Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Why wouldn't a deity be real? At best one may doubt a deity, at worst, just not noting evidential argument for.
-
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!
What gives you the idea that a deity is real?
- Thread starter Sand Dancer
- Start date
Why wouldn't a deity be real? At best one may doubt a deity, at worst, just not noting evidential argument for.
... it means the gods we're talking about aren't physical. It means we're talking about something like the Spirit of Creativity, which is not directly evidenced in the physical given it is an abstract principle, but can be inferred through the processes of artists and bards. Or it means we're talking about something like the Spirit of Learning, which is also inferred through the process of accumulating knowledge or new skills. It's not really that complicated. If your gods have no (direct) physical evidence, it means they aren't physical in nature. I suppose alternatively, it could also mean that you're human - a finite being of limited experiences and tremendous ignorance when compared to the scope of many of the gods.
There are also plenty of gods that are physical, though. For those, I guess this line of speculation doesn't really apply?
I made that decision when the theological box I'd been thinking in was ruptured. I started actually asking questions and becoming more educated about the diversity of theological ideas out there. I realized there were plenty of options out there that could work for me.
Nope, because there is no lack of proof. What there might be a lack of is some particular individual or culture choosing to understand the things I consider gods to be gods. That's their right. Not everyone is into dirt worship.
Every day, all the time. That's kind of how it works when you've come to see everything as sacred and worthy of worship, and therefore see everything as gods. The real challenge is prioritizing, which ends up being an expression of your values.
Just a thought, I think that there is a very real and obvious language problem with @leov, which likely makes it extremely difficult and frustrating to express what he wants to say.
I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean how does a person have contact with my deities or how do they come off to me?
dianaiad
Well-Known Member
when there is no physical evidence, what made you decide that there are no gods? Do you care about lack of proof? How do you experience the lack of this/these deity/ deities?
Or....Lack of proof is not proof of lack.
If I believe in a deity (and I do) and I tell you that the reason I do is subjective, emotional....and still I accept that reason, how is that proof that one exists? If you don't believe in one, how is your utter lack of such experiences proof to anybody else that there isn't one?
It is possible to show that some particular version of Deity isn't logical or reasonable (in your view, anyway) but how is it possible to prove that NO deity can possibly exist?
Now it is true that simply because you cannot prove to me that one does not exist, this is not proof that one does.
However, the reverse is also true; if you don't like the evidence I use to base my faith in deity upon, that is not proof that no deity at all can possibly exist.
As for me, I have what I believe to be sufficient evidence to base my faith in God upon. Wouldn't work for you. Wouldn't work for anybody BUT me; y'all have to go get your own evidence. I don't have a problem with this.
....and I certainly do not feel that I have to prove that God exists TO YOU before *I* believe.
Just sayin'.
dianaiad
Well-Known Member
Evidence is simply 'reason to believe' in something. Many people believe in evidence for things that others do not. Look up Fred Hoyle's opinion of the Big Bang, for instance. Or the entire field of medicine back during Semelweis's day.
Or your opinion of what theists accept as a reason to believe as they do.
Your choice and your right, of course...but don't claim that theists have no evidence. They just have evidence you don't like. There is a difference.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Thankyou very much.
I need to download and read through that as best as I can.
Everything seems (to me) to be getting comparatively smaller. We may never know but our Universe could be one of billions. And any such collection might itself be one of billions.
And to think that mankind once believed that Earth was at the centre of all. For me the concept of an aware, interested and involved God slides further and further in to absurdity as Science discovers more and more about our surroundings.
But for me, to perceive that everything that is is a part of One is somehow very calming and reassuring. When I realise that the molecules that are part of me are going to be scattered and reduced and then borrowed by other lifeforms .... on and on..... I realise that they have been within and part of countless lifeforms before....... and it is alright.
PureX
Veteran Member
There is no objective reality that we can know. It is a theory based on our limited subjective experience and understanding that we call "reality". And anyway, no one is proposing that "God" exists as an object in reality.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
There is however something that is qualitatively different in everybody's experience, that is both inescapable, apparently shared (it contains facts that can be intersubjectively verified) and that behaves consistently enough that we can do science and engineering. If it isn't objective reality, it might as well be.
Flatly untrue. There are plenty of theists who claim god is objectively real.
Fred Hoyles hypothesis on the bb was debunked by the mounting evidence. Evidence that could be verified or falsified. He lost that debate but did win several others that as evidence has amassed has verified his various hypothesis.
And again, medicine develops on verifyable evidence, the days of, 'i think bleeding the patient will cure his cancer' are long gone.
Evidence : the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
Saying i believe in ... Is not evidence.
And in all my years on various forums no theist had ever provided evidence for a gods existence of any kind. None.
Sure they have said, 'its obvious' - not evidence. They have said, 'science doesn't know so it must be god' - not evidence. They have said 'look around, you see god in everything' - not evidence.
However if you do have evidence for a gods existence then please present it.
Andrei Linde and Vitaly Vanchurin have calculated a possible 10^10^16 universes with up to 10^10^10^7 including universes we are unable to distinguish.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0910/0910.1589v1.pdf
Or a quick phys.org write up on the paper
https://phys.org/news/2009-10-physicists-parallel-universes.html
And i love telling that we are all made of dead people ;-) and that one day in the distant future some of my atoms may help power a star that gives life to a planet.
Personal experiences with my Guru and collective personal experiences with my Guru convinced me.
Before that I was always highly skeptical because the idea seemed irrational to me.
If your desire for the Great has not yet ripened enough, He will not reveal Himself to you.
Audie
Veteran Member
Every breath contains air farted by Jesus.
Audie
Veteran Member
Or-the greater the desire, the easier it is
to fool yourself.
Actually, that is not an if. That is just a well
known principle of human behaviour.
So is the belief that the others may
be fooled, but not me!
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
You need to bottle that up and sell it. I'd buy. Great post!
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
Which one?
Why would we need to?
If you agree that there's no evidence for gods, then this implies that you:
- agree that every theistic claim is unjustified.
- agree that any religious claim that would serve as evidence if it were true is necessarily false.
When we're dealing with "you can't prove they DON'T exist," we're talking about stuff out beyond human knowledge: the "unknown unknowns," as they say. We can't make justifiable claims about stuff that is or isn't in the "unknown unknowns," so yes, in a sense, we can't justifiably say that something that looks kinda like someone's god absolutely isn't lurking out there somewhere, but so what?
When we get into "you can't prove God DOESN'T exist" territory, we're talking about how we can't tell the difference between:
- a god that doesn't provide any evidence for its existence in any way that we can perceive and is irrelevant in every way we can measure to anything we can measure, and
- a god that doesn't exist at all.
What we aren't talking about is any god that anyone is properly justified in believing exists (since we're talking about what to do when there's no evidence to justify a firm position).
Is that irrelevant god the god you believe in?
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
Both.