1. 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!

How to prove God to an atheist (no, really)...

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by s2a, Jul 10, 2005.

  1. s2a

    s2a Heretic and part-time (skinny) Santa impersonator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2005
    Messages:
    3,255
    Ratings:
    +588
    Religion:
    Really?
    A modest proposal to redeem a few Billion souls...

    As an atheist (with neither faith nor belief in any gods or supernatural entities and/or supernatural cause/effect), I have often been asked what would be considered undeniable empirical evidence and proof of the claims of (a) divine/supernatural presence and existence.

    Focusing upon (simply because they tend to be more vociferous), but certainly not limited to the Christian faith, I wish to submit one scenario that would certainly make me an instant convert and devout believer in (a) God/Goddess.

    Both in Old Testament and New, "miracles" (i.e. what would be deemed as humanly impossible acts) were performed on a somewhat regular basis to "prove" God's might and power to believer and non-believer alike. Of course the problem was then, as it is today, that natural skepticism would kick in amongst many...dismissing such "miracles" as: mere illusionist's trick; "mass hysteria"; singular delusion(s); or otherwise, as "extraordinary", but certainly not categorically implausible or erstwhile unexplainable/unattributable phenomena. Obviously, there are also people with beliefs in alternate supernatural deities, spiritual forces, etc. that remain equally unmoved by such Biblical "miracles".

    Many would contend that "miracles" happen every day (spiritually speaking, not colloquially), and that it simply remains for the unbeliever to recognize/identify/concede such as "miracles". Arguably, the "degree" (and scope) of present day "miracles" is certainly lessened, not just in frequency alone; for we no longer "witness"...believer-induced/adherent-ascribed "partings" of the "water"; re-animation of "days-long-dead" folk; transformations of staffs into snakes; changing of water to human blood; royally ordained "first born" infanticides, etc. , etc., etc.

    I leave it to others to explain why this is so.

    In order to provide demonstrably incontrovertible; universally observable; independently falsifiable; and unequivocal "faith-specific" evidence and proof of an omniscient and all powerful god, the following suggestion is proposed:

    1) God (meaning to represent any divine entity in question) "speaks" to a group of His followers/adherents (after they prayerfully beseech Him to "reveal Himself to unbelievers), commanding them to preach of an upcoming "miracle" and message in the sky from God Himself (this would provide the basis of a prophecy to be borne out as true). Such a caveat is *optional*. Either the miracle can be "foretold", or manifest itself as a complete "surprise" (it's just that "fulfilled" prophecy seems to hold more sway and cognitive superficial influence than "unannounced" miracles.

    2) Afterwards, God arranges distant stars and galaxies (maybe even comets) to form a written message. Preferably, the message would be faith specific, ie. "I am Allah", or "I am Jehovah", "I am the God and Father of Jesus Christ", etc. (essentially to settle the debate as to which religion is "right"), but that is not critical to proving at least a supernatural entity causation. Maximum effect may be achieved by altering the message at least twice (to rule out any additional doubts as to whether the phenomena was natural or supernatural).

    3) The message must be observable from both hemispheres of the planet (therefore two identical messages, for maximum exposure and continuity).

    4) The "message" should be written in a modern earthly language (not symbols or untranslatable dead languages). The particular language doesn't especially matter, but for maximum impact, God could vary the message on a rotating weekly basis to eventually reflect all written human languages (time consuming, but what is that to God?)

    5) When God is done with the message "miracle", He should return the cosmos to the state it was in prior to the "miracle" (don't want to interfere with any long term plan or purpose).

    If the "miracle" were to be performed under the parameters stated above, I can virtually assure you a couple of billion converts in short order, with myself first at the altar in prayerful worship.

    Why?

    1)Because that proposed "miracle" is beyond any human (or even alien) capacity to hoax, regardless of technological prowess, and would defy every known law and theory of physics.

    2) Because the miracle is readily accessible, observable, and potentially falsifiable by any and all humans (discounting any possibility of "mass hysteria", or selective uncorroborated eyewitness accounts, or singularly anecdotal "testimonies").

    3) The Doppler shift of the utilized galaxies and stars could be measured and documented, with independently observable/verifiable results.

    4) It's pretty darn impressive.

    Resistance to this proposition is inevitable. I anticipate responses along the lines of, "If God proves His existence, then what would be the purpose of faith?", or "God doesn't need to prove Himself to you", or "All the proof you need is already here and available". Fine. If you wish to defend a position stating that your God need not prove His existence to unbelievers, please do so based upon the written tenants of your faith. Don't simply render an opinion; base your case in quotable, referenced, dogmatic/Scriptural text.

    I've offered a sure fire way to convert a few billion heathens to your particular faith or beliefs with little more effort than prayerful request of your omniscient, all-powerful God to so enlighten, and consequently save these immortal souls for all eternity.

    So I ask you, what's wrong with that?
     
  2. s2a

    s2a Heretic and part-time (skinny) Santa impersonator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2005
    Messages:
    3,255
    Ratings:
    +588
    Religion:
    Really?
    Dear mods....

    While I would be more than pleased to engage any "one-on-one" debate upon this topic...this thread was intended to be introduced more "generally" (though I'm not sure where).

    I defer to your wisdom and experience in directing "traffic" accordingly.

    Yours,
    s2a
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,667
    Ratings:
    +2,656
    Hi S2a, I think you're standing in the right 'corner' - you'll do fine where you are!:D PART QUOTE........"Resistance to this proposition is inevitable. I anticipate responses along the lines of, "If God proves His existence, then what would be the purpose of faith?", or "God doesn't need to prove Himself to you", or "All the proof you need is already here and available". Fine. If you wish to defend a position stating that your God need not prove His existence to unbelievers, please do so based upon the written tenants of your faith. Don't simply render an opinion; base your case in quotable, referenced, dogmatic/Scriptural text.

    I've offered a sure fire way to convert a few billion heathens to your particular faith or beliefs with little more effort than prayerful request of your omniscient, all-powerful God to so enlighten, and consequently save these immortal souls for all eternity.

    So I ask you, what's wrong with that?"..............PART QUOTE

    Hehe, What's wrong with that? - the basic premise that you ask God to Prove himself to you! I can understand your skepticism, but God wants you to commit yourself to him, on faith alone, and through the scriptures........

    God wants each of us to...
    How do we know what God wants us to do? He tells us in the Holy Bible, His Word. There he provides us with valuable information about how to live, what to do and what not to do. His ten commandments given to moses tell us some of his most basic rules, including "do not lie," "do not steal," honor your father and mother, and more (Exodus 20:1-17; Matthew 19:19).

    If everyone would follow God's rules, this world would be a much, much better place to live. More importantly, every sin and every good deed will effect us in eternity. Those who reject God and go to Hell, will be judged for every sin they have done. The more sins one does, the greater the penalties.

    Those who accept Jesus Christ will go to Heaven. They will receive wonderful rewards for the good things that they have done in love for God. The more that we do in obedience to God, the more rewards we will receive.

    [size=-1]Author: Paul S. Taylor, Eden Communications. Copyright © 2002, Eden Communications, All Rights Reserved.[/size]

    I am sorry if that is not what you wanted to hear; Is that a start?:)
     
  4. Fluffy

    Fluffy A fool

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Messages:
    7,570
    Ratings:
    +1,002
    This assumes that a god is out there that has the motive of converting as many human beings as possible. Afterall, you are not asking for a certainty or knowledge but merely a demonstration that would make the leap of assumption smaller. I would simply bring you out of your drug induced state after a few weeks and welcome you to Albion, the world of flying hippies. In other words you are accepting that humans require different levels of evidence to assume a position without justifying why a god should provide such a sufficient level of evidence or even whether it is possible.

    For example, if it were me, there is nothing that god could do to convince me of his existence. I believe in him because I WANT to. Writing a gigantic cosmic message won't impact on me at all, even if it were written by the Christian god instead of my own because this would still not validate reality as correct.
     
  5. s2a

    s2a Heretic and part-time (skinny) Santa impersonator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2005
    Messages:
    3,255
    Ratings:
    +588
    Religion:
    Really?
    Hello Michel,
    You said:

    >"Hi S2a, I think you're standing in the right 'corner' - you'll do fine where you are!"<

    Hmmm. OK. While I stated that I certainly wouldn't mind engaging a one-on-one debate on the topic, I had hoped to find (or with suitable direction, have placed) a less limited (more open) forum to invite discussion, beyond a "one-on-one" focus. Perhaps you could suggest another topical forum that would be suitable/appropriate for a more wide-ranging or engaging discussion?

    Just the same, I thank you for your feedback and reply, to wit:

    I concluded,
    >>"So I ask you, what's wrong with that?"<<

    You said:
    >"Hehe, What's wrong with that? - the basic premise that you ask God to Prove himself to you! I can understand your skepticism, but God wants you to commit yourself to him, on faith alone, and through the scriptures........"<

    Actually, that's NOT the basic premise I presented. Note when I said in Point 1:

    >>"1) God (meaning to represent any divine entity in question) "speaks" to a group of His followers/adherents (after they prayerfully beseech Him to "reveal Himself to unbelievers), commanding them to preach of an upcoming "miracle" and message in the sky from God Himself (this would provide the basis of a prophecy to be borne out as true). Such a caveat is *optional*. Either the miracle can be "foretold", or manifest itself as a complete "surprise" (it's just that "fulfilled" prophecy seems to hold more sway and cognitive superficial influence than "unannounced" miracles."<<

    See? I make no request of your God, nor do I demand that He "prove" (reveal) Himself to me, or to anyone else (even the idea of a prophetically foretold "miracle" is left as optional).

    The established premise/proposal simply suggests that *believers* pray (ask, beseech, etc.) for God to do so, for the especial benefit of unbelievers with "hardened hearts"; or for those of firmly convicted alternate beliefs (that should cover a few billion stray/heretical souls).

    Bear in mind, I retain no "belief" in your God, nor in any divine entity or supernatural force or cause/effect. In essence, I have no one to "ask" (demand) from which such a proposed miracle is to be delivered (with the literally thousands of worldwide religious/spiritual beliefs/myths/superstitions, I wouldn't even know where to begin). This is why my proposed miracle is presented instead to the adherent faithful, since *they* believe that they at least have God's "ear", if not (necesarily) His guaranteed favor.

    It is, after all, the earthbound believers that are charged with evangelizing and proselytizing their beliefs in their religion to: the uninitiated; the "wayward" (heretics, infidels, practicers of other beliefs); and the inherently skeptical doubters that don't (or have yet to) accept claims of supernatural cause/effect.

    Recall, I said:
    >>"As an atheist (with neither faith nor belief in any gods or supernatural entities and/or supernatural cause/effect), I have often been asked what would be considered undeniable empirical evidence and proof of the claims of (a) divine/supernatural presence and existence."<<

    Quite a few believers have asked of me to define what would provide undeniable and compelling evidence in order to accept that their god(s)...IS God (or whatever entity/force/spirit).

    And so, in answer as presented, is my reply/proposal; with the question, "What's wrong with that?".

    You followed with:
    ">God wants each of us to...[followed by appropriate Scripture references as to basic Christian dogma, "commandments", and beliefs]"<

    In providing me an intro to "Basic Christianity 101", you do a credible job as representative of your faith. But as you should be aware (by now), I am both well-acquainted and well-beyond (in understanding of ) such cursory and elemental aspects of the Christian belief.

    However, your careful provision of referenced Scripture does not address the concluding question at hand ("What's wrong with that?"). After your reconsideration of what my premised "miracle" proposal *actually* suggests (as reiterated above), you are certainly invited to reference Scripture that details what is "wrong" with the proposal as suggested.

    For example (as far as the Christian faith is concerned):

    Does all Scripture suggest that believers NOT pray that unbelievers "see", "find", or "discover" God (or that He might intervene on their behalf)?

    Does all Scripture suggest/emphatically state that "miracles" are worthless in converting unbelievers?

    Are all "miracles" intended solely for the benefit of believers (in reinforcing faith)?

    Is faith *lessened* in some way by witnessing a "miracle"?

    Are some "miracles" too much (or too generalized) to ask of God (like, say, "World Peace")?

    Is there a cut-off, or a specified number, of "affected" (or resultant) converts requisite before praying for divine intervention (ie, a "miracle") as "worthy"? Would such a proposed "miracle" be "unworthy" (of God's time, attention, and effort) if only ONE convert was realized?

    Does Scripture suggest that witness of/to "miracles" has in fact effected instantaneous and devout conversion and belief, or does it not?

    In essence (though other examples are extant), *these* are the questions that are underlying subtext of, "What's wrong with that?".

    If you would offer, "Yes it's wrong, and here's why..."; well, *that's* the Scriptural reference that I'm seeking as support to that perspective/position.

    If you would offer, "No, there's nothing wrong with that"; then I would suggest that believers get praying. There's a few billion souls at stake, and such a "miracle" would at least deliver one more believer into their midst.

    >"If everyone would follow God's rules, this world would be a much, much better place to live."<

    Perhaps. Remind me about Leviticus and Deuteronomy again, just for those that can't seem to "follow the rules".

    >"More importantly, every sin and every good deed will effect us in eternity. Those who reject God and go to Hell, will be judged for every sin they have done. The more sins one does, the greater the penalties.

    Those who accept Jesus Christ will go to Heaven. They will receive wonderful rewards for the good things that they have done in love for God. The more that we do in obedience to God, the more rewards we will receive."<

    Well, I touched upon that aspect (and those claims) in my thread "So What's So Great About a Christian Heaven?", here:
    [ http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?p=187645#post187645 ]

    You basically suggested (in that thread) that I go sit in a quiet field to experience Heaven. A nice sentiment to be sure (and not one I'd quibble with from an earthly perspective), but I note that you didn't bother to specify (beyond the Scriptural references I initially provided) just what those afterlife promised "wonderful rewards" would BE. I invite you to detail within that thread any and all specified "rewards" that your Heaven offers (Scripturally supported, of course) to saved (especially the "good") believers.

    You'll forgive my skepticism, and want of greater detail of such claims, but quite frankly, I wouldn't send a cherished loved one to a retirement community in this *mortal* realm based upon such sparse and generalized claims, much less chance their remaining existence upon a - "trust me, you'll love it - it's WONDERFUL!" proposition. Why don't Christian adherents exert the same level of skepticism and concern in basing their entire existence and behavior upon a similar "promise"?

    >"I am sorry if that is not what you wanted to hear; Is that a start?"<

    It's not what I "wanted to hear", because it didn't pointedly address the question at hand, but you're certainly invited to start over.
     
  6. s2a

    s2a Heretic and part-time (skinny) Santa impersonator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2005
    Messages:
    3,255
    Ratings:
    +588
    Religion:
    Really?
    Hello Fluffy,

    You said:

    >"This assumes that a god is out there that has the motive of converting as many human beings as possible. Afterall, you are not asking for a certainty or knowledge but merely a demonstration that would make the leap of assumption smaller."<

    Granted...somewhat...but, I'm not assuming that one belief has any greater or lesser credence/legitimacy than another. I'm not seeking to qualify the range or extent of the spirit/force/entity in play (or any associative motives, per se), but rather that adherents of "whatever" belief in supernatural cause/effect (granted, where applicable), IF they have in interest in gaining "converts" (presumably, "for their own good"), that such believers engage their "mutually omnipresent, beneficient spirit/force/deity (whathaveyou)" to enact/manifest themselves (itself) in such a way as to remove any doubt as to their/it's existence in fact.

    Perhaps your beliefs don't invite/encourage "converts", or aren't especially concerned (on behalf of "unbelievers)) with "afterlife/nextlife" aspects of reward/punishment. Matter of fact, I can't recall any Wiccans ever trying to "convert" me, or expressing interest in what would be required for me to accept their claims of the supernatural.

    You continued:
    >"I would simply bring you out of your drug induced state after a few weeks and welcome you to Albion, the world of flying hippies."<

    Hee. Timothy Leary as God. Could be worse...I suppose...;-)

    On more pointed note, I would refer you back to the original outlined premise itself. Whether or not you (or some other nefarious alien abductors) would place me in a lengthy drug-induced state of unconsciousness, there would be in fact...everyone else (however many billions - 5?; 6? - of currently existing people reside upon this world) would yet bear witness to the proposed "miracle" - excursion to planet of flying hippies for my personal intake notwithstanding.

    >"In other words you are accepting that humans require different levels of evidence to assume a position without justifying why a god should provide such a sufficient level of evidence or even whether it is possible."

    Well...I didn't suggest that such a proposed "miracle" would work for *everyone*. Despite overwhelming and incontrovertible evidence that demonstrates that we reside on and within a spherical world, there yet remains some "flat earthers" in abject denial of such evidence. But...their numbers are small...(even compared to the rolls of adherent or self-professed Wiccans - and no, I'm NOT suggesting that Wiccans are comparable to "flat-earthers"), and I'm taking about "billions" of erstwhile potential converts to a rather compelling, empirically evidenced, universally observable, objectively testable, and readily falsifiable cosmological "event" of unprecedented scope and impact.

    I submit that such an event (or "miracle") as outlined and qualified in my proposal, would certainly earn my "conversion"...and would perhaps do so for billions of others as well.

    >"For example, if it were me, there is nothing that god could do to convince me of his existence. I believe in him because I WANT to. Writing a gigantic cosmic message won't impact on me at all, even if it were written by the Christian god instead of my own because this would still not validate reality as correct."<

    Well, OK then. My proposed "miracle" wouldn't "work" for you.

    I'm as die-hard a skeptic as the "unbeliever" factory can manufacture today, but my standard of acceptance remains "beyond a reasonable doubt" - NOT "beyond any and all doubt"; or...as you may suggest for yourself, "beyond any and all evidence/proof". You're welcome to retain such an unequivocal and irrevocable standard, however reasonable you deem it to be in suiting your own sensibilities. Let's just say that I'm (and perhaps, a few billion other folks are) a tad more flexible...;-)
     
  7. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,667
    Ratings:
    +2,656
    S2a,

    heh, I thought I was being 'flexible' -within the bounds of my faith; since the Religion I follow has the scriptures as the basis for it's beliefs, I look to the scriptures for answers.

    If you truly want a 'one to one' you will need to find someone more able than I - I suggest Scott, or Netdoc, or Mister Emu, among others - I am not as well read as they. If you really want this to be one to one, I will move it onto the one to one debate forum; let me know - I thought you might want the option of more input...it's up to you.

    Fluffy, With all due respect, My God does not want 'To go and convert everyone to his way of thinking" - he might be delighted if that occured....

    What he hopes for is that you will decide to follow his dictates of your own free will; a Religious follower who has been brainwashed or press ganged is not worth havibng; you Need to want to be a Christiam, follower of Islam:) , Catholic........
     
  8. s2a

    s2a Heretic and part-time (skinny) Santa impersonator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2005
    Messages:
    3,255
    Ratings:
    +588
    Religion:
    Really?
    Hello Michel,

    You said:

    >"heh, I thought I was being 'flexible' -within the bounds of my faith; since the Religion I follow has the scriptures as the basis for it's beliefs, I look to the scriptures for answers."

    I would expect nothing less. ;-)

    However, this thread was initiated to address/answer MY question/proposal, not yours. ;-P

    Upon your subsequent reevaluation of the offered proposal, I surmise that you have no "answer" to offer, - either "pro" or "con".

    (Ya know, within the realm of skeptics, "I don't know" is considered an acceptable, if not especially satisfying reply).

    >"If you truly want a 'one to one' you will need to find someone more able than I - I suggest Scott, or Netdoc, or Mister Emu, among others - I am not as well read as they. If you really want this to be one to one, I will move it onto the one to one debate forum; let me know - I thought you might want the option of more input...it's up to you."

    Whups. Some crossed wires here (maybe my fault).

    No, I would prefer that the topic remain more "open" (even inviting a more candid reply of your own behalf perhaps).

    I note (dejectedly) that you chose not to address my invitation (with relevant thread link) for you to elaborate upon the Heavenly "rewards" that you alluded to in your previous post. The invitation remains...
     
  9. Scuba Pete

    Scuba Pete Le plongeur avec attitude...

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    16,472
    Ratings:
    +3,192
    Religion:
    Christian Taoist
    s2a,

    I can sense your "conversion" is at hand... :D

    1) God already reveals himself and his word to believers. Not being overly dramatic, he has chosen the miracle of "Faith" to demonstrate his existence to the world. That and loving your enemies. :D

    2) These messages already exist in the heavens. If you had but faith, you could read the message easily. Here is the rough translation: "Hey people of earth, Jehovah God here. You're going to be a lot happier if you stop hating and killing each other and focus on loving instead. You should listen to my son on this... he died for you while you still hated him."

    3) The message is observable any time you look for God. It's under rocks, deep in the ocean, all over the forests and jungles, and yes, even in the celestial firmament.

    4) The language is timeless: the language of love and faith. Anyone can understand it if they seek God's face.

    5) God's message is needed until the heavens and earth pass away. You can expect him to keep reaching out to us since he desires that all of us should be saved. Probably the best place to read it is on the hearts of those committed to serving his children. I think it's clearest there.

    By the way...

    1) God used a star to show the way to his son and yet many disregarded it.
    2) Miracles have always been accessible
    3) People will ALWAYS find reasons to not believe.
    4) A changed heart is far more impressive then a fabricated celestial event.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. tkdrocks

    tkdrocks Mellowing with Age

    Joined:
    May 6, 2005
    Messages:
    239
    Ratings:
    +47
    Religion:
    Militant Skeptic
    Please allow me to be specific to Christianity (for I am most familiar with that concept). I believe a big issue here is that non-belief in God/Jesus etc. results in eternal damnation. Since it is so easy to achieve Hell because of an action done by someone millenia prior (Adam and Eve), shouldn't their big a giant roadsign in space telling everyone the answer (or some other method)?

    According to the story, God physically was in the presence of Adam and Eve and spoke to them. Evidently, they still could not get it right, so it begins. Why should the rest of humanity not get the same benefit? Why are we left with 2nd and 3rd hand oral traditions that eventually get written down?
     
  11. Scuba Pete

    Scuba Pete Le plongeur avec attitude...

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    16,472
    Ratings:
    +3,192
    Religion:
    Christian Taoist
    tk,

    God still has his ambassadors here on earth, and they are sufficient for faith.
     
  12. tkdrocks

    tkdrocks Mellowing with Age

    Joined:
    May 6, 2005
    Messages:
    239
    Ratings:
    +47
    Religion:
    Militant Skeptic
    Yes, ambassadors that are passing on a message that is based upon someone else's experience. The proposed consequences are to serious to rely on a third party for accuracy.

    Item 1 - How is it that no astronomers in that time recorded such an event? The only source seems to be the New Testament.

    Item 2 - Miracles seem to be elusive to the many. I have seen many claims, healings of cancers and such, but in every case, medicine that could have brought about the same result were involved.

    Item 3 - Such is human nature. Thus eternal punishment based upon a belief is entirely illogical.

    Item 4 - Changing the belief of a person about an event that may have happened in history is really not life changing.
     
  13. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,667
    Ratings:
    +2,656
    You see, there you go again; this seems to be a recurring trait where agnostics and atheists will not seem to understand that the 'game' is played this way: We look for God, and find him; we join the church.

    God is not a 'recruiting officer' going round telling everyone 'Hurry up! roll up! - if you don't pray to me, you'll be in trouble when you die" - he left us his scriptures, with all the 'instruction' in those.

    You - or any human - NEEDS to WANT to have faith, to join a group where they can worship God - without your willingness,the exercise is futile.:)
     
  14. Fluffy

    Fluffy A fool

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2004
    Messages:
    7,570
    Ratings:
    +1,002
    Personally, I believe that this is a more accurate interpretation of the Bible than the alternative. However, many Christian groups do believe this alternative although I did not mean to allude to such in my reply.

    That makes sense. I just wanted to qualify that such a proposal would only work for religions of a certain nature. It would be a little more tricky to come up with a way of convincing the possibility of a god who had no interest in proving his existence to provide such a feat.

    Proselytising is a practice which is generally discouraged in neopagan faiths. I would be interested in attempting to converting somebody out of an anthropologic interest or as a way to compare my own beliefs with another but an actual conversion often comes across as pointless.

    Those 6 billion would be part of the drug induced illusion along with the message in the sky. Albion is the real world along with every single one of those flying hippies (they use magic carpets by the way, not wings or anything).
    This is exactly my point. What is defined as overwhelming and incontrovertible is completely a matter of opinion. What if god already believes he has offered overwhelming and incontrovertible proof of his existence? Many people believe he has. Therefore, such a god would not feel the need to indulge those few who missed the evidence on offer.

    Such a comparison is fair in that they have both looked at what they see as evidence and come to a conclusion that suits them. But then the comparison would extend to any human being.

    I do not see skepticism as being a factor in the cause of atheism. By this paragraph I am more of a skeptic than you yet I am believer. Don't know why but that just interests me a great deal.
    I consider that to be fair enough. Its just that if you want evidence, why not ask for the unequivocal kind? Im simply not comfortable with stating a certainty till it is based on a certainty.
     
  15. Firecat89

    Firecat89 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    42
    Ratings:
    +7
    *Is staring* This post... is a joke, right? The day stars rearrange to form long messages is the day I get a sex change. Gee, that rhymed. The more complex the miracle sounds, usually it has less of a chance to work. Of course if he's God he can do anything, but...
     
  16. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,667
    Ratings:
    +2,656
    Firecat;

    What point are you trying to make?:)
     
  17. Firecat89

    Firecat89 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    42
    Ratings:
    +7
    I'm... not sure.
     
  18. Scuba Pete

    Scuba Pete Le plongeur avec attitude...

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    16,472
    Ratings:
    +3,192
    Religion:
    Christian Taoist
    Yo tk

    Item 1) Thankfully they are getting more and more observant. There was no excuse for missing such an OBVIOUS sign, and yet they did. As Trump told them; "You're FIRED!"

    Item 2) Miracles are ovrerated. They are not needed for most to believe the truth. I thought Jesus' first miracle was pretty tongue in cheek at that. He musta known how anal so many preachers would be about alcohol when he did it! Bwahahaha!

    Item 3) Eternal punishment is based on our hate for our fellow man. God HAS provided a way to redeem our shattered lives, much like a boat trying to pick up survivors of the Titanic. But in our case, we are blaming the Carpathia for the Iceburg. I just don't get it! :D

    Item 4) What about "changing a belief" is not life changing? A quick read about Saul would give you plenty of proof of how much changing a belief is "life changing". If you need a contemporary example then choose me. :D
     
  19. tkdrocks

    tkdrocks Mellowing with Age

    Joined:
    May 6, 2005
    Messages:
    239
    Ratings:
    +47
    Religion:
    Militant Skeptic
    Item 1 - From what I understand, there is a pretty good record of astronomical events thousands of years back with plenty of redundancy globally.

    Item 4 - That is an interesting example. Saul/Paul evidently believed he was doing right in murdering heretics. Very strange for such closely related belief systems. This also spotlights a problem with revealed religion. Why does it take a vision from God to tell someone that murder is wrong?
     
  20. Quiddity

    Quiddity UndertheInfluenceofGiants

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Messages:
    19,866
    Ratings:
    +1,395
    Religion:
    Catholic
    It doesn't. Man can figure this out on his/her own. But unfortunately if I remember correctly in my Anthropology class my professor did note that some socities murdered and it was a cultural thing. What do you do when a disorder like this takes place? How do you solve it? Do you tell them "that's wrong, you guys need to stop that"?

    The Least
    ~Victor
     
Loading...