Evidence for God...

by tec 251 Replies latest jw friends

  • tec
    tec

    People do think of new concepts. For example, I, and I'm sure others, sometimes wish I could be in two places at once. The concept of being in two places at once is not built upon previous knowledge - no one has ever been in two places at once, and yet I thought of it. How can the fact that people have thought of something, in your case god, be considered evidence that the thing actually exists? People engage in wishful thinking all the time. Although reality inspires wishful thinking, people add their own made-up ideas to it. Superheros have some connection to reality, and the creators add all sorts of far-fetched attributes to them. The fact that people have conceived of these made-up attributes is not evidence that those attributes, or the characters, are real. Similarly, the fact that people have thought of a god is not evidence for its existence. Why do you disagree?

    Because I do not think this is the same thing. This is still taking things that you know... you... and just multiplying, or adding something to. Flying - you know flying is real, and you know men are real... so combining them is still building upon two things you have seen and known.

    I'll have to read the link you posted. I've never even read the 'cosmological argument' to know precisely which part of what I posted must fall under it for you to link me to the rebuttal, lol.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • NewChapter
    NewChapter

    Why would a purely natural species develop a need for something that does not exist? Why not a natural explanation? Why leap to the spiritual, or supernatural?

    They had no answers and did not have the knowledge necesssary to find the answers. Since we are able to ask the questions, it is only natural that we will find the answers---even if they are wrong. Dreams, hallucinations, logical fallacies. We are not rational beings all the time. This was not a 'leap' at all. I'm building a god---we can do that.

    When I was little, I didn't know how TV worked. I imagined tiny people in there---a whole universe not based in what I knew---they slept at night, ate lunches and then put on little plays. I didn't have an answer---I made one up.

    I never had an imaginary friend though, but I've know children who have, they are quite creative. Spots, pink, horns, wings---crazy stuff----but it proves that humans are naturally creative, and will simply make things up for comfort. And you can argue that they ALL did it, (cultures) so there MUST be something there. Well half the kids are making up imaginary friends---and they don't resemble each other---but there is a common theme. Would you argue that imaginary friends MUST exist, because they were created independently by such a wide cross section of children? This is not evidence. It is an observation. It is a fact. It is something to look into---but it is not evidence that invisible friends exist.

    NC

  • biometrics
    biometrics
    Defend away. Why do you believe, or rather, how do you know God has always existed? Please explain to me, because I don't understand how you arrive at this conclusion.

    Ok, I'll have a play at it provided you can first answer this question:

    How did life begin without God?

  • NewChapter
    NewChapter

    Where does the information that God has no beginning come from?

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    Where does the information that God has no beginning come from?

    Until you conclude on what the beginning was and can prove it then I don't believe you have business demanding answers to such a question. I wouldn't assume it's a demand at face value unless I hadn't seen you ask this question in so many words as what seems thousands of times. That seems to constitute a demand. A demand of which a incomplete answer to frames your entire world view. What was the beginning like NC? Were you there? Or are you required to bust out a protractor and theorize like the rest of us?

    By the way tec this thread is amazing. Your reasoning is hard to argue with.

    -Sab

  • tec
    tec

    I'm trying to puzzle through your motives for starting this thread, tec.

    I mentioned my faith was based on evidence... rather than on nothing... someone asked me about that. So here I am. Mind you, he has not shown up, lol.

    I appreciate our mutual affinity for your peace at living with your faith even if it has shaky provenance. You are not demanding certainty where it cannot be found.

    Depends on what you mean by certainty, and for whom? Certainty for me? Demanding isn't going to get that for me, and for a long time, I followed Christ because I chose to, not because it was certain. I believed, and I agreed with his teachings. But this is not necessarily the same as faith. Faith IS certainty in the things hoped for.

    Certainty for others, no. I can't do that.

    Our difference, I think, is in your need for evidence. That's mixing reason with faith, which I am convinced cannot be done. Though I live by faith, I am also embracing my logical side and the associated pleasures of an ordered mind. I keep them apart as oil with water; mutually incompatible.

    I agree that this is where we disagree. Reason and faith are completely compatable, imo. And it isn't that I need evidence to believe... it is just that my faith did not come based on nothing. Which means it is based on something. That is evidence.

    I am further confused by your presentation to an audience, of which some will demand that reason be applied. Those who live by strict reason and observation will reject your evidence. It is fine for you, but is unconvincing to the outside observer.

    That is fine. Reason and faith are not in conflict to me. Knowing that my evidence will be rejected by many is not a reason not to present it, though. Especially as someone asked me to. Perhaps it just forms understanding. Not a bad thing either.

    If you are appealing to an audience wider than the athiest, who are you trying to convince? From my worldview, this is the class of muddled thinkers who go by their gut and have considered only shallowly what drives them forward. I can barely speak to people like this, unless it is "Pass the bread."

    I'm not sure what you're saying here.

    People ask me all the time what my evidence is. So I placed some in a post here. Plus, the thing I state are always read and debated by atheists, whether I am speaking to an atheist or not.

    My 'intended' audience, besides those who asked for me to share my evidence, is anyone who wants to hear about this. No biggee.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    Where does the information that God has no beginning come from?

    The information you demand from others comes from within not without. You have to look within yourself not at the external world which is constantly changing.

    The wind blows over the lake and stirs the surface of the water. Thus visible effects of the invisible manifest themselves. The hexagram consists of firm lines above and below, while it is open in the center. This indicates a heart free of prejudices and therefore open to truth. On the other hand, each of the two trigrams has a firm line in the middle; this indicates the force of inner truth in the influences they present. The attributes of the two trigrams are: above, gentleness, forbearance toward inferiors; below, joyousness in obeying superiors. Such conditions create the basis of a mutual confidence that makes achievements possible. The character of fu ("truth") is actually the picture of a bird's foot over a fledgling. It suggests the idea of brooding. An egg is hollow. The light-giving power must work to quicken it from outside, but there must be a germ of life within, if life is to be awakened. Far-reaching speculations can be linked with these ideas. I CHING 61

    Knowing God is being influenced by God. If you have never been influenced by Him you will ask questions like, "how do you know he exists?"

    -Sab

  • NewChapter
    NewChapter

    Until you conclude on what the beginning was and can prove it then I don't believe you have business demanding answers to such a question.

    You could have just said that your refuse to answer the question---or you could have not responded at all. So I'll ask this question for someone that would like to answer it. Don't feel compelled if you have no answer.

    Where does the information that God has no beginning come from?

  • NewChapter
    NewChapter

    The information you demand from others comes from within not without.

    So are you saying that you looked within yourself and determined that God had no beginning? Is that the complete answer?

  • tec
    tec

    What exactly about this god is not based on previous knowledge and experience?

    Well, actually, I think He is based on previous knowledge and experience. Because He IS. Because we are more than physical beings, we are also spiritual, and so we seek out the spiritual because it is part of us and within us to do so. Were we purely physical beings, we could not do this.

    But if he did not exist... or the spiritual did not exist... then my answer to the question above would be:

    God, himself.

    This god was made up and limited by the knowledge of those that created it. It did not come from the outside, but from the inside.

    Yes, because we ARE more than just the physical. It is why we seek more than just the physical for an answer.

    There is not one trait that this god is attributed with that is not already evident in humans. There is not one bit of knowledge that this god had, that was not available to the people that created it.

    Eternity is one not evident in humans.

    Knowledge, I will have to disagree with you. Raising the dead, healing the sick, the so called 'miracles'. The understanding of no beginning, no end, before science has discovered it. The simple term... putting on and taking off the flesh... I am certain is understanding of something that science has yet to uncover; though it has learned things that could be considered backing such an idea. We won't know this for a fact yet, because science is not there yet. But we do know, according to Einstein, that matter and energy is constant... that it is two forms of the same thing... that matter and energy can move from one form to another, because the amount of both remains constant in the universe, and we know that energy can become matter... (or is it the other way around?)

    Science is going to prove things that some tried to describe, imo, but did not themselves have the knowledge nor words to do so. The trick is whether we will be able to recognize that some of those things were communicated to men, who just did not have the scientific terms or understanding to communicate that knowledge beyond their limited understanding. Like being limited as to how something appears, rather than describing the technical aspects of a thing.

    And you are wrong about one shade---humans CAN think up things beyond their reality. Fiction. The big questions, The WHY. That is what makes us different than other species. Had George Lucas ever seen a light saber? No. Do we conclude that knowledge of light sabers must have come from an outside source? No. We know that Lucas saw lights and lasers and swords---and he simply combined a bunch of known things with his imagination to come up with a new weapon.

    Fiction is still based on things we know, and simply manipulate into other things.

    Your argument, Tec, does not acknowledge what humans are capable of. We can do more than take in information, we can build on it. We can CREATE. We can think symbolically. Why you insist that humans just could not have made up god concepts is just beyond me. I am creating a god as we speak.

    Build on what, is the question.

    We cannot build on nothing.

    In a world full of fiction and science, music, art, literature, to hold the position that humans are incapable of making up gods to answer their questions is just---I don't know---closed minded? So let's think about gods. Why such a widespread concept (although NOT universal). Well it makes sense. In the human experience, everything created is created by humans. It is not a huge leap to come up with a superhuman that creates the larger things. Did you dream of someone who died? But you can't see that someone while awake? But they were there! But not here? So there must be some special 'there' where they still walk.

    Could be there is some special 'there' that they still walk. That dreams help us see more. That dreams themselves might suggest that we ARE more. However, I stated earlier that I do not know about dreams... that it is a good question to ponder, and for me, to ask about. I will wait for an answer, and perhaps also research more about their cause and our need for them.

    Einstein thought thoughts that no one ever thought before. We are capable of taking in available evidence and extrapolating it. That's logic. Sometimes we start from a place of ignorance--and we end up anywhere. Sometimes we start from a place of knowledge, and the journey is more directed and supported. But to pretend that it is just impossible for humans to create gods and spiritual things is to deny that we are able to think creatively and symbolically.

    We can think thoughts that no one thought before... but not on things that we have not observed and built upon.

    It is not adequate evidence. In fact, it is not evidence at all.

    It is evidence for me... though certainly not proof, and not infallable, so to speak. Though I have used it as more of a question. I cannot even conceive of how to go about 'conceiving' something entirely outside my realm of existence.

    Peace,

    tammy

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit