Scientific proof that God exists?

[the joint]

Seeing oneness in the words god and universe is trapping me?

Is this still the joint from a couple years ago?

If you hold awareness and are able to conclude that you exist, you can also conclude that the universe exists.  If you can conclude through your awareness of your existence that the universe exists, you can conclude that the universe is aware.

Is god not an omnipresent form of consciousness?  Ie, the aware universe your awareness concluded to exist?

I've gotten progressively less heady with my philosophy. It's not so much that I believe anything different, but rather that the approach that I used to take (much more similar to yours) left me feeling frustrated, and I never made much progress with anyone.  Usually, the only people I impressed were those who wouldn't be able to tell the difference between fact and fantasy anyway, or women who swoon for heady guys, and I can tell you they weren't listening to me because of my wisdom.

I used to think that just by preaching about philosophy and meditation and truth with a (sometimes conscious, sometimes unconscious) tone of subtle arrogance that people would go, "Wow! You really know something I don't! Teach me!"  Well, it didn't.  My intentions were mostly good, though of course there was some desire to seek recognition for my efforts of learning and practice.  I genuinely wanted others to benefit from what I knew.  Edit: I still act this way from time to time, as evidenced by my posts here.

Then I realized after a few years that not only was I not getting anywhere with people, but I was deluding myself into thinking that what I was doing was actually useful.  Perhaps at times it was as I believe my style of presenting information appeals to a certain type of person, but I realized that there were a lot more productive ways that I could be spending my time, facilitating good and spreading good vibes.

People just don't typically get good vibes from people who keep spouting the same thing like a broken record, no matter how true or important it might be.  Find another method.  Yours isn't working.  

[1715580027]

1715580027

[1715580027]

1715580027

[the joint]

Seeing oneness in the words god and universe is trapping me?

Is this still the joint from a couple years ago?

If you hold awareness and are able to conclude that you exist, you can also conclude that the universe exists.  If you can conclude through your awareness of your existence that the universe exists, you can conclude that the universe is aware.

Is god not an omnipresent form of consciousness?  Ie, the aware universe your awareness concluded to exist?

Dank, you might find this useful reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_paralysis

Analysis paralysis or paralysis of analysis is an anti-pattern, the state of over-analyzing (or over-thinking) a situation so that a decision or action is never taken, in effect paralyzing the outcome. A decision can be treated as over-complicated, with too many detailed options, so that a choice is never made, rather than try something and change if a major problem arises. A person might be seeking the optimal or "perfect" solution upfront, and fear making any decision which could lead to erroneous results, when on the way to a better solution.

The phrase describes a situation where the opportunity cost of decision analysis exceeds the benefits that could be gained by enacting some decision, or an informal or non-deterministic situation where the sheer quantity of analysis overwhelms the decision-making process itself, thus preventing a decision. The phrase applies to any situation where analysis may be applied to help make a decision and may be a dysfunctional element of organizational behavior. This is often phrased as paralysis by analysis, in contrast to extinct by instinct (making a fatal decision based on hasty judgment or a gut-reaction).

[Billbags]

I posted the link to Steven Hawkins 2 hour tv special on this subject earlier in the thread.

Here are some thoughts by Nick Szabo:

http://szabo.best.vwh.net/tradition.html

[BADecker]

I posted the link to Steven Hawkins 2 hour tv special on this subject earlier in the thread.

Here are some thoughts by Nick Szabo:

http://szabo.best.vwh.net/tradition.html

As always, when talking about complex subjects, all kinds of assumptions are made. They are often automatically injected, and the listener (reader), because he is focused on some major point, often misses some little assumption that can have a tremendous impact on the whole.

For example, from the above, linked, Nick Szabo article:

As Dawkins has observed, death is vastly more probable than life. Cultural parts randomly thrown together, or thrown together by some computationally shallow line of reasoning, most likely result in a big mess rather than well functioning relationships between people. The cultural beliefs which give rise to civilization are, like the genes which specify an organism, a highly improbable structure, surrounded in "meme space" primarily by structures which are far more dysfunctional. Most small deviations, and practically all "radical" deviations, result in the equivalent of death for the organism: a mass breakdown of civilization which can include genocide, mass poverty, starvation, plagues, and, perhaps most commonly and importantly, highly unsatisying, painful, or self-destructive individual life choices.

Look at the assumption in the first line of the quote. What is really meant by it? Does the rest of the paragraph really explain it?

Consider. Death is NOT more probable than life, because without life, there would be no death, right? I mean, something that is dead, must have been alive at some time. Otherwise it is simply an inanimate object, right?

So far in the existence that is around us, we haven't found anything that is alive, and will be alive forever. At least not that we know of. So, someone might think that life and death could be equally probable. However, here is where life is more probable than death. There exist MANY, MANY living things that have not yet died. And until they ALL die, we cannot be secure in the knowledge that they absolutely WILL die.

Personally, I do not follow Dawkins. But if he truly thinks that death is more probable than life, he is not thinking clearly. At the very least, he is not expressing himself clearly. Death is absolutely not more probable than life. Death is not even the opposite of life. In fact, life and death have nothing to do with each other except that, without life there cannot be death.



EDIT: If you read the article in its entirety, you will be able to find many places where something is inserted that is not explained. It isn't just once or twice. It is throughout the article. Such insertions may sound right and proper. Yet, because there often isn't any explanation of them at all, and because most of the time they could be explained in many different ways, the interpretation of them is left to individual readers who may have many different ideas about what is being expressed.

The point? The whole article is virtually meaningless. One might have as relevantly said, "Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, etc.," and let it go at that.

[S.Boxx]

@ BADecker

Please don't take this wrong, but you are abusing personal boundaries by trying to push your personal beliefs on other people. I am not a doctor, but you seem to be displaying many symptoms of schizophrenia. I am not trying to joke or ridicule you, but do you hear voices in your head? Maybe Jesus or God may be helping you out a little. I am concerned that you may need a good mental health evaluation. Please don't get so upset if the whole world doesn't believe in a magical man that lives in the clouds. You can't let yourself get so upset because people won't do what you want them to. I'm talking about acceptance. You have to accept every person, place, thing or situation for what it is. You are not the director of the play. If you seek true love and peace in your life, acceptance is the answer.

Thanks, S.Boxx

[BADecker]

@ BADecker

Please don't take this wrong, but you are abusing personal boundaries by trying to push your personal beliefs on other people. I am not a doctor, but you seem to be displaying many symptoms of schizophrenia. I am not trying to joke or ridicule you, but do you hear voices in your head? Maybe Jesus or God may be helping you out a little. I am concerned that you may need a good mental health evaluation. Please don't get so upset if the whole world doesn't believe in a magical man that lives in the clouds. You can't let yourself get so upset because people won't do what you want them to. I'm talking about acceptance. You have to accept every person, place, thing or situation for what it is. You are not the director of the play. If you seek true love and peace in your life, acceptance is the answer.

Thanks, S.Boxx

Thanks, Boxx, for your kind words, for your trust in what I have been saying and the way I say it, and for your concern about my mental health. I would have responded like this sooner, but weekends are so hectic most of the time.

As can be readily seen in this forum, people often discuss many topics. People often have many opinions. Sometimes they back their opinions up. Sometimes they don't. So, I want to thank you again, that you think my points are real-world relevant enough that you might want to stop me from expressing them. I don't know why you would want to do this. Perhaps it is that people really don't want to hear something that makes sense, right? The fact that people go to all kinds of goofy sci-fi movies - or watch them on TV - suggests that they might not want the truth, right?

I know not everybody believes in some "magical man that lives in the clouds." Yet quite a few in this forum want to believe in magical scientists that spout all kinds of things as truth that are not... at least by any real evidence that they have to back it up.

Take evolution, for example. The commenter called the joint wants to twist the ideas of evolution into something that isn't commonly understood among folks, just to hide some of the truths about how foolish of an idea evolution is. I mean, who has a time viewer that can take a peek back to see what really happened. Nobody! And when you are dealing with something as complex as the formation of life and species, there's simply no way of outguessing what really happened. Yet that is what modern evolution promoters seem to be trying to do. Just look at all the textbooks that suggest over many pages that evolution is a fact, even though they formally mention in an obscure line or two that it isn't known to be fact for sure.

And look at my comment above yours - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg9625147#msg9625147. Some joker by the name of Nick Szabo is credited with reaffirming some statement by another joker named Richard Dawkins, that death is more probable than life. How silly. Everybody knows that you can't have death except that you have life first. And everybody can see that there are gigantic numbers of living things that are alive, that haven't died yet.

Do people really want to believe death is more probable than life, when they can see all the living things around them that have not, yet, died? How foolish. Can't folks see that death only exists among the things that were living and are not living any more? This makes death and life probability equal among dead things. Life is way more probable because there is so much more of it that death hasn't, yet, affected. What's with the head games? Are they really trying to suggest that life and death have something to do with probability, when we all can see that death only follows in things that are living?

Your little comment about me has me a little worried about YOU. Come on down off your fictional delusions. Wake up and smell the coffee. Of course, if "they" are paying you to test me, I can understand. A person's got to earn a living. In that case, I welcome all the comments about me you want to make. We wouldn't want you to starve, now, would we?

[BitChick]

This is a great question. One responds with the truth by stating facts.

All I ever wanted was for you to back up your claim that the Bible is an impossible book. Actually, what you were really trying to claim is that "the Bible is the only written word of God". I had asked you to back that up!

When BADecker refused, that is when I went on the prowl, chased him, and took him down, along with his dogma.

I hope you're not implying that you're the one responding with truth.  You aren't.  Your threads intentionally avoid logic, and you make no indication that you want to learn why your arguments carry absolutely no weight.

All of your posts in this entire thread could have been summed up as "I believe in the Bible, no matter what" and it would carry just as much weight as everything else you've said.   Actually, it would carry *more* weight because it would be one of the only factual things that you've stated.

Now, children. I know it hurts a little when you find out that there isn't much (if any) substance to the things that you believe. But YOU ARE ALIVE! You have the opportunity to shake your childishness off, and to move ahead in the direction of REAL TRUTH.

Don't fail me now. I have pointed you in the direction where you can find TRUE life, and love, and fulfillment. Grab hold of the things I have shown you. Run with them. LIVE!

There were those in this forum who told me it was useless to try to save you. Others suggested that I was only casting my pearls before the swine. But rather than simply accept their words, I pressed on, in the hopes that I could somehow show some of you the way. And I have succeeded with some.

Don't fail yourselves, now... now that you are so close to finding out the truths of the Bible. Jesus would love to have you with Him in His kingdom. Throw off the foolishness of your childish ways, and grow up into eternal life!

I was one of the people that said we need to be careful not to "cast our pearls before swine" as the Bible warns.

I guess it just comes down to having wisdom to know when our words are really not going to bear any fruit or be profitable.  It isn't that I give up hope. I don't want to ever give up hope: to do so would mean that I have lost a heart of compassion.  But there comes a time when I wonder if saying nothing at all is the wiser way to go.  Perhaps the "soil" is hard and the seeds would just bounce off and not take root.  These are the times to just pray.  Nothing I say will make a difference and in fact, can just add fuel to the fire.  Many like to take things I say and twist them.  But that becomes a question of discernment in each case.  Also, I could just give up too easily and I need to work on that.

All that said, I just returned from an absolutely amazing and life changing trip to India.  I spent two weeks working with an organization, Harvestindia.org and I left with a renewed joy of the amazing things that God is doing and His love for those that are less privileged than most people here on this forum perhaps.  It isn't that God doesn't love those that are rich or have "much" but it seems that with money, power, education comes pride and self satisfaction and no need for God.  If there was a place to "cast my pearls" where they were received with joy and celebration it was in India.  I literally had women dancing for joy in my arms.  I had a vision of Jesus dancing with them as well.  I had the opportunity to feed, hug and pray for people suffering with leprosy and provide medical care and food for them and had a small glimpse of how Jesus must have felt as he was here.  It is no wonder His heart broke for them and they were more receptive to His gift of "eternal life" than those that had all their earthly needs met.  But our lives on this earth are fleeting and it takes wisdom to think beyond the short years we are given at this time.  

But press on in your good works  BADecker (and strive to speak the truth in love)  Perhaps the seeds will take root at some point.

[BADecker]

This is a great question. One responds with the truth by stating facts.

All I ever wanted was for you to back up your claim that the Bible is an impossible book. Actually, what you were really trying to claim is that "the Bible is the only written word of God". I had asked you to back that up!

When BADecker refused, that is when I went on the prowl, chased him, and took him down, along with his dogma.

I hope you're not implying that you're the one responding with truth.  You aren't.  Your threads intentionally avoid logic, and you make no indication that you want to learn why your arguments carry absolutely no weight.

All of your posts in this entire thread could have been summed up as "I believe in the Bible, no matter what" and it would carry just as much weight as everything else you've said.   Actually, it would carry *more* weight because it would be one of the only factual things that you've stated.

Now, children. I know it hurts a little when you find out that there isn't much (if any) substance to the things that you believe. But YOU ARE ALIVE! You have the opportunity to shake your childishness off, and to move ahead in the direction of REAL TRUTH.

Don't fail me now. I have pointed you in the direction where you can find TRUE life, and love, and fulfillment. Grab hold of the things I have shown you. Run with them. LIVE!

There were those in this forum who told me it was useless to try to save you. Others suggested that I was only casting my pearls before the swine. But rather than simply accept their words, I pressed on, in the hopes that I could somehow show some of you the way. And I have succeeded with some.

Don't fail yourselves, now... now that you are so close to finding out the truths of the Bible. Jesus would love to have you with Him in His kingdom. Throw off the foolishness of your childish ways, and grow up into eternal life!

I was one of the people that said we need to be careful not to "cast our pearls before swine" as the Bible warns.

I guess it just comes down to having wisdom to know when our words are really not going to bear any fruit or be profitable.  It isn't that I give up hope. I don't want to ever give up hope: to do so would mean that I have lost a heart of compassion.  But there comes a time when I wonder if saying nothing at all is the wiser way to go.  Perhaps the "soil" is hard and the seeds would just bounce off and not take root.  These are the times to just pray.  Nothing I say will make a difference and in fact, can just add fuel to the fire.  Many like to take things I say and twist them.  But that becomes a question of discernment in each case.  Also, I could just give up too easily and I need to work on that.

All that said, I just returned from an absolutely amazing and life changing trip to India.  I spent two weeks working with an organization, Harvestindia.org and I left with a renewed joy of the amazing things that God is doing and His love for those that are less privileged than most people here on this forum perhaps.  It isn't that God doesn't love those that are rich or have "much" but it seems that with money, power, education comes pride and self satisfaction and no need for God.  If there was a place to "cast my pearls" where they were received with joy and celebration it was in India.  I literally had women dancing for joy in my arms.  I had a vision of Jesus dancing with them as well.  I had the opportunity to feed, hug and pray for people suffering with leprosy and provide medical care and food for them and had a small glimpse of how Jesus must have felt as he was here.  It is no wonder His heart broke for them and they were more receptive to His gift of "eternal life" than those that had all their earthly needs met.  But our lives on this earth are fleeting and it takes wisdom to think beyond the short years we are given at this time.  

But press on in your good works  BADecker (and strive to speak the truth in love)  Perhaps the seeds will take root at some point.

Thanks for your encouragement, BitChick. So far, in this forum, it is really fun to be able to show people the truth. They are basically nice people. Just look at the things S.Boxx has to say. His (her?) encouragement and concern are wonderful, even if he/she is a little backward in the way he says it.

I am happy for your successes in India. I haven't had the opportunity to do something like that... travel with an outreach or medical group. Maybe I simply haven't made my opportunity.

Lots of churches say that you can't receive Jesus without hearing God's Word. Personally, I am coming to believe more and more that it is in the heart through nature that you first hear Jesus... not the Bible. What I mean is this.

If God hadn't held back the destruction when Adam and Eve ate the fruit, everything would have collapsed back then.
We don't know what it would have been like to have children in a sinless state, because it never happened.
Even though little children and fetuses have sin in them (they are physically flawed in their DNA), it is the power of Jesus that they are living in from their start.
In other words, all people hear Jesus throughout their fetal life, and for the first few years as children, even though they are gradually being corrupted by sin, and the hearing is becoming dull.
The point is that ALL hear Jesus, not only those to whom the Bible is read (although most reject who have not heard the Bible because they haven't received the confirmation of God working through His Word, and they have become deaf to their original fetus and little-child training from nature).

I know that I have opened up a lot of folks in this forum to alternative ideas. It's evident from the way some of them pick on me. Oh well. They are the ones that have to live with themselves.

Thanks, again. And blessings on YOUR work.

[the joint]

Thanks for your encouragement, BitChick. So far, in this forum, it is really fun to be able to show people the truth. They are basically nice people. Just look at the things S.Boxx has to say. His (her?) encouragement and concern are wonderful, even if he/she is a little backward in the way he says it.

I am happy for your successes in India. I haven't had the opportunity to do something like that... travel with an outreach or medical group. Maybe I simply haven't made my opportunity.

Lots of churches say that you can't receive Jesus without hearing God's Word. Personally, I am coming to believe more and more that it is in the heart through nature that you first hear Jesus... not the Bible. What I mean is this.

If God hadn't held back the destruction when Adam and Eve ate the fruit, everything would have collapsed back then.
We don't know what it would have been like to have children in a sinless state, because it never happened.
Even though little children and fetuses have sin in them (they are physically flawed in their DNA), it is the power of Jesus that they are living in from their start.
In other words, all people hear Jesus throughout their fetal life, and for the first few years as children, even though they are gradually being corrupted by sin, and the hearing is becoming dull.
The point is that ALL hear Jesus, not only those to whom the Bible is read (although most reject who have not heard the Bible because they haven't received the confirmation of God working through His Word, and they have become deaf to their original fetus and little-child training from nature).

I know that I have opened up a lot of folks in this forum to alternative ideas. It's evident from the way some of them pick on me. Oh well. They are the ones that have to live with themselves.

Thanks, again. And blessings on YOUR work.

Oh God.

So far, in this forum, it is really fun to be able to show people the truth.

You realize it's a contradiction to have faith in something and then claim something is 100% true, right?   If you have faith in something, that specifically means that you aren't (and can't be) 100% certain that it's the truth.

Epic fail.

You and I both know that the primary reason why you spread the "truth" is because you're seeking recognition for something.  The truth is just never as fun, interesting, or beneficial unless someone else believes the same things that you do, am I right?  This is a rhetorical question.  But actually, you basically confirm this yourself when you then say:

Just look at the things S.Boxx has to say. His (her?) encouragement and concern are wonderful, even if he/she is a little backward in the way he says it.

You don't care one bit whether people know the "truth" about anything.  You're interested in reactions.

Maybe I simply haven't made my opportunity.

God probably doesn't want someone running around preaching a bunch of nonsense all over the world  

I know that I have opened up a lot of folks in this forum to alternative ideas. It's evident from the way some of them pick on me. Oh well. They are the ones that have to live with themselves.

You have a really hard time understanding the difference between correlation and causality.  We're not picking on you because you have exposed us to alternative ideas, we're picking on you because you're proud to be wrong about things and proud to be a complete asshole to others because they don't believe the absurd things that  you do.  

But yes, your ideas are very "alternative"...like if there was an "alternative" reality with an "alternative" form of logic that is mutually exclusive from our own.

[BADecker]

Thanks for your encouragement, BitChick. So far, in this forum, it is really fun to be able to show people the truth. They are basically nice people. Just look at the things S.Boxx has to say. His (her?) encouragement and concern are wonderful, even if he/she is a little backward in the way he says it.

I am happy for your successes in India. I haven't had the opportunity to do something like that... travel with an outreach or medical group. Maybe I simply haven't made my opportunity.

Lots of churches say that you can't receive Jesus without hearing God's Word. Personally, I am coming to believe more and more that it is in the heart through nature that you first hear Jesus... not the Bible. What I mean is this.

If God hadn't held back the destruction when Adam and Eve ate the fruit, everything would have collapsed back then.
We don't know what it would have been like to have children in a sinless state, because it never happened.
Even though little children and fetuses have sin in them (they are physically flawed in their DNA), it is the power of Jesus that they are living in from their start.
In other words, all people hear Jesus throughout their fetal life, and for the first few years as children, even though they are gradually being corrupted by sin, and the hearing is becoming dull.
The point is that ALL hear Jesus, not only those to whom the Bible is read (although most reject who have not heard the Bible because they haven't received the confirmation of God working through His Word, and they have become deaf to their original fetus and little-child training from nature).

I know that I have opened up a lot of folks in this forum to alternative ideas. It's evident from the way some of them pick on me. Oh well. They are the ones that have to live with themselves.

Thanks, again. And blessings on YOUR work.

Oh God.

I know, I know. I should have PMed her. Sorry about that.

So far, in this forum, it is really fun to be able to show people the truth.

You realize it's a contradiction to have faith in something and then claim something is 100% true, right?   If you have faith in something, that specifically means that you aren't (and can't be) 100% certain that it's the truth.

Epic fail.

You and I both know that the primary reason why you spread the "truth" is because you're seeking recognition for something.  The truth is just never as fun, interesting, or beneficial unless someone else believes the same things that you do, am I right?  This is a rhetorical question.  But actually, you basically confirm this yourself when you then say:

Having 100% faith is different. So is knowing something for a 100% fact. One hundred percent faith is blind faith. One hundred percent fact is no faith at all.

The reason that God gave us the Bible is that most people can't live on 100% faith. Life is based on cause and effect, at least the way we perceive it. Simply living throws us out of faith some, and into looking for facts to back things up. If we were required to have blind faith in God, we would all fail.

Nobody knows anything as 100% fact. Sometimes we think we do. But we take even the most factual things in life on faith at least a tiny bit. In many of my previous posts in this thread, I have pointed out why evidence for God is way stronger than evidence for there not being any God. So, what's the big deal about 100% true (fact)? Our knowledge of such doesn't exist.

One of the primary reasons that anyone spreads his truth is as you say. We'd have a lot of lonely evolution scientists out there if they couldn't spread their "truth" to other lonely evolution scientists.

Just look at the things S.Boxx has to say. His (her?) encouragement and concern are wonderful, even if he/she is a little backward in the way he says it.

You don't care one bit whether people know the "truth" about anything.  You're interested in reactions.

While I am interested in reactions, I am also interested in people knowing the truth. Part of the way to get people to know truth is getting them to react and respond on something.

Consider kids in school. School isn't very interesting when all the professor does is profess. There needs to be interaction, often so that the professor can learn exactly which area of his expertise people need to know about more so that they get a better picture of the truth.

Maybe I simply haven't made my opportunity.

God probably doesn't want someone running around preaching a bunch of nonsense all over the world  

That's probably a very big truth. God doesn't want people preaching a bunch of nonsense around the world. That's why I and a few others sit tight and study... just so that there are a few of us that know the bottom-line truth.

I know that I have opened up a lot of folks in this forum to alternative ideas. It's evident from the way some of them pick on me. Oh well. They are the ones that have to live with themselves.

You have a really hard time understanding the difference between correlation and causality.  We're not picking on you because you have exposed us to alternative ideas, we're picking on you because you're proud to be wrong about things and proud to be a complete asshole to others because they don't believe the absurd things that  you do.  

And you have a really hard time understanding that the real reason people pick on my responses and myself is, that they don't really have any logical responses for my arguments.

It hurts to be wrong, and to know that someone has showed you up. And it hurts even more to know you are wrong, but to NOT know WHY you are wrong... to feel like you have had your very base ripped out from under you. And that's the exact thing I have done to the atheists in this forum who have thoroughly read my comments here.

What else can they do than to fight back any way they know how? After all, they don't have any God who teaches them any morals (they think). So they are allowed to make their own morals, or to have none, if they so desire. So, they act like the beasts, and fight back, rather than to simply lick their wounds, and try to remain friendly.

A few of them like S.Boxx remain cordial, maybe even friendly.

But yes, your ideas are very "alternative"...like if there was an "alternative" reality with an "alternative" form of logic that is mutually exclusive from our own.

It's kind of sad to see how many people accept the alternative ideas of things like evolution, big bang, and atheism... ideas which are alternative to the truth.

[BitChick]

And you have a really hard time understanding that the real reason people pick on my responses and myself is, that they don't really have any logical responses for my arguments.

It hurts to be wrong, and to know that someone has showed you up. And it hurts even more to know you are wrong, but to NOT know WHY you are wrong... to feel like you have had your very base ripped out from under you. And that's the exact thing I have done to the atheists in this forum who have thoroughly read my comments here.

What else can they do than to fight back any way they know how? After all, they don't have any God who teaches them any morals (they think). So they are allowed to make their own morals, or to have none, if they so desire. So, they act like the beasts, and fight back, rather than to simply lick their wounds, and try to remain friendly.

A few of them like S.Boxx remain cordial, maybe even friendly.

But yes, your ideas are very "alternative"...like if there was an "alternative" reality with an "alternative" form of logic that is mutually exclusive from our own.

It's kind of sad to see how many people accept the alternative ideas of things like evolution, big bang, and atheism... ideas which are alternative to the truth.

I am going to disagree with you here BADecker.  I think that many, if not most, people are very sure of their ideas and believe that they are correct in their thinking and they are confident that they are NOT wrong and are fairly sure that we are the ones that are fully misguided.  They are content with their level of morality and gauge themselves on a standard in which they compare themselves to others around them.  In a way they believe that morality is graded on a curve.  As long as there are some that are worse (which of course there usually is) then are in a good place and could even rationalize that if there is an afterlife they should be granted admission.  However, some of us have come to the realization that when looking at God's standards, no one on earth is "good enough."  Seeing ourselves for who and what we really are in light of God's perfection and complete holiness becomes the integral part of a person realizing that they are indeed in need of help.  Why some realize it more than others is the question.  The Bible even says that it is the "sick that need a doctor" and "those that are forgiven of much love much."  To grasp that we have not measured up to God's standards and we have all broken one of His laws (who has not lied for instance) become the measuring stick in which we need to look at our lives and realize that all of us need help and need to repent, instead of doing a simple comparison.  To compare ourselves to others really isn't the way to justify ourselves.  I think in a way it is those that feel completely ashamed and unworthy of God's grace are the ones that He reaches down to with love and forgiveness just for the humility in which they come to Him.  

This is why I think it becomes futile to even have these discussions.  Most of the people on this forum are not the "sick" and do not think that they have any need of forgiveness.  Of course we all need forgiveness and no one is "good enough" but if someone thinks that they are good enough it will take something to convince them otherwise and unfortunately I feel that nothing I can say on here will really do that.  

[cooldgamer]

So much BS in this I couldn't help but make a giant response

Having 100% faith is different. So is knowing something for a 100% fact. One hundred percent faith is blind faith. One hundred percent fact is no faith at all.

The reason that God gave us the Bible is that most people can't live on 100% faith. Life is based on cause and effect, at least the way we perceive it. Simply living throws us out of faith some, and into looking for facts to back things up. If we were required to have blind faith in God, we would all fail.

You still have blind faith in the bible, there is absolutely no way to know the accuracy of what was written.  Every religion has a holy book, what makes yours valid and theirs not?

Nobody knows anything as 100% fact. Sometimes we think we do. But we take even the most factual things in life on faith at least a tiny bit. In many of my previous posts in this thread, I have pointed out why evidence for God is way stronger than evidence for there not being any God. So, what's the big deal about 100% true (fact)? Our knowledge of such doesn't exist.

Actually, there are many things we know as 100% fact.  We know we're not going to go floating away because of gravity, we know that cause has effect, we know that mass x velocity = force, etc...  If we didn't know anything for sure the computer you're typing on right now wouldn't exist

One of the primary reasons that anyone spreads his truth is as you say. We'd have a lot of lonely evolution scientists out there if they couldn't spread their "truth" to other lonely evolution scientists.

Actually they spread it because we're trying to evolve as a species and understand our universe better, unlike religious people trying to stay in the dark ages.  Everything we have found so far points to evolution, and nothing towards the christian idea of intelligent design.

While I am interested in reactions, I am also interested in people knowing the truth. Part of the way to get people to know truth is getting them to react and respond on something.

Consider kids in school. School isn't very interesting when all the professor does is profess. There needs to be interaction, often so that the professor can learn exactly which area of his expertise people need to know about more so that they get a better picture of the truth.


That's probably a very big truth. God doesn't want people preaching a bunch of nonsense around the world. That's why I and a few others sit tight and study... just so that there are a few of us that know the bottom-line truth.

No, there's so few of you that are stupid enough to believe in a book of fairy tales that contradicts everything we have observed

And you have a really hard time understanding that the real reason people pick on my responses and myself is, that they don't really have any logical responses for my arguments.

It hurts to be wrong, and to know that someone has showed you up. And it hurts even more to know you are wrong, but to NOT know WHY you are wrong... to feel like you have had your very base ripped out from under you. And that's the exact thing I have done to the atheists in this forum who have thoroughly read my comments here.

Oh man, this is rich.  You have /no/ logic whatsoever, every post you make is full of fallacies, false information, and straight up ignoring facts.  I've read through all of your comments, and they're moronic.  There is nothing convincing in them, nothing that hasn't already been debunked, and the majority of it was just preaching about your sky-daddy.

What else can they do than to fight back any way they know how? After all, they don't have any God who teaches them any morals (they think). So they are allowed to make their own morals, or to have none, if they so desire. So, they act like the beasts, and fight back, rather than to simply lick their wounds, and try to remain friendly.

I love how you're pretty much admitting here that without your holy book you would probably act like a beast.  We have morals because we're decent human beings, because of societal rules, and because jail sucks.

A few of them like S.Boxx remain cordial, maybe even friendly.


It's kind of sad to see how many people accept the alternative ideas of things like evolution, big bang, and atheism... ideas which are alternative to the truth.

These ideas are not alternative to the truth, yours are.  There is no evidence whatsoever for your beliefs and a ton for ours.  

[BADecker]

So much BS in this I couldn't help but make a giant response

Having 100% faith is different. So is knowing something for a 100% fact. One hundred percent faith is blind faith. One hundred percent fact is no faith at all.

The reason that God gave us the Bible is that most people can't live on 100% faith. Life is based on cause and effect, at least the way we perceive it. Simply living throws us out of faith some, and into looking for facts to back things up. If we were required to have blind faith in God, we would all fail.

You still have blind faith in the bible, there is absolutely no way to know the accuracy of what was written.  Every religion has a holy book, what makes yours valid and theirs not?

Nobody knows anything as 100% fact. Sometimes we think we do. But we take even the most factual things in life on faith at least a tiny bit. In many of my previous posts in this thread, I have pointed out why evidence for God is way stronger than evidence for there not being any God. So, what's the big deal about 100% true (fact)? Our knowledge of such doesn't exist.

Actually, there are many things we know as 100% fact.  We know we're not going to go floating away because of gravity, we know that cause has effect, we know that mass x velocity = force, etc...  If we didn't know anything for sure the computer you're typing on right now wouldn't exist

One of the primary reasons that anyone spreads his truth is as you say. We'd have a lot of lonely evolution scientists out there if they couldn't spread their "truth" to other lonely evolution scientists.

Actually they spread it because we're trying to evolve as a species and understand our universe better, unlike religious people trying to stay in the dark ages.  Everything we have found so far points to evolution, and nothing towards the christian idea of intelligent design.

While I am interested in reactions, I am also interested in people knowing the truth. Part of the way to get people to know truth is getting them to react and respond on something.

Consider kids in school. School isn't very interesting when all the professor does is profess. There needs to be interaction, often so that the professor can learn exactly which area of his expertise people need to know about more so that they get a better picture of the truth.


That's probably a very big truth. God doesn't want people preaching a bunch of nonsense around the world. That's why I and a few others sit tight and study... just so that there are a few of us that know the bottom-line truth.

No, there's so few of you that are stupid enough to believe in a book of fairy tales that contradicts everything we have observed

And you have a really hard time understanding that the real reason people pick on my responses and myself is, that they don't really have any logical responses for my arguments.

It hurts to be wrong, and to know that someone has showed you up. And it hurts even more to know you are wrong, but to NOT know WHY you are wrong... to feel like you have had your very base ripped out from under you. And that's the exact thing I have done to the atheists in this forum who have thoroughly read my comments here.

Oh man, this is rich.  You have /no/ logic whatsoever, every post you make is full of fallacies, false information, and straight up ignoring facts.  I've read through all of your comments, and they're moronic.  There is nothing convincing in them, nothing that hasn't already been debunked, and the majority of it was just preaching about your sky-daddy.

What else can they do than to fight back any way they know how? After all, they don't have any God who teaches them any morals (they think). So they are allowed to make their own morals, or to have none, if they so desire. So, they act like the beasts, and fight back, rather than to simply lick their wounds, and try to remain friendly.

I love how you're pretty much admitting here that without your holy book you would probably act like a beast.  We have morals because we're decent human beings, because of societal rules, and because jail sucks.

A few of them like S.Boxx remain cordial, maybe even friendly.


It's kind of sad to see how many people accept the alternative ideas of things like evolution, big bang, and atheism... ideas which are alternative to the truth.

These ideas are not alternative to the truth, yours are.  There is no evidence whatsoever for your beliefs and a ton for ours.  

Actually, you do quite well for someone who obviously doesn't have the ability to analyze evidence, and come to a conclusion that approximates reality.

[BitChick]

Cooldgamer,

I know your comments are directed to BADecker, but if you don't mind I will share a few thoughts. (And if you do mind you can just ingore me. )

Blind faith?  I guess you can can see it that way.  What is really strange, and even supernatural if you will, is that the Bible says that God will "Open the eyes of the blind."  In a way a person cannot see things spiritually until this happens.  Many people have said that the Bible made no sense to them until they accepted Christ and then it was like they could "see" things that they never saw before.  There have been times in my life where I have "seen" sins that a person is struggling with with the sole purpose of just praying for that person.  I have "seen" visions.  I have "seen"  several people that I recognized were demon possessed just by feeling their presence in the room and then looked that direction and saw that they "saw" me too!  A bit creepy but at the same time it just proved to me that I can "see" things in a spiritual way that many cannot.  The Bible is even said to be "foolish" to those that do not have the eyes to see.  Instead of judging others for not seeing I should be saying that I would not expect anything less.

There are some things in science that are 100% fact.  Evolution has not been proven as 100% fact.  It is taught that way now.  This is a huge problem with the scientific community today.

It is hard for me to grasp how something as complex as a human cell could be thought to happen by chance and knowing the complexity of even a single celled organisms structure and ability to work could have just happened from nothing.  The odds of even a single cell evolving are beyond belief and could even be said to be mathematically impossible. Order does not come from chaos.  This is impossible and has not been observed.  It seems that the desire to prove evolution no matter what the evidence shows has blinded most from what I can see.  

Morality should not be based solely on societal norms.  Throughout history there have been things that society says is "OK" that changes based on whatever the culture decides is good or bad (for instance, right now our culture is fine with abortion and under God's law that is murder for example)  God has given us His laws and these laws are the standards in which we should judge ourselves by.  If we have even broken one of His commandments then we are held guilty under those laws and will need to pay the price for breaking those laws.  The penalty is eternal punishment.  However, God out of His great love and mercy has given us the option of repenting and He even paid the price for our sins (Jesus' death on a cross then resurrection) if we are willing to accept that free gift.  However, many do not even think that they need a savior.  

I guess the thing that I would mention, in regards to your point that the Bible is not true or it is just our "truth" is the question of why are so many people hostile to it?  If it wasn't so revolutionary why is it still banned in so many places?  Why has the Bible changed people's lives so much?  Why have people been willing to give up their lives for the "truth" in it, especially if it was not important?  Sure there are other religions that people give their lives for willingly, however, the one thing that separates Christianity from all other religions is that Christianity is the only religion that is not about earning our way to God.  In fact, it is all about realizing that there is no possible way to earn salvation at all.  It is about realizing that we are in need of help.  It takes humility and an open heart that prays and ask God to forgive us and "open our eyes" if you will to see things from God's perspective.  Then God, out of His great love, comes in and helps us to see not only ourselves, but others in a different way.  He helps us to love ourselves and others. He helps us to forgive, have joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, self-control.  He give us the gift of His Spirit in our hearts and then we are able to do good things because of His love, not because we are trying to "earn" our salvation but because we are so thankful for what He has done for us.  

[BADecker]

Oh, BitChick. You have such a nice way of saying things. You always remind us that we need not take the burden of the world on our shoulders, but that God has already done that through Jesus, His Son, our Savior.

Thanks.

[(oYo)]

I'm going to keep this as short as possible.

I've come to the realization that I am not an atheist. I am actually antitheist, since I am repulsed by the thought of there being a god character responsible for bringing things like suffering, horror and despair into existence. A god capable of creating any existence could have created it to be perfect or 'heavenly' in the first place. Therefore I find the god character loathsome and despicable.

Even the (agnostic) uncertainty of god's existence and intentions is in and of itself taxing, like a form of cancer. This is why people of faith believe without question. Yet a god wanting to have a relationship with its creation obviously wouldn't be so ambiguous.

So you see, the idea of there being no god is by far more preferable to me than the idea of there being one, since if there is one I could not despise it more.

Have a nice day. 

[BADecker]

I'm going to keep this as short as possible.

I've come to the realization that I am not an atheist. I am actually antitheist, since I am repulsed by the thought of there being a god character responsible for bringing things like suffering, horror and despair into existence. A god capable of creating any existence could have created it to be perfect or 'heavenly' in the first place. Therefore I find the god character loathsome and despicable.

Even the (agnostic) uncertainty of god's existence and intentions is in and of itself taxing, like a form of cancer. This is why people of faith believe without question. Yet a god wanting to have a relationship with its creation obviously wouldn't be so ambiguous.

So you see, the idea of there being no god is by far more preferable to me than the idea of there being one, since if there is one I could not despise it more.

Have a nice day.  

God didn't do that.

God was so loving that He gave to many kinds of creatures life, and He gave to the angels and to people part of the greatness that He is. He gave us freedom.

God told us how to act - one simple rule in the Garden - don't eat the one kind of fruit. We listened to the devil - a formerly good angel who corrupted himself - and caused our own destruction by eating the fruit.

Now, God provides almost the only method possible to exist for saving us - His Son, Jesus - and so many of us still think God is bad, that God creates the evil, that God wants to harm us.

Please, for your own good, stop rejecting the only salvation that there is. Turn to God for the help He so willingly offers. God is not against you. God is in your favor, trying to help you. But you simply won't let Him.

[BitChick]

I'm going to keep this as short as possible.

I've come to the realization that I am not an atheist. I am actually antitheist, since I am repulsed by the thought of there being a god character responsible for bringing things like suffering, horror and despair into existence. A god capable of creating any existence could have created it to be perfect or 'heavenly' in the first place. Therefore I find the god character loathsome and despicable.

Even the (agnostic) uncertainty of god's existence and intentions is in and of itself taxing, like a form of cancer. This is why people of faith believe without question. Yet a god wanting to have a relationship with its creation obviously wouldn't be so ambiguous.

So you see, the idea of there being no god is by far more preferable to me than the idea of there being one, since if there is one I could not despise it more.

Have a nice day.  

This is an age old question.  How could a loving God allow suffering?  

It is a valid question and one that many people, myself included, have had to wrestle with.  There is of course the question of God giving us "free will" which allows us to make choices.  We can choose to do good and love others or we can choose to sin and harm others.  We live in a "fallen" world where sin is around us all of the time and we have these choices to make on a daily basis.  Sure, God could just hit the "smite button" from heaven and kill us all when we sin.  There would be no one left on earth if that happened.

But from God's love for us comes a great opportunity.  We have the chance to extend love and forgiveness to others.  We have a chance to repent of our mistakes.  We have to realize that God is not in heaven looking down in a cruel way and laughing at our suffering.  He chose to become one of us.  He came to earth as a baby and even suffered greatly and was killed, as an innocent man on the cross, in one of the cruelest and most painful deaths a human could endure.  Why? Because He wanted to show us that He loved us that much.  Did He have to do that for us?  Instead of being grateful for that, instead we yell at Him.  We throw our fists in the air and say, "if there is a god I could not despise it more."  If a friend was willing to give up his life for you so that you could be saved from suffering is this the way to treat him?  In the same way this is how we are treating Jesus when we do this to Him.  

I for one am forever grateful that God out of His great love for us, chose to come and live with us to understand our pain and suffering and then gave His life for mine.  

[(oYo)]

God told us how to act - one simple rule in the Garden - don't eat the one kind of fruit. We listened to the devil - a formerly good angel who corrupted himself - and caused our own destruction by eating the fruit.

Why would god create something (the fruit of knowledge) only to deny us it? Why would god create an angel only to cast it into hell? This is insane, at the very least sadistic.

This is an age old question.  How could a loving God allow suffering?  

There is of course the question of God giving us "free will" which allows us to make choices.  

I knew this would be the argument. Being an all powerful omnipotent being, god can grant 'free will' without pain and suffering.

Let me just say, if I were god I would not need to test you. I would not create things to torture them or even leave them in uncertainty. (I could write a book on this, but I'd rather not.)

<edit> Ok for the sake of argument here's one example of god creating something specifically for pain and suffering.

Why is there a need for such excruciating pain?
"In the Schmidt sting pain index, a 0 is given to a sting from an insect that can not break through human skin, a 2 is given for intermediate pain, and a 4 is given for intense pain. Tarantula hawks, have a sting rating of 4. The sting is described as "blinding, fierce, and shockingly electric. A running hair dryer has been dropped into your bubble bath." Only the sting of the Bullet Ant is ranked higher, with a 4+ rating."

Why is there a need for such suffering?
"As the larva feeds on its host, it saves the vital organs, such as the heart and central nervous system, for last. By waiting until the final larval instar, it ensures the spider will not decompose before the larva has fully developed."

[BitChick]

God told us how to act - one simple rule in the Garden - don't eat the one kind of fruit. We listened to the devil - a formerly good angel who corrupted himself - and caused our own destruction by eating the fruit.

Why would god create something (the fruit of knowledge) only to deny us it? Why would god create an angel only to cast it into hell? This is insane, at the very least sadistic.

This is an age old question.  How could a loving God allow suffering?  

There is of course the question of God giving us "free will" which allows us to make choices.  

I knew this would be the argument. Being an all powerful omnipotent being, god can grant 'free will' without pain and suffering.

Let me just say, if I were god I would not need to test you. I would not create things to torture them or even leave them in uncertainty. (I could write a book on this, but I'd rather not.)

<edit> Ok for the sake of argument here's one example of god creating something specifically for pain and suffering.

Why is there a need for such excruciating pain?
"In the Schmidt sting pain index, a 0 is given to a sting from an insect that can not break through human skin, a 2 is given for intermediate pain, and a 4 is given for intense pain. Tarantula hawks, have a sting rating of 4. The sting is described as "blinding, fierce, and shockingly electric. A running hair dryer has been dropped into your bubble bath." Only the sting of the Bullet Ant is ranked higher, with a 4+ rating."

Why is there a need for such suffering?
"As the larva feeds on its host, it saves the vital organs, such as the heart and central nervous system, for last. By waiting until the final larval instar, it ensures the spider will not decompose before the larva has fully developed."

Of course I am not a fan of pain and suffering either, who is really?  But my question then is why would God then choose to suffer with us?  He did not have to do that either.  It becomes more a question of trusting Him in spite of the pain and suffering we are enduring during our short time here on earth and allowing Him to use that pain.  Diamonds can't shine unless they have been polished.  Flowers can't grow unless they have had rain.  We all have long roads and long journeys in our lives but God can help us see that there can be treasures hidden in the painful things we go through, if we just let him use those things!  I like to say that the greatest treasure in my life came through pain and suffering,  the pain and suffering Jesus endured on the cross for me.
 
Also, there is something miraculous in how God is able to use our suffering for good.  In fact, He even promises to "work out all things for the good of those called according to His purpose."  Regardless of how much I dislike pain and suffering, I trust that God has a plan and He does promise that He will wipe "all tears from our eyes" someday.