Religion: Fact Or Fiction?

i like the response........what if i said that i have had direct contact with a higher intelligence that some may call god or gnosis or buddahood or whatever......are you goning to dismiss me as a loony because you cant entertain the possiblity that i may be telling the truth?????????????.........or would you consider me a charlatan tring to get one over on you????????.............."I live in a solid gold mansion and wear a robe of solid jewels, I fly, don't need to breathe, and have the strength of a thousand men, I don't need to prove it though, you need to prove I don't."........lucky you............as for my reality tunnel, i am agnostic about such things...........my experiences of life, universe and everything, have lead me to the conclusion that humans have the ability to beleive anything they like............you have no proof that the creator does not exist (except wobbly intellectual arguments may i direct you to http://www.general-semantics.org/ just in case you are still under the misconception that the logic in the athiests argument is robust)......the creationists have creation to proove it does..........................

__________________
"...any theory that satisfies the facts demands assumptions which are completely absurd."

Aleister Crowley

Where is this proof?

In a book, because a human said so?

I recently had a chance to attend a lecture/debate, it was between some religous folk and some scientists, one of the things they talked about was the proof of god. The religous people had no concrete evidence that he actually existed, they cited the bible and other texts, one of the scientists brought up a true fact; those who wrote the bible and other texts wrote it from their own memory and did not intend for it to be used as an auto-biography of all that happened, they intended it to be a general account of what happened and to teach their ideals through anology, thus not everything in the bible actually, truly happened, some was made up. The religous people agreed to this concept, with some reservation and protest, but still admitted it had some truth to the statement.

There has never been true hard facts that creation and god are real, only the belief and faith of humans, and humans are very succeptable to being decieved from the truth and to lying to themselves to believe something that is not true. If I tell myself every morning, noon, and night that I am a perfect person and everyone loves me, that I will be the greatest martial artist, philosopher, carpenter, that has ever existed, then most likely I will come to beleive it's true without a doubt, but I still have no actual proof that that is so, and so it really isn't, it's just fantasy.

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

“	Originally Posted By: Mei Hua But to be a builder, you yourself must first be built, so who built god?	”

This argument is the ontological argument and was first metered out by St. Anselm. You can brush up on it here and also here.

I am particularly fond of St. Thomas Aquinas thesis- Summa Theologica. It really is brain ache, but well worth trying to read.

On more simple lines, and probably (for me at least) more appropriate, I also posted here about how some envisige God's involvement in our world.

“	Originally Posted By: Mei Hua I build houses among other things, and if I build something that has a flaw or is imperfect and thus defective, I'm at fault and it shows that I made a mistake and am imperfect. With all that's gone wrong over the centuries in the name of God, all the evil, all the bad, doesn't that imply that the builder is himself not perfect? And if God is supposed to be perfect, why do you worship one who claims so but in reality isn't, thus proving that he's lying to the people to gain their trust and adoration?	”

Ever see AI?

Man does bad stuff, maybe in the name of God, maybe he says it's in the name of God but really it's an excuse for something else. For every bad, you can find an incredible good, for every wrong you can find an impeccable right. We must taste bitter in order to understand sweet.

“	Originally Posted By: Mei Hua Or, if God is the builder but is imperfect, doesn't that truly mean that God really isn't the builder but that someone else/thing is? And how do we know that this other really has any plan for us? This could explain all the bad, because the real master doesn't give squat about us and so "God's" hands are tied from any intervention. Another thing about building, when I build something, I always leave some characteristic mark that identifies my handywork, no matter how small or minute, other people familiar with me can always tell if I did something by my craftsmanship. So doesn't it follow that if God is the builder of all things, how come there is no trace what so ever of him? And even though he might be a powerful being, there would still be a way to trace his mark because with the creation of something, something of yourself goes into it and so a mark is made, why can we find no mark of God?	”

We can find marks of God, lots and lots of them. 1.1 Billion Catholics is a pretty big mark. There are a millions stories people tell of the marks God has made in their lives. You just have to be listening in the right way.

“	Originally Posted By: Mei Hua Could it be because we made god ourselves and thus he is merely an entity of our design, and because we wanted soemthing that couldn't be found, we can't find him?	”

Could be. I think the worst argument I know for God's existence is Pascal's wager, ever heard of it?
In the seventeenth century the mathematician Blaise Pascal formulated his infamous pragmatic argument for belief in God in Pensees. The argument runs as follows:

If you erroneously believe in God, you lose nothing (assuming that death is the absolute end), whereas if you correctly believe in God, you gain everything (eternal bliss). But if you correctly disbelieve in God, you gain nothing (death ends all), whereas if you erroneously disbelieve in God, you lose everything (eternal damnation).

How should you bet?

“	Originally Posted By: Mei Hua Where is this proof? In a book, because a human said so?	”

This is exactly how I feel about so much...I refuse to believe something because another man told me it is the truth. If it is the truth, or contains some measure of the truth, in experiencing and testing it, that truth will become self evident to me.

God is like that for me. I can only tell you that I do have experience of something I call God. I cannot proove it to you. I do not think you should act a certain way because of my experience, I can only share my experience if you are interested, and allow you to reach your own conclusions.

“	Originally Posted By: Mei Hua I recently had a chance to attend a lecture/debate, it was between some religous folk and some scientists, one of the things they talked about was the proof of god. The religous people had no concrete evidence that he actually existed, they cited the bible and other texts, one of the scientists brought up a true fact; those who wrote the bible and other texts wrote it from their own memory and did not intend for it to be used as an auto-biography of all that happened, they intended it to be a general account of what happened and to teach their ideals through anology, thus not everything in the bible actually, truly happened, some was made up. The religous people agreed to this concept, with some reservation and protest, but still admitted it had some truth to the statement. There has never been true hard facts that creation and god are real, only the belief and faith of humans, and humans are very succeptable to being decieved from the truth and to lying to themselves to believe something that is not true.	”

I would have to say that if you believe that Jesus Christ was a historical figure who died and rose from the dead, ergo, you would have to consider that some pretty good evidence for God's existence. Likewise if you or someone you know had been healed at Lourdes or by Padre Pio, or through prayer, or the eucharist, you would be pretty convinced. What you are saying is if God is real, he must proove himself to me. I guess we all do that to some extent. Maybe some of us convince ourselves better than others, or maybe, just maybe, God is not a figment of our imaginations.

“	Originally Posted By: Mei Hua If I tell myself every morning, noon, and night that I am a perfect person and everyone loves me, that I will be the greatest martial artist, philosopher, carpenter, that has ever existed, then most likely I will come to beleive it's true without a doubt, but I still have no actual proof that that is so, and so it really isn't, it's just fantasy.	”

I would have to disagree with that pronouncement on several levels. primarily, the power of positive thought.

SunWuKung would love this thread! Still, I'm sure he is enjoying sweltering in Venice equally as much!

I wonder if he'll visit St. Marks?

__________________
Faith itself, compelled by the Holy Spirit, possesses an inner dynamism that necessitates deeper understanding. ~Thomas Weinandy O.F.M.

Arguments against the existence of God

While some theists argue that a god entirely transcends logic and that logical discourse about him is therefore meaningless, others would disagree with the assertion that a god has incompatible or incoherent properties. Each of the following arguments aims at proving that some particular conception of a god either is inherently meaningless, contradictory or contradicts known scientific and historical facts, and that therefore a god thus described cannot exist.
[edit]

Deductive arguments against the existence of God

• Logically contradictory definitions show that the object so defined can not exist. A God who can do "anything" is logically contradictory because by logic he can't both cause a thing to be both True and False. This is often expressed as: Can God create a rock too big for himself to lift? Whether the answer is yes or no, God therefore can't do "anything". Responses to the self contradictory argument range from God is not limited to logic, to God can do "anything logic allows", to God has powers beyond our understanding but whether limited to logic or others things is unknowable, to God is "most powerful", to God has as least these powers (A, B, etc). The argument is a simple proof that a mindlessly broad brush definition of God is unhelpful in proving anything.
• The argument from free will contests the existence of an omniscient god who has free will by arguing that the two properties are contradictory.
• The Transcendental Argument for the Non-existence of God contests the existence of an intelligent Creator God by demonstrating that such a being would make logic and morality contingent, which is incompatible with the presuppositionalist assertion that they are necessary, and contradicts the efficacy of science. A more general line of argument based on TANG, materialist apologetics, seeks to generalize this argument to all necessary features of the universe and all god-concepts.
• The "chicken or the egg" argument states that if the Universe had to be created by God because it must have a creator, then God, in turn would have had to be created by some other God, and so on.
• Theological noncognitivism, as used in the literature, usually seeks to disprove the god-concept by showing that it is meaningless in some way.

[edit]

Empirical arguments against the existence of God

• The argument from inconsistent revelations contests the existence of the Middle Eastern, Biblical deity called God as described in holy scriptures, such as the Jewish Tanakh, the Christian Bible, or the Muslim Qur'an, by identifying contradictions between different scriptures, contradictions within a single scripture, or contradictions between scripture and known facts.
• The problem of evil (or theodicy) in general, and the logical and evidential arguments from evil in particular contest the existence of a god who is both omnipotent and omnibenevolent by arguing that such a god would not permit the existence of evil, which can easily be shown to exist.
• The argument from nonbelief contests the existence of an omnipotent god who wants humans to believe in him by arguing that such a god would do a better job of gathering believers.
• The argument from poor design contests the existence of an intelligent Creator God by arguing that much of nature is poorly designed.
• The atheist-existentialist argument for the non-existence of God, if God is supposed to be a perfect sentient being: As presented by Jean-Paul Sartre in Being and Nothingness, it states that since existence precedes essence, it follows from the meaning of the term sentient that a sentient being cannot be complete or perfect. Sartre's phrasing is that God would be a pour-soi [a being-for-itself; a consciousness] who is also an en-soi [a being-in-itself; a thing]: which is a contradiction in terms. The argument is echoed thus in Salman Rushdie's novel Grimus: "That which is complete is also dead."
• The "no motivation" argument states that if god is omnipotent, then he would not be motivated to act in any way, specifically creating the universe, since God would have anything God wanted in infinite amounts and would have no desires since there is no reason for God to have any. Since the universe exists, there is a contradiction and an omnipotent God cannot exist.
• The argument from poor design contests the idea that a god created life on Earth on the basis that lifeforms exhibit poor or malevolent design, which can be easily explained using Neo-Darwinism and naturalism.

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

Mei Hua, when quoting from a website, it's a requirement to post a link and source, in this case Wikepedia. I know there are lots of links on the page, but I still think it would be worth putting a little 'source' link at the bottom.

Of course Wikepedia also has the opposite argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transce...istence_of_God

__________________
Faith itself, compelled by the Holy Spirit, possesses an inner dynamism that necessitates deeper understanding. ~Thomas Weinandy O.F.M.

What if God IS all things ? I know for a fact we have the ability to affect our reality in a significant way through thought. I mentioned in a different thread about collective conscience. When someone prays for a miracle, is it all things that hear it subconsciencly ? Do all people and things have the ability to affect one persons reality in a tremendous way ? ie: perform a miracle ? Maybe we don't/can't see God because it too obvious where/what he is ?

__________________
"-when you yourself know that a thing is good, that it is not blamable, that it is praised by the wise and when practiced and observed that it leads to happiness, then follow that thing.”

Experience is a window of enlightenment, however as people do the window becomes decorated with blinds or curtains. They cover the window; even when open they still reduce the window though they are meant to enhance it. Dialogs of thoughts and complex analogies are like curtains.

__________________
You are not where you have been and you are not where you are going you are only here.

“	Originally Posted By: aqira Experience is a window of enlightenment, however as people do the window becomes decorated with blinds or curtains. They cover the window; even when open they still reduce the window though they are meant to enhance it. Dialogs of thoughts and complex analogies are like curtains.	”

you're saying I should become a decorator ? Or a philosipher ?

__________________
"-when you yourself know that a thing is good, that it is not blamable, that it is praised by the wise and when practiced and observed that it leads to happiness, then follow that thing.”

“	Originally Posted By: FightingFat Man does bad stuff, maybe in the name of God, maybe he says it's in the name of God but really it's an excuse for something else. For every bad, you can find an incredible good, for every wrong you can find an impeccable right. We must taste bitter in order to understand sweet.	”

In truth, how much good has been done in the name of god, and how much bad?
The bad far outweights the good.

“	We can find marks of God, lots and lots of them. 1.1 Billion Catholics is a pretty big mark. There are a millions stories people tell of the marks God has made in their lives. You just have to be listening in the right way.	”

I can find just as many people who believe that hobbits are real and so are elves and dwarves, they also read a book that made them beleive something, that wasn't actually there, no matter how you explain that it's fantasy, they still argue that they are real, even with no proof!
The same goes for the stories people tell of how god has made a mark, they are just another form of fiction by people seeking attention and notoriety.
I asked for actuall solid concrete proven factual truth concerning the marks left by god, I still have not recieved them, just more stories and more look at the bible, I can show you countless books proving that there never was a god, it doesn't make them true, just because someone wrote words and sentences down doesn't in fact make them true, thus the bible is just another book of fiction, there has been no solid facts that have been proven by various means that this god does exist.

“	Could be. I think the worst argument I know for God's existence is Pascal's wager, ever heard of it? In the seventeenth century the mathematician Blaise Pascal formulated his infamous pragmatic argument for belief in God in Pensees. The argument runs as follows: If you erroneously believe in God, you lose nothing (assuming that death is the absolute end), whereas if you correctly believe in God, you gain everything (eternal bliss). But if you correctly disbelieve in God, you gain nothing (death ends all), whereas if you erroneously disbelieve in God, you lose everything (eternal damnation). How should you bet?	”

I wouldn't bet, bliss and damnation are just human ideals that have no true meaning, more stories written in a book of fiction, with no actual proof that these things do exist.
I have no worries about bliss/damnation, they are just fears and desires of the human mind, one of the greatest deceivers that exists, it causes us to believe in a being that has never been seen, never been heard, never been proven as real, except in our own minds, and if we believe something then of course it must be true, so there's no point in arguing against it, as those who do are atheists, heathens, pagans, sinners, and devil worshippers.

“	This is exactly how I feel about so much...I refuse to believe something because another man told me it is the truth. If it is the truth, or contains some measure of the truth, in experiencing and testing it, that truth will become self evident to me. God is like that for me. I can only tell you that I do have experience of something I call God. I cannot proove it to you. I do not think you should act a certain way because of my experience, I can only share my experience if you are interested, and allow you to reach your own conclusions.	”

I agree with your reasoning, and you have my respect.
This is one of the things I've been saying, that it's better for each person to question and explore their faith, not blindly follow the dogma handed down to them by books or those of the faith, if after a thorough research you still feel that this or that belief is the one for you, how can I argue with that? But there are way too many who do no such thing and do blindly follow, believe in, and argue against those of other beliefs, because that is what they have read, been told, or have seen. And so in fact are nothing more than spiritual slaves to a false spiritual path that will cause them ruin in the end, rather than taking them to the heaven they know they rightfully deserve.

“	I would have to say that if you believe that Jesus Christ was a historical figure who died and rose from the dead, ergo, you would have to consider that some pretty good evidence for God's existence. Likewise if you or someone you know had been healed at Lourdes or by Padre Pio, or through prayer, or the eucharist, you would be pretty convinced. What you are saying is if God is real, he must proove himself to me. I guess we all do that to some extent. Maybe some of us convince ourselves better than others, or maybe, just maybe, God is not a figment of our imaginations.	”

I believe that Jesus was real, I don't believe that he rose from the dead or was the son of god, but he was an actual historical figure; an interesting fact is that he spent about ten years in the East, this is where he gained many of his ideas about brotherly love, etc.

For all of those healed, I can provide twenty more that have been irrevocably harmed, if not killed from lack of care, by Christian Scientists.

God may not be a figment of our imaginations, but he is also not here with us either, or concerned with our wellbeing or development. Those are just theories that humans have applied to his name, and not actual facts from the horse's mouth.

“	I would have to disagree with that pronouncement on several levels. primarily, the power of positive thought.	”

Positive thought does nothing more than continue to strengthen the lies you tell yourself, still doesn't make them true, what does is action with intent.
I can tell myself everyday that every single person I meet will love me as a brother, but it will not happen because I have positive thought, it will happen because I work hard to make that so, and even then it will not happen completely, still many people will not like me, and because of my positive thought, I will be crushed because I thought that all people would like me not just the few.
Positive thought is nothing more than affirming the foolishness and illusions created by the human mind to decieve us from reality, to truly succeed in our thoughts we need to break free from foolishness, from illusions, and work with reality to make things truly happen.

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

God may be Supreme but is not necessarily a Being.

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

"There has never been true hard facts that creation and god are real"..........you and the whole of creation can be said to be proof of existance.......duhhhh........as concrete as you like................i dont think the existance of a god is any more bizzare than the idea of a big bang..............in fact the guy who came up with the theory of the big bang was a christain wasnt he?????????............mei hui forgive me. but i am finding your definitions of god rather childish.....as if your stuck in some fantasy of your own about what people believe god to be..........

__________________
"...any theory that satisfies the facts demands assumptions which are completely absurd."

Aleister Crowley

"There has never been true hard facts that creation and god are real"............just to emphasis that i think that this sentence is one of the funniest things ive read on the DL since FF said "As I always say, it was demonstrating that these theories take massive leaps in logic and are built on one or two mythical stories.".............if there is no hard evidence of creation go headbut a wall....................if thats not hard enough then maybe try jumping in front of a train.............no evidence of creation pah!............there is a great jewish story about a philosphy student arguing with a rabbi.............the student says anything can prooved even that the two of them dont exist, at which point the rabbi punches him in the nose and asks "what hurts?"..............

__________________
"...any theory that satisfies the facts demands assumptions which are completely absurd."

Aleister Crowley

meh i used to wonder about this for my entire 9th-11th grade year.
then i realized i shouldnt spend all my time worrying about whether or not he does exist. Because either way i choose, i will still die. And if he doesnt exist then i spent all my lfie worrying about it. And if he does exist and i go to hell.Then so be it, b/c Eternal damnation is a hell of alot better than an Eternal Slumber.

__________________
Vision without action is a daydream.
Action without vision is a nightmare.

Our worst fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond all measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that frightens us

www.myspace.com/loveiscancer
www.xanga.com/loveiscancer

It was an old fashioned way of maintaining order, but other than that it is not fact nor fiction, it's belief.