Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: Existence of God (was Re:Rights)  (Read 13744 times)

<Patrick>

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 911
  • Radical Capitalist
    • Ayn Rand Institute
Re:Rights
« Reply #30 on: March 04, 2004, 11:05:30 pm »

Patrick, I'm simply saying that all we have for past events is witness testomony, or the people who wrote and documented things back then.

Witness testomony is not proof. And it could never be construde as such.

Of course I realize that sensery experience is a form of reason. In fact, it's called abductive logic.

But just because you can't directly experience or see something yourselve doesn't mean it's not real. Other people can also experience things. They can tell you about their experiences.  If you choose to believe them. You believe them based on faith (unless they take you and show it to you so you can see for yourself) however this faith is not blind. You believe them (or lack thereof) based on previous encournters with this person, and your own experiences.

If you Disbelieve them. You've also taken a positive stance on something.  The positive statement is "I believe you're lieing" But yet their really is no way to prove that they're lieing.

"I believe God doesn't exist" Is just as much a statement based on faith as "I believe God DOES exist." But their really is no third alternitive. There is evidence that possibly supports both views. You have to look at the evidence, and deside for yourself which evidence is more compelling.

By not choosing which one you believe. You are effectively by default choosing to believe that God doesn't exist. I would hate for you to die and realize their is no third choice like you thought. It's like binary. Either their is or it isn't. Their is no absurd.

You don't like my positive assertion.

But by the same token it's also illogical to state a universal negative. "Their's no such thing as _____" How do you know? Prove it.

However if I have personally experienced ______, then I know it exists. And it's proof enough to me.  But if you didn't see it, I still couldn't prove its existence.

It's like Einstien once said, "No amount of experiments can prove me right. But it only takes one to prove me wrong."

Speaking of Which. The theory of relativity is only a theory. It hasn't been PROVEN. But does that mean it's absurd? Of course not. In spite of the fact that it hasn't been proven, we can use these theories to help us function better in our increases in technology and whatnot.

By the same token. If somebody doesn't believe in God. They are effectively stating.

"We were created through Evolution."  This is a positive assertion. The burden of proof is then on the Evolutionist to prove it. However this hasn't been done. And in fact Darwinian and Neo-Darwinian theories are on quite shakey ground. You can't PROVE that we evolved from Apes, or whatever.  So in effect, the Aithist IS stateing a positive.

This is why the burden of proof rest on any person who makes an absolute/universal assertion -- whether that be negative of positive. Because when you make a Universal negative assertion, you are in fact making a different possitive one.

Tracy

I make no universal assertion.

All I say is that in the absense of evidence for the existence of God there is no reason to think he exists...

Why don't you believe in gremlins? Do you believe in Unicorns? Reincarnation? Palm readings? There is no evidence that they exist, but no one can prove that they don't exist.

Thus the only reasonable thing you can say is that in the absence of evidence for the existence of something it is absurd to think that it exists.

The same applies to God.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2004, 11:06:21 pm by Patrick Norton »
Logged
"I came here to say that I do not recognize anyone’s right to one minute of my life.  Nor to any part of my energy.  Nor to any achievement of mine… I wished to come here and say that I am a man who does not exist for others."
-Ayn Rand
http://www.aynrand.org
http://capitalism.org

Tracy Saboe

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3859
    • Rand for US Senate in Kentucky!
Re:Rights
« Reply #31 on: March 04, 2004, 11:09:17 pm »

The different between gremlines, unicorns, etc.

Is that their IS evidence that supports the existence of God.

Untill you've proven the theory of evolution, their is evidence.

Untill you can prove that the Romans, and Jewish and Christian writers in the 1st century were all Crazy, liers, or both,  their IS evidence.

Tracy
Logged
We agree that "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." --George Washington

Jack Conway

Conway Supports Obamacare
Conway Supports Cap and Trade
Conway Supports Abortion
Conway’s Utilities Rate Hike Scandal
Conway is in Bed with Big Pharma
Conway is Backed by Wall Street Bankers

<Patrick>

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 911
  • Radical Capitalist
    • Ayn Rand Institute
Re:Rights
« Reply #32 on: March 04, 2004, 11:15:36 pm »

Quote
Speaking of Which. The theory of relativity is only a theory. It hasn't been PROVEN. But does that mean it's absurd? Of course not. In spite of the fact that it hasn't been proven, we can use these theories to help us function better in our increases in technology and whatnot.

The fact remains that Relativity is grounded in SOME EVIDENCE. It is not proven but there is at least SOME EVIDENCE for it. There is none for God.

Quote
By the same token. If somebody doesn't believe in God. They are effectively stating.

"We were created through Evolution."  This is a positive assertion. The burden of proof is then on the Evolutionist to prove it. However this hasn't been done. And in fact Darwinian and Neo-Darwinian theories are on quite shakey ground. You can't PROVE that we evolved from Apes, or whatever.  So in effect, the Aithist IS stateing a positive.

Package deal. There is no reason someone who does not think there is evidence for the existence of God has to offer their own explaination for life.

What about the person that says: "I don't claim to know how we got here. But I do know that nobody has been able to show me any evidence of God's existence, so I see no reason to believe in him."

BTW, there is physical evidence that may not prove but does support the theory of evolution--there is no physical evidence of God.
Logged
"I came here to say that I do not recognize anyone’s right to one minute of my life.  Nor to any part of my energy.  Nor to any achievement of mine… I wished to come here and say that I am a man who does not exist for others."
-Ayn Rand
http://www.aynrand.org
http://capitalism.org

<Patrick>

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 911
  • Radical Capitalist
    • Ayn Rand Institute
Re:Rights
« Reply #33 on: March 04, 2004, 11:18:23 pm »

The different between gremlines, unicorns, etc.

Is that their IS evidence that supports the existence of God.

Untill you've proven the theory of evolution, their is evidence.

Untill you can prove that the Romans, and Jewish and Christian writers in the 1st century were all Crazy, liers, or both,  their IS evidence.

Tracy

At least now you claim to have evidence. That's a start.
 :)
Logged
"I came here to say that I do not recognize anyone’s right to one minute of my life.  Nor to any part of my energy.  Nor to any achievement of mine… I wished to come here and say that I am a man who does not exist for others."
-Ayn Rand
http://www.aynrand.org
http://capitalism.org

Tracy Saboe

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3859
    • Rand for US Senate in Kentucky!
Re:Rights
« Reply #34 on: March 04, 2004, 11:24:21 pm »

Quote
The fact remains that Relativity is grounded in SOME EVIDENCE. It is not proven but there is at least SOME EVIDENCE for it. There is none for God.

And that's what I dispute.

Look at the archeological, and papyrological evidence. Those documents are all dated with-in living memory of Jesus Death, and Resurection. Do you have reason to believe the writers were lieing?

Again. Aristotle's dictum. If the historical document is internally consistent. The benifit of the doubt should go to the validity of the historocity document.

Go and find the book "The New Evidence that demands a virdict." You'll find their is quite a lot of evidence that support the existence of Jesus, his death, his resurection, and his assention.

You'll also find that they'res a good amount of evidence, in archeology pointing to the validity of the old testement.

I think the information we find in DNA, Protiens synthisis, etc., is all evidence for inteligent design.

Look a Charles Thaxton's paper.
http://www.arn.org/docs/thaxton/ct_newdesign3198.htm

Look at my papers, on cosmology and consciousness.

If you look at the world around you, at history, at archeology, at biochemistry, etc, you'll find evidence supporting the existence of some inteligent designer. Again, that doesn't constitute proof. But, like I said, Relativity hasn't been proven, but it's still usefull and not absurd.

Tracy
Logged
We agree that "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." --George Washington

Jack Conway

Conway Supports Obamacare
Conway Supports Cap and Trade
Conway Supports Abortion
Conway’s Utilities Rate Hike Scandal
Conway is in Bed with Big Pharma
Conway is Backed by Wall Street Bankers

Tracy Saboe

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3859
    • Rand for US Senate in Kentucky!
Re:Rights
« Reply #35 on: March 04, 2004, 11:25:25 pm »

Quote
At least now you claim to have evidence. That's a start.
 :)

:-) I thought that's what I was saying all along. I'm not the best writer. Maybe I wasn't very clear.

Tracy
Logged
We agree that "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." --George Washington

Jack Conway

Conway Supports Obamacare
Conway Supports Cap and Trade
Conway Supports Abortion
Conway’s Utilities Rate Hike Scandal
Conway is in Bed with Big Pharma
Conway is Backed by Wall Street Bankers

nonluddite

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1242
  • Caveat Emptor!
Re:Rights
« Reply #36 on: March 04, 2004, 11:56:51 pm »

Quote
The fact remains that Relativity is grounded in SOME EVIDENCE. It is not proven but there is at least SOME EVIDENCE for it. There is none for God.

And that's what I dispute.

Look at the archeological, and papyrological evidence. Those documents are all dated with-in living memory of Jesus Death, and Resurection. Do you have reason to believe the writers were lieing?

Again. Aristotle's dictum. If the historical document is internally consistent. The benifit of the doubt should go to the validity of the historocity document.

Go and find the book "The New Evidence that demands a virdict." You'll find their is quite a lot of evidence that support the existence of Jesus, his death, his resurection, and his assention.

You'll also find that they'res a good amount of evidence, in archeology pointing to the validity of the old testement.

I think the information we find in DNA, Protiens synthisis, etc., is all evidence for inteligent design.

Look a Charles Thaxton's paper.
http://www.arn.org/docs/thaxton/ct_newdesign3198.htm

Look at my papers, on cosmology and consciousness.

If you look at the world around you, at history, at archeology, at biochemistry, etc, you'll find evidence supporting the existence of some inteligent designer. Again, that doesn't constitute proof. But, like I said, Relativity hasn't been proven, but it's still usefull and not absurd.

Tracy

Sorry, you are comparing apples and oranges.  The theories of science are tested by experiment or by logic nearly on a daily basis.  Now if you can devise a scientific experiment to prove that God even MAY exist, you would be a rich man!

The point is, until God introduces himself or commits suicide (or man says "by refusing to give us any sign that you exist you only prove to us that you don't exist' 'Oh dear' says God, 'I hadn't thought of it that way' and he promptly vanishes in a puff of logic"), whether you are a theist or atheist, is a matter of faith (I'm agnosic on the issue myself! :D).
Logged
"I'm trying to free your mind, but I can only show you the door.  You're the one that has to walk through it."- Morpheous, The Matrix

Tracy Saboe

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3859
    • Rand for US Senate in Kentucky!
Re:Rights
« Reply #37 on: March 05, 2004, 12:53:17 am »

Quote
whether you are a theist or atheist, is a matter of faith

That's all I ever try to get acrost to people.

Personally I believe it takes more faith to disbelieve in his existence then believe in it. But it's faith none-theless.

Tracy
Logged
We agree that "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." --George Washington

Jack Conway

Conway Supports Obamacare
Conway Supports Cap and Trade
Conway Supports Abortion
Conway’s Utilities Rate Hike Scandal
Conway is in Bed with Big Pharma
Conway is Backed by Wall Street Bankers

thewaka

  • FSP Member
  • FSP Participant
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 263
Re:Existence of God (was Re:Rights)
« Reply #38 on: March 05, 2004, 01:12:16 pm »

This thread was a split from "Rights" on the "On the Commons" forum. It was off-topic for that forum and violates the Religion & Liberty forum posting guidelines. At this time the thread will remain here, but locked. All posters are warned not to begin or participate in threads of this nature again.

Diana
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up