Searching for GOD...

[Leonard James]

I.m afraid I can say largely what you have said Len with the added bonus of the atheist case not stacking up in the full self knowledge of being ...............brought about by the actual presence of God.
I can bet my bottom that your reasoning follows a certain school of thought. I am afraid that given that you cannot retreat to the I just don't believe position since that is a position which commands no reason.

On the contrary, it is based entirely on reasoning.

The horrors of WW2 started when I was barely 15. I was a fervent believer at the time, went to church every Sunday, sang in the choir, and was enormously moved during the prayers for our fighting forces.

Then I realised that the Germans were doing exactly the same, and the rot set in. I asked my vicar why, and he said he didn't know but that "God know best".

That answer was not sufficient for the young, active mind I had been blessed with.

The rest is history.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

On the contrary, it is based entirely on reasoning.

The horrors of WW2 started when I was barely 15. I was a fervent believer at the time, went to church every Sunday, sang in the choir, and was enormously moved during the prayers for our fighting forces.

Then I realised that the Germans were doing exactly the same, and the rot set in. I asked my vicar why, and he said he didn't know but that "God know best".

That answer was not sufficient for the young, active mind I had been blessed with.

The rest is history.

I'm sorry but that anecdote shows insufficient reasoning to disprove God and I suspect involves the fallacies of invoking Hitler and going nuclear.

At best though you have involved feelings which I believe are reasonable but if you are to categorise this in your reasoning it should be unpicked and unpacked.

As for the young active mind business......that is just blowing your own trumpet

.

[SusanDoris]

Interesting you mention that time when you were 15 and about WWII, LJ. I must have been about 7 when I had a conversation with my father about how God could be on both sides in the War. He couldn't understand it but, as he was 100% sure that God was, it was a case of God moves in mysterious ways. At that time I did not consider pursuing the subject, since, if my father said, I had no reason to doubt him.  At least he did not think any of the biblical stories were true, but knew them to be stories to help learn good/bad, right/wrong, etc.

[torridon]

The devil has many ways to convince you that God does not exist, even after you have once known Him.

Why does God not eliminate the Devil then ? That God tolerates to Devil to exist and to continue to function, messing up his divine plans, suggests that God is either too feeble to intervene, and therefore is not God, or he secretly desires the Devil to continue in his ruinous work, and therefore is not God.

[torridon]

But my base is far more real than you could ever imagine.

You can't begin to know anything about a relationship with God until you actualy enter that relationship.

We cannot really know what your visceral experience of life is like.  And vice versa.  But we can comment on the quality of the broader conceptual logic framework that you use to explain it and convey it. Does it stack up ? Is it coherent ?

[Nearly Sane]

As for the young active mind business......that is just blowing your own trumpet

.

According to the book I was given when growing up, only about 1 in 20 boys can do that.

[ippy]

Your definition of delusional would fit most of the world's population.  The sad thing is that you may well find out that you are deluding yourself into thinking you came into existence entirely by natural unguided forces.

Not really Alan, I'll go with the current well tested and not had a realistic challenge in more than 150 years, theory, unless we can find some holes in it, let's go with the realistic without deluding ourselves, we don't really want to have any more egg on our faces, do we, Alan.

ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Morning Mr S top of the morning to you.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Not really Alan, I'll go with the current well tested and not had a realistic challenge in more than 150 years, theory, unless we can find some holes in it, let's go with the realistic without deluding ourselves, we don't really want to have any more egg on our faces, do we, Alan.

ippy

Everytime you do this Ippy you are really holding up naturalism and saying ''this is the truth''.......But naturalism is a philosophy which needs arguing.

There are some seemingly fixed laws governing the emergence of intelligent life.
2 options.....Who or what fixed them ......or do we just accept that they are without further questioning( Akin to religious humility)........what's it to be be Ippy?

[Nearly Sane]

Morning Mr S top of the morning to you.

And to you. I think you might want to look at the article I just plated link to in the Science section. Should be grist to your mill on the 'end of empiricism in science'

[Alan Burns]

Not really Alan, I'll go with the current well tested and not had a realistic challenge in more than 150 years, theory, unless we can find some holes in it, let's go with the realistic without deluding ourselves, we don't really want to have any more egg on our faces, do we, Alan.

ippy

If you think there are no holes in Darwin's theory you really are deluded.

[Rhiannon]

If you think there are no holes in Darwin's theory you really are deluded.

Not god-shaped holes though.

[Shaker]

If you think there are no holes in Darwin's theory you really are deluded.

Those holes are gaps in knowledge, the same as in every other field of science - and as Rhi says, absolutely none of them are God-shaped. Nothing, nothing, nothing in science requires a gap to be plugged with "God." You might as well put "Beyond here be dragons" for the same effect and make as much sense, i.e. none whatever.

EbNS is the core of biology (you could equally say zoology, ethology ...) for a reason, Alan.

[Alan Burns]

Those holes are gaps in knowledge,

You may see them as gaps.  I see them as unbreachable voids.  Evolution by natural selection can be demonstrated to perform a fine tuning process, but it has not been demonstrated to create any specific complexity whithout intelligent guidance.  Nor is it able to generate self awareness, since this has no definition in biology.  As for free will, you would have to keep this in denial because it could never be derived from any evolutionary process.

[Alan Burns]

Nothing, nothing, nothing in science requires a gap to be plugged with "God."

I would tend to agree with this statement, but there is more to reality than science alone.

[Shaker]

You may see them as gaps.  I see them as unbreachable voids.

Well yes. You would say that, wouldn't you?

Evolution by natural selection can be demonstrated to perform a fine tuning process, but it has not been demonstrated to create any specific complexity whithout intelligent guidance.

"Specific complexity"? I smell the dead hand of Dumbski and his cohort of IDiots here.

Nor is it able to generate self awareness, since this has no definition in biology.

Your evidence for this assertion is ..?

As for free will, you would have to keep this in denial because it could never be derived from any evolutionary process.

Ths is the same free will you're endlessly banging on about but have never once, anywhere, demonstrated to exist, yes?

[Shaker]

I would tend to agree with this statement, but there is more to reality than science alone.

Hope is another one fond of wheeling out this sort of intellectual blancmange. Lots of people ask him what sort of methodology he thinks he has for discovering these other things, but every time he goes all shy. I'd be delighted if you could do better.

[Shaker]

I don't think there is anything which can't be explained by science, if not now, eventually.

I take a different position: there are literally uncountable things not yet explained (Donald Rumsfeld's unknown unknowns), but without a method like the scientific method to discover and explain them, how would you ever know of them?

[Alan Burns]

I suppose that concocting a devil is some sort of defence mechanism; without that scapegoat, the blame thusly diverted may have to be sought uncomfortably closer to home. Given your, let's face it, abject failure to bring anyone around to your way of thinking, the Devil is a very handy patsy or fall guy. After all; if not him - who?

Have you ever been tempted to do something which you know to be wrong?
Have you ever wondered what the source of this temptation is?
You may deduce that it is just some form of self gratification, but I question who or what is being gratified - and this truly terrifies me.

[Shaker]

Have you ever been tempted to do something which you know to be wrong?
Have you ever wondered what the source of this temptation is?
You may deduce that it is just some form of self gratification, but I question who or what is being gratified - and this truly terrifies me.

Explain.

[Gordon]

Have you ever been tempted to do something which you know to be wrong?

Yes

Have you ever wondered what the source of this temptation is?

I know what it is: it is my brain.

You may deduce that it is just some form of self gratification, but I question who or what is being gratified - and this truly terrifies me.

Then you are easily terrified - BOO!

[Alan Burns]

This is the same free will you're endlessly banging on about but have never once, anywhere, demonstrated to exist, yes?

Free will is simply what gives us the ability to choose between good and evil, but those who try to deny that we have free will may also try to deny the existence of evil.

[Shaker]

Then you are easily terrified - BOO!

He's bound to be. His universe is populated by supernatural spooks - a god, angels, demons, even a super-demon who makes people think rationally. How could he not be easily terrified?

[Alan Burns]

Quote from: Alan Burns on Today at 10:53:42 AM

    Have you ever been tempted to do something which you know to be wrong?
    Have you ever wondered what the source of this temptation is?
    You may deduce that it is just some form of self gratification, but I question who or what is being gratified - and this truly terrifies me.

Explain.

When I contemplate what drives people (including myself) to do things which have no apparent good in them I feel that I am touching on something which is both powerful and terrifying.  CS Lewis described something similar while he was writing "The Screwtape Letters".  He felt that he was actually thinking along the same lines as the devil and he described it as being the most disturbing experience he had ever had.

[floo]

Have you ever been tempted to do something which you know to be wrong?
Have you ever wondered what the source of this temptation is?
You may deduce that it is just some form of self gratification, but I question who or what is being gratified - and this truly terrifies me.

Of course I have been tempted and done things which are wrong, my brain is responsible for my actions, not some entity!