Rehash god/proof debate

[F1fan]

How does that compare to god?

Well God accomplishes as much as Santa.

 

[F1fan]

You've had a bad experience with religion?

Religions dont do anything. But i've been an observer my whole life and i have observed many religious people do very bad things, and justify them via their religious belief.

I've often noted that religion can help good people be good, but it cannot help bad people be good.

 

[firedragon]

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

Narwhal - Wikipedia.


View attachment 53538

Fantastic. Maybe there will an atheistic Narwhal church soon where people get together and sing praise.

 

[We Never Know]

Religions dont do anything. But i've been an observer my whole life and i have observed many religious people do very bad things, and justify them via their religious belief.

I've often noted that religion can help good people be good, but it cannot help bad people be good.

I agree. Religions don't do much. However people do a lot.

 

[We Never Know]

Fantastic. Maybe there will an atheistic Narwhal church soon where people get together and sing praise.

Now days you never know

 

[rational experiences]

I am a human first.

I ask for a human spirit experience.

I gain it.

Yet I am still a human.

All humans born from sex. Today look back. First is their owned human parents.

First human parents in human life deceased.

Science taught earths heavens as body records all images animate and inanimate plus sounds voice transmits it's.

Build machines proving machines own the reason why.

So a human natural who never owned a machine can categorically state I did it to myself. Hence creation science teaching told you so.

O earths heavens owned by men in science machine from dusts invention caused it.

You hear your own first human father and mother's image and voice.

Transmitters.

From earth ground machine components. Transmitted above us.

Images hence out above our heads by machines.

Human life brain chemistry metallic irradiated. Not our chemical minerals. We gain body mind change. Physical and also paranormal.

Para and normal occurs by our side.

Either harmful by radiation amount feedback or assistance cooling.

Still just a human in any topic of discussion telling a human experience.

Reason for telling......advice to humans in science your inventions changed my natural life and it was proven.

No machines no history of causes.

Science a chosen human practice by humans as humans caused it.

Information. Recording the state exists before bio life meaning removal of life. By one condition stated before a life lived.

First human parents of everyone deceased.

 

[rational experiences]

Reason of advice.

Humans as bio life directly owned the bio manifested self as first parents. Direct highest first ownership living self owned. Death left a vision or record. Is not first.

Living is first.

 

[Tiberius]

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?

I'd accept it as proof if it was something that could be verified by other people.

As it is, every single religious experience that I've seen people describe is uncheckable.

 

[Brian2]

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).

Philosophical arguments can be debunked easily enough. Not that they are debunked in reality, it is just that they are debunked to the extent that someone has opinions against these arguments and that is enough for someone who does not believe or want to believe to jump on the debunking arguments as part of their proof that there is no God.
When it comes to presenting the historical things that show God has revealed Himself in history, that whole idea has been attacked to the extent that those who do not believe or want to believe can jump on those attacks as part of their proof for no God of history.
When it comes to people having different ideas of God,,,,,,,,,,,,I don't know, maybe that is true. Some people, after the debunking and attacks I have spoken of, end up with a possible God that is outside the God that some theists have in mind. That is probably not an atheist vs theist debate however, even though the possible god that many atheists may have in mind does not include the real God, ie. the God of the Bible. who has already been eliminated because of attacks on the Bible and debunking of philosophical arguments or other reasons associated with what the Biblical God looks like to many in the Bible and with only a surface reading and understanding of what was going on there.
Otoh some atheists may have an idea of God as an old man in the sky and not bother to try to see the real God who goes beyond that picture.

 

[Aupmanyav]

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).

Just that, an imaginary entity, a crutch for many people. My view is radical even in Hinduism. I do not believe in God, Creation, soul, heaven, hell, rebirth, day of judgment or salvation (in Hindi/Sanskrit - Mukti). It is a very stark no-nonsense belief.
Yeah, I understand theists or atheists, both have many shades of views. We have five varieties of Advaita Hinduism itself.

 

[Brian2]

I'd accept it as proof if it was something that could be verified by other people.

As it is, every single religious experience that I've seen people describe is uncheckable.

There are many experiences which could be called religious in the Near Death Experience context which are verified by other people and imo show the existence of spirit.

 

[Justanatheist]

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?

A world that is consistent with the existence of a god.

 

[viole]

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

Since believers in god X, and believers in god Y, with X not equal Y, both claim their God to have changed their lives profoundly, then it follows that this sort of claims prove nothing.

They are at the same standard of proof as saying: the Blue Fairy saved me from cheating, lying, and drinking, therefore this is evidence that the Blue Fairy is true.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Tiberius]

There are many experiences which could be called religious in the Near Death Experience context which are verified by other people and imo show the existence of spirit.

Near death experiences have completely naturalistic explanations. There is no need to go beyond the neurological to explain them.

 

[viole]

There are many experiences which could be called religious in the Near Death Experience context which are verified by other people and imo show the existence of spirit.

You can replace the phrase "Near Death Experiences", with ""Barely Alive Experiences". Ergo, they are experiences while still alive, and cannot therefore be used to draw any conclusion about the existence of life after death.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Valjean]

Non-believers don't want proof. We'd be satisfied with some empirical evidence.

 

[Valjean]

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?

People generally don't believe in unicorns because there is no evidence for them. They are just folk tales. Non-believers point out that exactly the same situation obtains for God -- yet because of pre-rational, childhood indoctrination and social pressure, people believe in theistic folk tales despite the lack of any hard evidence.

 

[Spirit of Light]

People generally don't believe in unicorns because there is no evidence for them. They are just folk tales. Non-believers point out that exactly the same situation obtains for God -- yet because of pre-rational, childhood indoctrination and social pressure, people believe in theistic folk tales despite the lack of any hard evidence.

So a personal belief in God is a belief that must be proven to the non believers (or others) to be a valid belief?

 

[Brian2]

Near death experiences have completely naturalistic explanations. There is no need to go beyond the neurological to explain them.

Not all NDEs have naturalistic explanations. Some people have verified memories of what happened in other rooms for example, when they were supposed to be unconscious.

 

[Brian2]

You can replace the phrase "Near Death Experiences", with ""Barely Alive Experiences". Ergo, they are experiences while still alive, and cannot therefore be used to draw any conclusion about the existence of life after death.

Ciao

- viole

It is not life after death that I am talking about even if a conclusion about that can be taken from the experiences of some with NDEs.
The experiences I am talking about are those where verifiable evidence is given that the person remembered seeing and hearing things they should not remember if unconscious at the time, and even things in other rooms.