Searching for GOD...

[Rhiannon]

My daughter had to put up with her friend telling her to ignore the geography teacher as he was talking nonsense and God made the universe in six days. Not sure what is more worrying, the fact they were year & or the fact her parents are teachers.

Good grief, Rhi, where do you live? That should be reported to the school authorities ... they have no right to be teaching if those are their views. 

Slight misunderstanding Len: Rhi wasn't saying that the girl's parents were promoting such views in the classroom, only that said girl was/is the daughter of teachers.

Mind you, that's bloody worrying in itself; the girl didn't come up with such ideas spontaneously so it's a fair bet that she absorbed them in the family home, so even if those parents aren't teaching such views, it's likely that they hold them regardless 

Absolutely, you've got it spot on.

That's Yr7 by the way - first year of senior school.

[Leonard James]

My daughter had to put up with her friend telling her to ignore the geography teacher as he was talking nonsense and God made the universe in six days. Not sure what is more worrying, the fact they were year & or the fact her parents are teachers.

Good grief, Rhi, where do you live? That should be reported to the school authorities ... they have no right to be teaching if those are their views. 

Slight misunderstanding Len: Rhi wasn't saying that the girl's parents were promoting such views in the classroom, only that said girl was/is the daughter of teachers.

Yes, Shakes, I was totally aware of that, but feel that the parents, with such stupid ideas, would automatically pass them on to their students, if not directly, by inference.

Mind you, that's bloody worrying in itself; the girl didn't come up with such ideas spontaneously so it's a fair bet that she absorbed them in the family home, so even if those parents aren't teaching such views, it's likely that they hold them regardless 

Which is precisely what I meant. I don't think such people are suitable for the teaching profession.

[Nearly Sane]

Do you honestly think there is a process in place where creationists can be reported to an education authority simply for holding the views if they are teachers?

[Maeght]

I think one way to asses whether someone's claim to have found God is genuine is to look at the fruits their faith produces.
Matthew 7:16 You shall know them by their fruits

Of course it is! But that doesn't prove that "God" really exists.

It may not satisfy your standards of proof, Len, but it is just one of many indications to  the reality of God's existence.

Not at all. Belief in God can certainly have quiet  an effect on people's lives but that doesn't mean that God exists.

[Alan Burns]

And reading through AB's posts is like wading through treacle, isn't it?

Susan, I am sorry you have issues with my logic.  If you have any problems with understanding my posts please tell me and I will try to explain more fully.

[Shaker]

Susan, I am sorry you have issues with my logic.  If you have any problems with understanding my posts please tell me and I will try to explain more fully.

The only problem people have with your logic, Alan, is the absence of it.

[ekim]

You are misunderstanding my post.  It was not about condemning the whole of Christianity, that would be a whole new topic.  This topic is about searching for God.  If I am reading you correctly, your claim is that you have found God and you wish to share the insights and truths given to you.  From an outsider's perspective, there are many people from a variety of religions throughout history who have made similar claims.  In the world there are people who are adept in the art of persuasion and there are others who are suggestible.  To get to the truth, questioning is necessary to break the hold of the former and reduce the gullibility of the latter.  I am not saying that you and your friends fall into either of those categories but how is anyone to know, especially on the Internet?

I think one way to asses whether someone's claim to have found God is genuine is to look at the fruits their faith produces.
Matthew 7:16 You shall know them by their fruits

There are a number of observations one could make about that faith statement.  The Vatican has a vast wealth of 'fruit' collected over the ages.  Children are not always particularly good at watching out for wolves dressed in cassocks and distinguishing the genuine fruit from the fruit flavoured.  People of other faiths and non-faiths may also exhibit equally fruitful products and without attributing it to 'finding God'.

[floo]

You are misunderstanding my post.  It was not about condemning the whole of Christianity, that would be a whole new topic.  This topic is about searching for God.  If I am reading you correctly, your claim is that you have found God and you wish to share the insights and truths given to you.  From an outsider's perspective, there are many people from a variety of religions throughout history who have made similar claims.  In the world there are people who are adept in the art of persuasion and there are others who are suggestible.  To get to the truth, questioning is necessary to break the hold of the former and reduce the gullibility of the latter.  I am not saying that you and your friends fall into either of those categories but how is anyone to know, especially on the Internet?

I think one way to asses whether someone's claim to have found God is genuine is to look at the fruits their faith produces.
Matthew 7:16 You shall know them by their fruits

There are a number of observations one could make about that faith statement.  The Vatican has a vast wealth of 'fruit' collected over the ages.  Children are not always particularly good at watching out for wolves dressed in cassocks and distinguishing the genuine fruit from the fruit flavoured.  People of other faiths and non-faiths may also exhibit equally fruitful products and without attributing it to 'finding God'.

A good point.

[savillerow]

Msg 2888 AB "I am curious to know. . . " Its as Leonard says "we dont know"  but it really is a genuine observation that someone like you with your approach to a made up answer is arrogant, naive, annoying and ignorant of what is being acheived in the discoveries of our world, universe, cosmos etc. Why dont you sit back and relax and take some sort of pleasure in that science is finding out so much and not one prayer in the last zillion years has done a scooby doo.

[SusanDoris]

Well said, Floo, Shaker and savillerow ... as usual.

[Alan Burns]

... and not one prayer in the last zillion years has done a scooby doo.

never underestimate the power of prayer. 

[Shaker]

... and not one prayer in the last zillion years has done a scooby doo.

never underestimate the power of prayer.

It doesn't have any, otherwise we'd know about it by now, wouldn't we?

[Leonard James]

... and not one prayer in the last zillion years has done a scooby doo.

never underestimate the power of prayer.

We don't! But we recognise it for its placebo effect. Belief can work wonders.

[Alan Burns]

but it really is a genuine observation that someone like you with your approach to a made up answer is arrogant, naive, annoying and ignorant of what is being acheived in the discoveries of our world, universe, cosmos etc.

I think you vastly overestimate what can be achieved by human investigation.  In human scientific discovery there is not even a definitive explanation of the word "manipulation".  Because in order to manipulate anything you need a source of free will, which is not defineable in deterministic science.

[Shaker]

Alan:

Do you have a methodology for assessing the "power of prayer" so as to be able to determine that prayer operates in the manner in which you presumably believe it does as compared to the operations of random chance? Because without such a methodology your belief in prayer is worthless, old fruit.

[Leonard James]

... and not one prayer in the last zillion years has done a scooby doo.

never underestimate the power of prayer.

And what exactly is the power of prayer? If some Christians pray and they appear to get a positive result, they praise the deity to the skies, if the result, as more often than not, is negative they don't blame it. They fall back on the old cliché, 'God sometimes says, 'No'!' What sort of deity will grant a nice day for the church fete, but refuse to cure a seriously ill child? GET REAL!

I can answer that one, Floo! "God" has his reasons.

[Alan Burns]

And what exactly is the power of prayer? If some Christians pray and they appear to get a positive result, they praise the deity to the skies, if the result, as more often than not, is negative they don't blame it. They fall back on the old cliché, 'God sometimes says, 'No'!' What sort of deity will grant a nice day for the church fete, but refuse to cure a seriously ill child?

I was struck by one of the Gospel readings in church last week.  It refered to Jesus not being able to perform any miracles at one place because of the people's lack of faith.  This indicates that God needs human faith to enable His power on earth.  He brought us into existence for a divine pupose, and part of this purpose would appear to help His will to be done hear on earth.

[Leonard James]

I was struck by one of the Gospel readings in church last week.  It refered to Jesus not being able to perform any miracles at one place because of the people's lack of faith.  This indicates that God needs human faith to enable His power on earth.  He brought us into existence for a divine pupose, and part of this purpose would appear to help His will to be done hear on earth.

Yeah, right! How did I know it was going to be the people's fault and not "God's"? 

[Alan Burns]

Alan:

Do you have a methodology for assessing the "power of prayer" so as to be able to determine that prayer operates in the manner in which you presumably believe it does as compared to the operations of random chance? Because without such a methodology your belief in prayer is worthless, old fruit.

My assesment is simply this:
I often pray for something which I know is unlikeley to happen without God's help, but I have faith that God can do it.  And seemingly against all the odds it happens.

One example from history.  In the battle of Lepanto in the mediterranean, the Christian alliance were vastly outnumbered and less powerful than the Muslim forces.  The pope called upon the Christian population to pray the rosary to avoid defeat, and against all the odds the Muslims were defeated, and Europe was saved from what would have been total Muslim domination.  Following this victory, the Pope dedicated a special feast day to celebrate the power of the rosary which is still celebrated in the church callendar.

[Shaker]

I was struck by one of the Gospel readings in church last week.  It refered to Jesus not being able to perform any miracles at one place because of the people's lack of faith.  This indicates that God needs human faith to enable His power on earth.  He brought us into existence for a divine pupose, and part of this purpose would appear to help His will to be done hear on earth.

A few points immediately present themselves.

The idea that miracles can't be performed until and unless people have a prior belief in them is extremely suspicious to say the very least - what sort of omnipotent deity is it who can't do some sort of footling conjuring trick unless the audience is already primed to believe in magic? Remember: if this deity you claim to believe in wants the belief and the following of humans, it's not the terminally credulous it needs to convince but the thoroughgoing sceptics and rationalists. Convincing some gullible clown that you've done something "miraculous" is the stock in trade of every stage conjuror and con-man there has ever been since the year dot. Convince, thoroughly and completely convince a hard-headed, questioning sceptic (which would be a doddle for any genuinely omnipotent deity, I'd have thought) would be vastly more impressive. Convincing somebody already primed to accept miracles that you've performed a miracle is nothing; convincing a sceptic - now that's something. Why don't we see this, Alan? As I say, it should be a job that wouldn't cause any half-way competent deity to raise a sweat, so to speak, yet the vast majority of the world is unconvinced. Shoddy work, wouldn't you say, Alan?

[Shaker]

My assesment is simply this:
I often pray for something which I know is unlikeley to happen without God's help, but I have faith that God can do it.  And seemingly against all the odds it happens.

That's called confirmation bias. What do you make of it when it doesn't happen, Alan?

One example from history.  In the battle of Lepanto in the mediterranean, the Christian alliance were vastly outnumbered and less powerful than the Muslim forces.  The pope called upon the Christian population to pray the rosary to avoid defeat, and against all the odds the Muslims were defeated, and Europe was saved from what would have been total Muslim domination.  Following this victory, the Pope dedicated a special feast day to celebrate the power of the rosary which is still celebrated in the church callendar.

Unless you're a bit more advanced in years than you seem, you weren't at the Battle of Lepanto. This is just another fairy story.

Not that I really expected it but you still haven't answered the question I asked. Until and unless you have a methodology for being able to tell when prayer is really at work as opposed to the simple workings of random chance, the belief in prayer is at the very best a fifth wheel, a useless, superfluous, redundant belief. At worst it indicates chronic gullibility and the inability to break free of confirmation bias.

[Alan Burns]

I was struck by one of the Gospel readings in church last week.  It refered to Jesus not being able to perform any miracles at one place because of the people's lack of faith.  This indicates that God needs human faith to enable His power on earth.  He brought us into existence for a divine pupose, and part of this purpose would appear to help His will to be done hear on earth.

A few points immediately present themselves.

The idea that miracles can't be performed until and unless people have a prior belief in them is extremely suspicious to say the very least - what sort of omnipotent deity is it who can't do some sort of footling conjuring trick unless the audience is already primed to believe in magic? Remember: if this deity you claim to believe in wants the belief and the following of humans, it's not the terminally credulous it needs to convince but the thoroughgoing sceptics and rationalists. Convincing some gullible clown that you've done something "miraculous" is the stock in trade of every stage conjuror and con-man there has ever been since the year dot. Convince, thoroughly and completely convince a hard-headed, questioning sceptic (which would be a doddle for any genuinely omnipotent deity, I'd have thought) would be vastly more impressive. Convincing somebody already primed to accept miracles that you've performed a miracle is nothing; convincing a sceptic - now that's something. Why don't we see this, Alan?

But God does not do conjouring tricks to impress.  He does things out of love.  Faith must come first - it is the key to unlock God's power.

[Shaker]

But God does not do conjouring tricks to impress.  He does things out of love.  Faith must come first - it is the key to unlock God's power.

I didn't think it would be very long before the theist's favourite circular argument was brought back out of the box - we were headed that way in any case.

What you are of course in fact saying here is that you need to have faith in a god in order to believe that there's a god in the first place to have faith in the god that you have faith in ... you can see the circularity here I'm sure, Alan. It's pretty shoddy, intellectually, isn't it?

[Alan Burns]

But God does not do conjouring tricks to impress.  He does things out of love.  Faith must come first - it is the key to unlock God's power.

I didn't think it would be very long before the theist's favourite circular argument was brought back out of the box - we were headed that way in any case.

What you are of course in fact saying here is that you need to have faith in a god in order to believe that there's a god in the first place to have faith in the god that you have faith in ... you can see the circularity here I'm sure, Alan. It's pretty shoddy, intellectually, isn't it?

What is the difficulty in putting your faith in the one who died to save you from sin and death?

[Shaker]

What is the difficulty in putting your faith in the one who died to save you from sin and death?

The difficulty of believing such obviously self-serving tripe, Alan. There's no such thing as sin and everything living dies - yes, you too, Alan. You, Mrs Alan, the little Alanettes, the birds in your garden, the worms under the back lawn - in short, if it lives, it's going to die at some point or other, and nobody and nothing can stop that. A rock can be destroyed as a rock (by being pulverised, let's say), but a tree dies, because a tree is alive and a rock isn't - death is a consequence of life, something that the theist is obligated to believe was set up by the god in whom they claim to believe. Unless you're of a certain bent which sees you believing in an afterlife for the birdies and the wormies, what you actually believe is that every single other species of living thing on the planet dies and dies completely and finally, but you're special enough to be kept around for ever and ever and ever and ever and ever.

To (slightly) paraphrase my late hero Christopher Hitchens, I've been called arrogant in my time, but that's beyond my conceit. If you can't see that this is self-evidently a narrative created by humans fearful of death, you're beyond hope. It's entirely understandable on a psychological basis, no question of that; but that doesn't prevent it from being rather obnoxiously narcissistic and arrogant in a way that only religion can manage.