Re: Believing in Something Invisible

[Dannager]

In the creationist sub-forum, the following was posted:

I was just reading the wiki on Dark Matter when the first sentence struck me.

Many times in my life, I have heard or seen atheistic objections to belief in God because He is invisible,
so we can't prove He is there.
Yet apparently, atheists don't have any trouble believing in invisible things when it suits their agenda.

Dark Matter
"In astrophysics and cosmology, dark matter refers to hypothetical matter of unknown composition that does not emit or reflect enough electromagnetic radiation to be observed directly, but whose presence can be inferred from gravitational effects on visible matter."

In a very similar way, I could describe God!
i.e. God is someone who does not emit or reflect enough electromagnetic radiation to be observed directly, but whose presence can be inferred from [His] effects on visible matter.

Just an observation.

In this post, FallingWaters claimed that God's presence can be inferred from God's effects on visible matter.

FallingWaters, could you please demonstrate for us, empirically, God's effects on visible matter? And if you yourself are incapable of demonstrating this (as I very strongly suspect you are), could you please provide some experimental data that demonstrates, empirically, God's effects on visible matter? And if you are still unable to do so (as I also very strongly suspect you are) would you mind retracting the unsupported statement you made in that sub-forum thread?

 

[Jase]

I was gonna bring this to the OT forum also. She claims atheists accept dark matter, even though it's invisble, but not God. Well, for atheists, God has no effect on the universe, where as dark matter does.

I wouldn't hold your breath about fallingwaters responding to you. She refuses to come to the OT forum cause we're mean I guess.

 

[Dannager]

I was gonna bring this to the OT forum also. She claims atheists accept dark matter, even though it's invisble, but not God. Well, for atheists, God has no effect on the universe, where as dark matter does.

I wouldn't hold your breath about fallingwaters responding to you. She refuses to come to the OT forum cause we're mean I guess.

Her loss. Refusal to participate in open debate just makes it look to those watching like she's incapable of defending her position.

And perceived hostility isn't an excuse. TEs and evolutionists in general deal with belligerent creationists all the time, but we never retreat into our sub-forum because of it. We counter their arguments and move on. If she feels that rules violations are taking place, then she can report people. Otherwise, it looks like it's simply a case of not being able to handle debate.

 

[Melethiel]

Guys, lay off the personal comments.

 

[Galle]

I believe in dark matter, and I believe in God, but the two beliefs are quite different. It seems to me that creationists often conflate "provisionally accept on the basis of evidence" and "believe as a matter of faith". It's sometimes difficult to tell whether this is intentional or accidental, but either way it's incorrect. My belief in dark matter is comparable to my belief that the Earth is a spheroid or my belief that germs cause disease like influenza or typhoid. It's based on evidence and subject to alteration or abandonment should the evidence warrant that. My belief in God is based on personal experience rather than repeatable objective evidence and is a rather more personal conclusion than what's written in peer-reviewed journals.

Considering that there are plenty of atheists in the main CvE forum, it's quite the mystery as to why this subject was originally posted in the creationist-only subforum. I have no doubt that the subject is of interest to the denizens of f70 and that there would be a far more informative response from the people that are the subject of the thread in the first place. I don't wish to single anyone out of course, but I highly encourage interested parties to repost a topic that talks about atheists in a forum where atheists can respond! For that matter, there are plenty of TEs who, like myself, also believe in God and dark matter and who I'm sure would have valuable insight.

 

[Mallon]

Aye. Let's keep it civil, boys.
The point is this: astrophysicists accept dark matter because there is evidence for it. They don't just believe in it for the sake of believing. They don't make it into some sort of false idol, like the OP insinuates. In 1803, John Dalton also subscribed to the atomic structure of nature, not because he could see atoms, but because he felt there was sufficient stoichiometric evidence to testify to their existence. And now, nearly 200 years later, we can confidently say he was right! So let's not be so quick to excuse dark matter. It explains a great many things.

 

[laptoppop]

I would agree there is a difference between believing in a scientific theory like the existence of dark matter, and believing in God.

(note - all Scriptural references are rough paraphrases, etc. Please don't get hung up on the exact wording and consider the meanings.)

I do believe that God has left plenty of evidence to His existence. As Paul says in Romans - the very creation displays the work of the Creator. God has also chosen to reach into history in real ways at various times, especially in the incarnation and resurrection.

On the other hand - as Jesus said to Thomas - Do you believe because you see? Blessed are those who have not seen, and yet believe.

There is a spiritual reality which is actually more important than anything physical. God is more concerned with our hearts and souls than with our toenails. Lord, let me have a yielded listening heart -- too often I can be stubborn and full of myself.

 

[theIdi0t]

As Paul says in Romans - the very creation displays the work of the Creator.

Which verse in Romans are you speaking of? just curious?

 

[Mallon]

Which verse in Romans are you speaking of? just curious?

Probably Rom 1:20.

 

[juvenissun]

In the creationist sub-forum, the following was posted:

In this post, FallingWaters claimed that God's presence can be inferred from God's effects on visible matter.

FallingWaters, could you please demonstrate for us, empirically, God's effects on visible matter? And if you yourself are incapable of demonstrating this (as I very strongly suspect you are), could you please provide some experimental data that demonstrates, empirically, God's effects on visible matter? And if you are still unable to do so (as I also very strongly suspect you are) would you mind retracting the unsupported statement you made in that sub-forum thread?

Young man, do not be so sure on everything you know.

You are visible matter and God has effect on you.

 

[Dannager]

Young man, do not be so sure on everything you know.

You don't want to bring age into this.

You are visible matter and God has effect on you.

I asked for an empirically demonstrable effect. Please follow the prompt and don't derail my thread.

 

[laptoppop]

Probably Rom 1:20.

Yes. (NASB)
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, Rom 1:19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. Rom 1:21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Rom 1:22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, Rom 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.

 

[Galle]

You are visible matter and God has effect on you.

In the same way that dark matter has an effect? Can we observe this effect in an analogous way to the way we observe dark matter's effect? Can this observation be repeated? Is God the best explanation for this observation? Does your hypothesis (which I'm quite interested to hear) make any novel predictions?

I second Dannager's request: please demonstrate for us, empirically, God's effects on visible matter

 

[juvenissun]

In the same way that dark matter has an effect? Can we observe this effect in an analogous way to the way we observe dark matter's effect? Can this observation be repeated? Is God the best explanation for this observation? Does your hypothesis (which I'm quite interested to hear) make any novel predictions?

I second Dannager's request: please demonstrate for us, empirically, God's effects on visible matter

This is a hopelessly nebulous question.

1. How about general emotions: laugh, sad, exciting, etc.
2. Or how about some natural features such as: rain, earthquake, etc.

Please make the question harder to answer. Thanks.

 

[Dannager]

This is a hopelessly nebulous question.

1. How about general emotions: laugh, sad, exciting, etc.
2. Or how about some natural features such as: rain, earthquake, etc.

Please make the question harder to answer. Thanks.

You haven't satisfied the one she (nor I) posed. Emotions have naturalistic explanations, as do weather phenomena. Please provide empirical evidence of God's effects on matter.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Infer: to reach a conclusion by reasoning, evidence.

Prove: To determine by testing.

Her inference isn't testable scientifically any more than the statement that, "God upholds all things by the word of his power."

(The pile of bible pages grows larger at the feet of the TE, who, unable to scientifically prove their words, tears them from the book. At last he is left with the empty cover, all pages now removed.)

 

[The Lady Kate]

1. How about general emotions: laugh, sad, exciting, etc.

How about them? Is it God that makes us sad?

2. Or how about some natural features such as: rain, earthquake, etc.

Please make the question harder to answer. Thanks.

Ok, well, we know what causes rain, earthquakes, etc. Natural phenomena caused by natural means... not the wrath of an angry God, as people once thought.

Please answer a question correctly before patting yourself on the back.

 

[Galle]

This is a hopelessly nebulous question.

1. How about general emotions: laugh, sad, exciting, etc.
2. Or how about some natural features such as: rain, earthquake, etc.

Please make the question harder to answer. Thanks.

My query is open-ended because I wanted to give you the freedom to answer in detail before I started making assumptions about your belief. I do not think that this freedom should be confused with ambiguity.

You have yet to answer Dannager's request. You have made some vague assertions about God's effect on visible matter, but you have not demonstrated this causal link empirically. To help you along, let me ask you some questions:

When God causes or influences emotions (or weather or geology), what exactly do you think happens? Just what is it that God does in these cases?

How could you test this hypothesis? What predictions can you draw?

What possible observations would falsify your hypothesis?

Of course, I highly encourage you to perform this test and inform us of the results. For that matter, please consider submitting the results of this test for publishing in an appropriate peer-reviewed journal.

 

[Galle]

(The pile of bible pages grows larger at the feet of the TE, who, unable to scientifically prove their words, tears them from the book. At last he is left with the empty cover, all pages now removed.)

Let us imagine, purely for the sake of argument, that this were true. What would it say about the validity of the Bible? What would this say about the "science" of creationism? What would this say about the honesty of TEs and creationists?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Let us imagine, purely for the sake of argument, that this were true. What would it say about the validity of the Bible? What would this say about the "science" of creationism? What would this say about the honesty of TEs and creationists?

The validity of the bible is intact. TE's and Creationists alike err by trying to use science to validate or debunk certain scriptural accounts.

It is a book of faith that must be accepted on faith if it is to have spiritual value for the christian. Proving or disproving scripture scientifically is of no real spiritual value.

However, debating and arguing is fun, interesting, and educational. So it has some value in the end.