And you know what, that might just very well be true if we’re talking about some supernatural force that is indifferent to its creations, not out of malice, but because it simply is truly neutral.

But as evidence for the religious capital ‘G’ God, the one who communicates and plans every little detail because he loves us so much? What is the point of these “subtle” proofs that took thousands of years to be studied and recorded when he has shown that he can just pop up anywhere or perform miracles and whatever the fuck.

It is no coincidence that the vast majority, possibly 99%, of devout religious people do not give a shit about using math to explain god because it’s all proven in their holy books. It is no coincidence that the “empirical” evidence is, in reality, just pointing at the existence of features and concepts of math and science rather than utilizing said features and concepts to prove the existence of god. And no, philosophical musings about morality using the language of mathematical proofs does not count as utilizing math and science (literally, all the axioms in these types of “proofs” are subjective shit like “bad” and “good” and not, say, the difference between 1 and 0).

And I didn’t even want to make a post dunking on religion, but I’m irritated because YouTube recommended some dumbass video by a channel called “Reformed Zoomer” and one of the arguments is “there is an infinite range of numbers between two numbers, and if we turn those numbers into letters, then every book possible has already been written. Checkmate atheoids”. https://youtu.be/z0hxb5UVaNE?si=RpjF6S0fHiF71iH-

  • RyanGosling [none/use name]@hexbear.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I honestly have more respect for people who use their faith as their evidence for the existence of God because at least they respect themselves and others enough to not pretend to understand hard science to prove you wrong.

    • FunkyStuff [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s where I’m at. Used to be big into all the philosophical arguments, then quickly realized philosophy is much more complicated than I gave it credit for.

      How do you feel about the people who just point to miracles as evidence? Even as a kid I always thought that it was a little weird that we’d chalk up someone’s knee healing as an act of God. But there are some miracles/apparitions that, if they really happened as described, you’d think would get more attention. I still don’t think they make good evidence, but it’s weird that they don’t get brought up as often as the weak philosophical arguments.

    • Hohsia [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t even know where I am at with my understanding of reality, so I can’t be anything but agnostic

      Maybe that will change when we figure out consciousness