ForumGarden

I think God is real, but the biggest problem with that is God himself; he is not revealing himself, like he really could, if he wanted to.

Mickiel;1489163 wrote: I think God is real, but the biggest problem with that is God himself; he is not revealing himself, like he really could, if he wanted to.


That is reminiscent of a typical playground scenario:

"I could could do that if I wanted to."

"Do it then".

"Don't want to!"

Ted;1489136 wrote: I happen to disagree with the idea that faith is a fantasy hope. God is an experiential reality not provable with science and that is problem for some. However religions seem to respond to an inner need to look at areas that science is simply not set up to study. Science does not deal with love, hate, altruism, or any of the emotions.Not so. Neuroscience is doing just that because in the 21st century we now understand that "inner needs" are in the brain, and not the "heart" or the "spirit". Neuroscience understands quite a bit about emotional triggers, where they reside and much more these days.

Mickiel;1489163 wrote: I think God is real, but the biggest problem with that is God himself; he is not revealing himself, like he really could, if he wanted to.I know you don't like to hear this, but it's because there's no God there.

Science has monitored emotions with the use of MRI scans. It has yet to scan God.

Ahso!;1489168 wrote: I know you don't like to hear this, but it's because there's no God there.


I have heard it all my life, and it has yet to affect me.

I just laugh when a neuroscientist trys to tell me what I experienced. One of the age old questions is did my brain direct me in contemplative matters or did the thoughts come first and not my neurons. They can see the brain activity but they do not know the essential cause. They know how the physical brain works but do no know how to interpret what it does or how.

Ted;1489296 wrote: I just laugh when a neuroscientist trys to tell me what I experienced. One of the age old questions is did my brain direct me in contemplative matters or did the thoughts come firstA brain is required to have thought. Thought cannot come without the brain and therefore outside the brain. Ted;1489296 wrote: and not my neurons.Neurons are cells. Cells are what makes us. What you've said to this point is circular. Ted;1489296 wrote: They can see the brain activity but they do not know the essential cause. They know how the physical brain works but do no know how to interpret what it does or how.In fact they do.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=c ... rain+works

Ahso!;1489298 wrote: A brain is required to have thought. Thought cannot come without the brain and therefore outside the brain. Neurons are cells. Cells are what makes us. What you've said to this point is circular. In fact they do.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=c ... rain+works


interesting article on how a former Atheist spokesman was convinced that God is real, through a study of DNA;

Is God Real? - See Why DNA Convinced Former Atheist Dr. Antony Flew

Mickiel;1489305 wrote: interesting article on how a former Atheist spokesman was convinced that God is real, through a study of DNA;

Is God Real? - See Why DNA Convinced Former Atheist Dr. Antony FlewFlew later retracted that statement. He had become a deist, not a theist. Flew did have dementia in his later years and seemed to begin to contradict himself more as he aged.

This from wikipedia:

In the months following the Habermas interview, Flew contradicted some statements made in the interview and retracted others. When asked in December 2004 by Duncan Crary of Humanist Network News if he still stood by the argument presented in The Presumption of Atheism, Flew replied he did but he also restated his position as deist: "I'm quite happy to believe in an inoffensive inactive god." When asked by Crary whether or not he has kept up with the most recent science and theology, he responded with "Certainly not," stating that there is simply too much to keep up with. Flew also denied that there was any truth to the rumours of 2001 and 2003 that he had converted to Christianity.[28] In letter to Carrier of 29 December 2004 Flew retracted his statement that a deity or a "super-intelligence" was the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature. "I now realise that I have made a fool of myself by believing that there were no presentable theories of the development of inanimate matter up to the first living creature capable of reproduction." He blamed his error on being "misled" by the (supposed) fact that Richard Dawkins had "never been reported as referring to any promising work on the production of a theory of the development of living matter."[27] His 2007 book There is a God (see below) revisited the question, however, and questioned contemporary models: "the latest work I have seen shows that the present physical universe gives too little time for these theories of abiogenesis to get the job done."[29] He added: "The philosophical question that has not been answered in origin-of-life studies is this: How can a universe of mindless matter produce beings with intrinsic ends, self-replication capabilities, and 'coded chemistry'? Here we are not dealing with biology, but an entirely different category of problem."[29]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Flew

Ahso!;1489314 wrote: Flew later retracted that statement. He had become a deist, not a theist. Flew did have dementia in his later years and seemed to begin to contradict himself more as he aged.

This from wikipedia:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Flew




Here's a list of Atheist who walked away from Atheism;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_f ... _agnostics

Mickiel;1489330 wrote: Here's a list of Atheist who walked away from Atheism;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_f ... agnosticsI haven't looked at the rest yet. This on Ted Turner.

In 2008, Turner explained he not only regretted these statements but said he had made peace with organized religion and had worked with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod and the United Methodist Church to fight malaria.[38] In a 2008 MSNBC interview, Turner stated that he no longer considers himself atheist or agnostic, and prays for sick friends, but keeps it short because "I don't want to load up the wires."[39] However, in 2013 he declared himself still to be agnostic, saying that he still prays for friends when they are sick, because "it can't hurt anything".[40]

Mickiel;1489330 wrote: Here's a list of Atheist who walked away from Atheism;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_f ... _agnostics


We can add this young lady to the list;

Atheist blogger Leah Libresco converts to Christianity - U.S. News

It's difficult to be an atheist when you don't really know why you are one to begin with. People go both ways. Education is a definite variable in the decision making process.

Ahso!;1489333 wrote: It's difficult to be an atheist when you don't really know why you are one to begin with. People go both ways. Education is a definite variable in the decision making process.


I am sure it is confusing, which is why so many Atheist are changing; we can add this Brit to the list;

Atheism Aside: Peter Hitchens' Journey to Faith - World - CBN News - Christian News 24-7 - CBN.com

Why then do you think it is that "nones" are on the rise while religious belief has be declining fairly rapidly in the US and the UK?

Ahso!;1489335 wrote: Why then do you think it is that "nones" are one the rise while religious belief has be declining fairly rapidly in the US and the UK?


Why do you think the decline of Atheism is global?

Global Study: Atheists in Decline, Only 1.8% of World Population by 2020

Mickiel;1489336 wrote: Why do you think the decline of Atheism is global?

Global Study: Atheists in Decline, Only 1.8% of World Population by 2020We'll see in 2020 - it's only five years away.

Ahso!;1489337 wrote: We'll see in 2020 - it's only five years away.




It just kind of always tickles me when Atheist harp on religion declining in certain countries, when the decline of Atheism is Global, and has lasted for over 30 years;

Global atheism - Conservapedia

You seem to be working on the basis that there is Atheism & there is Christianity. Given the increase of Islam you might say that Atheism is decreasing - ie if someone coverts to Islam that might mean that the levels of Atheism has declined by 1. It doesn't mean that Christianity is increasing. Far from it. At the moment about 25% of the world's population is Muslim. Not only is this figure increasing by increased numbers of Muslim families over other cultures, they are also known for enforced conversions. Embrace Islam or die. Suddenly the number of Atheists drops dramatically.

FourPart;1489346 wrote: You seem to be working on the basis that there is Atheism & there is Christianity. Given the increase of Islam you might say that Atheism is decreasing - ie if someone coverts to Islam that might mean that the levels of Atheism has declined by 1. It doesn't mean that Christianity is increasing. Far from it. At the moment about 25% of the world's population is Muslim. Not only is this figure increasing by increased numbers of Muslim families over other cultures, they are also known for enforced conversions. Embrace Islam or die. Suddenly the number of Atheists drops dramatically.




The number of people who are not associated with religion is expected to drop;

Why people with no religion are projected to decline as a share of the world’s population | Pew Research Center

Here's an interesting look on a man who gives 50 proofs that God is imaginary:

God is Imaginary - 50 simple proofs

I had never seen this kind of work.

Mickiel;1489355 wrote: Here's an interesting look on a man who gives 50 proofs that God is imaginary:

God is Imaginary - 50 simple proofs

I had never seen this kind of work.


It makes perfect sense. Each listed item is something that the Religious insist on believing in & not one of them makes any sense in a realistic world. Definitely proof of being imaginary.

Mickiel;1489351 wrote: The number of people who are not associated with religion is expected to drop;

Why people with no religion are projected to decline as a share of the world’s population | Pew Research Center


This is largely attributable to the fact that religious “nones are, on average, older and have fewer children than people who are affiliated with a religion. In 2010, for instance, 28% of people who belong to any of the world’s religions were younger than 15 years old, compared with just 19% of the unaffiliated. And adherents of religions are estimated to give birth to an average of 2.6 children per woman, compared with an average of 1.7 children among the unaffiliated.


The same article, as I said, predicts Muslims to outnumber Christians. The irresponsible superstitious Religious follow the creed of "Go Forth & Multiply", thus increasing their particular cult by family size. This is not Religion by choice - it is Religion by force & brainwashing. The responsible, rational amongst us keep the family numbers down & not contributing to global overpopulation.

Still - as Religion is the singlemost cause of all wars, it will probably end up in a total Holocaust in the end, leaving no-one left to follow any faith or not (as the case may be). The tools of war have become incrementally efficient in their ability to destroy humanity. There's no reason to believe they won't continue to do so, then all it will take is one Religious Extremist & the entire world is despatched to meet up with their 20 virgins.

Mickiel;1489355 wrote: Here's an interesting look on a man who gives 50 proofs that God is imaginary:

God is Imaginary - 50 simple proofs

I had never seen this kind of work.


Thanks for that link.

FourPart;1489378 wrote: The same article, as I said, predicts Muslims to outnumber Christians. The irresponsible superstitious Religious follow the creed of "Go Forth & Multiply", thus increasing their particular cult by family size. This is not Religion by choice - it is Religion by force & brainwashing. The responsible, rational amongst us keep the family numbers down & not contributing to global overpopulation.

Still - as Religion is the singlemost cause of all wars, it will probably end up in a total Holocaust in the end, leaving no-one left to follow any faith or not (as the case may be). The tools of war have become incrementally efficient in their ability to destroy humanity. There's no reason to believe they won't continue to do so, then all it will take is one Religious Extremist & the entire world is despatched to meet up with their 20 virgins.




You know, I don't mind debating Atheist, but I grow so tired of this utter nonsense of religion causing most wars, its an Atheist crutch;

Is Religion the Cause of Most Wars? | Rabbi Alan Lurie

A tiresome crutch which a simple study can prove. This study showed out of 1763 wars, religion had only 123 involvements that we can catalog in history.

perhaps YOU CAN GET AWAY WITH YOUR PREJUDICE WHEN TALKING TO THOSE WHO DO NOT STUDY;

BUT NOT HERE ON THIS THREAD.

Ahso!;1489379 wrote: Thanks for that link.




Well yes, I don't agree with the guy, but I honor his effort that he made; it was the most comprehensive effort that I have read.

Mickiel;1489383 wrote: Well yes, I don't agree with the guy, but I honor his effort that he made; it was the most comprehensive effort that I have read.Have you clicked on any of the "proofs" and read the explanations?

Ahso!;1489384 wrote: Have you clicked on any of the "proofs" and read the explanations?




Oh yes. What I like about this guy is that he does not try to avoid scripture, but actually uses the bible in his defense of his points. He approaches his argument like no one I have read before. And I am not so biased as to ignore that in this research, this thread; I will show both sides, although I am for one side.

But I like this guy, he is not ignorant in his defense; and he is offering plenty to look at.

Did you notice that there is also a forum connected to the site where you can discuss these issues with him directly as well as others there? I read a few posts. There are other believers there that post.

Ahso!;1489386 wrote: Did you notice that there is also a forum connected to the site where you can discuss these issues with him directly as well as others there? I read a few posts. There are other believers there that post.


Ahso, allow me to say this to you;

a formidable adversary makes you grow stronger; I am given more strength by the strength of what I fight.

Mickiel;1489388 wrote: Ahso, allow me to say this to you;

a formidable adversary makes you grow stronger; I am given more strength by the strength of what I fight.I agree completely. I've found it very rewarding to travel the internet and try to better myself through reading and interacting with people who I consider much brighter than myself as well as more educated. You appear to be feeling confident in yourself and your positions - go test it out.

You only live once - well, from my perspective that is. For you, I guess it's twice.

Be sure to keep us updated.

Ahso!;1489390 wrote: I agree completely. I've found it very rewarding to travel the internet and try to better myself through reading and interacting with people who I consider much brighter than myself as well as more educated. You appear to be feeling confident in yourself and your positions - go test it out.

You only live once - well, from my perspective that is. For you, I guess it's twice.


Well in my view, we only live as humans once, but I believe in another life. In don't think that one life is all there is. I believe in a far differing reincarnation; a new birth so to speak. Where we will shed humanity and put on a completely different form of life. That is also a new form of knowledge, one that holds none of the limits we now see. One in which humanity is taken from its incubator, and is birthed into a totally new life; so I favor any knowledge that supports our continuum into a far better reality. And that's one reason I like the bible, because it continues our life span and does not end it.

All things change.

Has not even our conversation changed from years ago, until now? What caused that change? You? Me? Or just time? Just the time to grow in knowledge.

I think we both have become a little more accommodating toward one another.

Now reincarnation is something I can sort of subscribe to. Not as any kind of 'soul', as such, but as a 'life energy'. When one lifeform dies it's 'life energy' is passed on along the food chain to sustain other lifeforms who, in turn, pass on their 'life energy'. I suppose it 'might' be classed as a Spiritual thing, but it's something I believe could well exist & have a valid scientific explanation for it.

FourPart;1489399 wrote: Now reincarnation is something I can sort of subscribe to. Not as any kind of 'soul', as such, but as a 'life energy'. When one lifeform dies it's 'life energy' is passed on along the food chain to sustain other lifeforms who, in turn, pass on their 'life energy'. I suppose it 'might' be classed as a Spiritual thing, but it's something I believe could well exist & have a valid scientific explanation for it.Then start a thread on it and share your evidence.

Ahso!;1489400 wrote: Then start a thread on it and share your evidence.
1. I didn't start the subject. Not my place to start the thread.

2. I didn't state anything as a fact - just a notion I could relate to. What evidence is there to provide that I can relate to something.

You surely are the master of getting both things wrong in the minimal length sentence.

Ahso!;1489398 wrote: I think we both have become a little more accommodating toward one another.


Oh yes, for sure.

If one reads "Christianity after Religion" one will find that many polls conducted by a wide variety of non-interested people people with no agenda you will find that the statistics clearly show that the Christian "religion" is on the decline and continues to do so.

Ted;1489686 wrote: If one reads "Christianity after Religion" one will find that many polls conducted by a wide variety of non-interested people you will find that the statistics clearly show that the Christian "religion" is on the decline and continues to do so.


One third of the world is Christian. They grew so fast in the past, a decline now is not going to hurt them. Any Atheist cheerlead to try and magnify that decline, is simply rah, rah Atheist. Christianity is on top now, and has been on top a long time. If you try to compare Christianity and its present membership, to Atheist membership; Atheist would be embarrassed. Christianity is still number one, and I think that will change, but not much.

Its just too many of them; and God wanted it to be like that; but not for the reasons Christians like to think.

Mickiel;1489693 wrote: One third of the world is Christian. They grew so fast in the past, a decline now is not going to hurt them. Any Atheist cheerlead to try and magnify that decline, is simply rah, rah Atheist. Christianity is on top now, and has been on top a long time. If you try to compare Christianity and its present membership, to Atheist membership; Atheist would be embarrassed. Christianity is still number one, and I think that will change, but not much.

Its just too many of them; and God wanted it to be like that; but not for the reasons Christians like to think.


I don't think there is any real atheist 'membership.' It's not a contest, and more people believing in something doesn't make it true. One believes or doesn't, it's really that simple. No cause for embarrassment, IMO. There are those who strongly don't want religion in the public forum & that is growing, IMO, not shrinking. It's personal. We should, IMO, just show respect for each other. That's the hard part.

Well I'll be a monkey's uncle. I have no problem with the theory of evolution. The evidence is clear. BtW back in our genetic history there are rats. Yes rats are part of the human ancestory.

AnneBoleyn;1489696 wrote: I don't think there is any real atheist 'membership.' It's not a contest, and more people believing in something doesn't make it true. One believes or doesn't, it's really that simple. No cause for embarrassment, IMO. There are those who strongly don't want religion in the public forum & that is growing, IMO, not shrinking. It's personal. We should, IMO, just show respect for each other. That's the hard part.




Well what if " Those" people gather themselves together here at Forum Garden and eliminate the Religious discussion section? Would that be right in your eyes? What if there were 3,000 members and only 10 of them wanted this done; how is it that the majority numbers rights are removed by a minority? Numbers count for something. Not that I say where the majority exist, it should rule. I just says it means something.

Mickiel;1489708 wrote: Well what if " Those" people gather themselves together here at Forum Garden and eliminate the Religious discussion section? Would that be right in your eyes? What if there were 3,000 members and only 10 of them wanted this done; how is it that the majority numbers rights are removed by a minority? Numbers count for something. Not that I say where the majority exist, it should rule. I just says it means something.
Sounds like a plan to me.

FourPart;1489712 wrote: Sounds like a plan to me.




Well yes, gather together enough people who think alike , and start a crusade;

just hang the religious section, and then burn it on a stake.

Then ask yourself, where are you going to go now?

since you hang out in it so much;;;

Mickiel you are engaging in wishful thinking. Christianity is not on top. If anything is it is Islam. However that is not important in any case. Even D. Bonhoeffer wrote a book called "Religionless Christianity" and modern theologians are heading in that direction too. There is no search and rescue in the sky. God does no work that way. "God is love" and they that love God are following His direction.

Mickiel;1489708 wrote: Well what if " Those" people gather themselves together here at Forum Garden and eliminate the Religious discussion section? Would that be right in your eyes? What if there were 3,000 members and only 10 of them wanted this done; how is it that the majority numbers rights are removed by a minority? Numbers count for something. Not that I say where the majority exist, it should rule. I just says it means something.


Well. The majority of Germans supported Hitler, no matter what their reasoning. Did that make them right?

AnneBoleyn;1489773 wrote: Well. The majority of Germans supported Hitler, no matter what their reasoning. Did that make them right?




Hitler was wrong, in no manner could millions of his followers be right; their direction was doomed from the get go. Millions destined to think wrong. The numbers don't mean much, it means something, but does not mean the people are right.

Mickiel;1489725 wrote: Well yes, gather together enough people who think alike , and start a crusade;

just hang the religious section, and then burn it on a stake.

Then ask yourself, where are you going to go now?

since you hang out in it so much;;;
I don't actually 'hang out' in any 'section'. I just do View New Posts & lo & behold I get whatever's new.