Where do you stand on the probability of God's existence?
1.00: Strong theist. 100 percent possibility of God. In the words of C.G. Jung, 'I do not believe, I know.'
2.00: Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. 'I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there
3.00: Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. Technically agnostic but leaning towards theism. 'I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.'
4.00: Exactly 50 per cent. Completely impartial agnostic. 'God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.'
5.00: Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. Technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism. 'I don't know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be sceptical.'
6.00: Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. 'I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.'
7:00: Strong atheist. 'I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung 'knows' there is one.'
It's not me who calls these things supernatural. It's one of the more common descriptions given to these alledged phenomena or forces or whatnot.
My question was about your initial statement regarding keeping an open mind for an eventual proof of a divinity's existence, divinity for which I had in mind that most common description.
Once you give an attribute to "God" that attribute can be scrutinized. If we say that God is "all powerful" then we can simply use logic to disprove that. "Can he create a rock he can't lift?" No matter the answer he is not "all powerful."
What I was saying is that you can't disprove "God" you can only disprove certain gods and their attributes. A God could exist, one we have not discovered yet. If we can discover him he is natural.
We tend to think of the Christian God as our standard of what a God has to be. The pagan gods for the most part were basically described as powerful humanoids. They could be defeated by mortal men if given the numbers and they could be killed, they could also loose their powers. If your a Star Trek fan, perhaps I can use Q and an example of what a God could be. Yes many times they were described as being supernatural but when you look at the over all picture, you can conclude they if they had existed, could have been extraordinary evolved humanoids - Natural Gods.
I know its a stretch and borderline absurd, which is why I'm an atheist, these types of creatures are possible though highly improbable. Then again, once we learn how to create earth-like Planets out of dead ones like mars, we will also be God like.
Well, Edmund, that is what Sagan said, too, saying, (para) "for someone to say they are atheist, they know a lot more than i do."
but, again, Sagan's wording is slightly off,
as atheism refers to what we believe.
and agnostic/gnostic refers to what we know...but Sagan was not a believer, not at all.
(off topic, but, didja know, sagan loved pot? ha ha, who knew? but, he did not want that info out there til he was dead. Also, he had a boatload of kids with 3 different wives, who knew?)
and Hitchens and Dawkins said on scale above, they are both 6.999999, stopping short of absolute 7s.
Well, I,m most definitely a 7:00. When I die I want to be cremated and that people around me throw a really really big party...
I have been very close to death but never had any kind of "revelation"............
Theory of god?
That doesn't fit into my lexicon.
I think most of us sit around 6 or 7; I wonder why? =)
7-0.1 *10 to the minus33