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!

Featured If God Writes Something With the Stars...

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by thomas t, Feb 20, 2021.

?
  1. yes

    4 vote(s)
    28.6%
  2. no, I would search for or look out for answers the scientific method could provide.

    6 vote(s)
    42.9%
  3. no. Other reasons.

    3 vote(s)
    21.4%
  4. no, I would rather believe in aliens moving the stars, instead

    1 vote(s)
    7.1%
  1. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    9,049
    Ratings:
    +7,013
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I just explained to you why that is not the case.

    It's what intellectual dishonesty means.

    Which is intellectually dishonest.

    And intellectually honest position would be that you WOULD change your mind if new evidence / proof would require you to do so.

    Stating in advance that you will be dogmatic in your beliefs and ignore and all evidence to the contrary is literally what intellectual dishonesty is.
     
  2. Brian2

    Brian2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    2,085
    Ratings:
    +307
    Religion:
    Christian
    Or maybe, considering chance, there is the possibility for the start to align to do that naturally, and why go with a God when you can go with Occam's Razor and eliminate the complication of a God.
     
  3. Brian2

    Brian2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    2,085
    Ratings:
    +307
    Religion:
    Christian
    I think most people would want to reconcile their faith with what other people call evidence against that faith. I'm sure you do.
     
  4. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,386
    Ratings:
    +335
    Religion:
    Christian
    Intellectual honesty, as I see it, does not require anyone to be open to the impossible.
    I hold it is impossible to disprove God.
    So it's not dishonest from my side to never change my belief that he is there.
    which is impossible, I think. You cannot present proof against the existence of a Creator God, I think.
    I do not expect that the impossible might happen.
    This does not have anything to do with being dishonest
    See above.
    Atheists usually agree that you cannot disprove God.
    So there is no reason to blame me for not being open enough to expect the impossible to happen and to potentially be confronted with proof against God.

    The whole concept of intellectual dishonesty makes sense in a scenario in which it is theoretically possible to prove the existence or the absence of something.
     
    #64 thomas t, Feb 22, 2021
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2021
  5. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    9,049
    Ratings:
    +7,013
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Indeed. I consider that a problem.

    Nope.

    I actively try to stay clear of "faith".
     
  6. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    9,049
    Ratings:
    +7,013
    Religion:
    Atheist
    You're just digging a deeper hole here.
    You don't know in advance what is and isn't impossible.

    Only because god is unfalsifiable. Just like undetectable graviton fairies.

    It is.
    Also, your particular beliefs, as you have already expressed them on this forum, ARE falsifiable. And indeed CAN be falsified. You have gone through great lengths to try and defend the undefendable when it was pointed out to you how your beliefs concerning human history, geological history, biological history, etc are demonstrably false.

    Realizing that there is no good evidence in support of your beliefs, is also a good reason to stop believing them.

    We can't prove that undetectable unicorns don't exist, but it wouldn't exactly be a rational or an intellectually honest stance to believe they exist, right?
     
  7. cOLTER

    cOLTER Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2020
    Messages:
    755
    Ratings:
    +183
    Religion:
    Disciple
    God is already so obvious it’s blinding.
     
  8. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,386
    Ratings:
    +335
    Religion:
    Christian
    I stay with my opinion that it is not dishonest.
    That's my assumption that it is.
    But wait...

    so you too think that God cannot be disproven.

    according to you there is lack of evidence for the Creator.
    In general, lack of evidence for him ...can also point to other hypotheses, in my view.
    Such as a good and humble God unwilling to print "made by YHWH, finest" on every single detail.
    Or a God whose evidence is undetectable for some.

    I don't care about them. I just ignore.

    -----------------------------------
    I don't think I was shown wrong in previous threads, btw.
    You didn't provide a quote when it was that I was shown wrong according to you.
    It's an empty claim. It is just your personal guesswork, I think.

    It is only the very basic beliefs that I hold fast to. Not the ones that I consider falsifiable...

    EDITED to change the third paragraph
     
    #68 thomas t, Feb 22, 2021
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2021
  9. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    9,049
    Ratings:
    +7,013
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Depends on how said god is defined.

    Vague unverifiable and unfalsifiable notions and concepts can't be disproven (or proven, or even only supported) no. Such things are in themselves, I'ld say, intellectually dishonest propositions. :)


    Uhu.

    The point exactly.
    You ignore everything that is inconvenient for the beliefs that you want to hold.
     
  10. A Vestigial Mote

    A Vestigial Mote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Messages:
    6,003
    Ratings:
    +3,966
    Religion:
    ?
    They need to add a "predictable" rating for this site, I feel.
     
  11. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    10,119
    Ratings:
    +805
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    The stars are so allocated, so that even the Zodiac signs tell the gospel story . . . a ram, a bull, justice, a virgin, an enemy, water carried and borne, fish(ing for people), etc.!
     
  12. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    59,309
    Ratings:
    +17,200
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    You would need to first establish that God is possible at all before I would find any argument based on the likelihood of God to be compelling.

    In the same vein, consider that assuming the existence of a monotheistic god also requires the existence of two mechanisms:

    - something that would allow gods to exist
    - something that would limit the number of gods to one.

    Would they have to convince everyone, or would they only have to convince me? For all I know, everyone around me could be in on the con.

    Is it the same?

    You just finished saying how you think God is somehow beyond the physical laws of the universe. Do you think someone with extraordinary technology would be beyond the physical laws of the universe?

    This is touching on why I asked @thomas t to expand on his hypothetical scenario and explain exactly how we know that what he's assumed happened actually happened.

    He hasn't bothered to do this yet, but one can always hold out hope.

    The specifics of this matter, because the question of "how do we know?" ties directly into the question "how could our conclusion be wrong?"

    Then they are no physical laws.

    "Mass and energy are always conserved" is a law. "Mass and energy either are or aren't conserved based on God's whims at the time" is useless and not a law.

    Again: laws of science are descriptive laws based on observation. If our observations say that something isn't universally true, then the law is false... regardless of whether you attribute those contradictory observations to some god or another.

    BTW: I'm still waiting for you to describe this God that you think is compatible with our understanding of the universe.
     
  13. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    59,309
    Ratings:
    +17,200
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    A question for you:

    I gather you expect that if that happened, it would convince a lot of atheists.

    I also gather that you think God has the power to do this.

    ... so why do you think God hasn't done it?
     
    • Creative Creative x 1
  14. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,386
    Ratings:
    +335
    Religion:
    Christian
    I disagree.
    It is not dishonest.

    No. I do not ignore everythint that is inconvenient for the beliefs I hold.
    I ignore these things like unicorns...
    That's all.
    Don't generalize here.
     
  15. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,386
    Ratings:
    +335
    Religion:
    Christian
    no, I don't expect that, honestly I expected the outcome as shown by the poll.
    I'm often wrong in what I imagine could happen, but this time I was right though.

    no idea.

    EDITED to add last paragraph
     
    #75 thomas t, Feb 22, 2021
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2021
  16. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    59,309
    Ratings:
    +17,200
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    Why would you ignore unicorns?

    You do realize they're biblical, right?

    Unicorns in the Bible
     
  17. thomas t

    thomas t non-denominational Christian

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,386
    Ratings:
    +335
    Religion:
    Christian
    that's the version.
    My favorite Bibles don't have this.
    You need to show the original word and show it means unicorn indeed.

    Note that I added something to my previous answer to you, you are just to quick in replying, for me;)
     
  18. lewisnotmiller

    lewisnotmiller Grand Hat
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    18,864
    Ratings:
    +11,060
    Religion:
    atheist
    Seems like a lot of work. Just make all Bible's start glowing, and become completely impervious to damage. Job done.
     
  19. Brian2

    Brian2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    2,085
    Ratings:
    +307
    Religion:
    Christian
    You are avoiding the issue. You also defend your beliefs against evidence or arguments to the contrary.
     
  20. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    9,049
    Ratings:
    +7,013
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Huh?

    There's a difference between arguing for your position because you think your evidence is better then that of the opposition on the one hand, and simply dogmatically asserting ahead of time that no matter what the opposing evidence is you'll stick to your beliefs no matter what.
     
Loading...