World Forums

A place to continue the religion debate from the WX World Politics board.

http://wc6.worldcrossing.com/webx?14@@.1dde33c7

<b>Bela:</b>

F: Inductitve logic is absolute. Sure, it cannot prove everything. In particular, it cannot prove or disprove God's existence, or the veracity of the Bible, or the correctness of reincarnation. But, if something is impossible even through the means of inductive logic, then we can safely conclude that it does not exist.

I tend to think that God can get away with quite a lot. Simply put, God is not hindered by our mental limitations and conceptual restrictions. Any being that can create life itself and the entire universe is not going to be hobbled by what our minds conceive is possible.

It's one of the most fundamental errors of human thinking to say "We cannot understand it, so it cannot be possible" . So, in a way, I concur. However, I think that, while we certainly cannot fully explain God, it is possible to make stataments about Him. Logic is one of the tools available. A weak one inasmuch as it will never give you a fully satisfactory explanation. But on the other hand, if used properly, it will not betray you either.

But to hold that both "A" and "not A" are true would just be silly. And even an all-powerful being cannot invalidate that.

I would think an infinite, omnipotent being just might be beyond the dichotomies we set our watch by.

Still, we can safely apply the A vs not A scheme. Either He exists or He does not exist. Either the Biblical God exists and all other gods are false gods, or the Biblical God does not exist and some other idea of Him is true. To hold that all of us are right is simply false.

Fair enough. So what rules do we apply to an infinite, omnipotent, omniscient being? Do we confine "Him" to a gender? A lifespan? An ethical system? Emotional responses (ie, do we make him angry or sad or happy)?

I can only speak of the Biblical God. The Biblical God does not have a specific gender. Both man and woman are created in His image. Sure, most pictures describing God describe Him as a male, but there are also some female associations to be found in the Bible.

Lifespan: He's the one who has always been, always will be.

Ethical system: This one is obvious. If there is a God, and this God defines "sin", then His definition also defines the ethical system.

Emotional responses: Like in the gender case, this is merely an antromorphism. If God has emotions, they are certainly not comparable to those of human beings.

How do you upset a being who not only created everything, but the rules of the game, and who knows everything that will happen before it happens?

How can we surprise God?

We can't. He knows everything we do in advance.

We can always disagree to disagree.

I remember saying exactly that a few weeks ago- for the xth time I may add. Those discussions are not about proselitizing. They are mainly about understanding each other's position, not about convincing anyone of anything.[/quote][/b]

and completed until judgment day.

Scientists are still keeping the faith

http://www.analphilosopher.com/files/La ... aith_(1997).pdf

"Nobody can dispute the intellectual greatness of Thomas Aquinas, Isaac Newton, René Descartes, Blaise Pascal, John Locke, or Immanuel Kant. Yet all of them were devoutly religious. When atheists say (or imply) that there is a correlation between religiosity and intelligence, they are being stupid." - Keith Burgess-Jackson

Thomas More, Erasmus....

I don't think it should matter whether a scientist is religious, as long as he applies scientific method.

As long as personal religion is not an obstacle to scientific method - we're fine.