Does God exist?

[Thunderbird]

The presumptions made by posters on this thread that the belief in God, which I will define briefly and broadly as experiences felt by a person that leads to an awareness of an inherent presence that gives order to the ground of their individual existence, can be scrutinized with the scientific approach is a false one.

Religious beliefs are not based upon the same criteria, just as art is not subject to the same critical eye. It’s goals are not the same. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The experience of the ground of one's own being is in the heart of the one who has had an experience.

 

I believe this fervent need to attack the religious minded stems from the prior attacks by creationist on evolution. These claims made of inaccuracy of Darwinian origins by the religious right, were made by those who do not understand the scientific method, as well as the function of their own church in society.

The ridicule made by some posters against the religious life systems as irrational and therefore a detriment to society, again do not understand their function in society.

To study religion and its impact on the development of culture needs to be approached objectively and as a reality of the human condition. To believe one is above an aspect of our culture that has shaped a shared history of art, literature, intrapersonal relationships, institutions of education and the collective unconscious, is as naive as saying science has not shaped our culture. Observing this “tit for tat” mentality has only shown that both sides need to understand that religious and scientific paradigms as two separate parts of the human condition.

[InfiniteNow]

The presumptions made by posters on this thread that the belief in God, which I will define briefly and broadly as experiences felt by a person that leads to an awareness of an inherent presence that gives order to the ground of their individual existence, can be scrutinized with the scientific approach is a false one.

That's total rubbish, Thunderbird. Using the method of science, we can probe beliefs in unicorns, we can examine beliefs in fairies, we can research beliefs in the easter bunny, and we can scrutinize beliefs in god.

 

Simply asserting that science has no purview into this arena does not make it so.

 

 

 

This is part of the reason these beliefs are so dangerous. Not only are believers taught not to ask questions, they are taught that it is acceptable to answer someone elses questions with "god is outside the material world and cannot be studied," or "I just believe it, that's why," or "It's because I have faith." That's not acceptable at all!

 

 

The most heinous acts in human history have used that logic. It's time for critical examination and for us to stop walking on egg shells because some weak *** religiot gets too easily offended.

 

I've never once seen a religious person win an argument on this topic. It's a war of attrition, and religion and god are losing.

[Thunderbird]

 

It's a war of attrition, and religion and god are losing.

Explain this war, if you are referring to ID and schools I understand that, and that ID has lost in the courts, but you have repeatedly said that religion is detrimental to "our culture" How are all religion, and religious people a threat to this culture.

[InfiniteNow]

you have repeatedly said that religion is detrimental to "our culture" How are all religion, and religious people a threat to this culture.

 

 

 

That last part would be a misrepresentation of my actual position, aka a strawman or a complete lack of understanding on your part. Would you like to try asking your question again, but this time without the logical fallacies?

[Thunderbird]

That's total rubbish, Thunderbird. Using the method of science, we can probe beliefs in unicorns, we can examine beliefs in fairies, we can research beliefs in the easter bunny, and we can scrutinize beliefs in god.

 

.

Explain please. I have studied many good sources about religion and mythology, but I do not know of any written information about religions of the things you speak. What religious beliefs and text include unicorns, Easter bunnies and fairies. I know of no such information. please explain.

[InfiniteNow]

Explain please. I have studied many good sources about religion and mythology, but I do not know of any written information about religions of the things you speak. What religious beliefs and text include unicorns, Easter bunnies and fairies. I know of no such information. please explain.

 

Gosh, Thunderbird. When you miss a point, you sure do miss it hard (hmm... haven't I said that to before? :) )

 

 

The point of my statement was not to suggest that there are religions or their texts centered around belief in unicorns, fairies, easter bunnies, or leprechauns (although, if I'm to be perfectly honest, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if such religious doctrines existed, but that's beside the point).

 

The point of my statement was that science can probe beliefs in god in the same way that science can probe beliefs in unicorns and their friends (only some of which have I listed).

[Thunderbird]

That last part would be a misrepresentation of my actual position, aka a strawman or a complete lack of understanding on your part. Would you like to try asking your question again, but this time without the logical fallacies?

What logical fallacies ?

These questions went unanswered by you in previous post as in this present last post. It is time you starting explaining your claims instead of avoiding direct questions about them.

 

 

 

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow Nor anyone else who chooses to live in reality and disengage from the ridiculous wish thinking which has stood in the way of our culture for far too long. Claim 1

 

 

InfiniteNow He'd have no platform for such comments if religion were not so protected. Claim 2

 

I have the questions before and you allways avoid them.

 

Question 1, Thunderbird, Our culture ? what culture are you referring to ? and how is the way someone thinks standing in the way of this "culture" ? please explain.

 

 

Question 2 Thunderbird, What are you suggesting?

[InfiniteNow]

What logical fallacies ?

I never said all religious people are dangerous, and that is a disingenous attempt to summarize my stance on your part.

 

 

Also, I can't see how you think I've avoided your questions since nearly every post I've made on this topic has directly confronted them.

 

However, here ya go...

 

 

Question 1, Thunderbird, Our culture ? what culture are you referring to ?

Earth. Humanity. All living homo sapiens.

 

 

and how is the way someone thinks standing in the way of this "culture" ?

Because they each think they hold the absolute truth, yet someone who just happened to be born somewhere else into a different set of beliefs ALSO thinks they hold the absolute truth. When those truths are compared, they differ, so clearly one or both of them is wrong.

 

This leads to fighting, and a complete separation from reality.

 

Question 2 Thunderbird, What are you suggesting?

 

That religion and belief in a three letter word with ambiguous meaning does more harm than good, that it is a sign of weakness, and it should be discarded for the refuse it is.

 

 

 

Did you watch the video shared by Reason? That does a fair job of summarizing my own stance.

[Thunderbird]

Gosh, Thunderbird. When you miss a point, you sure do miss it hard (hmm... haven't I said that to before? :) )

 

 

The point of my statement was not to suggest that there are religions or their texts centered around belief in unicorns, fairies, easter bunnies, or leprechauns (although, if I'm to be perfectly honest, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if such religious doctrines existed, but that's beside the point).

 

The point of my statement was that science can probe beliefs in god in the same way that science can probe beliefs in unicorns and their friends (only some of which have I listed).

You repeating yourself I get that, but you're still not explaining the science involved and how it relates to the study of religion. Back up the claim.

[InfiniteNow]

I made an edit while you were posting. Please look again.

 

 

Btw... you appear to be at least one post behind me. I'll slow down for a while so you can catch up.

[Thunderbird]

I never said all religious people are dangerous, and that is a disingenous attempt to summarize my stance on your part.

 

 

Please show me were I said you did ?

[Thunderbird]

I made an edit while you were posting. Please look again.

 

 

Btw... you appear to be at least one post behind me. I'll slow down for a while so you can catch up.

You have failed to directly answer questions, or back up claims you are making.

 

It is you that have a lot of catching up to do here. Now start posting in order to adress the questions and not avoid them.

[Pyrotex]

Please show me were I said you did ?

Okay, that's enough, Tbird. The last half dozen or so of your posts have degenerated into rhetorical twaddle and dissembling. If you claim to "not understand" ONE MORE POINT that was made, or ONE MORE QUESTION that was asked, we will be forced to consider the possibility that you are brain damaged.

 

Either that--or--you are playing your Troll Games again. If you can't understand what is being said around you, then go someplace where you CAN. Like, maybe, kindergarten. You have become tiresome.

 

PS: If you have the gall to demand that I "prove" you are dissembling, or that you have no idea what I'm talking about, I will neg-rep you into the middle of last month.

 

Have a wonderful day! :) ;) :) ;) :)

[Thunderbird]

Okay, that's enough, Tbird. The last half dozen or so of your posts have degenerated into rhetorical twaddle and dissembling. If you claim to "not understand" ONE MORE POINT that was made, or ONE MORE QUESTION that was asked, we will be forced to consider the possibility that you are brain damaged.

 

Either that--or--you are playing your Troll Games again. If you can't understand what is being said around you, then go someplace where you CAN. Like, maybe, kindergarten. You have become tiresome.

 

PS: If you have the gall to demand that I "prove" you are dissembling, or that you have no idea what I'm talking about, I will neg-rep you into the middle of last month.

 

Have a wonderful day! :) :) :) :) :)

Prove it... Or anything you claim in this post.

[Thunderbird]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

I never said all religious people are dangerous, and that is a disingenous attempt to summarize my stance on your part.

 

 

 

Please show me were I said you did ?

 

Still waiting for the response to this one above, by the way... I did go back and read the post to see if I could find where I said you used the word dangerous in describing religion.. looks like your telling lies wrapped in more lies. :) You going to answer up or just have a Mod cover up for you?:)

 

 

Simply asserting that science has no purview into this arena does not make it so.

 

 

 

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow;This is part of the reason these beliefs are so dangerous. Not only are believers taught not to ask questions, they are taught that it is acceptable to answer someone elses questions with "god is outside the material world and cannot be studied," or "I just believe it, that's why," or "It's because I have faith." That's not acceptable at all!

[InfiniteNow]

Still waiting for the response to this one above, by the way... I did go back and read the post to see if I could find where I said you used the word dangerous in describing religion.. looks like your telling lies wrapped in more lies. :) You going to answer up or just have a Mod cover up for you?

 

Okay, slugger. I gave you the head's up that I'd be taking a break (letting you catch up), as I have better things to do with my day then sit here making you look stupid. Although, since it's so very easy, I'll give it another go.

 

What you are doing now is called equivocating. You are trying to suggest that when I said:

 

 

This is part of the reason these beliefs are so dangerous. Not only are believers taught not to ask questions, they are taught that it is acceptable to answer someone elses questions with "god is outside the material world and cannot be studied," or "I just believe it, that's why," or "It's because I have faith." That's not acceptable at all!

 

I want you to take a deep breath, and take special notice of my use of the word "beliefs." As is plainly evident to seemingly everyone but you, I was discussing the problems with these beliefs, not with people.

 

 

 

However, here's where your other logical fallacy came in, the one I referred to as a strawman. You tried summarizing my comments above thusly:

 

How are all religion, and religious people a threat to this culture

.

 

Ignoring for a moment the fact that you've ended your question with a period instead of a question mark, I want you to notice that you shifted my words away from the concept of belief and onto people. Further, you also added the word "All."

 

 

If you're still struggling to understand what's happening here, maybe you can tell the moderators to go fornicate with themselves again. That seemed to work out pretty well for you the last time you were too incompetent to understand context and support your position. :)

[Thunderbird]

Equivocating ? you lied.... post # 564 hello. And for the record you are Equivocating. I am asking you to clarify you're claims. You are equivocating religion with Easter bunnies. God with the belief in unicorns.

 

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow Nor anyone else who chooses to live in reality and disengage from the ridiculous wish thinking which has stood in the way of our culture for far too long

 

Originally Posted by Thunderbird you have repeatedly said that religion is detrimental to "our culture" How are all religion, and religious people a threat to this culture

InfiniteNow That last part would be a misrepresentation of my actual position, aka a strawman or a complete lack of understanding on your part. Would you like to try asking your question again, but this time without the logical fallacies?

 

You said "anyone" you said "dangerous" now answer the post #564 directly.