|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 10, 2015 7:05:14 GMT -5
Atheists love miracles. How else did the world create itself? How else could the laws of physics and mathematics just appear out of nothing? Did nothing just decided to become something? How is that possible - and with what did it manage to do this? Easy, it was a miracle. You wonder, bert, why people don't take you seriously as to your "challenges" etc., -well this is one reason why we don't take you seriously. You take words like "miracles" out of their true meaning and give them a "Bert" meaning.
You can twist any old thing that you want to when you leave the land of reality and "Bertify" it to suit what you want to believe! (Please note that I coined a new word there, -a new word just for you Bert. That should make you feel real good, -to have a very own word for yourself)
Miracle :
"A miracle is an event not explicable by natural or scientific laws. Such an event may be attributed to a supernatural being (God or gods), magic, a miracle worker, a saint or a religious leader."
It is you theists that believe in miracles, -not we atheists.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 10, 2015 7:08:35 GMT -5
[quote , I understand how difficult it is to imagine no "original cause" (prime mover, creator, whatever), and I understand your feeling of God's love. Why do you lump the two together? In my opinion, my earliest thought on this subject Was that G-D must have created our Creator.
A cause needs an origin, there can be many Causes, but we only perceive the causes that Produced . As we know , "Wisdom is justified of her children" (Wisdom ((Father)) ,The cause ; Children- produced )[/quote - Lost you way back on the second line!
|
|
|
Post by Guest4 on Dec 10, 2015 7:20:28 GMT -5
G-D created (caused into being) all things, The pre-emanate of all is Light, whether taken To represent enlightens, or natural , if you remove Light from creation, there will be nothing remaining.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Dec 10, 2015 12:00:24 GMT -5
Probably getting a little ahead of myself with this topic so early, but it seems we're heading in that direction quickly. Guest4 postulated that the reason for creation was to teach us God/Love. But does our universe have a creator at all? And if it does, why on earth do we tend to lump our creator into the same pot as the source of the God-experiences we share? Is Guest4 purely guessing? My head tells me probably were created. To me, it's just numbers: our development on earth is advancing exponentially, and it's not at all hard for me to imagine a time not too many centuries in the future when we could emulate the big bang, in essence creating our own life-bearing universe. And if we could, I'm sure we would. Now, unless we imagine that we are alone in the universe and life has not formed anywhere else, why would we not believe other beings have already reached the stage of creating universes? And if that is so, what are the odds that our own universe was created? I am suggesting that our own universe, however it came to be, is likely to spawn many more universes of our own creation ("we" being the inhabitants of our universe). It would therefore seem statistically probable that we have a creator. More life-bearing universes are being created than are naturally happening. But if we do, and if he/she/it (our creator) is anything like we humans, he probably created us just to see if he could. OK...avoiding "feelings" (which we'll talk about later) what logic tells you we do or do not have a creator? I fear that I reflect on the question posed by this thread like an old "left-field contrarian". I feel as if a great deal of spade work needs to be done before we can objectively address the question posed. I get tripped up by at least three issues which I will try to briefly describe: 1) As I read through the posts on this sub-board (and the main board), I am struck by the absence of a shared and mutually acceptable vocabulary for discussion of a transcendent reality. We all do our very best to capture the essence of our feelings and beliefs using concepts and categories derived from our common temporal existence. But these concepts and categories may not properly capture our feelings and beliefs regarding the existence/non-existence of a transcendent reality. The consequence is that we spend most of our time talking past one another. 2) I am concerned about the human ego in discussions of the possibility of a transcendent reality. To the my awareness, humans have never had any difficulty feeling and expressing the superiority of their intellect over all other species. It seems, however, that most humans find themselves outside their comfort zone to reflect on the possibility of a consciousness/intellect superior to that of humans. To address the question posed by this thread, it seems to me that each participant might need to find a comfortable way to embrace the unknowable and grant each participant the opportunity to seek the essence of their own feelings and beliefs in the void created by lack of knowledge. 3) It seems to me that the transition from individual "experiences of God" to the question "do we have a creator?" may be a "Bridge Too Far". Perhaps all participants can remain more objective my taking somewhat smaller steps, attempting to achieve mutual understanding (not consensus) at each of the smaller steps. Just some thoughts from an old contrarian.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 10, 2015 12:32:04 GMT -5
Atheists love miracles. How else did the world create itself? How else could the laws of physics and mathematics just appear out of nothing? Did nothing just decided to become something? How is that possible - and with what did it manage to do this? Easy, it was a miracle. So was a rainbow at one time but now you can make one in your back yard with a garden hose. The laws of math and physics were developed by men from observations of the world around them. The biggest problem was getting people to realize that natural events were not miracles.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Storebo on Dec 10, 2015 13:50:34 GMT -5
In the beginning God exploded. This event is known as the Big Bang. The material universe came into existence. As individualized aspects of God, the game is for all sentient beings in the universe to come to a realization of their own inherent divinity, and that we all are divine particles of God, who whether we know it or not, are evolving toward eventual reunification with the Source.
|
|
|
Post by maryhig on Dec 10, 2015 17:49:24 GMT -5
Atheists love miracles. How else did the world create itself? How else could the laws of physics and mathematics just appear out of nothing? Did nothing just decided to become something? How is that possible - and with what did it manage to do this? Easy, it was a miracle. So was a rainbow at one time but now you can make one in your back yard with a garden hose. The laws of math and physics were developed by men from observations of the world around them. The biggest problem was getting people to realize that natural events were not miracles. But, there wasn't just a hose used to make the rainbow, that's just the vessel! there was water and sunshine too! Just like God giving us revelation, it comes through the word and light! The hose just transports the water from one place to another. Like Gods people do with his word! You can pour water out of a hose all day, but you won't see a rainbow until the sun comes out. And, you won't receive Gods revelation without light given through his son!
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 10, 2015 17:58:53 GMT -5
In the beginning God exploded. This event is known as the Big Bang. The material universe came into existence. As individualized aspects of God, the game is for all sentient beings in the universe to come to a realization of their own inherent divinity, and that we all are divine particles of God, who whether we know it or not, are evolving toward eventual reunification with the Source. OMG! So God hisself exploded! No wonder the world is is such a mess! yuk!
|
|
|
Post by Guest4 on Dec 10, 2015 18:46:27 GMT -5
So was a rainbow at one time but now you can make one in your back yard with a garden hose. The laws of math and physics were developed by men from observations of the world around them. The biggest problem was getting people to realize that natural events were not miracles. But, there wasn't just a hose used to make the rainbow, that's just the vessel! there was water and sunshine too! Just like God giving us revelation, it comes through the word and light! The hose just transports the water from one place to another. Like Gods people do with his word! You can pour water out of a hose all day, but you won't see a rainbow until the sun comes out. And, you won't receive Gods revelation without light given through his son! very nice analogy.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Dec 10, 2015 18:53:15 GMT -5
I fear that I reflect on the question posed by this thread like an old "left-field contrarian". I feel as if a great deal of spade work needs to be done before we can objectively address the question posed. I get tripped up by at least three issues which I will try to briefly describe: 1) As I read through the posts on this sub-board (and the main board), I am struck by the absence of a shared and mutually acceptable vocabulary for discussion of a transcendent reality. We all do our very best to capture the essence of our feelings and beliefs using concepts and categories derived from our common temporal existence. But these concepts and categories may not properly capture our feelings and beliefs regarding the existence/non-existence of a transcendent reality. The consequence is that we spend most of our time talking past one another. 2) I am concerned about the human ego in discussions of the possibility of a transcendent reality. To the my awareness, humans have never had any difficulty feeling and expressing the superiority of their intellect over all other species. It seems, however, that most humans find themselves outside their comfort zone to reflect on the possibility of a consciousness/intellect superior to that of humans. To address the question posed by this thread, it seems to me that each participant might need to find a comfortable way to embrace the unknowable and grant each participant the opportunity to seek the essence of their own feelings and beliefs in the void created by lack of knowledge. 3) It seems to me that the transition from individual "experiences of God" to the question "do we have a creator?" may be a "Bridge Too Far". Perhaps all participants can remain more objective my taking somewhat smaller steps, attempting to achieve mutual understanding (not consensus) at each of the smaller steps. Just some thoughts from an old contrarian. yknot, I had rather hoped our participants would not so quickly try to join the two threads. I confess, one of the hardest jumps in logic for me to make is from "I feel something" to "hey, that's gotta be the fella who created everything." I have a tendency to separate "spiritual" topics from "scientific" topics. It's probably just habit. What I would LOVE is to be able to tie the two together. However, I am not fond of the quack science used by various spiritualists to merge the two (usually by inserting the word "quantum" into the god-of-the-gaps). I've started two ends of a potential bridge with the two topics; if they DO somehow meet in the middle, I'd be ecstatic. I confess my doubt that they will, and we will be forced to look for "God" somewhere besides our creator. Anyway...
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 10, 2015 21:18:03 GMT -5
But, there wasn't just a hose used to make the rainbow, that's just the vessel! there was water and sunshine too! Just like God giving us revelation, it comes through the word and light! The hose just transports the water from one place to another. Like Gods people do with his word! You can pour water out of a hose all day, but you won't see a rainbow until the sun comes out. And, you won't receive Gods revelation without light given through his son! very nice analogy. Analogies make for good sermons except that it doesn't prove anything.
They are a ways of comparing something you believe in order to get your point across but it doesn't make your statment of what you believe to be any more true.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2015 21:36:16 GMT -5
Some of you guys must have too much time on your hands. You were created or you wouldn't be here.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 11, 2015 21:43:13 GMT -5
Mankind has yet to know a moment without serious political, contention and division. What business do we have creating new planetary systems? Assuming we could influence such a system after its creation, who would determine who controls and owns what? Well,- that being true, that "(Man) -Humankind has yet to know a moment without serious political, contention and division. " Has the "biblical creator " done any better?
I don't think so!You don't believe in God because he's a fail-loser? Is that logical? Is it nice?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 12, 2015 0:12:09 GMT -5
Well,- that being true, that "(Man) -Humankind has yet to know a moment without serious political, contention and division. " Has the "biblical creator " done any better?
I don't think so! You don't believe in God because he's a fail-loser? Is that logical? Is it nice? What in the name of GOD (pun intended) is a "fail-loser?" Lee, you can come up with the nuttiest words of any body I know!
Maybe you should just write your own dictionary.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 12, 2015 21:44:39 GMT -5
You're deflecting. Answer my questions.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 13, 2015 0:14:56 GMT -5
You're deflecting. Answer my questions. When you make up terms it is difficult to respond. But fail-loser is supported in the bible. Personally, belief is dictated by evidence. It is the evidence that is missing.
|
|
|
Post by bubbles on Dec 13, 2015 5:32:56 GMT -5
Probably getting a little ahead of myself with this topic so early, but it seems we're heading in that direction quickly. Guest4 postulated that the reason for creation was to teach us God/Love. But does our universe have a creator at all? And if it does, why on earth do we tend to lump our creator into the same pot as the source of the God-experiences we share? Is Guest4 purely guessing? My head tells me probably were created. To me, it's just numbers: our development on earth is advancing exponentially, and it's not at all hard for me to imagine a time not too many centuries in the future when we could emulate the big bang, in essence creating our own life-bearing universe. And if we could, I'm sure we would. Now, unless we imagine that we are alone in the universe and life has not formed anywhere else, why would we not believe other beings have already reached the stage of creating universes? And if that is so, what are the odds that our own universe was created? I am suggesting that our own universe, however it came to be, is likely to spawn many more universes of our own creation ("we" being the inhabitants of our universe). It would therefore seem statistically probable that we have a creator. More life-bearing universes are being created than are naturally happening. But if we do, and if he/she/it (our creator) is anything like we humans, he probably created us just to see if he could. OK...avoiding "feelings" (which we'll talk about later) what logic tells you we do or do not have a creator? DD Do we have a creator? What makes you think we werent created? Why do we lump our creator into the same pot as the source of the God experience we share? Dont you think its because of scripture our reading and understanding of it? 3rd paragraph I agree based on the scriptures where he spoke and it was so.. His word cant return to him void. Some scriptures I believe whole heartedly this is one of them. The word was a creative word designed to continue on and on. Since reading your threads I cant help going back to my favourite physicist of all time. Brian Cox. Ive lost the page I found of his didnt save it on my phone. His explanation is brilliant. To lean on logic. Energy. The universe is complete with energy fields. Our bodys are a part of a whole. I cannot comprehend the likely hood of there being no mastermind behind it all. Simply because of the wonder the awesome way our planet shifts and moves with the elements all in place directed by the pulse of time the influence of other planets (sun and moon) taking care of our environment.
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Dec 13, 2015 6:55:31 GMT -5
Probably getting a little ahead of myself with this topic so early, but it seems we're heading in that direction quickly. Guest4 postulated that the reason for creation was to teach us God/Love. But does our universe have a creator at all? And if it does, why on earth do we tend to lump our creator into the same pot as the source of the God-experiences we share? Is Guest4 purely guessing? The first reason that comes to mind for lumping creator with source of God-experiences is familiarity with the Christian concept of God as creator. Secondly if there is a creator as well as a separate source of God-experiences that leaves us with an additional thing to explain. By separating the two I now seem to be left with more questions such as did the creator create the source of the God-experiences also? Did some third thing create both of these? My initial thoughts on this idea of life within a universe emulating the big bang to create other universes with life also able to create further universes is that there could end up being a lot of universes creating a lot of universes creating… creating… an infinite number of universes. The other perplexity I have with this idea of life from universes creating universes is that there presumably was a first universe. That takes us back to the question of what brought that universe into being. This seems to me to be more or less the same question as when we consider our universe to be the first. And as for myself I have no idea of whether we do or do not have a creator. It's all a bit beyond me I'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Dec 13, 2015 7:04:13 GMT -5
In the beginning God exploded. This event is known as the Big Bang. The material universe came into existence. As individualized aspects of God, the game is for all sentient beings in the universe to come to a realization of their own inherent divinity, and that we all are divine particles of God, who whether we know it or not, are evolving toward eventual reunification with the Source. The idea of us all as divine particles of God makes me wonder about good and evil. It would appear that some of the parts of God are evil. It also does seem that God is favour of explosions Parts of God do seem to enjoy going around blowing up and chopping up other parts of God. Take these problems of good and evil and God destroying other parts of God I actually like the idea of God being in all things myself.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 13, 2015 16:16:19 GMT -5
You're deflecting. Answer my questions. How am I "deflecting?" I can't answer your question until I know what you mean!
How in the hell can I answer your questions when I have no idea what you mean by "God" being a "fail-loser?"
Describe what you mean by "God" being a "fail-loser?"
In plain English, please.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 15, 2015 22:27:10 GMT -5
Mankind has yet to know a moment without serious political, contention and division. What business do we have creating new planetary systems? Assuming we could influence such a system after its creation, who would determine who controls and owns what? Well,- that being true, that "(Man) -Humankind has yet to know a moment without serious political, contention and division. " Has the "biblical creator " done any better?
I don't think so!You're on record here implicating God along with man. Either you believe in God or you don't. But postulating that God isn't on the basis he a loser, a fail, like the creation he is said to have created is not a logical basis to believe in him or not.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 16, 2015 1:46:25 GMT -5
Well,- that being true, that "(Man) -Humankind has yet to know a moment without serious political, contention and division. " Has the "biblical creator " done any better?
I don't think so! You're on record here implicating God along with man. Either y ou believe in God or you don't. But postulating that God isn't on the basis he a loser, a fail, like the creation he is said to have created is not a logical basis to believe in him or not. I don't believe in a god, however, in order to address theists beliefs it is necessary for me to use the "language" of believers when I post.
You stated that , "Mankind has yet to know a moment without serious political, contention and division," and questioned whether mankind should be in the business of creating new planetary systems.
I questioned the idea as to whether your "biblical creator" had done any better! For an entity who according to the Jewish-Christian, is all powerful, all knowing & always been around; that entity certainly made a mess out of the supposed creating that he did!
PS: "God" as a "loser or a failure," as you put it, isn't the reason why I don't see any evidence for a paranormal being called god.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 19, 2015 11:34:29 GMT -5
If its not the reason you believe or disbelieve, why do you insist that it must be the reasoning of believers?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 19, 2015 14:06:55 GMT -5
If its not the reason you believe or disbelieve, why do you insist that it must be the reasoning of believers? I question why people will turn over their minds, lives and their whole being to an entity whom they claim to be always present, all knowing and all powerful, -yet by demonstration in the bible really didn't have any of those characteristics.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 20, 2015 2:00:06 GMT -5
Why do you base your perception of God on your perception of God's presentation in the Bible?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 21, 2015 10:28:55 GMT -5
Why do you base your perception of God on your perception of God's presentation in the Bible? Nor sure to whom the question was directed but I base my perception of god (or any such entity) on the evidence available. So far - no evidence, no god.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 22, 2015 11:47:53 GMT -5
Then tell your comrades to stop bashing the bible as if it proves anything. If God truly doesn't exist we can expect traditional readings will say just about anything.
|
|
|
Post by Commonman on May 19, 2016 20:15:39 GMT -5
Was reading that evolution does jhabe its roots in pagan religions of at least 2400 years ago. The greek mathmetician Pathagoreous learned of it from the Hindu, who picked it up from pagan religion , they have no proof and it was their belief, since God wasn't an option for them??! Weird huh? I think some Greeks were mystified by the monarch butterfly caterpillars, they didn't understand that that little green bump was an egg... they thought the caterpillars just spontaneously appeared!! Hmmmm
|
|