What Proof do Theists Want?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-11-2012, 11:32 AM
RE: What Proof do Theists Want?
(28-11-2012 11:30 AM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  Your mind closes to any argument or logic for Gods existence and just respond as though you will never accept any answer at all.
Link?

(28-11-2012 11:30 AM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  So if I do explain why I believe God exists (Which I have done many times already throughout this Forum)
Link?

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2012, 11:34 AM
RE: What Proof do Theists Want?
Hey, Erxomai.

I used to have a job at Ikea, protecting Kierke's. That's right. I was a Kierkegaard.

Question.

People keep saying you can't prove something doesn't exist; you can't prove a negative. What about, "There is no such thing as a human that can fly under their own power and achieve an altitude of 2 kilometers using flatulence as thrust." Is it not entirely possible, using what we know about anatomy, physiology, aerodynamics, thrust and say, breathing, to prove that it is physically impossible?

What about, "Blue Whales do not mate with termites."

Or, "John does not have tea with the planet Saturn in his bathtub once every forty two nanoseconds."

Or, "There are no human beings that were born before the Big Bang."

Or, "The square root of pi is an Aunt Jemima pancake."

Certain things we know necessarily rule out certain other things, even if we have never observed them. So why then is it impossible to disprove a negative?"

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2012, 11:52 AM
RE: What Proof do Theists Want?
(28-11-2012 11:34 AM)Ghost Wrote:  Hey, Erxomai.

I used to have a job at Ikea, protecting Kierke's. That's right. I was a Kierkegaard.
DAMMIT! I soooooooo wanted to use a Kierkegaard or Sartre reference but couldn't think of any.

Well played, sir. Well played indeed!

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2012, 12:02 PM
RE: What Proof do Theists Want?
(28-11-2012 11:32 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(28-11-2012 11:30 AM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  Your mind closes to any argument or logic for Gods existence and just respond as though you will never accept any answer at all.
Link?

(28-11-2012 11:30 AM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  So if I do explain why I believe God exists (Which I have done many times already throughout this Forum)
Link?

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...hing--8535

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...lute-Truth

To name a couple.
Do you know what I mean by explain?

“What you believe to be true will control you, whether it’s true or not.”

—Jeremy LaBorde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2012, 12:25 PM (This post was last modified: 28-11-2012 12:29 PM by Vosur.)
RE: What Proof do Theists Want?
(28-11-2012 12:02 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...hing--8535

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...lute-Truth

To name a couple.
Do you know what I mean by explain?
I don't think so. What do you mean when you use the term "explain"?

As for the links: Apparently I keep missing the reason why you believe. I've re-read both threads but didn't notice anything specific.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2012, 12:36 PM
RE: What Proof do Theists Want?
(28-11-2012 12:25 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(28-11-2012 12:02 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...hing--8535

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...lute-Truth

To name a couple.
Do you know what I mean by explain?
I don't think so. What do you mean when you use the term "explain"?

As for the links: Apparently I keep missing the reason why you believe. I've re-read both threads but couldn't find anything specific.
Well think about this -
Explain why you don't believe in Gods existence.
You can give a simple answer that only takes maybe two paragraphs and really has no profundity to it.
Or you can devote hours, days, months to a forum going into details here and there about different arguments or topics regarding why you find the Theory of God to be fallacious and fictitious.

When you ask me to explain why I believe in Gods existence, it seems like you're asking me to give you a quick and short answer that is satisfactory enough.
For me, no such explanation exists.
That's honestly the story of my life. I can't explain something as simple as texting without going into a mass lecture with detailed presentations and an audience.
I'm complicated.
But like I said - my explanation of why I believe God exists is a journey of explanations and conversations.

When I talk to you about God - I'm usually revealing why I believe He exists. Sometimes I'm also revealing other things like things that make me wonder if He exists or not.

“What you believe to be true will control you, whether it’s true or not.”

—Jeremy LaBorde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2012, 01:43 PM
RE: What Proof do Theists Want?
(28-11-2012 11:34 AM)Ghost Wrote:  People keep saying you can't prove something doesn't exist; you can't prove a negative. What about, "There is no such thing as a human that can fly under their own power and achieve an altitude of 2 kilometers using flatulence as thrust." Is it not entirely possible, using what we know about anatomy, physiology, aerodynamics, thrust and say, breathing, to prove that it is physically impossible?

What about, "Blue Whales do not mate with termites."

Or, "John does not have tea with the planet Saturn in his bathtub once every forty two nanoseconds."

Or, "There are no human beings that were born before the Big Bang."

Or, "The square root of pi is an Aunt Jemima pancake."

Certain things we know necessarily rule out certain other things, even if we have never observed them. So why then is it impossible to disprove a negative?"

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Well, some of those are just nonsense, so I'll disregard them. Others are things are defined by physics. John has no way to get to Saturn in his bathtub, and couldn't do it that often. A termite could try to mate with a blue whale, but it wouldn't work well and would not produce viable offspring in any case. None of that is the same as proving nonexistence. Not to mention that there is no one adequate definition of "God" that everyone agrees upon. That in itself makes it impossible.

Take unicorns for example. We don't know of any existing in the present. There are none in the fossil record, but that might be because they lived in places or at times that make fossilization less likely. They might be deep in the rainforest, so we never see them. However, that doesn't mean we can't say "It's unlikely for unicorns to exist." Absence of evidence does make a better case for evidence of absence, though it doesn't "prove" anything. And that's what science does anyway: it collects evidence. Evidence can show up what it most likely to be true.

Once again, the burden of proof is one the side making extraordinary claims. It's not on the person who's simply saying, "I haven't seen evidence for gods, so I don't believe in any." Why is this so difficult to accept? Why do theists always seem to shift the burden of proof? It's like John having teatime: I haven't seen evidence of him drinking tea on Saturn, so I refuse to believe he does so until such evidence is provided.

You can't test for "lack of god" or "lack of unicorns," but you can test whether or not John can make it Saturn for teatime.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2012, 03:01 PM (This post was last modified: 28-11-2012 03:06 PM by Vosur.)
RE: What Proof do Theists Want?
(28-11-2012 12:36 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  Well think about this -
Explain why you don't believe in Gods existence.
You can give a simple answer that only takes maybe two paragraphs and really has no profundity to it.
Or you can devote hours, days, months to a forum going into details here and there about different arguments or topics regarding why you find the Theory of God to be fallacious and fictitious.
What profundity could there possibly be to the absence of a belief in the existence of god(s)? I arrived at my current position due to the complete absence of any evidence to support the notion that an afterlife and/or an immaterial and sentient being with any interest in the human race and the ability to punish and reward us for our moral actions exists. I have asked you repeatedly to give me a reason to think otherwise. I've been waiting for months and you have given me zero material to work with.

(28-11-2012 12:36 PM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  When you ask me to explain why I believe in Gods existence, it seems like you're asking me to give you a quick and short answer that is satisfactory enough.
For me, no such explanation exists.
That's honestly the story of my life. I can't explain something as simple as texting without going into a mass lecture with detailed presentations and an audience.
I'm complicated.
But like I said - my explanation of why I believe God exists is a journey of explanations and conversations.
When I talk to you about God - I'm usually revealing why I believe He exists. Sometimes I'm also revealing other things like things that make me wonder if He exists or not.
We've been over this already. I don't expect a short answer from you, I expect an answer from you at all. I don't care about it's length, I care about it's content and validity. It's been several months since I opened the "Compelling evidence for Christianity" thread and as of today, you have contributed nothing to it. Zero. Nada. Niets. Last time you responded, you suggested that you were thinking about posting your reply on your blog instead. I said it's fine with me as long as you publish it somewhere. As far as I can see, your blog also does not contain any material on the topic to work with. I'm starting to grow tired of your excuses. The fact that I've been waiting this long should give a clue as to why I'm not asking you to give me a "quick and short answer that is satisfactory enough".

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2012, 04:02 PM
RE: What Proof do Theists Want?
I think that my purpose for asking the question was to pinpoint why the question asked on either side is stupid.

Theists don't believe based off of testable evidence, so the question to them is moot, though if I were a theist and someone asked me the same question at the very least it would make me question whether it made sense to believe something that couldn't be proven.

Atheist typically don't believe in a god because of the complete lack of testable evidence. The argument goes back and forth often because the theist sees a ton of evidence (their definition is radically different) and can't understand how we need more. We keep repeating that we would pretty much take anything, but would love something testable. Maybe to see god create another world right before our eyes.

The definition for evidence needs to be agreed upon before the discussion can truly begin.

It's still a silly question though, because if there was a god that wanted to be worshipped and wanted us to know he exists it would be so easy for him to make that so. For me, I'd pretty much take god appearing before me and saying "yo, sup, I'm fuckin god dude." and for my medical tests to come back clean and sane. That would do it. So simple.

Would I worship him? No. Not without some reason as to why. Worship is either a form of admiration, respect, or fear. And the god that's been written about in the new or old testament is not worthy of any of those. If it were some other god I'd need to learn about it.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like lucradis's post
28-11-2012, 05:15 PM
RE: What Proof do Theists Want?
Hey, Amy.

I didn't actually mention Theists, so I don't know why you went on about them.
Quote:John has no way to get to Saturn in his bathtub, and couldn't do it that often.

Exactly. And we can prove that, can we not?

Quote:None of that is the same as proving nonexistence.

I didn't say non-existence, I said negative. The line is you can't prove a negative.

Also, this has nothing to do with burden of proof and I couldn't tell you why it's difficult to accept.

Quote:It's like John having teatime: I haven't seen evidence of him drinking tea on Saturn, so I refuse to believe he does so until such evidence is provided.

I haven't seen evidence of it either, but I don't have to. Because I know that it's physically impossible. So if one makes the statement, "John does not..." can we not prove that negative?

People say "you can't prove a negative" all the time. I'm just trying to determine if that's true, or if it's just an ideological position.

Hey, Lucky Lucradis.

The definition of evidence has been agreed upon. It's just that Atheists don't accept anything other than empirical evidence and Theists accept evidence that isn't empirical. It's a case of denial, not disagreement.

If God showed up and was like, "Sup. Name's God." That would convert me too. But that's not empirical evidence, it's revelation. If the two of us tried to convince others of what happened, they'd deny it because we wouldn't have any empirical evidence.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: