• 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!

Agnosticism is debunked using advanced methods of Science

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
The "principle of sufficient reason" states that everything must have a reason or a cause. The modern formulation of the principle is usually attributed to Gottfried Leibniz, although the idea was conceived of and utilized as well by the THEIST Dr. Thomas Aquinas. The cause of modern Beuty and Simplicity scientific principles can not be illusion (otherwise their application violates the principle of sufficient reason), because in such case all Science is illusive. The cause of the Beuty and Simplicity criterion/concept is the belief, that Beautiful and simple God exists. And because the concepts have been justified by experiment/observation, then the source of the concepts (God) must be real as well.

Bad logic. If science cannot explain it then it just means that we do not know until evidence presents itself to give an idea of what did cause it. God becomes one of the possibilities but not the conclusion.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
@questfortruth

You say that you are seeking the “truth”, and yet you keep refusing to learn from your mistakes.

Science seek solutions by discovering “evidence” that will “verify” the model or “refute” the model, not by “proving” or “disproving” the “proof”.

Any mathematical model, like an “equation” or “formula” or “constant”, is proof, not evidence.

When they try to “prove” the proof, a mathematician might attempt to reduce the size of a very complicated equation into a smaller or simpler equation, OR attempt to reduce multiple equations to a single equation.

The problem with mathematical proof is that the maths could be wrong, or the proof don’t match up with evidence or with physical phenomena.

After all, proofs are man-made using variables and constants, and as such they can be wrong.

Evidence is real world and physical solution that will either show the explanatory models (eg hypotheses or theories) are right or wrong, depending on if the evidence verify or refute the model.

Science don’t seek proofs, science seek evidence, seek observation.

Evidence is something that can be -
  • observed or detected,
  • measured,
  • quantified (eg counting),
  • compared,
  • tested
Ideally, evidence should meet all these requirements.

For example. Some things like electricity cannot be directly observed, but they can be detected, using multimeter. The multimeter would not only detect electricity, it can also provide a number of different measurements, like measuring the electric current, voltage, power, energy. And writing down or recording these measurements provide data useful to science, so data must be supplied as test results, and test results are considered evidence.

And you can also used multiple multimeters so to ensure that the first multimeter is providing the correct measurements. This is one of the means of verification.

Verification is very important to science.

No models (hypotheses, theories) are consider true, without rigorously testing the model, through evidence (evidence in the form of observations and data). Nothing is true by default.

God cannot be true, by default, even if the models are wrong, because God himself cannot be observed, detected, measured or tested, therefore there are no evidence for god.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member

This is not a proof based on Godel's Math Logic it is an apologetic ontological argument not related to math. In fact for the argument to be believed you have to accept the premises which are conjecture. Second, all I can see from his ontological proof is he believes other intelligent beings exist in other worlds, ie aliens, and ah . . . all religion is not bad, ie Buddhism may be good, or possibly agnosticism. No mention of God, nor any specific religion mentioned here.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
No models (hypotheses, theories) are consider true, without rigorously testing the model, through evidence (evidence in the form of observations and data). Nothing is true by default.

God cannot be true, by default, even if the models are wrong, because God himself cannot be observed, detected, measured or tested, therefore there are no evidence for god.

If so, He can not be dismissed. I argue, that any false thing can be shown false [given unlimited research time and resources].

Hmmm I hae not decided if the Pagan Gods are real or not either, they are undecidable. That makes them real then? HUH!

If a god would be false, it can be demonstrated by either:
1. contradiction in his theology,
2. contradiction in nature,
3. inventing god-less model of reality [google "missing antimatter paradox"]
The pagan gods and laws of nature are not in the intersection. Thus, they are not necessary. This holds true the third point [in my vision by Occam's and Hitchen's Razors].

Bad logic. If science cannot explain it then it just means that we do not know until evidence presents itself to give an idea of what did cause it. God becomes one of the possibilities but not the conclusion.

It is wrong and unthankful to God to say because the apostasy violates the principle of sufficient reason: modernists have no reason to murder God of Love&Reason. "God is dead, we have murdered Him" (F.N.) "But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law: 'They hated me without reason.'" (John 15:25)
 
Last edited:

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
If so, he can not be dismissed. I argue, that any false thing can be shown false [given unlimited research time and resources].

Neith false nor true. It is believed or not believed,

If a god would be false, it can be demonstrated by either:
1. contradiction in his theology,
2. contradiction in nature,

Contradiction over the millennia of many conflicting and contradictions concerning what and who the God(s) are. and yes this results in numerous contradictions in nature.

3. inventing god-less model of reality [google "missing antimatter paradox"]

'Missing matter paradox' if used from a theological subjective 'arguing from ignorance.' From the scientific perspective it only represents unanswered questions nothing more.

The pagan gods and laws of nature are not in the intersection. Thus, they are not necessary. This holds true the third point [in my vision].

Only from this perspective of those who believe differently. From the perspective of those that believe in pagan Gods, your beliefs are not in the intersection.

It is wrong and unthankful to God to say because the apostasy violates the principle of sufficient reason: modernists have no reason to murder God of Love&Reason. "God is dead, we have murdered Him" (F.N.)

You cannot murder someone or something one does not believe in.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Neith false nor true. It is believed or not believed,

FAITH IS FAITHFULNESS TO KNOWLEDGE

Contradiction over the millennia of many conflicting and contradictions concerning what and who the God(s) are. and yes this results in numerous contradictions in nature.

YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT IS CONTRADICTION IN NATURE. IT IS ABSURD-IC PHYSICS. SUCH ONE IS NOT SEEN.

'Missing matter paradox' if used from a theological subjective 'arguing from ignorance.' From the scientific perspective it only represents unanswered questions nothing more.

IT IS PROOF THAT GOD OF GAPS IS ALIVE&WELL

Only from this perspective of those who believe differently. From the perspective of those that believe in pagan Gods, your beliefs are not in the intersection.

YOU DO NOT GET IT. REALITY WORKS PERFECTLY WITHOUT ANYONE FROM OLYMP.

You cannot murder someone or something one does not believe in.

Please read my comments inside your comment.

You cannot murder someone or something one does not believe in.

People are so deep in apostasy that have completely forgotten the faith their relatives had. I wildly guess two things: you are not a believer in my God, but your for-fathers in the Middle Ages were.
"But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law: 'They hated me without reason.'" (John 15:25)

This is not a proof based on Godel's Math Logic it is an apologetic ontological argument not related to math. No mention of God, nor any specific religion mentioned here.
Is strangely then, that the word God is central in the Wikipedia Article: "Gödel's ontological proof".
 
Last edited:

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Please read my comments inside your comment.

Read the comments. Nothing persuasive, just statements of what you believe.


People are so deep in apostasy that have completely forgotten the faith their relatives had. I wildly guess two things: you are not a believer in my God, but your for-fathers in the Middle Ages were.
"But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law: 'They hated me without reason.'" (John 15:25)

This is simply what you believe, nothing less and nothing more. Nothing convincing to those that do not believe as you do.


Is strangely then, that the word God is central in the Wikipedia Article: "Gödel's ontological proof".

Strange, but God(s) not mentioned. Again . . . This is not a proof based on Godel's Math Logic, which is much more coherent than his ontological argument. it is an apologetic ontological argument, which is not related to math. No mention of God, nor any specific religion mentioned here.
 
Last edited:

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Read the comments. Nothing persuasive, just statements of what you believe.

Strange, but God(s) not mentioned. Again . . . This is not a proof based on Godel's Math Logic it is an apologetic ontological argument not related to math. No mention of God, nor any specific religion mentioned here.
I insist that faith is staying true to knowledge. Therefore the beliefs of people have objective value. Do I have hallucination, I see word God in the Wikipedia?
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I insist that faith is staying true to knowledge.

Only from the context of what you believe.

Therefore the beliefs of people have objective value.

No, beliefs are many various contradictory subjective versions not supported by objective verifiable evidence. No objective value here, by definition of the mind only.


Do I have hallucination,

It's possible,

I see word God in the Wikipedia?

I see hundreds of thousands of words in Wikipedia,

God is a three letter word.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
It is wrong and unthankful to God to say because the apostasy violates the principle of sufficient reason: modernists have no reason to murder God of Love&Reason. "God is dead, we have murdered Him" (F.N.) "But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law: 'They hated me without reason.'" (John 15:25)

The problem is that there is no sufficient reason to believe that God exists, especially a specific one, and therefore no reason to thank him for something that he might or might not have done. It is the same reason why I don't thank you for my Computer or the books I read because I have no idea whether you created or printed them or not. Once again your reasoning is very flawed.

The term "God is dead, we have murdered him" in context, from what i have heard from another RFer, is not saying that God is dead, but that humans, because of scientific progress, have less reason to rely on God for things now than they have before. So humans pretty much help themselves with their own reasoning ability.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
The problem is that there is no sufficient reason to believe that God exists, especially a specific one, and therefore no reason to thank him
You don't get it, look:
1. Jesus gave observational reasons to abandon the Greek gods.
2. nobody gave reason to abandon Jesus.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
You don't get it, look:
1. Jesus gave observational reasons to abandon the Greek gods.
2. nobody gave reason to abandon Jesus.

Reason to abandon Jesus:
- Haven't observed him or any effect he has had in the world besides a psychological one on believers
- No valid evidence that he had a link to God
- No valid evidence that he still exists
- No valid evidence that he performed miracles or any such thing
- The bible makes claims and doesn't provide evidence

At present he is as impotent as the Greek gods.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Reason to abandon Jesus:
- Haven't observed him or any effect he has had in the world besides a psychological one on believers
- No valid evidence that he had a link to God
- No valid evidence that he still exists
- No valid evidence that he performed miracles or any such thing
- The bible makes claims and doesn't provide evidence

At present he is as impotent as the Greek gods.
I believe following:

Bible, I read my Bible. There are sources outside the Bible as well about Jesus. Moreover Jesus is the reason to abandon pagan gods. They were abandoned by all Europeans. Thus, people were impressed by Jesus's miracles and teaching. So for our for-fathers, Jesus is True God, He was scientifically proven God (by observation). There is no reason yet to abandon Jesus.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
I believe following:

Bible, I read my Bible. There are sources outside the Bible as well about Jesus. Moreover Jesus is the reason to abandon pagan gods. They were abandoned by all Europeans. Thus, people were impressed by Jesus's miracles and teaching. So for our for-fathers, Jesus is True God, He was scientifically proven God (by observation). There is no reason yet to abandon Jesus.

The Bible is a book of claims. Its claims have to be proven using outside evidence apart from the book. Certain claims have been proven, while other claims have not and sometimes have been disproven, even contradicting reality.

Yeah, those who worshipped pagan gods were heavily persecuted and killed. Many pagans "abandoned" paganism under false pretense to preserve their lives:

Persecution of pagans in the late Roman Empire - Wikipedia

And not all pagan gods were abandoned in europe:

European Paganism and Christianization

Also paganism was in full force after Jesus death, so most pagan converts in history never saw Jesus miracles. Plus, how many of them even read the Bible? It was mostly hearsay from what I understand. So many pagans were forced to become Christian so I don't know why you are mentioning pagans abandoning history because it sheds negative light on Christianity.

Observation and science haven't proven the existence of God.

So again your reasoning is flawed. I also stated a few reasons to abandon Jesus in my post you replied to.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
In your understanding, what is God? And in your understanding why can there not be more then one?
Spirit of all, which come from God is the essence of God. From God came names.
Therefore, "God" is Name, and the Name is God (cf. John 1:1). Because the name is defined as unique, which selects the person form the group, then there unique God.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
The Bible is a book of claims. Its claims have to be proven using outside evidence apart from the book. Certain claims have been proven, while other claims have not and sometimes have been disproven, even contradicting reality.

Yeah, those who worshipped pagan gods were heavily persecuted and killed. Many pagans "abandoned" paganism under false pretense to preserve their lives:

Persecution of pagans in the late Roman Empire - Wikipedia

And not all pagan gods were abandoned in europe:

European Paganism and Christianization

Also paganism was in full force after Jesus death, so most pagan converts in history never saw Jesus miracles. Plus, how many of them even read the Bible? It was mostly hearsay from what I understand. So many pagans were forced to become Christian so I don't know why you are mentioning pagans abandoning history because it sheds negative light on Christianity.

Observation and science haven't proven the existence of God.

So again your reasoning is flawed. I also stated a few reasons to abandon Jesus in my post you replied to.
I spoke "Europe has accepted Jesus Christ" as of consensus, status quo. Official Status Quo. Therefore, there must be a reason to change the Status Quo, otherwise, society sins against the "principle of sufficient reason", cf. Wikipedia. The groundless doubts in the Bible are not a reason.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
I spoke "Europe has accepted Jesus Christ" as of consensus, status quo. Official Status Quo. Therefore, there must be a reason to change the Status Quo, otherwise, society sins against the "principle of sufficient reason", cf. Wikipedia. The groundless doubts in the Bible are not a reason.

Argumentum ad populum, another logical fallacy on your part. The problem with this logical fallacy is that it fluctuates because popular opinion changes all the time.

The reason for the change in status quo was conversion and forced conversion.

By your reasoning then, the pagan gods were true at one point because they were the Status Quo.
Allah is actually the true God because Islam is becoming the fastest growing religion in the world and dominates the middle east.

The majority of the world at one point believed that the world was flat, was that then true at the time?

The actual reason why Christianity and Islam are dominating the religion scene is because they have been used as imperialistic religions. They actively proselytise and used nations to dominate people through wars and laws, then it becomes easier for pagans to convert because they will reap benefits from the state. Then the process is natural, as people who are naturally born into households following a particular religion will most likely become part of that religion.

I will state again:

Reason to abandon Jesus:
- Haven't observed him or any effect he has had in the world besides a psychological one on believers
- No valid evidence that he had a link to God
- No valid evidence that he still exists
- No valid evidence that he performed miracles or any such thing
- The bible makes claims and doesn't provide evidence

At present he is as impotent as the Greek gods.
 
Top