Curt's Invitation - Prove God Exists!

[mdwh]

4. A quite good analogy to God (just an ANALOGY - don't forget this!) would be electricity - humans can't feel it but can see and feel its effects.
(Applys also to gravity and magnetism - we have no organs that can directly sense those - only their results.)

Yes, we can see effects which are proof of things like gravity - we can see that matter attracts in the way that the theory of gravity describes.

However, we cannot see effects which prove your assertions of a God. We see the Universe - but we don't know that this is an effect of an intelligent being, or something else.

It would be a bit like if I said that gravity was caused by invisible pixies which push things around. I could then say that we see the effects - but the effects are not evidence of invisible pixies, they're only evidence that things attract.

 

[Pentium]

It would be a bit like if I said that gravity was caused by invisible pixies which push things around. I could then say that we see the effects - but the effects are not evidence of invisible pixies, they're only evidence that things attract.

Exactly, you have just as much proof for that pixies' existance as you have for God's.

Here's a better analogy: I believe there is a little green hamster in my computer. I go and spread my belief, but strangely, most of people don't believe me. There are a few people that believe me, because they've never seen a computer from inside, and I might be right. But the people who don't believe me go and open my computer. I told them that the hamster is 10cm long, but they can't find it, so I say it's probably very small and it's hiding in a microprocessor. Then they open the processor and still find nothing, so now I'm convinced my hamster is hiding inside a wire, or maybe inside an electron.

Now compare this to the 7-day creation and some other biblical stories that were all proven wrong. The further human knowledge expands, the less chance is there to prove God's exitance. Yet people still believe there's a God, just like I still believe there's a little green hamster hiding in my computer.

@civ2: You didn't really make a point. You provided one example. Now go and explain to millions of starving people on Earth. Are they all murderers and thieves?

 

[Birdjaguar]

The further human knowledge expands, the less chance is there to prove God's exitance. Yet people still believe there's a God,

Hmmm...Why is your first statement true?

How does your science explain the second?

 

[Pentium]

Hmmm...Why is your first statement true?

Maybe I phrased it wrong: At first they believed in the 7-day thing, but now nobody does anymore. So there was one point of religion that was rejected. Then came the flat or round earth, soon to be followed by the argument about geocentric and heliocentric system. So with time, more and more religion's claims are disproven. Also, with time, human knowledge expands. If you take both into account, the more we know about our world, the farther from the truth seems the Bible, and along with it the idea of God.

How does your science explain the second?

Which one does this sentence refer to? The one that says people believe in God?

 

[Birdjaguar]

Maybe I phrased it wrong: At first they believed in the 7-day thing, but now nobody does anymore. So there was one point of religion that was rejected. Then came the flat or round earth, soon to be followed by the argument about geocentric and heliocentric system. So with time, more and more religion's claims are disproven. Also, with time, human knowledge expands. If you take both into account, the more we know about our world, the farther from the truth seems the Bible, and along with it the idea of God.

So all science can do is show that biblical text is either supported or not supported by its inquiry. How can you support the statement that the idea of god is declining? Everywhere? Your neighborhood? Scientific refutation of the literalacy of the bible only impacts those who take the bible as the literal word of God. That group is a very small percentage of christians and even smaller percent of god believers worldwide.

Which one does this sentence refer to? The one that says people believe in God?

This sentence:

Yet people still believe there's a God,

You seem to be surprised that people still believe in god even after science has proven the bible to wrong about certain facts. How can you explain this persistent clinging to obviously wrong beliefs?

 

[Pentium]

First of all, science's primary task is not proving or disproving biblical texts. It can do other things too.

Fewer and fewer people believe in god. That's a fact. I am absolutely certain for Slovenia in the last 100 years, and I'm quite sure that's the case in the whole Europe. In Middle Ages, pretty much everybody believed in God. Now, the percentage is much lower.

There are actually a lot people that go to church, get married there and raise their children in a religious way, but don't really believe in God. How many of them would fight for their beliefs, how many would die for them? Would you? If you're so certain there's Heaven waiting for you, why don't you do something good and then kill yourself?

So Bible isn't the litteral word of God. That means someone came up with it. And many people believed in its every word for centuries, and some still do. That means it is in fact possible for a relatively small group to convince a lot of people into believing in a lie for a very long time.

I am surprised that so many people still believe, just like you are surprised that I believe in the green hamster.

How can you explain this persistent clinging to obviously wrong beliefs?

You should be explaining your beliefs, not me.

But how do I explain it: It's a tradition. Parents teach their children, and the children believe it, of course. Then they teach their children, and it goes on and on. There are more people that were raised in christianity that are now atheists than the other way round. One might ask why.

 

[Birdjaguar]

First of all, science's primary task is not proving or disproving biblical texts. It can do other things too.

Fewer and fewer people believe in god. That's a fact. I am absolutely certain for Slovenia in the last 100 years, and I'm quite sure that's the case in the whole Europe. In Middle Ages, pretty much everybody believed in God. Now, the percentage is much lower.

Of course science has other more pressing tasks than to disrove the bible. And I await the outcome of that work. Your claim of a decline in religon seems to be about Europe. What about Latin America, Africa and Asia? With the decline of communism in Rusia and China there appears to be a resurgence of religion. I would agree that fewer Europeans seem to be believing in god. Religion is on the rise in the US though.

There are actually a lot people that go to church, get married there and raise their children in a religious way, but don't really believe in God. How many of them would fight for their beliefs, how many would die for them? Would you? If you're so certain there's Heaven waiting for you, why don't you do something good and then kill yourself?

Interesting speculation, but that is all it is. You have no way of knowing whether or not people who raise their families in a religious manner believe in god or not. Nor do you know whether people who do not raise their families in a religous manner believe in god.

Why do you equate belief in god with fighting to defend that belief? Since when does belief in god require a willingness to fight? Personally, I am pretty sure that heaven does not exist and my time is best spent doing what I can for my friends and family.

So Bible isn't the litteral word of God. That means someone came up with it. And many people believed in its every word for centuries, and some still do. That means it is in fact possible for a relatively small group to convince a lot of people into believing in a lie for a very long time.

The fact that the bible is not the literal word of god does not mean it is a lie. Every major religion was founded by a small group of people who convinced a larger group to believe in something new. That belief was then transferred down through the generations in ever widening circles of influence. Either the messages are very powerful or people very stupid. And the nice thing is that we each get to choose which is correct.

I am surprised that so many people still believe, just like you are surprised that I believe in the green hamster.

I am not surprised at all.

You should be explaining your beliefs,

Why? From your previous posts you would just think that they are stupid because I cannot prove them. Seems like a total waste of effort to me.

But how do I explain it: It's a tradition. Parents teach their children, and the children believe it, of course. Then they teach their children, and it goes on and on. There are more people that were raised in christianity that are now atheists than the other way round. One might ask why.

So are you saying that there are more atheists in the world than christians? Or again are you only talking about Europe or Slovakia?

Of course your family tradition view of how religion spreads does not account for new converts.

 

[FredLC]

So are you saying that there are more atheists in the world than christians? Or again are you only talking about Europe or Slovakia?

I think that what he meeans is that christians de-converting is something far more common than atheists "finding God" - what is quite a thing, considering that being raised to be a chirstian, and the social pressure to be one, is much greater than the other way around.

In that, he is right by my experience. About 95% of all atheists I know have once being religious; and the few atheists that converts back to religion also were religious once as well. I'm unaware of a single case of a person raised in a non-religious environment which seeks God on his own (though, admiteddly, it's too small a sample for a representative figure).

Regards .

 

[Birdjaguar]

I think that what he means is that christians de-converting is something far more common than atheists "finding God" - what is quite a thing, considering that being raised to be a chirstian, and the social pressure to be one, is much greater than the other way around.

Could be, but I don't see that in his post. English could be the problem. In Europe I would think the pressure to be christian would be much less than in South America.

In that, he is right by my experience. About 95% of all atheists I know have once being religious; and the few atheists that converts back to religion also were religious once as well. I'm unaware of a single case of a person raised in a non-religious environment which seeks God on his own

*Birdjaguar quietly raises his hand*

 

[Perfection]

Yeah, but your version of God is so different from the standard religionists that I classify you as a secular freethinker and not some rabid religious dogmatist.

 

[Birdjaguar]

But the search is the same.

 

[GenMarshall]

In that, he is right by my experience. About 95% of all atheists I know have once being religious; and the few atheists that converts back to religion also were religious once as well. I'm unaware of a single case of a person raised in a non-religious environment which seeks God on his own (though, admiteddly, it's too small a sample for a representative figure).

Erm, Not sure where I would fall under since between the age of six till 21, I was raised in a non-religious environment and found God in my early 20s.

 

[FredLC]

Could be, but I don't see that in his post. English could be the problem. In Europe I would think the pressure to be christian would be much less than in South America.

Let's wait and see what kind of clarification he can offer, than.

And, indeed, I suppose pressure in Europe is smaller.

*Birdjaguar quietly raises his hand*

Erm, Not sure where I would fall under since between the age of six till 21, I was raised in a non-religious environment and found God in my early 20s.

I said that my universe of samples were not too representative.

But i gotta ask: Have you had no religious context whatsoever? uncles, friend's parents, this sort of thing? Because I find that rather unlikely...

Civgeneral, what about 1 to 6? and at 7, were you a God-fearing man?

 

[Birdjaguar]

But i gotta ask: Have you had no religious context whatsoever? uncles, friend's parents, this sort of thing? Because I find that rather unlikely

None. We didn't go to church and I had no close relatives other than family anywhere nearby. I'm sure classmates went to church, but I didn't care one way or the other. I attended a private boys school from grade 1-12. It did not have any religious affiliation.

Never went to church when I visited my grandparents either.

 

[GenMarshall]

Civgeneral, what about 1 to 6? and at 7, were you a God-fearing man?

Nope, I was not a God-fearing man, err Child.

 

[FredLC]

Interesting, BJ - what brought you to convertion?

CG: than you do fit my description.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Edited for clarity

Truth? Enlightenment? Ha! Far from it. Just a way to see the world. A way that embraces both reason and that which is not even close to reasonable. But it is a path; a path that is mostly hard work. You all have been burdened with the way I see the world for quite some time now.

 

[Perfection]

But the search is the same.

Most religionists I know claim to have found truth, they're not searching.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Most religionists I know claim to have found truth, they're not searching.

that there shows that theyre still searching. its like the people who go about braggin more or less about how they are going to heaven, their spot is secure, etc etc. It just shows how far in their understanding of God they have to go. Not that I claim to know it all, rather, I understand that I do not know it all, and never can.

 

[Birdjaguar]

See edit above, Perf and Fred.