Evidence that God is real
- Thread starter James R
- Start date
One step at a time.
If one cannot even theoretically accept the notion of a prescriptive body surrounding a claim, there's zero value in launching into any sort of precise unpacking of that body.
If one cannot recognize scripture being jam packed with such info it seems fruitless to attempt elucidating further details.
If you look at any sort of motivational discussions surrounding any school of transcendental thought, you will see the prescriptive foundations.
If one is blithely ignorant of such plain facts, it seems to reflect a personal decision, determination or agenda (aka, the atheist credo).
kx000
Valued Senior Member
And we might not
Check
But there are only so many things in a eternal universe.
If it is jam packed with such info it should be easy for you to go and choose an example.
If you are feeling cornered, and as a result are just throwing out arguments out there to see if one sticks, then of course you won't be able to.
We'll see which one it is.
I'd give you colours (although colour is non existent - only perception)
Shapes not to sure about. One shape, add a grain of sand, another shape. Another grain of sand another shape.
Even run out of sand twist the final shape to make a new one
Guess could be true. What ever exist now always has and always will be
Even if the Universe continues to expand until (my favourite theory) even the binding energy of atoms comes apart.
Not sure how the energy which bound the atoms is dispursed (under the matter / energy can be exchanged but not distroyed idea)
That's a thought for another moment
Take your pick
We have our answer. You couldn't do it.
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
All that suggests to me is that you have nothing to offer. Now I know that is perhaps not the case but really what else can I say?
If you had anything reasonable I am sure you would have tabled it well before now. Although I can follow the approach of not wasting my breath perhaps knowing even to explain your entire position would not move folk like me.
I think that is the message U get from both you and Jan.
No....I think it boils down to this...before you decide to talk about these matters I think you require someone who is already convinced so they are easily guided by what input you would then offer which is now you opening up a world that they have already accepted.
From your position that is reasonable.
But then that leaves you open to being called a troll and I would not call it that way only because we are both here grindging our own axe ...and so if you are a troll then I guess I must be also.
Further I expect you realise that although I am just an old mug I dont buy out of date superstitious philosophy just because other folk grab the idea and run with it.
Still I cant think of a better political tool or a quicker way to make a couple of million dollars with just the gift of the gab.
I dont know if you have ever bothered but you should read upon explainations to the emotion described as the holy spirit from a clinical approach.
I suspect theists use this feeling of release and somewhat an abdication of responsibilty and something to believe choosing to let it all somehow become the responsibility of someone else has it all under control...I wander but there is a good reason for the elation and belief it is devine...more like certain chemicals in the brain fire up as opposed to some devine connection...I could be wrong but I will go with that.
However I expect you would have read about all of which I refered to...or should I say "to which I refer" ... the science behind that devine feeling...interesting and I must read it again.
It all adds up explanations for this and that....apparently I few theists have doubts but stay in line from family and friend pressure.
Thats a pity.
Your position rests upon an unsupported claim that firstly there is a creator and secondly that without any meaningful contact between it and humans you have determined specifics merely by invention.
At least that is the straw man I chose to deal with☺
So if you were to unpack this mysterious bag of goodies I suggest that first you support your claim in some manner...is that not reasonable.
Perhaps if you told me how you really see things you would find out my response. Nevertheless I have learnt good things from you and indeed Jan so on the whole the odd relationship one forms with others on in this place for me produce a benefit.
Neither will be surprised if the other was wrong☺
Anyways nice chatting to you as always.
Have a great day.
Alex
You type a large volume of refusals to type a much smaller volume of answers you claim are ready to hand.
And that is without counting the extra work of all the personal disparagements.
Why?
If one can not be decent enough to answer a relatively straight forward request then it begs the question of why you bother here. You post, you type much, you say surprisingly little, and seem more concerned with your post count than actual discussion.
Do you hold yourself out as an example of someone who holds the prescriptive qualifications to know God? Which qualifications do you think you hold that, say, a non-believer does not have? Other than holding the belief that God exists, of course.
I asked you to provide an example of what you considered to be such. Not just to point in some general direction and expect me to fathom what it is you consider to be such.
But yes, I have a personal agenda. I think everyone here does, including you. Mine is to try to understand things. Yours seems to be to obfuscate, deflect, evade and derail any such attempt.
Again, do you hold yourself out as an example of someone who holds the prescriptive qualifications to know God? Which qualifications do you think you hold that, say, a non-believer does not have? Other than holding the belief that God exists, of course.
The first Google road map to God you linked says all the others are all fakes.
John 14:6 ESV / 6 helpful votes
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
https://www.openbible.info/topics/knowing_god
This scripturally enlightened individual used Google Earth to find a road map to Heaven that makes about as much sense as the links you provided.
I just find it strange that you can't recognize the broadness of the subject, as a category. Basically the very moment a religious or spiritual precept grafts to a social body, is the very moment prescriptive details emerge. And furthermore, subsequent discussions within the social body remain fixed on such prescriptive details as time places and circumstances change.
It seems totally pointless for someone to qualify such details to another who denies, is oblivious or even vehemently rejects the category.
If you reject the category, what is the value in my answering that question? What on earth would you measure my claims against?
If you encountered someone who rejects biology as a category, would you waste your time venturing into details of effective practices for a biologist?
And there you have it.
So says the strawman, which is so integral to the atheist credo.
If you can't fathom the general direction, you certainly can't fathom the specifics.
If you don't have the means to discern the merit of my answer, why ask such foolish questions?
(Aside from having the convenience of relegating religiousity to the psychological, which is so integral for the atheistic strawman)
Well, at a guess, you would have to start with prescriptive descriptions found in scripture .... which is the central topic for practically any scriptural or religious commentary since day dot.
Given the time and place of Jesus's speaking, it sounds pretty accurate.
Yazata
Valued Senior Member
So what epistemology do you think is appropriate to the problem of justifying the claim that God really exists? That's the question of this thread. You aren't really coming any closer to answering it by insisting over and over that atheists are all using the wrong epistemology.
In short, you have to go through scripture. You have to understand what is God, according to how God defines Himself. There is no other way. And you have to understand the means for approaching God, as God explains such means. There is no other way. And, finally, one has to understand the goal as God estblishes it. There is no other way.
Technically, one can take a shortcut to all these things via a saintly person who can present such conclusions, but even then one requires scripture to identify such a person.
You can talk of other paths, such as the pursuit of good works or the cultivation of knowledge as means to making progress. However, ultimately, such paths must culminate in the above summations of relationships/definitions , means and goals as defined in scripture. IOW the culmination of all good works and knowledge finds its final purpose and resting place in God.
This of course is totally unacceptable to atheists ... hence the constant return to the sore point of square pegs in round holes, etc.
Why would you trust an alien overlord to give reliable information about itself? How to Cook Forty Humans comes to mind.
Yes... thats exactly how i found God an then started the only true religion (NACA)... an now i also have all the answrs.!!!
What you find strange (irrespective of whether or not your perception is accurate) or not is pretty much irrelevant. The question has been asked. Either be decent about it or don't.
Where have I denied the category, been oblivious to it, or rejected it? I have simply asked for you to to explain I'm not asking Google. Or anyone else. I'm asking you.
Where have I rejected the category. Where have I denied that scripture is not jam packed with what you claim? I am simply asking you to explain what you see as such a prescriptive detail of personal qualifications for knowing God.
I would at least have the decency to answer his question, and then probably have a discussion with him as to the differing views we might hold on the matter. But you haven't actually answered my questions:
Do you hold yourself out as an example of someone who holds the prescriptive qualifications to know God?
Which qualifications do you think you hold that, say, a non-believer does not have?
So you don't believe that God exists? You don't think that to know God you must also believe that God exists?? I do find that bizarre. Do you know anything about that which you don't believe exists?
As such, how is it a strawman? Note that my comment of "Other than holding the belief that God exists, of course" was simply to avoid you stating the one obvious thing I think we agree on as being a difference between believers and non-believers in terms of qualification.
Can you name another, as an example, please?
So rather than actually explain what you see as such a prescriptive detail of personal qualifications for knowing God, as asked, you intend simply to evade the matter?
Let me ask again: what you see as such a prescriptive detail of personal qualifications for knowing God?
You haven't answered, other than to throw out a few links and effectively say "If you can't understand from that, why should I bother!"
So I'll ask one of the other questions again, which you also haven't answered: Do you hold yourself out as an example of someone who holds the prescriptive qualifications to know God?
Everything we think can be deemed psychological, can it not? Is religiousity not part of what we think, as much as, say, atheism (agnostic or otherwise) is? Sure, there are more practical aspects that stem from it, but what we think is all part of our psychology.
Wow, all this and you bring it back round nicely to my first post on this. To wit:
Such as? Please can you give me an idea of what you consider to be such a prescriptive detail of personal qualifications for knowing God? If scriptures are as packed with such as you claim, providing but a single example should not prove too onerous, should it, just so that I can understand what sorts of thing you are referring to?
Thanks.
So really it's all just belief, and no knowledge whatsoever.
First you have to believe that God exists, otherwise you can't begin to understand what is God according to how God defines Himself.
For if you don't believe God exists then who is it that is telling you what is God?
The same goes for the means for approaching God, for identifying saintly persons, for understanding "the goal", etc.
It is all predicated on already believing that God exists.
Because if you don't believe that God exists then there is no authority behind the scripture.
Everything is just one man telling another man.
Of course it is unacceptable to atheists.
People are called foreigners because they don't come from your country.
It's not a matter of not accepting that your country is great, or better than their own.
It is simply a matter of definition: they don't come from your country - thus they are foreigners.
Your epistemology requires belief in God from the outset.
It in fact relies on the circularity of it.
Believe in God and you will believe that you know God.
But where is the actual demonstration of the truth of it?
Or is it just all belief?