Total Posts:53|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Is Proof Of God Necessary?

RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?
tarantula
Posts: 863
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 4:34:29 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

People who insist that the Bible is literally true, and the word of god, need to provide proof it is so, imo.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 5:01:15 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 4:34:29 PM, tarantula wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

People who insist that the Bible is literally true, and the word of god, need to provide proof it is so, imo.
Why?

And wouldn't proof of God need to come first before proving the Bible is literally true? What about the claims of the deists?
Dirty.Harry
Posts: 1,585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 5:23:59 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 4:34:29 PM, tarantula wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

People who insist that the Bible is literally true, and the word of god, need to provide proof it is so, imo.

The term "proof" must be used with caution here.

Proof requires both an advocate and a skeptic, the refusal of a skeptic to accept some evidence as proof when the advocate has accepted it as proof is a dilema.

If an advocate presents some "thing" as a proof of some assertion then that does not of course mean he is correct. But likewise the rejection of the proof by the skeptic also does not he is correct either.

Furthermore "proof" is not a term we should use, it is best reserved for mathematics and logic, all we can do in our world is propose evidence in support of some claim.

So how do you propose we resolve the dilema?
Face-of-the-deep
Posts: 65
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 5:40:47 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
First, one must define God. Without a definition, proving (whatever) is futile. To describe the God of Genesis or the God in The Gospel Of John, It's possible to see the Word as creating The Kingdom Of Heaven on earth. Darkness was everywhere until the arrival of the light (knowledge).
Looncall
Posts: 460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 9:20:47 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

(Sorry, I do not remember the author of this.)

If religionists wish to be taken seriously, they should back up their assertions.
The metaphysicist has no laboratory.
Dirty.Harry
Posts: 1,585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 10:32:09 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 9:20:47 PM, Looncall wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

(Sorry, I do not remember the author of this.)

If religionists wish to be taken seriously, they should back up their assertions.

Willows has recently said it - he also said "There is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of God".

Therefore I've politely asked what evidence he has for this assertion and await his reply, see my post # 39 here:

http://www.debate.org...

if atheists wish to be taken seriously they too must back up their assertions, wouldn't you agree?
mrsatan
Posts: 429
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 10:52:18 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society?

Necessary for what in society?

Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence?

Depends what you mean by God, but probably not.

Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

I couldn't care less what's suggested about God, or anything else for that matter. But, plain and simple, without proof (favorable, and irrefutable, evidence and reasoning), then it's unreasonable to expect others to believe it, or abide in accordance with it.
To say one has free will, to have chosen other than they did, is to say they have will over their will... Will over the will they have over their will... Will over the will they have over the will they have over their will, etc... It's utter nonsense.
ANON_TacTiX
Posts: 460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 3:10:00 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

If you are going to tell me that your God exists, you must provide proof. If you are going to tell me how our universe and the world around us were created, you must provide proof. If you are going to tell me what will happen when I die, you must provide proof. at the very least you must provide scientifically valid evidence. When someone makes a claim, especially when they are as big as most religions' claims, they must provide proof, or at least evidence. The fact is that this almost never happens. Rarely have I seen a religious person actually give scientifically valid evidence for their claims.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning. - Albert Einstein
Bennett91
Posts: 4,237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 3:39:30 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society?

Because many in society try to enforce the will of their God on the rest society. If I were to become President and said " My God tells me to attack Israel" the people of America would have good reason to question weather I'm actually in communion with a God, or if my God even exists for that matter.

Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence?

That's not possible. We will know if we encounter aliens because we can see them, touch them and potentially communicate with them, and they'll probably be firing lasers at us - in short it wouldn't require faith to discover them. God on the other hand is purported to be here already, yet non-belivers don't have the means to see touch or communicate without first buying into the premise then the evidence will purportedly come.

Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

I personally don't care what goes on in churches, sing as loud as you want, just don't bring it into politics or on to others who don't want to hear it. A sports commentator can't determine who wins the game, theocrats CAN determine which laws get passed effecting millions.
bulproof
Posts: 25,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 3:57:48 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 10:32:09 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:
At 10/9/2016 9:20:47 PM, Looncall wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

(Sorry, I do not remember the author of this.)

If religionists wish to be taken seriously, they should back up their assertions.

Willows has recently said it - he also said "There is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of God".

Therefore I've politely asked what evidence he has for this assertion and await his reply, see my post # 39 here:

http://www.debate.org...

if atheists wish to be taken seriously they too must back up their assertions, wouldn't you agree?
My next post will provide all of the evidence ever presented in support of the claim that gods exist.
bulproof
Posts: 25,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 3:59:57 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
...........................................................................................................................o.........................................................................................
bulproof
Posts: 25,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 4:01:03 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 3:59:57 AM, bulproof wrote:
...........................................................................................................................o.........................................................................................
And that is your evidence that you have no evidence.
What an absurd request.
graceofgod
Posts: 5,101
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 9:03:25 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

don't see why it should be kept quiet other than because of the work of the enemy, speaking as a believer of course.
If you said to gays today, ok you can be gay but no pink, no rainbow flags, no kissing or cuddling in public, keep it to yourself, guess the outcome of that...
Willows
Posts: 2,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 10:42:54 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 3:59:57 AM, bulproof wrote:
...........................................................................................................................o.........................................................................................

Yeah Bul, I tried that one and wanted to put absolutely nothing in the post...won't let you do it. So I made up the Topic and wrote a sarcastic remark and it's going gangbusters.http://www.debate.org...
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 12:13:36 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 5:23:59 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:34:29 PM, tarantula wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

People who insist that the Bible is literally true, and the word of god, need to provide proof it is so, imo.

The term "proof" must be used with caution here.

Proof requires both an advocate and a skeptic, the refusal of a skeptic to accept some evidence as proof when the advocate has accepted it as proof is a dilema.

If an advocate presents some "thing" as a proof of some assertion then that does not of course mean he is correct. But likewise the rejection of the proof by the skeptic also does not he is correct either.

Furthermore "proof" is not a term we should use, it is best reserved for mathematics and logic, all we can do in our world is propose evidence in support of some claim.

I understand what you're saying, and fully agree. I'm actually attempting to use the terminology that seems very common in this forum. The whole argument demanding proof or evidence for God is quite shaky at best. It's not really clear most of the time what people are asking proof/evidence for. Various terms are used that have different indications (God, religion, theism, fundamentalism, extremism, etc.).

The title of the thread by the way could have easily read "Why Is Proof Of God Necessary?"
So how do you propose we resolve the dilema?
To answer the question the best I can at the moment, I don't think there is, or should be a dilemma at all.

I'm thinking of that corny commercial by Jeep Cherokee I think it is where they play that Cat Stevens sing-along song that goes something like "If you wanna be you be you", and then they show bumper stickers that indicate opposing views (animal rights and hunting, democrat and republican, etc.). Corny commercial, but that's kind of how I see it. I don't see any reason to need to provide evidence let alone proof. I personally think there's plenty of evidence, and it's up to the individual what they wish to do with it.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 12:21:06 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 9:03:25 AM, graceofgod wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

don't see why it should be kept quiet other than because of the work of the enemy, speaking as a believer of course.
If you said to gays today, ok you can be gay but no pink, no rainbow flags, no kissing or cuddling in public, keep it to yourself, guess the outcome of that...
I agree of course, but there seems to be a trademark mandate among various forum members (and various other members of society) that say religion (generally referring to, or aka Christianity) is okay as long as it's kept to themselves. But there's really no clarity as to what they mean by that, or how that's supposed to be put into practice.

Of course as far as I'm concerned it's as nonsensical as demanding that people keep their political views to themselves.
Looncall
Posts: 460
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 12:21:19 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 12:13:36 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 10/9/2016 5:23:59 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:34:29 PM, tarantula wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

People who insist that the Bible is literally true, and the word of god, need to provide proof it is so, imo.

The term "proof" must be used with caution here.

Proof requires both an advocate and a skeptic, the refusal of a skeptic to accept some evidence as proof when the advocate has accepted it as proof is a dilema.

If an advocate presents some "thing" as a proof of some assertion then that does not of course mean he is correct. But likewise the rejection of the proof by the skeptic also does not he is correct either.

Furthermore "proof" is not a term we should use, it is best reserved for mathematics and logic, all we can do in our world is propose evidence in support of some claim.

I understand what you're saying, and fully agree. I'm actually attempting to use the terminology that seems very common in this forum. The whole argument demanding proof or evidence for God is quite shaky at best. It's not really clear most of the time what people are asking proof/evidence for. Various terms are used that have different indications (God, religion, theism, fundamentalism, extremism, etc.).

The title of the thread by the way could have easily read "Why Is Proof Of God Necessary?"
So how do you propose we resolve the dilema?
To answer the question the best I can at the moment, I don't think there is, or should be a dilemma at all.

I'm thinking of that corny commercial by Jeep Cherokee I think it is where they play that Cat Stevens sing-along song that goes something like "If you wanna be you be you", and then they show bumper stickers that indicate opposing views (animal rights and hunting, democrat and republican, etc.). Corny commercial, but that's kind of how I see it. I don't see any reason to need to provide evidence let alone proof. I personally think there's plenty of evidence, and it's up to the individual what they wish to do with it.

The problem is that people act on their beliefs, often to the detriment of others. Beliefs based on unfalsifiable, or inaccurate ideas can lead to unlimited harm.
The metaphysicist has no laboratory.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 12:23:30 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 12:21:19 PM, Looncall wrote:
At 10/10/2016 12:13:36 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 10/9/2016 5:23:59 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:34:29 PM, tarantula wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

People who insist that the Bible is literally true, and the word of god, need to provide proof it is so, imo.

The term "proof" must be used with caution here.

Proof requires both an advocate and a skeptic, the refusal of a skeptic to accept some evidence as proof when the advocate has accepted it as proof is a dilema.

If an advocate presents some "thing" as a proof of some assertion then that does not of course mean he is correct. But likewise the rejection of the proof by the skeptic also does not he is correct either.

Furthermore "proof" is not a term we should use, it is best reserved for mathematics and logic, all we can do in our world is propose evidence in support of some claim.

I understand what you're saying, and fully agree. I'm actually attempting to use the terminology that seems very common in this forum. The whole argument demanding proof or evidence for God is quite shaky at best. It's not really clear most of the time what people are asking proof/evidence for. Various terms are used that have different indications (God, religion, theism, fundamentalism, extremism, etc.).

The title of the thread by the way could have easily read "Why Is Proof Of God Necessary?"
So how do you propose we resolve the dilema?
To answer the question the best I can at the moment, I don't think there is, or should be a dilemma at all.

I'm thinking of that corny commercial by Jeep Cherokee I think it is where they play that Cat Stevens sing-along song that goes something like "If you wanna be you be you", and then they show bumper stickers that indicate opposing views (animal rights and hunting, democrat and republican, etc.). Corny commercial, but that's kind of how I see it. I don't see any reason to need to provide evidence let alone proof. I personally think there's plenty of evidence, and it's up to the individual what they wish to do with it.

The problem is that people act on their beliefs, often to the detriment of others. Beliefs based on unfalsifiable, or inaccurate ideas can lead to unlimited harm.
Well people act on their political beliefs as well. If someone believes Clinton or Trump should be president, they will probably cast a vote for one of them.

But can you give me an example?
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 12:26:06 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 3:10:00 AM, ANON_TacTiX wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

If you are going to tell me that your God exists, you must provide proof. If you are going to tell me how our universe and the world around us were created, you must provide proof. If you are going to tell me what will happen when I die, you must provide proof. at the very least you must provide scientifically valid evidence. When someone makes a claim, especially when they are as big as most religions' claims, they must provide proof, or at least evidence. The fact is that this almost never happens. Rarely have I seen a religious person actually give scientifically valid evidence for their claims.
That's a big "if" there (If I tell you God exists).

You said rarely. Does that mean at times a religious person has given you valid evidence?
Chaosism
Posts: 2,673
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 12:44:54 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

Human beings are incredibly prone to misguided beliefs and delusions, especially en masse because we're very socially focused animals. The problem is that our wild imaginations and imperfect recollections often distort our own perceptions and understanding of the world, and we're prone to immediately assuming some sort of agency is behind the unexplained events we witness. This is why the scientific method is so important to us.

The fundamental problem is that those who espouse truth about God are expressing knowledge that is beyond the availability of humankind (or else everyone could see the evidence for it) and so must demonstrate how they've come into this knowledge or why this knowledge is actually true. Even if a divine revelation happens to be true for a given individual, the infallible nature of the human makes it impossible for others to reliably discern between such an individual and one whose imaginations and rationalizations have gotten the better of them.
bulproof
Posts: 25,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 1:00:39 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 12:21:06 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 10/10/2016 9:03:25 AM, graceofgod wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

don't see why it should be kept quiet other than because of the work of the enemy, speaking as a believer of course.
If you said to gays today, ok you can be gay but no pink, no rainbow flags, no kissing or cuddling in public, keep it to yourself, guess the outcome of that...
I agree of course, but there seems to be a trademark mandate among various forum members (and various other members of society) that say religion (generally referring to, or aka Christianity) is okay as long as it's kept to themselves. But there's really no clarity as to what they mean by that, or how that's supposed to be put into practice.

Of course as far as I'm concerned it's as nonsensical as demanding that people keep their political views to themselves.
It's quite simple, keep your bronze age goatherd prognostications on morality away from our lives.
graceofgod
Posts: 5,101
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 3:58:40 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 12:21:06 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 10/10/2016 9:03:25 AM, graceofgod wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

don't see why it should be kept quiet other than because of the work of the enemy, speaking as a believer of course.
If you said to gays today, ok you can be gay but no pink, no rainbow flags, no kissing or cuddling in public, keep it to yourself, guess the outcome of that...
I agree of course, but there seems to be a trademark mandate among various forum members (and various other members of society) that say religion (generally referring to, or aka Christianity) is okay as long as it's kept to themselves. But there's really no clarity as to what they mean by that, or how that's supposed to be put into practice.

Of course as far as I'm concerned it's as nonsensical as demanding that people keep their political views to themselves.

exactly, I think their idea is you can say you are Christian, go to church but you are not allowed to live by Christian principals out side of your own life, home but as you said, how that could possibly be put in to practice...
the truth is that this is driven by the gay agenda, which don't what Christians to say their lifestyle is wrong...
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 4:06:50 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 3:39:30 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society?

Because many in society try to enforce the will of their God on the rest society. If I were to become President and said " My God tells me to attack Israel" the people of America would have good reason to question weather I'm actually in communion with a God, or if my God even exists for that matter.

"Because many in society try to enforce the will of their God on the rest society."

I've never experienced anyone try to enforce the will of their God on me. Have you?

As far as " My God tells me to attack Israel", are you talking about Muslim nations, or are you referring to George Bush Jr.?

Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence?

That's not possible. We will know if we encounter aliens because we can see them, touch them and potentially communicate with them, and they'll probably be firing lasers at us - in short it wouldn't require faith to discover them. God on the other hand is purported to be here already, yet non-belivers don't have the means to see touch or communicate without first buying into the premise then the evidence will purportedly come.

Are you familiar with SETI, and the money spent (or wasted) on that project?

With all the claims of ET encounters alleged to have taken place on Earth already, I have yet to see one.

And should Jesus make a return according to scripture, it would stand for reason that it will be quite evident what's happening.
Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

I personally don't care what goes on in churches, sing as loud as you want, just don't bring it into politics or on to others who don't want to hear it. A sports commentator can't determine who wins the game, theocrats CAN determine which laws get passed effecting millions.
There's a lot of things I don't want to hear, but have no choice. I don't feel any special privilege in silencing anyone.

A theocrat could potentially determine which laws get passed without saying a word about their faith. What difference does it make whether or not at some point they state their religious beliefs, say, in an interview....or just never happen to mention it?
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 4:10:39 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 3:58:40 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 10/10/2016 12:21:06 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 10/10/2016 9:03:25 AM, graceofgod wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

don't see why it should be kept quiet other than because of the work of the enemy, speaking as a believer of course.
If you said to gays today, ok you can be gay but no pink, no rainbow flags, no kissing or cuddling in public, keep it to yourself, guess the outcome of that...
I agree of course, but there seems to be a trademark mandate among various forum members (and various other members of society) that say religion (generally referring to, or aka Christianity) is okay as long as it's kept to themselves. But there's really no clarity as to what they mean by that, or how that's supposed to be put into practice.

Of course as far as I'm concerned it's as nonsensical as demanding that people keep their political views to themselves.

exactly, I think their idea is you can say you are Christian, go to church but you are not allowed to live by Christian principals out side of your own life, home but as you said, how that could possibly be put in to practice...
the truth is that this is driven by the gay agenda, which don't what Christians to say their lifestyle is wrong...
In addition, when we see groups attempting removals of iconic figures like the cross at Ground Zero, a statue of Jesus on a ski resort, etc., seeing churches on street corners with marquees would have to drive them nuts. So I don't really buy into the "we don't care what you do in your churches" thing either.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 4:16:27 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 12:44:54 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

Human beings are incredibly prone to misguided beliefs and delusions, especially en masse because we're very socially focused animals. The problem is that our wild imaginations and imperfect recollections often distort our own perceptions and understanding of the world, and we're prone to immediately assuming some sort of agency is behind the unexplained events we witness. This is why the scientific method is so important to us.

The fundamental problem is that those who espouse truth about God are expressing knowledge that is beyond the availability of humankind (or else everyone could see the evidence for it) and so must demonstrate how they've come into this knowledge or why this knowledge is actually true. Even if a divine revelation happens to be true for a given individual, the infallible nature of the human makes it impossible for others to reliably discern between such an individual and one whose imaginations and rationalizations have gotten the better of them.
Since you used an even if, the person who receives the revelation that happens to be true is often someone who listened to a testimony of another who had a revelation. So while some may not be able to discern whether or not a revelation is authentic, some might, and would benefit from stated revelation.
Chaosism
Posts: 2,673
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 4:23:11 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 4:16:27 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 10/10/2016 12:44:54 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

Human beings are incredibly prone to misguided beliefs and delusions, especially en masse because we're very socially focused animals. The problem is that our wild imaginations and imperfect recollections often distort our own perceptions and understanding of the world, and we're prone to immediately assuming some sort of agency is behind the unexplained events we witness. This is why the scientific method is so important to us.

The fundamental problem is that those who espouse truth about God are expressing knowledge that is beyond the availability of humankind (or else everyone could see the evidence for it) and so must demonstrate how they've come into this knowledge or why this knowledge is actually true. Even if a divine revelation happens to be true for a given individual, the infallible nature of the human makes it impossible for others to reliably discern between such an individual and one whose imaginations and rationalizations have gotten the better of them.
Since you used an even if, the person who receives the revelation that happens to be true is often someone who listened to a testimony of another who had a revelation. So while some may not be able to discern whether or not a revelation is authentic, some might, and would benefit from stated revelation.

You're begging the question: you're assuming the testimony or the other person's revelation has been somehow authenticated. The problem has not been addressed.
graceofgod
Posts: 5,101
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 4:24:21 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 4:10:39 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 10/10/2016 3:58:40 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 10/10/2016 12:21:06 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 10/10/2016 9:03:25 AM, graceofgod wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

don't see why it should be kept quiet other than because of the work of the enemy, speaking as a believer of course.
If you said to gays today, ok you can be gay but no pink, no rainbow flags, no kissing or cuddling in public, keep it to yourself, guess the outcome of that...
I agree of course, but there seems to be a trademark mandate among various forum members (and various other members of society) that say religion (generally referring to, or aka Christianity) is okay as long as it's kept to themselves. But there's really no clarity as to what they mean by that, or how that's supposed to be put into practice.

Of course as far as I'm concerned it's as nonsensical as demanding that people keep their political views to themselves.

exactly, I think their idea is you can say you are Christian, go to church but you are not allowed to live by Christian principals out side of your own life, home but as you said, how that could possibly be put in to practice...
the truth is that this is driven by the gay agenda, which don't what Christians to say their lifestyle is wrong...
In addition, when we see groups attempting removals of iconic figures like the cross at Ground Zero, a statue of Jesus on a ski resort, etc., seeing churches on street corners with marquees would have to drive them nuts. So I don't really buy into the "we don't care what you do in your churches" thing either.

No it is a constant attack on Christianity, the idea of forcing churches to marry same sex couples, it is wrong Churches should be allowed to stand for what they believe, These people pushing claim they want equality, when in reality they don't want that at all, they want the Christian church to either say being gay is ok or they want them closed...

I live in an area where most of the local fellowships have stopped doing marriages completely, to make sure they cannot be called if they turn down a same sex couple...
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 4:43:09 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 4:23:11 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 10/10/2016 4:16:27 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 10/10/2016 12:44:54 PM, Chaosism wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

Human beings are incredibly prone to misguided beliefs and delusions, especially en masse because we're very socially focused animals. The problem is that our wild imaginations and imperfect recollections often distort our own perceptions and understanding of the world, and we're prone to immediately assuming some sort of agency is behind the unexplained events we witness. This is why the scientific method is so important to us.

The fundamental problem is that those who espouse truth about God are expressing knowledge that is beyond the availability of humankind (or else everyone could see the evidence for it) and so must demonstrate how they've come into this knowledge or why this knowledge is actually true. Even if a divine revelation happens to be true for a given individual, the infallible nature of the human makes it impossible for others to reliably discern between such an individual and one whose imaginations and rationalizations have gotten the better of them.
Since you used an even if, the person who receives the revelation that happens to be true is often someone who listened to a testimony of another who had a revelation. So while some may not be able to discern whether or not a revelation is authentic, some might, and would benefit from stated revelation.

You're begging the question: you're assuming the testimony or the other person's revelation has been somehow authenticated. The problem has not been addressed.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

What do you mean by authenticated?
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,384
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 4:48:21 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 10/10/2016 4:24:21 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 10/10/2016 4:10:39 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 10/10/2016 3:58:40 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 10/10/2016 12:21:06 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 10/10/2016 9:03:25 AM, graceofgod wrote:
At 10/9/2016 4:32:14 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
Why would the proof of God be necessary in society? Should the existence of God be explored like, say, extraterrestrial existence? Or, should positive suggestion of God's existence be kept quite like a sports commentator's bias for a particular team?

don't see why it should be kept quiet other than because of the work of the enemy, speaking as a believer of course.
If you said to gays today, ok you can be gay but no pink, no rainbow flags, no kissing or cuddling in public, keep it to yourself, guess the outcome of that...
I agree of course, but there seems to be a trademark mandate among various forum members (and various other members of society) that say religion (generally referring to, or aka Christianity) is okay as long as it's kept to themselves. But there's really no clarity as to what they mean by that, or how that's supposed to be put into practice.

Of course as far as I'm concerned it's as nonsensical as demanding that people keep their political views to themselves.

exactly, I think their idea is you can say you are Christian, go to church but you are not allowed to live by Christian principals out side of your own life, home but as you said, how that could possibly be put in to practice...
the truth is that this is driven by the gay agenda, which don't what Christians to say their lifestyle is wrong...
In addition, when we see groups attempting removals of iconic figures like the cross at Ground Zero, a statue of Jesus on a ski resort, etc., seeing churches on street corners with marquees would have to drive them nuts. So I don't really buy into the "we don't care what you do in your churches" thing either.

No it is a constant attack on Christianity, the idea of forcing churches to marry same sex couples, it is wrong Churches should be allowed to stand for what they believe, These people pushing claim they want equality, when in reality they don't want that at all, they want the Christian church to either say being gay is ok or they want them closed...

I live in an area where most of the local fellowships have stopped doing marriages completely, to make sure they cannot be called if they turn down a same sex couple...
Oh I know. I've been through a number of conversations here about businesses who have been penalized because of their Christian conviction. It's been suggested that anyone who refuses to use their business to cater to a same sex wedding or union ceremony on the ground of their Christian conviction is without exception homophobic. Even though the businesses owners were clear about it not being about their personal lifestyle. In one case the business owner served the clients on numerous occasions, and had a friendly relationship with them.