Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 172 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
12/07/19 03:58 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
True 1
paul 1
Page 35 of 35 < 1 2 ... 33 34 35
Topic Options
#21667 - 05/18/07 09:49 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: bgmark]
terrytnewzealand Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 1031
Loc: Whangarei New Zealand
Bgmark. Sure, evolution does not disprove God. I fail to see how "science adds to the fact that God exists" though. Evolution certainly reduces God's role in running everything. For example if God is primarily concerned with human affairs at what stage in our evolution did he develop this concern? Was it as we changed from Australopithecus to Homo habilis? Or Homo habilis to Homo erectus? Perhaps way back when we changed from Ardipithecus to Australopithecus? Redewenur, take note. Is this why the "out of Africa" hypothesis has such appeal?

Top
.
#21682 - 05/19/07 12:16 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: terrytnewzealand]
redewenur Offline
Megastar

Registered: 02/14/07
Posts: 1840
Perhaps, Terry, perhaps. I've just finshed viewing some videos of Richard Dawkins interviews and, bearing in mind our recent posts, I can even more fully appreciate why he's making so much effort to get his point across to the public.

Bgmark, I too don't see how science does, or can, provide any objective evidence of God's existence. I can tell you that I have a concept of God, but I don't use this forum to try to discuss that. Pointless. What I can say, though, quite apart from the 'evidence' aspect, is that science (and mathematics) reveals the nature of PHYSICAL reality. To the human mind, the insight that it provides can be a source of great joy, alongside the other joys which we experience. It's been recalled before, on SAGG, that Einstein mentioned God many times, and I can well imagine that it was, at least in part, due to his joy at the wonder and splendour of this awesome universe. It's quite interesting that Dawkins (a) does not deny the possibility that such a God exists (b) says that he understands how Einstein must have felt (c) believes that science may one day give a definitive answer to the question. Bgmark, I guess you would agree with Dawkins on the last point. I wouldn't, but then it depends on one's concept of God.
_________________________
"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler

Top
#31665 - 08/17/09 12:39 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: redewenur]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
This topic has resurfaced again and I think this old debate could go around another time as there is some good stuff here.

Some of the stalwarts aren't here posting anymore-- DAM, Terry from NZ, Turner and blacknad for example.

I am amazed it went on for 35 pages- it may not be even NQS but It's certainly interesting!

Top
#31668 - 08/17/09 04:28 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Ellis]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Thanks, Ellis! May we always agree to disagree, agreeably. And have fun doing so.

The thread title raises the question: Is there evidence for God as an objective being, or person, to whom one can point and say: There is a god called God?

I agree, atheism is right! Not even theism says that there is such a god. Check out:

http://www.iep.utm.edu/god-west/#H3

Western Concepts of God

Western concepts of God have ranged from the detached transcendent demiurge of Aristotle to the pantheism of Spinoza. Nevertheless, much of western thought about God has fallen within some broad form of theism.

Theism is the view that God is unlimited with regard to knowledge (omniscience), power (omnipotence), extension (omnipresence), and moral perfection; and is the creator and sustainer of the universe.

Though regarded as sexless, God has traditionally been referred to by the masculine pronoun. Concepts of God in philosophy are entwined with concepts of God in religion.

This is most obvious in figures like Augustine and Aquinas, who sought to bring more rigor and consistency to concepts found in religion.

Others, like Leibniz and Hegel, interacted constructively and deeply with religious concepts. Even those like Hume and Nietzsche, who criticized the concept of God, dealt with religious concepts. While Western philosophy has interfaced most obviously with Christianity, Judaism and Islam have had some influence.

The orthodox forms of all three religions have embraced theism, though each religion has also yielded a wide array of other views. Philosophy has shown a similar variety. For example, with regard to the initiating cause of the world, Plato and Aristotle held God to be the crafter of uncreated matter.

Plotinus regarded matter as emanating from God. Spinoza, departing from his judaistic roots, held God to be identical with the universe, while Hegel came to a similar view by reinterpreting Christianity.

Issues related to Western concepts of God include the nature of divine attributes and how they can be known, if or how that knowledge can be communicated, the relation between such knowledge and logic, the nature of divine causality, and the relation between the divine and the human will.
Table of Contents

1. Sources of Western Concepts of God

There is no evidence whatsoever. Belief in God and gods, as such, requires faith, and nothing but faith. Which is OK by me, if one is willing to go that route....

UNITHEISM
Me? As a unitheist, I'm with Spinoza and Hegel. For me G0D (Note the zero, 0)--an acronym, not a noun--is as real as existence--the universe as perceived by the senses. Here I include intuition and feelings. This is why I say: We need to redefine G0D. See www.redefinegod.com

Atheists, do you deny existence and the future of being? You are free to do so. But what benefit is this to you, or to anyone?

Meanwhile, as a unitheist, I say we, as one with G0D, are in the business of creating existence and the future.

If atheists are right, they will never have the fun of saying: See, we were right! But think of the fun unitheists will have. laugh


Edited by Revlgking (08/17/09 04:32 AM)
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#31674 - 08/17/09 12:03 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Revlgking]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Ellis, I repeat the following:
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Thanks, Ellis! May we always agree to disagree, agreeably. And have fun doing so.

The thread title raises the question: Is there evidence for God as an objective being, or person, to whom one can point and say: There is a god called God?

I agree, atheism is right! Not even theism says that there is such a god. Check out:

http://www.iep.utm.edu/god-west/#H3
and I will add: This thread was not started by me, it was started by Tim (Wed Aug 16 2006), who was then 16--a young conservative, if not fundamentalist Christian, at the time. I joined the thread--was it just before you?--in February, 2007.

BTW, because of the way I deal with the god hypothesis, I would not use "Evidence for God" as a title. In my opinion,as a student of process philosophy and theology I do not think of G0D as a subject, or object of scientific research. Science is about physicalism http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/

In my opinion, science has no place, other than that of servant, in G0D, or GØD--the symbol I prefer to use when dialoguing with scientists. Ø, null, the no-thing from which all things emanate.

To scientists who say, "Scientists ought to be given the absolute power of the intellectual and social order of things." I have this to say: May GØD, as Love (agape), guide you. But be very, very careful of the power of arrogant pride.

BTW, are there really any scientists out there who would like to have this power?
There are some religionists who have claimed this power. And some are still with us.



Edited by Revlgking (08/17/09 12:23 PM)
Edit Reason: So as to communicate
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#31716 - 08/19/09 04:42 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Tim]
atoz Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 08/19/09
Posts: 3
Why do you even try???????? Tihs is such a lame try. This is just another attempt at the anthrocentirc argument. Almost like Decart's "I think therefore I am." Which is actually misqupted as it is really "I think therefore I know I am." and thus a true statement. We are here because we are,some day we may know but ti is cause of the Flying Spagettie Monster. The concept of god is just a superstitios belief resulting from the trait in man to find cause and effect relatinshops. The problem with the idea of god is it is just a cop-out to really finding the true cause effect relationship.
But none of this matters to you, i.e. TIM, as your a true believe and just want to try to prove your eronious idealis in a world where it is crumbling every day.

Cheers

Top
#31737 - 08/20/09 08:28 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: atoz]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Atoz, I think Tim has backed away from this forum. We have not heard from him for some time. Assuming this to be so, I am going to start a thread: My evidence that GOD/GØD IS
BTW, I have difficulty accessing this thread, directly. I get an error. I get around the problem by going indirectly, through the "watch lists" in My Stuff.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#31738 - 08/20/09 08:40 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Tim]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Just testing to see if this is still working. It doesn't consistently. Therefore, the new thread.


Edited by Revlgking (08/20/09 09:53 PM)
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#31801 - 08/24/09 02:49 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Tim]
Joe Duggins Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 08/24/09
Posts: 4
Here's the problem with that logic.

Premise: There is a universe, It began.

Up to this point I agree.

Premise: Only God makes a universe......why would that be true? There's no set of particles that can do it...maybe a multi-verse physical principle?

You see, if you assume your conclusion backwards, you'll always be right.
_________________________
Money without intelligence is like a car without a road.
http://www.intelligentinvestingtips.com

Top
#31812 - 08/25/09 12:22 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Joe Duggins]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
Joe D-- I'm possibly being a bit thick-- but what is your conclusion?

Top
#39393 - 08/09/11 07:35 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Tim]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
TheFallibleFiend, noticing that you are now on line, I invite you--and anyone else who may be interested, to take a look at, even if just only for old times sake, the following thread from 2006--the first year I began to post at SAGGO. FF, you were an early respondent in this thread, which I just stumbled on in my bookmarks. It was started by Tim. I think he was a student at the time and very much a fundamentalist, I think. Let us see where it takes us. If not far, so be it!
Originally Posted By: Tim
There is abounding evidence for a Creator God.

If you're familiar with Geometry, an indirect proof is when you prove something by proving what it's not. To start this indirect proof, the given information I'm using is the universe and all it contains; I'm trying to prove that there's a God.

First, I will assume temporarily that there is no God. So that means that there is no-one or nothing to create the universe and all it contains. But that conflicts the given that there is a universe. Therefore, there is a God that created the universe because there's not not a God.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#39396 - 08/09/11 09:42 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Revlgking]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Originally Posted By: Tim
First, I will assume temporarily that there is no God. So that means that there is no-one or nothing to create the universe and all it contains. But that conflicts the given that there is a universe. Therefore, there is a God that created the universe because there's not not a God.


Okay. I looked at this for old-times sake and it's still nonsense. Poor reasoning is not generally a good method of establishing correct conclusions.

Top
#39397 - 08/09/11 10:22 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Revlgking]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
FF, thanks for you quick response.

BTW, SINCE I HAVE NEITHER FOUND: THE FOUNTAIN OF TRUTH, NOR OF THE FOUNTAIN OF YOUTH, I AM NOT HERE TO CONVERT ANYONE. ABOVE ALL, I DO NOT DEMAND THAT ANYONE FOLLOW ME.

WHY AM HERE? If anything, I am here to practice the art of writing and communicating. With YOUR gracious help and the help of this art my goal is to discover: WHO AM I?

PLEASE TELL ME: IS THIS CLEAR?

HOW I GOT INVOLVED WITH THIS SITE
when I heard about it, with an open mind, I entered the fray at scienceagogo on page 4, I think.

The fur started to fly on page 5, when D.A. Morgan--For fun, I called him DAM laugh --recommended to the hosts (internationally located) that I be banned, because my thread, he said--it was not my thread--had nothing to do with science.

BTW, the thread was actually started by a 16-year-old student by the name of Tim. Tim was, and perhaps still is, obviously a born-again Christian. I looked forward to having a respectful dialogue with him. He bowed out without a trace, later. I hope Tim will check in, now and then.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#39404 - 08/10/11 11:14 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Revlgking]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
FOR BETTER, OR FOR WORSE, I AM OBLIGED TO LIVE LIFE AS I FIND IT NOW--ALONE, WITH FAMILY MEMBERS AND WITH OTHERS. In other words, life in the NOW is the only time that I have to live. That, to the best of my ability, I choose and will to. [more on this, later.]
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#39480 - 08/14/11 06:18 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Revlgking]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
Rev- I think you are obviously living life as fully as is possible as, I suspect, you always have. You certainly have a tenacious point of view, and a rich, certain belief in the existence of God which none of us atheists have been able to shake, and maybe we even envy a bit.

Please keep typing away! (I wonder what happened to Tim).

Top
#39487 - 08/14/11 02:08 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Ellis]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Originally Posted By: Ellis
... and a rich, certain belief in the existence of God which none of us atheists have been able to shake, and maybe we even envy a bit.

Please keep typing away! (I wonder what happened to Tim).
Thanks for your positive attitude, Ellis! You mentioned Tim--the 16 year old. It would be interesting to know. Maybe when he grew a little, he failed to find that 'god' to which both theists and atheists apply the term 'existence'. BTW, I was 16 when I applied and was accepted as a candidate for the minister. Here is where it all happened--Twelve miles from where I lived www.bellisland.net
http://gowerunited.ca/tp40/Default.asp?ID=111067

And what the "hell" happened to DAM? cry

BTW, all joking aside: Let's you and I have a communication experiment: When I use the acronyms GOD and G0d, what do you imagine that I have in mind?
Also, what does it mean to your imagination and mind?

Then we will take it from there, OK? All in good fun!
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#41987 - 01/03/12 06:08 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Revlgking]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
FOR THOSE WHO MAY BE INTERESTED: The following is my first post to SAGOGO, in 2007. I wonder, is DAM--D.A. Morgan still in the land of the living?
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
To express my understanding of the concept of God, I use the symbol, G?D
I first used this symbol in 2005 in
http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=16227
where I have been involved for some time.
I call the theology 'unitheism', similar to panentheism.
===========================================================
Although I have participated in other forums since 1997, this is my first post in this forum, so go easy on me, please!

Though I have some training in theology/philsophy/psychology and pneumatology--using an integrated approach--I prefer to take the child-like approach to knowledge. I am very curious, open-minded and willing to agree to disagree agreeably. I love exploring the claims of the New Physics--talk about having to have faith in the unknown--and other sciences. In my humble opinion--an expression I will use often using the acronym, IMHO--no one I know of is infallible.

Above all, I love it when we do not have take ourselves and our opinions too seriously. I love a good joke, even about religion.
I like the saying: We should not be so heavenly minded that we are of no heavenly good. smile

I will begin by saying that I was raised in a fairly open-minded kind of theist religion--The United Church of Canada--based on the Old and New Testaments and we were expected to believe, in a liberal (freedom-based) sort of way, in God as an almighty, all-knowing, everwhere-present and loving Heavenly Father who hears and answers our prayers.

As a child I was taught to speak to God, in prayer, as if he is a person. I have always found this a difficult concept to accept as a fact. For awhile in my youth, as I began the serious study of science am mathematics, I became an agnostic, if not almost an atheist.

I am still agnostic--I hope a very curious one--about many things, however, because, in my university years, I was encouraged to bring reason, science and faith in harmony with one another I began to explore the history of beliefs. The led me to new ways of theological thinking and I stopped trying to igagine that God is a three-dimensional and personal being separate and apart from the Cosmos--IMHO, the all that is physically, mentally and spiritually.

Inspired by the fact that Orthodox Jewism scholars, to avoid making God and objective being, write the divine name thus: G-d.
I devised the symbol, G ? D. I will parse it in a later post.

BTW, as you write to me in response to what I write, feel free to tell me where you stand, theologically. I respect all sincerely held beliefs, including agnosticsm and atheism. I will do my best to avoid attacking people, personally, and tell me if it appears that way. However, I hope you don't mind me challenging your beliefs.

I repeat: In all this, let us do our best to agree to disagree, agreeably--even lovingly. smile
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#41989 - 01/03/12 06:40 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Tim]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Rev, just wait till TT spots that you have re-posted your original post! He/she must have something to say about that. laugh
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#42003 - 01/04/12 05:24 AM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Bill S.]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Rev, just wait till TT spots that you have re-posted your original post! He/she must have something to say about that. laugh


Thanks for taking care of mentioning it for me.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#42008 - 01/04/12 03:37 PM Re: Evidence for God [Re: Tim]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
Thanks for taking care of mentioning it for me.


I do my best.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
Page 35 of 35 < 1 2 ... 33 34 35



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.