|
Post by Admin on Aug 8, 2023 3:01:39 GMT
An arm growing back at Lourdes immediately after prayer would be one of various red line events for me, compelling my immediate acceptance of his power and existence for instance. lol. No it wouldn't.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 8, 2023 18:26:50 GMT
An arm growing back at Lourdes immediately after prayer would be one of various red line events for me, compelling my immediate acceptance of his power and existence for instance. lol. No it wouldn't. If you mean arms don't grow back at Lourdes, then one must unfortunately agree with you. God does not like curing amputees it would seem.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 8, 2023 18:29:19 GMT
Jf you told someone that I doubt whether they would ever believe it. Exactly the point. I was just spitballing the question of why God presumably puts so much importance on faith. You could live a billion years and still not believe it. Likewise, I could prove to you an infinite amount of times that I will catch you when you fall, but you would still struggle with letting go. Perhaps faith is more of a necessity. The Lost One That would imply evidence, not faith - which would be the point.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 8, 2023 19:17:01 GMT
If you mean arms don't grow back at Lourdes, then one must unfortunately agree with you. God does not like curing amputees it would seem. Not sure why you think agreement with me is necessarily unfortunate, but that might explain a few things. At any rate, I'd bet my bottom dollar that an arm growing back at Lourdes would not compel your immediate acceptance of God's power and existence. You would first look for a physical cause (maybe it was a magic trick, an illusion). Failing that, you would assume a psychological cause (perhaps you were hypnotized). The last resort would not be an acceptance of God's existence; it would simply be classified as an unexplained natural phenomenon. Or in other words, "nature works in mysterious ways." Even in the unlikely scenario that the arm does indeed compel you to accept God's power and existence, it would not be immediate. Exactly the point. I was just spitballing the question of why God presumably puts so much importance on faith. You could live a billion years and still not believe it. Likewise, I could prove to you an infinite amount of times that I will catch you when you fall, but you would still struggle with letting go. Perhaps faith is more of a necessity. The Lost One That would imply evidence, not faith which would be the point. Nope, it's still faith, for you have no proof that I will catch you next time.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 8, 2023 19:22:24 GMT
If you mean arms don't grow back at Lourdes, then one must unfortunately agree with you. God does not like curing amputees it would seem. Not sure why you think agreement with me is necessarily unfortunate, but that might explain a few things. At any rate, I'd bet my bottom dollar that an arm growing back at Lourdes would not compel your immediate acceptance of God's power and existence. You would first look for a physical cause (maybe it was a magic trick, an illusion). Failing that, you would assume a psychological cause (perhaps you were hypnotized). The last resort would not be an acceptance of God's existence; it would simply be classified as an unexplained natural phenomenon. Or in other words, "nature works in mysterious ways." Even in the unlikely scenario that the arm does indeed compel you to accept God's power and existence, it would not be immediate. That would imply evidence, not faith which would be the point. Nope, it's still faith, for you have no proof that I will catch you next time. er ... but you said "I could prove to you.." if you did, I would have no need of faith. That's how it works. Also, saying you will be catching me when I fall requires a different order of belief or level of credulity than asserting that you know I will never die.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 8, 2023 19:37:52 GMT
Not sure why you think agreement with me is necessarily unfortunate, but that might explain a few things. At any rate, I'd bet my bottom dollar that an arm growing back at Lourdes would not compel your immediate acceptance of God's power and existence. You would first look for a physical cause (maybe it was a magic trick, an illusion). Failing that, you would assume a psychological cause (perhaps you were hypnotized). The last resort would not be an acceptance of God's existence; it would simply be classified as an unexplained natural phenomenon. Or in other words, "nature works in mysterious ways." Even in the unlikely scenario that the arm does indeed compel you to accept God's power and existence, it would not be immediate. Nope, it's still faith, for you have no proof that I will catch you next time. er ... but you said "I could prove to you.." if you did, I would have no need of faith. That's how it works. Also, saying you will be catching me when I fall requires a different order of belief or level of credulity than asserting that you know I will never die. How could I prove to you that I will catch you next time?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 8, 2023 21:37:21 GMT
er ... but you said "I could prove to you.." if you did, I would have no need of faith. That's how it works. Also, saying you will be catching me when I fall requires a different order of belief or level of credulity than asserting that you know I will never die. How could I prove to you that I will catch you next time? That's your problem. You said "If I could.." and I replied "if you did" remember? A reminder that this springs from the notion that an omnipotent God presumably knows what would persuade (not coerce) people into a certainty of His existence. Unlike yourself catching me or not, He can prove this, and I have even helpfully named examples which would satisfy me. You, on the other hand do not have a way of proving that you will always catch me let alone know that I will live for ever. In the latter case at least this is probably because you are not God.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 8, 2023 22:48:54 GMT
How could I prove to you that I will catch you next time? That's your problem. You said "If I could.." and I replied "if you did" remember? A reminder that this springs from the notion that an omnipotent God presumably knows what would persuade (not coerce) people into a certainty of His existence. Unlike yourself catching me or not, He can prove this, and I have even helpfully named examples which would satisfy me. You, on the other hand do not have a way of proving that you will always catch me let alone know that I will live for ever. In the latter case at least this is probably because you are not God. You could live a billion years and still not believe you would never die. But I could catch you a billion times and that's enough to believe I'd catch you again? Doesn't seem consistent, but whatever, there's still no proof either way.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 8, 2023 22:56:55 GMT
That's your problem. You said "If I could.." and I replied "if you did" remember? A reminder that this springs from the notion that an omnipotent God presumably knows what would persuade (not coerce) people into a certainty of His existence. Unlike yourself catching me or not, He can prove this, and I have even helpfully named examples which would satisfy me. You, on the other hand do not have a way of proving that you will always catch me let alone know that I will live for ever. In the latter case at least this is probably because you are not God. You could live a billion years and still not believe you would never die. But I could catch you a billion times and that's enough to believe I'd catch you again? Doesn't seem consistent, but whatever, there's still no proof either way. The point is, still, that God can offer satisfactory proof of existence and does not and so I would ask Him why. It is not a matter of how much proof I would need since He presumably knows that already. But perhaps even if you live for a billion years you will still not see that distinction.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 8, 2023 23:16:33 GMT
You could live a billion years and still not believe you would never die. But I could catch you a billion times and that's enough to believe I'd catch you again? Doesn't seem consistent, but whatever, there's still no proof either way. The point is, still, that God can offer satisfactory proof of existence and does not and so I would ask Him why. It is not a matter of how much proof I would need since He presumably knows that already. But perhaps even if you live for a billion years you will still not see that distinction. Presuming you don’t have proof of God, that God is omniscient, and faith is belief without proof, the question should by why an omniscient being places so much importance on faith.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 8, 2023 23:41:51 GMT
The point is, still, that God can offer satisfactory proof of existence and does not and so I would ask Him why. It is not a matter of how much proof I would need since He presumably knows that already. But perhaps even if you live for a billion years you will still not see that distinction. Presuming you don’t have proof of God, that God is omniscient, and faith is belief without proof, the question should by why an omniscient being places so much importance on faith. I certainly don't have proof. That, you may remember is what I asked for - given any deity worth its salt would know what would wash and what would not. And as an atheist I suspect the answer to the question you prefer is an obvious one.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 9, 2023 0:23:04 GMT
Presuming you don’t have proof of God, that God is omniscient, and faith is belief without proof, the question should by why an omniscient being places so much importance on faith. I certainly don't have proof. That, you may remember is what I asked for - given any deity worth its salt would know what would wash and what would not. And as an atheist I suspect the answer to the question you prefer is an obvious one. Perhaps you're looking the wrong way. You may as well demand proof that you can think. What I would prefer is an acknowledgment of the inconsistency I pointed out above, but once again, you're all about winning the debate with grade school tactics, even despite there being no debate here. Do better or excuse yourself from the table again.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 9, 2023 1:00:36 GMT
I certainly don't have proof. That, you may remember is what I asked for - given any deity worth its salt would know what would wash and what would not. And as an atheist I suspect the answer to the question you prefer is an obvious one. Perhaps you're looking the wrong way. You may as well demand proof that you can think. I am not sure why this comparison is relevant. I know I can think since it is proved by me being aware of my question. I am not necessarily aware of a deliberate supernatural Cause in the same way (although some philosophers have endeavoured to show this ought to be the case) "you could live a billion years and still not believe you would never die. But I could catch you a billion times and that's enough to believe I'd catch you again? Doesn't seem consistent" I acknowledge your two statements. What they have to do with asking a supposed omnipotent god to prove itself in a way it knows will be the most effective way of fulfilling its will, only you can explain. If it put its head above the parapet beyond doubt now and again no one would have to wait a billion years. Indeed; since here you appear to finding inconsistencies in something only you have said lol As already mentioned, living forever and catching someone interminably do not require the same levels of credulity. That's very kind of you so I will be off. In the meantine, if God exists and knows the answer to the question by raising his face above the parapet, He necessarily knows where to find me.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 9, 2023 1:28:38 GMT
Perhaps you're looking the wrong way. You may as well demand proof that you can think. I am not sure why this comparison is relevant. I know I can think since it is proved by me being aware of my question. I'm just suggesting that maybe the proof you're looking for isn't external. It's about faith. That's the point, remember? An omniscient being would have no need for faith, if that were even possible. But here we have a presumably omniscient being who apparently thinks faith is somehow important for us. Asking why is not a catalyst for debate. I don't remember saying anything about credulity, but I do remember you saying that you doubt anyone would ever believe they would live forever, even after living a billion years. And yet, after a billion catches, you would still hesitate to let go. It's a valid comparison in terms of faith being belief without proof. "You must have the capacity to receive, or even omnipotence can't give." - CS Lewis
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 9, 2023 1:47:35 GMT
I'm just suggesting that maybe the proof you're looking for isn't external. In which case God would still know that and could work on an indisputable 'internal proof' 'that would persuade me. So again: why doesn't he? In the event of voices in my head however I might have to seek professional advice... Its about that, where there is evidence, no one talks of faith, remember? As already said, as an atheist I can easily think of an alternate reason why faith is necessary and evidence or poof absent. Asking why is exactly a catalyst for debate. (No one knows what this supposed God thinks, btw. Just saying.) And btw the above smells like special pleading. Then you remember wrong, and it is just another straw man blowing in the wind Corrected. But now as you suggested I definitely leave the table, unless of course anyone else can add something useful.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 9, 2023 4:02:38 GMT
I'm just suggesting that maybe the proof you're looking for isn't external. In which case God would still know that and could work on an indisputable 'internal proof' 'that would persuade me. So again: why doesn't he? In the event of voices in my head however I might have to seek professional advice... You keep talking about persuasion, but you seem to be asking for indisputable proof. You're flopping around again. Is faith belief in the absence of proof or is it belief in the absence of evidence? Surely you would let go without hesitation if you had proof that I'd catch you given that a billion catches apparently isn't enough evidence. No, it's an invitation for discussion. What do you think you're debating here? "Jf you told someone that I doubt whether they would ever believe it." "You do not have a way of proving that you will always catch me." If there exists an omnipotent god (that's the condition, the premise of the question), it would indeed be able to make it impossible for anyone to doubt its existence. To say it doesn't do that because it doesn't exist is to dismiss the conditional (something you clearly enjoy doing) only to avoid speculating a reason why. You're trying too hard to funnel this into what you expect to hear: "God works in mysterious ways." Someone one told me that without doubt, it isn't faith. What do you make of that? No, changed. You really got a handle on those straw men you accuse me of, but I've noticed that you really like using the word "credulous" when referring to theists. If theists believe merely because they want to, can we not say that atheists don't believe merely because they don't want to? Cool. Later dude.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 9, 2023 10:59:42 GMT
If there exists an omnipotent god (that's the condition, the premise of the question), it would indeed be able to make it impossible for anyone to doubt its existence Later dude. QED dude.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 9, 2023 13:48:54 GMT
What exactly do people need to do in order to avoid going to Hell?
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 9, 2023 14:03:10 GMT
Suspend your belief/disbelief for a minute. Just assume God exists... You can ask Him/Her just one question... What would it be? You know what it would take to convince everyone of your existence and also what would never work. Why not make yourself known to the entire world without any doubt and thus bring many more souls to salvation? So there issue here is there would always be doubt. That is the problem of not ever being able to escape the fact that the only thing you can know for certain is that you exist. The only way to remove doubt would be for God to literally take away everyone's ability to doubt. Keep in mind that the answer you gave is only referring to the Abrahamic idea of God where the God wants us to know they exist and it also assumes there is such thing as Salvation. That still wouldn't be a waste of a question though assuming the God would be able to answer you. The answer might just be "the Christian idea of God is made up by humans."
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 9, 2023 14:41:36 GMT
You know what it would take to convince everyone of your existence and also what would never work. Why not make yourself known to the entire world without any doubt and thus bring many more souls to salvation? So there issue here is there would always be doubt. That is the problem of not ever being able to escape the fact that the only thing you can know for certain is that you exist. Doesn't this mean that you don't know for certain all of that which you have just said?
|
|