Proof / disproof

[chatfsh]

It seems clear to me that whether you

[Kokiri-Mentat]

Yup that's the sight for the 10 dimensions. here it is again.

http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks.php

I especially like the sound effects they added. Nice and crisp.

Wow, even I remember that thread Edrico. That was when I was just begining to lurk and hadn't even bothered to write more than 3 posts yet.  Spazelord, lol.  Haven't seen Dante reply that much to anyone since I've been on.

Anyway, about what edrico is saying.......God would not be able to "prove" himself to you unless you were a being capable of processing infinite data.  Seeing as that is probably not the case among this crowd (no offense  ;)), probably everyone here who claims to be of a religious creed does so under the banner of faith. Otherwise I would be very curious to hear your story.

However Edrico, I think you don't give the big guy enough credit.  If God is God, then the fact that we are human should not hinder him from revealing himself to us beyond doubt.  Your referenced post deals with the human condition as it currently stands.  If God is God then he could change the human condition at whim so that your previous post scenario would no longer be relevant.  I'm not saying that God should be able to make a triangle with 4 corners, I'm just saying that God should be able to make a triangle out of a square, which I think is feasible.  (besides if he did the former he would be contradicting his own rules of Geometric logic and would thus disappear in puff of logic)

Well, anyway it's too easy to argue divine intervention on everything so I'll just leave it at that, because that's all I'm really doing.

[Edric O]

Edric, I'm going to try to keep from Dawkinsing out on you, but...this is exactly what I find so frustrating about discussions about the existence of god.

Why is it at all important to have evidence for the existence of God?

I just find it ridiculous to posit the existence of a being and then define it as completely 100% unprovable. But then maybe that's why I am what I am.

It's not so much the existence of God that is unprovable, but rather the identity of God. In other words, if a powerful being claimed to be God, you could not tell if it was telling the truth or lying. God can prove that He exists, but He cannot prove that He is, in fact, God.

There are a few attributes of God that make Him by definition unable to prove His own identity, yet it is not at all unreasonable to postulate the existence of a being with these attributes. It's not even necessary to talk about omnipotence or anything like that; we can just look at more simple things like creating the universe or serving as the inspiration for the Bible.

If the universe had a creator, how could this creator prove to you that he did, in fact, create the universe? I can think of no possible way. Likewise, suppose someone claimed to be the author of the Bible or the inspiration behind it. Given that we lack the original manuscripts of the books of the Bible, he could never prove his claim. Or suppose someone claimed to be Jesus Christ. How could you scientifically determine whether this was true?

It is not at all unreasonable to say that someone wrote a book of the Bible - Genesis for example. Yet the identity of the author of Genesis is 100% unprovable. Does that mean he never existed?

[chatfsh]

According to bible lore, 10 miraculous plagues were performed for the benefit of the ruling Pharaoh during the period in which the Hebrews were in bondage under the Egyptian yolk.  Yeah

[Dragoon Knight]

While I accept your argument, Edric O, that real sceptics would be able to explain away any miracle that God used to try and convince us of his existence - and I also agree that we would not be able to distinguish God from a technologically-advanced alien species - I think that the majority of people would find it easier to believe in God should such "proof" be made real.  I know I would believe in God if I could see him in action - a miracle would be enough to convince a lot of people.

Your statement that there are some people who would refute God's existence is missing the point, you see.  People still dispute that the Earth is round.  Having evidence to the contrary is enough to convince most people.  An all-powerful God managed to convince a hell of a lot of people in the Bible that he existed, so there must be a way for him to convince us that he created the universe.

And Jesus could get DNA testing.  :P

[Dude_Doc]

Well, the universe is huge, and to think that things on earth are the only living things in the universe is arrogant... well sort of.

But, we have no proof, so what is so wrong with thinking that we are the only ones?

Imagine that there are only a couple of planets in the whole universe that supports life. Imagine also that those planets are so far appart, that whatever technological level we come to, we can simply never reach those planets (nor can the aliens reach us, or even know we exist).

My meaning here is that we can never determine that there is or isn't life out there just because we haven't encountered any yet. Unless, of course, we know everything there is to know about life, how it is created, how it works etc.

I know I would believe in God if I could see him in action ...

But would you still believe that miracle 10 years into the future? Would your children believe in what you experienced? And for that matter, how do you know miracles didn't happen as described in the Bible?

[Dragoon Knight]

But would you still believe that miracle 10 years into the future? Would your children believe in what you experienced? And for that matter, how do you know miracles didn't happen as described in the Bible?

Yes, I would.  Because we now have the means to document, record and verify such things happening.  Miracles might have happened as the Bible says, but we didn't have the technology 2000 years ago to add proof to the arguments.

[nemafakei]

"The God of the Bible seems to be exceptionally fond of testing people"

A slightly different kind of testing, but I was trying to say that it is inconsistent for god to expect belief in the unproven and obedience in the face of reason, while threatening vengeance in return for disobeying orders that are never clearly received. Unless we reject the 'God is good' tenet which also underpins the abrahamic religions.

And, correct me if I'm wrong, but the god of the Bible did manifest himself and otherwise make it quite clear that he existed on a number of occasions - your argument that he is inherently unable to do that contradicts the Bible.

"You either believe it with every ounce of your being or you don

[chatfsh]

Fair enough, Nema.  But just out of curiosity

[nemafakei]

"as a result of all of these discussions on religion and God in PRP, has a single forum member changed their opinion on the subject?  Even slightly?"

There are forum members whose religious views have wandered over the years - it's unclear what role discussions on Fed2k had to play in that. I think it's also important to view things not just in terms of the 'Is there a god' question, but in terms of the 'what do we do about it'. Furthermore, even if this thread changes no-one's stance on that particular question, people reading this thread might learn a lot about (for example) the principle of falsifiability.

[gunner154]

You can say that monkeys exist on Neptune when you find a monkey on Neptune, but if you haven't found any monkey on Neptune, you can't say that monkeys absolutely do not exist on Neptune. You can only say for sure that monkeys probably don't exist on Neptune.

Even if you were to find monkeys on Neptune, you might prefer to think it as some other type of organism that resembles and behaves like a monkey, but yet not a monkey.

[Andrew]

Even if you were to find monkeys on Neptune, you might prefer to think it as some other type of organism that resembles and behaves like a monkey, but yet not a monkey.

WRONG.

I read a book that was written 2000 years ago, and inspired by a monkey god that states that there are monkeys on Neptune. Therefore there are monkeys on Neptune because a book says so. And because this book was inspired by monkey god (it says so in the book!), it is infallible.

Havn't you heard of circular reasoning? It has to be correct! circular reasoning

[gunner154]

Nobody said the book would prove that monkeys exist on Neptune. Perhsps it only proves some signs of monkeys existing on Neptune. If the book were to simply say that monkeys do exist on Neptune (and leave it at that), it would indeed be circular reasoning.

[Wolf]

I want to speak to Nema's point up above: no one should be entering any of these discussions with the intent of "converting," or "changing" peoples' beliefs. As a result of these discussions, that may indeed happen -- if only slightly -- but it would be unreasonable for you to expect that a few dozen forum posts are going to fundamentally alter the way someone approaches life. It's just ridiculous. You should be walking into these discussions with the hope that your unique point of view might make others consider something they never had before, and leave it at that. That way, we all benefit from an exchange of information, rather than a series of escalating temper tantrums. Not that anyone here has done that, of course. I was just saying.

Now, to address the problem of monkeys on Neptune... there are no monkeys on Neptune. Is there life elsewhere in the universe? Of course. Is there life like us? Prolly not. For a variety of reasons. If you have the time, check this out;

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3aa.html

But the part of that I find most convincing is this:

"Sir Arthur C. Clarke made a famous observation about space explorers discovering aliens. If one considers the millions of years of pre-history, and the rapid technological advancement occurring now, if you apply that to a hypothetical alien race, one can figure the probabilities of how advanced the explorers will find them. The conclusion is "we will find apes or angels, but not men."

Why? Consider the history of Planet Earth. Let the height of the Empire State building represent the 5 billion year life of Terra. The height of a one-foot ruler perched on top would represent the million years of Man's existence. The thickness of a dime will represent the ten thousand years of Man's civilization. And the thickness of a postage stamp will represent the 300 years of Man's technological civilization. An unknown portion above represents "pre-Singularity Man", the period up to the point where mankind hits the Singularity/evolves into a higher form/turns into angels. Say another dime. Above that would be another Empire State building, representing the latter 5 billion years of Terra's lifespan."

You gotta think rationally. The chances of us finding another species at our exact level of development are slim to none. And just the smallest error on the above example, say, you hit an inch away from the postage stamp, translates into tens of thousands of years of technological difference. We'd be lucky if our spaceships found a planet with Medieval knights on horseback.

[Warskum]

Why do people believe what they believe?

I think thats an important thing to look at.

I will use my story to illustrate my point.

I am an Armenian, and since we accepted Christianity in 301 we are the first Christian country.

Being raised with this background I always called myself a Christian and actually thought I was one.

So I believed that God existed because I was raised like that. Would I have been born in an Islamitic family or an Atheist one, I probably would have believed whatever I was thaught.

Now about 1 year ago God entered my life. I don't want to go into details, but lets say I now have proof that Jesus is God and that He exists.

This is not based on my background, since I can now say, I wasnt a Christian before. It is based on facts and proof, proof one cannot deny if it would happen to anyone. Its not a one time miracle thing either, I have proof of Gods existince everyday in my life.

One thing has to be realised, God says He is a living God and not dead unlike the gods of other religions, this means one can interact with God.

People ussualy think of faith as thinking that something/someone exists based on no clear proof.

Look at what the bible says: Hebrew11: 1Now faith is the substance (assurance) of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

So Gods word says that in order to have faith one has to have assurance and proof. God is willing to give this proof to anyone that looks for Him.

I don't want anyone to believe based on my story, what I actually would like to ask every non believer and believers with no proof, to pray to God for a week or two and ask Him to show you His true way, that is how it more or less started with me. God will then Himself give you proof of his existence.

Edric, God can do everything. He can even show that He is God, or make a square circle etc.. What you are trying is to use the inferior human brain to argue things that the human brain is uncabapable of understanding. Since you are a Christian I assume you have read the bible, if you take a look at 1 Corinthians 1 and 2, you will see how God views people trying to understand his ways and his power.

Final note:

In order to believe you need to have proof.

If you believe God does not exist you need proof too.

Just try and pray for a week orso and convince yourself.

[Megashrap]

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3aa.html

You gotta think rationally. The chances of us finding another species at our exact level of development are slim to none. And just the smallest error on the above example, say, you hit an inch away from the postage stamp, translates into tens of thousands of years of technological difference. We'd be lucky if our spaceships found a planet with Medieval knights on horseback.

For the life of me I cannot remember the name of the television show I watched on this very thing last week. I think it was Nova or the Discovery channel.It also had several mathematical probabilities in the show that ended up calculating something like a few trillion to one chance that man might travel to distant planets and find a common house fly or an ant or something similar.It was an interesting show.

@ Warskum

Can you elaborate a bit more on the proof part of your story? The details I can live without. I'm not asking  because I want to debunk your story in any way,just curious as to what you consider solid proof. And i'm sure i'm not the only one wanting to hear it.

[Kokiri-Mentat]

Anyway, about what edrico is saying.......God would not be able to "prove" himself to you unless you were a being capable of processing infinite data.  Seeing as that is probably not the case among this crowd (no offense  ;)), probably everyone here who claims to be of a religious creed does so under the banner of faith. Otherwise I would be very curious to hear your story.

wow, someone not previously involved actually read through the whole thread and made a thorough, sincere response. and on the PRP board, no less.  Thank you for your post Warskum.

It's not so much the existence of God that is unprovable, but rather the identity of God. In other words, if a powerful being claimed to be God, you could not tell if it was telling the truth or lying. God can prove that He exists, but He cannot prove that He is, in fact, God.

However Edrico, I think you don't give the big guy enough credit.  If God is God, then the fact that we are human should not hinder him from revealing himself to us beyond doubt.  Your referenced post deals with the human condition as it currently stands.  If God is God then he could change the human condition at whim so that your previous post scenario would no longer be relevant.  I'm not saying that God should be able to make a triangle with 4 corners, I'm just saying that God should be able to make a triangle out of a square, which I think is feasible.

Edric, God can do everything. He can even show that He is God, or make a square circle etc.. What you are trying is to use the inferior human brain to argue things that the human brain is uncabapable of understanding.

Just making it easier to catch up to speed on where we are in the discussion. thanks.

[Acriku]

In order to believe you need to have proof.

If you believe God does not exist you need proof too.

Just try and pray for a week orso and convince yourself.

I honestly think that "believing God does not exist" and "not believing God exists" are two entirely different views that can occupy a man simultaneously or singularly (in the case that a man just simply does not believe in God, as he may not believe in Zeus or Krishna). A lot of people use both views as one, and it really should be differentiated.

Edric:

It is not at all unreasonable to say that someone wrote a book of the Bible - Genesis for example. Yet the identity of the author of Genesis is 100% unprovable. Does that mean he never existed?

The many authors, translators, editors and molesters of the Bible surely existed at one time, but like you say the identity of those authors (like the identity of God) is impossible to prove. However, in that case we have a clear result of those authors' work. In the case of the universe, it is not clear that it was created by a being(s). Of course, I'm up for discussing Intelligent Design any day of the week.

[Wolf]

Speaking of intelligent design, Ben Stein is supposed to have an extremely interesting documentary coming out soon. I need to do some more research and, for one thing, find out the title, my apologies, but the previews looked very good.

Now about this God business... I agree with Edric that God's identity is the chief problem. Ultimately, that's what most of the human population is really concerned about. God's identity is what confirms or denies their worldview, it's what gives them codes for behavior, and allows them to do with moral certainty the good and bad things that they wish to do. The debates surrounding the specific identity of God are related to things such as, the reformation (the Lutheran belief that God's grace alone shall save you vs. the Catholic tradition of good works shall save you), is one example, among others. If you really think about it, most debates within religions and between religious people are about the identity of God -- they all assume the existence to be self-evident, and therefore are unconcerned with this question. (The funny part is, they're unconcerned with it to such an extent that even if God didn't exist, they wouldn't know and it wouldn't matter.)

But what about God's existence? What about plausible thoughts on the literal what question concerning God. Really, what is God? Does a physical structure exist that could possibly maintain the consciousness described to us in scripture and imagined by religious believers? Is consciousness, in nature, or as a result of supremely advanced civilizations, relegated to our organic bodies, or can it arise from another system? I'm leaning on the side that it is indeed possible. Remember the "apes or angels" comment (see, it did relate to the topic at hand!) -- what if a civilization of angels progressed yet further, into a civilization of gods, and then what...?

[Dude_Doc]

Yes, I would.  Because we now have the means to document, record and verify such things happening.

That is assuming that the miracle can be captured on video, or audio, or can be researched on.

Miracles might have happened as the Bible says, but we didn't have the technology 2000 years ago to add proof to the arguments.

But it seemed true enough for many people to believe it, even base entire empires on.

Really, what is God? Does a physical structure exist that could possibly maintain the consciousness described to us in scripture and imagined by religious believers?

You heretic! :D

Really, I don't think there can be any physical structure that could maintain such an intelligence. I remember the BBC documentary "Parallel Universes", where they mostly talk about dimensions etc. I believe that someone in that documentary mentioned something about how gravity "leaks" into our universe. Anyway, everything is made up by a huge membrane of strings. Maybe the cosciousness in question is something similar as that?

[gunner154]

Now, to address the problem of monkeys on Neptune... there are no monkeys on Neptune. Is there life elsewhere in the universe? Of course. Is there life like us? Prolly not.

Err... Monkeys on Neptune was an analogy. Probably a bad analogy in this case since the topic of lifeforms on other planets has popped up on this thread.

I honestly think that "believing God does not exist" and "not believing God exists" are two entirely different views that can occupy a man simultaneously or singularly (in the case that a man just simply does not believe in God, as he may not believe in Zeus or Krishna). A lot of people use both views as one, and it really should be differentiated.

Good observation. Proving that God does not exist seems rather impossible, I'd say. Not believing that he exists would be the more rational atheist stand, I think.

[Warskum]

Acriku, if God exists then so does hell and heaven and thus eternal life or eternal death.

This seems quite serious to me and would seem quite logical to try to atleast find out whether God exists or not.

For example if quite some people say eating an food X is lethal. Wouldn't it be wise for both those that believe and don't believe to try to find evidence supporting them since this is a matter of life and death?

The reason why I don't want to go into detail is the following...

I don't want anyone to believe based on what a human says, but based on what God says and does.

Therefore I will post a few qoutes from the bible below, with no interpretation from me.

I would like to ask everyone to read the qoutes and then summarize in a few sentences what they think the qoutes say.

In my opinion the qoutes are very clear, but the problem is that most people who call themselves Christians wouldn't be able to explain them to you. After a while I will post the interpretation, not based on my idea's or whatever, but on what I see everyday, which is one of my evidences of Gods existence.

QOUTES:

Mathew 3:

11"I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. 12His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire."

-----

John 14:

15"If you love me, you will obey what I command. 16And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever

[Dude_Doc]

Acriku, if God exists then so does hell and heaven and thus eternal life or eternal death.

Yes, if the Christian God exists. 

This seems quite serious to me and would seem quite logical to try to atleast find out whether God exists or not.

Which seems quite impossible. The only way to find out is through faith.

For example if quite some people say eating an food X is lethal. Wouldn't it be wise for both those that believe and don't believe to try to find evidence supporting them since this is a matter of life and death?

Except that the food in question can be found (since it can be eaten), identified and warning signs and such can be set up to warn people of the food. It can be taken into a lab, and we can find out what makes the food dangerous.

But how can you do that with something supernatural? It defies every mathematical formula, physics, biology, chemistry. I mean, what are angels made of? Building upon that, say the angel told us that it was made of some sort of supernatural fabric, something that is not part of this universe. If it isn't then we can't research it. We would have to trust the angel and what it told us. And how would we know the angel is telling us the truth? Through faith.

So, in short, we can't really find proof. It has to be through faith.

[Warskum]

Yes, if the Christian God exists. 

Which seems quite impossible. The only way to find out is through faith.

Except that the food in question can be found (since it can be eaten), identified and warning signs and such can be set up to warn people of the food. It can be taken into a lab, and we can find out what makes the food dangerous.

But how can you do that with something supernatural? It defies every mathematical formula, physics, biology, chemistry. I mean, what are angels made of? Building upon that, say the angel told us that it was made of some sort of supernatural fabric, something that is not part of this universe. If it isn't then we can't research it. We would have to trust the angel and what it told us. And how would we know the angel is telling us the truth? Through faith.

So, in short, we can't really find proof. It has to be through faith.

If you read my 1st post you will find the answers to your post.

God is not dead but alive. God's own word says that in order to believe one needs proof and assurance.

So in short, since we are dealing with a living God, interaction is possible and getting proof and assurance is possible and actually God is more then willing to do this to save people. Jesus clearly says somewhere that if people don't see signs they will not believe.

I would like to ask you to read my 2nd posts with the qoutes from the bible and post what you think the qoutes say.

Because the qoutes contain evidence of the Christian God's existence

[Dude_Doc]

So in short, since we are dealing with a living God, interaction is possible and getting proof and assurance is possible and actually God is more then willing to do this to save people. Jesus clearly says somewhere that if people don't see signs they will not believe.

So, how does that apply to atheists? To an atheist, all religions have the same value. And, as Edric said in another thread, why would atheists (and for that matter people of other religions) believe that this is the Christian miracle? Why couldn't this be aliens, with very advanced technology, posing as angels?

I mean that you would still have to have a reason to associate this to the Christian belief.

I would like to ask you to read my 2nd posts with the qoutes from the bible and post what you think the qoutes say.

Because the qoutes contain evidence of the Christian God's existence.

I don't know, it appeals to a Christian, but otherwise you would have to believe in the Bible to make those quotes true. I mean, Islam is the fastest growing religion - logically, that could be seen as proof that Islam is the true religion, right?