Does God exist? (1 Viewer)

[michaelnashid]

You want detailed answers for all your questions???
Listen to my advice and listen to the sermons available on this website...
There is a sermon for EVERYTHING..even one for science and religion (http://www.orthodoxsermons.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=25&Itemid=26)
This issue of DOES GOD EXIST is one of which should be approached with an open mind, with patience and understanding so look around and trust me...if u dont find the answer to your questions here...i dont know where else you will..
Heres the website:
http://www.orthodoxsermons.org/index.php?option=com_docman&Itemid=26

 

[Slidey]

While the probability argument is good secondary evidence for life on earth, I think probability and randomness have no bearing on the creation of the universe.

It's an information thing; all information (in the scientific sense) before the big bang probably got destroyed during it, which prevents probabilistic analysis, even qualitatively.

 

[Slidey]

I hope he posts the website again. I didn't quite catch it the first 7 times.

 

[HalcyonSky]

You want detailed answers for all your questions???
Listen to my advice and listen to the sermons available on this website...
There is a sermon for EVERYTHING..even one for science and religion (http://www.orthodoxsermons.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=25&Itemid=26)
This issue of DOES GOD EXIST is one of which should be approached with an open mind, with patience and understanding so look around and trust me...if u dont find the answer to your questions here...i dont know where else you will..
Heres the website:
http://www.orthodoxsermons.org/index.php?option=com_docman&Itemid=26

ur joking, right?

 

[youBROKEmyLIFE]

You want detailed answers for all your questions???
Listen to my advice and listen to the sermons available on this website...
There is a sermon for EVERYTHING..even one for science and religion (http://www.orthodoxsermons.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=25&Itemid=26)
This issue of DOES GOD EXIST is one of which should be approached with an open mind, with patience and understanding so look around and trust me...if u dont find the answer to your questions here...i dont know where else you will..
Heres the website:
http://www.orthodoxsermons.org/index.php?option=com_docman&Itemid=26

Where's the sermon that gives arguments for the existence of God?

 

[Slidey]

Where's the sermon that gives arguments for the existence of God?

Windmills do not work that way!

 

[michaelnashid]

Here are two sermons a sermon:
Science and Religion:
http://www.orthodoxsermons.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=748&Itemid=26
Jesus, the God of Love & Salvation: Christ Among Other Gods:
http://www.orthodoxsermons.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=363&Itemid=26
Jesus, the God of Love & Salvation:
http://www.orthodoxsermons.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=33&Itemid=26
Back To Basics:
http://www.orthodoxsermons.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=36&Itemid=26

 

[youBROKEmyLIFE]

I really don't see any argument that god exists. What evidence do you think there is for God's existence (in particular the Christian God) that isn't there for love pixies or Hindu Gods? I want to believe in God/The afterlife more than anything, there is nothing more I would rather be true.

 

[Kwayera]

The problem with those "sermons" is they all pre-assume the listener believes in God; it's more of a giant Christian clusterfuck than a persuasive influence to a non-believer.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

The problem with those "sermons" is they all pre-assume the listener believes in God; it's more of a giant Christian clusterfuck than a persuasive influence to a non-believer.

This year's easter messages from the usual holy men were about the drought, reconciliation and interest rates

Drowning in their own irrelevance

 

[michaelnashid]

For those online watch the passion of the christ currently on channel 7

 

[ur_inner_child]

For those online watch the passion of the christ currently on channel 7

How does that prove anything?

Watch Star Wars. NOW. Believe in the force!

 

[Captain Gh3y]

God Said It
I Believe It
That Settles It

 

[HalcyonSky]

For those online watch the passion of the christ currently on channel 7

damn, i missed it

that movie was badass

 

[SashatheMan]

God Said It
I Believe It
That Settles It

can't argue with that!

 

[scarybunny]

God exists as the collective morality of a religious community.

 

[BradCube]

I still don't think we're on the same page here. Patterns exist in nature, of course. More abstractly, structures exist in nature. Whether information supervenes on these structures depends (using your definition) on meaning ascription. Thus information only exists relative to a population of meaning-ascribers --> in a sense one could say information comes into existence when we reocognise it or, instead, that it always existed relative to a standard of meaning-ascription that we were eventually to create.

If meaning ascription is what creates information (of this sort) then god is not needed to explain any identified instance of information (because we can provide a simple, naturalistic explanation without postulating unnecessary entities). Do you understand how I am using Ockham's Razor here?

I have to confess that my mind is in a vicious cycle here, just going round and round trying to make sense of what you are saying. On one hand, I agree that it is our meaning ascription that allows us to identify data as information (the same information as found through written works etc). However, I do not see why it is not valid to use this meaning when applied to DNA. Either an intelligent being put it there (in the same way one may write a novel) or it had a way of naturally arising by itself. If naturally, I'm yet to see a substantial proof of how.

So I guess I must not be understanding the way you are using Ockham's razor here when there it seems to me that we have no other explanation to fall back upon.

 

[BradCube]

YouBROKEmyLIFE, I've been thinking and doing a little digging to do with our previous discussions and although I don't think that I have come to a succinct answer yet, I thought I would add this in.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The only time we can say this is:

1. When we know what evidence we would expect to find and
2. We have thoroughly researched and found that there is no such evidence.

So on this basis, weighing up the existance of pixies that cause love I find that I'm not even sure of what evidence I would expect to find. Fairy dust? Either way, I don't think there has been any evidence found to support such an existance.

 

[youBROKEmyLIFE]

I think you're misunderstanding me - let's go back to the comment I made and I think you'll find that I'm saying much the same thing:



In other words, I agree that there is no cause for amazement if either a) a life supporting universe is necessary (for some, as of yet, unknown reason) or b) the MW interpretation holds and all possible universes exist (or anything in between). What I said is that if other universes which don't support life are possible and it just so happens that only ours eventuated, then I think this is cause for amazement. As you can see, my amazement only really exists in a conditional form.

Yeah I think we're fairly close, but to me the only reason why I think this would be amazing/a bit of a mindfuck is because it doesn't seem to be right. I think my line of thinking is along Slideys in that probabilistic arguments about the beginning of a singular universe can not work.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The only time we can say this is:

1. When we know what evidence we would expect to find and
2. We have thoroughly researched and found that there is no such evidence.

So on this basis, weighing up the existance of pixies that cause love I find that I'm not even sure of what evidence I would expect to find. Fairy dust? Either way, I don't think there has been any evidence found to support such an existance.

There is no (good) evidence for pixies or God, your best arguments will generally be evidenced by some sort of unfalsifiable claim.

 

[BradCube]

There is no (good) evidence for pixies or God, your best arguments will generally be evidenced by some sort of unfalsifiable claim.

There are plenty of scientific principles which are unfalsifiable to, ie Copernican principle

So if this is your line of argument for what is reasonable to believe in, then I don't feel that it holds much weight. Even properly basic beliefs are unfalsifiable - hence why we have called them properly basic.