Author Topic: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?  (Read 15442 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #667 on: July 17, 2014, 05:23:46 PM »
Lukvance, have you ever taken a basic statistics or research methods class? You do not seem to have the most rudimentary idea of what I am talking about in terms of how a study should be designed to reduce bias, etc. You are describing the kinds of things that you learn not to do in the first week of research methods. Like comparing one person with a disease to one other person with a disease, or assuming that everyone with a disease is your sample.

A control group is a randomly selected group of people who will not have the treatment, in this case, prayer or other religious activity, so you can compare the baseline rate of improvement (people who would have gotten well anyway no matter what) to the rate of improvement from the treatment.
Astreja, can you help? I am at a loss.
That's ok. I know that you are, and you will be until you follow the instruction I gave you.
Now what you are talking about is a clinical research on the use of miracle as a cure for disease.
IT IS NOT A SOLUTION. It has never been a solution to the disease, it will never be.
Miracles are acts from God. Not a "medicinal product"or a treatment.
jaimehlers and you surely have misunderstood that part since you are trying to compare miracle and medicinal products/treatment studies.
" If doctors were running a clinical trial where they were testing a new medicine"
"A control group is a randomly selected group of people who will not have the treatment, in this case, prayer or other religious activity,"
I hope this will help you clarify things and allow you to answer you own questions.
With that in mind, review the 2 first answer I gave you and maybe follow my suggestions before claiming things with you lack of knowledge.

Ps : jaimehlers I talked to an expert and if only by that fact I know more than you will ever know until you talk to or read from an expert.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #668 on: July 17, 2014, 05:37:33 PM »
"theology" has nothing to do with my example of a "College of Miracles" b/c in theology it is ASSUMED that the deity is real, and it cannot be independently verified or checked out by disinterested or disagreeing parties. Conversely, science CAN be independently verified by disinterested parties. That is the difference you need to deal with in this false analogy you keep trying to draw.
Thank you for your counter argument. This paragraph sum it up perfectly. It shows also your lack of knowledge.
What is preventing you, median, verify/check out the miracle? Then from your experience and what you know of God conclude if it is him doing that or if it is not.
Do you know that there are atheist attending theology classes? Some even graduate?
Do you know that there are people from other religion than Christian attending theology classes?
Why, apparently, do you believe they do not represent disinterested parties?
You're worth more than my time

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #669 on: July 17, 2014, 05:45:16 PM »
You haven't proven wrong skeptic54768's claim that your Catholic church is led by Satan.  Guess that makes that legit, right?
You are in a hurry for some reason? Wait long enough and I (or someone else) will prove him wrong.
So...you do accept the claim that the Catholic church is led by Satan?  What in seven hells are you doing still being Catholic then?  I'm confused.
Maybe I wrote something wrong. I do NOT believe that the Catholic church is led by Satan.

Quote
Quote
Or are you going to eventually figure out that assuming all claims are right until proven wrong is an inefficient, error prone, and idiotic way of seeking truth?
Oh I already know that about ALL claims.But, isn't scientists claim that they have found the Higgs Boson right until proven otherwise?
Yeah I'm with jaimehlers on this.  You kinda need to shut up about the Higgs Boson.  It's pretty clear that the only thing you know regarding it is the spelling.
Great way to avoid answering the question. Accusing that other don't know what he is talking about. What do you call that again when someone avoid addressing points raised against their arguments.
You're worth more than my time

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5061
  • Darwins +580/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #670 on: July 17, 2014, 05:49:04 PM »
What do you call that again when someone avoid addressing points raised against their arguments.
"Doing a Lukvance."

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6612
  • Darwins +789/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #671 on: July 17, 2014, 06:21:03 PM »
Lukvance

From the perspective of the catholic church, do miracles ever happen to non-catholics?
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 706
  • Darwins +108/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #672 on: July 17, 2014, 06:30:37 PM »
Accusing that other don't know what he is talking about.

Dude, seriously, stop pretending, you're not fooling anyone.
"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2255
  • Darwins +406/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #673 on: July 17, 2014, 07:06:37 PM »
So...you do accept the claim that the Catholic church is led by Satan?  What in seven hells are you doing still being Catholic then?  I'm confused.
Maybe I wrote something wrong. I do NOT believe that the Catholic church is led by Satan.
Yes, you certainly did write something wrong.  This abysmal failure of a post:
Quote
Is the story legit though?  Did a Basillian hieromonk say a prayer with doubt in his heart, at which point “God” turned the bread into flesh and the wine into blood?
Yes, it has yet to be proven wrong.
The implication is that a story is legit until it is proven wrong.  Do you happen to have convincing evidence that the Basillian hieromonk's prayer did, in fact, instigate god turning bread into flesh and wine into blood?  Saying that you have convincing evidence that the claim is correct, and, if necessary, supplying that evidence, is what your response should have been.  But no - your first response[1] was because it hadn't yet been proved wrong.

That is a poor method for seeking truth Lukvance.
That is a poor method for seeking truth Lukvance.
That is a poor method for seeking truth Lukvance.

It is idiotic - that is, it is a stupid way (or, in other words, the methodology that morons use[2]) - to declare that some claim is true, or even likely true, based solely on whether or not that claim has been proven false.  Now, I will grant you, from a believability standpoint, the fact that a claim has not been proven as false does mean that the claim is more believable than if the claim has been proven as false.  I will not deny you that, nor do I deny myself that.  But it does not increase the believability of a claim.  The non-existence or removal of the proof of falseness of the claim is what increases the believability, or in other words, the existence of a proof of falsehood of a claim reduces the believability.

We're at a stage of a claim that is not proven false and only not proven false, and the level of believability of a claim at that stage should be rather small and pragmatically zero.  This is primarily due to the fact that the number of claims that satisfy the conditions of "not proven false and only not proven false" is essentially infinite.  And aside from your subjective feelings regarding the claim, there is no way for you to differentiate the relative truth or falsehood of one claim over any other claim in that subset.  And that's...fine for crap that describes strictly subjective things.  But that isn't fine for establishing what is or is not true in our shared, objective reality.  You can't assert the validity of an arbitrary claim regarding objective reality that leaves no evidence (goddidit!  No, you can't detect anything.  He doesn't leave behind that kind of evidence.  You know, the detectable kind of evidence) and dismiss the validity of another arbitrary claim regarding objective reality (flying saucers, that can sweep away evidence that they may otherwise leave behind, are watching everyone masturbate).

You need to start providing evidence of claim in that stage in order to increase it's believability.  And, mark my words, this is not a binary process - it needs to be sufficiently compelling evidence to reach past a particular threshold.  Some bits of evidence increase the believability more than others, some bits of evidence work in concert with other bits of evidence to increase believability even more, and yes, some bits of evidence decrease believability.  Our thresholds are going to be different - each and every one of us.  Exactly where you establish that threshold is a subjective 'thing'; however, I think that we, as a collective group of sentient creatures with, presumably, an interest in understanding reality can agree on a rough ballpark of where this threshold is, and my friend, your shit is set WAAAAAAYYYYYY too low.  Bullshit-on-a-dinnerplate too low.

Do you understand this?

Quote
Great way to avoid answering the question. Accusing that other don't know what he is talking about. What do you call that again when someone avoid addressing points raised against their arguments.
Yeah that's totally what I'm doing.  Obviously you know what the Higgs Boson is, and just how bosontastic it is.  Might as well believe that complete and utter bullshit on top of the flying saucer pervs, right?
 1. ...and I think we can all agree that one's first response to a question regarding the truth of a claim would likely (but not always) be their most compelling reason for accepting legitimacy of the claim in question.
 2. Another way to put this is that it is what one would expect to observe in the thought and behavior patterns of an imbecile.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4655
  • Darwins +106/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #674 on: July 17, 2014, 07:14:04 PM »
Lukvance

From the perspective of the catholic church, do miracles ever happen to non-catholics?
or have non Christians ever had " miracle" healings?
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #675 on: July 17, 2014, 07:22:23 PM »
Okay, let’s review the evidence I have and what you seem to be implying you have regarding miracles.
SevenPatch has the following evidence:
A. Scientific evidence and conclusions that no known cause can explain the event that occurred.

Lukvance seems to be implying he has the following evidence:
A. Scientific evidence and conclusions that no known cause can explain the event that occurred.
B. Evidence that “God” is the cause of the event that occurred.

I don’t have evidence “B”, give me evidence “B”, show me where evidence “B” is.  My conclusions so far are based on not having “B”.  No “B” is the counter argument.  In order for you to refute the counter argument, all you have to do is provide “B”.
DO NOT tell me that miracles are “B”, or this discussion will end and you will have proved that my points are valid.

B is not miracles. Miracles are the proof of the existence of God. The evidence that God is the cause of the miracle comes from your knowledge of God and what he can do and what he would do if he was to prove his existence using a miracle. From that knowledge you can conclude that it is indeed God who caused the event, we then call the event miracle.

I’ve identified miracles as merely being something having occurred which the cause is unknown.  Not knowing the cause does not prove “God” was the cause.

There. This does not make sense. Let's say that according to Higgs Boson theory you should be able to "see" his effect but when you see it I tell you that what you see is "merely something having occurred which the cause is unknown". What would your reaction be? How is your reaction different than mine?

Of course it doesn’t make sense to you.  You lack any understanding of what impact the Higgs boson particle discovery has on particle physics and science in general.  Your attempts to equivocate the discovery of the Higgs boson particle with miracles and “God” while being completely ignorant of the science behind the Higgs boson particle only leads me to believe you are also completely ignorant regarding miracles.
I actually started to write up a few paragraphs explaining the science behind the Higgs boson particle but I will take jaimehlers’s advice and not provide you with the means to continue to falsely equivocate science with miracles. 
Who exactly do you think you are fooling by pretending to possess understanding of the science behind the Higgs boson particle, Lukvance? 
Your ignorance exposes you Lukvance as a fraud.  That is not an insult, nor is it merely my opinion.  It is a fact that you are ignorant of the science behind the Higgs boson particle, your own words demonstrate this for all to see.  The fact that you pretend to have knowledge that you do not makes you a fraud.  The definition of fraud is a person who pretends to be what he or she is not in order to trick people.  Your methods may work on those as ignorant as you, but they will not work here.
DO NOT attempt to imply that I am doing the same regarding miracles, or this discussion will end and you will have proved that my points are valid.  I admit to only understand what I have learned from the sources I’ve provided, I’ve shown you the conclusions I have drawn from those sources and I’ve asked you for the information that leads you to your conclusions but you refuse to provide this information.  I am beginning to think you do not have the information which would mean that indeed you are exercising confirmation bias.
If you wish to not be a fraud, Lukvance, stop pretending to have knowledge that you do not.  Stop using the Higgs bosen particle as an equivalent to miracles unless you can demonstrate understanding of the science behind the Higgs boson particle.

Quit stonewalling and answer the questions.

If you say we do know the cause and that cause was “God” then THAT is the evidence I would like to review.  I would like to examine the evidence that “God” was the cause of the miracle.
You are looking at it. The evidence is the miracle.
Wow, seriously dude? 
Let me get this straight.  Miracles are evidence that “God” was the cause of miracles which proves the existence of “God”.
Did you seriously just write “the evidence is the miracles”?   
I asked you for evidence  that “God” was the cause and you say “the evidence is the Miracles”.
Sorry, with your explanation on evidence previously in this post, I realize that I should have written "the evidence is in the miracles" I understand that little word can make a whole lot of difference. Good thing you took time to explain further the bit about evidences.

Miracles are not evidence that it is God who made them. Miracles are evidence of the existence of God outside your body.

Again, with the Higgs boson, If I tell you "If you say we do know the cause (of what you see) and that cause was the Higgs Boson then THAT is the evidence I would like to review. I would like to examine the evidence that the Higgs Boson  was the cause of what you are looking at." What would your reaction be? How is your reaction different than mine?
[...]
My response would be to provide you with background information, links to the scientific research, results and data which (so far) verify the predictions made regarding the Higgs boson particle.

I can provide you links to theology courses and books and website if you want. You will then have the necessary background information to know it was indeed an act from God. See? Your reaction is not that different than mine.

Is the story legit though?  Did a Basillian hieromonk say a prayer with doubt in his heart, at which point “God” turned the bread into flesh and the wine into blood?
Yes, it has yet to be proven wrong.
[...]
I have a rock in my back yard that was put there by aliens from another planet.  What is that you say?  You question the legitimacy of my story?  Well of course it is true, it has yet to be proven wrong.  GO AHEAD, I DARE YOU to prove that aliens from another planet didn’t put the rock in my back yard.
Give me enough time and I (or some rock expert or some alien expert) will prove you that the rock that you have was NOT put there by aliens from another planet.

I have no more reason to believe the Miracle of Lanciano is true than I do to believe that Thor went fishing for the serpent Jormungandr.  You can go to Altuna, Sweeden to see the Altuna Runestone and visit the relics, see them with your own eyes. It is Thor’s own carvings.
Is the Altuna Runestone presented as proof of the existence of Thor? The miracle of Lanciano is presented as proof of the existence of God. If not, why comparing the two?
[...]
There are over 900 footprints attributed to BigFoot and are presented as evidence for the existence of BigFoot.  You can look up the locations of where the mold imprints of these footprints are displayed, go there and see with your own eyes.  The footprints are evidence that BigFoot exists.

I understand that Altuna Runestone is not presented as proof of the existence of Thor. Now you shift to some other example. That's ok.
Big Foot footprints are presented as proof of the existence of Big foot? I remember reading an article about that and how these footprints where in fact made by kids with sticks and plastic feet. Are you sure you want to compare The miracle of Lanciano to Bigfoot footprints? Because I believe there are some trusty website that I can find that will convince you that they are not proof of anything.

Any means to detect “God” are, as long as it can be verified objectively (as opposed to subjectively), acceptable and would be the first step making me accept that miracles are an act from “God”.
What means are you thinking of when you write this down? How are they different than the ones already in place?
Why do you keep asking me for specific means of how to detect something I don’t know to exist?  Do I ask you what specific means you would use to detect the existence of leprechauns or Santa Clause?  You don’t have any reason to believe leprechauns or Santa Clause exist, so why would you know how to detect them?
Explain to me how they are detected and hwy they are detected that way. I will then have a specific mean that I would use to detect the existence of leprechauns or Santa Clause BEFORE telling you that your means are not working.

If you’re asking me if I know how to detect “God”, then no, I do not know how to detect “God”, if I did then we wouldn’t be having this discussion and I would be working on a scientific paper showing everyone how to detect “God”.
Then allow yourself to learn how to detect God. People already wrote the paper for you.
[...] Sounds like you want me to believe without evidence, like you do.  No thanks, I’ll wait until I get the evidence.  Anytime you’d like to share any such evidence what-so-ever, be my guest.
Oh it wasn't so hard. You don't have to twist you mind that much. "allow yourself to learn how to detect God" simply means take some course in theology. Do you want me to redirect you to the University closest to you?

If someone (anyone) were to inform the world how to detect “God” and then ascertain “God’s” behavior and verify that “God” was the cause of certain events for which the cause was unknown (aka miracles), then I would be able to accept the fact that a miracle is an act from “God”.  How is that not answering your question?
Because my question is in two parts. The second part being "How is that different to what is already in place?" Someone already informed the world how to detect God and ascertain his behavior and verify that he is the cause of the event and this is the process used to determine if an event is a miracle.
Source please.
I hope this will help you :
http://education-portal.com/articles/5_Universities_Offering_Free_Theology_and_World_Religions_Courses_Online.html

It looks like the 3 steps that the Catholic Church use are only step 1 of the scientific method.
Here is how Miracles fit in the Scientific method :
1.   Propose a means to detect “God” : You can find how to detect a miracle. (the 3 steps you talked about are a good start then there are others)
Again, not knowing the cause of something is not the means to detect something.  It only means that we need to figure out the unknown.  That is the point of using the scientific method and step 1 of detecting that which is unknown.  [...]
2.   Make predictions regarding the behavior of “God” : We know what a miracle might look like and how it should behave. (for example, the cure must be permanent)
Since when do acts of “God” behave?  That is what a miracle is right?  An act of “God”? 
How do we know what an “act of God” might look like?  Source please.  Why must the cure be permanent?  How do we know that “God’s” intention wasn’t just to cure the person temporarily so they might achieve something before they die?  Source please.
3.   Test the predictions to verify or falsify the predictions and/or hypothesis for the proposed means to detect “God” : We do compare the event to what has been predicted.
The cause of the event is unknown, Lukvance.  We’re trying to prove that “God” is the cause of the event.  If we can prove that “God” is the cause of the event, then we will know the cause was “God” and thus we can declare that a miracle (act of “God”) has occurred.
What I’m not getting from you or any searches that I’ve done is how we would know that “God’ is the cause.  Comparing the event to what has been predicted would fall under step 4.

[...]
4.   Use the verified information/data to determine if “God” was in fact the cause of events with no known causes.
5.   Use the verified information/data to determine if “God” is the cause of any events with known causes.
To understand them better let's compare the scientific method you proposed and apply it to the Higgs Boson :
1.   Propose a means to detect the Higgs Boson
2.   Make predictions regarding the behavior of the Higgs Boson
3.   Test the predictions to verify or falsify the predictions and/or hypothesis for the proposed means to detect the Higgs Boson.
4.   Use the verified information/data to determine if the Higgs Boson was in fact the cause of events with no known causes.
5.   Use the verified information/data to determine if the Higgs Boson is the cause of any events with known causes.
Could you give us examples of the equivalent for the Higgs Boson? (for step 4 and 5)
No, your understanding of the 5 steps is lacking.  How about you describe in your own words what impact the discovery of the Higgs boson particle means to science?  Then I’ll go into detail regarding the 5 steps.
Beside the stonewalling for step 4 and 5 I believe that your study in theology will answer your counter arguments for the other steps.

Anyone should be able to verify that “God” was actually involved In these “miracles” assuming they have the means to perform the experiments and testing procedures.  Currently the Catholic Church is the only body that makes the determination, and I cannot find any information on their methods In actually making the determination.  I can only find the methods relating to determining if the cause is known or unknown.
  I see. You didn't have the following information : You and anyone are able to verify that God is involved in these miracles. They just have to study the subject (become theologians)
As you can see there are no difference between what you expect and what is already in place.

Why would I need to become a theologian just to read the information regarding their methods used to determine that “God” was the cause?  Is the information secret?  Why would the information be secret?  I’m not a particle physicist yet I can read the information regarding the methods used to discover the Higgs boson particle.  Information regarding the Higgs boson particle is free to all to review for themselves.
OMG! I had already told you about theologians. Look at that! I am smarter than I think I am haha. Since your post was so long I took time to answer each part when in fact the answer was already been given. Just maybe misunderstood.
What you might not have understood about theology is that it is where you learn how to determine that God is the cause. It is not a secret information, you can read books about theology and follow the courses that I've linked you.

I need to know the methods used by the Catholic Church to actually determine that “God” was the cause.  The claim is never reviewed by non-Catholic parties.  Non-Catholic parties only make the determination that the cause is unknown which in no way verifies that “God” was the cause.
The claim is reviewed by non Catholic parties. What are you talking about? Everyone on earth have the capacity to review the claim. You understand that before you can claim that God is the cause, you have to know who God is (and isn't), right? For that there are schools where you can study God. Not all theologians are Catholics.
Source please that shows that non-Catholic Church personal reviewed the claims and also determined the cause to be “God” and that a miracle occurred.[/quote] The best would be that you review it yourself. That way you will be sure that the reviewing has been done correctly. If you want to read about the others reviewing, I think you will have to read books or go to the Vatican archives. Maybe with luck you can find a theological review online for the miracle you want to investigate. Something along the lines of that book.

Wow, that was the longest reply I ever posted. I hope you will find your answers inside it.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #676 on: July 17, 2014, 07:28:28 PM »
But, isn't scientists claim that they have found the Higgs Boson right until proven otherwise?
No scientist ever claimed that he/she had found the Higgs Boson until he had proof that he/she had indeed found it.
Any man and his dog can say that they have proof of god and often do.
What's your point?
Once he had proof he claimed that he is right. And he is until proven otherwise. Like those scientists claiming that The Earth Is the Center of the Universe. They were right until proven otherwise.
My point is the following :
Finding a miracle proves the existence of God outside our Body until proven otherwise.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #677 on: July 17, 2014, 07:36:02 PM »
Lukvance
From the perspective of the catholic church, do miracles ever happen to non-catholics?
Yes. But they are not miracle like the ones we are talking about in this thread. (I use miracle as a shortcut to "Miracle recognize by the Vatican") I don't think The Vatican recognize a miracle that happen to non-catholics. I believe that in these instances it is not God's touch.
You're worth more than my time

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6612
  • Darwins +789/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #678 on: July 17, 2014, 07:36:41 PM »
Like those scientists claiming that The Earth Is the Center of the Universe. They were right until proven otherwise.

They were right because they didn't know they were wrong? They were right because nobody knew any better, which confirmed their claims?

How is somebody right merely because nobody knows they are wrong? Back when there was no germ theory, was it right to eat with your bare hands after using them to clean out crap out of the animal pens without washing with soap?

With all the ignorance we have left, I could start being right about a lot of things if I thought I could get away with it.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #679 on: July 17, 2014, 07:37:18 PM »
Accusing that other don't know what he is talking about.

Dude, seriously, stop pretending, you're not fooling anyone.
Apparently you are. Good work.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #680 on: July 17, 2014, 07:45:32 PM »
Like those scientists claiming that The Earth Is the Center of the Universe. They were right until proven otherwise.

They were right because they didn't know they were wrong? They were right because nobody knew any better, which confirmed their claims?

How is somebody right merely because nobody knows they are wrong? Back when there was no germ theory, was it right to eat with your bare hands after using them to clean out crap out of the animal pens without washing with soap?

With all the ignorance we have left, I could start being right about a lot of things if I thought I could get away with it.
I think you know the answers to your questions. So I will consider this not as a counter argument. Just spam.
You are smarter than that. Use your head.
Some "scientist" said "fire burns" and he was right until proven otherwise...which he has not...yet :)
You're worth more than my time

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6612
  • Darwins +789/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #681 on: July 17, 2014, 07:58:04 PM »
Like those scientists claiming that The Earth Is the Center of the Universe. They were right until proven otherwise.

They were right because they didn't know they were wrong? They were right because nobody knew any better, which confirmed their claims?

How is somebody right merely because nobody knows they are wrong? Back when there was no germ theory, was it right to eat with your bare hands after using them to clean out crap out of the animal pens without washing with soap?

With all the ignorance we have left, I could start being right about a lot of things if I thought I could get away with it.
I think you know the answers to your questions. So I will consider this not as a counter argument. Just spam.
You are smarter than that. Use your head.
Some "scientist" said "fire burns" and he was right until proven otherwise...which he has not...yet :)

SPAM? You made a claim and I ask about it and you call it SPAM? I'm specific and you call it SPAM?

I don't know the answer that you would give. I know my answer, which is that being wrong doesn't make us right just because we don't know we're wrong.

I'll ask again. It is the year 1600. I'm just gotten back from watching Bruno get burned at the stake and I have to clean out the chicken coup before dinner. I scoop handful after handful of poop into a bucket, then I wipe my hands on my tunic and go in to eat some fried chicken. I have no idea that germs exist. I have no particular reason to worry about it as I eat the chicken. I get sick. I die. Was I right to eat the chicken without washing my hands with soap (which may not have even existed at the time), or was I merely ignorant?l

So I guess that's what I'm asking. Why do you equate ignorance with being right? I have never encountered this before.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4655
  • Darwins +106/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #682 on: July 17, 2014, 08:02:23 PM »
PP sure you have,there was Tbright and a handful of others.but they were just ignorant,not ignorant AND stupid
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5061
  • Darwins +580/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #683 on: July 17, 2014, 08:07:57 PM »
Accusing that other don't know what he is talking about.

Dude, seriously, stop pretending, you're not fooling anyone.
Apparently you are. Good work.
tldr, "NO U".

Are you trying to prove that you're as bad at comebacks as you are at science?

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6869
  • Darwins +925/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #684 on: July 17, 2014, 08:11:05 PM »
What you said above about miracles not being in the same category as medical treatments, and therefore not subject to the same kind of research methodology just put the nail in the coffin of your argument. Miracles are acts of god, not a product or a treatment.

You have just explained very clearly why it is impossible to examine miracles performed by god using the scientific method. The scientific method only works on real world physical phenomena. The scientific method cannot be used to explain or describe acts of god.

Here's why:

God decides, on his whim, whether to heal or not to heal, a woman's paralyzed hand. God decides, on his whim, which prayers to answer and which to ignore or to say no to. God decides, on his whim, whether to allow evidence to be detected by scientists or priests or both, or neither.

God is running his own secret science experiment here, and he can disrupt or interfere with any instruments or procedures that human beings bring to bear.  God does not want to heal people in any noticeable, statistically significant way, or else he would just heal people in a noticeable, statistically significant way.

He wants to remain miraculous and mysterious more than he wants people to get better. His healing rate is less than a statistical error. That is why doing nothing at all produces more spontaneous healings than praying to this god. Praying to this god just leads to more suffering, since the vast majority of people will get jack sh!t from him, and will feel unworthy of his grace or whatever.

Because this god is a d!ck. I hope I do meet him when I die so I can tell him to kiss my round black a$$.[1]

I don't know why anyone would ever ask this god for anything. I don't even know why the Vatican bothers to pretend that what they are doing is scientific. It's magic. All the way down.

And I am really, truly, done here. Lukvance, thanks for several book chapters.  8)
 1. Likewise, I hope there is a heaven, but not for me, since I am destined for hell in many different faiths. I hope there is a heaven for all the people who have spent their whole lives devoutly worshiping this sick fvck of a god. They deserve to get something nice.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2014, 08:14:53 PM by nogodsforme »
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6612
  • Darwins +789/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #685 on: July 17, 2014, 08:39:29 PM »
PP sure you have,there was Tbright and a handful of others.but they were just ignorant,not ignorant AND stupid

He was talking about in real life. That's where I hadn't encountered it. Here on the forum, yea, you're right. Well, I'd better not say you're right or Lukvance will accuse me of making claims that I can't prove. Oh wait, that's what I'm doing to him. I get so confused.  ;D

Right now Tbright would be an ever so slight improvement.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6869
  • Darwins +925/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #686 on: July 17, 2014, 08:53:16 PM »
Wasn't Tbright the JW who told me my family had not been "real" JW's?

Just like Jst is trying to do? Because JW's never do wrong. They don't lose their jobs, drink, beat their wives, run cons and scams, destroy their family's finances, threaten to kill their kids, end up homeless. No. Anyone who does that stuff cannot possibly be a JW.

I know a young woman who is a JW. She is unmarried and has a child with a drug dealer who has two other baby mamas.

People who do that stuff are never of the religion they belong to, for some reason. Until they repent. And then everyone wants them back. &)
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6612
  • Darwins +789/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #687 on: July 17, 2014, 09:08:18 PM »
Nogods

Its the same old, same old. "Hey, I have so much information that I'm right about everything!"

I'd call it a mentality, but somehow I don't think brains are involved.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #688 on: July 18, 2014, 01:27:23 AM »
"theology" has nothing to do with my example of a "College of Miracles" b/c in theology it is ASSUMED that the deity is real, and it cannot be independently verified or checked out by disinterested or disagreeing parties. Conversely, science CAN be independently verified by disinterested parties. That is the difference you need to deal with in this false analogy you keep trying to draw.
Thank you for your counter argument. This paragraph sum it up perfectly. It shows also your lack of knowledge.
What is preventing you, median, verify/check out the miracle? Then from your experience and what you know of God conclude if it is him doing that or if it is not.
Do you know that there are atheist attending theology classes? Some even graduate?
Do you know that there are people from other religion than Christian attending theology classes?
Why, apparently, do you believe they do not represent disinterested parties?

And once again you are attempting to derail the subject. It makes no difference if an atheist takes a theology class. Such classes are not verification that the claims are true! These classes do not demonstrate the miraculous each semester. I know this because I have taken many theology courses. So you are presenting a false analogy b/c you desperately want to make "theology" out to be some legit science, when it is not. The church of Scientology has class, and so do astrologers, New Agers, and people of homeopathy. So what. The miraculous claims of religious doctrines, or those practicing pseudo-science, are not independently verified as actually true in such classes. On the contrary, science courses (in general) DO in fact allow students to independently verify the information provided therein (such as in physics, chemistry, or biology). That is the difference you keep missing. Your theology courses cannot be independently verified as pertaining to anything real or actual b/c we do not have a "God" thing to examine, question, or test independently.


As demonstrated by others here, the lack of knowledge is all yours b/c you clearly do not understand how science works and are falsely attempting to lump science and theology together. And there is nothing preventing me from checking out your claims, and the claims of your church. I have done so, and find you both irrational and in error (as I have previously shown). Furthermore, I do not believe there is a "God". In fact, I do not believe that word actually refers to anything real or coherent. But it is you who is making the claims that a "God" is doing a miracle. Yet your argument is wholly circular because you are assuming what you need to prove.

DEMONSTRATION OF YOUR VICIOUS CIRCULARITY:

-What is a miracle?
-A miracle is an act of God.
-How do you know God exists outside your brain?
-Because there are miracles (acts of God) at Lourdes
-So...God exists because God did an act of God???

If your definition of miracle is akin to "an act of God" then you cannot use that as evidence for the alleged "God" existing outside your brain b/c you have placed your conclusion inside your premise - which is viciously circular.

YOUR FALLACIOUS REASONING:

P1- God did "acts of God"
C- Therefore, God exists outside the brain

You cannot put "God" (or any term of the kind) in your premises because "God" is the very thing you are trying to prove. See how again you are irrational.


EDIT: Just a quick side note on something you wrote above (which I find incredibly laughable):

Miracles are evidence of the existence of God outside your body.

This is comedy! So earlier you said a miracle was an act of God. Let's insert that definition and see how your argument works out, shall we!!

Acts of God are evidence of the existence of God outside your body.


So your evidence of God is...God? LOL. Get real dude. You-are-irrational.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2014, 01:40:48 AM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #689 on: July 18, 2014, 10:35:05 AM »
So I guess that's what I'm asking. Why do you equate ignorance with being right? I have never encountered this before.
I do not equate ignorance with being right. I say that people are right until proven wrong. I also say that some people will never be proven wrong. You are the one interpreting it the other way around.
You're worth more than my time

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6612
  • Darwins +789/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #690 on: July 18, 2014, 10:59:13 AM »
So I guess that's what I'm asking. Why do you equate ignorance with being right? I have never encountered this before.
I do not equate ignorance with being right. I say that people are right until proven wrong. I also say that some people will never be proven wrong. You are the one interpreting it the other way around.

People are right until they're proven wrong? Where do you get this shit?

And where do you draw the line. If someone thinks they are right and they ignore evidence to the contrary, do they get to stay right? Who decides this crap?

When I was a kid, I thought there were monsters under my bed. Was I right until I got old enough to realize that they didn't exist. Was I right up to that point when I got enough information to discard the fears? Have I been right ever since that there are not monsters under my bed, or are they still there, waiting for someone else to believe they exist?

Is there a line to draw somewhere, or is this a black and white issue for you. All a person has to do is think they are right and the burden of proof falls on others to prove otherwise.

If I think I can jump off a cliff and survive, am I right up to the point where I spat on the ground and figure out a new "right". And then am I right but dead? Or do I finally get have that awful word, "wrong" etched on my tombstone.

By the way, why do we have the word "wrong' in our vocabulary, if everything we think is right is right. There seems to be no need for it.

What determines when something is so right that it right, even though its wrong. What if I just think "maybe". Does that make it true? That I've concluded some sort of "maybe" about something? Or do I have to erroneously conclude that I am right to be right?

At this moment in time and space, scientists do not consider themselves "right" about science. They consider themselves in the ballpark, so to speak,  in a lot of areas, but not "right". So are they wrong in the meantime, by not defining their discoveries as "right"?

Maybe this is why you like miracles so much. You need one right about now.

Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Online Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6773
  • Darwins +542/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #691 on: July 18, 2014, 11:26:10 AM »
My point is the following :
Finding a miracle proves the existence of God outside our Body until proven otherwise.
It is not possible to be sane and believe that at the same time.

A: "How does this work?"
B: "ABC and then DEF."
LUK: "God did it."

100 years later.

A: "How does this work?"
B: "ABD and then HIJ."
LUK: "God did it."

100 years later.

A: "How does this work?"
B: "We know for certain: ABD and then HIJ."
LUK: "OK, God didn't do it, it was HIJ"

This, Luk, is "the god of the gaps" -> "If we do not know the answer, it is God."

This means that you worship ignorance -> God is an excuse for everything that we do not understand.

But the remarkable thing is that the Hindu does not think it is your god at all - he knows it is his god.

Your god does not exist, and, no, that is not opinion, it is the only reliable conclusion and that must remain the case until you show otherwise. But, Luk, the problem is that every day, you show that your god is not there.

You pray.  Let us say your good friend boards an aircraft that later is reported to have crashed. You may pray for his well-being. But you only do that because you are ignorant of his condition: Is he alive or dead?

Once you know the outcome, you no longer pray. Why? If he is dead, can you not pray to make him alive again? If he has lost a leg, can you not pray for the leg to regrow overnight?

See, if you know the answer, there's no point to god: once you know how something works, there is no need for god. So why was there a need for a god to start with?


Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #692 on: July 18, 2014, 11:39:35 AM »
Dear median,
I believe that you don't want to acknowledge theology as the science of God. But it is like not wanting to acknowledge physics class as the science of particle physics. To know about God academically you have to follow theology classes. You are allowed to learn about god "by yourself" like you are allowed to learn about particle physics "by yourself".
"These classes do not demonstrate the miraculous each semester" Is as true as the particle physics classes do not demonstrate the existence of the Higgs Boson each semester. I agree with you!
These courses are just a necessary piece for the demonstration in one hand of the existence of the Higgs Boson and the other hand the existence of God.
You say :
DEMONSTRATION OF YOUR VICIOUS CIRCULARITY:
-What is a miracle?
-A miracle is an act of God.
-How do you know God exists outside your brain?
-Because there are miracles (acts of God) at Lourdes
-So...God exists because God did an act of God???
I say :
DEMONSTRATION OF the existence of God:
-What is a miracle?
-A miracle is God interacting with this world.
-How do you know God exists outside your brain?
-Because there are miracles and I am not causing them with my brain.
-So...God exists because God interact with this world.

If your definition of miracle is akin to "an act of God" then you cannot use that as evidence for the alleged "God" existing outside your brain b/c you have placed your conclusion inside your premise - which is viciously circular.
You are correct. I believe the trouble you have understanding the proof comes from the use of the word miracle.
I told you that miracle are proof of the existence of God. But I might as well told you that events that have God as an explanation are proof of his existence.
God comes as a conclusion of the event, not the premise. At the beginning you don't have God, you just have an event then you look for what could have caused the event. If the event happen in a controlled environment (as Lourdes for example) you could conclude that the event was caused by God.

I hope this will clarify things.
You're worth more than my time

Offline Lukvance

  • Emergency Room
  • ******
  • Posts: 1982
  • Darwins +13/-258
  • Gender: Male
  • Catholic
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #693 on: July 18, 2014, 12:01:16 PM »
My point is the following :
Finding a miracle proves the existence of God outside our Body until proven otherwise.
It is not possible to be sane and believe that at the same time.
[...]
Your god does not exist, and, no, that is not opinion, it is the only reliable conclusion and that must remain the case until you show otherwise.
I see a lot of unsupported claims. What is your counter argument? Could you start with that, then give us something to support it?
I don't remember using the God of the gaps argument. You are the one presenting it as if I was using it.
I mean I could copy/paste your text and tell you that you are using the "god of the gaps argument" about the existence of Higgs Boson. Do you want me to do that? I hope not because I don't believe the Higgs Boson exist because of the "god of the gaps argument".
When you know how something will behave then you measure something that act like you predicted. Is it still god of the gaps argument?
We know how God can interact with the world we measured his interactions and it acted like we predicted. How is it still god of the gaps argument?

You pray.  Let us say your good friend boards an aircraft that later is reported to have crashed. You may pray for his well-being. But you only do that because you are ignorant of his condition: Is he alive or dead?
I don't know.

Quote
Once you know the outcome, you no longer pray. Why?
I keep praying even if I know the outcome. What makes you believe that I don't?
Quote
If he is dead, can you not pray to make him alive again? If he has lost a leg, can you not pray for the leg to regrow overnight?
I can pray, as much as I want to.

Quote
See, if you know the answer, there's no point to god: once you know how something works, there is no need for god. So why was there a need for a god to start with?
You need God to guide you with your everyday life decision. You need God as an example in your life, as a goal, as a purpose to your existence. You need God as an infinite source. You need God for things I can't even start to comprehend.
We need God for many many reasons.
You're worth more than my time

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12554
  • Darwins +703/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #694 on: July 18, 2014, 12:55:05 PM »
I say that people are right until proven wrong.


This is why no one here has any respect for you.  This is not something a smart person says. It is the opposite of what a smart person says.


Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6869
  • Darwins +925/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Does God exists as a separate entity - separate from human brains?
« Reply #695 on: July 18, 2014, 01:45:55 PM »
I say that people are right until proven wrong.


This is why no one here has any respect for you.  This is not something a smart person says. It is the opposite of what a smart person says.
When Lukvance's friend calls and tells him, "Bigfoot is at the door wearing a cloak of invisibility, and wants a hundred dollars or he will kill me," Lukvance will happily drive over and hand his friend the money. He knows he won't see Bigfoot himself, since there is that invisibility cloak.  Because his friend is right until proven wrong.

When the police come to his home and say his mother robbed a bank, he will happily turn his mother over to them. The police need no evidence, witnesses, proof. All they have to do is say they think she did it.

Because the police are right until proven wrong:police:

Likewise the government, all religions, the cable company, the military, the crazy guy on the corner ranting, the drug dealer who says that the stuff he's got will make you feel good and is not addictive at all. Everyone is right until proven wrong. Despite the fact that, in many cases, the proposition cannot be proven wrong, or it would be too costly or dangerous to do so.

That is why we make people show evidence that what they are saying has merit, instead of relying on others to prove them wrong.  Otherwise, we would let all cars, appliances, toys, medications, foods, beverages, etc. on the market as soon as the producers said they were safe. After a few injuries and deaths, we would have proven them wrong. Too bad for the people who got hurt or died.

You know how there are people who don't think atheists should serve on juries because they won't swear on holy books to tell the truth? I am wondering if some theists should not be allowed to serve on juries because of a lack of ability to reason.  :?
« Last Edit: July 18, 2014, 01:58:47 PM by nogodsforme »
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.