|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 17, 2022 4:08:13 GMT
The One Who Created space & time. And who created the One Who Created space and time? We can do this ad infinitum or until you run out names. I think you might be interested in reading up on pop physics that speculate on the quantum whatever It is. And you don’t need the flowery and angelic names and prayers and supplications for It does not need special treatment. It isn’t something that needs to be believe in it. Christian and Sufi spirituality hints at It, Buddhism is already there, but the western churches and mosques do not want the believers to give up their dogmatic possessions, leave the family, let the dead bury the dead, and become seekers after the “kingdom of It.” They have mouths to feed too. Our thoughts are created out of electromagnetic energy just like electricity, but are our thoughts something that can be smelled or felt too? Do the sparking in our heads keep going even after the power is shut off? I like thinking about these things, and I like being free of fear of dying that makes Christianity so appealing. Our Heavenly Father. He Is the VERY BEGINNING. Nobody Existed prior to Him, otherwise that BEING Would Be God the Father. You are right that our thoughts are "created out of electromagnetic energy just like electricity." Gabriel Dionisi mentioned this also in his essay on Catholic Christianity. Life is energy, & energy never ceases to exist. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Dec 17, 2022 17:04:41 GMT
My point regarding the existence of the O Zone was my evidence for the Existence Of Our Heavenly Father. So what if it developed naturally. Its function protects life on Earth from the harmful rays of the sun. Therefore, Someone (Our Father) PLANNED for it to be. I'm not tap dancing on anything. You just refuse to acknowledge the arguments that I have given you. Because none of them are rational; they are fallacious. You cannot use the existence of a phenomenon (that you're attributing to a god which you haven't demonstrated yet) as your "evidence" for a god. That's called a begging the question fallacy. God is the thing you're trying to prove! You're only asserting that a god is responsible for the Ozone layer, with no demonstration of the God, and no demonstration of a causal link between the god and the phenomenon. We have an Ozone layer! Cool. The existence of an Ozone layer does not prove the existence of a god. It only proves the existence of an Ozone layer. You might as well be pointing to a tree, or a rock, or anything else. You can assert that all of these things were created by a god too, but that's not evidence that they were. The fact that the Ozone layer protects life on Earth speaks to how life on Earth evolved to fit its environment, not some intentional design. If there is no God, then your explanation for the existence of the Ozone layer is completely wrong. So how do we find out whether it's correct or not? In order to demonstrate design you must first demonstrate the designer! If there is no demonstrable designer, then it doesn't matter what your phenomenon "looks like", it's NOT a design! A dam may have the function of creating a large body of water to make food easier to catch for local wildlife. But the fact that it exists doesn't tell you anything about how it got there. It could have been designed (by a beaver), OR it could have occurred naturally when a bunch of old logs fell over in high winds. In order to conclude that a beaver designed it, you'd have to have evidence (external to the phenomenon) of BEAVERS being in the area! The existence of the damn itself is not the evidence that beavers made it. Get it? I did respond by saying that it was a red-herring that I won't engage with. You're free to speculate about my prior beliefs; it's not necessary for me to add anything to that. The conversation we're having is about your claim that a god exists, not what beliefs I used to have. I'm pointing out holes in your reasoning with respect to your claim that a god exists. What I used to believe doesn't relate to whether or not you can support your claim with evidence, so why are you trying to change the subject? |
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Dec 17, 2022 18:32:13 GMT
My point regarding the existence of the O Zone was my evidence for the Existence Of Our Heavenly Father. So what if it developed naturally. Its function protects life on Earth from the harmful rays of the sun. Therefore, Someone (Our Father) PLANNED for it to be. I'm not tap dancing on anything. You just refuse to acknowledge the arguments that I have given you. Because none of them are rational; they are fallacious. You cannot use the existence of a phenomenon (that you're attributing to a god which you haven't demonstrated yet) as your "evidence" for a god. That's called a begging the question fallacy. God is the thing you're trying to prove! You're only asserting that a god is responsible for the Ozone layer, with no demonstration of the God, and no demonstration of a causal link between the god and the phenomenon. We have an Ozone layer! Cool. The existence of an Ozone layer does not prove the existence of a god. It only proves the existence of an Ozone layer. You might as well be pointing to a tree, or a rock, or anything else. You can assert that all of these things were created by a god too, but that's not evidence that they were. The fact that the Ozone layer protects life on Earth speaks to how life on Earth evolved to fit its environment, not some intentional design. If there is no God, then your explanation for the existence of the Ozone layer is completely wrong. So how do we find out whether it's correct or not? In order to demonstrate design you must first demonstrate the designer! If there is no demonstrable designer, then it doesn't matter what your phenomenon "looks like", it's NOT a design! A dam may have the function of creating a large body of water to make food easier to catch for local wildlife. But the fact that it exists doesn't tell you anything about how it got there. It could have been designed (by a beaver), OR it could have occurred naturally when a bunch of old logs fell over in high winds. In order to conclude that a beaver designed it, you'd have to have evidence (external to the phenomenon) of BEAVERS being in the area! The existence of the damn itself is not the evidence that beavers made it. Get it? I did respond by saying that it was a red-herring that I won't engage with. You're free to speculate about my prior beliefs; it's not necessary for me to add anything to that. The conversation we're having is about your claim that a god exists, not what beliefs I used to have. I'm pointing out holes in your reasoning with respect to your claim that a god exists. What I used to believe doesn't relate to whether or not you can support your claim with evidence, so why are you trying to change the subject? ^^ This. Well said. |
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Dec 17, 2022 18:51:36 GMT
And who created the One Who Created space and time? We can do this ad infinitum or until you run out names. I think you might be interested in reading up on pop physics that speculate on the quantum whatever It is. And you don’t need the flowery and angelic names and prayers and supplications for It does not need special treatment. It isn’t something that needs to be believe in it. Christian and Sufi spirituality hints at It, Buddhism is already there, but the western churches and mosques do not want the believers to give up their dogmatic possessions, leave the family, let the dead bury the dead, and become seekers after the “kingdom of It.” They have mouths to feed too. Our thoughts are created out of electromagnetic energy just like electricity, but are our thoughts something that can be smelled or felt too? Do the sparking in our heads keep going even after the power is shut off? I like thinking about these things, and I like being free of fear of dying that makes Christianity so appealing. Our Heavenly Father. He Is the VERY BEGINNING. Nobody Existed prior to Him, otherwise that BEING Would Be God the Father. You are right that our thoughts are "created out of electromagnetic energy just like electricity." Gabriel Dionisi mentioned this also in his essay on Catholic Christianity. Life is energy, & energy never ceases to exist. You are devoid of imagination because I’m giving reasons why being atheist isn’t necessarily being non-spiritual. Atheists can contemplate the universe, but we understand we are limited to reality. Maybe we’re doing the best we can. I have always been amazed at how much complex thinking went into writing the Hebrew Scriptures from a backwater tribal society stuck in the middle of a dozen mighty civilizations. It certainly seems divine, but it’s more like being who the Hebrews were at the time and science and social science can do a lot to uncover this remarkable society who didn’t have much other than their abilities to tell stories. Of all ancient societies, they kicked ass and changed the world with their literary tradition. “Life is energy, & energy never ceases to exist” is something worthy to ponder outside of science, but it is not a substitute explanation. Accept that you can never prove God. Even your own religion warns you to not look for evidence because that shows a lack of faith in the divine mercy of the divine creator/destroyer. If he is who you say he is, you are okay. Don’t worry about the rest of us. It’s faith alone that gets you into the golden door, the rest is crass baggage that will not fit through it. |
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 18, 2022 0:54:34 GMT
My point regarding the existence of the O Zone was my evidence for the Existence Of Our Heavenly Father. So what if it developed naturally. Its function protects life on Earth from the harmful rays of the sun. Therefore, Someone (Our Father) PLANNED for it to be. I'm not tap dancing on anything. You just refuse to acknowledge the arguments that I have given you. Because none of them are rational; they are fallacious. You cannot use the existence of a phenomenon (that you're attributing to a god which you haven't demonstrated yet) as your "evidence" for a god. That's called a begging the question fallacy. God is the thing you're trying to prove! You're only asserting that a god is responsible for the Ozone layer, with no demonstration of the God, and no demonstration of a causal link between the god and the phenomenon. We have an Ozone layer! Cool. The existence of an Ozone layer does not prove the existence of a god. It only proves the existence of an Ozone layer. You might as well be pointing to a tree, or a rock, or anything else. You can assert that all of these things were created by a god too, but that's not evidence that they were. The fact that the Ozone layer protects life on Earth speaks to how life on Earth evolved to fit its environment, not some intentional design. If there is no God, then your explanation for the existence of the Ozone layer is completely wrong. So how do we find out whether it's correct or not? In order to demonstrate design you must first demonstrate the designer! If there is no demonstrable designer, then it doesn't matter what your phenomenon "looks like", it's NOT a design! A dam may have the function of creating a large body of water to make food easier to catch for local wildlife. But the fact that it exists doesn't tell you anything about how it got there. It could have been designed (by a beaver), OR it could have occurred naturally when a bunch of old logs fell over in high winds. In order to conclude that a beaver designed it, you'd have to have evidence (external to the phenomenon) of BEAVERS being in the area! The existence of the damn itself is not the evidence that beavers made it. Get it? I did respond by saying that it was a red-herring that I won't engage with. You're free to speculate about my prior beliefs; it's not necessary for me to add anything to that. The conversation we're having is about your claim that a god exists, not what beliefs I used to have. I'm pointing out holes in your reasoning with respect to your claim that a god exists. What I used to believe doesn't relate to whether or not you can support your claim with evidence, so why are you trying to change the subject? I have demonstrated the Existence Of God, by the very using of the afore-mentioned O Zone. Likewise, the author of that essay that I had shared, used the example of consciousness in the brain as evidence for God too. And yes, BOTH are very good reasons for believing in a Supreme Creator. God Is the Designer of the universe. "If there is no God, then your explanation for the existence of the Ozone layer is completely wrong." And yet, if there IS a God, then my explanation for the existence of the ozone layer is completely right. As for your prior beliefs: I'm not speculating what they WERE, you yourself used to claim to be a devout Christian who denied that God Is a Trinity. You believed that the Lord Jesus Christ Was the Son Of God, but, not God the Son. I'm not changing any subject. You yourself have now said that you are a gnostic atheist, in that you say that you know that the Christian God does not exist. Yet, you say that I am wrong? What makes you so arrogant as to claim to KNOW that God does not exist (at least, not the Christian understanding Of God)? |
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 18, 2022 1:00:58 GMT
Our Heavenly Father. He Is the VERY BEGINNING. Nobody Existed prior to Him, otherwise that BEING Would Be God the Father. You are right that our thoughts are "created out of electromagnetic energy just like electricity." Gabriel Dionisi mentioned this also in his essay on Catholic Christianity. Life is energy, & energy never ceases to exist. You are devoid of imagination because I’m giving reasons why being atheist isn’t necessarily being non-spiritual. Atheists can contemplate the universe, but we understand we are limited to reality. Maybe we’re doing the best we can. I have always been amazed at how much complex thinking went into writing the Hebrew Scriptures from a backwater tribal society stuck in the middle of a dozen mighty civilizations. It certainly seems divine, but it’s more like being who the Hebrews were at the time and science and social science can do a lot to uncover this remarkable society who didn’t have much other than their abilities to tell stories. Of all ancient societies, they kicked ass and changed the world with their literary tradition. “Life is energy, & energy never ceases to exist” is something worthy to ponder outside of science, but it is not a substitute explanation. Accept that you can never prove God. Even your own religion warns you to not look for evidence because that shows a lack of faith in the divine mercy of the divine creator/destroyer. If he is who you say he is, you are okay. Don’t worry about the rest of us. It’s faith alone that gets you into the golden door, the rest is crass baggage that will not fit through it. Actually, a great many ancient cultures were greatly into complex thinking, & it in no way, prevented them from believing in, & worshipping God or gods. Take the ancient Greeks and/or Egyptians for example. Nobody said that the fact that life being energy is not a substitute explanation. Yes, I can never actually prove Our Heavenly Father. However, His non-existence cannot be proven either. One can only give logical reasoning for their own choice of religious belief, or there, lack of. I myself, have studied a great many religions, both Christian & non-christian alike, despite growing up in a devout Catholic upbringing. So I have a solid reason for choosing to remain in my own faith. |
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Dec 18, 2022 4:37:44 GMT
You are devoid of imagination because I’m giving reasons why being atheist isn’t necessarily being non-spiritual. Atheists can contemplate the universe, but we understand we are limited to reality. Maybe we’re doing the best we can. I have always been amazed at how much complex thinking went into writing the Hebrew Scriptures from a backwater tribal society stuck in the middle of a dozen mighty civilizations. It certainly seems divine, but it’s more like being who the Hebrews were at the time and science and social science can do a lot to uncover this remarkable society who didn’t have much other than their abilities to tell stories. Of all ancient societies, they kicked ass and changed the world with their literary tradition. “Life is energy, & energy never ceases to exist” is something worthy to ponder outside of science, but it is not a substitute explanation. Accept that you can never prove God. Even your own religion warns you to not look for evidence because that shows a lack of faith in the divine mercy of the divine creator/destroyer. If he is who you say he is, you are okay. Don’t worry about the rest of us. It’s faith alone that gets you into the golden door, the rest is crass baggage that will not fit through it. Actually, a great many ancient cultures were greatly into complex thinking, & it in no way, prevented them from believing in, & worshipping God or gods. Take the ancient Greeks and/or Egyptians for example. Nobody said that the fact that life being energy is not a substitute explanation. Yes, I can never actually prove Our Heavenly Father. However, His non-existence cannot be proven either. One can only give logical reasoning for their own choice of religious belief, or there, lack of. I myself, have studied a great many religions, both Christian & non-christian alike, despite growing up in a devout Catholic upbringing. So I have a solid reason for choosing to remain in my own faith.I can accept that as your chosen path. Atheists can have a path or not, so to call us stupid is ridiculous. We probably think about the subject more than most committed believers. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Dec 18, 2022 7:03:42 GMT
I have demonstrated the Existence Of God, by the very using of the afore-mentioned O Zone. No, you haven't (and I literally just explained why). You have demonstrated that ozone exists by pointing to an ozone layer. You can point to anything and say "God did it", but that is not a demonstration of a god - it's just a claim! You need show that there is a god BEFORE you attribute the existence of something else to the god. How are you still not understanding this? I didn't read any articles here, but I'm familiar with consciousness and I agree that consciousness exists. So what? Again, you have to show that a God exists before attributing the existence of consciousness to it. Otherwise, someone else could come along and attribute it to magical fairies, or cyborg aliens from the future. The argument for those being the answer is equal to the argument for a god being responsible! Except that they're not because they are both based on a fallacy. That is the claim; now you have to prove that by demonstrating the existence of the God. Not pointing to things that exist and then claiming that God is responsible. That's not how that works! Correct. Now PROVE that there is a God, and THEN your explanation will be shown to be correct! Because right now, your explanation is only another claim. Seems like you're starting to get it now.  So for one thing, that IS a change of subject (because the discussion we are having is about your evidence for a god). This seems like an attempt to get away from that discussion because you know you can't actually produce evidence for God, but only produce begging the question fallacies by pointing to things and asserting that "God did it". However, I will play along with your futile attempt to shift the burden of proof. The reason I can confidently say that your god does NOT exist is because it is defined with logically contradictory properties which cancel themselves out of existence. The Christian God is the easiest of the monotheistic gods to disprove because of that. Not only do the claims associated with your god contradict themselves, the but words attributed to the god can and have been falsified. There are things said in the Bible which are demonstrably false, which serves as evidence against those claims. But I'm not here to convince you that God doesn't exist; you're here to convince me that God does exist (with evidence), and you've failed because youre arguments for God are rooted in irrationalism, not logic. Calling me arrogant because my position differs from yours, or because YOU can't imagine a world where you might be wrong doesn't speak to my arrogance, it speaks to your own. Anyone who declares that the god THEY believe in and worship is everyone else's god too is fucking arrogant as hell. It's possibly the most arrogant statement anyone else has made here; the assertion that I'm somehow a slave to a concept that seems to manifest only in your imagination. How dare you call anyone here arrogant? There is no greater arrogance than religious declarations based on irrational argumentation! |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Dec 18, 2022 15:56:49 GMT
MY CREATION CONUNDRUM
Nothing comes from nothing. Force sets things in motion.
The idea of a universe coming from nothing defies science. The universe set in motion without something setting it in motion defies science.
Could God exist before the universe was set in motion? Sure. He would exist outside the universe, thus outside the realm of time.
It is a concept beyond my scope of comprehension... but, the fact that I can't fathom an existence outside of time doesn't make it impossible.
On top of that... I see the odds of a universe forming... planets made... life somehow coming into existence.. that life evolving to the point of intelligence and self-awareness.. far greater than the concept of a God causing it to happen or guiding it.
Now, beyond those concessions... I see no evidence of a God. The universe exists and continues to exist as if there was no Creator....
The Bible says that God "Causes it to rain on the just and the unjust"... but, the same thing would occur if there were no God.
So how are we supposed to tell the difference?
|
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 18, 2022 17:00:37 GMT
I have demonstrated the Existence Of God, by the very using of the afore-mentioned O Zone. No, you haven't (and I literally just explained why). You have demonstrated that ozone exists by pointing to an ozone layer. You can point to anything and say "God did it", but that is not a demonstration of a god - it's just a claim! You need show that there is a god BEFORE you attribute the existence of something else to the god. How are you still not understanding this? I didn't read any articles here, but I'm familiar with consciousness and I agree that consciousness exists. So what? Again, you have to show that a God exists before attributing the existence of consciousness to it. Otherwise, someone else could come along and attribute it to magical fairies, or cyborg aliens from the future. The argument for those being the answer is equal to the argument for a god being responsible! Except that they're not because they are both based on a fallacy. That is the claim; now you have to prove that by demonstrating the existence of the God. Not pointing to things that exist and then claiming that God is responsible. That's not how that works! Correct. Now PROVE that there is a God, and THEN your explanation will be shown to be correct! Because right now, your explanation is only another claim. Seems like you're starting to get it now. So for one thing, that IS a change of subject (because the discussion we are having is about your evidence for a god). This seems like an attempt to get away from that discussion because you know you can't actually produce evidence for God, but only produce begging the question fallacies by pointing to things and asserting that "God did it". However, I will play along with your futile attempt to shift the burden of proof. The reason I can confidently say that your god does NOT exist is because it is defined with logically contradictory properties which cancel themselves out of existence. The Christian God is the easiest of the monotheistic gods to disprove because of that. Not only do the claims associated with your god contradict themselves, the but words attributed to the god can and have been falsified. There are things said in the Bible which are demonstrably false, which serves as evidence against those claims. But I'm not here to convince you that God doesn't exist; you're here to convince me that God does exist (with evidence), and you've failed because youre arguments for God are rooted in irrationalism, not logic. Calling me arrogant because my position differs from yours, or because YOU can't imagine a world where you might be wrong doesn't speak to my arrogance, it speaks to your own. Anyone who declares that the god THEY believe in and worship is everyone else's god too is fucking arrogant as hell. It's possibly the most arrogant statement anyone else has made here; the assertion that I'm somehow a slave to a concept that seems to manifest only in your imagination. How dare you call anyone here arrogant? There is no greater arrogance than religious declarations based on irrational argumentation! Yes I have. I explained the reason why there is a God by using the example of the purpose of the O Zone. The O Zone is supposed to protect all life on Earth from the cancerous effects of the sun. That means Somebody Planned for it's existence to protect His Creation. Yes, consciousness shows that we have a Supreme Creator. Since you just told me that you did not read the article that I had shared please allow me to copy & paste the part that the author had addressed regarding atheism vs theism: "Atheism vs. some sort of supernatural power. For me, this is the trickiest step to argue, because it involves a lot of very abstract philosophical arguments which don’t have many real-world parallels. However I think that it’s possible to construct a strong rational case for the supernatural for a couple reasons. The existence of consciousness. Thanks to science, we know that the human brain works by taking in electrical signals, running them through circuits, and outputting more electrical signals. This means that the brain is nothing more than a machine, albeit a very complex one. However no machine can ever be conscious of its decisions, or experience what we call the “theater of the mind”. This means that humans must have an immaterial part of our existence, which we call the soul. The design of the universe. When we play a computer game, we observe how the world in the game operates according to consistent rules, according to the dictates of a programming language. In the same way, our universe has consistent rules, which are in the language of Mathematics. Humans never “invented” math, math is written in the very fabric of the universe. And just like a programming language could never exist without an intelligent programmer, how could the laws of the universe come about without an intelligent entity? The fine-tuning argument. Building on to my last point, not only are the laws of the universe beautifully written in math, but they are very specifically-tuned to allow for life. Stanford University physicist and cosmologist, Leonard Susskind, says, “ If the value of this ratio [electrons to protons] deviated more than 1 in 10^37, the universe, as we know it, would not exist today. If the ratio between the electromagnetic force and gravity was altered more than 1 in 10^40, the universe would have suffered a similar fate. Furthermore he states that “If the expansion rate of the universe deviated by more than 1 in 10^37, or the mass density of universe varied more than 1 in 10^59, there wouldn’t be a single habitable galaxy or planet in the universe.[1] For a great article about this, see Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God. Also, the chance of life on Earth developing by accident is also infinitesimally small. Even the most “simple” multicellular organisms are immensely complex, with over 100,000 DNA base pairs and very complex interlocking mechanisms. Even the random creation of a few working proteins is statistically impossible. To watch scientist Stephen Meyer do some mathematical calculations, look at this video: In my opinion, believing that all of these things happened by chance takes a lot more faith than believing in God." ~ Gabriel Dionisi. Wrong!!! Nothing that God Says or Does Contradict or cancel Himself out. You say that you are not here to convince me (& I am assuming everyone else)that God Does not exist, yet, you were the one who posted here earlier that you are a "gnostic atheist" in claiming to " know" that the Christian God doesn't exist. That is a lofty claim, & since you posted on a public message forum for religious belief, **KNOWING** that Christians post here.I It would be as arrogant for me, to post that I "know" that God (as Christianity understands Him) Exists. No, God Is not defined with logically contradictory properties which cancels out of existence. Everything you said here about God is mistaken. Archeology has proven much of what is in the Bible. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Dec 18, 2022 18:04:01 GMT
No, you haven't (and I literally just explained why). You have demonstrated that ozone exists by pointing to an ozone layer. You can point to anything and say "God did it", but that is not a demonstration of a god - it's just a claim! You need show that there is a god BEFORE you attribute the existence of something else to the god. How are you still not understanding this? Yes I have. I explained the reason why there is a God by using the example of the purpose of the O Zone. The O Zone is supposed to protect all life on Earth from the cancerous effects of the sun. That means Somebody Planned for its existence to protect His Creation. Okay, so at this point you’re not even listening anymore. What you just said here is a total non-sequitur! Your conclusion does not logically follow from your premise. You’re apparently so desperate to be correct that you can’t even comprehend the argument I’m making for why you are necessarily wrong. You just repeated your original claim without ever acknowledging what I said about it in response. And if you’re not going to acknowledge the points that I’m making then there’s really no point in arguing with you. Wrong!!! Nothing that God Says or Does Contradict or cancel Himself out. That is literally a begging the question fallacy! You say that you are not here to convince me (& I am assuming everyone else)that God Does not exist, yet, you were the one who posted here earlier that you are a "gnostic atheist" in claiming to " know" that the Christian God doesn't exist. Please go back and read the title of the thread! You seem to be implying that answering the question honestly amounts to arrogance. That is a lofty claim, & since you posted on a public message forum for religious belief, **KNOWING** that Christians post here. Except that it’s NOT a message forum FOR religious belief. It’s a message forum ABOUT religious beliefs (among other positions). It would be as arrogant for me, to post that I "know" that God (as Christianity understands Him) Exists. So you admit that you are in fact arrogant then? Thank you for making my point for me. You have no leg to stand on calling anyone else arrogant. The difference is, I have evidence that Christianity is a lie. You can only assert evidence that some of its claims are true by pointing to trees, rocks, and ozone and then claiming that “God did it”. All of your reasoning is circular and therefore fallacious. No, God Is not defined with logically contradictory properties which cancels out of existence. Everything you said here about God is mistaken. No, God IS defined with logically contradictory properties which cancels itself out of existence. Everything I’ve said here about God is accurate. See, I can do that too! Archeology has proven much of what is in the Bible. Archeology has also DISPROVED much of what is in the Bible. |
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 18, 2022 22:57:04 GMT
Yes I have. I explained the reason why there is a God by using the example of the purpose of the O Zone. The O Zone is supposed to protect all life on Earth from the cancerous effects of the sun. That means Somebody Planned for its existence to protect His Creation. Okay, so at this point you’re not even listening anymore. What you just said here is a total non-sequitur! Your conclusion does not logically follow from your premise. You’re apparently so desperate to be correct that you can’t even comprehend the argument I’m making for why you are necessarily wrong. You just repeated your original claim without ever acknowledging what I said about it in response. And if you’re not going to acknowledge the points that I’m making then there’s really no point in arguing with you. Wrong!!! Nothing that God Says or Does Contradict or cancel Himself out. That is literally a begging the question fallacy! You say that you are not here to convince me (& I am assuming everyone else)that God Does not exist, yet, you were the one who posted here earlier that you are a "gnostic atheist" in claiming to " know" that the Christian God doesn't exist. Please go back and read the title of the thread! You seem to be implying that answering the question honestly amounts to arrogance. That is a lofty claim, & since you posted on a public message forum for religious belief, **KNOWING** that Christians post here. Except that it’s NOT a message forum FOR religious belief. It’s a message forum ABOUT religious beliefs (among other positions). It would be as arrogant for me, to post that I "know" that God (as Christianity understands Him) Exists. So you admit that you are in fact arrogant then? Thank you for making my point for me. You have no leg to stand on calling anyone else arrogant. The difference is, I have evidence that Christianity is a lie. You can only assert evidence that some of its claims are true by pointing to trees, rocks, and ozone and then claiming that “God did it”. All of your reasoning is circular and therefore fallacious. No, God Is not defined with logically contradictory properties which cancels out of existence. Everything you said here about God is mistaken. No, God IS defined with logically contradictory properties which cancels itself out of existence. Everything I’ve said here about God is accurate. See, I can do that too! Archeology has proven much of what is in the Bible. Archeology has also DISPROVED much of what is in the Bible. Wrong. My conclusion does follow my premise for a Supreme Creator. I know what the title of the thread is. You have no evidence for Christianity being a lie. In fact, there have been many ways to prove the truth of Christianity, including the martyrdoms of the Apostles, first disciples, etc., for bearing witness to the Resurrection Of Christ. You are wrong. God is not defined with contradictory properties which cancels itself out of existence. |
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Dec 19, 2022 5:11:59 GMT
MY CREATION CONUNDRUM Nothing comes from nothing. Force sets things in motion. The idea of a universe coming from nothing defies science. The universe set in motion without something setting it in motion defies science. Could God exist before the universe was set in motion? Sure. He would exist outside the universe, thus outside the realm of time. It is a concept beyond my scope of comprehension... but, the fact that I can't fathom an existence outside of time doesn't make it impossible. On top of that... I see the odds of a universe forming... planets made... life somehow coming into existence.. that life evolving to the point of intelligence and self-awareness.. far greater than the concept of a God causing it to happen or guiding it. Now, beyond those concessions... I see no evidence of a God. The universe exists and continues to exist as if there was no Creator.... The Bible says that God "Causes it to rain on the just and the unjust"... but, the same thing would occur if there were no God. So how are we supposed to tell the difference? It may defy current science, but all physics breaks down right before the "big bang" moment, so we don't exactly know what happened before the Big Bang. And just because we don't know, doesn't mean we will not know as science progresses. It's our intuition telling us there must be something that stated all this. Like you say, it's beyond our scope, but so was most if the visible universe until they invented the telescope. This universe may be bubble off another universe where the laws of physics allow for Big Crunches. |
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Dec 19, 2022 5:44:21 GMT
MY CREATION CONUNDRUM Nothing comes from nothing. Force sets things in motion. The idea of a universe coming from nothing defies science. It may defy current science, but all physics breaks down right before the "big bang" moment, so we don't exactly know what happened before the Big Bang. And just because we don't know, doesn't mean we will not know as science progresses. It's our intuition telling us there must be something that stated all this. Like you say, it's beyond our scope, but so was most if the visible universe until they invented the telescope. This universe may be bubble off another universe where the laws of physics allow for Big Crunches. Theoretical physics is interesting because it relies a lot on thought experiments, that sometimes take many decades before they can be tested. Most of my life, I assumed it would be impossible to know what happened before the Big Bang but I'm no longer certain. I've been listening/watching physics lectures and have learned how far science can go just with imagination so it may be possible one day for us to have a working hypothesis, if not a theory, of before. The most important thing I learned is the universe is not what most of us think it is. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Dec 19, 2022 6:43:08 GMT
Wrong. My conclusion does follow my premise for a Supreme Creator. No it doesn't. You have no evidence for Christianity being a lie. Yes, I do. In fact, there have been many ways to prove the truth of Christianity, including the martyrdoms of the Apostles, first disciples, etc., for bearing witness to the Resurrection Of Christ. All of those are the CLAIMS, not the EVIDENCE. You are wrong. God is not defined with contradictory properties which cancels itself out of existence. I am RIGHT! God IS defined with contradictory properties which cancels itself out of existence. Doesn't matter how many times you reply with the opposite of what I've said, as long as you fail to address my argument then you're not making a case. I'm just going to keep repeating back to you the opposite of what you're saying. You see how pointless this argument is? You need to learn the difference between an assertion and an argument. So far, you're just disagreeing with me by making claims, but you're not actually presenting an argument. |
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Dec 19, 2022 10:44:14 GMT
Wrong. My conclusion does follow my premise for a Supreme Creator. No it doesn't. You have no evidence for Christianity being a lie. Yes, I do. In fact, there have been many ways to prove the truth of Christianity, including the martyrdoms of the Apostles, first disciples, etc., for bearing witness to the Resurrection Of Christ. All of those are the CLAIMS, not the EVIDENCE. You are wrong. God is not defined with contradictory properties which cancels itself out of existence. I am RIGHT! God IS defined with contradictory properties which cancels itself out of existence. Doesn't matter how many times you reply with the opposite of what I've said, as long as you fail to address my argument then you're not making a case. I'm just going to keep repeating back to you the opposite of what you're saying. You see how pointless this argument is? You need to learn the difference between an assertion and an argument. So far, you're just disagreeing with me by making claims, but you're not actually presenting an argument. What became Christianity was a Jewish apocalyptic political and messianic cult who were at odd with the powers that be in Jerusalem and who expected Jesus whom they identified as the fully human Messiah to usher in the Kingdom of God while he was still alive. Then after he died, they expected he would return to usher in etcetera before they died. When that didn't happen, they had to come up with another explanation, so they went back to the Hebrew Scriptures, to reconfigure just who Jesus was. However, nowhere in the Hebrew Scriptures does it say the Messiah would be a man born of God who also God. This is theology is cobbled together using out of context passages from various books, then applied some pagan magic to it. Every so often the apocalyptic cults form up again, especially went they feel under threat. This is one of those times. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Dec 19, 2022 12:09:06 GMT
No it doesn't. Yes, I do. All of those are the CLAIMS, not the EVIDENCE. I am RIGHT! God IS defined with contradictory properties which cancels itself out of existence. Doesn't matter how many times you reply with the opposite of what I've said, as long as you fail to address my argument then you're not making a case. I'm just going to keep repeating back to you the opposite of what you're saying. You see how pointless this argument is? You need to learn the difference between an assertion and an argument. So far, you're just disagreeing with me by making claims, but you're not actually presenting an argument. What became Christianity was a Jewish apocalyptic political and messianic cult who were at odd with the powers that be in Jerusalem and who expected Jesus whom they identified as the fully human Messiah to usher in the Kingdom of God while he was still alive. Then after he died, they expected he would return to usher in etcetera before they died. When that didn't happen, they had to come up with another explanation, so they went back to the Hebrew Scriptures, to reconfigure just who Jesus was. However, nowhere in the Hebrew Scriptures does it say the Messiah would be a man born of God who also God. This is theology is cobbled together using out of context passages from various books, then applied some pagan magic to it. Every so often the apocalyptic cults form up again, especially went they feel under threat. This is one of those times. You’re preaching to the choir my friend, no pun intended. |
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Dec 19, 2022 13:20:38 GMT
Wrong. My conclusion does follow my premise for a Supreme Creator. No it doesn't. You have no evidence for Christianity being a lie. Yes, I do. In fact, there have been many ways to prove the truth of Christianity, including the martyrdoms of the Apostles, first disciples, etc., for bearing witness to the Resurrection Of Christ. All of those are the CLAIMS, not the EVIDENCE. You are wrong. God is not defined with contradictory properties which cancels itself out of existence. I am RIGHT! God IS defined with contradictory properties which cancels itself out of existence. Doesn't matter how many times you reply with the opposite of what I've said, as long as you fail to address my argument then you're not making a case. I'm just going to keep repeating back to you the opposite of what you're saying. You see how pointless this argument is? You need to learn the difference between an assertion and an argument. So far, you're just disagreeing with me by making claims, but you're not actually presenting an argument. Nope. God Is. He Is the Ultimate Reality of the entire universe, & the Holy Bible makes that perfectly clear. |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Dec 19, 2022 18:41:33 GMT
MY CREATION CONUNDRUM Nothing comes from nothing. Force sets things in motion. The idea of a universe coming from nothing defies science. The universe set in motion without something setting it in motion defies science. Could God exist before the universe was set in motion? Sure. He would exist outside the universe, thus outside the realm of time. It is a concept beyond my scope of comprehension... but, the fact that I can't fathom an existence outside of time doesn't make it impossible. On top of that... I see the odds of a universe forming... planets made... life somehow coming into existence.. that life evolving to the point of intelligence and self-awareness.. far greater than the concept of a God causing it to happen or guiding it. Now, beyond those concessions... I see no evidence of a God. The universe exists and continues to exist as if there was no Creator.... The Bible says that God "Causes it to rain on the just and the unjust"... but, the same thing would occur if there were no God. So how are we supposed to tell the difference? It may defy current science, but all physics breaks down right before the "big bang" moment, so we don't exactly know what happened before the Big Bang. And just because we don't know, doesn't mean we will not know as science progresses. It's our intuition telling us there must be something that stated all this. Like you say, it's beyond our scope, but so was most if the visible universe until they invented the telescope. This universe may be bubble off another universe where the laws of physics allow for Big Crunches. I think it was Steven Hawking that explained it like this: the Big Bang is a singularity that can be compared via an analogy to the south pole of Earth. The south pole is a directional singularity of the Earth's surface, unlike any other point on Earth (except for the north pole when talking about north). At most points on Earth, it is possible to travel south from that point, but not for the south pole: it doesn't make sense to talk about being further south than the south pole. Similarly, the Big Bang is a singularity in spacetime. Spacetime is a 4-dimensional domain of the universe with 3 spatial dimensions and 1 temporal dimension. Gravity can warp spacetime, causing spatial dimensions to blend with the temporal dimension. The stronger the gravity, the greater the warping, in extreme cases Black Holes can seal themselves off from the rest of the universe. In the case of the Big Bang, since time is involved in this singularity, it doesn't make sense to talk about time before the Big Bang any more than "being south of the south pole". |
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Dec 19, 2022 19:40:27 GMT
No it doesn't. Yes, I do. All of those are the CLAIMS, not the EVIDENCE. I am RIGHT! God IS defined with contradictory properties which cancels itself out of existence. Doesn't matter how many times you reply with the opposite of what I've said, as long as you fail to address my argument then you're not making a case. I'm just going to keep repeating back to you the opposite of what you're saying. You see how pointless this argument is? You need to learn the difference between an assertion and an argument. So far, you're just disagreeing with me by making claims, but you're not actually presenting an argument. Nope. God Is. He Is the Ultimate Reality of the entire universe, & the Holy Bible makes that perfectly clear. There is another God, one much higher than your God. He actually created him. |
|
