ForumGarden

Life can only be produced by life, a living God is academic; its the best conclusion , in my view. Science itself could only have been produced by a prior scientific knowledge that exist. Knowledge did not produce itself, nor did life produce itself, those who believe that, believe in myths. The past has a purpose, and Atheism seeks to rob us of that purpose, and put a blindfold on us by twisting reality; they are teaching that belief in God is being blind, when really unbelief in him is true blindness.

Its a weird blindness too, because its self indoctrinating and eventually feeds on itself. It teaches itself that you got " Lucky" and now you are alive, but once you die your existence is over! The luck runs out and eats itself out of life and purpose ; its a dead end belief. Robing clarity.

The great Religious answer to everything. If you don't know the answer, rather than admit ignorance, accredit it to 'God'. When the answer is found, deny it for as long as possible while continuing to accredit it to God.

The great Atheist answer; find another answer other than God.

The Atheist keeps looking, learning more the process, amassing gigaquads of written references & hard evidence in the process.

The Theist, on the other hand, remains complacent, relying on the 'evidence' of a single story book.

FourPart;1494093 wrote: The Atheist keeps looking, learning more the process, amassing gigaquads of written references & hard evidence in the process.

The Theist, on the other hand, remains complacent, relying on the 'evidence' of a single story book.


As a Theist, I kinda resent that remark.

Not all who believe in God are so simple-minded.

FourPart;1494093 wrote: The Atheist keeps looking, learning more the process, amassing gigaquads of written references & hard evidence in the process.

The Theist, on the other hand, remains complacent, relying on the 'evidence' of a single story book.


Once in this thread in 2013, I decided to list the current evidence I had about God being real; my answer is recorded on page 113;

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... l-113.html

The list is now much longer, but I still kind of enjoy reading my old answer.

Mickiel;1494096 wrote: Once in this thread in 2013, I decided to list the current evidence I had about God being real; my answer is recorded on page 113;

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... l-113.html

The list is now much longer, but I still kind of enjoy reading my old answer.
I don't see why. There's no evidence submitted there to prove the existence of a God whatsoever. It's basically a list of things that exist that have no relationship to a God. The fact that they exist is not evidence as you seem to be taking their very existence as being proof of a God because you are taking it as an unfounded assumption that God brought them into existence. The fact that something exists is not evidence of the cause of its existence.

FourPart;1494119 wrote: I don't see why. There's no evidence submitted there to prove the existence of a God whatsoever. It's basically a list of things that exist that have no relationship to a God. The fact that they exist is not evidence as you seem to be taking their very existence as being proof of a God because you are taking it as an unfounded assumption that God brought them into existence. The fact that something exists is not evidence of the cause of its existence.




I see why, it was an excellent list, I have been asked by others to use it many times. A stunning list of answers, it was before its time, and will surface in the future. I can sense it already.

And sometimes that is how we have to consider God; use your senses; sense him.

Use common sense when you look at the wonders of the world.

In this case it's not senses - it's imagination. In other words, use your imagination - Imagine him, for that's all it is - Imagination.

FourPart;1494121 wrote: In this case it's not senses - it's imagination. In other words, use your imagination - Imagine him, for that's all it is - Imagination.




I agree completely with the use of imagination when we consider God.

Mickiel;1494135 wrote: I agree completely with the use of imagination when we consider God.


In fact I think its impossible to consider God without using your imagination; because God is beyond our intelligence , he is beyond our accumulated knowledge, he is more than what we are conscious of ; we need the ability of our imagination to go beyond to help enlist the powers it takes to rightly divide the truth God is.

I don't think imagination needs to be subtracted from a search for this kind of truth.

The question "does God exist? " is meaningless . First of all, define God . Different people have different conceptions of what a deity might or might not be .

Many Christians, particularly in America, believe in an imaginary bronze age Semitic sky God described in the Old Testament . One who demands constant praise and worship and who supposedly hates gay people. And who says that eating pork and shellfish is an "abomination ".

This imaginary being wants anyone who works on the Sabbath to be put to death, as well as rebellious children, adulterers, gay people etc .

According to him, you must never wear clothing with more than one fabric on it , and you must not plant more than one crop at a time in a filed .

No rational, thinking person can believe in this primitive imaginary deity . Possibly there is some kind of deity , but this one is purely imaginary .

superhorn;1496261 wrote:

Possibly there is some kind of deity , but this one is purely imaginary .


If s/he's real then s/he's a real prick. But s/he loves you.

I always find it somewhat contrary that such a disproportionately high number of Gays follow a Religion that is so vehemently homophobic.

Fuzzy;1496270 wrote: If s/he's real then s/he's a real prick. But s/he loves you.




I figure God must be loving and forgiving, because he allows so many human pricks to insult him, without squashing them like bugs.

Mickiel;1496296 wrote: I figure God must be loving and forgiving, because he allows so many human pricks to insult him, without squashing them like bugs.


I'm certainly not going to be a hypocrite because the bastard might be able to squash me like a bug.

Are you kidding? Loving and forgiving? Apparently he once killed the whole population apart from one family and a few animals. If that is what you call a loving and forgiving god then there must be something wrong with my understanding.

Fuzzy;1496304 wrote: I'm certainly not going to be a hypocrite because the bastard might be able to squash me like a bug.

Are you kidding? Loving and forgiving? Apparently he once killed the whole population apart from one family and a few animals. If that is what you call a loving and forgiving god then there must be something wrong with my understanding.


I think its something wrong with how you get your rocks off; you get off on calling a being insulting names that you feel does not exist. Mental insititutions are full of people who do as such.

Mickiel;1496310 wrote: Mental insititutions are full of people who do as such.


True - they're called Churches.

FourPart;1496319 wrote: True - they're called Churches.




Churches have done more for the world than Atheist have.

Now, prove that is wrong.

This I got to see.

Mickiel;1496323 wrote: Churches have done more for the world than Atheist have.

Now, prove that is wrong.

This I got to see.


You have a point. It has been the cause of practically every war throughout history, and every war has result in massive advances in technology & medicine. Therefore, I suppose that by the barbarity of millenia in the name of a loving God that some good has come of it.

FourPart;1496325 wrote: You have a point. It has been the cause of practically every war throughout history, and every war has result in massive advances in technology & medicine. Therefore, I suppose that by the barbarity of millenia in the name of a loving God that some good has come of it.




My goodness, will wonders never cease; a ray of light gets through the wall.

Mickiel;1496330 wrote: My goodness, will wonders never cease; a ray of light gets through the wall.
The point being, of course, that it was Religion that caused the slaughter.

Mickiel;1496310 wrote: you get off on calling a being insulting names that you feel does not exist.


The cosmic bastard is not a being. According to the bible he is the worst murdering dictator ever. He hides from us whilst demanding we worship and believe in him. Otherwise he'll send us down to hell for eternal torture. But he loves us? I'll have nothing to do with a 'being' like that.

Of course I could pretend to believe in the weirdo, but then again he's meant to be able to read our minds. So, what's the point?

Fuzzy;1496340 wrote: The cosmic bastard is not a being. According to the bible he is the worst murdering dictator ever. He hides from us whilst demanding we worship and believe in him. Otherwise he'll send us down to hell for eternal torture. But he loves us? I'll have nothing to do with a 'being' like that.

Of course I could pretend to believe in the weirdo, but then again he's meant to be able to read our minds. So, what's the point?




Religion spreads lies about God, they have suckered you into telling lies about him, but they have gone further with their deception of you; you do their work, and add insults to injury, which makes you a religious assassin. A worker elf, a Trojan horse placed on the inside of Atheism, and imploding; all the while, your anger hides these things from you. You are not true Atheist, as long as you call God insulting names, you admit that he exist. Because you give him a personage in your perverted vocabulary.

Mickiel;1496341 wrote: Religion spreads lies about God, they have suckered you into telling lies about him, but they have gone further with their deception of you; you do their work, and add insults to injury, which makes you a religious assassin. A worker elf, a Trojan horse placed on the inside of Atheism, and imploding; all the while, your anger hides these things from you. You are not true Atheist, as long as you call God insulting names, you admit that he exist. Because you give him a personage in your perverted vocabulary.


So, what's your point?

Fuzzy;1496349 wrote: So, what's your point?


If you don't know my point from that, then its best that you don't know.

Theists, or more to the point, Creationists, are, by nature, incapable of compiling a structured argument of their own. Everything they stand for is in their one & only story book. Nothing else exists. If it isn't in that book, it's not true, or doesn't rely exist. It's an ostrich mentality. Close your eyes and it'll all go away. La-la-la-la - I can't hear you...

This is where I don't even include him as a "Theist". There are many Scientists who are also Theists. However, true Scientists also accept the evidence before them & face it with a Realist view. Most Theists only accept the story of the Creation as a metaphor & not as a reality. It doesn't stop them from believing in a God in whatever form it may take for them, though. There is far more evidence out there supporting Scientific explanations to explain the origins of the Universe & life in general than there is in the Bible. Science says, "This is the evidence. It looks like this is what really happened, and this is how it happened & why it happened". Later, more evidence turns up which supports that theory. The Bible, on the other hand, simply says "This happened because the Bible says so". That is nothing to do with being Theist or Atheist. It is to do with being Rational & a Realist.

Here's 150 scientist who were creationist;



Lists of creationist scientists - RationalWiki

Not as metaphor, but as reality.

I grow weary of modern day Atheist, they are no challenge at all. I miss the old school Atheist, but see they don't bother posting on the internet, they see it for what it really is, a waste of time.

I wish I could draw one of them out, then we would really have a substance school.

Mickiel;1496399 wrote: Here's 150 scientist who were creationist;



Lists of creationist scientists - RationalWiki

Not as metaphor, but as reality.
I must say I found that link highly amusing. Did you actually read it - or more to the point, did you actually read any of the sub-links? Such as the link to CMI (Creation Ministries International - RationalWiki), for instance, including such paragraphs as this:

Much like AiG, CMI is an ardent promoter of young Earth creationist claptrap. However, CMI attempts to take a rather more "scholarly" tone than does AiG, if that term can possibly be applied to any creationist organization; it uses the presuppositionalist style of argument, which along with the scholarly veneer may help to explain why CMI doesn't have its own ignorance museum, complete with saddled Triceratops.


Then there was the AiG one (Answers in Genesis - RationalWiki)...

In 1993, after 7 years in the US working with the Institute for Creation Research, former Australian high-school teacher Ken Ham decided to start a creation science ministry similar to the Creation Science Foundation (now Creation Ministries International) he had founded back in Australia, because he felt that the ICR were too "intellectual" and what was needed was a more layman's approach to teaching creation science. Also, he wanted to sell his magazines, but the ICR would not help him.

The first snag in the road is that in the US a foundation has to give away money, so he called it the Creation Science Ministries. The second snag was he had no money. According to CMI they gave significant financial support to Ham to start his new US ministry,[4] while AiG say they needed no such thing and had plenty of money thank you.[5] In 1995, both of Ham's ministries changed their names to become Answers in Genesis-US and Answers in Genesis-Australia. For many years they were pretty much the same organisation even generating a common Statement of Faith that was supposed to bind the two.

I like this one too; see if you can find the weak links in this one;



Science Confirms the Bible - RationalWiki

Most of them are self evident by observation, and of no real consequence. Yes, the evidence is there. Yes, theories have been formed, and further evidence has supported those theories. That much is accepted Science. That much is valid in all time periods & by all cultures around the world & makes no difference to whether the person is a Theist or not as it is not evidence of the existence of a deity. It is just observed evidence of what it is.

As for the "Creation made of invisible elements (Hebrews 11:3)" one, however, I would still question the validity of that one as being interpretive, considering that the 'Elements' at the time were considered to be Fire, Earth, Air & Water.

The Bible also makes repeated references to the Sun revolving around the Earth (as well as obeying a command for the Sun & Moon to stop still) - very Scientific:

(Joshua 10:12-13)

Then spoke Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord gave the Amorites over to the men of Israel; and he said in the sight of Israel, "Sun, stand thou still at Gibeon, and thou Moon in the valley of Aijalon." And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stayed in the midst of heaven, and did not hasten to go down for about a whole day.

(Ecclesiastes 1:5)

The sun rises and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises.

(1 Chronicles 16:30)

Tremble before him, all earth; yea, the world stands firm, never to be moved.

(Psalms 93:1)

The Lord reigns; he is robbed in majesty; the lord is robbed, he is girded with strength. Yea, the world is established; it shall never be moved.

(Psalms 96:10)

Say among the nations, "The Lord reigns! Yea, the world is established, it shall never be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity."

Also, you will find that the idea of the Science of the time ever believing in a flat earth, is actually a modern day myth.

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

we should perhaps look at all of the contradictions in the Bible. They cannot be reconciled in any way. For instance how did Judas die. The Bible is not a history book it is a religious book. There is some history there but not a great deal. History and archaeology simply do no support the historical accuracy of the Bible.

I think the bible was written for everybody, but its just not " For" everyone at this time, or any other time in human history. That may sound like contradiction, ; in example, water should be for everyone to drink, but there are some people who just do not like it. You can't explain to them the benefits of water, because they have rejected it.

I view spirituality in that same manner, we all have it inside of us, but we all evaluate just what it is differently. God is there in each of us, but how we determine what God is is different. Boldly different.

All of my brothers and sisters in my family are different, but we all share common views as to how our mother was in life. And we each have things in common with our mother.

We all came from God, but we just don't act like we do. And our views of God are just all wacked up.

Its all just fracked up man.

God as a reality is simply impossible to define or conceive of. Human language is not up to the task.

Ted;1496968 wrote: God as a reality is simply impossible to define or conceive of. Human language is not up to the task.


You got that right!

God as a concept I accept to be real.

God as a reality I do not.

Thats ok as we must each follow our own path.

Ted;1497084 wrote: Thats ok as we must each follow our own path.


I'm fine with that as well, so long as someone else's path isn't thrust upon my own.

One of the reasons why I accept the concept of a creator , is the availability of water in the universe. Earth was just very well suited for life to exist. Water all over the planet ; obvious design and intent. Obvious to me.

Proof positive there is no god - I pray to die yet I am still here.

FourPart;1497345 wrote: Proof positive there is no god - I pray to die yet I am still here.


Fail. God traditionally gives you what you need, rather than what you want. And of course, should he exist, it is his decision on what you need that counts, not yours.

I just eamyt o fin d my rope

FourPart;1497350 wrote: I just eamyt o fin d my rope


Well, that is where most of us find God.

FourPart;1497345 wrote: Proof positive there is no god - I pray to die yet I am still here.


Why would you need to ask God to do something that you could do yourself?

I would hope that you truly do not want to die ,but I suspect your post is a smoke screen.

I do not believe that God intervenes in our daily lives. We are not puppets and God isn't pulling the strings.

Ted;1497414 wrote: I do not believe that God intervenes in our daily lives. We are not puppets and God isn't pulling the strings.


I think he pulls them when he wants to.

Is God real? Well is he real in your consciousness , the mind within your mind. Does it appeal to you? Does the thought of it never leave you? From the time I was born , all that I have been exposed to tends to build up my belief , I have not, in 61 years, experienced any information that has subtracted from my belief. I have become "More" conscious of a God existing , not less conscious. That growth, that building experience , that adding has been sufficient for me to continue my belief. Its a relatively easy thing to do.

For me God is an experiential reality. I do not believe God intervenes in human affairs. God is the great mystery behind all of creation. No human language exists with which to define God or explain Her/Him/It. The more I study and take courses at VST the less I believe in a theistic God. I accept the panentheistic God.