Reply to an Atheist

You claimed that there is no god evidence. I replied that the evidence is plentiful. I did not promise to present the evidence, and I explained why: unlike scientific evidence which can be pointed to as an external object in the material universe, god evidence is internal and nonmaterial. God is neither an object nor a theory. Moreover, the evidence can only be acquired by a hands-on individual, experiential methodology, not by discussion or debate.

I said that god evidence, like scientific evidence, results from a three-stage process of knowledge acquisition (it’s sketched out in the final paragraph of this post).

Do you want to know if Jupiter has moons? Since they are invisible to the naked eye, to confirm or disconfirm the proposition that Jupiter has moons, you will need to look through a specialized lens. Only after you have done that will you be competent to talk about the existence or nonexistence of Jupiter’s moons. Do you want to know if god is real, or if attributes ascribed to god are valid? Since these are invisible by common perceptual means, in order to confirm or deny the proposition that god is real/has particular attributes, you will need to look through a specialized lens. Only after you have done that will you be competent to talk about the existence or nonexistence of god/god’s attributes.

To reiterate: If you want to know if Jupiter has moons, you yourself must look through a prescribed lens. If you listen only to others (whether or not they themselves have looked through that lens), you’re only getting information by hearsay. Only if you yourself do the looking through the specialized lens can you truly have verified or disconfirmed the existence of Jupiter’s moons. The same applies to spiritual issues: If you want to know about god/spirit/the sacred, you yourself must look through a prescribed lens. If you listen only to others –  me or anyone else – you’re only getting your spiritual data by hearsay. Only if you yourself look through spirituality’s specialized lens can you truly have verified or disconfirmed the existence of Jupiter’s moons.

Do you wonder if Jupiter may or may not have moons? Want me to prove it to you? I can’t. I can only tell you to look for those satellites by using a specialized lens. Do you wonder if god/spirit/the sacred may or not be real? Want me to prove it to you? I can’t. I can only tell you to look for those entities by using a specialized lens. For the acquisition of both scientific and spiritual data, the ONLY means of confirmation or denial of a proposition is to 1) perform the injunction; 2) do the experiment; 3) share your conclusions with the community of others who have adequately performed # 1). There’s no other way. Unless you’d rather satisfy yourself with faith and belief-in, rather than experiential investigation.  In that case, you would strongly resemble the very religionists you so vehemently condemn.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Reply to an Atheist

  1. smoore22

    Sorry but that is not enough for me… I was a catholic until 3 years ago (age 17). When I say catholic I mean I went to a catholic school and catholic church, even from a young age I was against organized religion (what are the odds I was born into the right religion out of thousands was my argument). I made a conscious effort to keep an open dialog with God until senior year in high school when I started to realize that there wasn’t really a need for God, from a scientific view. Still I kept open to the possibility because it was comforting… but mainly because I didn’t want to go to hell if I was wrong and there as a God. Eventually (once I explored science a little further in college) I realized there was absolutely no need for a God in the universe as it exists. I also realized that if God really wanted me to believe based on faith alone He wouldn’t have programmed me the way he did. Therefore if He wants to punish me for the way He made me then there is nothing I can do.

  2. rennyo01 Post author

    I agree, “there was absolutely no need for a God in the universe as it exists.” My god definition excludes a creator, and thus excludes a god “needed” in the universe.
    Thanks for your comments.

  3. nazrudin

    I also agree. But it doubly makes me wonder why people perpetuate the Concept…

  4. rennyo01 Post author

    Hi nazrudin – I think people perpetuate the concept for two reasons

    1. The idea of a creator is derived from the making of tools by us; we create the human world via artifacts; the pre-and-non-human world must be an artifact. Therefore there must be a humanlike Artifactor.

    2. A humanlike creator makes the world a place made for us – it’s a home designed and run by a father-creator.

  5. rennyo01 Post author

    Hi The Ancient Flood… thank you for your comments. I’m glad you’re enjoying the blog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s