The God or Not God Discussion

[bippy123]

Yes I would agree. I suspect most people who say they are atheists actually are technically very convinced agnostics. They don't believe in any gods like they don't believe in the tooth fairy. There's no evidence to suggest any gods exist, so there's really no reason to believe they exist. Just like the tooth fairy.

That is an opinion . Now let me ask why why are there very rational people that also believe that there is evidence of God's existence .

Are they delusional and if you believe that they are can you prove it ?

 

I happen to see lots of evidence for God's existence .why is it that we are probably looking at the same evidence. And coming to different conclusions ?

Are are we really looking at the same evidences?

 

I remember having this conversation before with an atheist not about God but about remote viewing of all things .he said there was no evidence for remote viewing just as there is no evidence for tooth fairies .

 

Not long ago our government spent 20 million dollars to do a remote viewing study and it was called (if my faulty memory serves me correctly ) operation stargate , and at the end of that 5 year 20 million dollar study, they hired an independent scientist statistician who concluded that by any normal means if science remote viewing has been proven scientifically .

 

Then all of a sudden the government pulled the plug on the study

The atheist used this as an excuse to say ""see I told you there was no evidence of remote viewing ""

 

I chuckled and just nodded yea lol

 

This is an emotional response and not a response based on logic

[LookAtThisPOst]

I've had several terrible things happen to me and when I was younger, I often prayed for an end or help or anything... and there was never any help from anyone. That solidified it for me - to me, if god existed, there would be no way innocent children would be treated the way they are treated every day.

 

Thing is, this is pretty much a lot of atheist go the way of being an atheist...something bad happens to them, and it's "How could God possibly allow this to happen?"

 

There's something to be said about the 9/11 disaster. Some have thought the same thing, however, this event did bring people together as well and even strengthened their faith.

 

The thing about faith is to accept the fact that one should be able to be resilient in times of disaster, not expect to be "protected" from such things.

 

Also, I can't fathom that there's complete "nothingness" after death as if we were nothing just like that rock or some inanimate object sitting on the ground (worm food) when we die. The idea of it ONLY being "lights out" after death is something I cannot comprehend believing.

[LookAtThisPOst]

Also, I am noticing a movement of sorts of atheists foolishly demanding pre-existing structures or monuments to be removed from a municipal area. Why the eagerness to have these things removed? Why all of a sudden is this a problem with atheists?

[LookAtThisPOst]

I believe there is no God. I believe the afterlife is the exact same feeling as the time before you were born.

 

I had no feeling during the time before I was born, unless that's what your driving....the oblivion? I response to those who beleive in the Big Bang Theory, since some believe in science is that "God said Bang!!"

[Weezy1973]

Then tell me what have you learned logically and rationally from the peer reviewed nde literature and the nde scientists that have done these studies ?

 

That more research should be done. It's interesting research for sure. There are a number of limitations in the research of course (just like any research), and because of those limits I don't think a definite conclusion can be drawn at the moment - but more research would definitely be beneficial. The two things I personally noted were that clinical death (i.e. the heart stopping) does not mean brain death, and lack of measurable brain activity does not mean the brain is not active. It just means we may not have the tools to measure it.

 

 

 

Also are you an avid faith based believer in the worldview of scientism ? Namely that only science can be used to acquire knowledge?

 

No. As stated before logic, reason, and evidence shape my beliefs. That being said, the scientific method does seem to have delivered mankind more knowledge about our universe than any other method. But it certainly isn't the only method of knowledge acquisition - just to date seems to be the most successful.

 

If not then are you uncertain and open minded enough to consider other views ?

 

Of course!! Especially if they're logical and rational and supported by evidence....

[Weezy1973]

That is an opinion . Now let me ask why why are there very rational people that also believe that there is evidence of God's existence.

 

Considering just about every human that currently exists and has ever existed has been religious, it stands to reason that a certain percentage of these have been very rational. Although the non believers are certainly a quickly growing demographic, they are are still vastly outnumbered by believers and the growth has really only become significant over the last few decades.

 

But I'd also say that, as far as I know, most people that believe in a god or gods, don't actually believe there is any evidence to support that belief. They believe based on faith or because they've personally had an experience or experiences that made them believe. Of course, that's not evidence.

 

Are they delusional and if you believe that they are can you prove it?

 

I hate the term delusional because it implies mental illness. I don't think children that believe in Santa Claus are delusional either. I think that for some people, based on their lives, how they were raised, the culture that happened to be born into, etc, it likely only makes sense for them to believe in a god or subscribe to a certain religion. Still doesn't mean it's true.

 

I happen to see lots of evidence for God's existence .why is it that we are probably looking at the same evidence. And coming to different conclusions?

 

Are are we really looking at the same evidences?

 

How we interpret the evidence is going to be different based on those factors I just mentioned. If you were born into a predominantly Christian country, to Christian parents, and have gone to a Christian church your whole life, chances are that you'll filter the evidence through your Christian beliefs. Nobody is objective. Most people never question their own beliefs. You can change the word Christian with the word Muslim and the interpretation of the same evidence would be different.

 

If Islam is true, Christianity can't be. If Christianity is true, Islam can't be. The reason somebody is a Muslim rather than a Christian (or vice versa) has nothing to do with the truth, and everything to do with (for the most part) what country and what family that individual happened to be born into.

 

 

Not long ago our government spent 20 million dollars to do a remote viewing study and it was called (if my faulty memory serves me correctly ) operation stargate , and at the end of that 5 year 20 million dollar study, they hired an independent scientist statistician who concluded that by any normal means if science remote viewing has been proven scientifically .

 

Then all of a sudden the government pulled the plug on the study

The atheist used this as an excuse to say ""see I told you there was no evidence of remote viewing ""

 

I chuckled and just nodded yea lol

 

This is an emotional response and not a response based on logic

 

 

The bold in the above quote would make me very leery. Scientists should never use the term proven about anything. There's either evidence to support or evidence that refutes or evidence that's non conclusive. Nothing is ever proven.

[bippy123]

"

"That more research should be done. It's interesting research for sure. There are a number of limitations in the research of course (just like any research), and because of those limits I don't think a definite conclusion can be drawn at the moment - but more research would definitely be beneficial. The two things I personally noted were that clinical death (i.e. the heart stopping) does not mean brain death, and lack of measurable brain activity does not mean the brain is not active. It just means we may not have the tools to measure it. ""

 

I totally agree that more research should be done , but I totally disagree in that the evidence so far points to a non brain non material explanation. The evidence so far points compellingly in that direction. Actually the 2 things noted is that clinical death is starting to be called actual death as the agnostic nde researcher doctor sam parnia is starting to call them or ADE's. Your right that in some cases just be use there is cardiac arrest it doesn't mean that there isn't some deep activity , and this was noted by a study done by neuroscientists which did actually capture a deep brain surge after cardiac arrest in mice that last about 30 seconds or so caught by deep brain electrodes. The problem here is that this deep brain surge can't explain the veridical Nde's .

 

The other problem with the deep brain surge in rats is that none of the rats that were given anesthesia experienced a deep brain surge at all. The brain was non functional , plus it can't as I have already stated explain veridical Nde's as well as peak in Darien Nde's .

 

What you need to do is listen to the nde researchers themselves on skeptiko when they were interviewed . Even if there is some small amount of brain activity it can't explain these types of Nde's . So the research inconclusive as you have stated. The evidence points in the direction of the soul and afterlife . More research is needed of course , but the reason it's needed is to further explain how the mind survives physical death , not if it does . All the evidence so far says it does .

 

 

"

"""No. As stated before logic, reason, and evidence shape my beliefs. That being said, the scientific method does seem to have delivered mankind more knowledge about our universe than any other method. But it certainly isn't the only method of knowledge acquisition - just to date seems to be the most successful. """

 

It is one tool for studying the material world. No one is doubting that it isn't successful but it certainly has its limits . Nde's are starting to show that science as it's being defined today by methodological naturalism is woefully inadequate in understanding this experience .

 

I prefer the definition of science as used by the ancient Greeks which is less restrictive which means to acquire knowledge .

 

""Of course!! Especially if they're logical and rational and supported by evidence....""

 

Good then I'm expecting u to shift your thinking when you research Nde's more deeply as the evidence points towards the soul and the afterlife .

Just as former atheists and nde experts doctor Pim van Lommel and doctor jeffrey long have done . Both were atheists before their nde research and both converted away from atheism after.

 

In fact I doubt u can find one nde resets her today that is still an atheist after conducting their nde research.

 

Doctor parnia is the best one out there but he's an agnostic not an atheist and even he is starting to come to the side of survival after death .

 

I would also look at peak in Darien Nde's because in this kind if nde people are bringing back information from the afterlife which they couldn't have possibly have known otherwise .

 

Weezy, like I said the skeptiko forum and the interviews done by alex tsakiris would be the best place to start .

 

Tsakiris claims (and I tend to agree with him here ) that there doesn't need to be much faith needed to believe in the afterlife as science itself is pointing towards it .

 

Please if you can give me a brain based explanation for Nde's , such as Veridcal ones and the peak in Darien Nde's , such as the one experienced by doctor eben Alexander . I have studied this from the skeptic side and from the proponents side and it seems like it's the atheists who need to resort to emotions to explain this away in a naturalistic way .

[bippy123]

Thing is, this is pretty much a lot of atheist go the way of being an atheist...something bad happens to them, and it's "How could God possibly allow this to happen?"

 

There's something to be said about the 9/11 disaster. Some have thought the same thing, however, this event did bring people together as well and even strengthened their faith.

 

The thing about faith is to accept the fact that one should be able to be resilient in times of disaster, not expect to be "protected" from such things.

 

Also, I can't fathom that there's complete "nothingness" after death as if we were nothing just like that rock or some inanimate object sitting on the ground (worm food) when we die. The idea of it ONLY being "lights out" after death is something I cannot comprehend believing.

 

Correct and that is why I totally believe that most atheists are driven by emotion and not logic . Weezy had to tread lightly when I brought up Nde's be usse I think he or she understood the reason why I brought them up

 

I've had this conversation on many fronts , when it comes to the origin of life , evolution (I was an evolutionist for 41 years before changing my mind based in the evidence and not my theological beliefs as being a Catholic allows me to believe in evolution if I feel the evidence is strong enough), Nde's, remote viewing etc.

[jay1983]

I brought that up on the other thread. There's a big correlation between athiesim and depression and anger as well skin color. They try and chalk it up to education, but that's a copout.

[bippy123]

I brought that up on the other thread. There's a big correlation between athiesim and depression and anger as well skin color. They try and chalk it up to education, but that's a copout.

Yes. I know of one atheist who went to a fire and brimestone church and was made so fearful of hell by his pastor that he left the church and became an atheist . Thankfully he is now an agnostic with a Christian girlfriend

 

I know of another atheist whose dad was too strict in his religious upbringing . This is what the bible calls knowing the letter of the law without practicing the heart of the law which is love .

 

But I have also seen Christians with some doubt being bullied by groups of atheists who left their faith because of the pressure from this ridiculing . I've seen a lot during my almost 48 years on this earth.

 

Agape love is the answer

[whirl3daway]

Yes. I know of one atheist who went to a fire and brimestone church and was made so fearful of hell by his pastor that he left the church and became an atheist . Thankfully he is now an agnostic with a Christian girlfriend

 

thankfully???

[Weezy1973]

I totally agree that more research should be done , but I totally disagree in that the evidence so far points to a non brain non material explanation. The evidence so far points compellingly in that direction.

 

I feel the limits on the research make it largely inconclusive. Certainly not compelling. But it does do what research often does; it leads to more questions - which is always a good thing.

 

Actually the 2 things noted is that clinical death is starting to be called actual death as the agnostic nde researcher doctor sam parnia is starting to call them or ADE's.

 

Well this is one of the questions raised; at what point physiologically do we die. I don't think we can just make up definitions. For me, I would say that we are dead once we are past the point where we can no longer be brought "back to life" so to speak. Which would emphasize the "near" in near death experience. It might suggest that we were never actually dead, so whatever experience we had should not be confused with what one might experience (if anything) once they're actually dead.

 

 

 

Good then I'm expecting u to shift your thinking when you research Nde's more deeply as the evidence points towards the soul and the afterlife.

 

First, the study of consciousness and/or mind/body is not limited to research done on near death experiences. If there is to be a comprehensive scientific theory on consciousness it has to be inclusive of all research in the area. As far as I can tell, most researchers in the area still favour a purely materialistic view. Even with NDEs there is no consensus. But again, NDE research is only one piece of the puzzle and we should never base our opinions on one small part of the research. The more data we have to form our belief, the better.

 

Just as former atheists and nde experts doctor Pim van Lommel and doctor jeffrey long have done . Both were atheists before their nde research and both converted away from atheism after.

 

In fact I doubt u can find one nde resets her today that is still an atheist after conducting their nde research.

 

 

Please if you can give me a brain based explanation for Nde's , such as Veridcal ones and the peak in Darien Nde's , such as the one experienced by doctor eben Alexander . I have studied this from the skeptic side and from the proponents side and it seems like it's the atheists who need to resort to emotions to explain this away in a naturalistic way .

 

First, as I stated earlier, the research on NDEs is quite limited - as in you can't draw a lot of conclusions from it. I'm not sure if your biases make you blind to the limits. That being said, I acknowledge that it does raise a number of very good questions. And I'm very open to the possibility that the mind and the brain are two separate entities. To date, the evidence I've seen, including the research on NDEs, does not convince me, and it seemingly does not yet convince the majority of scientists who work in the field. Not to say it won't at some point - but it doesn't yet.

[Rejected Rosebud]

I believe in God deeply but I can't align myself with people or groups who are focussed on all the stuff that they think God hates like gay people or the President or democrats or whatever so sometimes I guess I come off as a nonbeliever to those types.

[autumnnight]

I would think the most rational answer to the question of whether or not there is a god - IF we are going by the purely scientific method (I mean the actual scientific methodology, not "science" as a topic) - would be "we don't know."

 

Faith is what causes a believer to believe with everything in them that there is a God. And. as Hebrews clearly states, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." That is why it is called faith.

 

However, as for the absence of a god, no one can definitively say one way or the other.

 

So while it is not necessarily "scientific" to believe there is a god, it is absolutely unscientific to act as if one knows with complete certainty that there is no god.

 

Bottom line, no one on this thread or anywhere else knows for sure.

[Rejected Rosebud]

Also, I am noticing a movement of sorts of atheists foolishly demanding pre-existing structures or monuments to be removed from a municipal area. Why the eagerness to have these things removed? Why all of a sudden is this a problem with atheists?

I'm pretty sure this has nothing to do with the atheists, it's more like people are against non-Christians being marginalized by Christian iconography in public places, even though our country was founded on christian principals it is NOT a

Christian Country it is supposed to be welcoming to people of all different faiths!!

[Brigit]

I brought that up on the other thread. There's a big correlation between athiesim and depression and anger as well skin color. They try and chalk it up to education, but that's a copout.

 

Feeling that there isn't a God, someone who loves you unconditionally and will provide you with a safe haven once you leave earth is scary and can lead to feelings of loneliness and isolation. God is like the ultimate parent who will love and take care of you no matter what. My father didn't love me or take care of me so it's hard for me to believe there's a God. I've tried to believe but the Bible doesn't seem right to me. I've listened to a lot of Dharma talks. I don't think of myself as a Buddhist but listening to the monks seems to help calm me down. Right now, I'll go wherever there is comfort and peace. If however, I was told I only had five minutes to live I'd pray to God. Why chance it?

[autumnnight]

I'm pretty sure this has nothing to do with the atheists, it's more like people are against non-Christians being marginalized by Christian iconography in public places, even though our country was founded on christian principals it is NOT a

Christian Country it is supposed to be welcoming to people of all different faiths!!

 

Exactly how does a statue of a football player with a verse about doing your best under it that has been there for decades "marginalize" a non-Christian?

 

That is just BS

[jay1983]

I believe in God deeply but I can't align myself with people or groups who are focussed on all the stuff that they think God hates like gay people or the President or democrats or whatever so sometimes I guess I come off as a nonbeliever to those types.

 

I strongly believe that being gay is not a choice. What's a person to do if they are only attracted to their same sex?

[bippy123]

thankfully???

Thankfully he's not an atheist anymore and he's more of a seeker of truth now.

[Weezy1973]

I would think the most rational answer to the question of whether or not there is a god - IF we are going by the purely scientific method (I mean the actual scientific methodology, not "science" as a topic) - would be "we don't know."

 

I totally agree - I actually don't know of any atheists who actually exclude the possibility that any gods exist. For the most part they don't believe in any gods like they don't believe in the tooth fairy. And that's a rational position. If evidence came available that the tooth fairy actually existed, then they would believe in the tooth fairy, but until then - they're non-believers. That seems very rational to me.

 

Faith is what causes a believer to believe with everything in them that there is a God. And. as Hebrews clearly states, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." That is why it is called faith.

 

And faith is also what causes people to fly airplanes into buildings. And if those people are right, then they are certainly justified in their actions. But, if all you are using is faith (i.e. rather than reason, logic, and evidence) then who are we to judge? What one person believes can't be any more right or wrong than anybody else. Flying airplanes into buildings is perfectly justified if it's based on faith. Right? Or is faith only okay if it's the same thing you believe?

 

However, as for the absence of a god, no one can definitively say one way or the other.

 

So while it is not necessarily "scientific" to believe there is a god, it is absolutely unscientific to act as if one knows with complete certainty that there is no god.

 

Bottom line, no one on this thread or anywhere else knows for sure.

 

Exactly right. That's why I'd never advocate atheism. It's also why I argue for reason, logic, and evidence being the basis of one's belief.

[Rejected Rosebud]

Exactly how does a statue of a football player with a verse about doing your best under it that has been there for decades "marginalize" a non-Christian?

 

That is just BS

I didn't say it does, but I think that is the thinking behind this removing of christian statues, prayer in school etc. I don't think that it's because of atheists.

[autumnnight]

And faith is also what causes people to fly airplanes into buildings. And if those people are right, then they are certainly justified in their actions. But, if all you are using is faith (i.e. rather than reason, logic, and evidence) then who are we to judge? What one person believes can't be any more right or wrong than anybody else. Flying airplanes into buildings is perfectly justified if it's based on faith. Right? Or is faith only okay if it's the same thing you believe?

 

This just gets on my nerves. This is getting to the point of people bringing Hitler into a debate. 99% of people who have faith would never fly a plane into a building. This is at the very least a red herring and at the most just plain offensive.

[Robert Z]

Exactly right. That's why I'd never advocate atheism. It's also why I argue for reason, logic, and evidence being the basis of one's belief.

 

 

What is evidence? Do you mean scientific evidence, anecdotal evidence, physical evidence, statistical evidence, analogical evidence, testimonial evidence...?

 

Unless the clouds part and he lands in all of his glory at a lab at MIT, there will never be scientific evidence for a god. This gets back to a common problem that I have noted with engineers and scientists, and men in general: They are looking for a logical means of making a faith decision, where none exists. I have seen this paradox send men right down the rabbit hole. And I understand the paradox because I went through it as well.

 

 

This also gets back to one of the most annoying aspect of religion: The need to disprove what is well-established science. Everyone is trying to prove or justify faith, which is a logical absurdity.

Edited June 10, 2015 by Robert Z

[Robert Z]

This just gets on my nerves. This is getting to the point of people bringing Hitler into a debate. 99% of people who have faith would never fly a plane into a building. This is at the very least a red herring and at the most just plain offensive.

 

 

Alright, fair point, most people of faith would not commit mass murder. But I can point to other evils faith imposes on society.

 

More to the point, how many wars have been fought in the name of god? How can anyone look at the ME and not recognize the devastating effects of faith? This is what happens when people listen to the voice in their head and believe it's real.

 

And not just the ME, George W invaded Iraq, he said, because God told him to.

Edited June 10, 2015 by Robert Z

[Brigit]

Alright, fair point, most people of faith would not commit mass murder. But I can point to other evils faith imposes on society.

 

More to the point, how many wars have been fought in the name of god? How can anyone look at the ME and not recognize the devastating effects of faith? This is what happens when people listen to the voice in their head and believe it's real.

 

And not just the ME, George W invaded Iraq, he said, because God told him to.

 

Religion and God are different don't you think?