# Faith, religion, and the afterlife: A form of denial **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 2, 2014, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713 "2014-01-02T16:57:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/361 "2014-01-15T17:51:53Z")
> [@Gateway](#): > > Unless you honestly don’t think they can exist and that’s the frame of reference you assume for everyone else. Would you mind quoting the post where it is even implied that anyone here is making that assumption? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/362 "2014-01-15T18:02:42Z")
> [@Gateway](#): > > Well in their possibility of existing, how can it be sure that no one has come across one to where they are not in a state of denial if they think that the entity exists? Unless you honestly don’t think they can exist and that’s the frame of reference you assume for everyone else. I can’t figure out what you’re trying to say in the first sentence. To answer the second, I’m not ruling anything out. I just see gods pretty similar to how you see fire-breathing dragons, giants, and trolls, most likely. ---
**Author:** ![Razncain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/363 "2014-01-15T18:06:22Z")
> [@YoungKusher](#): > > It’s just logic, I’m not saying I’m agnostic to the IPU’s existence here on Earth. I’m not sure there are any claims that somebody has ever seen one in this world to make me even think twice about it, but I can’t say for sure one way or the other if there is a herd of them running around in some alternate universe. Leaving earth is not necessary, when you quantify pink and invisible it can’t be both, and is no longer logical. One doesn’t need to search the whole universe as well with square circles, and 2+3=7, and married bachelors. Is there anything you’d consider a logical impossibility? ---
**Author:** ![Gateway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/dbc845/32.png) [@Gateway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gateway)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/364 "2014-01-15T18:45:42Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I can’t figure out what you’re trying to say in the first sentence. To answer the second, I’m not ruling anything out. I just see gods pretty similar to how you see fire-breathing dragons, giants, and trolls, most likely. If it is a possibility that mythical/“mythical” creatures exist, then how can it be certain that no one has come across one? If they have come across one, then they would not be in a state of denial about thinking that the being exists. That’s what my first sentence was saying. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/365 "2014-01-15T18:53:25Z")
> [@Gateway](#): > > If it is a possibility that mythical/“mythical” creatures exist, then how can it be certain that no one has come across one? If they have come across one, then they would not be in a state of denial about thinking that the being exists. > That’s what my first sentence was saying. Without any objective evidence that a particular creature exists - the default position “X does not exist” is considered true. It is not being in denial if no objective evidence has been presented. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/366 "2014-01-15T18:56:39Z")
> [@Gateway](#): > > If it is a possibility that mythical/“mythical” creatures exist, then how can it be certain that no one has come across one? If they have come across one, then they would not be in a state of denial about thinking that the being exists. > That’s what my first sentence was saying. But since no such evidence exists, those who have seen them must have surely been eaten before getting the word out. Q.E.D. mythical creatures exists. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/367 "2014-01-15T19:22:04Z")
> [@Gateway](#): > > If it is a possibility that mythical/“mythical” creatures exist, then how can it be certain that no one has come across one? If they have come across one, then they would not be in a state of denial about thinking that the being exists. > That’s what my first sentence was saying. Who is certain? I’m not. Most atheists are not certain, I believe. Lacking belief does not imply certainty. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/368 "2014-01-15T19:31:15Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Who is certain? I’m not. Most atheists are not certain, I believe. Lacking belief does not imply certainty. I’m pretty close to certain… (Grin!) The chain of inference I like is this: Koroastes, the Vyrellian god of fire, doesn’t exist. I know, because I just made him up. J.R.R. Tolkien made up Elbereth. H.P. Lovecraft made up Azathoth. (Not the SDMB member…) Snorri Sturlsson made up several of the stories about Thor. Virgil made up several of the stories about Zeus. Hesiod made up bunches of stories about Zeus. Why would the ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Hindus, and others be included in this list of people who made up stories… …but the ancient Hebrews, solely and only, be left off the list, and their made-up stories and fables suddenly make a quantum jump over to the “Revealed Truth” column of the ledger? They’re all just made-up stories! God has no more claim to real existence than Koroastes does! ---
**Author:** ![Gateway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/dbc845/32.png) [@Gateway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gateway)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/369 "2014-01-15T19:36:09Z")
QuickSilver, Simster, _ **Just because there has been no objective evidence shown to you, doesn’t mean that it hasn’t been shown to someone else.** _ I don’t know how many times I need to rewrite this… and just because there could have been evidence at one time, it doesn’t mean that the evidence is still available though, maybe like seeing a UFO which disappears before you can get a picture of it. Or like the passage in the Bible where the light shown from the sky on Saul. Sure, its probable that a lot of people thought he was crazy using their own paradigm of what’s possible, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Andy, I’m not sure what we are in disagreement about. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/370 "2014-01-15T19:39:42Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > I’m pretty close to certain… (Grin!) > > The chain of inference I like is this: > > Koroastes, the Vyrellian god of fire, doesn’t exist. I know, because I just made him up. > > J.R.R. Tolkien made up Elbereth. > H.P. Lovecraft made up Azathoth. (Not the SDMB member…) > Snorri Sturlsson made up several of the stories about Thor. > Virgil made up several of the stories about Zeus. > Hesiod made up bunches of stories about Zeus. > > Why would the ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Hindus, and others be included in this list of people who made up stories… > > …but the ancient Hebrews, solely and only, be left off the list, and their made-up stories and fables suddenly make a quantum jump over to the “Revealed Truth” column of the ledger? > > They’re all just made-up stories! God has no more claim to real existence than Koroastes does! I’m pretty close to certain too. But I leave a smidge of doubt for aliens, a great simulation, insanity, and the like. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/371 "2014-01-15T19:39:44Z")
> [@Gateway](#): > > QuickSilver, Simster, > _ **Just because there has been no objective evidence shown to you, doesn’t mean that it hasn’t been shown to someone else.** _ I don’t know how many times I need to rewrite this… > and just because there could have been evidence at one time, it doesn’t mean that the evidence is still available though, maybe like seeing a UFO which disappears before you can get a picture of it. Or like the passage in the Bible where the light shown from the sky on Saul. Sure, its probable that a lot of people thought he was crazy using their own paradigm of what’s possible, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. > > Andy, I’m not sure what we are in disagreement about. Do you understand what _ **objective** _ evidence is? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/372 "2014-01-15T19:41:43Z")
> [@Gateway](#): > > QuickSilver, Simster, > _ **Just because there has been no objective evidence shown to you, doesn’t mean that it hasn’t been shown to someone else.** _ I don’t know how many times I need to rewrite this… > and just because there could have been evidence at one time, it doesn’t mean that the evidence is still available though, maybe like seeing a UFO which disappears before you can get a picture of it. Or like the passage in the Bible where the light shown from the sky on Saul. Sure, its probable that a lot of people thought he was crazy using their own paradigm of what’s possible, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. > > Andy, I’m not sure what we are in disagreement about. We’re in disagreement about likelihoods, not certainty. Sure, it’s possible all these stories are true… but it’s extremely unlikely that most of them are anything but false. If a guy on the street comes up to you and tells you he spoke to God, the chances are not 50-50 he’s telling the truth… the chances are 49.99-49.99 that he’s lying vs insane, with the smidge left over for “other”. Same goes for most stories of supernatural claims. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/373 "2014-01-15T19:41:46Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’m pretty close to certain too. But I leave a smidge of doubt for aliens, a great simulation, insanity, and the like. Until I am provided with objective evidence , I am certain. And if such evidence is ever provided, I am 99.99999% sure it will not add up to the ‘Bible God’. ---
**Author:** ![Gateway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/dbc845/32.png) [@Gateway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gateway)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/374 "2014-01-15T19:44:29Z")
> [@](#): > > Do you understand what objective evidence is? I suppose I did not. Still, you get what I am saying in my message, and my point is valid. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/375 "2014-01-15T19:46:25Z")
> [@Gateway](#): > > I suppose I did not. Still, you get what I am saying in my message, and my point is valid. You’re trying to say that “people believe what they believe because they believe it” - doesn’t make it valid or true - it’s only special pleading when the individual doesn’t want to be rational about it - which is, in effect, denying reality in favor of a fantasy. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/376 "2014-01-15T19:56:23Z")
> [@YoungKusher](#): > > the start. I still don’t understand how that wouldn’t work. He would never actually be changing anything from his original plan, because he would only be doing things he already knew he would do. > > If you asked him, “which horse will win, A, B, or C?” He would respond, “B, unless I change it.” (knowing all along that you will ask him to make horse A win) See what I’m getting at? My point is, this being would never change anything from what he already knew, he would simply be acting out preordained acts through infinity. Exactly! With omniscience, he is constrained to perform preordained acts. Now, he could say that horse B wins unless he changes his mind, but he knows that horse B will win, so his statement, while logically correct, always evaluates to Horse B winning. If horse A wins then he knows that horse A wins from the beginning of time. And, as I mentioned in my response to **cosmosdan** , he is outside of time so I don’t know what is meant by him changing his mind, which implies ordering in time. You see, it is easy to say that he is outside of time, but the implications get a bit tricky. So, as you say in your last sentence, if he is omniscient he is basically impotent since the moment at t = -infinity - epsilon where he decided how the universe was going to work. In fact, if he is truly eternal and timeless, when would this be? It would have to be before he knew how it was going to work through omniscience, but he knows that infinitely far in the past also. Think of the implications of him really trying to change something. The more I think of it, the less logically coherent the whole thing gets. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/377 "2014-01-15T21:02:34Z")
> [@Gateway](#): > > QuickSilver, Simster, > _ **Just because there has been no objective evidence shown to you, doesn’t mean that it hasn’t been shown to someone else.** _ I don’t know how many times I need to rewrite this… > and just because there could have been evidence at one time, it doesn’t mean that the evidence is still available though, maybe like seeing a UFO which disappears before you can get a picture of it. Or like the passage in the Bible where the light shown from the sky on Saul. Sure, its probable that a lot of people thought he was crazy using their own paradigm of what’s possible, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. > > Andy, I’m not sure what we are in disagreement about. There are a million things people claim. They claim they see angels, ghosts, UFOs. Adamski claimed he was given a ride to Venus. Atheism means lacking belief in. How many of these things do you lack belief in? After all, Adamski could have been right, and the Venusians could have hacked the probes to make Venus seem uninhabitable, but is that the way to bet? The point here is not to disprove God conclusively (which can only be done for a subset of possible Gods) but to show that you should not believe in any God for the same reason you don’t believe in ghosts or Venerian astronauts. It seems far more probable that anyone seeing any of these things is lying or delusional. It may turn out otherwise, but the burden of proof is on them. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/378 "2014-01-15T22:16:13Z")
> [@YoungKusher](#): > > [QUOTE=Der Trihs] > > Of course it has a physical form; the brain. That’s where consciousness comes from, not what consciousness is. [/quote] No, that is what consciousness is; a physical process that occurs in a brain. > [@YoungKusher](#): > > Also, faith is explicitly not a form of delusion. Nonsense; it’s the assertion that a fantasy is true without evidence, or outright against evidence. That’s delusion. > [@YoungKusher](#): > > Yawn… just another red herring argument. Trying to distract from the fact that you _are_ claiming you know better than most of the world. It’s irrelevant how they are wrong from one another when discussing faith in general. You really love handwaving away all the obvious flaws & contradictions to your beliefs with “it’s a red herring”. Let me guess; the _only_ claims that aren’t “red herrings” are those that agree with you. And it certainly isn’t irrelevant; the fact that most of them must be wrong completely demolishes your attempt at argument from popularity. Which is a fallacy to begin with. > [@YoungKusher](#): > > Why I ever thought an atheistic zealot would ever be capable of understanding the significance of this… I do not know. I understand it just fine; people’s fantasies are not significant. And if they were, that brings us right back to why God, and only God? Plenty of people have “subjective evidence” for all sorts of bizarre and impossible things; why should I take someone’s unsupported claims they have a personal relationship with God and not someone who claims to have one with Zeus, or fairies, or aliens? Yeah, I know; _\_ “Red herring! Red herring!” :rolleyes: > [@YoungKusher](#): > > Suuuuuure buddy, you’re the only one who can see the matrix, the other 99% of the world’s population is just a bunch looney tunes… Most people by definition are wrong about religion, since they contradict each other. > [@Gateway](#): > > Der Trihs, perhaps you can share this knowledge you keep talking about which makes you think that there can be no god? The laws of physics, the total lack of evidence that gods are even possible, the fact that it’s obviously nothing but a leftover ancient myth, logic. Same reasons I don’t believe in fairies and Santa Claus. > [@Gateway](#): > > Maybe God WANTS to be hid from the masses, don’t you think he’d be able to do that if he had that much power? And such a “god” is indistinguishable from not existing, and the logical default is that there are no gods. > [@Gateway](#): > > Do you think science perfectly explains life, or explains existence, explains how stuff like time and space exist in the first place? Nope. However it’s the most successful method we have be far, while religion is an utter failure. Religion is _consistently wrong_ about every claim it makes; why should I buy that they are right about gods? And for that matter why are you going on about “God”? Why is the Abrahamic big-G God more plausible than any of the other gods of mythology? > [@Gateway](#): > > 1. There is no evidence that YOU have found, SO FAR. There is no evidence that anyone has found. Which is why you don’t just settle the argument for your side by producing it. ---
**Author:** ![YoungKusher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3e96dc/32.png) [@YoungKusher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YoungKusher)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/379 "2014-01-15T22:59:10Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > An omniscient god can see this entire 3 dimensional space, and since he is not limited by time, he can see it all at once, in his eternal now. BTW, part of the 3d space includes his interactions with the universe. Through omniscience, he can see all at once. Now, how can he change anything? All of time is spread out for him, and there is no time for him, so you can’t say he changed his mind, since that implies he is a time-based being. > If was not omniscient then parts of the 3d space-time universe will be closed to him, and he can do anything he wants within them. You keep assuming that he would need to step out of this omniscient state of seeing all time past, present, and future to “change” something. God may have never changed anything from the original plan. He may have specifically interacted with people to set a certain chain of events into motion. Any perceived “changes” aren’t actually him changing his mind, but him setting a new(to us) chain of events into motion to a predetermined end. ---
**Author:** ![YoungKusher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3e96dc/32.png) [@YoungKusher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YoungKusher)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2014, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713/380 "2014-01-15T23:06:05Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > So, as you say in your last sentence, if he is omniscient he is basically impotent since the moment at t = -infinity - epsilon where he decided how the universe was going to work. In fact, if he is truly eternal and timeless, when would this be? It would have to be before he knew how it was going to work through omniscience, but he knows that infinitely far in the past also. > > Think of the implications of him really trying to change something. The more I think of it, the less logically coherent the whole thing gets. I don’t think that would make him impotent since throughout the course of infinity, he would have accomplished every thinkable act to prove his omnipotence. I can’t, however, explain how a being like this would ever come into existence. They would have just had to always exist along with everything else. Unless you think that the Big Bang was the t = -infinity- epsilon moment. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faith-religion-and-the-afterlife-a-form-of-denial/677713.md?page=20)