Rehash god/proof debate

[Unveiled Artist]

I do not need physical proof to believe in a God or in the teaching the teaching is proof enough for me since it has change my life fully

Something CT made me think....

What proof do nonbelievers (to whom this question is appropriate) want for god?

Why wouldn't proof be how it chances a person's life and not something explained objectively?

If something changed your life profoundly, would you use logic to verify your experiences, or?

 

[Kooky]

Plenty of people's lives have been profoundly changed by fictitious stories, conspiracy theories, and blatant lies.

Does that mean that unicorns are real, and the Elders of Zion really are plotting world domination?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Plenty of people's lives have been profoundly changed by fictitious stories, conspiracy theories, and blatant lies.

Does that mean that unicorns are real, and the Elders of Zion really are plotting world domination?

How do you know what god is to compare it to unicorns?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Plenty of people's lives have been profoundly changed by fictitious stories, conspiracy theories, and blatant lies.

Does that mean that unicorns are real, and the Elders of Zion really are plotting world domination?

If a belief changes me for the better, I'd say it has its merits. However, on the other hand, a lot of religious ideas, certainly not all, kind of don't change one for the better, I feel.

 

[F1fan]

Something CT made me think....

What proof do nonbelievers (to whom this question is appropriate) want for god?

Yeah, we hear this quite a bit. It depends on the God. There are about 4-5000 gods in human history and each have their own description, and as such has its own level of what evidence would be necessary to move it from fiction to probable. Oddly the more a theists defines and describes their God the more it tends to be unlikely to exist. They essentially define their god out of probability, especially when facts contradict what they claim. Being vague helps retain some possibility, but that is less that is relevant to judge. Let's not forget the the logical default is that all claims are by default UNTRUE, so there is a burden to demonstrate a claim is true to some degree that a rational mind can deem it probable.

The member Trailblazer recently defended her belief that her idea of God exists, but she claimed God created all things, and has total awareness of what it creates, but isn't responsible for cancers existing. This is a contradiction that can't be reconciled, so she invalidated her own claim. Lose lips sinks ships.

Theists are at a serious disadvantage to openly debate their beliefs. They have no facts. No credible evidence. And the claims tend to be contrary to what we understand of reality. Being vague and clever is their only hope to survive debate.

Why wouldn't proof be how it chances a person's life and not something explained objectively?

Because there are better explanations than a supernatural. Plus, if a supernatural is so God-damned concerned for us why doesn't it make our lives better since it's so God-damned smart, right? Is a god really so clueless about what makes life hard for people that it doesn't;t get it until people hit hard times and begs for something better? Guess what, cancer patients are such people, yet many don't get the miracle they deserve.

If something changed your life profoundly, would you use logic to verify your experiences, or?

Things change for the better when a person decides to make their life better. Some need to assign their own authority over to a "higher power" proxy because the don't respect themselves enough to commit. they might work harder for their God than they will for their self. In psychology the human mind has many flaws, and can be very confused and lost in fear and bad pattens of behavior. It's not unusual to resort to tricking the mind to get past self-destructive behavior.

I'm an atheist and by background is psychology. I prefer hard, blunt head on reality in life. But if a person is using religion to move past some seriously harmful behaviors i don't have a problem with it.

 

[F1fan]

How do you know what god is to compare it to unicorns?

No unicorn has done a damn thing for me, ever!!

But I'll say that i got a lot of money from the Tooth Fairy. And loads of presents from Santa Claus. So that is very tangible evidence for a kid.

But then the fraud was revealed. Do you know who it really was? Five guesses.

 

[sun rise]

If something changed your life profoundly, would you use logic to verify your experiences,

As a former atheist, my experience came first and then I used logic to make sense of what I had experienced. The verification was that when I read or heard experiences others had had, I could say "Yes, that is what happened to me" and that was validating.

 

[F1fan]

As a former atheist, my experience came first and then I used logic to make sense of what I had experienced. The verification was that when I read or heard experiences others had had, I could say "Yes, that is what happened to me" and that was validating.

Well you weren't listening to the experiences of other atheists. You were listening to the beliefs and claims of other theists. Of course the wonder and awe many of us can feel is the same. But reason and objectivity typically reveals most of these experiences to be mental phenomenon, not some supernatural goings on.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

No unicorn has done a damn thing for me, ever!!

But I'll say that i got a lot of money from the Tooth Fairy. And loads of presents from Santa Claus. So that is very tangible evidence for a kid.

But then the fraud was revealed. Do you know who it really was? Five guesses.

How does that compare to god?

 

[Aupmanyav]

What proof do nonbelievers (to whom this question is appropriate) want for god?
Why wouldn't proof be how it chances a person's life and not something explained objectively?

Non-believers like me have no problem with people who imagine God and are helped by that thought. However, I can do without it.
"A proof is sufficient evidence or a sufficient argument for the truth of a proposition." Proof (truth) - Wikipedia

 

[Brian2]

Something CT made me think....

What proof do nonbelievers (to whom this question is appropriate) want for god?

Why wouldn't proof be how it chances a person's life and not something explained objectively?

If something changed your life profoundly, would you use logic to verify your experiences, or?

It seems to be non believers who are the ones demanding proofs for God and the reason seems to be so that they can debunk them.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

No unicorn has done a damn thing for me, ever!!

But I'll say that i got a lot of money from the Tooth Fairy. And loads of presents from Santa Claus. So that is very tangible evidence for a kid.

But then the fraud was revealed. Do you know who it really was? Five guesses.

You've had a bad experience with religion?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Non-believers like me have no problem with people who imagine God and are helped by that thought. However, I can do without it.
"A proof is sufficient evidence or a sufficient argument for the truth of a proposition." Proof (truth) - Wikipedia

What is god to you that you'd say its imagination?

Many believers use the term but they don't always mean what non-believers think they mean (from a general point of view rather than their personal experiences).

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It seems to be non believers who are the ones demanding proofs for God and the reason seems to be so that they can debunk them.

The thing is, I wouldn't know how they could unless they have a different idea of god majority of theists just don't have (excluding human incarnations and manifestations).

 

[rational experiences]

Humans are supposed to use human basic common sense.

You were a human baby now a human adult. One day you die. Become bodily a deceased human. Human in an objective reason.

Two humans adults had sex not you personally but are human.

Then egotists just humans also born by human sex own groups. Be a human member of my group a status. Believe only in my cult which includes any human expressed science.

Natural group equal human family extended humans are family human race. Natural self owned no argument. We are human.

Basic human commonsense.

If you believe in indoctrination words books stories then you don't believe in self human first. Natural first.

About time you just accept a human is a human.

If strange human effects are experienced still you are just a human.

A human talking to a human. Be an equal only when you talk human talk human. Then no problem arises in human explanation by enforced human egotism.

If you tell a human as just a human any condition you experience as a human living is a living human experiencing it. You are not lying.

As lying is an established human coercion by egotism it is a problem caused by just humans inherited by and because of egotists.

Not in any advice human are you not a human even if you say but I believe in the status phenomena. You still are just a human first

Basic advice if we all die as humans in one human agreed calculated moment. No argument afterwards about who was right or wrong.

 

[firedragon]

How do you know what god is to compare it to unicorns?

The problem is, your criteria used in your OP is that it was your experience that you used as your standard. Not logic, not reason, not even theology. Thus, the point being made in return is that if experience is your criteria, one may have similar experiences with a unicorn which is a fictional being and one may say that changed his or her life. Is that in any way a kind of proof of a unicorn existing in reality?

One canon compare God to unicorns, but in this particular analogy, its a valid point. Simply because you are making experience your standard.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The problem is, your criteria used in your OP is that it was your experience that you used as your standard. Not logic, not reason, not even theology. Thus, the point being made in return is that if experience is your criteria, one may have similar experiences with a unicorn which is a fictional being and one may say that changed his or her life. Is that in any way a kind of proof of a unicorn existing in reality?

One canon compare God to unicorns, but in this particular analogy, its a valid point. Simply because you are making experience your standard.

But how does unicorns play into this?

I mean, you can challenge personal experiences as proof of god by saying its culture created, upbringing, or maybe just an human need to find one's place (psychological), but unicorns?

 

[firedragon]

But how does unicorns play into this?

I mean, you can challenge personal experiences as proof of god by saying its culture created, upbringing, or maybe just an human need to find one's place (psychological), but unicorns?

Its just an example.

See, when I was younger I was trying to understand a certain number of Buddhists in a particular area who believed in a God called Ayyanayaka who is supposed to be a tree God. I travelled like half the world just to see this tree among other things. This tree honestly has a certain "Gupta" as they called it which means "a hidden quality" if may translate that way. Its the way its bred. The experience people have when they visit this tree has made them create this deity, who in my paradigm is absolutely false or not a real deity, but this is their experience and according to them, this deity change their lives.

Thats another example.

 

[We Never Know]

But how does unicorns play into this?

I mean, you can challenge personal experiences as proof of god by saying its culture created, upbringing, or maybe just an human need to find one's place (psychological), but unicorns?

But yet unicorns do exist. We now call them narwhals.

Narwhal - Wikipedia.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Something CT made me think....

What proof do nonbelievers (to whom this question is appropriate) want for god?

Why wouldn't proof be how it chances a person's life and not something explained objectively?

If something changed your life profoundly, would you use logic to verify your experiences, or?

The way i understand what atheists ask for as proof of God is that a believer in some way can show a God in physical form, the atheists can touch and feel. That is not possible

My life change fully when I begun praying to Allah, the praying was heard, and answered. To me that is proof of Allah