18 Apr 11
Originally posted by Agergreally just looking for some honesty, a simple yes, no or I don't know would suffice.
From an emotional perspective I'm no less indifferent to the hypothetical scenario you capitalised "G" "God" exists than the scenario the tooth fairy exists.
Would you be disappointed if supposing you could actually soar like an eagle, you could only do such a thing between 18:00-19:52?
18 Apr 11
Originally posted by DowardExcuse me for butting in, but surely the answer to your question would depend on 'which' God supposedly exists.
really just looking for some honesty, a simple yes, no or I don't know would suffice.
For instance, if it was the God of the OT then i would be rather petrified. If it was a God who personifies the 'Sermon on the Mount' then that would be better.
18 Apr 11
Originally posted by AgergIf a person wants to believe in tooth fairies let him/her do that. Belief is a personal matter and we cannot criticize any person for holding this or that belief,so long as that personal belief does not cause harm to others holding contrary views or even broadly speaking,does not adversely affect society at large.
No, I think you'll find he's very sure...we atheists or anyone/thing else simply lack the facility to disprove the unfalsifiable - and so for the sake of integrity, the most we can say is "[there] almost certainly is no God".
Going by your thinking, none of us are sure about the non-existence of tooth fairies. We can't outright disprove them neither.
Belief in God surely cannot be compared to a belief in tooth fairies-whatever in the western children's lore that may mean. We believe in a lot of things,some beliefs we discard for whatever reasons,some beliefs get strengthened during the course of life. Surely, the belief in God cuts across age,maturity,level of scientific knowledge,cultures and has been the persistent belief of a huge no.of humans since times immemorial.
I smiled at that bit of" Integrity having caused the particular wording of the title of chapter in Dawkins' book." I hope you don't impute dishonesty/lack of integrity to the believers.
18 Apr 11
2 edits
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoBelief in God surely cannot be compared to a belief in tooth fairies-whatever in the western children's lore that may mean. We believe in a lot of things,some beliefs we discard for whatever reasons,some beliefs get strengthened during the course of life. Surely, the belief in God cuts across age,maturity,level of scientific knowledge,cultures and has been the persistent belief of a huge no.of humans since times immemorial.
If a person wants to believe in tooth fairies let him/her do that. Belief is a personal matter and we cannot criticize any person for holding this or that belief,so long as that personal belief does not cause harm to others holding contrary views or even broadly speaking,does not adversely affect society at large.
Belief in God surely cannot be compared r in Dawkins' book." I hope you don't impute dishonesty/lack of integrity to the believers.
This is merely a statement of your own bias towards "God" (where the quotation marks are there to reference some particular God, with properties that humans assign to it) and imputing onto us atheists the notion that belief in the tooth fairy is sillier than belief in "God". You'd be wrong in doing this. I find them both to be equally plausible.
I smiled at that bit of" Integrity having caused the particular wording of the title of chapter in Dawkins' book." I hope you don't impute dishonesty/lack of integrity to the believers.
You will find many of your Christian colleagues assert they are absolutely sure that "God" exists as though it is a factual statement. Such a position lacks the intellectual integrity to concede they cannot know
18 Apr 11
Originally posted by Nicksten“...There is enough prove that Jesus is the Son of God, ...”
The same argument goes for Jesus Andrew. There is enough prove that Jesus is the Son of God, you're just not reading the right books on that subject and without passing any critics, your mind possibly is not open enough to look at it from another angle hence the reason you don't see credible evidence but I do.
I also once lived like there is no God. Now ...[text shortened]... right? How many remarkable things have Jesus done so that so many people have recorded this.
there is none.
“...you're just not reading the right books on that subject ...”
a book merely saying something is so is not evidence of it so.
“...I just can not believe that people believe there is no God, ...”
can you believe that people believe there is no tooth fairy?
“...How can anything have existed without God being there to start it all? ...”
-by there being no god to start it. By is starting without a god. By there being no god or gods to do anything. By everything happening without a god or gods.....
“...I do believe in evolution in science but not as the reason that humans and the universes are here. ...”
nobody believes or is claiming or is implying here that evolution created the universe.
“...In this case, if he doesn't have to provide me prove of his great great great great great grandfather, the same basic biological facts will still have been the same irrespective of time and age. ...”
you can call those biological facts 'proof' of his great great great great great grandfather -why not? It is proof.
“...Now, after 2000 years there are hundreds of books of a person called Jesus and what He has done and where He came from. Do you think there will be any prove of his great great great great great grandfather even now? ...”
yes, the biological facts. Those biological facts are the proof of his great great great great great grandfather.
“...How many remarkable things have Jesus done so that so many people have recorded this. ...”
if you are talking about miracles or supernatural things -none that was real. There is no evidence for miracles and the supernatural. A book or even a trillion books merely saying something is so is not evidence for it.
18 Apr 11
Originally posted by AgergKnowledge is not acquired by logic and reason alone. Direct experience often is another way. Many saints and devotees,Yogis had this direct personal experience of God.
[b]Belief in God surely cannot be compared to a belief in tooth fairies-whatever in the western children's lore that may mean. We believe in a lot of things,some beliefs we discard for whatever reasons,some beliefs get strengthened during the course of life. Surely, the belief in God cuts across age,maturity,level of scientific knowledge,cultures and has been ...[text shortened]... tement. Such a position lacks the intellectual integrity to concede they cannot know
There is no way God can be viewed as an entity under a microscope/a petri dish,unless one accepts the Hindu view that God permeates everything in this universe,viruses included.
God's existence cannot be proven nor can he be described,human mind and language being totally inadequate for this purpose.
I concede that I cannot prove but ,yes,I know that God exists.
18 Apr 11
Originally posted by rvsakhadeo“almost certainly” in this case would mean something vaguely like 99.999999999% (just as it is for my certainty that there is no tooth fairy) making the distinction between absolute certainty and “almost” certainly a purely academic one.
Even the principal non-believer Dawkins is not sure about the non-existence of God. He has titled the relevant chapter in his book ' the god delusion' as 'why there almost certainly is no God.'
That also means that, without being silly and pandemic about this, he IS “sure” that there is no god.
18 Apr 11
Originally posted by rvsakhadeo“...Knowledge is not acquired by logic and reason alone. Direct experience often is another way. ...”
Knowledge is not acquired by logic and reason alone. Direct experience often is another way. Many saints and devotees,Yogis had this direct personal experience of God.
There is no way God can be viewed as an entity under a microscope/a petri dish,unless one accepts the Hindu view that God permeates everything in this universe,viruses included.
God's exi ...[text shortened]... ly inadequate for this purpose.
I concede that I cannot prove but ,yes,I know that God exists.
he said nothing to contradict that.
“...Many saints and devotees,Yogis had this direct personal experience of God. ...”
and many people in mental asylums also would say they see god or experience god or are a god.
If somebody says they experience god then, to an atheist, that is like somebody saying that they experience the tooth fairy -in both cases and for the same reasons we would not think that such an experience corresponds to reality but rather is just a delusion or a hallucination.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
18 Apr 11
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonMaybe he is trying to avoid a debate scenario in which his opponent says, "Mr. Dawkins claims to know with absolute certainty that there is no God, yet he can offer no proof. He knows that science is silent on such things. So it is just an article of blind faith, for him."
“almost certainly” in this case would mean something vaguely like 99.999999999% (just as it is for my certainty that there is no tooth fairy) making the distinction between absolute certainty and “almost” certainly a purely academic one.
That also means that, without being silly and pandemic about this, he IS “sure” that there is no god.
18 Apr 11
Originally posted by rvsakhadeo“...God surely cannot be compared to a belief in tooth fairies ...”
If a person wants to believe in tooth fairies let him/her do that. Belief is a personal matter and we cannot criticize any person for holding this or that belief,so long as that personal belief does not cause harm to others holding contrary views or even broadly speaking,does not adversely affect society at large.
Belief in God surely cannot be compared ...[text shortened]... r in Dawkins' book." I hope you don't impute dishonesty/lack of integrity to the believers.
the belief that there is a god and the belief that there is a tooth fairy has one thing in common; they are both absurd beliefs because they both are beliefs in the existence of something with no credible evidence to base that belief that that thing exists.
So these two beliefs can be compared on that bases.
18 Apr 11
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoIt can be argued that all belief in non-existent beings does adversely affect society at large. In fact, Richard Dawkins make a pretty good argument to that effect in "The God Delusion".
If a person wants to believe in tooth fairies let him/her do that. Belief is a personal matter and we cannot criticize any person for holding this or that belief,so long as that personal belief does not cause harm to others holding contrary views or even broadly speaking,does not adversely affect society at large.
Surely, the belief in God cuts across age,maturity,level of scientific knowledge,cultures and has been the persistent belief of a huge no.of humans since times immemorial.
I am not aware of any evidence to that effect. As far as I know the only people who believe in God are those followers of the Jewish religion or its descendent's. Most other societies believed in various imaginary entities but none of them can rightly be equated to the God of Judaism, Islam and Christianity.
19 Apr 11
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonIt is an arguable point whether the world which we take for granted as unchanging and static is itself a delusion. Hindu philosophy says that this universe is dynamic and changing constantly. Physicist David Bohm has theorised that this universe is a giant hologram,a shadow of some multidimensional universe.
“...Knowledge is not acquired by logic and reason alone. Direct experience often is another way. ...”
he said nothing to contradict that.
“...Many saints and devotees,Yogis had this direct personal experience of God. ...”
and many people in mental asylums also would say they see god or experience god or are a god.
If somebody says they expe ...[text shortened]... that such an experience corresponds to reality but rather is just a delusion or a hallucination.
19 Apr 11
Originally posted by Proper Knobmmm no in this instance any god would do.
Excuse me for butting in, but surely the answer to your question would depend on 'which' God supposedly exists.
For instance, if it was the God of the OT then i would be rather petrified. If it was a God who personifies the 'Sermon on the Mount' then that would be better.
19 Apr 11
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoThose theories are rather fanciful and are not accepted as fact be the scientific community and, IF Physicist David Bohm theory is not truely evidence/reason based ( I am not implying that it isn't nor that it is) I think also can be compared to a belief in tooth fairies but NOT if Physicist David Bohm theory IS truely evidence/reason based.
It is an arguable point whether the world which we take for granted as unchanging and static is itself a delusion. Hindu philosophy says that this universe is dynamic and changing constantly. Physicist David Bohm has theorised that this universe is a giant hologram,a shadow of some multidimensional universe.