Christian Adoption

[La_Dolce_Vita]

It don't know what you mean.

[ScotsAlan]

You are just talking nonsense now. Nobody knows if the universe is infinite. And there are no goods statistics that indicate that aliens will exist. And I never said they do not exist, only that there is no evidence for me to think that they do.

 

Yup. Infinity is a difficult concept to grasp.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

I think many things are for you. I just said that nobody has determined the universe to be infinite.

[ScotsAlan]

I think many things are for you. I just said that nobody has determined the universe to be infinite.

 

So if you cant define the universe, how can you define what is in it ?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

We can define those things that are in the universe, such as stars. But your applying an attribute to the universe when we don't have evidence.

[VinnieK]

LDV's right. The jury's generally still out on whether or not the universe is infinite; we can't even really decide on its topology, never mind answer such a question definitively (I think the current state of affairs is that at best we can say that from our perspective, and with our current technology the universe looks locally 'flat' ).

 

Edited to Add: Also, there's no such thing as statistical evidence for aliens. There's some statistical justification for believing that life could also have originated elsewhere, but that's very different from evidence of existence. Even then, it's difficult to say how much justification there is either way: since we don't know all of the variables involved in the growth of life or about the habitability of planets we can't really say whether present models over estimate or under estimate the chances of life.

 

 

[&roid]

I really don't know how or where to start, Not even sure If it's a good idea to participate in the debate.. But anyway, it's too late to step back now

Maybe I should start by introducing myself.. So, Ahem.. I define myself as a religious person, I follow my religions' teachings, stick to the rules, abstain from the forbidden. I see my religion as a whole that satisfies me spiritually and physically.

 

I do - of course - believe in God, and I'm really happy with the answers my religion provides about life and even what's beyond life. And even though i find those answers just perfect, I do not expect all people to think the same about them. And that's just another thing i firmly believe in, Which is the freedom of belief.. Let people believe - or not believe - just as they want - as long as we all have respect to each other - In the end, It's not our role to judge each others' beliefs.

 

Going through the thread, i think the main question here is whether God exists or not? and we all know, It's just a very common question - if not the most common question throughout history - people have been debating it over and over again. And to be honest, I can confidently say that no matter what a Non-believer - here or anywhere else - would say, It would never change my belief in God. And just as you can't prove to me that God doesn't exist, I doubt i can provide you acceptable evidences - in your standards - that he really does.

 

But here i am just sharing thoughts, not that i need your agreements to stick to my beliefs, nor that your disagreements would shake them. Not that what I'm saying would change any of your opinions either.. That's why I call it "sharing thoughts".

 

So.. back to the question.. how do i prove that the God i believe in exists? Just the other day I was trying to convince a 10 years old kid that air - which we can't see - is actually a matter that has a volume and occupies space, I tried using a simple experiment, by tipping an empty glass in a tank of water.. although the kid understood the method, she was still not fully sure it's true, since she can't "see" the air. At that moment I DID KNOW FOR SURE the air was there filling the empty glass, But i just couldn't "show" it to her, As It's always hard to prove things that we can't see, hear...etc using our limited senses and abilities.. I tried again by giving more examples about the existence of air. But anyway, I'm sure you ALL agree that, Me failing at convincing the kid, doesn't mean air wasn't there!

 

I'm saying all that cause I think it's pretty much the case here, Non of us who believes in God can show you God.. But that doesn't mean HE isn't there! I can list some of the many reasons that make me strongly believe in God, But it won't necessarily make sense to all of you, But even that doesn't mean it's not the truth!

 

Peace and blessings..

[ScotsAlan]

LDV's right. The jury's generally still out on whether or not the universe is infinite; we can't even really decide on its topology, never mind answer such a question definitively (I think the current state of affairs is that at best we can say that from our perspective, and with our current technology the universe looks locally 'flat' ).

 

Edited to Add: Also, there's no such thing as statistical evidence for aliens. There's some statistical justification for believing that life could also have originated elsewhere, but that's very different from evidence of existence. Even then, it's difficult to say how much justification there is either way: since we don't know all of the variables involved in the growth of life or about the habitability of planets we can't really say whether present models over estimate or under estimate the chances of life.

 

 

 

 

Yup.

 

I like a good debate. And I am no stranger to defeat in that particular pastime :-)

 

I agree with both your arguments. And I accept I am not capable of giving proof to my beliefs. So I bow out gracefully :-)

 

Actually, I remember in the distant past of hearing a theory about how, if anyone did prove God exists, we would all cease to exist. But I may be remembering of a Woody Allen sketch, or something like that.

 

I need to google that :-)

[Chinahand]

&roid, greetings! Welcome to the Forums.

 

I have to admit this thread is such a tangle of postings its hard to work out exactly what it is asking, but I see it a little different from you.

 

I'm not really asking for proof of God, rather I'm asking how do you know the claims you make of him/it are true - you attempted to demonstrate to the child the existence of air, what is your denomstration for the existence of God?

 

Blind faith is a perfectly acceptable answer, but surely you must admit its limitations - it seems to me that Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindu's, Daoists, Shintoes(what do you call someone who practices Shinto - Japanese is a close match, but misses the point!?) etc etc all say they are privy to information directly from some supernatural entity or entities which gives them superior knowledge to secular philosophers, ethicists etc.

 

This claim to some higher morality is for me highly contentious - I really want to understand how the religious can claim some better knowledge that a secular person could not gain via their own efforts.

 

My view is that everyone is left when all is said and done with doubt and so must interpret the world - that uncertainty equalizes claims and means in the end you either have authority, blind faith, or reasonableness to bulwark your morality.

 

This thread has been inspired by Christian attitudes to homosexuality, the Westboro Babtist Church firmly believes homosexuals will, and should, burn in hell. Many Muslims firmly believe that apostates and blasphemers should be stoned to death.

 

I don't know what your beliefs are, but if some of them are based purely on authority or blind faith then I think they can be morally dubious. The religious often say that athiests cannot develop morality - because they do not have faith in the authority of a divine power. I feel that claim is almost about face - the religious are at risk of immorality due to acting solely on man made interpretations of divine authority.

 

Can anyone other than the zealot really say they can clearly hear divine's command? I find any such voice entirely swamped by man's shouting and claiming they know the truth. Christians, Muslims, Jews etc - all make incredible claims to know God's will - these ideas contain multiple contradictions - they can't be all right. &droid - how do you think religions different from yours get their claims to truth - how much weight do you, should we, lay on those claims?

 

Was Mohammed/Moses/Jesus a superior ethicist to Kant because of their claimed divine connection, and how can we, in our ignorance, know this?

[Chinahand]

Douglas Adams - the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:

 

There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

There is another theory which states that this has already happened.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

...I see my religion as a whole that satisfies me spiritually and physically.

Do you mean 'mentally' or 'psychologically' when you use the word 'spiritually'?

 

I do - of course - believe in God, and I'm really happy with the answers my religion provides about life and even what's beyond life. And even though i find those answers just perfect...

But the answers you have been provided with may not be true. I can't be too presumptuous about your beliefs, not knowing exactly what they are, but take Heaven as an example.

A Christian might be very happy with the idea of there being a place where their consciousness goes where they will enjoy happiness and to be a better world than this. It might provide great contentment, but is it true?

 

Religion can provide lots of answers to things, but they can be completely bogus. In the face of the lack of evidence regarding religious claims there is little to no indication that they are true.

 

I do not expect all people to think the same about them. And that's just another thing i firmly believe in, Which is the freedom of belief.. Let people believe - or not believe - just as they want - as long as we all have respect to each other - In the end, It's not our role to judge each others' beliefs.

You are very wrong here. Freedom of belief is absolutely fine and such freedoms have to be maintained. However, beliefs of others should be judged and they will be judged.

 

The reason is because beliefs are claims of what is true or not. We need to have an understanding of our world and that is determined by having a knowledge about it, about what is true or not. If we do not rely on facts or truths then we can make no sense of our world and our ourselves. And we do this by looking at the evidence and then coming to a conclusion as to whether the weight of evidence lends itself to a particular understanding.

 

Why do you think religion should be an exception? I personally don't think you really mean that people should not judge.

 

If you woke up tomorrow to find that almost everyone had adopted a religion because they had a read a book that produced a few days ago. And say you had a certain or almost certain recognition that the claims of this religion were bogus, what sort of judgments will be made by you?

 

And what about the consequences for such people? What if most of the population spent hours a day worshipping a monster in this book, taught it to their children, and people thought that the world was going to end in 2015 and that people should give all their money to the author in order to avoid damnation?

 

What would your judgement be? You could maybe apply this to something as more obviously ridiculous to you as Scientology or Raelism. Or even apply it to racism, where people have beliefs about others based on skin colour which aren't true. Surely, you place judgement on racist beliefs?

 

And to be honest, I can confidently say that no matter what a Non-believer - here or anywhere else - would say, It would never change my belief in God. And just as you can't prove to me that God doesn't exist, I doubt i can provide you acceptable evidences - in your standards - that he really does.

I don't know what God you are talking about. But If you were to determine that there was little or no evidence for the existence, would you not abandon the belief?

If not, it is indicative of the fact that you have little interest in whether your beliefs are true or not. They just make you feel comfortable. It would be a great shame that the truth is ignored in forming your view and understanding of the world.

 

I don't need to prove to you that a God does not exist. The theist is the person who is making the claim/s, as such it your requirement to prove to me and others that this God does exist. Otherwise, others will reject the claim. If you're a Christian, it is your duty to demonstrate the existence of the Christian God.

 

How do you know what standards of evidence would be good enough or not good enough? Though, with Christianity, it appears that Christians really only have the Bible.

 

So.. back to the question.. how do i prove that the God i believe in exists? Just the other day I was trying to convince a 10 years old kid that air - which we can't see - is actually a matter that has a volume and occupies space, I tried using a simple experiment, by tipping an empty glass in a tank of water.. although the kid understood the method, she was still not fully sure it's true, since she can't "see" the air. At that moment I DID KNOW FOR SURE the air was there filling the empty glass, But i just couldn't "show" it to her, As It's always hard to prove things that we can't see, hear...etc using our limited senses and abilities.. I tried again by giving more examples about the existence of air. But anyway, I'm sure you ALL agree that, Me failing at convincing the kid, doesn't mean air wasn't there!

But repeatable tests can be done to determine that air exists. That it manifests in our reality. Although we cannot see air, we know it there. We can even feel it on a windy day.

 

But claims of God's existence require the believer to demonstrate how your God manifests. Can you do that?

 

I'm saying all that cause I think it's pretty much the case here, Non of us who believes in God can show you God.. But that doesn't mean HE isn't there!

I can't show you the Flying Spaghetti Monster, but he's there!

[Evil Goblin]

Douglas Adams - the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:

 

There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

There is another theory which states that this has already happened.

China - I doubt either of these suggestions is anywhere near the status of a theory!

 

The thread certainly has wandered well away from the original subject but I think the progress has been logical. Humans can only understand the world on the basis of beliefs about it and it seems to me that we are discussing what sort of foundation beliefs should have. LDV and yourself seem to think any particular belief should be supportable/proved by scientific examination/evidence and unless so supported is irrational and should be dispensed with. This is tantamount to making a religion out of science.

 

I would contend that people reach conclusions and beliefs based on what they actually perceive and what works for them, irrespective of what the religion of science may have to say about it. If a particular belief confers advantages and help to people in living their everyday lives I see nothing wrong with that. Perhaps it is not in accord with diligent scientific enquiry's results, but so what?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

I agree with both your arguments. And I accept I am not capable of giving proof to my beliefs. So I bow out gracefully :-)

Like I was saying before, you don't need to provide proof. At least provide some evidence that indicates that a God exists.

[Evil Goblin]

LDV - the Theist will see the evidence around them in the events of the world - you will see the same things but not recognise them as evidence because you do not believe.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

LDV and yourself seem to think any particular belief should be supportable/proved by scientific examination/evidence and unless so supported is irrational and should be dispensed with. This is tantamount to making a religion out of science.

Not necessarily dispensed with, but certainly hold back on making a judgement where no evidence exists. And that means not forming a belief.

In all other areas of life we come to have an idea of what is truth based on evidence. We don't form beliefs about what is true on a whim, randomly, or without support. We do have beliefs because we think that offer an explanation of what is true about the world and ourselves. It is simply in the case of religious beliefs that evidence is given scant regard or very little evidence is used to support claims.

 

I would contend that people reach conclusions and beliefs based on what they actually perceive and what works for them, irrespective of what the religion of science may have to say about it. If a particular belief confers advantages and help to people in living their everyday lives I see nothing wrong with that. Perhaps it is not in accord with diligent scientific enquiry's results, but so what?

And what are these advantages?