News1 min ago
Just a siily question really
33 Answers
Everyone welcome to answer this but IF there is a one true god(whatever religion or (Aethiesm) you believe in)
what act would it have to do in front of you for you to truly believe in it?
what act would it have to do in front of you for you to truly believe in it?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by The Sherman. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
That would depend on what the believers in that god claim it can do.
If, for example, they say that its prime achievement is to turn ballpens into live frogs then I would ask it to do that under test conditions.
If, on the other hand, the claim is that it created the universe then it's difficult to know where I could stand to watch it creating another one.
But I'm game. Point me towards one of the thousands of gods, tell me what it is supposed to be able to do and then I'll tell you what my test would be.
If, for example, they say that its prime achievement is to turn ballpens into live frogs then I would ask it to do that under test conditions.
If, on the other hand, the claim is that it created the universe then it's difficult to know where I could stand to watch it creating another one.
But I'm game. Point me towards one of the thousands of gods, tell me what it is supposed to be able to do and then I'll tell you what my test would be.
I don't think it's a silly question, Sherman. I assume you're talking about God in the accepted sense of the word - an almighty being who created the universe and who takes great interest in the progress, or otherwise, of mankind? If so, I can't think of anything that would convince me, so I'm with Chakka. I would need to know what the claims are before deciding which to put under the microscope.
Oh, have a heart, Brionon! Punching Jesus's nose wouldn't be fair at all. I mean - honestly - is it his fault that people made up stories about him after he died? The man has just had some terrible press, that's all. He was a Jew, and what good Jew would even consider founding a new religion? Perish the thought! The poor guy hasn't been around to defend himself for the past couple of thousand years, so the gossip-mongers have had free rein to say what they like, with no one to contradict them - and we all know how rumours grow and metamorphasise, especially when the fires are purposefully and systematically stoked. If you really want to punch someone, the story writers and the law makers would be a far more appropriate - and a far more satisfying - target.
Oh, have a heart, Brionon! Punching Jesus's nose wouldn't be fair at all. I mean - honestly - is it his fault that people made up stories about him after he died? The man has just had some terrible press, that's all. He was a Jew, and what good Jew would even consider founding a new religion? Perish the thought! The poor guy hasn't been around to defend himself for the past couple of thousand years, so the gossip-mongers have had free rein to say what they like, with no one to contradict them - and we all know how rumours grow and metamorphasise, especially when the fires are purposefully and systematically stoked. If you really want to punch someone, the story writers and the law makers would be a far more appropriate - and a far more satisfying - target.
I was going to answer this on Friday Sherman but got too busy - sorry.
Actually one of the very best questions.
One of the criticsms often levelled at athiests is that their position is a matter of faith as much as a Christians.
Their lack of belief is in itself a belief.
This is untrue - or it should be!
Carl Popper was a great philosopher of science. He stated the principle of falsifyability.
To be truely rational you must admit the possibility that you are wrong and state evidence that would make you change your mind.
No religious person will pass this test - they will refuse to admit they may be wrong. It would be a lack of faith.
Similarly any athiest that fails this test is not truely rational.
It's a difficult one to come up with because you have to protect against mental illness - If a hand writes God in the Sky I must be sure it's not a prank and I'm not mad.
Even then it might just be evidence of a superior technology.
Let's start with the immortal soul I'd need incontravertiable evidence of it's existance and immortality
Not weighing the bodies of the dying!
Actually one of the very best questions.
One of the criticsms often levelled at athiests is that their position is a matter of faith as much as a Christians.
Their lack of belief is in itself a belief.
This is untrue - or it should be!
Carl Popper was a great philosopher of science. He stated the principle of falsifyability.
To be truely rational you must admit the possibility that you are wrong and state evidence that would make you change your mind.
No religious person will pass this test - they will refuse to admit they may be wrong. It would be a lack of faith.
Similarly any athiest that fails this test is not truely rational.
It's a difficult one to come up with because you have to protect against mental illness - If a hand writes God in the Sky I must be sure it's not a prank and I'm not mad.
Even then it might just be evidence of a superior technology.
Let's start with the immortal soul I'd need incontravertiable evidence of it's existance and immortality
Not weighing the bodies of the dying!
Gosh didnt realise I had posted such a thought provoking question! (quietly stroking my own ego!)
It started with me remebering that a fooballer had said he was Jesus come back and as this is meant to happen what we would need to beleive it was him and what we would ask of him?
but Also yeah a person appears claiming to be the or a god what would be the first thing you asked of hm/her/it?
It started with me remebering that a fooballer had said he was Jesus come back and as this is meant to happen what we would need to beleive it was him and what we would ask of him?
but Also yeah a person appears claiming to be the or a god what would be the first thing you asked of hm/her/it?
As far returning of Jesus (pbuh) is concerned then my faith might not be same as others but according to my knowledge he would not appear in Europe any way. Damascus is the place where he would come back and few signs have been given to recognize him.
God bit is very easier. If someone claims to be God then as far as Islam is concerned then he/she/it should be able to withstand the test given in Quran.
1. Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
2. Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
3. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
4. And there is none like unto Him.
Any one who passes this test, I have no doubt believing in him/her/it as God.
Otherwise ask him/her/it a simple question.
If claiming to be God then make the Sun rise from the West and I will believe you</b
God bit is very easier. If someone claims to be God then as far as Islam is concerned then he/she/it should be able to withstand the test given in Quran.
1. Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
2. Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
3. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
4. And there is none like unto Him.
Any one who passes this test, I have no doubt believing in him/her/it as God.
Otherwise ask him/her/it a simple question.
If claiming to be God then make the Sun rise from the West and I will believe you</b
Well chakka as an aethiest I dont believe in gods but i am fully open to the point that there might be one!
I just need the evidence!
if for example god appeared and healed someone in front of me, I'd be really angry that he did it to prove a point and not actually want to help someone, or the fact that he could have done that at any point and didn't! But yeah if any god appeared of any faifth what would they/it need to do chakka to convince YOU. Most gods are cited as being the creators of the world so you can take your pick which denomination!
I just need the evidence!
if for example god appeared and healed someone in front of me, I'd be really angry that he did it to prove a point and not actually want to help someone, or the fact that he could have done that at any point and didn't! But yeah if any god appeared of any faifth what would they/it need to do chakka to convince YOU. Most gods are cited as being the creators of the world so you can take your pick which denomination!
sherminator, you ought to phrase your questions more precisely if you want sensible answers.
For example, if someone healed someone in front of me I would assume that he/she was a doctor. Doctors do that all the time.
Did you mean 'miraculously healed'? If so, then it would be up to the healer to show that it was miraculous and not normal healing or spontaneous remission. I would then take it up from there. No-one has ever proved a miracle in the case of any of those incidents at Lourdes, for example.
If the claim was the ability to create a universe then I would ask for a demonstration, as I said before.
You are wrong to say that most gods are cited as creators. If you browse through the Penguin Dictionary of Religions or the Encyclopedia of Gods (which lists over 2500) you will find that only a minority are 'creator gods'.
Finally you cannot claim to be a member of that noble band who are atheists if you are 'fully open to the point that there might be [a god]'. That makes you a theist or one of those watered-down theists called agnostics.
An atheist totally rejects the idea of gods, for precisely the same reason that he totally rejects the idea of the Easter Bunny, fairies, crystal gazing or tealeaf-reading. All are absurd ideas with not a shred of evidence to support them.
For example, if someone healed someone in front of me I would assume that he/she was a doctor. Doctors do that all the time.
Did you mean 'miraculously healed'? If so, then it would be up to the healer to show that it was miraculous and not normal healing or spontaneous remission. I would then take it up from there. No-one has ever proved a miracle in the case of any of those incidents at Lourdes, for example.
If the claim was the ability to create a universe then I would ask for a demonstration, as I said before.
You are wrong to say that most gods are cited as creators. If you browse through the Penguin Dictionary of Religions or the Encyclopedia of Gods (which lists over 2500) you will find that only a minority are 'creator gods'.
Finally you cannot claim to be a member of that noble band who are atheists if you are 'fully open to the point that there might be [a god]'. That makes you a theist or one of those watered-down theists called agnostics.
An atheist totally rejects the idea of gods, for precisely the same reason that he totally rejects the idea of the Easter Bunny, fairies, crystal gazing or tealeaf-reading. All are absurd ideas with not a shred of evidence to support them.
No Chakka am afraid you are wrong there!
What was on the side of busses in London?
There is no god, Probably! You will need to read the god delusion to fully understand the definition aethiest. I beleive in No god but am willing to accept if presented with evidence that there could be a god -that is aethiesm, To say otherwise would be unscientific.
But my earlier point you are correct i did mean that if jesus came along and attached an arm back on to someone or touched someone and cured them of cancer or some other miracle.
and Also I apologise I didn't realise there were 2500 gods and I did mean then, some of the more important ones who are cited as being the creator of earth!
What was on the side of busses in London?
There is no god, Probably! You will need to read the god delusion to fully understand the definition aethiest. I beleive in No god but am willing to accept if presented with evidence that there could be a god -that is aethiesm, To say otherwise would be unscientific.
But my earlier point you are correct i did mean that if jesus came along and attached an arm back on to someone or touched someone and cured them of cancer or some other miracle.
and Also I apologise I didn't realise there were 2500 gods and I did mean then, some of the more important ones who are cited as being the creator of earth!
Are The Sherman and sherminator the same person? I think we should be told.
Whoever you are, you should try to avoid being patronising; it doesn't become you. I know full well what an atheist is (I even know how to spell it) because I am one. I have read The God Delusion at least three times and various parts of it more often than that. I own, and read as often as the mood takes me, all of Dawkins' books, so I know full well what his thinking is. And I was an atheist long before I discovered his work.
Re the bus slogan, you confuse two quite separate things. The first is that all scientific principles are theories and remain so however long ago they were formed, however solidly they are established and however much we may rely on them in our everyday lives.
Thus it is scientifically as wrong to say 'God does not exist' as it is to say 'Santa does not exist. The Tooth Fairy does not exist. Cinderella's Fairy Godmother did not exist' and so on. The word 'probably' must always be inserted. So the bus slogan was scientifically correct.
But the second thing is that we are all entitled to make up our minds, on the evidence, as to what the truth is.
Now I don't believe that Santa, the Tooth Fairy, and all the rest of those things (and a hundred others) exist. For precisely the same reason I don't believe that God exists.
Neither does Dawkins, as you should have found obvious.
That makes me an atheist like him. (Or he like me!)
What you are doing is hiding behind that standard scientific discipline to justify your sitting on the fence.
You are perfectlly entitled to do that, of course, but not to purport to be an atheist at the same time. You are claiming a status which your thinking has not earned you.
Whoever you are, you should try to avoid being patronising; it doesn't become you. I know full well what an atheist is (I even know how to spell it) because I am one. I have read The God Delusion at least three times and various parts of it more often than that. I own, and read as often as the mood takes me, all of Dawkins' books, so I know full well what his thinking is. And I was an atheist long before I discovered his work.
Re the bus slogan, you confuse two quite separate things. The first is that all scientific principles are theories and remain so however long ago they were formed, however solidly they are established and however much we may rely on them in our everyday lives.
Thus it is scientifically as wrong to say 'God does not exist' as it is to say 'Santa does not exist. The Tooth Fairy does not exist. Cinderella's Fairy Godmother did not exist' and so on. The word 'probably' must always be inserted. So the bus slogan was scientifically correct.
But the second thing is that we are all entitled to make up our minds, on the evidence, as to what the truth is.
Now I don't believe that Santa, the Tooth Fairy, and all the rest of those things (and a hundred others) exist. For precisely the same reason I don't believe that God exists.
Neither does Dawkins, as you should have found obvious.
That makes me an atheist like him. (Or he like me!)
What you are doing is hiding behind that standard scientific discipline to justify your sitting on the fence.
You are perfectlly entitled to do that, of course, but not to purport to be an atheist at the same time. You are claiming a status which your thinking has not earned you.
first off yes i am same person!
second im the biggest athiest that can be I personally beleive that there is no god but to say i know there is no god is as stupid to say there definately IS a god is all, I think were getting to the same point!
I find the very notion of a god both infantile and redundant in the modern world but again am fully open to the possibility that i could be wrong.
second im the biggest athiest that can be I personally beleive that there is no god but to say i know there is no god is as stupid to say there definately IS a god is all, I think were getting to the same point!
I find the very notion of a god both infantile and redundant in the modern world but again am fully open to the possibility that i could be wrong.
Latest Posts
Editor's Blog2 mins ago
Is It Safe To Take Paracetamol
How it Works33 mins ago
Can't Access My Hard Drive On File...
Technology35 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.