Evidence for God...

by tec 251 Replies latest jw friends

  • tec
    tec

    I think I can see why you are not understanding what I am trying to say...and I apologise for not being able to say what I am thinking clearly.

    No need to apologize. I understand what you are saying. I am not certain of what it has to do with what I said, is all.

    OTWO, I know what confirmatin bias is, and of course I am willing to be wrong. Takes a lot to make me sure of something, and even then I am open to something changing, or adding to the growth of, my understanding. May I ask how you were sure you weren't engaging in confirmatin bias. Because I tend to see the same thing in even the atheists here. Something causes them to discard or lose their faith; then everything that comes after shores that decision up as the correct one.

    Twitch, love that quote too. Goes with 'the wise man knows that he knows nothing'. (which tends to make very few people on jwn wise,lol)

    Fernando - thank you.

    mP - thank you as well. I am not the one who said that someone dying for their belief was evidence of the belief being true, though. It is just evidence that THEY believed in it enough to die for it.

    Passwordprotected - thank you for replying. Please note that I did not ever say that I could prove there is a God. People offer evidence for things that they see, for their opinion, for their conclusions, in every day life that is not proof. It is then up to the other person to weigh that evidence for themselves (unless it IS proof, in which case no weighing is necessary; just acceptance)

    Tec - like I once did - wants to believe there was this all powerful, sovereign being who created the universe and has a "plan and a purpose" for his/her life, and that this God was best represented in a man, his son, Jesus Christ.

    It really has nothing to do with 'wanting' to believe. I simply cannot dismiss the evidence that I see. I am at this place in my faith because there is, quite simply, no other place that I can be. Not unless I ignore what I have seen, heard, and understood. I realize that my testimony is not enough to be proof to others, nor should it be. No one else's testimony was ever enough to be proof for me. I had to know for myself.

    Not all believers hear or helieve such things.

    True. But not all have the same strength or weakness... so also not the same gift. It is described as a body with different members, because people are so different. So are those who might approach Christ, themselves, after hearing the testimony. I also think that some hear and just don't realize... however, their understanding is the same as someone else who does profess to hear, so perhaps they listen without knowing it, or perhaps they simply have the same spirit so as TO understand. People also tend to believe as they are told, unless they manage to become truly free people. Some believe that Jesus is dead, and accept only in theory that He is alive... because it is not emphasized that He is alive; that he can and does speak, knock, call... except in theory. Some teach that He does not speak altogether, that hearing voices (even though it is a voice, and not actually audible) is demons or mental illness. So there is fear associate with hearing, and we tend to shrink back from something that causes us fear.

    The above tends to boil down to faith. No faith, no hearing any call. And there is a difference between faith and belief.

    Belief is something that you can choose or discard, and it does not necessarily mean that you are certain in anything. Faith, however, is a knowing. It is more than belief. It is stronger than belief. To help illustrate this point, think about faith in someone (your mother) for a moment. You don't believe you have a mother. You know you have a mother. This is a given. Faith IN your mother is more along the lines of trusting that she is who she says she is; and that she will keep the promises that she has made, do the things she says she will do. You trust her. That is faith In your mother.

    Same with faith in Christ. It isn't... I believe He is real. Knowing he is real and alive is a given, same as knowing your mother is real and alive. The faith IN Christ comes in trusting Him... that He is as He said, that He will do as He has said, that He will keep his promises, etc.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • OnTheWayOut
    OnTheWayOut

    Sab, if I come off the pedestal, will you get off your high horse?

    Tec, I don't speak for everyone. I can say that it was a long journey to arrive at atheism. Mine was started with confirmation bias that Christianity was right, slowly got to the point where christendom, as WTS calls it, seemed to have the essence of Christian truth way more than JW's, but as I examined onward, I realized that DNA and othet evolutionary science was correct while the Bible was inaccurate. I won't drone on with the typical details about the flood, tower of Babel, the exodus, the kingdom of David, the disagreement within 4 gospels (and the "other" gospels) written long after what would have been the time they reflected. You've heard all that before. After processing that, I equate Bible-based beliefs with all other legends.

    If an atheist seems cold on Christianity or any faith, consider how well Christians view Wiccan or Voodoo and any tribal beliefs. As difficult as it is, I don't ridicule believers in my daily offline life. But you have to admit that this forum is the proper place for such "heated" discussions.

  • tec
    tec

    I was more interested in the process you used, OTWO. How do you know that you are not now doing the same thing to come to your conclusions? That you don't latch on to certain pieces of evidence or arguments over another one, because of how it fits what you want or do believe?

    I can see how insisting on something is true when all the evidence points to it NOT being true (or insisting that something is NOT true, when all the evidence points to it being true - evidence as in proof or almost proof in this instance)... this would be surrendering to confirmation bias, or grasping at straws. Perhaps.

    Otherwise, who is to say?

    Peace,

    tammy

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    Sab, if I come off the pedestal, will you get off your high horse?

    Two words and a snort cannot explain away entire experiences such as Tammy's or anyone else's spiritual path for that matter. I remain on the ground and I shout at you on top the Eiffel Tower of Evidence, I'm surprised you even heard me. Then again maybe you didn't.

    of course I am willing to be wrong.

    Tec, what exactly are you willing to be wrong about? The existence of God? Where do you draw the line as to where you will never budge? Is atheism on the table for you even hypothetically?

    -Sab

  • tec
    tec

    No, not on the existance of God, or of Christ. That is not a belief. That is a given, at least for me. (see difference between faith and belief in someone above) I am willing to be wrong about certain things I think, assume, or conclude about Christ or God... or the universe. The only time I am certain is if something is revealed to me or confirmed to me BY Christ.

    Off to work... be back in a bit.

    Peace Sab,

    tammy

  • tec
    tec

    Also, thanks for pointing that out. I noticed how that could be taken wrong as I wrote it, but I didn't clarify.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • OnTheWayOut
    OnTheWayOut

    Tec, I am sure many many atheists use confirmation bias. I have stated enough of my own process in my comments. I examined the Bible and archaeology and read what historians had to say. I read pro and con on the Bible. I looked at what science says, particularly on evolution.

    To be fair to atheists that seem to or actually do engage in confirmation bias, once they see how Christianity is no different than other legends, why should they only look to Christ? Do you, Tec (and others) give serious consideration to pagan beliefs or to Islam? Which personal testimony should they give weight to, if they have none of their own? -Joseph Smith's or maybe someone from JWN?

    I know the answer is to put trust in Christ first, then He should provide the rest. That's the very recipe of confirmation bias.

  • Qcmbr
    Qcmbr

    As a former xian I can happily say that all the evidences I used and accepted for God from subjective experiences with bliss and demon attacks through to practical expressions of love and community within the Mormon faith are , once observed from without the bounds of faith , not evidences at all, not even close. It is not the quality or lack of evidence that is the problem it is faith itself that is the crack whore wrecking peoples' ability to discern fact from fiction. Once you confront the problem of faith ( which is that it is a circular dependency, faith needs faith to make it work) then you have the key to examining and ultimately rejecting foolish or misunderstood memes.

    Demon attacks become sleep paralysis or symptoms of brain stress, intuitive morality is discovered to no longer be rooted in an external book or entity and ultimately a reliance on invisible beings is replaced by self determination and ego maturity.

  • tec
    tec
    Tec, I am sure many many atheists use confirmation bias. I have stated enough of my own process in my comments. I examined the Bible and archaeology and read what historians had to say. I read pro and con on the Bible. I looked at what science says, particularly on evolution.

    Then are you certain that I have not rid myself of as much confirmation bias as is humanly possible? I have done all of the same things that you have done. Yet I never feared anything in science in conjunction with my faith, because there was never any need to do so.

    To be fair to atheists that seem to or actually do engage in confirmation bias, once they see how Christianity is no different than other legends, why should they only look to Christ? Do you, Tec (and others) give serious consideration to pagan beliefs or to Islam? Which personal testimony should they give weight to, if they have none of their own? -Joseph Smith's or maybe someone from JWN?

    No reason why they should, unless further evidence cements something for them. Otherwise, explore all you want. I personally love reading and learning about other faiths, and I have done so. None of them spoke to me... with the possible exception of Buddhism for its spiritual and peaceful aspects - in a sort of learning from their understanding of quieting oneself in the spirit, to be able to hear the Spirit, who is Christ. The religion of christianity does not tend to be spiritual, in my experience... despite the fact that Christ is Spirit, God is Spirit... and the spirit is what Christ emphasized.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    Tec (and others) give serious consideration to pagan beliefs or to Islam?

    I give serious consideration to any faith that has a force in the world or did at any point in time. All faiths start with one person or a group of people who experienced something they couldn't not believe to be outside of their known world. Critical thinking skills have always existed even before the scientific method was established. Even in the ignorant world for something to be considered the supernatural it had to pass their sniff tests. Lighting for example acts in a very consistent manner. The source seemed godly, but it only came in a certain manner. It didn't just burst from nothing, it came with clouds and storms. So, just because a populace believed a deity to be the source of the lightining, experiencing it would not necessarily be considered something out of the ordinary. Therefore a set of critical thinking skills were not impossible to obtain for the educated highborns. For a whole system of faith that stands the test of time to spring forth a real event, or series of events, is necessary. It's those events, that are mostly hidden in time, that are of interest to me so I study the religions that I feel have the best chance of being connected to the real supernatural instead of the misconcieved natural. However all religions have many layers of untruth that have cropped up like a mold over time. These spoils greatly hinder progress towards the truth of what happend so long ago.

    Once you confront the problem of faith ( which is that it is a circular dependency, faith needs faith to make it work)

    Faith is the only solution to mankind's and science's problems that has ever existed. If Thomas Edison would have listened to his contemporaries and lacked faith (like they did in him) our world would be dramatically different. Leaps of faith are required in all stages and phases of humanity or progress is hindered or even completly obstructed. Religion was science before science was science. You are throwing the baby out with the bath water, Qcmbr. To be an atheist you have to jetizen your faith I get that, but it's a step further (maybe a few) to call it the problem. It seems even you can't throw the One Ring into the fire from whence it came. Instead, you flung it around your neck like everyone else before you.

    -Sab

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit