LCD2YOU wrote:Coggins7 wrote:No credible evidence which has objective, transparent, tested result has been established for God claims.
This is very easy to argue against. We've done it again and again here.
I was going to dig in, but its far too late and its far too well worn territory to delve into it again at this early date.
Of course Coggins7 but continually arguing and losing continually the arguemnet is why you don't wish to proceed, right?
Instead of "god", replace it with "Santa Claus", "Easter Bunny", "Leperchauns" or "Jackalope". See there is just as much evidence for a god as there is for the other creatures I listed.
See, the arguement that you make is exactly the same as other religious beliefs. Do you think the exploits of the Gods and Goddesses in the Vedic are real? So why is yours different?
----------
LCD2YOU,
While I haven’t been reading your posts, you’re exactly correct in your rejoinder to Coggins here.
I stated in an earlier post essentially what you are saying here.
No clear, transparent, researched evidence has been presented which establishes any of these. In the case of
the gods or
God, particularly the latter, many
assume they are talking about a
fact when they are pontificating on
God. In religion, we generally have emotionally packed claims marketing some doctrine/dogma.
Of course religious pontificating is not about fact. Contrary to Coggins statement: “this is very easy to argue against,” he has presented no such
evidence as I previously characterized.
Now we have
evidence for gravity on earth. We confirm gravity every moment. I use this merely as example of many facts found which are established by clear, transparent, researched evidence. It is established.
God claims, on the other hand, are mercurial and subject to
interpretation and counter-claims by those of different superstition/religion.
“Santa Claus” is real – a real fairy tale which some tell to small children. With a Santa in every mall and elsewhere, eventually even children recognize “Santa” is someone dressed in a particular suit playing a role.
But the notion that there is
one Santa who visits every home (well not the homes of impoverished people, half the world’s population), but we don’t tell little kids that - - that notion is irrational and absurd.
God notions (for Coggins’ benefit) are equally irrational and absurd.
Contrary to his statement (“easy to argue against”) included in your post,
no credible evidence which has objective, transparent, tested result has been established for God claims.
I’ll understand that he: “continually arguing and losing continually the argument is why you (Coggins) don't wish to proceed, right?"
That is, I accept your analysis of Coggins.
On another forum many years ago,
2think Forum, we had lengthy discussion regarding the question:
Are some people’s brains hard wired to swallow religious myths?
In that discussion, some participants considered that there were such people. Others, considered that it was early “wiring” from cradle up in environment which made some people closed into
God boxes such as religious people tend to be.
The passage of time is a key and critical factor it would seem. The acceptance that people could actually fly in an invention (airplane) was flatly rejected by many older people who were the early witnesses to the early inventions of
flying machines. Today, few if any living in the Western world (culture, education) would posit that the airplane is an illusion or that space travel to the moon did not happen or that we have no
space lab orbiting the earth.
Doctrinal shifts in religion have been most difficult involving tyranny, wars, hatred, prison sentences, etc. Prior to the Protestant Reformation, the literacy percent was very low. Hence, people believed what they were told by the hierarchy.
With the invention of the printing press and the proliferation of written material, more and more people learned to read. Of course they read the Bible since it was held up to them as
The word of God.
And there is where much further trouble began in religion. People read. In so doing, they reached
different conclusions about what they read. Given the fact that the Bible is filled with contradictory claims and historical inaccuracies as well as pronouncements on what we know today as
modern science, people came to those
different conclusions. And so we have historical documentation of the fracturing of Christianity even from 1517. There were fractures before of course. But the large one which is perhaps most relevant to
Christianity today is that of the Protestant Reformation.
Now I’m sure this is nothing you don’t know already. But given Coggins’ remarks, it appears that he has no clue regarding the historical evolution of Christianity. If he did understand the well documented history regarding the
doctrinal shifts within Christianity, he certainly would not defend by fiat
God claims which contradict with
other God claims.
Perhaps you’re familiar with these websites.
Bible Contradictions
A List of Biblical Contradictions
Freedom From Religion
More Examples of Biblical Contradictions
101 Clear Contradictions
Of course there are many more.
Having said that, as you most likely know, every religious organization of any size has
its websites to defend some slant on its religion.
Let the buyer beware.
JAK