Failed Conversion

[.]

You offer nothing of substance to debate here except the same tired arguments….

[Strega]

The only difference between the purple pigs theory and the God/jesus theory is the number of people who believe some form of the latter.  Numbers do not equate to evidence.

You say you see tons of evidence.  Evidence that there is a supernatural force, or evidence that a bloke called Jesus was really god slumming it with the masses?  All the ‘meaningful signs’ that I’ve come across (including finding long lost relatives) could at best, with a serious stretch of the imagination, be indications that there is a force of some supernatural kind meddling in human affairs.  That doesn’t lead to Jesus.  Or Yahweh (or Allah, etc).  It just leads to the question, “what is it?”    Science can’t find an “it” to examine, because nothing actually exists on our plane of reality, to examine.

It’s not a cop out.  What would the purpose of a cop out be? Why would anyone ‘cop out’ of understanding some exciting supernatural force?

[Dang Martin]

Belle Rose wrote:

You offer nothing of substance to debate here except the same tired arguments….

Hmmm… Since it seems that I cannot bring substance, maybe you can do so. Where is this evidence, why does it get dismissed, and why should it not be dismissed?

[Dang Martin]

I once heard some “proof” that god is a woman. It was during one of those “Moments of Prayer” television segments, from back when television stations used to sign off for the night.

This female preacher’s proof, according to her, was in a bible verse.

Luke 15:8-10New International Version (NIV)
The Parable of the Lost Coin
8 “Or suppose a woman has ten silver coins[a] and loses one. Doesn’t she light a lamp, sweep the house and search carefully until she finds it?9 And when she finds it, she calls her friends and neighbors together and says, ‘Rejoice with me; I have found my lost coin.’ 10 In the same way, I tell you, there is rejoicing in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.”

She read this, said that this was proof, and the “Moment of Prayer” was over, just like that.

The bible cannot serve as proof of anything, for it is not supported by any other documentation. It is the claim. And if I were leaning on the bible as proof, I could certainly find more passages supporting the idea that this god, Yahweh, has male genitalia, as well as female jealousy. But I digress.

But I’m open to being wrong, and maybe I’m missing how this passage is proof that god is a woman.

I think that make the religious have different standards or definitions for what constitutes “proof,” and that quite possibly it is something that also has the requirement of belief. So if you do not believe, then this is not proof. From my perspective, proof should work regardless of what I believe or do not believe, for it is proof.

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

It’s really just a bs cop out.

Where is it wrong?

You called BS on what I said and I asked you to explain where my argument is wrong. You have not done so.  You are getting all “Dr. Bob” about it with a non-answer.  The “onus” is on you to tell me where I “copped out” and not to repeat later on that what I say is again BS.

[.]

It isn’t just what you said. I was referring to another comment….I’ll explain more thoroughly when Inam not typing on my phone lol….will reply in a few hours

[.]

All of the same tired arguments have started to piss me off lol

[Dang Martin]

When someone claims that there is proof, and they do not deliver the proof, then it can be safely assumed that the “proof” in question does not meet the standards required to consider it as such.

Should I declare that “mermaids reside in the deepest parts of the oceans,” there is not a sudden burden of proof on the person who does not believe me, or on the person who is requesting proof of my claims. The onus, as it were, is on me, for I have made the positive claim.

To say that there is proof, “you just don’t choose to see it as such,” is to assert a few things. One is that this “proof” can only serve as proof if you look at it in a certain way [with the eyes of a believer]. The other assertion is that the person who is “choosing to not see it as such” is either intellectually dishonest or incapable. That is, they’re a liar or they’re stupid.

When declaring that someone is wrong, it is important to explain how and why they are wrong. The simple declaration is not enough.

The thing about all religions is that there is no proof. That’s why it’s a faith. That’s why belief is required. Of course, there is NO evidence of it in the natural world. Science cannot prove any religious claims, for those are supernatural claims, and science deals only in the natural world. Religious belief, gods, devils, angels, etc., “just ain’t natural,” as one might say.

If there were proof, then we’d have only one religion, and only one sect of one religion. There would be one book. There would be one way. But we have so many religions and so many ways in this world that it is impossible to try them all in one’s own lifetime. Just with Christianity alone, there are more than 50,000 version available for purchase, and that number is growing every day.

When someone tells me that they believe in god, jesus, etc., then I take that at face value. They believe it. Fine. I think it’s silly, but I’ll keep that to myself if it stops at a place where it’s their belief.

But when they tell me it’s real, it’s the truth [which is different from “a truth”], or that it’s factual, and that I will burn eternally for not believing, then I am left with no choice but to demand solid proof that their claim is indeed real, truth, and factual, because it has been taken out of the lofty realm of belief, and put upon a pedestal where questions and skepticism roam free. They took it there, not me.

The religious believers with whom I’ve had interactions in the past are of the position that THEIR method of belief is “the truth.” They “practice the truth,” while the rest of the world “holds beliefs.” It’s their way of noting that THEIR belief is special and righteous, while the others are wrong.

If there is proof, then it has to be proof that is seen as proof, without the need for special belief or a unique world view. And it doesn’t have to be outrageous or huge, either. Everyone has heard that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” But I would never ask for that. Just give me ANY evidence. It can’t be flimsy, but it does not have to be extraordinary.

Here’s a best-case fictional scenario for the “proof” of god:

In this fictional example, a formless being descends upon the planet. It has the capacity to communicate via telepathy to every person in the world, at the same time, in their native tongue. This being gets everyone’s attention, and it makes a declaration:“I am your creator! I am! From beginning to end, I shall be with you. Your heart is my heart.”

It says that, and nothing more. It vanishes.

What would happen?

Christians around the world would declare this to be proof that their god, Yahweh, is indeed real, and the one true god.

Muslims around the world would declare this to be proof that their god, Allah, is indeed real, and the one true god.

Hindus around the world would declare this to be proof that their god, Vishnu, is indeed real, and the one true god.

The list goes on. Every religious person around the world will see this as proof that THEIR god is real.

However, a non-believer who places value in the scientific method, would look into this, do some testing, and then come to a conclusion:

“We have performed some double-blind studies, and have confirmed that it is highly likely that everyone on the planet saw this being descend upon the planet. Furthermore, we have confirmed via peer-reviewed testing methods that the being said the exact same thing to every person on the planet. At this time, it has become apparent to us that there is some kind of god out there, in the universe, watching us, and that it has some type of involvement in our daily lives. HOWEVER, this god did not declare that it had an affiliation with any of the religions currently practiced on earth. To put it bluntly, this god was not wearing a name tag, and therefore it cannot be concluded that this god is the Christian god, the Muslim god, or any other god. In fact, it is possible that the now-known presence of this god could in fact invalidate all current and previous religious beliefs. More testing must be done, if possible.”

[JadeBlackOlive]

Good post, Dang Martin.

[.]

, “What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”.

Ok I remember my train of thought lol….this is a cop out. Kitchens demands “evidence” but never specifies what constitutes evidence….it’s a cop out

[.]

Sorry damn auto correct made it Kitchens lol

[Dang Martin]

Lots of talk about cop-outs, and little in the way of either evidence or how other arguments are wrong. Every time you mention cop-out, you are avoiding addressing your lack of proof. Using “cop-out” as a cop-out is some rather strong irony.

I think it’s time to admit that you have no proof.

I’m open to being wrong about everything. However, I’ve been on this planet for roughly 53 years. During that time, many Christians and other religious people have had plenty of opportunity to provide proof/evidence to support their claims of truth and/or fact. They have not. Based on this experience, I have a high level of confidence that this proof/evidence does not exist.

I don’t care if Hitchens did not tell you what constitutes proof or evidence. You can tell US what constitutes proof or evidence.

You now have a choice:

1. You can take this opportunity to tell people HOW and WHY they are wrong, and then deliver the proof / evidence, and explain to us HOW and WHY this is proof / evidence.

OR

2. You can cop-out by talking more about cop-outs.

The floor is all yours. The choice is completely yours.

[PopeBeanie]

Personal evidence isn’t the same as scientific, universally reproducible evidence. I’ve suggested what I might consider as “evidence” of God, but honestly, 1) there is no universal definition or universal religion, 2) attempting to define anything supernatural or proof of it is just speculation that is most probably not ever going to happen the way we might guess. Since mankind has made up so much myth and religion, it’s quite credible that all of them are complete fiction and not the direct word of “God”.

In any case, what I have the most serious problem with is anyone so sure of their belief(s) that they feel it’s okay to impose them on other people. This isn’t a problem with you, Belle, so I have no problem with your honesty!

I’m most interested to learn how so many beliefs can co-exist, even when they often discredit each other. It’s probably fair to say that 90% of the world’s people believe what they believe because it’s human nature (both fortunately and unfortunately) to conform to the local belief system. Some will call this a human “flaw”, but I rather think of it as the social need to adapt to in-group “standards” more than the cognitive need to think logically, dispassionately, accurately, precisely and so on, like Spock in Star Trek. We’re just animals still, but with overgrown brains run mostly by emotions and feelings.

Results can vary widely, yet they strongly tend toward in-group standards whether by genes or also by powerful brains. That’s true for any species, sometimes for better and sometimes for worse.

[.]

You can take this opportunity to tell people HOW and WHY they are wrong, and then deliver the proof / evidence, and explain to us HOW and WHY this is proof / evidence.

I say it is a cop out because it is said in a way that Hitchens 1. Has a giant chip on his shoulder, and 2. (Like I told Reg in another thread) he exaggerates to the point of being completely inaccurate (as I pointed out) and ultimately the overarching attitude that I see time and time again is an utter lack of even (honestly) being WILLING to examine the evidence that IS presented. Regularly and repeatedly. It has become apparent to me over time that perhaps atheists just don’t want to believe in God. That’s your choice but at least admit it instead of hiding behind this “onus” bullshit when even when presented with evidence you always find a way to Wiesel out of it.

I have more evidence than I need and more than I could possibly write in one thread. But I have already stated on the forum what was the big event that sent it over the edge for me. The experience of finding my biological family and grandmother. I know without any doubt that God was behind that. There really is no alternative explanation

[Dang Martin]

Indeed, considering personal evidence, scientific evidence, and the nature of supernatural “events” or experiences, it probably be impossible to prove anything. Given the nature of these things, it would probably be a good idea for others to not assert that they have proof when they don’t have it.

Agreed that, when someone asserts their beliefs or wants to impose them, this is where trouble starts.

The need to adapt to social in-groups is an interesting topic to me, for several reasons. I never believed, I did not know that NOT believing was “wrong,” I got found out, and was an outcast until I was an adult and left the state.

Since I’ve not really been socialized, I may come off as harsh sometimes. My humblest of apologies if I’ve upset anyone, for that is not my goal. I just saw a claim of proof, noticed that it wasn’t being provided, and was trying to get it provided. In that context, I feel that my mistake was an honest one.

But, given the fact that acceptable and substantial evidence has never been provided, be it personal or scientific, it may have been short-sighted for me to suspect that this time would be different.

On the topic of “failed conversions,” if there were an award, then I would give it to every single Christian who judged me, belittled me, dehumanized me, and rejected me for the first 21 years of my life.

They could have shown me the love in their church, and yet they did not, for there was none. They had only fear, and that was what drove them to church every week, or twice per year.

They could have welcomed me into their church and guided me in a way that would have, at the very least, lead to a mutual understanding. Instead, they branded me “evil” and “non-human,” and cast me out.

The list goes on. To put a point on it, they did not do it as their jesus would have done it. Whether true or mythological, their bible contains stories indicating that jesus would have treated me WAY differently than they did. Of course, they can’t be bothered to read their bibles, or to live in the way that their jesus lived.

It’s truly messed up. I don’t need anyone to feel sorry for me, but I certainly feel sorry for them. So misguided, blind, self-righteous, and failed. But they’re “forgiven” and I am not. Get out of jail free.

Oh well. I’ve been away from them for roughly 32 years. I’d like to think that maybe one day I can move past the damage done by them. That’s a slow process, and a discussion for a completely different thread in a completely different forum.

[Author]

Posts