ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
- How do you know this ever happened?
- If it did, how do you know it's a 'miracle'?
- How do you define a 'miracle'?
- How does any of that get you to a god or gods?
-
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!
Explain to me why god is real using facts
- Thread starter Felix Harris
- Start date
james blunt
Well-Known Member
Everyones mistake is the same thing , poor English language .
space
/speɪs/
noun
- 1.
a continuous area or expanse which is free, available, or unoccupied.
You are doing what many others do and generalising space . The word for generalisation is the visual Universe .
All's people mostly say is
Perhaps you are looking for MORE !
james blunt
Well-Known Member
I've reverse engineered the entire Universe and science , I have the Gods equation miracle maths , I know it's a miracle because of the process and physics involved , no thing can exist without a space to exist in .
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
No, you haven't.
One explanation for dark energy is that it is a property of space. Albert Einstein was the first person to realize that empty space is not nothing.
What Is Dark Energy?
More is unknown than is known. We know how much dark energy there is because we know how it affects the universe's expansion. Other than that, it is a complete mystery. But it is an important mystery. It turns out that roughly 68% of the universe is dark energy. Dark matter makes up about 27%. The rest - everything on Earth, everything ever observed with all of our instruments, all normal matter - adds up to less than 5% of the universe. Come to think of it, maybe it shouldn't be called "normal" matter at all, since it is such a small fraction of the universe.
james blunt
Well-Known Member
Are you a mind reader ? How do you know I haven't ?
Yes I have so stop trying to say I haven't !
It is so obviously true .
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Because (for example) you can't even do sums with negative numbers, you don't understand simple Newtonian gravity, and you can't explain your ideas about science without making basic mistakes. The evidence for all these points exists on this forum.
If you'd "reverse engineered the entire Universe and science" none of the above would apply. You'd be totally proficient in current science and the associated mathematics.
Good luck with that.
If you want to change the meaning of god from that of a sentient, volitional agent capable of creating universes to just a word, then nobody will argue with you that such a word exists. I think that the OP was referring to something more substantial than a word.
I would call them unsupported claims, not facts. A fact is a linguistic string that accurately maps a portion of reality. When I write that the sun appears each morning on the eastern horizon to turn night into daybreak, and claim that that string of words is a fact, what I mean is that you can use those words to accurately predict a potential experience available to you in the mornings. It means that if you go outside and look east at the correct time in the pre-dawn morning, an object will appear to rise into the sky and illuminate it. That's what I mean by a fact - once again, a linguisitic string that accurately maps a portion of reality. It's tied to empiricism.
If that's not what you mean by a fact, then you are using the word differently that what I believe the OP intended.
This is a nice summary of the argument to date.
Isn't that appropriate? Preexisting convictions are our beliefs to date. Re-testing them is appropriate.
And if there is a weakness in religious belief, isn't this the proper venue to explore that?
It was also once the case that a live human birth had never been observed that wasn't preceded by a man and a woman having intercourse. That was then.
That's surely not the definition being used in the OP. I'm pretty sure that its author would concede that if one wants to redefine fact or god, he could demonstrate that what he calls a fact supports the existence of his version of a god. I doubt that there is any interest in such answers except to illustrate that nobody actually has any facts to support their god-belief if the god they believe in is more than just a word, for example, rather than an entity that exists outside of the heads of believers.
My definition of proof is that which convinces. Personally, I am not very interested in what others are willing to believe, but what they know and can demonstrate. I do not call that which convinces another but not me proof.
Is this what you mean by a fact that convinces you that the particular god that you have chosen to worship is real?
God is neither. Nor black nor white. Nor gay nor straight. Nor adult nor child.
God is Michael Jackson.
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
No that is not all.
PureX
Veteran Member
"Reality" is a subjective determination being made from each individual human's perspective, but also refers to that which we presume to exist beyond our human perception/cognition. So when someone asks "is God real" there will be multiple possible answers, and no way of determining their veracity without specifying their context. Until those asking and answering this question recognize and understand this, the discussion will almost certainly be confused and fruitless.
james blunt
Well-Known Member
''YOU'' couldn't even get light right , the gravity mechanism ., the big bang , time , time dilation .
We can't know all things , that is why you suppose to work with me , not against me !
Then we might actually get somewhere , my notions don't use what you mentioned so why would I need to know it ?
Epic Beard Man
Bearded Philosopher
I'm sure someone covered it here earlier but to me, two things are a missed here, your definition of "God," and your definition of "real facts."
Earthling
David Henson
Are you not even capable of seeing what a losing argument you have there. The OP subject heading reads: "Explain to me why god is real using facts"
I gave four examples. You are going to dismiss those because it isn't the definition being used in the OP and claim that doing so is redefining fact or god? It is neither. You can't reject the definition of god nor those things I presented in images.
Does Zeus not fit into that category? He exists only in peoples heads and yet he is factually a god. It doesn't matter whether or not he exists outside the heads of believers.
Now the OP text reads: "Basically, I am an atheist right, so I would like for you to explain to me why your god is real and use facts not opinions, please."
That is somewhat more problematic because it requires a careful consideration of ancient texts in various ancient languages. My God Jehovah could fall under the same definition as Zeus, only existing in my head, but he would still be factually a god that existed as such, but I believe my God is different. He's real and he exists. How can I show this atheist that without using opinion, only facts? Through careful study of the Bible . . . IF his mind is open to it.
Has anyone here ever presented facts to someone who wasn't open to them? Who didn't believe them?
I might use the prophecy of Cyrus to do this for a start, or I might just start with Genesis, but it isn't going to happen by saying 'Well, the nation of Israel.' That's a fact. What is it's history?' because the atheist would simply dismiss anything that has to do with the supernatural.
When I look at the universe I see something amazing. Whether it's the outer-space, the unique characteristics of the earth or the complexity and interaction of life forms, I'm in awe of how everything works, how all the pieces fit together, like a well rehearsed choreography. The universe is incredible, that's a fact.
Either all that came to exist by chance, or someone planned it and executed it brilliantly. Since I don't believe in myriads and myriads of happy coincidences, that leaves the second option. Someone made it. That's my opinion, of course, and as much as I would love to set up a meeting and introduce you to God, I'm afraid that won't be possible. That's where faith comes in.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
The problem with this kind of argument is that you end up with something just as (if not more) amazing than you started out to explain. It's a step in the wrong direction.
A being who is able to conceive of, plan, and create a universe is no less amazing and unexplained than just a universe...
Last edited:
lukethethird
unknown member
God is either real or is not real, end of story and no need for further explanation. If you want to believe in God, knock yourself out.
PureX
Veteran Member
Shadow Link
Active Member
God comes first to our minds as an idea that needs further investigation. Is Atheism simply an expression of not reasoning deeply enough, misinformed, or just a theme expressed by many whose been hurt from some form of false religion about God? — Would you think I have enough of a grasp to understand Atheism?
How would Ben Shapiro consider the subject?
we had a love, a love, a love, a god, a god.
Slaughterhouse is killin' hogs
Twisted children killin' frogs
Fool dumb bigots gainin' power
Tired old ladies kissin' dogs
Isn't the human race above them all? (I can't use it!)
Slaughterhouse is killin' hogs
Twisted children killin' frogs
Fool dumb bigots gainin' power
Tired old ladies kissin' dogs
Isn't the human race above them all? (I can't use it!)
Atheism is the only rational position possible absent a compelling demonstration of a god. Think of it as the equivalent of aleprechaunism and avampirism.Would you believe that they exist absent compelling evidence to the contrary?
Or perhaps you also think that those are also expression of people not reasoning deeply enough, or of being misinformed, or are an expression by many who have been hurt from some form of false religion about leprechauns and vampires.
The answer is obvious. If there is no reason to believe in gods, leprechauns, or vampires, one probably shouldn't believe in any of them, and if one does, it is that person that is not reasoning deeply enough.