Forum menu
The whole religion thing on here has been incredibly dull and predictable for too long, can we not explore other definitions rather than trot out the same old shite?
Ok let's do that. You start.
Some people really do believe in this version of God: supporters of 'intelligent design', for example – for whom Hart reserves plenty of scorn – and other contemporary Christian and Muslim fundamentalists, too. But throughout the history of monotheism, Hart insists, a very different version of God has prevailed. In a post at The Week, Damon Linker sums up this second version better than I can:
… according to the classical metaphysical traditions of both the East and West, God is the unconditioned cause of reality – of absolutely everything that is – from the beginning to the end of time. Understood in this way, one can’t even say that God "exists" in the sense that my car or Mount Everest or electrons exist. God is what grounds the existence of every contingent thing, making it possible, sustaining it through time, unifying it, giving it actuality. God is the condition of the possibility of anything existing at all.
The one theology book all atheists really should read
@perchypanther The Church of Scotland has a huge influence on our government and how it affects our lives "Religious representatives currently enjoy a legal right to places on council education committees in Scotland. At least three places on each council are reserved for religious nominees, under legislation dating back to 1929 and beyond. In most parts of Scotland this includes at least one Catholic and one representative of the Church of Scotland."
They influence other agencies too
Science does not require belief, quite the opposite.
Maybe I should have been clearer unless you can prove that a God doesn't exist then you are choosing to believe that they don't exist. You may say you know that God doesn't exist but given how little we know about the universe you can't categorically rule out the possibility of the existence of a God, (although you can choose to believe based on what you understand that he doesn't exist) You could legitimately counter this argument by saying you also can't prove God exists hence you have to accept the possibility that he doesn't exist, but this is where in faith a relationship with God comes in, which again you could argue is made up or nonsense (sometimes it is, we have all seen how some extremists/nut jobs commit atrocities in the name of their "religion")
There are no atheists appointed to the House of Lords purely because of their atheism.
There are no atheists pushing atheist agendas in law making because of what they don’t believe.
There are no atheists knocking on people’s doors to talk to people about their lack of belief.
There are no atheists standing around with megaphones in city high streets polluting the air with how they don’t believe in Allah, Jehova or any other deity.
Fair enough I will accept that in a general sense as you have described but not everyone believes everything that current scienctific thinking tells us, which is pushed as fact through schools and the media when much of what we supposedly "know" is based on fairly large assumptions being correct, radio carbon dating is a good example of this, which if wrong totally changes the timeline of "evolution" and the coming about of the planet we live on. I am all for well balanced debate and critical thinking that allows people to make up their own minds and agree that one group shouldn't seek have its views forced on everyone, but getting back to my point I stand by my statement that ultimately everyone has a faith whether that be for or against God.
Sure that looks like an interesting philosophical debate and all. But if god is ‘the light of being itself’ (and he/she may be, and I have no issue with people believing so at all) why does that make it okay for believers of such to enforce rules based on their impossible to evidence opinions on people who don’t believe such, or believe a different version of such. And why should such beliefs qualify for tax breaks? Ie; why am I subsidising them just because they believe something? I believe that they should subsidise me because I believe in Odin, but I’m peeing in the wind I think...
God is what grounds the existence of every contingent thing, making it possible, sustaining it through time, unifying it, giving it actuality.
Ah the Higg's Boson.
V8ninety you raise a very interesting point here.
It's too easy to lump "religious people" or "people with faith" into the same camp as the more organised/institutional arm of the belief structure they hold. And as we've seen, often it's the "organisation" that is the facilitator (or at least blind eye turner) to misuse for power/money/status or other gain.
Sure that looks like an interesting philosophical debate and all
It looks like a variant on deism. So, unsprisingly, is something which has been considered by atheists through the ages. It is just that since it is completely unprovable one way or another the real world relevance is limited.
Plus, as you allude to, it quickly becomes apparently that very few religious people actually believe in this. Pretty much all the major religions are interventionist gods.
An interesting test as to whether it is worth engaging with would be to have his book handed out to some average church/mosque goers and see if they agree with it.
Maybe I should have been clearer unless you can prove that a God doesn’t exist then you are choosing to believe that they don’t exist.
So basically kick it down the road and put the emphasis on other people to prove a negative....
Fair enough I will accept that in a general sense as you have described but not everyone believes everything that current scienctific thinking tells us, which is pushed as fact through schools and the media when much of what we supposedly “know” is based on fairly large assumptions being correct, radio carbon dating is a good example of this, which if wrong totally changes the timeline of “evolution” and the coming about of the planet we live on.
OK, until you stop mixing up the meanings of things the debate will go nowhere. Science presents it's facts, shows it's working and then takes you along for the ride. It does all the hard work and has all of it's homework done. It's not a matter of believe it's a matter of understanding.
Nice attempt there to call into question Radio Carbon dating - what are the flaws in it? What are the reasons you think it might not be true?
With science you can choose to ignore the evidence etc. not believing it is more like ignoring it - like the climate change deniers who provide no evidence but use the pah - experts what would they know my mate down the pub thinks....
I am all for well balanced debate and critical thinking that allows people to make up their own minds and agree that one group shouldn’t seek have its views forced on everyone, but getting back to my point I stand by my statement that ultimately everyone has a faith whether that be for or against God.
The strange bit there is your suggesting that somebody having faith in something means others have a faith against it? What is this faith is in the woods and nobody sees it?
Again it's a mixing up of words - a faith in science is not the same as faith in a god.
Even scientific facts have a half life
Ok let’s do that. You start.
I did, you missed it, I tried redefining God.
Ah the Higg’s Boson.
Nearly but not quite
Could you point out which bits are metaphor and which bits are real please? That’d save a lot of time.
Dude, seriously? You’re taking the piss right? At least I hope you are.
Where’s the face palm emoji?
Y’all seem a bit frightened to think away from the doctrines and their interpretation and personification of God...
I stand by my statement that ultimately everyone has a faith whether that be for or against God.
Amen to that.
Again it’s a mixing up of words – a faith in science is not the same as faith in a god.
And yet you have faith in our contemporary illusion of money. If we didn’t have that, the bits of paper and numbers on a spreadsheet are valueless.
I’ll also add that your belief that there is no human like God is in many ways a faith
….you all remind me of Abu Hamza
A hook for a hand and burning hatred of the west?
its ALL about faith, some have faith in a creator and others have Faith in what a scientist has told them. Faith.
Maybe I should have been clearer unless you can prove that a God doesn’t exist then you are choosing to believe that they don’t exist
No, using all known facts show there is no god (any of the 3000 or so that have been worshiped) where as the is not one single fact that suggests there is one.
its ALL about faith, some have faith in a creator and others have Faith in what a scientist has told them. Faith.
You have trust not faith in what a scientist will say. This will be backed up by research that is peer reviewed. It isn’t remotely the same thing.
I’ll also add that your belief that there is no human like God is in many ways a faith
OK, so as many groups of people have come up with numerous gods to believe in and explain things they could not at the time. They contradict each other and overlap in so many ways but none have any proof in any way that they exist but I have to believe that they don't exist?
its ALL about faith, some have faith in a creator and others have Faith in what a scientist has told them. Faith.
All right George Michael, calm down. You’re wrong by the way. There is NO place for faith where science, and evidence is concerned. It’s the absence of evidence that requires faith.
yea, like people have Trust that man has walked on the moon when there is a ton of evidence that says he has not. its Still believed by many to be true though
but none have any proof in any way that they exist but I have to believe that they don’t exist?
Or hope, you decide
George michael?
Or hope, you decide
Nope neither required, do you have faith Odin isn't about? What about Zues?
I know the weather has been a little changeable today, but that was a cracking ride. A little spot of lunch en famille, and time to light the fire and settle down in front of the rugby.
I wonder what other folks on STW have been up to today....
Oh. I see.
😂😂😂🤗
I did, you missed it, I tried redefining God.
Yes I did, unless it was that stuff about the universe expanding and contracting.
I know the weather has been a little changeable today, but that was a cracking ride. A little spot of lunch en famille, and time to light the fire and settle down in front of the rugby.
I wonder what other folks on STW have been up to today….
Oh. I see.
lol
is based on fairly large assumptions being correct, radio carbon dating is a good example of this,
carbon dating doesn't actually work on an assumption.
I think it's more like this Bigyan especially for the OP.
And yet you have faith in our contemporary illusion of money. If we didn’t have that, the bits of paper and numbers on a spreadsheet are valueless.
No they aren't. Values are real - this is easily verifiable - hold a pair of balls in your hand, do you have two or one? If one, please explain why two equals one.
Values are real – this is easily verifiable
Tell that to the Venezuelans
hold a pair of balls in your hand
Sounds like catholic priest training to me
Scout Master Kevin?
No they aren’t. Values are real – this is easily verifiable – hold a pair of balls in your hand, do you have two or one? If one, please explain why two equals one.
They're dough arghhhh plasticine balls and I've squeezed them together to make one.
yea, like people have Trust that man has walked on the moon when there is a ton of evidence that says he has not. its Still believed by many to be true though
Ok, I’ll bite. Show us the factual evidence that man has not, in fact, traveled to and landed and walked on the moon.
And no, YouTube video from some self-appointed expert will not be accepted as evidence.
https://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/
Just in case we head off on the diversion......
It's interesting to spot the #FakeNews tricks in plane sight though - the "What if Carbon Dating is wrong" then head off to say how that could easily mean evolution didn't happen. So we sow some seeds of doubt that we can work with now - cause it's just a theory, I mean you need to have some faith to believe all this stuff....
… according to the classical metaphysical traditions of both the East and West, God is the unconditioned cause of reality – of absolutely everything that is – from the beginning to the end of time. Understood in this way, one can’t even say that God “exists” in the sense that my car or Mount Everest or electrons exist. God is what grounds the existence of every contingent thing, making it possible, sustaining it through time, unifying it, giving it actuality. God is the condition of the possibility of anything existing at all.
Or in other words, God is a philosophical construct, created by humans.
If there is a "condition of the possibility of anything existing at all", why do you have to call it God?
I had a very nice cycle today.
George michael
Second highest ranked search on Google after faith in a religious context being top prize on google
Ah the faith we hold that Google is correct
Or in other words, God is a philosophical construct, created by humans.
Maybe I should have been clearer unless you can prove that a God doesn’t exist then you are choosing to believe that they don’t exist.
Yeah, no. One cannot disprove a negative. If you're asserting that something exists then the burden of proof lies with you.
To put that another way, unless you can prove that Santa Claus / the Tooth Fairy / invisible unicorns / Batman don't exist then you are choosing to believe that they don’t exist.
You may say you know that God doesn’t exist but given how little we know about the universe you can’t categorically rule out the possibility of the existence of a God
You are correct that I cannot "categorically rule out the possibility of the existence of a God." However it is so astonishingly unlikely and there is precisely zero evidence to suggest otherwise beyond a 1500 year old book and a lot of people really really wanting it to be true a lot that I am comfortable in being atheist rather than agnostic and saying that there is no god / gods beyond reasonable doubt. Totally happy to be proved wrong (and in fact I'd *love* to be proved wrong).
Dude, seriously? You’re taking the piss right? At least I hope you are.
Where’s the face palm emoji?Y’all seem a bit frightened to think away from the doctrines and their interpretation and personification of God…
Sorry mate, I don't follow any of that. I've obviously missed something somewhere. Could you elaborate please?
cougar - its not just one god and one old book. If the Christian God is real then what about Hindu ones etc?
like people have Trust that man has walked on the moon when there is a ton of evidence that says he has not.
There's a ton of wildly debunked conspiracy theories, sure.
If you have any doubts whatsoever that man landed on the moon, I would ask you one question: in 1969 at the height of the Cold War, would the USSR have let the USA get away with faking it?
Case closed. Now, about that flat Earth...
its not just one god and one old book. If the Christian God is real then what about Hindu ones etc?
As Dire Straits once sang, "two men say they're Jesus... one of them must be wrong."
Ok, I’ll bite. Show us the factual evidence that man has not, in fact, traveled to and landed and walked on the moon.
And no, YouTube video from some self-appointed expert will not be accepted as evidence.
.
.
.
well, not Exactly self apointed experts BUT i think you might just know a few of em, Lol