ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old Today, 04:10 AM   #201
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,106
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
Having being an atheist in my youth, I have matured and realize that science does not have all the answers.
The fact that science does not know everything is not an excuse to wilfully ignore what it does know.

Quote:
Fallacy means that the underlying assumptions are false. Can you prove that?
The assumption that if lots of people believe something it is bound to be true is provably false, yes.

Quote:
Can you explain religion and man's belief in God?
Yes.

Quote:
Can you explain the many personal interactions and minor miracles that vast numbers of people experience?
Yes.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 04:43 AM   #202
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 11,729
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
You said you were an accountant, from London. That hardly suggests 'farmer'.


Evidence that it was created is sorely lacking...
I don't actually farm, but own farmland handed down through the generations. (My grandparents were hands-on farmers.) I spend my summers there.

I am indeed an accountant by trade.

As Roger Daltrey once said, 'I won't get to get what I'm after, till the day I die'.

Echoing Ecclesiastes 7:1.

Will I see my loved ones again? All those who went before me whom I have loved dearly? Who knows. <shrug>.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb

Last edited by Vixen; Today at 04:47 AM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:23 AM   #203
PartSkeptic
Master Poster
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 2,614
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
(snip)
No, please... you're not going to bring up your luck with finding parking spaces and malfunctioning water heaters as proof that you're God's Chosen One again, are you? Please do that in one of the countless threads you've created for that.

Stay with the thread. How does "vast numbers" translate into the experience of one person.?
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:38 AM   #204
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,771
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
Stay with the thread. How does "vast numbers" translate into the experience of one person.?
Stay with the thread?
The thread is about the apparent absence of God during the first couple hundred thousand years of humanity's early existence, if we go by the books that are ascribed to him.

How does 'vast numbers' of modern day people seeing the Virgin Mary on their grilled cheese sandwiches factor into that?
Porpoise of Life is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:49 AM   #205
PartSkeptic
Master Poster
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 2,614
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
The fact that science does not know everything is not an excuse to wilfully ignore what it does know.


The assumption that if lots of people believe something it is bound to be true is provably false, yes.

(snip)
First:
And what does science know about the how the Big Bang came about? Or how the Laws of Physics came into being. What am I ignoring anyhow?

Second:
You twist the fallacy somewhat.
Quote:
In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "argument to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: "If many believe so, it is so."
The statement "If many believe so, it is so" clearly does not prove the truth of a thing. It also does not prove that the the thing is wrong.

I was asked how I can be confident that Jesus and Muhammad were the "real thing".
Quote:
2. You seem to suggest that Jesus and Muhammad were the real thing, sent by God also as well as wise men in other religions, who were giving us "truths".
"Truth" is in quotation marks implying that it may not be so. If God exists and send us prophets the test of their mission and their "truths" is that they are accepted by huge numbers, and endure. The "truths" may not be 100% true, and may contain errors and inconsistencies. That does not invalidate the general thrust.

The challenge was:
Quote:
Apparently, Part Skeptic never received a classical education. Because if he had, he would have been able to recognize that his conclusion is based on the fallacy ad populum. How many people that believe something to be true is irrelevant to whether it is in fact true.
which implies that my conclusion (men of God being the "real thing") is false.

I stick to my conclusion that the test for a "man sent by God" is acceptance by large numbers and also endurance and spread.

Do you have a better proof/disproof? (Reminder: This is not science. It is beyond science.)
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 05:53 AM   #206
PartSkeptic
Master Poster
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 2,614
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
Stay with the thread?
The thread is about the apparent absence of God during the first couple hundred thousand years of humanity's early existence, if we go by the books that are ascribed to him.

How does 'vast numbers' of modern day people seeing the Virgin Mary on their grilled cheese sandwiches factor into that?

The thread is not about me.

How many people see the Virgin in their sandwiches? What is your definition of "vast numbers"?

Ever hear the term "helicopter Mom". Those mothers that hide in the background but closely monitor progress and intervene behind the scenes? The child has no idea.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 06:07 AM   #207
PartSkeptic
Master Poster
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 2,614
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
(snip)
Yes.

Yes.

And you can prove explain that your explanations are more correct than what the vast majority believe? Or at least have a high probability.

Or are you falsely attributing mental phenomena to things that are actually poorly understood? Because your explanations suit your beliefs?
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 06:31 AM   #208
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,106
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
First:
And what does science know about the how the Big Bang came about? Or how the Laws of Physics came into being. What am I ignoring anyhow?
You ignore everything we know about cognitive biases and probability theory, for a start.

Quote:
Second:
You twist the fallacy somewhat.

The statement "If many believe so, it is so" clearly does not prove the truth of a thing. It also does not prove that the the thing is wrong.
A statement doesn't prove anything, it is simply an assertion of fact. The statement "If many believe so, it is so" (where 'so' clearly means 'true') is provably false. For example, even when many people believed that the earth was flat it was still round.

Quote:
I stick to my conclusion that the test for a "man sent by God" is acceptance by large numbers and also endurance and spread.

Do you have a better proof/disproof? (Reminder: This is not science. It is beyond science.)
Before there could be a test for whether a man is sent by God there would need to be a test for the existence of God. The fact that lots of people believe that a man was sent by God certainly does not make it true.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 06:35 AM   #209
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,106
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
And you can prove explain that your explanations are more correct than what the vast majority believe? Or at least have a high probability.

Or are you falsely attributing mental phenomena to things that are actually poorly understood? Because your explanations suit your beliefs?
There are plausible explanations for belief in God and the supernatural which do not require the existence of God or the supernatural, so the answer to both your questions is "Yes".
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:27 AM   #210
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 15,396
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
Having being an atheist in my youth, I have matured and realize that science does not have all the answers.

Fallacy means that the underlying assumptions are false. Can you prove that? Can you explain religion and man's belief in God? Can you explain the many personal interactions and minor miracles that vast numbers of people experience?
No it doesn't. It says NOTHING about the underlying premise. A fallacy is a logically false syllogism. You can have something that is true but use a false syllogism to prove it. Which means you didn't prove anything. The fallacy ad populum basically states that the number of people that believe something doesn't prove or disprove it. That I can or can't explain why some people believe in God is IRRELEVANT to whether there is a God. The very essence of the 'fallacy ad populum'.

Also, I have never seen a single miracle, not one ever credibly proved.

As for so called interactions. I wouldn't say that an internal dialogue constitutes an interaction. Those are revelations. Every religion is based on them. If you want to say your revelation came from God, that might be reason for YOU to believe it. But it isn't a reason for anyone else to believe it nor should it EVER be. Neither should a revelation made to a shepherd made 2 or 4 or 6 thousand years ago. Just because someone recorded it in the goat herders guide to the galaxy doesn't make it true.

I don't know if there is a God. I doubt it. I certainly cannot prove or disprove it, nor have I ever seen anyone else be remotely succesful in that endeavor. That constitutes an unfalsifiable claim which puts it on par with pink unicorns, flying spaghetti monsters and Big Foot.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:32 AM   #211
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 15,396
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
From the OP:



Are you now asserting that the argument put forth in the OP, and the article cited in support of that argument, are irrelevant to the argument in the OP?



What relevance does the amount of time that humans have been in Israel have to that? If your answer is, as it seems to be, "nothing", then you're a second poster who is actually agreeing with me and disagreeing with Thor, despite apparently considering themselves to be supporting Thor's posts.
Your posts are intellectually vacuous. I'm done discussing your absurdly moronic sophistry.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:49 AM   #212
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,771
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
And you can prove explain that your explanations are more correct than what the vast majority believe? Or at least have a high probability.

Or are you falsely attributing mental phenomena to things that are actually poorly understood? Because your explanations suit your beliefs?
Says the person who claims he's right... because of magic.

And while the vast majority of people might believe in the supernatural, I doubt you could get most of them to agree that they believe in the same supernatural entities. The Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Animists and Jews all believe in something, but they certainly don't believe that they all believe in the same thing.
So your argumentam ad populum fails there too.

Also, secular/agnostic/atheist people have overtaken every religious population apart from Christianity, Islam and Hinduism in size. Hell, they're even almost as big as all of the other religious communities combined!
Does that mean their views are getting more and more correct, by your metric?
Porpoise of Life is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:13 AM   #213
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 17,744
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Your posts are intellectually vacuous. I'm done discussing your absurdly moronic sophistry.
So, to sum up our conversation:

Me (to someone else): If, as you say, God has ignored people for 200,000 years no matter what, then the amount of time God has ignored people for is not longer because people have been in Israel longer, which is the argument in the OP.

You: God ignored people until they were in Israel.

Me: That would mean that people being in Israel earlier than previously thought would mean that God had ignored people for a shorter length of time than previously thought, rather than a longer length of time, as the OP claims. Here's a list of things in chronological order, in order to demonstrate this simple fact.

You: Listing things in chronological order is too hard to do.

Me: I didn't think listing things in chronological order was a particularly hard thing to do, but if it is, I apologise.

You: When things happened is irrelevant to the argument in the OP.

Me: The argument in the OP is about when humans first lived in Israel, and that's what the article linked in the OP is about.

You: I have won the argument so I'm going to flounce off.

Well, if you're happy with the intellectual rigour of your posts then good for you, I suppose. Thanks for joining in on page 4 of a discussion in order to come to the conclusion that you don't want to participate in that discussion. I hope you got out of it what you intended to.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:20 AM   #214
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 15,396
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
And you can prove explain that your explanations are more correct than what the vast majority believe? Or at least have a high probability.

Or are you falsely attributing mental phenomena to things that are actually poorly understood? Because your explanations suit your beliefs?
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
Says the person who claims he's right... because of magic.

And while the vast majority of people might believe in the supernatural, I doubt you could get most of them to agree that they believe in the same supernatural entities. The Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Animists and Jews all believe in something, but they certainly don't believe that they all believe in the same thing.
So your argumentam ad populum fails there too.

Also, secular/agnostic/atheist people have overtaken every religious population apart from Christianity, Islam and Hinduism in size. Hell, they're even almost as big as all of the other religious communities combined!
Does that mean their views are getting more and more correct, by your metric?
It is worth noting to Part Skeptic that while science cannot prove or explain everything religions explain everything and prove NOTHING. Anyone can pull an explanation for the universe out of their ass. It's another endeavor entirely to set out to prove it.

Part Skeptic is just one of millions who are satisfied by a poor explanation without a shred of evidence. They even insult anyone who does need evidence as in 'doubting Thomas'.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:21 AM   #215
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 15,396
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
So, to sum up our conversation:

Me (to someone else): If, as you say, God has ignored people for 200,000 years no matter what, then the amount of time God has ignored people for is not longer because people have been in Israel longer, which is the argument in the OP.

You: God ignored people until they were in Israel.

Me: That would mean that people being in Israel earlier than previously thought would mean that God had ignored people for a shorter length of time than previously thought, rather than a longer length of time, as the OP claims. Here's a list of things in chronological order, in order to demonstrate this simple fact.

You: Listing things in chronological order is too hard to do.

Me: I didn't think listing things in chronological order was a particularly hard thing to do, but if it is, I apologise.

You: When things happened is irrelevant to the argument in the OP.

Me: The argument in the OP is about when humans first lived in Israel, and that's what the article linked in the OP is about.

You: I have won the argument so I'm going to flounce off.

Well, if you're happy with the intellectual rigour of your posts then good for you, I suppose. Thanks for joining in on page 4 of a discussion in order to come to the conclusion that you don't want to participate in that discussion. I hope you got out of it what you intended to.
Sophomoric sophistry. Go away.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 11:02 AM   #216
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 17,744
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Sophomoric sophistry. Go away.
Thanks for your useful contributions to the discussion.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 11:36 AM   #217
PartSkeptic
Master Poster
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 2,614
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
(snip) That constitutes an unfalsifiable claim which puts it on par with pink unicorns, flying spaghetti monsters and Big Foot.

The unfalsifiability of the claim is only because of your restrictive tests for proof.

And no sane person believes in your invented creatures.

People believe in God for a number of reasons. Some take the words of the prophets as giving an explanation for our existence, and for the incredible miracle that is this planet, and its diverse and beautiful landscapes, life, and forms - as well as the intricacy and beauty of the physics that allow mankind to perform wondrous, almost magical, feats.

Some have direct interaction with God. To say it is a brain malfunction is denial. Some experience spirits and the supernatural. To again attribute those events to brain malfunction is simply a convenience of confirmation bias.

You debate mostly with people who share your views. There are many tales from sincere believers who demonstrate that God cares.

And logically, if he cares now, it is likely he always cared. Of course you could argue that God is not consistent and switches from not caring to caring and back again at whim. The timelines are thus irrelevant.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 11:48 AM   #218
StackOverflow
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 124
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post


Some have direct interaction with God. To say it is a brain malfunction is denial. Some experience spirits and the supernatural. To again attribute those events to brain malfunction is simply a convenience of confirmation bias.
I just spoke with god. he said he put the fungus into your body to punish you for your lies, your false prophesies and the use of black magic.
__________________
Owners of dogs will have noticed that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they will think you are god.


Christopher Hitchens
StackOverflow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 11:51 AM   #219
PartSkeptic
Master Poster
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 2,614
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
It is worth noting to Part Skeptic that while science cannot prove or explain everything religions explain everything and prove NOTHING. Anyone can pull an explanation for the universe out of their ass. It's another endeavor entirely to set out to prove it.

Part Skeptic is just one of millions who are satisfied by a poor explanation without a shred of evidence. They even insult anyone who does need evidence as in 'doubting Thomas'.

The explanations are reasonable and not manufactured.

Despite the myths and mistakes of the past, the evidence for spirits and souls endures almost unchanged.

Not liking the evidence, namely that it takes human mind with a soul to "see" or "experience communication" with spirits and souls does not falsify the claims.

It is a better basis for a hypothesis of the truth behind the universe than any mathematical formula and the musings of scientists out to make money from books and lectures. They are no closer to the truth than the Buddhist monk I saw in Thailand who was interpreting a bunch of strange symbols and hieroglyphics as having mystical meaning.

Your scorn may impress others. Not me. People should doubt, and question contradictions, and question leaders and claims, but make decisions based on reasonable probability.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 11:56 AM   #220
PartSkeptic
Master Poster
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 2,614
Originally Posted by StackOverflow View Post
I just spoke with god. he said he put the fungus into your body to punish you for your lies, your false prophesies and the use of black magic.

No. It was not punishment.

I do think he allowed it for a reason. I think I know why. That is personal.

BTW. Have you just lied about speaking to God? And written your post with malice? God may not wait for the afterlife to deliver a sanction.

Of course, if God does not exist and there is no karma, you have free will to do anything to anyone without an afterlife consequence.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**

Last edited by PartSkeptic; Today at 11:57 AM.
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:09 PM   #221
PartSkeptic
Master Poster
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 2,614
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
Says the person who claims he's right... because of magic.

And while the vast majority of people might believe in the supernatural, I doubt you could get most of them to agree that they believe in the same supernatural entities. The Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Animists and Jews all believe in something, but they certainly don't believe that they all believe in the same thing.
So your argumentam ad populum fails there too.

Also, secular/agnostic/atheist people have overtaken every religious population apart from Christianity, Islam and Hinduism in size. Hell, they're even almost as big as all of the other religious communities combined!
Does that mean their views are getting more and more correct, by your metric?

You have a point about atheists increasing in number. It means that the religions are not updating their message and their logic. A number of priests are losing their spirituality and it shows. Money and security have become their gods. There are a number of groups that have retained their faith and charity and do good work - they will endure.

If God exists, as I think he does, he will sort out the situation.

Just this morning I came across this site. Interesting graphics and numbers. Save the images and then zoom in.

https://integralchurch.wordpress.com...all-religions/

Somewhat out of date but easy and quick. 6,3 billion people. 146 million atheists of 1.1 billion without religion.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:18 PM   #222
PartSkeptic
Master Poster
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 2,614
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
(snip)

And while the vast majority of people might believe in the supernatural, I doubt you could get most of them to agree that they believe in the same supernatural entities. The Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Animists and Jews all believe in something, but they certainly don't believe that they all believe in the same thing.
So your argumentam ad populum fails there too.

(snip)

I have said that in my opinion they all have a portion of the truth.

It seems logical that God gave each one of them a different message that has an underlying truth. I do not believe the claims of various religions that they are the only ones with the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

They need to re-evaluate and update in the light of other religions and also in light of scientific discoveries. Without changes, the strife and discord with result in mankind not dealing with critical problems such as over-population, pollution and global warming.

Maybe change will be forced upon them.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:21 PM   #223
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 15,396
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
The unfalsifiability of the claim is only because of your restrictive tests for proof.
No, that's not it at all. 'Unfalsifiable' means EXACTLY that. It means that a test CANNOT be devised that that can prove something to be false. If as you say that God is not unfalsifiable...please, please tell us the test. Otherwise, YOU ARE WRONG.
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
And no sane person believes in your invented creatures.
Nonsense. How do you know?

Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
People believe in God for a number of reasons. Some take the words of the prophets as giving an explanation for our existence, and for the incredible miracle that is this planet, and its diverse and beautiful landscapes, life, and forms - as well as the intricacy and beauty of the physics that allow mankind to perform wondrous, almost magical, feats.

Some have direct interaction with God. To say it is a brain malfunction is denial. Some experience spirits and the supernatural. To again attribute those events to brain malfunction is simply a convenience of confirmation bias.
You can make up all the reasons in the world. That doesn't make the claim true. Why should we believe the prophets in Israel? Why not believe the prophets in South America or Ancient Greece or Borneo or India or China or a million other places? How do you, me or anyone know who had a genuine interaction with this invisible unfalsifiable being or was influenced by narcotics or a potential malfunction of their brain? It's not denial, it's a reasonable understanding that are minds are not perfect and that they can be influenced falsely. False memories are real and we all have them.

Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post

You debate mostly with people who share your views. There are many tales from sincere believers who demonstrate that God cares.

And logically, if he cares now, it is likely he always cared. Of course you could argue that God is not consistent and switches from not caring to caring and back again at whim. The timelines are thus irrelevant.
People tell stories. Not all of them true. Now personally, if people believe in imaginary friends and it helps them cope, fine. No problem. But we have a problem when they insist that others believe in their imaginary friends. And that is how people have used their gods. They have stoned women and homosexuals for their sexuality. They have enslaved their fellow human beings and told them what they may or may not eat. They have justified their own power and position by their gods.

From me to any of you monstrous jerks who think your God can tell anyone what to do. 'Go screw yourself!'
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

Last edited by acbytesla; Today at 01:08 PM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:22 PM   #224
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,106
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
The explanations are reasonable and not manufactured.
Supernatural explanations are irrational and entirely made up.

Quote:
Despite the myths and mistakes of the past, the evidence for spirits and souls endures almost unchanged.
Because it is an artifact of cognitive biases and fallible perceptions which are unchanged.

Quote:
Not liking the evidence, namely that it takes human mind with a soul to "see" or "experience communication" with spirits and souls does not falsify the claims.
Not liking the evidence, namely that human minds are easily fooled by cognitive biases and fallible perceptions, does not validate the claims.

Quote:
It is a better basis for a hypothesis of the truth behind the universe than any mathematical formula and the musings of scientists out to make money from books and lectures.
The people who make the most money from books and lectures are the woo slingers who prey on the gullible.

Quote:
People should doubt, and question contradictions, and question leaders and claims, but make decisions based on reasonable probability.
Indeed, which is why supernatural claims should be rejected.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett

Last edited by Pixel42; Today at 12:24 PM.
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:05 PM   #225
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 15,396
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post

Quote:
It is a better basis for a hypothesis of the truth behind the universe than any mathematical formula and the musings of scientists out to make money from books and lectures.
The people who make the most money from books and lectures are the woo slingers who prey on the gullible.
This is the one I love the most. As if people all over are paying huge sums to listen to highly technical lectures from mathematicians and theoretical physicists. Yet Deepak Chopra nonsensical and moronic musings and charlatans like Ken Ham, Pat Robertson rake in millions. Pastors buy jets. Most scientists I know fly coach.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

Last edited by acbytesla; Today at 01:06 PM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:45 PM   #226
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,241
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
The unfalsifiability of the claim is only because of your restrictive tests for proof.

And no sane person believes in your invented creatures.
Give it time. By your reckoning if enough people believe in these "invented creatures" they will become true. Look at the number of people who believe in the Abrahamic God, his angels and demons. All invented creatures.

Quote:
People believe in God for a number of reasons. Some take the words of the prophets as giving an explanation for our existence, and for the incredible miracle that is this planet, and its diverse and beautiful landscapes, life, and forms - as well as the intricacy and beauty of the physics that allow mankind to perform wondrous, almost magical, feats.
I get a little tired of the faithful pointing to the "beautiful landscapes" and such as proof of God. As the physical world we live in is the only one we know, we have nothing else to compare it with, to measure beauty in any absolute way.

Quote:
Some have direct interaction with God. To say it is a brain malfunction is denial. Some experience spirits and the supernatural. To again attribute those events to brain malfunction is simply a convenience of confirmation bias.
Do you have some technique to assess the veracity of the "direct interaction with God" that some dudes have? If they say they have is that good enough for you?


Quote:
You debate mostly with people who share your views. There are many tales from sincere believers who demonstrate that God cares.
We are debating with you now. The believers who sincerely believe that God cares, does not trump the fact that the written evidence, and our knowledge of the age and size of the universe, clearly shows he does not - if he exists that is.

Quote:
And logically, if he cares now, it is likely he always cared. Of course you could argue that God is not consistent and switches from not caring to caring and back again at whim. The timelines are thus irrelevant.
Logically?

He cares now because some dudes have "direct interactions with God" ...... yes well who could argue with that.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:50 PM   #227
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,241
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Your posts are intellectually vacuous. I'm done discussing your absurdly moronic sophistry.

I admire your patience. I lost interest in it a while back.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:00 PM   #228
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,241
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
This is the one I love the most. As if people all over are paying huge sums to listen to highly technical lectures from mathematicians and theoretical physicists. Yet Deepak Chopra nonsensical and moronic musings and charlatans like Ken Ham, Pat Robertson rake in millions. Pastors buy jets. Most scientists I know fly coach.

You forgot Ray Comfort (The Banana Man), as far as moronic musings go he eclipses them all.

Pat Robertson is one of those dudes PartSkeptic is on about, you know the ones that have "direct interaction with God". Saw him on a video clip once recalling a chat he had with God, where God told him to buy another jet.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:11 PM   #229
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,106
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
I get a little tired of the faithful pointing to the "beautiful landscapes" and such as proof of God.
Especially when the ugliness of the world and the sheer horror of much of nature are not accepted as evidence against God but are usually hand waved away as the consequence of original sin, if they are acknowledged at all.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:17 PM   #230
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 17,744
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
I admire your patience. I lost interest in it a while back.
Yes, you do seem to have abandoned discussing anything to do with the OP long ago. Since it seems that the time that people first entered Israel is irrelevant to the discussion you wanted to have - which is "just that belief in the Abrahamic God is absurd" - I'm left wondering why you mentioned it at all. "Belief in the Abrahamic God is absurd" is a perfectly cromulent thread title.

If you think having the same circular conversations with PartSkeptic that everybody has in every thread that he posts in is a better use of your time than participating in the discussion that you initiated, then you do you, although it does leave unanswered the question of why not just post in one of the many threads that this conversation has already happened in. I usually assume that when someone posts a thread they have an interest in the topic of that thread, rather than that they think it irrelevant.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:30 PM   #231
Thor 2
Illuminator
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 3,241
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
Especially when the ugliness of the world and the sheer horror of much of nature are not accepted as evidence against God but are usually hand waved away as the consequence of original sin, if they are acknowledged at all.

Yes indeed! Who could doubt the existence of God when they see a female praying mantis devouring her lover. Obviously this was a result of man's original sin.

As I mentioned in a previous post it is difficult (nah impossible), to get the faithful to give their own thought out responses, to the tricky questions that challenge their faith. We only tend to get Biblical quotes, from Christians, and koranic quotes, from Muslims, for example.

My theory regarding this phenomena is they, the faithful, do not allow logical thought to enter that part of the brain, dealing with religious belief.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:30 PM   #232
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,312
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
So, to sum up our conversation:

Me (to someone else): If, as you say, God has ignored people for 200,000 years no matter what, then the amount of time God has ignored people for is not longer because people have been in Israel longer, which is the argument in the OP.

You: God ignored people until they were in Israel.

Me: That would mean that people being in Israel earlier than previously thought would mean that God had ignored people for a shorter length of time than previously thought, rather than a longer length of time, as the OP claims. Here's a list of things in chronological order, in order to demonstrate this simple fact.

You: Listing things in chronological order is too hard to do.

Me: I didn't think listing things in chronological order was a particularly hard thing to do, but if it is, I apologise.

You: When things happened is irrelevant to the argument in the OP.

Me: The argument in the OP is about when humans first lived in Israel, and that's what the article linked in the OP is about.

You: I have won the argument so I'm going to flounce off.

Well, if you're happy with the intellectual rigour of your posts then good for you, I suppose. Thanks for joining in on page 4 of a discussion in order to come to the conclusion that you don't want to participate in that discussion. I hope you got out of it what you intended to.
"intellectual rigour"?

Really?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:37 PM   #233
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 15,396
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Yes, you do seem to have abandoned discussing anything to do with the OP long ago. Since it seems that the time that people first entered Israel is irrelevant to the discussion you wanted to have - which is "just that belief in the Abrahamic God is absurd" - I'm left wondering why you mentioned it at all. "Belief in the Abrahamic God is absurd" is a perfectly cromulent thread title.

If you think having the same circular conversations with PartSkeptic that everybody has in every thread that he posts in is a better use of your time than participating in the discussion that you initiated, then you do you, although it does leave unanswered the question of why not just post in one of the many threads that this conversation has already happened in. I usually assume that when someone posts a thread they have an interest in the topic of that thread, rather than that they think it irrelevant.
I read your posts and say huh? At least I understand PartSkeptic. I don't agree with him, but I do understand his missives. In contrast your posts don't even attempt to make actual sense. They are multisylabbic verbose pedantic nonsense.

Intelligent people demonstrate their intelligence by turning the complicated into the simple when possible. In contrast, you seem to be deliberately trying to make the simple complicated. I have no patience for that.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:56 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.