense. Before the ship sailed, however, he succeeded in overcoming these melancholy reflections. He said to himself that she had gone safely through so many voyages and weathered so many storms that it was idle to suppose she would not come safely home from this trip also. He would put his trust in Providence, which could hardly fail to protect all these unhappy families that were leaving their fatherland to seek for better times elsewhere. He would dismiss from his mind all ungenerous suspicions about the honesty of builders and contractors. In such ways he acquired a sincere and comfortable conviction that his vessel was thoroughly safe and seaworthy; he watched her departure with a light heart, and benevolent wishes for the success of the exiles in their strange new home that was to be; and he got his insurance-money when she went down in mid-ocean and told no tales. "

You are right Kfunk it isnt just about transcendental beliefs. I wasnt saying that -
Beliefs have HUGE impact on how we live our lives here on earth!!! HUGE. But i dont always understand those impacts. Or why they are the way they are.
And if you believe what i believe, you believe things happen on Earth for a reason.
But you still CHOOSE to believe what those reasons are.
Thankyou for the 'parable'...i really appreciate your time etc. I have huge respect for your mind. I can see you are a thinker.But that parable is something i will still have to CHOOSE to place weight on.
Why should i lend it ANY credence at all? What makes it so special? It is just part of someones argument for their philosophy
I could share many parables that support my argument should i wish to... but you see , I dont think it would change a thing. You will choose , and i will choose.
I dont deny the existance of Earth, and happenings here. I just deny that any person understands the reason for them

 

[KFunk]

You seem to be vulnerable to a pitfall similar to that which so often traps those who claim "there is no Truth". What difficulty do they face? The fact that many of them speak as though they themselves offer a truth of the sort they deny. Similar issues pertain to your claim that (and correct me if I misconstrue your intent) noone fully understands the happenings of the world - but then you seem to have garnered enough understanding to make such a judgement. Thus, as with denials of truth, claims of universal ignorance have a tendency to swallow their own tail.

 

[*TRUE*]

You seem to be vulnerable to a pitfall similar to that which so often traps those who claim "there is no Truth". What difficulty do they face? The fact that many of them speak as though they themselves offer a truth of the sort they deny. Similar issues pertain to your claim that (and correct me if I misconstrue your intent) noone fully understands the happenings of the world - but then you seem to have garnered enough understanding to make such a judgement. Thus, as with denials of truth, claims of universal ignorance have a tendency to swallow their own tail.

Yes , it has always made me laugh when people say "this is truth , there is no truth!"

Yes , i think you misunderstood me a little.
Remember what i said about faith? how it takes faith to believe in anything? Even to believe in nothing?
I do not say that "no one fully understands the happenings of the world" because i have 'garnered enough understnading.' to make such a statement.
I say it because in Gods word it says that no man understands his own way.
I have faith , and my understanding follows.

My faith is the rock upon which my beliefs are built.

Im going to have to go and be a good girl and do some more study. Ill come back late tonight

 

[BradCube]

Brad, on all of these counts I think you may get a lot from a dialogue written by the logician/philosopher/magician Raymond Smullyan called Is God a Taoist? (<-- link).

Great read, many thanks. Had me laughing at parts by just pointing how the most simplest of assumptions don't have all that much grounding

 

[flappinghippo]

God is peace unto eternity, One's ease into gratuity.

However,

Man's lease unto acuity, is Time's beast – antiquity.

 

[KFunk]

I was just watching the Australian Christian Channel - one of my guilty pleasures - and I was given an enlightening lesson in biblical literalism (by a show called The Bible's greatest miracles: the proof!). Things I learnt:

- There is conclusive evidence, "that would hold up in any court of law", that a race of giants coinhabited Phillistine territory. Thus the existence of Goliath is verified.

- Rabbis know exactly where Moses' stone tablets are located.

- "Remember, there is no achaeological evidence showing that these Biblical characters, places and objects did not exist", i.e. a lack of evidence of non-existince is itself confirmatory evidence.

 

[Kwayera]

Hahaha, what a hilarious past-time, KFunk! I should do that and eat popcorn

 

[Besodeiah]

I was just watching the Australian Christian Channel - one of my guilty pleasures - and I was given an enlightening lesson in biblical literalism (by a show called The Bible's greatest miracles: the proof!). Things I learnt:

- There is conclusive evidence, "that would hold up in any court of law", that a race of giants coinhabited Phillistine territory. Thus the existence of Goliath is verified.

- Rabbis know exactly where Moses' stone tablets are located.

- "Remember, there is no achaeological evidence showing that these Biblical characters, places and objects did not exist", i.e. a lack of evidence of non-existince is itself confirmatory evidence.

That channel is my biggest source of lulz outside the TV evangalists on at 2am.

 

[BradCube]

I was just watching the Australian Christian Channel - one of my guilty pleasures - and I was given an enlightening lesson in biblical literalism (by a show called The Bible's greatest miracles: the proof!). Things I learnt:

- There is conclusive evidence, "that would hold up in any court of law", that a race of giants coinhabited Phillistine territory. Thus the existence of Goliath is verified.

- Rabbis know exactly where Moses' stone tablets are located.

- "Remember, there is no achaeological evidence showing that these Biblical characters, places and objects did not exist", i.e. a lack of evidence of non-existince is itself confirmatory evidence.

Sigh...it's all a little disheartening isn't it? Proofs and shows such as this serve to discredit Christianity more than ground it. Sadly, it's not all that uncommon within sermons I have heard too. I can't help but be overly critical (not necessarily negatively) of everything that is said from the pulpit.

Needless to say, I have often found myself fuming by the end of a sermon. Especially in cases where the speaker is trying to deal with "scientific" proofs.

Having said that, I see the opposite of this occurring everyday with the layman giving reasons for and against the existance of God. All I mean to point out really is that this un-thought out reasoning shown on the "Australian Christian Channel" is not something that I find exclusive to Christianity.

 

[Enteebee]

Yeah but there's not going to be any better arguments for the existence of an interventionist etc God than for love pixies so I doubt it's going to matter how sophisticated and intelligent the person providing such proves would be... edit: In fact, I'd say the arguments that anyone could find 'better' for the existence of such a being are likely to just be clever word games, so I doubt I'd like such proofs very much at all.

 

[Besodeiah]

Many times I'd argue, I don't know if it was to convince the person I was arguing with or myself. But I no longer require validation of Allah (Subhana W'talah)'s existence. Because now I know. I've experienced it.

I have no way to convince you I expereienced what I did, other than explain what I did and ask you to emulate it. Perhaps it will yield similar results. I foolishly attempted to communicate with Allah (Subhana W'talah) with absolute conviction, and only then after feeling Allah (Subhana W'talah)'s extreme power through an unrelenting light, which tore at the pit of my soul, like the amalgamation of every human being I've ever known's guilt and shame, did I come to realise that Allah (Subhana W'talah)'s existence is certain.

lol @ this

thanks ari