God is a concept that echoes through thousands of years and cultures. Millions have experienced his power and believe with their hearts in his majesty. If not because of his existance, why?
Why-
Do almost all cultures recognise a God figure?
Has the idea survived for thousands of years?
Do millions believe?
Have millions gained personal evidence of his existance?
Is this not enough for the "evidence" you seek?
(Please answer in as clear and detailed a way as possible, summarise any science stuff, I'm genuinely interested in the answer)
Originally Posted by PsySpi
Aren't you taking a bit for granted? :)
What is this evidence we are supposed to be considering?
The things in my post of course!
Aren't you taking a bit for granted? :)
What is this evidence we are supposed to be considering?
Is this the bit you mean? Or the bit I quoted in my last post? Or a bit of both?
Everything you mention as 'proof' is just anecdote, personal accounts and stories, none of it is replicable or testable, and thus fails to meet the criteria necessary to be considered proof.
All of it-
Is this the bit you mean? Or the bit I quoted in my last post? Or a bit of both?
Why-
Do almost all cultures recognise a God figure?
Has the idea survived for thousands of years?
Do millions believe?
Have millions gained personal evidence of his existance?
JUST an annecote? Millions of People, millions of "annecdotes" lasting for thousands of years?
Do almost all cultures recognise a God figure?
Has the idea survived for thousands of years?
Do millions believe?
Are these annecdotes?
Have millions gained personal evidence of his existance?
This may alone be annecdotes, but at such volume? When you can have no "scientific evidence" for God, because of his nature?
Do you have any proof God does not exist?
How many people have actually claimed to have had a direct personal experience of god? I mean beyond just feeling good during worship.
Yes, yes, and yes. Still not proof. The original religions worshipped multiple material gods, a god of rain, a god of wind, a god of sunshine, a god of crops, a god of wine, a god of thunder, a god of the woods, a god of the plains, a god for each river.........Do almost all cultures recognise a God figure?
Has the idea survived for thousands of years?
Do millions believe?
Many millions believe because they have been indoctrinated from birth, taught that if they ever stop believing and worshipping they condemn themselves to eternal torture. That's quite an incentive not to stop believing, or at least to not admit to not believing.
No, they're attempts to explain the physical world. These days we have science to do that. We know why the rain falls, why the wind blows, why the sun shines, what causes thunder and lightning, which is why god has become a more and more abstract concept.Are these annecdotes?
Many may have experienced something that they interpret as a direct experience of god. These can be easily explained by well understood psychological phenomena, such as sleep paralysis.Have millions gained personal evidence of his existance?
A million anecdotes are still just anecdotes. None of the points you've raised are valid evidence.This may alone be annecdotes, but at such volume? When you can have no "scientific evidence" for God, because of his nature?
No, none is required. God is surplus to requirement in explanations of the origin and state of the Universe. Look up Occam's Razor.Do you have any proof God does not exist?
I have a question for you.
If someone claimed to have a personal experience of an invisible pink unicorn that lived at the bottom of his garden would you believe him? If a million people claimed to have had a personal experience of said IPU, would you be convinced of its existence?
All of it-
Is this the bit you mean? Or the bit I quoted in my last post? Or a bit of both?
Why-
Do almost all cultures recognise a God figure?
Has the idea survived for thousands of years?
Do millions believe?
Have millions gained personal evidence of his existance?
Thank you. Now ( correct me if I've got this wrong) your questions invite a particular sort of answer: the best explanation for these widely held beliefs is that they are true.
I'll take your first three points ( crosscultural prevalence, longevity and popularity) together. All are bad arguments. We know of false beliefs that have been held by many people in many cultures for many years. Astrology is one: it was a widely held belief in classical antiquity, although the Greeks and Romans probably got it from other cultures where it was already well established. It has had a very long run, which shows little sign of ending. But it's twaddle.
Other examples would be various methods of divination: studying the flight of birds , the behaviour of beasts, the entrails of sacrificed animals, the casting of dice or bones, the content of dreams ,and so on. Again, it's all twaddle.
Your first three points are really just variations of the same idea: if a belief is widely held, it is likely to be true.
Your last point ( personal experience) is a bit different, but it's still wrong.
If we use experience in a strong sense ( so that what is said to be experienced is taken to exist), then saying that people have had experience of a god ( which must therefore exist) is assuming just what is in dispute. That is, it begs the question.
But if we use the word in a weaker sense ( with no implication about the existence of what is said to be experienced), then saying that people have experience of a god doesn't help you. It comes down to saying that they believe in their god. If it were a ground for sharing their belief, some odd consequences would follow. For example, the fact that some people with the DTs experience pink elephants would give us reason to believe in pink elephants. :)
All who truly follow him of course.How many people have actually claimed to have had a direct personal experience of god? I mean beyond just feeling good during worship.
But arn't those all aspects of a God of the universe?
Can you prove they have been indoctrinated? Why would one belief system grow so big anyway?
But God is an abstract concept!
Proof? Can you say that about ALL of them?
A million annecdotes equates to pretty strong evidence!
What could be simpler than God? After all wasn't Occam a monk?
Why is none required?
No, ONE person could be mistaken.I have a question for you.
If someone claimed to have a personal experience of an invisible pink unicorn that lived at the bottom of his garden would you believe him? If a million people claimed to have had a personal experience of said IPU, would you be convinced of its existence?
Yes. But an invisible pink unicorn isn't GOD.
How do you know they are twaddle?All of it-
Is this the bit you mean? Or the bit I quoted in my last post? Or a bit of both?
Why-
Do almost all cultures recognise a God figure?
Has the idea survived for thousands of years?
Do millions believe?
Have millions gained personal evidence of his existance?
Thank you. Now ( correct me if I've got this wrong) your questions invite a particular sort of answer: the best explanation for these widely held beliefs is that they are true.
I'll take your first three points ( crosscultural prevalence, longevity and popularity) together. All are bad arguments. We know of false beliefs that have been held by many people in many cultures for many years. Astrology is one: it was a widely held belief in classical antiquity, although the Greeks and Romans probably got it from other cultures where it was already well established. It has had a very long run, which shows little sign of ending. But it's twaddle.
Other examples would be various methods of divination: studying the flight of birds , the behaviour of beasts, the entrails of sacrificed animals, the casting of dice or bones, the content of dreams ,and so on. Again, it's all twaddle.
Your first three points are really just variations of the same idea: if a belief is widely held, it is likely to be true.
Your last point ( personal experience) is a bit different, but it's still wrong.
If we use experience in a strong sense ( so that what is said to be experienced is taken to exist), then saying that people have had experience of a god ( which must therefore exist) is assuming just what is in dispute. That is, it begs the question.
But if we use the word in a weaker sense ( with no implication about the existence of what is said to be experienced), then saying that people have experience of a god doesn't help you. It comes down to saying that they believe in their god. If it were a ground for sharing their belief, some odd consequences would follow. For example, the fact that some people with the DTs experience pink elephants would give us reason to believe in pink elephants. :)
It may not be scientific evidence, but its something.
Well, I'm pretty sure they're twaddle because for centuries those who believe in these things have been touting what they regard as evidence , and none of it has stood up to scrutiny. Of course, I'll reconsider if any evidence turns up that can withstand scrutiny.
As for the the suggestion that it's something: what exactly? Anecdote, appeal to popularity, appeal to antiquity?
Practitioners of such things would dissagree.
It is evidence beyond simple annecdote. It is annecdote repeated and confirmed countless times until it is worth more.
:) I'd be astonished if they didn't disagree. What of it, if they don't produce decent evidence?Practitioners of such things would dissagree.
It is evidence beyond simple annecdote. It is annecdote repeated and confirmed countless times until it is worth more.
As for the point about anecdotes, it won't do, or even begin to do. Repetition of anecdotes is worth no more than repetition of baseless rumour. Nothing multiplied by umpteen is still nothing. Confirmed anecdotes sound interesting. Are they the sort of anecdotes that are confirmed by evidence?
Hrmmph! I've just noticed that in post 9 I wrote about personal experience in reply to Psyspi's point about personal evidence. It doesn't make much difference to the criticism I made, but it was an oversight on my part.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks