Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

You know God exists. Now thats either true or its not. Your opinion matters.

1…1112141617…21

Comments

  • #652
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    iceman700 wrote: »
    A Lot of arguments here center around the fact that there is no evidence of God, therefore how can we know he exists, and people who accept the good book, often through out quotations from the Bible as truth.
    Its not, unless you have had personal experience, but your personal experience can never be someone elses proof.
    It all boils down to the same thing, seek your own proof, and then you will know.
    Many use the argument, there is no God because bad things happen, that which happened to the Jews for example.
    You all have freewill, why do you blame God, for what man does.

    So if a young child dies a painful death of cancer, how is that a function of free will and in what sense has God been benevolent?


  • #653
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,783 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    iceman700 wrote: »
    A Lot of arguments here center around the fact that there is no evidence of God, therefore how can we know he exists, and people who accept the good book, often through out quotations from the Bible as truth.
    Its not, unless you have had personal experience, but your personal experience can never be someone elses proof.
    It all boils down to the same thing, seek your own proof, and then you will know.
    Many use the argument, there is no God because bad things happen, that which happened to the Jews for example.
    You all have freewill, why do you blame God, for what man does.

    People all over the world "seek their own proof" and end up with completely contradictory "proofs". They can't all be right, in fact only one at most can be right, therefore "seeking your own proof" (whatever that actually entails) is not a valid way of determining truth.

    If god's existence is supposed to be an objective truth, then why is the evidence for it not?


  • #654
    storker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,688 ✭✭✭storker


    iceman700 wrote: »
    You all have freewill, why do you blame God, for what man does.

    Because (let's pretend he exists for a moment) this loving, caring god sits back and does nothing while the most terrible fates and experiences are inflicted on his people. And it's not just a question of illnesses or accidents (and I struggle to see how so many of these are down to the free will of the victims), it's also a question of the ****ty lives he allows some people to lead; abject, grinding poverty from cradle to grave (and some times the second happens very soon after the first) with the interim spent being hungry, fearful and living a miserable existence in squalid conditions.

    As has been pointed out before, either god cannot do anything about these things, or he doesn't want to. If he can't, then he isn't all-powerful, which must surely call into question his creation of the universe, or he doesn't want to, in which he can't be good or made from love.

    It all comes down to one thing: too many holes in the story.


    .


  • #655
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,167 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Not a believer of any kind but in regards God, why is there this belief he must be good? He seemed like a bit of a d1ck in the old testament, no reason to think he cares about anything if he does exist.


  • #656
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Not a believer of any kind but in regards God, why is there this belief he must be good? He seemed like a bit of a d1ck in the old testament, no reason to think he cares about anything if he does exist.

    In Christianity the bible seems pretty categorical on that one; https://www.openbible.info/topics/god_is_good In fact not just good, but omnibenevolent according to many. The old 'mysterious ways' clause is wearing somewhat thin.


  • #657
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,167 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    smacl wrote: »
    In Christianity the bible seems pretty categorical on that one; https://www.openbible.info/topics/god_is_good In fact not just good, but omnibenevolent according to many. The old 'mysterious ways' clause is wearing somewhat thin.

    Suppose myself and others have a different opinion on what good means, telling a guy to kill his kid (by burning her by the way), wiping out a load of Egyptian kids rather than the ones who are actually being the d1cks, also, not a nice move in my book. Also hating people who are a bit different, even though, if he exists, these differences were by his design. And

    Maybe Good, and it probably did, meant something different back then. HIstorical context etc but I still stand over the, if he was or is real, then he is a d1ck.


  • #658
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    iceman700 wrote: »
    Its not, unless you have had personal experience, but your personal experience can never be someone elses proof.

    Even when someone else has the SAME personal experience, that does not make it evidence (Careful with the word proof). For example many people have certain experiences during meditation. Some people interpret that experience as evidence there is a god or gods. Someone else having the exact same experience does not.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    It all boils down to the same thing, seek your own proof, and then you will know.

    Yeah the people who believe the number 23 controls everything do that too. There was a Jim Carey film about them. If you seek proof you can often find it IF you are willing to assume the conclusion true before applying the evidence.

    But if you need to assume the conclusion in order for evidence to be evidence, then it is not good evidence. Be it for a god, or for the number 23.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    You all have freewill, why do you blame God, for what man does.

    Do you have any evidence for the existence of free will? It is by no means an automatic given we DO have free will. So it is not an assumption I use either way at this time.


  • #659
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Suppose myself and others have a different opinion on what good means, telling a guy to kill his kid (by burning her by the way), wiping out a load of Egyptian kids rather than the ones who are actually being the d1cks, also, not a nice move in my book. Also hating people who are a bit different, even though, if he exists, these differences were by his design. And

    Maybe Good, and it probably did, meant something different back then. HIstorical context etc but I still stand over the, if he was or is real, then he is a d1ck.

    Alas, claimed omniscience means that historical context isn't God's get out of jail card here. If you exist outside of time and space, once a dick, always a dick. One of the major problems I have religion is its notion of absolutes, notably moral, which it claims to be independent of context. It is all horseshít of course, as even the most fundamental imperatives, e.g. thou shallt not kill, have plenty of get out clauses for those who need them.


  • #660
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,190 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Not a believer of any kind but in regards God, why is there this belief he must be good? He seemed like a bit of a d1ck in the old testament, no reason to think he cares about anything if he does exist.

    Or even why he's a he?

    If a god exists, I'm sure it's a she. :D
    But only a benevolent one. Her hubby's the ouanquer who sends plagues. :)


  • Advertisement
  • #661
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,420 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    smacl wrote: »
    In Christianity [...] omnibenevolent
    Not only omnibenevolent, but omniscient and omnipotent too - leading to the well-known "Problem of Evil":

    https://www.iep.utm.edu/evil-log/

    If god is omniscient and omnipotent, then he can't be omnibenevolent since he allows evil to take place. If he's omniscient and omnibenevolent, then he can't be omnipotent since evil takes place. If he's omnibenevolent and omnipotent, then he can't be omniscient since evil takes place. And if he's not omnibenevolent, omnipotent or omniscient, then - as somebody once asked - why bother calling him 'god'?


  • #662
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,167 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    I'd never hear the phrase omnibenevolent being used before. I thought the God person was meant to be Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresent. Which is fine,, the bible is the word of God, doesn't mean he or who ever wrote it on his behalf was telling the truth.

    Omnipotent - could be, so God chooses to do nothing ever,
    Omniscient - he knows everything except the bible often disagrees with this, but again, maybe the God thing is a bit of a d1ck and gets a kick out of winding people up
    Omnipresent - so he is everywhere, or has the choice to be, weird and pretty much unnecessary if he is the first two as he knows everything already, so he could be omnipotent and only go to the places he wants to be, as he knows about everywhere else


  • #663
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Which is fine,, the bible is the word of God, doesn't mean he or who ever wrote it on his behalf was telling the truth.

    If the bible isn't telling the truth, the whole God thing pretty much falls asunder. After all, we only know about all those other omni attributes because the bible tells about them. I swear, you couldn't make this stuff up. Or could you... :pac:


  • #664
    iceman700
    Registered Users Posts: 26 ✭iceman700


    As harsh as this may seem, spirit does not hold the human form in the same regard as we ourselves do, it is considered more the vehicle of transport for the soul in this life time, I dont normally quote from the Bible, but I do believe that was what Jesus was referring to when he said, "Let the dead, bury the dead."
    There seems to be a lot of people getting there information from the Bible, and thats fine if it works for you, but I would advocate a more direct route, first hand experience is a must anything else is hearsay.
    Free will is the ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded, before a spirit comes into human form, it chooses its parents, its life experience, during its life experience it chooses how it reacts, whether it accepts its fate, or reacts differently, for a young child, it could be a chance for spiritual growth for the parents, do they become bitter and resentful or take solace in the fact a soul choose to spend that small amount of time with them, out of all the people on the planet.
    Your children come through you, they are not for you, and though they are with you, they do not belong to you.


  • #665
    iceman700
    Registered Users Posts: 26 ✭iceman700


    For those that take on a spiritual path, as they travel along their journey, it is true each path is individual, but there are many common truths that each will encounter.
    You speak of people seeking the truth and coming up with contradictory proofs, is that different religions you mean, Im not quite sure what you are referring too, maybe you could give an example.


  • #666
    iceman700
    Registered Users Posts: 26 ✭iceman700


    The abject poverty, starving and diseased people of the world are not the result of God, but the sheer greed of the rest of mankind, who standby and allow this to happen to his fellow man.
    The US military fund alone could end poverty.
    It is not a reflection on God, but us.


  • Advertisement
  • #667
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    iceman700 wrote: »
    The abject poverty, starving and diseased people of the world are not the result of God, but the sheer greed of the rest of mankind, who standby and allow this to happen to his fellow man.
    The US military fund alone could end poverty. It is not a reflection on God, but us.

    Very true, particularly if you, like most of us on this forum, are of the opinion that God doesn't exist in the first place. Organised religion on the other hand is man made and has a long and bloody history. If we consider the abject poverty of many, and all its attendant woes, a result of human greed, how many of those greedy humans would call themselves Christian? The US military for example is primarily made up of gun toting Christians.


  • #668
    iceman700
    Registered Users Posts: 26 ✭iceman700


    Experiences during meditation are just that, we can ask questions and get the answer in meditation, but that experience is in our heads only.
    I do not consider it evidence until it spills over into this reality, the connection has to be seen from the spiritual to the physical, otherwise it is all just nonsense.
    The fact that you believe something and then see evidence in this reality, shows there is a connection between thought and this reality, and that thought effects this reality.
    It works on every level, if you grow up with low self esteem and self doubt, chances are you will not get very far in life, life coaches teach this very idea, positive thinking.
    Having belief in yourself and confidence, there is a far greater chance of succeeding in life.
    Hence the phrase, "Fake it, till you make it.
    TO say that believing in something first and then seeing the evidence is not evidence, I truly dont know what to say to that.
    Jesus Christ was always referred to as "Master", what was he master of, the mind, everything starts with thought, then belief, then effort then the materialization of the goal or object.


  • #669
    iceman700
    Registered Users Posts: 26 ✭iceman700


    There is a disconnect here, religion is man made, there maybe some down through the ages who were involved in religion who made genuine progress on the spiritual path, and there might even be today, but for the large part it is a money making organisation, who down through the ages have shed blood, and sucked money from those ill able to afford it.
    Heres the difference, someone who has made progress on a spiritual path could not take another life, those who hide under the banner of religion and murder for power and money or abuse children are not connected to God, but to their own spiritual ego of self importance and self righteousness.


  • #670
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    iceman700 wrote: »
    There is a disconnect here, religion is man made, there maybe some down through the ages who were involved in religion who made genuine progress on the spiritual path, and there might even be today, but for the large part it is a money making organisation, who down through the ages have shed blood, and sucked money from those ill able to afford it.
    Heres the difference, someone who has made progress on a spiritual path could not take another life, those who hide under the banner of religion and murder for power and money or abuse children are not connected to God, but to their own spiritual ego of self importance and self righteousness.

    The notion that any kind of incorporeal spirit exists is also man made. You might believe it to be true, just as other might believe in the existence of a blue elephant god. Believing something to be true or wanting something to be true does not make that thing true in any objective sense though.


  • #671
    iceman700
    Registered Users Posts: 26 ✭iceman700


    And that is where we differ greatly, spirit is not man made, does exist and can be experienced both on a spiritual level and in this physical reality.


  • Advertisement
  • #672
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,181 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    iceman700 wrote: »
    spirit is not man made, does exist and can be experienced both on a spiritual level and in this physical reality.
    no, yes and yes.
    i prefer irish to scotch personally, but YMMV.


  • #673
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    You made a series of posts already which I and a few others replied. You ignored all those replies and have simply made another string of posts.

    I am curious to know therefore.... since it will determine how I engage with you in the future.... if your main intention here is two way adult mature conversation..... or to soapbox sermons at us?
    iceman700 wrote: »
    spirit does not hold the human form in the same regard as we ourselves do, it is considered more the vehicle of transport for the soul in this life time

    Please define your terms. What is "spirit" exactly and how do you substantiate it's existence.

    In a debate between Dan Barker and the unfortunately named Kyle Butt, Butt kept using the word "spirit". Dan Barker therefore asked him to define it like I just asked you.

    Speaking out of an orifice more in line with his surname than his thesis, Butt was comically unable to do it. He trotted out a long definition which was a string of words telling the audience everything spirit is NOT. Not one word of his "definition" said what spirit IS.

    He was therefore of course entirely unable to substantiate the existence of the thing, given he lacked any substantive definition of it.

    Maybe you can do better?
    iceman700 wrote: »
    I would advocate a more direct route, first hand experience is a must anything else is hearsay.

    How very contrived and convenient of you, that the form of evidence you elevate to the highest level.... is the form of evidence that just happens to be LEAST amenable to scrutiny and rebuttal.

    However personal testimony in other areas of discourse seems to be steadily getting a bad rap for being less than reliable even at the best of times.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    Free will is the ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded

    Given you simply ignored my post to you before, and continued with your sermon.... I have to repeat my question. Have you ANY evidence that free will actually exists? It is by no means taken as a given in many realms of philosophy.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    that experience is in our heads only.

    As is all the "first hand experience" you speak of in an early post in your sermon.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    The fact that you believe something and then see evidence

    Which "you" do you refer to here, because you are not speaking for me. For me the evidence comes first, belief second. Not the other way around as you describe here.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    It works on every level, if you grow up with low self esteem and self doubt, chances are you will not get very far in life

    Not sure how true that is at all. Many successful people, especially in the arts, report being plagued by self doubt all the time, and suffer from issues of self esteem. In fact sometimes rather than hamper then, it drives them. And "positive thinking" in contrast can help some, but hinder others. There is no one size fits all here despite your fantasy narrative on the subject.

    What any of this has to do with "god" and "spirit" however is a mystery to me. You appear to be doing a Gish Gallop of rabbit holes and tangents without linking any of it to any thesis, topic or common theme.

    For all the sense and relevance you are making here you might as well shout "There is a god/spirit" and then move to telling us the best recipe for Guccamole you ever found.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    TO say that believing in something first and then seeing the evidence is not evidence, I truly dont know what to say to that.

    Agreed, I have no doubt you do not know what to say to it. But there is good reason one of the main agendas of the scientific method is to weed out confirmation bias. The problems associated with having a belief in a truth first, and fitting or interpreting the evidence to it later are well known and well documented.

    And it is not just in science this is an issue. But in all areas of our life. For example if you really believe a spouse is cheating on you, despite no evidence they are, you will suddenly start parsing everything through that narrative. A spouse may simply be delayed a long time in traffic on the way home, but under the rubric of the pre-belief of infidelity the spouse is actually off having a great time in someone elses bed in this time. And evidence not fitting that narrative may be ignored.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    everything starts with thought, then belief, then effort then the materialization of the goal or object.

    Speak, as I said, for yourself. Do not pretend, least of all for me, to speak for others.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    spirit is not man made, does exist

    <Definitions needed>
    <Citations needed>
    <Substantiation needed>

    This forum tends not to go much into "Truth by assertion" you see. In fact it tends after a short time to get the ire of the moderation team. Can I ask you directly to substantiate your claims therefore?


  • #674
    corks finest
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,708 ✭✭✭corks finest


    Yes God exists, for all


  • #675
    iceman700
    Registered Users Posts: 26 ✭iceman700


    This post is for Nozzferrahhtoo.
    In reply to your statement that the posts others made were ignored, did you read the second list of posts, or sermons as you state.
    I do believe I answered each in turn, your first reply mentioned, meditation experiences and belief before evidence, both were addressed in the fourth post, you also mentioned free will which was covered in the first post, if you wish to engage in a two way mature adult conservation, then maybe you should act like a mature adult and not try to patronize with threats of the moderation team and assume when a statement is made, it is made on behalf of everyone.
    Your inability to understand stems from the fact that you work solely from the confines of the limited logical mind, to know that anything exists beyond that will escape you.
    The spiritual is not material, it cannot be seen under a microscope or measured with any of your scientific equipment.
    Spirit is the life force itself, there are those who can sense the presence and engage with spirit, those restricted to the five senses only, will not, is it too hard to conceive that we have latent abilities that can be developed.
    As regards your cheating spouse, if you believe that, then look for evidence, if you find none then maybe she isint, if you find evidence, then maybe she is.
    Are you of the opinion, we cling to our beliefs, with nothing to back it up.
    The crux of the matter is you dont understand how limited and small the logical mind is, and why should you. you have never gone beyond it.


  • #676
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    iceman700 wrote: »
    if you wish to engage in a two way mature adult conservation, then maybe you should act like a mature adult and not try to patronize with threats of the moderation team and assume when a statement is made, it is made on behalf of everyone.
    Your inability to understand stems from the fact that you work solely from the confines of the limited logical mind, to know that anything exists beyond that will escape you.

    Mod warning: Personal attacks such as the above are against the charter of this forum. Please take a moment to read the charter before posting again.

    When replying to a point made by another poster, please use the quote option to quote the poster so everyone else knows who you're talking to and which point of theirs you are addressing. To address a poster more generally, the shorthand here is to use the @ symbol, e.g. if I wanted to address you I'd use @iceman. Thanks for your attention.


  • #677
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    iceman700 wrote: »
    The spiritual is not material, it cannot be seen under a microscope or measured with any of your scientific equipment.

    The same could be said for the imaginary. How exactly do you demonstrably distinguish what you perceive to be real, e.g. the spiritual, from what you imagine to be real?


  • #678
    Iamabeliever
    Registered Users Posts: 464 ✭✭Iamabeliever


    smacl wrote: »
    The same could be said for the imaginary. How exactly do you demonstrably distinguish what you perceive to be real, e.g. the spiritual, from what you imagine to be real?

    How can you give a warning to a person defending his beliefs yet in your next post make fun of them. Are you an idiot? Or just a bully?


  • #679
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Iamabeliever wrote: »
    How can you give a warning to a person defending his beliefs yet in your next post make fun of them. Are you an idiot? Or just a bully?

    Mod warning: Carded for personal abuse. As with the previous poster, it is acceptable to attack someone's opinion or beliefs but not their person as you have just done above. It is also against the charter to question moderation in-thread, we have a feedback thread here for that. Please also note that this is the atheist and agnostics forum, where most regular posters consider religious belief specious and tend to be critical of it. If you're not happy about having your beliefs examined under a critical eye, this is perhaps not the right forum to declare them. Thanks for your attention.


  • #680
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    I work with a guy who 'knows' that god exists and has an in-built distrust of science.

    So that's it really, when somebody 'knows' something you don't and truly believes that to be the case then it's impossible to debate with them. To be fair he has a great sense of humour though and we have good craic with him but he truly believe us unbelievers are all deceived.

    Incidentally:

    - He also believes the Earth is flat

    - Space doesn't exists (we're all living in a dome)

    - There are hidden signals and clues to the occult absolutely everywhere (such as the recurrence of the number 33, the 666 hand signal, 9/11 being revealed many times before it happened in things like the Simpsons, the Matrix and Loony tones etc etc etc)

    - Basically all terrorist attacks are fake, ie they're all staged, with dummies, fake guns, fake victims, fake blood and so on


    I have to say, lunchtime is never dull!! :-)


  • #681
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    No, none of your posts were directed at me. You are new the forum, perhaps you could check how it works before going off on on, or just ask if you need help. We are a helpful bunch you know.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    you also mentioned free will which was covered in the first post

    But it wasn't "addressed" now was it? What you did in a post was give your own personal definition of what you think Free Will means. Did I ask you for that? No. I did not. This is why your posts do not / did not appear to be directed at me. You did not actually reply to anything I said or asked.

    What I asked was not for a definition of free will, but your evidence that we actually HAVE it. If I ask for evidence you have cake, you would not give me the recipe for what cake contains. I already know what cake is.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    Your inability to understand stems from the fact that you work solely from the confines of the limited logical mind, to know that anything exists beyond that will escape you.

    It is a common theist trope around here that when a theist has no evidence for their claims, they instead pretend that is not their failing, but because their target/mark is lacking in some way. It has not convinced or tricked anyone before, so do not expect you trying the same move will do so today. This "You just do not understand because you lack some skill/ability/faculty that I have" is a complete canard. Raise your game please.

    It is funny that you mention logic though. Your tacit statement therefore is that to agree with your claims and ideas, we must be illogical. This much I would 100% agree with you on, I have no doubt that is the requirement you would need.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    The spiritual is not material, it cannot be seen under a microscope or measured with any of your scientific equipment.

    Oh look, just like Kyle Butt rather than tell us what it IS, you begin by listing the things it is NOT. I so called it.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    Spirit is the life force itself, there are those who can sense the presence and engage with spirit, those restricted to the five senses only, will not, is it too hard to conceive that we have latent abilities that can be developed.

    It is also not "hard to conceive" that you have 12 arms and three heads. But something being easy to conceive is not even remotely evidence that it is true or credible. If the best you can say for your positions on this thread is that they are "easy to conceive" then again we are 100% agreement. They are very simplistic and remarkably "easy to conceive".

    But being easy to conceive is NOT evidence that "spirit" or this "life force" of yours actually exists. So once again rather than replying to my rebuttals and questions, you are merely giving me a sermon on what you believe. WHAT You believe is clear. It is the WHY you believe it that is opaque to me and.... I am beginning to suspect.... to you too.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    As regards your cheating spouse, if you believe that, then look for evidence, if you find none then maybe she isint, if you find evidence, then maybe she is.

    Way to miss the point there. The point is that if I start with the belief a spouse is cheating FIRST, then I will be more than capable of finding things that fit it as "evidence" second. That is the problem with belief before evidence, rather than belief as a consequence of evidence.

    What you appear not to understand with the word "evidence" is the difference between data that supports a claim, and data that is merely congruent to a claim. When you admonish us to believe first and seek evidence second, you are simply recommending the latter form.


  • Advertisement
  • #682
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Iamabeliever wrote: »
    How can you give a warning to a person defending his beliefs yet in your next post make fun of them. Are you an idiot? Or just a bully?

    No one made fun of anyone. It is a valid question the user above asked. If one defines something as "not material, it cannot be seen under a microscope or measured with any of your scientific equipment" then a valid question to ask is how you can distinguish between that and anything else that you simply imagine. Because something you simply imagine WILL fit the same definition.

    How that comes across as "making fun" of anyone, is really a puzzle to me.


  • #683
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,492 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    iceman700 wrote: »
    The spiritual is not material, it cannot be seen under a microscope or measured with any of your scientific equipment.

    How conveeenient.

    Scrap the cap!



  • #684
    iceman700
    Registered Users Posts: 26 ✭iceman700


    I think it is fair to say that if someone sits there and asks for proof of God, it cannot be done, its not possible.
    The only way for this to happen is through searching yourself, spiritual practices etc, that is why I say personal experience.
    Once you have had personal experience, you will be in no doubt whether it is imaginary or not, and thats the bottom line, the evidence lies in your own experience.
    But look at it this way, just for a moment, lets say God exists and is responsible for all creation, we as individuals, in the grand scheme of things, are tiny, insignificant, but we feel God should come and prove himself to us.
    I would find it a more balanced view, if someone did partake in spiritual practice for a period of time and then proclaimed it didnt work.
    I have stated before the evidence can spill over into this reality, but again it is personal experience.
    The main bugbears so far seem to be putting the cart before the horse, I do not believe it is a die-hard belief needed at the start, more so an open mind, you can still remain critical of anything evidence wise that comes your way, Iam not advocating you have a die-hard belief and then go searching for evidence and except everything without question, no, the experiences will come by themselves.
    The other bugbear seems to be free will, was it not free will that was exercised when you got up this morning, when you decided to post on said forum, but we probably want more extreme examples, so I will give a personal one, my wife had a tumor removed from her spine when she was twenty seven, at the prime of her life, she worked in the medical profession, and was very logical and scientific. Since the tumor was removed her mobility has suffered and she has been left in chronic pain, all day, everyday, her career finished. Does she have free will, or was it taken away from her. Her response, she had the free will to re-act the way of her choice, constant pain has forced her to live in the now, she could have become very bitter, she didn't, she appreciates the small things in life once taken for granted, she realizes its not all about the material and possessions and feels she has grown as a person.
    Just because the decisions facing us become harsh, doesn't mean we haven't got free will.


  • #685
    nthclare
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭nthclare


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    How conveeenient.

    A rather dull response might I add...

    As much charisma as a dirty rag flopping on a brittle clothes line.

    There's a lot of variables in people's ideas of spirituality and whether they're Christian, Atheist or new age they can all live a spiritual lifestyle.

    I see people in here quote scientists and researchers, holy books and other people's ideas basically plagiarism to the highest order..

    Posting other people's interpretations then using it to put themselves up on a wet cardboard platform.....it's fallen down before one's standing on top.

    It's easy to emulate Dawkins or other atheists, and then use it to gain points in a debate.

    There's a lot of spiritual Atheists and Agnostics out there and they understand spirituality.

    It's a very simple way of living, uncomplicated and it opens up the mind...

    My way of life ain't for everyone, but it's not better than anyone elses...


  • #686
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,167 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    I believe in the illusion of free will, that I feel like I made a choice everyday. I don't mean this in the sociological context of something or someone is controlling me and I don't realise it (although that could easily be true). I mean it in the Mathematical way. Atoms, Electrons, sub atomic particles from the beginning of teh universe have a set of rules that they abide by, we don't know all of them but they are there. From the very first moment, they have reacted to all the other particles around them in regards to these rules. From this moment onwards, they would always act a specific way, bounce a specific way and always end up with me at a laptop with the illusion of free will.

    I don't think this is a bad thing, it is quite fascinating, the perception of free will is more than enough and is indistinguisahable from free will from our way we observe the universe and probably always will be.

    As for God, I think they are all a nice trick of the mind to help us deal with the fact that we are nothing, mean nothing and can't deal with the fact that nothing will change this. It is a nice comfort for some, i no longer need it but manny do and let them at it so long as they don't mess up my day.


  • #687
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    nthclare wrote: »
    My way of life ain't for everyone, but it's not better than anyone elses...

    That's fine, it works for you so go for it. I think the problems start happening when people start presenting their beliefs as undeniable truths that others should accept and live their lives accordingly. In this case, they should be able to evidence their beliefs if they are to have any kind of a convincing argument. Someone tells me they're Christian, Muslim, Wiccan, or Jedi I've absolutely no problem with it. The problem happens if they tell me I should also become Christian, Muslim, Wiccan, or Jedi or whatever, or try to teach it to my kids. Likewise if they try to set down rules as to who can or cannot get married, have sex, or engage in planned parenthood.


  • #688
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,783 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    iceman700 wrote: »
    I think it is fair to say that if someone sits there and asks for proof of God, it cannot be done, its not possible.
    The only way for this to happen is through searching yourself, spiritual practices etc, that is why I say personal experience.
    Once you have had personal experience, you will be in no doubt whether it is imaginary or not, and thats the bottom line, the evidence lies in your own experience.

    Given that everyone with contradictory ideas of god can't all be right, does that not mean that personal experience is insufficient to determine the existence of god?


  • #689
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,783 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    iceman700 wrote: »
    spirit is not man made, does exist and can be experienced both on a spiritual level and in this physical reality.
    iceman700 wrote: »
    The spiritual is not material, it cannot be seen under a microscope or measured with any of your scientific equipment.

    You have contradicted yourself.
    If something can be experienced physically then it can be measured scientifically.
    If something cannot be in any scientifically measured, then how is it distinguishable from not existing?


  • #690
    nthclare
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭nthclare


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    You have contradicted yourself.
    If something can be experienced physically then it can be measured scientifically.
    If something cannot be in any scientifically measured, then how is it distinguishable from not existing?

    This is like new age woo... your post is not making any sense or reason.

    Can you post this in layman's terms please.

    It's hard on the head.


  • Advertisement
  • #691
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,783 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    nthclare wrote: »
    Call a spade a spade, I notice a lot of anti religion and spirituality and point's being scored on this forum, collective thanking and moderators taking the atheists side more frequently, and shutting people down and ruining some banter and the odd squabble which could be sorted out here rather than face the rath of somewhere else to sort out the problems...

    What I see is a lot of critical discussion of theistic and spiritualist claims, well written and thought out posts receiving thanks from other posters who appreciate the points made and effort invested, and moderators working quite well with posters to keep discussions moving.
    The other thing I am seeing is posters who don't like their ill-thought religious and spiritual crutches being deconstructed in front of them, aghast that the mods don't step in and rescue them from the nasty atheists with their offensive reasoning and logic.
    I am sure that you are not one of these people and that you actually have plenty of evidence of your claims happening in this thread.
    nthclare wrote: »
    So in effect if this forum represents Atheism as a whole on board's it's quite PC sterile and boring... don't question a mod, you're banned because you questioned a mod ?

    One more infraction and you're out, it's like school..

    Then the mod puts up a smart comment...so and so are taking a break for a few days to cool down and the usual happy clapper's giving it a like.

    Seriously, there needs to be a bit of room for heated debates and discussions...

    There is a feedback thread to discuss this kind of thing and I would genuinely like to continue discussing this with you there because I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. The only times I have seen mods exercise their powers is when posters are directly insulting someone or ignoring direct mod instructions and they are very lenient when they do use their powers (any other forum on this site where calling a mod an idiot to their face would only get you an infraction?).
    nthclare wrote: »
    This place used to be very popular and entertaining now it's been run like a politically correct Californian college campus...one strike and you're infracted...

    A bit like what Atheism doesn't stand for...ye left the church and religion only to create something that's so similar.
    Very much like the Abrahamic dogma without the god head in charge.

    It is still entertaining, maybe the problem is that your posts and banter aren't as entertaining as you think you are?


  • #692
    s1ippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,980 ✭✭✭s1ippy


    nthclare wrote: »
    This is like new age woo... your post is not making any sense or reason.

    Can you post this in layman's terms please.

    It's hard on the head.
    He was referring to the other poster saying
    spirit is not man made, does exist and can be experienced both on a spiritual level and in this physical reality.
    and then
    The spiritual is not material, it cannot be seen under a microscope or measured with any of your scientific equipment.

    "If something can be experienced physically then it can be measured scientifically.
    If something cannot be in any scientifically measured, then how is it distinguishable from not existing?"

    Personally I can summon a feeling of awe or spirituality (in a non-Catholic sense) when confronted with beauty or the inexplicable. But the next person might say to me" I never feel spiritual". It's a matter of opinion.

    If I say "I feel cold" a person with me might say "I'm not cold" and we could measure the objective temperature of the room to see what the temperature actually is and where our thresholds are.

    The same doesn't work with the spirituality, because I can't reply to someone with no spirituality "you do feel spiritual!"

    I would probably tell them to go and watch Pocahantas or something so they can paint with all the colours of the wind. It's strange and sad to me if someone has never felt that way. Even the most staunchly atheist people I know have been able to feel it.


  • #693
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    nthclare wrote: »
    Absolutely, as long as you're happy why should anyone else try to convince you will be happy +++ if you close your mind with restrictions...

    Christianity is very restrictive and might I add vindictive...I found when I became a pagan I opened up to a whole new world that's amazing and all inclusive...

    Whether you're an atheist, Christian Mulsim Jew Buddhist we can all get along ok

    But being a dick head doesn't discriminate.

    Call a spade a spade, I notice a lot of anti religion and spirituality and point's being scored on this forum, collective thanking and moderators taking the atheists side more frequently, and shutting people down and ruining some banter and the odd squabble which could be sorted out here rather than face the rath of somewhere else to sort out the problems...

    So in effect if this forum represents Atheism as a whole on board's it's quite PC sterile and boring... don't question a mod, you're banned because you questioned a mod ?

    One more infraction and you're out, it's like school..

    Then the mod puts up a smart comment...so and so are taking a break for a few days to cool down and the usual happy clapper's giving it a like.

    Seriously, there needs to be a bit of room for heated debates and discussions...

    This place used to be very popular and entertaining now it's been run like a politically correct Californian college campus...one strike and you're infracted...

    A bit like what Atheism doesn't stand for...ye left the church and religion only to create something that's so similar.
    Very much like the Abrahamic dogma without the god head in charge.

    MOD

    This forum is moderated according to a charter - as is every other forum on boards - and it is there for all to read.
    IF you have an issue with the moderation of this forum there is a feedback thread.

    Do not drag other threads off topic so you can have a wee rant.

    I should also point out that you, personally, have been something of a time sink in terms of in thread warnings, infractions, and even received a one day ban - and yet here you are. Still able to post despite our alleged dogma.

    If you have difficulty abiding by the charter - as you seem to have - perhaps this is not the forum for you


  • #694
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,783 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    nthclare wrote: »
    This is like new age woo... your post is not making any sense or reason.

    Can you post this in layman's terms please.

    It's hard on the head.

    Iceman700 made two claims:
    The soul can be experienced physically
    It cannot be measured scientifically.

    These contradict, as anything that can be experienced physically must be by definition measurable scientifically (as scientific measurements are recorded physical experiences themselves).


    I followed up, as a general aside, asking that if something cannot be measured scientifically, then how do you know if it exists at all?


  • #695
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,783 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    s1ippy wrote: »
    Personally I can summon a feeling of awe or spirituality (in a non-Catholic sense) when confronted with beauty or the inexplicable. But the next person might say to me" I never feel spiritual". It's a matter of opinion.

    If I say "I feel cold" a person with me might say "I'm not cold" and we could measure the objective temperature of the room to see what the temperature actually is and where our thresholds are.

    The same doesn't work with the spirituality, because I can't reply to someone with no spirituality "you do feel spiritual!"

    I would probably tell them to go and watch Pocahantas or something so they can paint with all the colours of the wind. It's strange and sad to me if someone has never felt that way. Even the most staunchly atheist people I know have been able to feel it.

    Why do think the "spirituality" you describe when confronting beauty or the inexplicable is something besides the sum of your emotions at that time?


  • #696
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    s1ippy wrote: »
    Personally I can summon a feeling of awe or spirituality (in a non-Catholic sense) when confronted with beauty or the inexplicable. But the next person might say to me" I never feel spiritual". It's a matter of opinion.

    Very much the same, I think having a strong sense of wonder and to find things awesome is in itself wonderful and awesome. I value having a strong imagination and would find life very dull without it it. I also find when walking, cycling or practicing taiji, I often feel very much in tune with, and a part of, my immediate environment. These are all facets of my own mind and how it responds to external and internal stimuli though. I wouldn't say that I ever feel "spiritual" if by spiritual you mean anything distinct or separable from my own mind.

    There seems to be a line of argument put forward by many religious types implying that science is essentially reductive and and lacks the ability to conceive their supernatural notions. My opinion is that the reverse is true, in that if you look at any great scientists one thing they have in common is an active imagination and ability to think outside the box. Larger religions by comparison are defined by dogma.


  • Advertisement
  • #697
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,777 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    nthclare wrote: »
    Proselytizing isn't tolerated on the Atheist and Agnosticism forum, why should deconstructing people's beliefs be allowed ???

    Firstly, the charter is very clear that proselytizing is allowed on this forum and that's pretty much the thrust of the opening post. Secondly, atheist discussion regularly involves examining and deconstructing belief systems, including those purportedly held by atheists. You've done the same yourself plenty of times on this thread and others making sweeping generalizations about atheists, which is really just the type of point scoring nonsense you've been complaining about.


  • #698
    s1ippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,980 ✭✭✭s1ippy


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Why do think the "spirituality" you describe when confronting beauty or the inexplicable is something besides the sum of your emotions at that time?
    I absolutely accept that it could be that.

    But having taken hallucinogens as well, that kind of ruined my ability to chalk everything up to the rational. Now, I feel that everything in reality is connected; living, asentient, observable or occurring without observation. Tripping once flipped my entire life perspective on its head and changed my life for the better.

    I possibly won't even do it again but feel so glad to have this new, happier, more self-assured perspective. I've researched a lot of what is known about DMT and that area of the brain, it's quite incredible what humans, as complex machines, capable of.


  • #699
    nthclare
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭nthclare


    smacl wrote: »
    Firstly, the charter is very clear that proselytizing is allowed on this forum and that's pretty much the thrust of the opening post. Secondly, atheist discussion regularly involves examining and deconstructing belief systems, including those purportedly held by atheists. You've done the same yourself plenty of times on this thread and others making sweeping generalizations about atheists, which is really just the type of point scoring nonsense you've been complaining about.

    Ok point taken, that's very clear.
    We've all done it without thinking about it.

    Atheists make sweeping generalisations about religion and politics too...

    That's why I have a few less pane's in my glasshouse...so when I throw a stone it not going to hit anything because I can also look through the glass and nobody's in the way.


  • #700
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,783 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    nthclare wrote: »
    Where's your evidence for me thinking my post's are entertaining or my banter is appreciated ?

    You were the one complaining that this forum is boring and it's mods don't seem to appreciate banter and heated discussions. I assumed you were including your posts in that assessment.
    nthclare wrote: »
    You assume that some people are deconstructing others belief's in front of them.
    I think that's quite egotistical to be honest.
    Cohesion isn't about destroying people's beliefs and using my post to validate your argument or discussion is a poor attempt to get your point across.

    This is a discussion forum, it's for discussion. People should be able to handle their beliefs being deconstructed. If they can't and they rail against the notion, then they are closeminded and anti-cohesion.
    nthclare wrote: »
    I'm not going to discuss this with you where you'll have the upper hand in a discussion.

    I am not a mod, I have no upperhand anywhere. I just suggested a thread which deals with that specific topic, so that we don't drag this thread off topic.
    nthclare wrote: »
    You've a right to your opinion and me mine.

    Never said otherwise.


  • #701
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,783 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    s1ippy wrote: »
    I absolutely accept that it could be that.

    But having taken hallucinogens as well, that kind of ruined my ability to chalk everything up to the rational.

    Why? You just have the sum of your emotions plus mind altering drugs. Why does that remove things from the realm of the rational?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement