Welcome


Thank you for visiting our new forum! To start posting again please follow the link below to create a new password. First time forum users please follow the link to register. CFI thanks you for continuing the discussion on evidence-based thinking and humanist values.

There is God


Forums Forums Philosophy There is God

Viewing 13 posts - 31 through 43 (of 43 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #322529
    @halster
    Participant

    Of course there is.  Every single one of us has the capacity to harbor or vanquish spirits and gods that temporarily live in our mind.  Its proof of how primitive we are.

    #322752
    @write4u
    Participant

    Hal said; Of course there is.  Every single one of us has the capacity to harbor or vanquish spirits and gods that temporarily live in our mind.  Its proof of how primitive we are.

    That is an interesting observation.  It is true that each of us can create our own gods and demons.

    The earliest Gods were a product of  observation of unexpainable phenomena (miracles) by “Powerful Unseen Creatures” that dwelled in the sky.

    Almost every primitive culture had their own god of thunder and rain.

    Thunder Gods

    Mediterranean[edit]
    Teshub (Hurrian mythology)
    Adad, Bel, Ishkur, Marduk (Babylonian-Assyrian mythology)
    Baʿal, Hadad (Canaanite and Phoenician mythology)
    Set (Egyptian mythology)
    Aplu (Hurrian mythology)
    Tarḫunna (Hittite mythology)
    Tarḫunz (Luwian mythology)
    Vahagn (Armenian Mythology)
    Zibelthiurdos (Thracian mythology)
    Zeus (Greek Mythology)
    Restal (Renon Mythology)
    Northwestern Eurasia[edit]
    Afi (Abkhaz Mythology)
    Ambisagrus, Loucetios (Gaulish mythology)
    Atämshkai (Moksha mythology)
    Gebeleizis (Dacian mythology)
    Horagalles (Sami mythology)
    Jupiter, Summanus (Roman mythology)
    Orko (Basque mythology)
    Perëndi (Albanian mythology)
    Perkūnas (Baltic mythology)
    Perkwunos (Proto-Indo-European mythology)
    Perun (Slavic mythology)
    Ukko or Perkele (Finnish mythology)
    Taranis (Pan-Celtic)
    Tharapita or Taara (Estonian mythology)
    Thor (Norse mythology)
    Brontes (Greek mythology)
    Fulgora (Roman mythology)
    Astrape and Bronte (Greek mythology)
    Thunor (Anglo Saxon)
    East Asia[edit]
    Leigong (Chinese mythology)
    Dianmu (Chinese mythology)
    Ajisukitakahikone (Japanese mythology)
    Raijin (Japanese mythology)
    Tenjin (Japanese mythology)
    Susanoo (Japanese mythology)
    Takemikazuchi (Japanese mythology)
    South Asia[edit]
    Indra (Hindu mythology and Buddhist mythology)
    Parjanya (Hindu mythology)
    Raja Indainda (Batak mythology)
    Vajrapani (Buddhist mythology)
    Americas[edit]
    Thunderbird (Iroquois and Huron mythology)
    Aktzin (Totonac mythology)
    Haokah (Lakota mythology)
    Xolotl and Tlaloc (Aztec mythology)
    Cocijo (Zapotec mythology)
    Chaac (Maya mythology)
    Yopaat (Maya mythology)
    Chibchacum (Muisca mythology)
    Apocatequil (Incan mythology)
    Tupã (Guaraní mythology)
    Sub-Saharan Africa[edit]
    Shango (god of thunder and lightning, Yoruba Nigeria)
    Oya (goddess of hurricanes, storms, death and rebirth, consort of Shango in Yoruba religion)
    Azaka-Tonnerre (West African Vodun/Haitian Vodou)
    Mulungu
    Xevioso (alternately: Xewioso, Heviosso. Thunder god of the So region)
    Amadioha (Igbo, Nigeria)
    Àlamei (So region)
    Kiwanuka (god of thunder and lightning, Buganda, Uganda)
    Umvelinqangi (god of thunder, earthquake, sun and sky in Zulu mythology)
    Oceania[edit]
    Haikili (Polynesian mythology)
    Tāwhaki (Polynesian mythology)
    Kaha’i (Polynesian mythology)
    Te Uira (Polynesian mythology)
    Nan Sapwe (Pohnpeian mythology)
    Australia[edit]
    Mamaragan (Aboriginal mythology)
    New Zealand[edit]
    Whaitiri (Māori mythology)
    Tāwhirimātea (Māori mythology)

    #322767
    @lausten
    Keymaster

    Reminds of the lists you can find on Wikipedia. There are few like this, where Yahweh appears as just another one among many.

    #322823
    @write4u
    Participant

    Thanks for that link, very interesting.

    #323738

    The existence or non-existence of God can never be proved or disproved but certain considerations can be taken into account. The church, the bible, and the practice of religion have almost nothing to do with God and have quite a lot to do with man, coercive doctrines of conformity, dogma and naked worldly power. If we try to consider the question of God’s existence through the prism of our own personal experience with religion and church teaching we’ll eventually become disillusioned and cynical (provided we have a thinking and open mind.) The reason we see so many opinions asserting the non-existence of God is because the silly fairy tales that are still being promulgated in churches all over the world are increasingly being seen for what they are and have always been, moronic twaddle. The biggest obstacle to genuine belief in God is coming from those very sources that proclaim the loudest and most fervently how all of us need to believe. I say again as in an earlier post, science not religion owns the future of all serious theological discussion on this vital question. Those who in my view correctly assert the validity of God’s existence don’t have to retreat into the inane fabrications of the bible to justify their belief. Stories of Adam and Eve and Noah’s Ark wouldn’t pass the laugh test of a fourth grader but for the gullible ignorance of adults who give credence to them and more and more free thinking people are rejecting them.

    It is science, cosmology, evolutionary biology and other related disciplines that offer credible support for the existence of a supremely transcendent power that both originated and orders the cosmos.

    #323770
    @lausten
    Keymaster

    I’m feeling this is a bit of a repeat, but I can’t resist. I never followed your evidence from science, so I’ll pass on that. But your main theme is expressed here:

    The reason we see so many opinions asserting the non-existence of God is because the silly fairy tales that are still being promulgated in churches all over the world are increasingly being seen for what they are and have always been, moronic twaddle.

    I can’t untangle the “silly fairy tales” from the churches however. The only God I know of is the one talked about there. That’s the one I don’t believe. Which we seem to agree, that is, right up until you say we don’t. You say it’s a “vital question” and “serious”. Fourth graders do laugh, but because of how religion operates, they eventually stop laughing. They see that making these gestures actually helps establish their place in society. They aren’t gullible and ignorant, they are pretty much aware of how the world works and know they need to get with the program, or live on the fringes. Don’t know if you’ve noticed, but science is unpopular with a lot of people right now.

    #323790
    @halster
    Participant

    @write4u

    The Mesopotamian cuneiform script, invented in Sumer, present-day Iraq, c. 3200 BCE, can be traced without any discontinuity over a period of 10,000 years, from a prehistoric antecedent to the present-day alphabet.  Your list of Thunder Gods was obviously written well after humans invented writing.

    #323796
    @halster
    Participant

    @write4u said “The earliest Gods were a product of  observation of unexpainable phenomena (miracles) by “Powerful Unseen Creatures” that dwelled in the sky.”  THIS IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE.  Are you a creationist are something like that?

    Religious stories were easy to sell when there wasn’t one human who knew anything about the origins of the planet or the life on it.  Paleontology among other modern sciences has masterfully deciphered the evidence left by a developing planet and the evidence of evolution of life on it. Unfortunately the discoveries of modern science came along after the student experience of many Christians of today.

     

    #323819
    @write4u
    Participant

    halster said; @write4u said “The earliest Gods were a product of  observation of unexpainable phenomena (miracles) by “Powerful Unseen Creatures” that dwelled in the sky.”  THIS IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE.  Are you a creationist are something like that?

    I’m sorry, but you are completely misreading that statement.  IT IS TRUE and I can prove it. But that does not make me a creationist, on the contrary, it is a reasonable explaination  how creationism started in primitive minds at a time when the first hominid looked up into the sky and asked the question; “who is this unseen powerful enemy, who lives in the clouds and when angry makes thunder and fire in the sky and then throws water down on my family “. This is how the first gods were born in the mind of primitive man. These powerful gods can be seen by the earliest cave paintings depicting strange creatures descending from the sky.

    This proven by the the lists of the earliest sky-gods, which were common to EVERY HUMAN CULTURE on earth from the very first appearance of homo sapiens, regardless how isolated they were from each other.

    This primitive behavior hundreds of thousands of years ago can be observed today in Chimpanzees who have mentally not evolved very much from our common ancestor and still see a tropical thunderstorm as being caused by a powerful enemy hidden by the bushes in the sky.

    Worship and sacrifice came much later, when men started to try and appease these powerful skygods and created ritual worship.

    btw. I’m a hard atheist. I don’t even see a remote possibility of a supernatural  intelligent motivated creator being. I believe in a mathematical universe which yields the very same result, sans the religious BS.

     

    #323822
    @write4u
    Participant

    See list of Earliest “Thunder gods” above in the very post you quoted from.  That list did not mean anything to you? Think it through, man.

    Every culture all over the world had a thunder god. They were the first invented sky beings imagined by human minds.

    • This reply was modified 7 months, 2 weeks ago by Write4U.
    • This reply was modified 7 months, 2 weeks ago by Write4U.
    #332790
    @yoramdiamand
    Participant

     

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/s2oktg7goky70by/Thermodynamics%20with%20and%20without%20photosynthesis%20by%20Yoram%20Diamand.pdf?dl=0

     

     

    Dear thinkers,

    Where I was in doubt if I could call myself religious, I got ill, and struggling with survival I wrote a letter on God, evolution and Nature based solutions to climate change, for what it’s worth. I hope you’ll like it. Yours, sincerely Yoram Diamand

    #333153
    @widdershins
    Participant

    I started trying to read that, but it started with a part of a Bible quote and then the first actual sentence was a false dichotomy.  After that it seems like it was going to a “Prove A by disproving B” type of thing, common with false dichotomy arguments.  Nothing new.  Just one more person who thinks they can logic and argue God into existence.  Quick tip, people have been trying to do this for literally hundreds of years, at least.  No, you very much do not have a new idea on the subject.

    #333155
    @widdershins
    Participant

    The reason we see so many opinions asserting the non-existence of God is because the silly fairy tales that are still being promulgated in churches all over the world are increasingly being seen for what they are and have always been, moronic twaddle.

    Lol.  This has LITERALLY been the sales pitch for every religions speech I’ve ever gotten.  “Only WE know the TRUE God!  Everyone else is doing it wrong!”

    It is science, cosmology, evolutionary biology and other related disciplines that offer credible support for the existence of a supremely transcendent power that both originated and orders the cosmos.

    That is absolutely wrong.  Science is the study of the natural and only naturalistic explanations can be given in science.  Science can never propose, much less support a supernatural explanation.  There will never, ever be evidence in science that your supernatural beliefs are real.  If you think you see that evidence in science then your understanding of what science is and how it works is vastly deficient.

    No, what you have here is a common “reconciliation argument”, a kind of reverse-strawman where, instead of misrepresenting science to make it easier to attack, you misrepresent science in order to hijack it to support your beliefs.  It’s an attempt to legitimize magical thinking by claiming that only scientific thinking can support it.  It’s simply not true.

Viewing 13 posts - 31 through 43 (of 43 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.