There is no evidence for GOD...but I believe anyway. (America, myths)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is the statement that usually makes the loud scientifically minded anti-theist either A) shrug and say "as long as you aren't forcing that view on me, cool, at least you're honest" or B) (insert circular argument and stream of verbal diarrhea here)
Yes, there is no evidence for GOD. Yes, there is no scientific evidence that GOD created the Universe and yes, there is no evidence that any of my Myths are true.
And I don't care. I believe anyway.
And no, it isn't "brainwashing" as I'm a Gnostic Christian and we aren't exactly indoctrinating the world and I wasn't raised to believe anything at all. I just stumbled upon Gnosticism as an adult, read about it, found others who are into it and here I am. I choose it because it felt right.
That's it. It felt right. No reason, no logic, no science, no evidence. Just pure emotion and intuition. It felt right, so I went with it. An absolutely irrational decision. And?
I do not claim to say I can prove any of my Myths. I do not claim any science will ever prove the existence of Satan, GOD, angels or anything else. All I will say is that once you remove literal understandings of creation Myths there really isn't much there science can test anyway, and I never believed that the Bible literally tells the story of creation anyway.
The thing is, asking for scientific evidence is advocating for a philosophical school of thought: Positivism. I am not a Positivist and hence do not care really what science says or doesn't say. For me, science is not the be all, end all. I'm an existentialist, and I go with myself first and foremost and if ANY external issue gets into my way, including "evidence", I ignore it.
Where is the scientific evidence that a scientific worldview is the best? Can science prove itself? Once you step out of the bubble of scientific thought you see there are indeed other ways of approaching an issue besides "what does the data say?"
And before I get the inevitable "what if someone believes in a Flying Spaghetti Monster"? I will give an answer that usually makes the person who asked it very frustrated: A religion based on a Flying Spaghetti Monster, if its believers are sincere, is just as valid as my own or anyone else's.
All I would ask is proof that someone believed fully in a doctrine, as in what have they sacrificed in their life for that belief, to prove if it is valid for them. That's it. No religion, no matter how absurd it may be to some, is invalid because of its age, number of adherents, who founded it, its Myths, etc. As long as there are those who BELIEVE, that is enough.
We all have our own beliefs and systems to live by. As long as they do not hurt anyone, let people find their own path. And as long as a believer does not try to force their belief on anyone else, who cares what they do or do not believe?
So why believe in God? Simple: Because I chose to. It's fun and it works for me. I need no other justification besides that. And THAT is why they call it "FAITH"
(but I guarantee you somebody will reply with a long tirade about "muh scientific evidence", and completely miss the point)
Does Faith come from God? Or can one have Faith in themselves, thus self generating it?
Personally, I believe in the latter. What's my Faith? I woke up in the morning, thus I'm alive. I get knocked down like the rest of us, but I just pick myself and move forward (cursing under my breath of course).
So what's the game? Is God knocking me down and picking me up? Am I knocking myself down, and God picks me up? Or is the human race, the game of life...are they knocking me down, and I choose to get up? If it's the 3rd choice, then there is still Faith in my opinion, just not external.
I'm an Agnostic. I believe in both major theories, and I don't believe in either theory. Maybe one could say I lean towards Science. But it's a very small lean, maybe just a few percent. I don't seek evidence in either position, because I believe I am in control, and have the ability to march on despite the turmoils we face. I consider myself a piece in the Game of Life, and I choose to be a player.
I can't see how anyone would debate that statement. I believe that things usually work themselves out in the end despite evidence to the contrary. It's when people claim evidence that evidence is asked for. If a person uses faith as evidence then faith will be questioned as evidence.
The thing is, asking for scientific evidence is advocating for a philosophical school of thought:
How so? The fact of the matter is Philosophy does not generate knowledge. Science generates knowledge.
Philosophy is incapable of addressing the truly fundamental questions about our existence. If you have not noticed, Science is making Philosophy obsolete.
At one time Philosophy was merged with Science. Philosophy is merely a reflection on the knoweldge that we learn, but it does not generate knowledge.
The knowledge about how the Universe works comes from Science.
The Philosophers can talk about it and think about all they want and maybe even add insight, but at the end of the day they don't generate knowledge. In this sense, once Philosophy became divorced from Science...i.e. once Philosophy separated out on it's own, Science became Natural Science and Philosophy remained Philosophy. At this point Philosophy started becoming marginalized and it's been more and more marginalized ever since.
Of course Philosophers are not thrilled with this fact, but it's just a fact!
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
Where is the scientific evidence that a scientific worldview is the best?
Take a good look around this globe...are you impressed with what you see? Are you impressed with the dumbed down Americans? Are you impressed that 1 in 4 Americans don't know Earth Orbits the Sun and some still think that the Earth is flat and half think Evolution is false? These are the same folks who are climate deniers. Does that impress you?
It's clear that people who have scientific knowledge about the Universe and the world that we live in are the kind of people who are better equipped to make informed positive changes to society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
Can science prove itself? Once you step out of the bubble of scientific thought you see there are indeed other ways of approaching an issue besides "what does the data say?"
You clearly don't understand what science is about.
Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.
Contemporary science is typically subdivided into the natural sciences, which study the material world; the social sciences, which study people and societies; and the formal sciences, such as mathematics. The formal sciences are often excluded as they do not depend on empirical observations. Disciplines which use science like engineering and medicine may also be considered to be applied sciences.
I believe in God through Jesus Christ , and His spirit abides on my life, but an not a gnostic , as gnostic is of a high understanding of God , then even the authorship of Jesus Christ
This is the statement that usually makes the loud scientifically minded anti-theist either A) shrug and say "as long as you aren't forcing that view on me, cool, at least you're honest" or B) (insert circular argument and stream of verbal diarrhea here)
Could I have an example of the "circular argument" you think a "loud anti-theist" might offer in response to the "quote" in the OP Title? Because I can not think of one at this time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
Yes, there is no evidence for GOD. Yes, there is no scientific evidence that GOD created the Universe and yes, there is no evidence that any of my Myths are true. And I don't care. I believe anyway.
Yes, you seem to believe a LOT of things you can not support with any kind of substantiation. There is nothing wrong with that per se. So I am not sure why you are bringing it up.
But there is also nothing wrong with the fact that if you express yourself or a belief..... people have equal right to express a counter position to yours or express the issue they see with yours. ESPECIALLY on a forum made for discussion and debate.
Yet between this thread and your "Why post on a religion forum" thread it genuinely is starting to seem like you DO see an issue with it. Without lending any substance or coherence to what your issue actually is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
I choose it because it felt right.
Yea a lot of theists do that. I read one study which showed people in the US change religion more often then they change cell phone provider. And their reasons for changing or choosing a religion were as arbitrary as it gets. I can only imagine if I became deist and then moved towards theism.... I would want to select the one that had the most reasons for thinking I was selecting the correct one (or as near to correct as possible).... rather than selecting one based on "Da Feelz".
But that is just me I guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
An absolutely irrational decision. And?
Try answering your own question. YOU brought it up. That was your decision. And? so what? Whats the purpose of the thread or bringing it up exactly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
I do not claim any science will ever prove the existence of Satan, GOD, angels or anything else.
I do not expect any religion to "prove" any of these things either. SOME substantiation of SOME kind would be nice though I admit. They do not appear to have even that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
The thing is, asking for scientific evidence is advocating for a philosophical school of thought: Positivism.
I do not think it does, but that said at the same time I never ask theists for "scientific evidence". I ask them for "Any arguments, evidence, data or reasoning" that they have. Then THEY (like you) pretend I was demanting "Scientific evidence" when I never said any such thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
I go with myself first and foremost and if ANY external issue gets into my way, including "evidence", I ignore it.
Nice of you to admit that you believe nonsense not just without evidence, but despite it. Many people would not admit to such a thing. My mind simply does not work like yours however. I can not simply CHOOSE to believe or not believe something if the evidence before my eyes contradicts my belief. That you CAN put up this kind of "fundie shield" for evidence to bounce off is good to know.... and explains a lot about you. You have basically placed yourself OUTSIDE any attempt at rational discourse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
Where is the scientific evidence that a scientific worldview is the best? Can science prove itself?
Your hatred of science is palpable, but it does not really make the claims for itself that you think it does. If a better methodology for tending our species towards "truth" were to come about I would happily adopt it. It has merely been the best we have produced thus far, and the evidence of that is all around us from all the things it has taught us, and all the ways we have put that knowledge to working use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
And before I get the inevitable "what if someone believes in a Flying Spaghetti Monster"? I will give an answer that usually makes the person who asked it very frustrated: A religion based on a Flying Spaghetti Monster, if its believers are sincere, is just as valid as my own or anyone else's.
Funny that you imagine that that answer "frustrates" people when the opposite is true. When people employ the FSM.... or Russels Teapot..... it is very much usually to get that very admission out of the theist in question! I think you have failed.... quite totally..... to understand the purpose of the FSM argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
We all have our own beliefs and systems to live by. As long as they do not hurt anyone, let people find their own path. And as long as a believer does not try to force their belief on anyone else, who cares what they do or do not believe?
Very few do! I know I do not. The problem is that what you describe is NOT what is happening in the world around us. If it was, then likely there would be little to no atheists and/or secularists even bothering to post on here. Nugent covers this very well here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
(but I guarantee you somebody will reply with a long tirade about "muh scientific evidence", and completely miss the point)
And I guarantee you that in order to prove yourself true in this guarantee of yours you will purposefully misconstrue someone DISAGREEING with the point as someone missing or not understanding the point. A common move not just from you, but on this forum in general.
This is the statement that usually makes the loud scientifically minded anti-theist either A) shrug and say "as long as you aren't forcing that view on me, cool, at least you're honest" or B) (insert circular argument and stream of verbal diarrhea here)
Yes, there is no evidence for GOD. Yes, there is no scientific evidence that GOD created the Universe and yes, there is no evidence that any of my Myths are true.
And I don't care. I believe anyway.
And no, it isn't "brainwashing" as I'm a Gnostic Christian and we aren't exactly indoctrinating the world and I wasn't raised to believe anything at all. I just stumbled upon Gnosticism as an adult, read about it, found others who are into it and here I am. I choose it because it felt right.
That's it. It felt right. No reason, no logic, no science, no evidence. Just pure emotion and intuition. It felt right, so I went with it. An absolutely irrational decision. And?
I do not claim to say I can prove any of my Myths. I do not claim any science will ever prove the existence of Satan, GOD, angels or anything else. All I will say is that once you remove literal understandings of creation Myths there really isn't much there science can test anyway, and I never believed that the Bible literally tells the story of creation anyway.
The thing is, asking for scientific evidence is advocating for a philosophical school of thought: Positivism. I am not a Positivist and hence do not care really what science says or doesn't say. For me, science is not the be all, end all. I'm an existentialist, and I go with myself first and foremost and if ANY external issue gets into my way, including "evidence", I ignore it.
Where is the scientific evidence that a scientific worldview is the best? Can science prove itself? Once you step out of the bubble of scientific thought you see there are indeed other ways of approaching an issue besides "what does the data say?"
And before I get the inevitable "what if someone believes in a Flying Spaghetti Monster"? I will give an answer that usually makes the person who asked it very frustrated: A religion based on a Flying Spaghetti Monster, if its believers are sincere, is just as valid as my own or anyone else's.
All I would ask is proof that someone believed fully in a doctrine, as in what have they sacrificed in their life for that belief, to prove if it is valid for them. That's it. No religion, no matter how absurd it may be to some, is invalid because of its age, number of adherents, who founded it, its Myths, etc. As long as there are those who BELIEVE, that is enough.
We all have our own beliefs and systems to live by. As long as they do not hurt anyone, let people find their own path. And as long as a believer does not try to force their belief on anyone else, who cares what they do or do not believe?
So why believe in God? Simple: Because I chose to. It's fun and it works for me. I need no other justification besides that. And THAT is why they call it "FAITH"
(but I guarantee you somebody will reply with a long tirade about "muh scientific evidence", and completely miss the point)
I congratulate you on accepting that theistic Faiths have no adequate scientifically valid evidential support. And it wouldn't be needful to respond, except that you ask why a scientific worldview is the best, as you put it. I shall leave aside semantics, and just say that it has the best track record in respect of establishing fact. In fact science doesn't claim to deal in ethics, art of philosophy.But those are the areas which are down to personal taste an logical reasoning, and in between (Ethics are reasoning based on human preference). Humanist (secular) society seems to have made its case tacity to being preferable to a theistic one. The agenda we militant goddless have is to push theocracy out of public life and ensure that nobody has any reason to be in a Church if they don't want to. If they do, that is their affair.
The case for teaching science rather than religion as a factual study hardly needs to be repeated. That said, all that is needful to say is now said. I trust that you won't now be posting to say how wrong -headed atheism is.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 06-09-2016 at 04:59 AM..
Believing in God is FAITH - that one forms after doing his own independent research to find the signs of God.
What's the value of FAITH if it's based on evidence? It's not faith anymore. Simple as that.
Yes, we understand that. We also understand that that doing 'independent research' to "Find signs of God" is not what we would call evidence, but self -brainwashing. So you needn't be concerned that it migt dilute the purity of Faith, because Faith is all that "research" is based on.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
we understand that. We also understand that that doing 'independent research' to "Find signs of God" is not what we would call evidence, but self -brainwashing. So you needn't be concerned that it migt dilute the purity of Faith, because Faith is all that "research" is based on.
