Does God exist?

[BL2KTN]

Science can dictate our values. I'd prefer it that way.

 

[bhsmte]

Doesn't that equally damn the atheist, who looks at reality and interprets it in the same light?

Hard to not interpret objective and empirical evidence in a similar fashion. It is tested and proven, through many many experiments and when you keep getting the same results, it is what it is.

Is the issue with God, or your particular understanding of the Bible? I think a great deal of the Bible involves divine accommodation, not timeless, factual statements about how God is in himself. We need to use systematic theology to really understand God's attributes, and not just rely upon random snippets of scripture.

How do you know the bible is divine? Because the bible says so? Do you have a means to understand God, other than the bible? If you do, it would have to rely on personal experiences and we all know the reliability of personal experiences. And, I look at the bible as a whole and again, some good, some bad and to me, it points towards a bunch of people, who were desperate to understand the world the lived in, needed to create a God as humans have done for thousands of years and create the carrot to follow a certain set of rules.

 

[Received]

Science can dictate our values. I'd prefer it that way.

What you're really saying is facts dictate values. Things being the way they are dictate our values. I don't get that.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

What you're really saying is facts dictate values. Things being the way they are dictate our values. I don't get that.

The fact that I don't want my life tragically cut short by the actions of another person tells me that other people probably don't want to be killed either.

So I don't kill people.

How is that not based on a fact?

 

[Received]

You're talking about a desire, not a fact. Different deal.

 

[BL2KTN]

What you're really saying is facts dictate values. Things being the way they are dictate our values. I don't get that.

You're talking about a desire, not a fact. Different deal.

It's a fact he and others desire for people not to kill them.

 

[Received]

Then facts are everything, therefore nothing.

 

[FireDragon76]

How do you know the bible is divine? Because the bible says so? Do you have a means to understand God, other than the bible? If you do, it would have to rely on personal experiences and we all know the reliability of personal experiences.

Personal experience would have to factor in there somewhere... after all, all we ultimately have are personal experiences.

I believe in natural theology, to some extent. The various religions of the world are attempts at understanding God, for instance, with varying degrees of success. Through them we can learn important things about God's law, such as the Golden Rule. But the perfect revelation of God's will for humanity is in Jesus of Nazareth.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I am assuming you have refuted all of the philosophical arguments for the existence of God that theistic philosophers defend.

Several things.

First, an argument is only as good as its premises. I have yet to be presented with an argument for the existence of a god of which the premises aren't loaded with logical fallacies. I really don't understand how a person like William Lane Craig can be taken seriously by anyone.

Secondly, I don't see how such arguments matter at all. A philosophical argument by itself is not capable of showing the specific actual existence of anything without having actual empirical data to support it. Pure philosophy has its place, but distinguishing existence from non-existence of specific objects or entities is not one of them. Not without empirical data.

If you have, please send me these refutations in an email or a private message. I would love to take a look at them.

Since the OP of this thread is the broad question "does a god exist?" with a request to offer the evidence and arguments... how about YOU propose an argument to support your position that a god exists? I'll show you how it's fallacious, don't worry

Is this evidence that God does not exist?

Observing that there is suffering and injustice are things consistent with a universe not ruled by a loving god who cares and has the power to interfere.

I wouldn't really call it evidence as it could be that this guys has his reasons not to interfer and that somehow it's the moral thing to do. It could be that we don't see the big picture.

But it could also be that we live in the matrix.

As you say, we look for the best explanation. The best explanation is generally the one that needs the least assumptions, even if it turns out to be wrong in light of new evidence.

Seeing as your entire proposed explanation is completely for 100% dependend on faith based assumptions, it could not possibly be the best explanation. It's not even an explanation. Your entire story is a gigantic faith based assumption.


In science, the explanation also needs to be plausible. Anything is possible. Evidence for a specific thing makes the thing plausible.

There is no evidence of gods.

And "god-dun-it" is not an explanation. In fact, it's a thing that requires it's own ginormous explanation. Your "explanation" needs an explanation. That can't be good.

 

[FireDragon76]

The fact that I don't want my life tragically cut short by the actions of another person tells me that other people probably don't want to be killed either.

So I don't kill people.

How is that not based on a fact?

None of that explains why you shouldn't kill people though. It just means your preference is for not killing other people. Preferences hardly make for good morality.

 

[DogmaHunter]

The intelligibility of the universe implies a supreme intelligence that organizes the universe.

That makes no sense at all to me.

I'ld humbly request you to explain in detail how you get from "the universe in intelligable" to "therefor god".

Furthermore, intelligence is the product of organized matter.
You got a chicken and egg problem.

Rather than overthrowing science, this upholds the finding of science with moral gravity.

This too, actually, makes no sense at all to me...

 

[PsychoSarah]

Then facts are everything, therefore nothing.

What do you think of the fact god claims to be everything then in your religion?

 

[bhsmte]

Personal experience would have to factor in there somewhere... after all, all we ultimately have are personal experiences.

I believe in natural theology, to some extent. The various religions of the world are attempts at understanding God, for instance, with varying degrees of success. Through them we can learn important things about God's law, such as the Golden Rule. But the perfect revelation of God's will for humanity is in Jesus of Nazareth.

You don't think humans could have come up with the golden rule without the various religions and or holy books?

And, the various religions, are all attempts to reconcile the God's that were manufactured by those religions and they all are full of holes big enough, to drive a truck through.

 

[quatona]

None of that explains why you shouldn't kill people though. It just means your preference is for not killing other people. Preferences hardly make for good morality.

Depends on the alternative.

 

[Received]

What do you think of the fact god claims to be everything then in your religion?

What do YOU think about plastic flowers?

 

[DogmaHunter]

What you're really saying is facts dictate values. Things being the way they are dictate our values. I don't get that.

Without science and fact, you have no way of knowing the consequences of your actions and decisions.

Scientific knowledge is essential to uphold the best possible moral standard. In fact, I'ld say that willingly remaining blissfully ignorant is immoral.

For example, it was science that made us aware that animals can suffer both physically and emotionally.
It's through science that we find out what the effect is of certain products that we unload into the environment.

Proper education helps you in maximizing your intellectual potential, which in turn improves your reasoning skills. This improves your ability of moral reasoning.

The values are not given by science. The seeds of the values are embedded in our deepest instincts that is pretty much part of our genetic make-up. We are a social species. Most of us want peace and stability so that we can live our lives and maximize our potential (provide for our family, protect the kids, social engagement,...).

We find this in every single homo sapiens tribe/society/civilisation around the globe.

Without science, we would be making bad decisions. We might be making them with the best intentions, but we would be making bad decisions.

Today, we still make bad decisions. And we do because we are ignorant about the consequences. If not through science, how are we ever going to prevent such bad decisions? Science is the tool to turn ignorance into knowledge.

 

[Received]

Without science and fact, you have no way of knowing the consequences of your actions and decisions.

Scientific knowledge is essential to uphold the best possible moral standard. In fact, I'ld say that willingly remaining blissfully ignorant is immoral.

The world of truth is vastly different than the world of fact, which requires pretty strict criteria via science to determine. Science can definitely help people make decisions and gather information that can inform their moral decisions. But that's vastly different than saying that science alone dictates things.

 

[DogmaHunter]

1. If God did not exist, intentional states of consciousness would not exist.

2. But intentional states of consciousness do exist.

3. Therefore, God exists.

1 is an arbitrary statement with no evidence.

GIGO: garbage in, garbage out

Equally valid statement:

1. If pixies did not exist, the sun would not burn

2. the sun burns

3. therefore, pixies exist.

 

[quatona]

The world of truth

Ah, the world of truth!

 

[Received]

Sounds like a great Genesis album.