How does one come to believe something?

[Ana the Ist]

Ex-married people say the same about marriage...
And none of them study successful marriages...
What IS a Girl to DO??

Arsenios

There have been studies of prayer though...and the results show it doesn't work.

Of course those are "carnal" aka real results...not imaginary results...so I can already guess how you're going to respond to that.

 

[ScottA]

That's not the context you're using...because nothing about that definition suggests a being that doesn't experience time in the exact same way as you and I.

Do you want to try again? Or just give up now?

If you do not understand what I said and have to resort to semantics when I have made myself definitively clear...I do indeed have no choice but to give up on you.

 

[Ana the Ist]

If you do not understand what I said and have to resort to semantics when I have made myself definitively clear...I do indeed have no choice but to give up on you.

This is an issue of clarity...an issue of being correctly understood...and you want to avoid "semantics"?

If I existed forever...right from the beginning of time all the way up till now, and from this moment on into the future forever or until time as we know ends....I would perfectly fit your definition of "timeless". I wouldn't know the future or anything that's going to happen though...because it hasn't happened yet. I would be experiencing time exactly as I do now.

Now is that what you mean by "timeless" when you speak of god? Or are you speaking of an entirely different concept? It's your concept Scott....being clear about the details is rather important if you want to be understood.

 

[ScottA]

This is an issue of clarity...an issue of being correctly understood...and you want to avoid "semantics"?

If I existed forever...right from the beginning of time all the way up till now, and from this moment on into the future forever or until time as we know ends....I would perfectly fit your definition of "timeless". I wouldn't know the future or anything that's going to happen though...because it hasn't happened yet. I would be experiencing time exactly as I do now.

Now is that what you mean by "timeless" when you speak of god? Or are you speaking of an entirely different concept? It's your concept Scott....being clear about the details is rather important if you want to be understood.

I gave you the definition: "without beginning or end."

 

[Ana the Ist]

I gave you the definition: "without beginning or end."

And it's a perfectly fine definition....I suppose I hadn't expected your god to be so mundane. I thought you were one of those who believed in a all knowing all powerful god....not something so limited.

 

[bhsmte]

The only evidence you will find on this eminently empirical approach will be found only within your SELF...

So I can understand your hesitation...

But so will any other evidence - If you do NOT experience it, how can you believe it?

Arsenios

IMO, it is healthy to recognize, the inherent bias in personal experiences, without reliable external verification.

In regards to religion and faith beliefs, the wide difference in these experiences, is a big clue to what drives them.

 

[bhsmte]

You tell me.

I ask again, where did i say certain facts were not facts?

 

[Freodin]

Yes - ALL life-changing encounters not carnally attributable...

Arsenios

But because your distinction between what is "carnal" and what is "spiritual" is based on "because I say so"... there is no way to determine any "not carnally attributable" encounters.

 

[HitchSlap]

Because it is not an hypothesis...

I might just as well close my eyes and tell you there is nothing to see...

Arsenios

Or, open your eyes and see things for what they are.

 

[Dan Bert]

Prayer works.

Yes prayer works when it is in accordance to the will of God. Though God will at time gives according to our will, it is the lesser will of God that is fulfilled.

Prayer is for communication not a vehicle for getting what one wants. David said I shall not want, He maketh me to lie down in green pastures and leadeth me by the still waters. Need come from our Spirit and wants from our ego. Which one do you think God answers. Needs? or Wants?
bert12

 

[Freodin]

Yes prayer works when it is in accordance to the will of God. Though God will at time gives according to our will, it is the lesser will of God that is fulfilled.

Prayer is for communication not a vehicle for getting what one wants. David said I shall not want, He maketh me to lie down in green pastures and leadeth me by the still waters. Need come from our Spirit and wants from our ego. Which one do you think God answers. Needs? or Wants?
bert12

As this also explains why prayer does not work, it is quite useless as an explanation, wouldn't you think?

This dichotomy is what I see as the basic problem of all theistic systems, especially the monotheistic ones.
You need a consistent, understandable, predictable deity to justify all the dogmas and doctrines of your religion. And you need an unpredictable, mysterious, sovereign deity to justify all the failing of your dogmas and doctrines.

Religion is the ultimate case of keeping and eating your cake.

 

[Dan Bert]

My belief have been transformed into knowledge. I speak of what I know. And God heals those who live his teachings. When they ask for deliverance. Our voice is heard in heaven when we live the teachings. For God said for iniquites men cut themselves off from God and for sins God turn his face so he does not hear. That is how it works.

bert12

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Perhaps the only way it would make sense to you, is if you pretend you are a timeless god and then imagine your own tale - then ask yourself, "If you are timeless, and the tale has a timeline, how is that possible?"

My guess is, your answer would be, "I am timeless, but my tale has a timeline - what's the problem?"

By definition, the timeless has no tale, timeline, imagination, or answers, since those are time-like.

If you can make a reasoned argument how any of that could make sense, do so; but philosophy isn't about making up or asserting any old logically incoherent or inconsistent nonsense without a reasoned argument.

 

[Freodin]

By definition, the timeless has no tale, timeline, imagination, or answers, since those are time-like.

If you can make a reasoned argument how any of that could make sense, do so; but philosophy isn't about making up or asserting any old logically incoherent or inconsistent nonsense without a reasoned argument.

One could assume different "time-like" structures.
A tale is not bound to the timeline of the author, an author is not bound to the timeline of his tale.
But the author is not "timeless". He exists in his own timeline. He must exist in an own timeline... because else the concept of "author" becomes meaningless.

I've always said that the only theistic system that makes sense in the "timeless" or "outside of time" regard is pantheism... everything just "existing", both what is usually called "creation" and "creator". But of course, without time, both concepts do not have any meaning anymore... that might be the reason why Christians do like my conclusion.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I'm coming more and more to the conclusion that trying to argue with most of the Christians here is exactly like experiencing Monty Python's Argument Clinic sketch in real life.

It is disappointing; perhaps it's because reasoned argument can lead to a change of views and/or beliefs... ?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

One could assume different "time-like" structures.
A tale is not bound to the timeline of the author, an author is not bound to the timeline of his tale.

Agreed; messing around with timelines is a well-established literary technique.

But the author is not "timeless". He exists in his own timeline. He must exist in an own timeline... because else the concept of "author" becomes meaningless.

Yes; there seems to be the same temptation with 'timeless' (the absence of time) as there is with 'nothing' (i.e. the absence of anything rather than 'empty' spacetime); the temptation to represent them with something they are not - e.g. a 'higher' timestream, and a (or the) void, respectively.

I've always said that the only theistic system that makes sense in the "timeless" or "outside of time" regard is pantheism... everything just "existing", both what is usually called "creation" and "creator". But of course, without time, both concepts do not have any meaning anymore... that might be the reason why Christians do like my conclusion.

Yes, there is an equivalent concept in cosmology, represented by 'closed' universe models such as the quantum-mechanical Hartle-Hawking No-Boundary Proposal, where the universe is closed and self-contained, needing no 'external' cause, it just is. In this model, time is imaginary (in the mathematical sense, not a figment!), and the apparent beginning and flow of time that we experience are a consequence of our viewpoint within this cosmology. There's some doubt whether this particular model is valid, but there are a number of variations on the theme, none of which require initial causation or creation.

 

[Arsenios]

I think you meant "no".

Your question was:

do you have any actual evidence that any god exists or not?

My answer was:

Yes - ALL life-changing encounters not carnally attributable...

So I did mean yes, because any life-changing encounter that is not attributable to our carnal and oh so very physical world will thereby io-ipso have to be attributed to non-carnal and non-physical cause... You deny such a cause exists, either holy or demonic... And this because you have no first hand experience on which to empirically base such a claim...

And I the reverse...

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

It is disappointing; perhaps it's because reasoned argument can lead to a change of views and/or beliefs... ?

Reasoned argument led to the labor camp deaths of millions in Siberia under the atheists...

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

There have been studies of prayer though...and the results show it doesn't work.

Of course those are "carnal" aka real results...not imaginary results...so I can already guess how you're going to respond to that.

The study I was referring to is old now - Perhaps new ones are not repeating the earlier results...

Reducing prayer to scientific methodology has its own hazards...

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

IMO it is healthy to recognize the inherent bias in personal experiences,
without reliable external verification.

The fallacy in this IMO is that such experiences are not external...

If we were discussing gooey-ducks, you would be right...

Arsenios