Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
saying you "believe in fate" that something happened, it was just meant to be
sounds a whole lot like
believing in God's will that something happened, it was just meant to be
and if lack of scientific evidence is why a person does not "believe in God"
how can they "believe in fate" for which there is also no scientific evidence.
that's what comes to mind reading the view expressed in post above.
Good question since the common definition of fate in the dictionary is, "the development of events beyond a person's control, regarded as determined by a supernatural power."
I am curious how he would explain what he's talking about too...
Lack of scientific evidence may not be a reason to firmly state that there is no god. But lack of scientific -- or other conclusive -- evidence is a legitimate reason to have great doubt.
I have no doubt that no real scientific evidence has been discovered or proven able to establish the existence of a god. Not sure why I/we can't leave it at that, but I do.
I have no doubt that no real scientific evidence has been discovered or proven able to establish the existence of a god. Not sure why I/we can't leave it at that, but I do.
because most people recognize that science is an inadequate source of information on divinity.
looking to science for theology
is like looking in a car repair manual for how to bake cookies. wrong tool for the job.
Not sure if this the right forum, but here goes --
I am an agnostic, but it seems to me in looking over my 63-years-so-far life, that is something is meant to be, achieving or getting it is easy, and if it not meant to be, there are obstacles put in my path.
To give an example of something bad: If I am about to go on a vacation, but then I have trouble getting time off, I have an unexpected large repair bill the week before I am set to go (meaning less spending money), and then I develop a bad headache at the last minute, but I decide to go anyway -- I will end up having a lousy time and being sorry I went.
To give an example of something good: if I am just thinking about getting a puppy and on the way home from work the next day, I see a "Free Puppies" sign by a large cage with puppies in it, I fall in love with one of them, and she turns out to be the best non-human companion of my entire life.
So, do you thinks things like that are just coincidence or not?
P.S. The reason I asked for the opinions of atheists and agnostics is because it seems to me that many Christians say that Jesus/God is ALWAYS personally responsible for one's good luck or bad, and I personally just don't believe that.
I wonder why you ask if you "personally just don't believe that." Unless you are wondering if there is good reason to believe otherwise?
I don't think so, but I like the gambling analogies, because people can have the same sort of cause/effect rationale when it comes to gambling. (Not to mention I enjoy playing the tables on occasion). When playing craps for example...
Someone can roll a seven and win some money! Some will think that's just "the roll of the dice." Others feel god is looking down on them favorably. Roll another seven in a row. Win more money! What are the odds to roll two sevens in a row? Roll yet another seven! Now we're starting to think that's more than just coincidence or just good luck, but what is it really?
Roll another couple of sevens in a row, and who doesn't begin to wonder if the "Hand of Providence" has become involved? Either way, roll the dice enough times and just about any outcome is possible. No matter how unlikely. Good or bad. How is it decided whether it's some sort of external influence or just another roll of the dice?
The answer usually has to do with one's predisposition toward believing in god like things or knowing other ways to more realistically explain what sometimes seems unexplainable...
because most people recognize that science is an inadequate source of information on divinity.
looking to science for theology
is like looking in a car repair manual for how to bake cookies. wrong tool for the job.
Yes, because science shies away from woo unless it is determined that the subject is not woo. Wooists, on the other hand, tend to turn toward woo regarding almost everything.
because most people recognize that science is an inadequate source of information on divinity.
looking to science for theology
is like looking in a car repair manual for how to bake cookies. wrong tool for the job.
Never mind that religion often tries to take the place of what should belong in the scientific sphere...such as the solar system, etc. Just ask Galileo.
because most people recognize that science is an inadequate source of information on divinity.
looking to science for theology
is like looking in a car repair manual for how to bake cookies. wrong tool for the job.
I don't think so or see it the same way. Surprise surprise!
Best I can do with your analogy is to consider the effort to repair your car and in so doing also consider what resources are available to learn how to do so. If there is no viable way to repair your car, a car repair manual should make this fact clear. That and also the opinion of a mechanic. If nothing can be found that proves the car can be repaired, then it's reasonable if not intelligent to deem the car unrepairable.
In the same way when looking for information that supports any claims or beliefs of any kind, when there are no sources, information or facts that justify a claim or belief in any convincing or measurable way, it is not similarly reasonable to believe those claims or beliefs anyway.
There's the big difference between believing in god like things, repairing cars and baking cookies. Far as I'm concerned anyway...
I don't think so or see it the same way. Surprise surprise!
Best I can do with your analogy is to consider the effort to repair your car and in so doing also consider what resources are available to learn how to do so. If there is no viable way to repair your car, a car repair manual should make this fact clear. That and also the opinion of a mechanic. If nothing can be found that proves the car can be repaired, then it's reasonable if not intelligent to deem the car unrepairable.
In the same way when looking for information that supports any claims or beliefs of any kind, when there are no sources, information or facts that justify a claim or belief in any convincing or measurable way, it is not similarly reasonable to believe those claims or beliefs anyway.
There's the big difference between believing in god like things, repairing cars and baking cookies. Far as I'm concerned anyway...
the person wasn't trying to repair their car. they were trying to bake cookies.
that's why looking in a car repair manual is ineffective.
that's also why looking to science for information on divinity is also ineffective.
because it is an inadequate resource.
the analogy illustrates someone using the wrong tool for the job.
And an inability to recognize, identify, and utilize an effective tool for the job.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 09-05-2023 at 11:51 AM..
The fact that we humans have demanded that God MUST be all the Omni's to qualify to BE God is at base the actual cause of your rationale, Harry. Why do we get to decide what God MUST BE or be able to DO? That was why I rejected all the Omni's (except for omnipresence which I experienced). Our human expectations and demands about God are just that human expectations and demands without any basis.
I think Harry was simply saying that lived experience illustrates that god, if god existed, is not those "omnis". Not "demanding" that he must be. Simply stating that he is not. As you have apparently done yourself for the most part.
The universe is neither out to get us nor out to help us. It simply IS.
If your god is omnipresent then he sees all the suffering and does nothing about it. If you're okay with that, that's great. I would not be. It's one of the reasons that I find atheism to be preferable. I don't have to spend time understanding god's Mysterious Ways or whatever. He has no ways to begin with.
I think Harry was simply saying that lived experience illustrates that god, if god existed, is not those "omnis". Not "demanding" that he must be. Simply stating that he is not. As you have apparently done yourself for the most part.
The universe is neither out to get us nor out to help us. It simply IS.
If your god is omnipresent then he sees all the suffering and does nothing about it. If you're okay with that, that's great. I would not be. It's one of the reasons that I find atheism to be preferable. I don't have to spend time understanding god's Mysterious Ways or whatever. He has no ways to begin with.
It seems you unconsciously employ the omni's as indicated in the bold. Why do you think God CAN do anything about it? In my view, God is all that there is and we are His children reproducing His consciousness. IOW, God is experiencing any and all suffering right along with us. That might be why He wants us to do what we can about it, but we are too self-centered. Notice the typical concern is always about what is happening to ME, not what is happening to us. We each individually have a limited scope and capability to affect the suffering that exists, but we seldom do what IS in our scope and capabilities. The vast majority of us don't even concern ourselves with it at all if it doesn't affect us personally, IMO.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
