The Power of Prayer

[Simon Paynton]

I would have thought that instead of a “definition”, which is actually just our analysis and labelling of something, which can seem kind of irrelevant in practical terms, we can look at other things to do with God, such as actions, forces in the world, interventions.  People ask for evidence of things God would do, rather than evidence of a definition of God.  If God were to intervene, it wouldn’t bust the laws of phsyics, it could just look like a providentially lucky course of events that would seem to be there to facilitate some morally excellent endeavour.  A lucky break to help someone who is doing good.

[Strega]

@bellerose Actually I think I could describe myself sufficiently that if I were meeting someone I’d never met or seen before, they’d be able to recognize me.   As far as further definition goes, there are many add-ons I could provide, but all of them would be attached to my physical description to start with.  There’s a starting point.

Your philosophical quote defines the possibility of things utterly beyond our current comprehension.  Sure thats possible.  But not probable or even particularly likely.

But let’s assume for philosophical argument, that there is a force majeure out there that we have no clue about.  That’s fine, let’s accept that as true for the position of this debate.   Now we have people who think they are in direct communication with this force.  That this force wants something from humans individually.  That this force can dish out punishments and rewards.   Can you see that is not a supportable position?  Starting with an imaginary force doesn’t lead to the human interface religion describes.  It’s wild speculation on top of wild speculation.  In this arena, my flying elephants can also exist.

 

• This reply was modified 8 years, 6 months ago by Strega.

[Simon Paynton]

@strega – “physical description”

– it’s acknowledged that God doesn’t have physical form.  There isn’t some kind of creature who lives in some place, who is God.

“Now we have people who think they are in direct communication with this force. That this force wants something from humans individually. That this force can dish out punishments and rewards.”

– the religious position, or, a sensible position based on common sense theology, would say that the force is an attribute of God, it’s not necessarily God Himself / itself / whatever.  So, in that case, it wouldn’t be the force that people were in contact with, or which dishes out punishments and rewards.  The force is equivalent to a Spidey-power.

[.]

@Strega

RE: Actually I think I could describe myself sufficiently that if I were meeting someone I’d never met or seen before, they’d be able to recognize me. As far as further definition goes, there are many add-ons I could provide, but all of them would be attached to my physical description to start with. There’s a starting point.

I believe you are missing my point. There are many ways I could “Describe” myself too. But notice: I said “define” your self the way you expect God to be defined. You would not accept my arguments that God exists based on a description of his characteristics would you? Or would you? If that’s the case I could write pages full for you….but to DEFINE God….Can you tell me (for analogy sake) what is the DEFINITION of Strega (you)?

[Strega]

No @bellerose I am not asking you to define.  And yes, honestly, I could actually define myself. I probably would have struggled to do so when I was a lot younger, but I am certain, given sufficient ink and paper, I could define myself pretty well.

If you refer back to my earlier post, I accepted a force majeure unknown to humans, for the sake of this debate.  It’s so unknowable, that no clues are around because they would not be understandable as there was no starting point.  That’s the thing. No starting point, on which to hang any characteristics or behaviours.

I do not expect you to be able to define this force majeure – but using your philosophy extract of earlier, I’m going along with the unimaginable.  Something we cannot possibly comprehend.

And then, I’m enquiring as to how anyone can possibly think they’re communicating with it, and even more amazing, think they know what it wants them to do.  I’m not even going near the concepts of eternal rewards and punishments, they’re too bizarre for me to contemplate.  You can’t even escape through death.

If this unknowable force is making itself known to humans, it’s not really unknowable, is it?

 

 

[Strega]

@bellerose I have to go out, I’m interested in continuing, but won’t be able to reply til later on 🙂

[Davis]

And yes, honestly, I could actually define myself.

Indeed. I’m an animated human being with a specific genetic structure. There. I’ve defined myself in a way that can be tested and confirmed leaving very little doubt if the testing was carried out well.

What about humans? How to define them? Take a longer a explanation but all of it is rational and testable. We are limited animasl from a family of primates that have become somewhat intelligent on a blue green planet around an unremarkable star invthe milky way galaxy. We are billions of limited beings with a primitive consciousness, highly ignorant of the mechanics behind the body and consciousness and extremely ignorant of the laws of this universe and what else is contained in it. Were also unable to find a rational inherant meaning relative to who we are and the universe I live in. We are born at a specific moment coming from nothing and we will die most likely before reaching 100 revolutions of our planet around its star. We have no abilities beyond what we can do with our limited body and mind under the constrictions of the laws of physics (at least our limited knowledge of it) and have no supernatural abilities. We are sacks of water with a soft shell, we can see hear taste smell detect heat and body contact, equilibrium and other minor senses. We communicate via body signals and noise produced from the same orifice that is used for the ingestion of a gas we need to survive and the ingestion of matter which helps fuel and regulate the body. We are fragile and highly sensitive and emotional capable of both peace and extreme violence with very complicated irratic personalities. We are bigendered and typically choose a mate for life and reproduce via intimate bodycontact and gestation in one of the genders mid body cavity. We are born with weak bodies and barely formed cognitive structures. We bond at a family level and focus on the wellbeing and interests of those closest to us…sometimes at a severe cost to others. We all have unique genetic structures though some twins or triplets are born with nearly identical structure which changes slightly deviating from one another. We have wildly different physical appearances and body specs. We are urge driven and are usually unable to overcome many of our primitive urges. We have a mind capable of rational thought and empirical investigation however false ideas and fantastical explanations are invented and dispersed throughout the population frequently and rapidly. Cultural and intellectual change is slow and dangerous. We organise ourselves through dominant social structures where few people make rules which place severe restrictions on the choices of individuals. People may be grouped together by superficial differences and oppressed because the have such qualities. We have a very basic development of science and only a small portion of the world is informed by this knowledge and even fewer participate in the empirical processes…often preferring to believe in superstitions and unprovable grandious beings and metaphysical systems.

I’ve defined myself and human beings. Both in ways that are completely testable and falsifiable.

So…could someone please define God?

[.]

@Davis you are still missing my point.

The lengthy explanation you just gave to describe Davis was largely an explanation of what a human is and that is not the question. You are a human as God is a deity so that’s really a synonymous explanation. The only part of your rely that attempts to “Define Davis” – not what you are but to define YOU was this statement:

RE: I’m an animated human being with a specific genetic structure. There. I’ve defined myself in a way that can be tested and confirmed leaving very little doubt if the testing was carried out well.

So human being is a given just as God being a deity is a given. And by being human of course you have a genetic structure. But you cannot truly “Define Davis” without describing your attributes. That’s the same as God. We can define attributes but it is just a descriptor. So I can describe you all day long but to Define Davis specifically cannot be done. Just like we can describe God but we can’t define God….

Anyway I just don’t think you really get what I’m saying. I don’t know how else to say it right now.

[.]

You’re never going to be able to test verifiably for the existence of a God. It’s just not possible. All you have is a description just as you have for yourself.

[.]

Does that make sense? I mean really…

[_Robert_]

If I was born in India I would have been praying to some elephant god instead of the god of the Jews. I wonder if I would still have become an atheist? That is more of a cultural thing, perhaps… I have never met an atheist from India.

This god stuff….It’s just arbitrary nonsense.

[.]

@Robert

If I was born in India I would have been praying to some elephant god instead of the god of the Jews.

I really don’t see anything wrong with that.

[jakelafort]

Robert I know atheists in India.

Atheists in nations consumed by religious nonsense tend to be way smarter than average.

 

 

 

 

 

a

[Simon Paynton]

What does “define” mean?

How would you detect the presence of this entity that you have defined?  How could you tell if it is there?  What signs would it give of its existence?  You certainly couldn’t look straight at God and say, hello God.

[.]

@Simon the point I am trying to make is that there IS a huge difference between describing something and defining it. I believe that we can describe God but we cannot define him. There is not a way to sum up all of God into one small succinct explanation.

[Author]

Posts