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 Your Best Argument for God's Existence

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by ftacky, Jan 10, 2019.

  1. viole

    viole Metaphysical Naturalist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2014
    Messages:
    8,229
    Ratings:
    +3,518
    Religion:
    Gnostic Atheism
    So, my ancestors had a point to believe that Thor was involved in lighnings, since no study back then validated electromagnetism, which did not even exist?

    Ciao

    - viole
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    23,815
    Ratings:
    +7,816
    Yeah. Once you ball down to it, it's just personal experiences, perspective, and testimony. We can attribute our beliefs on any part of the natural world and human interaction in order to make sense of it. That's how we make sense of the world. When we start using our perspectives and beliefs as logical facts, that's where the problem comes in.
     
  3. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    20,013
    Ratings:
    +7,177
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    Outside of things like I feel it or sense it, or filling in the gaps with premature conclusions when it comes to artifacts and explaining natural complexity solely on the basis its complex, therefore it must be God , demonstrates the low standards of believability disregarding the importance of intense critique and scrutiny required for establishing the facts of the matter.
     
  4. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    20,013
    Ratings:
    +7,177
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    It's more like Nowhere Man appreciates the higher standards of believability through the process of critical thinking and scrutiny.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Milton Platt

    Milton Platt Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2015
    Messages:
    5,382
    Ratings:
    +1,962
    Religion:
    Atheist
    It’s just chemistry, actually. The use of words like instructions and code are just ways of making the process understandable in a less technical way for a lay aunience. They aren’t meant to be literal.

    But for the sake of the argument, assume they are. ahow does that prove the existence of your god? You just have a big mystery with no explanation now.....
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. dybmh

    dybmh Terminal Optimist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2019
    Messages:
    739
    Ratings:
    +432
    Religion:
    diversity
    Coincidences
     
  7. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    3,577
    Ratings:
    +440
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    Lol, the evidence is everywhere. Im convinced there is two kinds of blindness, physical and mental blindness.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    3,577
    Ratings:
    +440
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    When the atheist position is scrutinized it falls apart. When the God one gets scrutinized it holds up.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  9. viole

    viole Metaphysical Naturalist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2014
    Messages:
    8,229
    Ratings:
    +3,518
    Religion:
    Gnostic Atheism
    Sure, because you are a dualist. I, on the other end, am convinced that there is only one type of delusion. That is, seeing things that do not exist and believing that who does not see them is blind. Obviously, since the mental is reducible to the physical, like everything else.

    So, this argument is not taking you anywhere. Since you have no more evidence to say I am blnd, then I have to say you are deluded.

    But I will cut you some slack here. Show me some evidence, or what you consider evidence, that all we see, the marvels of the world, the beauty, the DNA, the infinite with all the stars, the poetry of a beautiful sunset, love, compassion, our moral feelings, etc. could serve as evidence that Apollo exists.

    Ciao

    - viole
     
    #49 viole, Jan 11, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2019
  10. viole

    viole Metaphysical Naturalist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2014
    Messages:
    8,229
    Ratings:
    +3,518
    Religion:
    Gnostic Atheism
    Well, we know that DNA and chemical processes unconsciously produce brains that consciously create things.

    So, to argue that conscious creative acts are ultimately the first ones of the chain, is begging the question. And therefore logically unwarranted.

    Ciao

    - viole
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. viole

    viole Metaphysical Naturalist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2014
    Messages:
    8,229
    Ratings:
    +3,518
    Religion:
    Gnostic Atheism
    Spiritual experiences are assumed spiritual. But assuming a spiritual reality is question begging and circular. They could be very well be simple neuronal storms. I believe they can even be reproduced with some physical substances. Obviously. I have similar things every night when I sleep REM.

    For what concern design. Can you make me an example of something in the universe that is definetely not designed?

    Ciao

    - viole
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    20,026
    Ratings:
    +8,243
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)

    If God were self evident, wouldn't you expect a more universal understanding of Him, Her, It, Them?
    Atheists have dogmas? I don't know of any general atheist dogma.
    No, it's not the definition that has us flummoxed. What we want is evidence.
    Not quite following you here, Artist.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    3,577
    Ratings:
    +440
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    I was only emphasising, not shouting. But, ill lower the caps for you in respect.

    Everyone has two eyes, two ears, one mouth, all in the same spot. Does that not show order? Each of those parts serve a function. Does that not show design?

    DNA is information. Information or codes from what we know in everyday life, comes from minds.

    "This information can be thought of as the basic set of inheritable "instructions" for the development and function of a human being."

    An Overview of the Human Genome Project

    Instructions come from mind or intelligence.

    Thats some weird theist then who does not adhere to design. They believe God created and designed the world, but yet they dont adhere to intelligent design. Thats crazy. What are they? Fence sitters?

    Patterns, order, complexity, information.

    Like i said, its not about proof, its about evidence, inference and philosophical thought.
     
  14. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    3,577
    Ratings:
    +440
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    There is no example of anything that is not designed. Absolutely everything is designed.
     
  15. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    23,815
    Ratings:
    +7,816
    Evidence for which god? Theists have so many personal definitions and interpretations from scriptures, it's very hard to know what evidence to look for.

    You're not the only one :p

    How can an atheist address the issues he has with god when the theist doesn't have a solid definition to which that atheist can properly build his own argument?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    23,815
    Ratings:
    +7,816
    Good way to see it is that the parts of the body function together. If it weren't "design" if one likes, parts won't work together as they do. As far as calling it "intelligent design" as though it has a mind as a creator is a bit far.

    How does that relate to god, though?

    No. They just have different beliefs not flawed. I don't take that negative view. God/creator isn't the default god-religion. If anything, polytheism is.

    But to a creator? How does one get a creator or draw that conclusion just from patterns, order, and complexity?

    What is the evidence, though? Facts arent dependent on one's inference and philosophy. If evidence is outside of these things, what is it and how does it connect with god?
     
  17. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    3,577
    Ratings:
    +440
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    That is the evidence (not proof) design, order and information. Thats the evidence that God created it. The inference that God actually created it comes out of the evidence.
     
  18. Vinayaka

    Vinayaka devotee
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    26,356
    Ratings:
    +10,849
    Religion:
    Saivite Hindu
    I have no argument for it. Just belief from personal experience that doesn't translate to argument.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    23,815
    Ratings:
    +7,816
    Take out the words evidence and proof. In a sentence (rather than dictionary; english is contextual), if you have evidence for something, you can either keep it as that or chose to use it as proof to validate a claim of somesort.

    I can careless about proof. Can you demonstrate how the evidence of patterns and order mean god? How did you (?) draw that conclusion?
     
  20. robocop (actually)

    robocop (actually) Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    2,395
    Ratings:
    +378
    Religion:
    newly baptized into Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
    I believe testimony comes from the Holy Ghost. John 7:17 says, "If any man shall do the will of the Father, he shall know for himself, whether I speak of God or am just a man" (something like that).

    But I will be happy to present my sharpest argument:

    In Judaism, there are 10 characteristics of God:

    1 Keter - "Crown"
    2 Chokhmah - "Wisdom"
    3 Binah - "Understanding"
    4 Chesed - "Kindness"
    5 Gevurah - "Discipline"
    6 Tiferet - "Beauty"
    7 Netzach - "Eternity"
    8 Hod - "Splendour"
    9 Yesod - "Foundation"
    10 Malkuth - "Kingship"

    I like Hod, splendor, the best. Stephen Hawking said he needed to find an initial variety in the Universe to explain it's diversity. It seems like any way to initiate it does not provide that variety. I have even tried making my own class of numbers to explain the variety, but it didn't work:

    "Debunking my Stephen Hawking variety problem solution - like centrifuge problem

    So Stephen Hawking wanted a way for the Universe to start where matter wasn't uniform so it would form into a variety of shapes.

    The Real numbers don't do it.

    My solution, or so I thought, was the defined class of numbers. Take '0','1','2',...,'9','.','+','-','*','/','^','root', 'ln', 'cos', 'sin', sum, sequence, product,'(',')', and maybe a delta function. Some variety is possible in the definition but the point is the same. By going through the digits like a number base, you get all the defined numbers. We want to divide all the numbers between concrete, defined numbers and random numbers that spread themselves everywhere and cannot even be defined. We don't need to know if numbers are infinite or if we are repeating numbers and should be able to tell if the expressions are legitimate.

    Again, by going through the digits like a number base, you get all the defined numbers. Do they form a variety? You might think so. Consider just these three points.

    0 ln (2) 1
    .............................

    It seems that irrational numbers like logarithms will be in different arrangements around different rational numbers, providing a variety.

    Finite decimals exist. Repeating decimals exist, and for things like logarithms there are infinite endings for which the endings stick even if a repeating decimal part modifies them systematically.

    It seems that these infinite endings will provide the variety trick.

    Let's say we had defined just 0, ln(2) and 1. We can include the extension of ln (2) to 0 and 1 to twice as far. We get -ln(2) and 2-ln(2).

    Each time we introduce a logarithm, in the process of counting, we add and subtract its value to all the other non-logarithm points. We extend all line segments involving the logarithm to twice their length and add the endpoint. Then we combine each pair of two logarithms, each set of three, until we have used all the logarithms so far.

    It takes almost forever to count but not forever and the point is unmistakeable. Every rational point has all the other rational points and the same logarithm parts on either side of it and extending as long as wanted. Every logarithm point also has all the the other rational points and the same logarithm parts on either side of it and extending as long as wanted. Perfectly balanced Universe.

    Logarithms should be the only thing that provides trouble but we can do this with other things.

    So we conclude two things:

    (1) The defined class of numbers does not provide the variety Stephen Hawking wanted in his initial Universe and
    (2) I should give you a discount on my books.

    Would anyone else like to try explaining initial diversity in the Universe?

    You never get all the real numbers with the defined class because the Reals are uncountable and the latter are countable, but you still fill up everywhere evenly."

    The only explanation is that part of the Universe is alive and dictating diversity for the rest of it. I think that is clearly God!
     
Loading...