Does Anyone Still Believe in God? (page 13)

WireRider

First show me any proof that any god exists, then we can discuss all gods.

(see my post above) I don't think there is any proof that humans can comprehend or have the words to describe. Human science is worthless here. Can you not fathom a being greater than humans that may be millions of years beyond our knowledge? As a scientist you cannot rule out the possibility of something just because you cannot understand it, don't have words for it, and cannot measure it. The possibility still exists. It would be arrogant to think otherwise.

I don't claim to know or have proof of "something" we don't understand. I'm still looking for answers myself. My point was that if you look at sociology and some of the biology there are too many coincidences to just write off something we don't understand. Is the want of religion, or a higher being, genetic? Running from something is pretty universal - what about the compulsion to run towards something we cannot even see? Why were the same fundamental traits of the need of religion, or for example pyramid building, happening all over the world at nearly the same time? "something" happened - I know not what.

I don't think there is really any proof required - it's really academic. I don't know if "something" was here, or if it left? But one trait is obvious - a lot of people do believe - real or not - and that shapes socio/economic behaviors and a lot of bloodshed.

cappytan

Just because Science can't currently explain something doesn't mean that's proof of a deity.

Science couldn't explain comets, so mankind made up reasons for why they were there. Today, though, Science CAN explain comets.

Viviane

I don't think there is any proof that humans can comprehend or have the words to describe.

The any god you could potentially be describing is worthless and pointless.

Human science is worthless here.

Human science has made the world a far better place. You suggests a pointless god that is impotent to even show it exists. Science, in your scenario, is the useful thing. You've it backwards.

My point was that if you look at sociology and some of the biology there are too many coincidences to just write off something we don't understand.

You've yet to show me there is a god we don't understand. You're attempting to use science to prove science is worthless. That's not how it works.

LexIsFree

I am an agnostic. I don't believe but I also do not disbelieve. Lately as my awakening process furthers along, I'm leaning towards the atheist side. The idea of a bearded, all knowing, old guy in heaven looking down at me and analyzing my every move seems a bit out there.

cofty

@cofty I believe the bible is the word of God. If you read the Bible, the hope is composed of: - kingdom of God coming - immortality for believers This is what I believe!!

Lots of people believe all sorts of strange things. What makes your belief more credible than those of a scientologist or somebody who thinks they are Elvis?

WireRider

You've yet to show me there is a god we don't understand.

That's a bit circular. I'm afraid you misunderstand me. I have made to attempt to claim/prove a God is real. I claim no tangible or empirical proof. But then again God cannot be proven to not be, or have been, real either.

Is the atom worthless and pointless? A couple of hundred years ago people said it didn't exist - they argued about whether it existed or not - they couldn't prove it either way. "Prove it". Where was the science and definitions then? We grew and learned, and now have particle theory that was once considered a joke, for lack of the right science and understanding.

No one doubts the contribution of science for society. Science is not worthless. Where will science be in 100yrs. I can't prove life exists on other planet - science and technology are not there yet. But I can say I have some degree of confidence base upon the context.

There was a Sumerian tablet uncovered by archaeologists that dated back to some 7000BC. On the tablet was an imprinted picture of the solar system with orbits. It also included Pluto. ?? Even though it has been there the whole time, our science didn't discover/prove it until about 1930.

I'm not saying that anyone has to believe in a God, or follow one if they did - but I'm not closing the door. What if they closed the door on the atom because they didn't understand it? Or life on other planets?

freemindfade

I claim no tangible or empirical proof.

ie god does not exist

Your example of the atom is not good, because as we progress and learn less and less things are accredited to "supernatural" means and discovered to be natural laws. We aren't going to discover 'God' we are discovering away from god. You are using he atom example poorly. That is a great example of not saying god did it, and that is why science progresses. As long as we don't give credit to the J dessert god, or any other incarnation, we keep searching, learning, and growing. 'God' closes minds. It does the opposite of what you imply happened with the atom.

fulltimestudent

Another poster said:

Can you not fathom a being greater than humans that may be millions of years beyond our knowledge?

If he's such a clever bastard, then he should find it easy to talk down to us.

But if you're conceptualising the god of the bible in this statement, then the YHWH/jesus combo god shows a distressing tendency to think on a purely human level. Which of course, is natural, because the history of the YHWY/jesus is totally imagined. Not one of his/her described actions (miracles) can be supported by observation.

cofty

There are more things we don't know than things we do know. That is a given.

There are some things we know that will always be true. We might discover a bit more detail but that won't change the basic facts. Prologos' pedantic point about the barycenter is an example.

The error that religious/superstitious people make is to thrust magical answers into the gaps.

Our beliefs ought to be commensurate with the evidence.

The evidence against "god" is overwhelmingly strong. The evidence for "god" is non-existent.

The last resort is to reduce god to some undefined impersonal force.

Viviane

That's a bit circular. I'm afraid you misunderstand me. I have made to attempt to claim/prove a God is real. I claim no tangible or empirical proof. But then again God cannot be proven to not be, or have been, real either.

I've not misunderstood you. You think there is a something. You said that you don't believe it is possible for humans to understand any possible evidence for god. I am simply saying that if there no evidence humans could understand, you can't possibly every assert that is a god that matches that lack of evidence. In what way is that circular?

Is the atom worthless and pointless? A couple of hundred years ago people said it didn't exist

People still say that. The problem here is that you are attempting to equate "don't have the information and technology to derive the information and proof" with "unable to understand the information even if they had the information and proof".

There was a Sumerian tablet uncovered by archaeologists that dated back to some 7000BC. On the tablet was an imprinted picture of the solar system with orbits. It also included Pluto. ?? Even though it has been there the whole time, our science didn't discover/prove it until about 1930.

Please show us that.

I'm not saying that anyone has to believe in a God, or follow one if they did - but I'm not closing the door. What if they closed the door on the atom because they didn't understand it? Or life on other planets?

You said science was worthless in this area and then attempt use something where science was the only way to discover this information as a reason we should remain open to this thing science could never possibly help us with and that we can't ever possibly comprehend.

That's not how it works.

Does Anyone Still Believe in God?

Share this