Are all discussions of God speculative nonsense?

[birch]

don't play stupid. all this about spreading the love is what you need to tell theists. the issue is often about their religious insistence of what god is which tends to be very concrete. no one said that god was love here. again, that is a 'spiritual' decision to embrace that as being important or wisest and to spread it. to attribute that to a higher power or force, is up to the individual.

the issue that is raised and argued by theists and atheists alike is the existence of an actual entity called god. no one knows what that is or if it exists. it's a faith as well as what one thinks god is or what attributes or values they subscribe to.

 

[kx000]

don't play stupid. all this about spreading the love is what you need to tell theists. the issue is often about their religious insistence of what god is which tends to be very concrete. no one said that god was love here. again, that is a 'spiritual' decision to embrace that as being important or wisest and to spread it. to attribute that to a higher power or force, is up to the individual.

the issue that is raised and argued by theists and atheists alike is the existence of an actual entity called god. no one knows what that is or if it exists. it's a faith as well as what one thinks god is or what attributes or values they subscribe to.

My point is the only way to know of God is to see God, but as no one has ever seen him or ever will the best you can do is just keep the faith, and spread the love. Just live your life. We don't need to know everything.

 

[kx000]

Yes, it is all speculative non sense.

 

[arfa brane]

My point is the only way to know of God is to see God, but as no one has ever seen him or ever will the best you can do is just keep the faith

I speculate that this is incorrect.
That means I also speculate that it isn't true that no-one has seen God.

What does it mean to "see" God, anyway? Is it something to do with your eyes or something to do with your visual system--i.e. the stuff inside your head?
Can you hear God as well? Is it true that no-one has ever heard God, or false? What does God sound like? Is there more to it than seeing or hearing, and do either of these mean "with your eyes or ears"?

Or is that like saying you can only see with your eyes--you have no imagination, you don't have dreams, hell, you can't "picture" anything unless you have a diagram, and then how do you draw one? Would you need to wait until God draws the diagram and leaves it lying around?

 

[kx000]

God can't show himself because if he were known to exist, like proof and everything everyone would be trying to get into Heaven even the people who truly don't belong there.

 

[NMSquirrel]

God can't show himself because if he were known to exist, like proof and everything everyone would be trying to get into Heaven even the people who truly don't belong there.

i would argue God can't prove himself..
he shows himself all the time, but most who don't believe attribute it to something else..(luck,karma,chance, etc)

 

[gmilam]

i would argue God can't prove himself..
he shows himself all the time, but most who don't believe attribute it to something else..(luck,karma,chance, etc)

And how do you distinguish between luck and divine intervention?

Many years ago I was talking to my boss when a co-woker walked up and shot him. Some of the shots missed me by inches.

Was it luck? If not, why wasn't god looking out for my boss?

Yes, I know - there's some things we're just not meant to understand... like luck.

 

[NMSquirrel]

And how do you distinguish between luck and divine intervention?

faith.
anything else would be science..

Yes, I know - there's some things we're just not meant to understand... like luck.

i believe (don't know,would have to ask a linguistics expert) that the word 'luck' comes from the word Lucifer.(as in Satan)

 

[birch]

i would argue God can't prove himself..
he shows himself all the time, but most who don't believe attribute it to something else..(luck,karma,chance, etc)

no, you are confused. this is the problem with most theists as they can't get past their own mental bubble. it's your 'belief' that it is a 'god'. that is how you reason your experiences and the world around you.

just like how you think concepts such as chance, luck, karma etc are due to a god, another may reason that these things are what you attribute to a god. they may just see this as the forces of nature; good, bad and indifferent.

 

[birch]

God can't show himself because if he were known to exist, like proof and everything everyone would be trying to get into Heaven even the people who truly don't belong there.

this is really weird. you say this like it's a fact. you don't know that. basically, you just made it up or thought of a possible excuse.

 

[SciWriter]

this is really weird. you say this like it's a fact. you don't know that. basically, you just made it up or thought of a possible excuse.

They are so far gone that they just roll merrily along making stuff up routinely.

 

[birch]

i tend to think that the idea that a singular god is responsible for all that occurs to be rather slim. this is because there are too many contradictory values that people gravitate to. it would be more likely that there are 'various' elements and forces in play.

when a baby gets raped, a theist may reason that it was in god's plan or that it was the 'devil'. then there is the issue of how a god that is all powerful and the creator has a problem handling something he created, aka the devil or why he gives him that continued power or allows it. we all know where all this leads with one contrived excuse or rationale after another.

so, when people say they see 'god' everywhere, it really usually means they are being selective about what they are viewing as god or with rose-colored glasses.

what's important is just that, focusing on what we do know and that is we're all in this together. we all want to survive, we all want to be safe, we all want to be loved or at least respected etc. no matter what abberant or evil exists within us as well as in others as well as the precariousness and indifference of the outside physical world, we know that love or caring is very important to our survival and well-being.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Greatest I am,

The only problem I see in a fully secularized world is that by enhancing the individual freedoms that we all enjoy, we have to give up some of our collective dignity.

I do not know of any way around it though.

The only freedom we have is to make the choice, but if the book
1984 is anything to go by, we won't even have that as technology marches on.

The moment we make the decision, we enter into a contract which we are bound by.

Again though, unless the freedoms of others is to be discriminated against for no good reason, that is the best that I can envisage.

I think you've raised a good point of discussion, what is freedom, and what does it mean to be free.
I asked you if ou believe in the trancendance of the soul, but you didn't respond to that part.
I asked because in these type of discussions, that is the only point that matters. If we ignore it, then we limit ourselves to these temporary vessels (bodies) and then all discussions about God ARE speculative, and run the high risk of being nonsense.

Religions cannot get rid of the poor or slavery in their demographic pyramid.

No, but they can keep the idea (at least) of God in our minds, and as long as
we have that there is always the hope of freedom. You can't control a free person.

Democracy cannot get rid of poverty or slaves either, although we have more politically correct names for them. Perhaps this is the limit of dignity we can build into our systems.

Do you seriously think that the powers that run this world couldn't get rid of
of poverty? Slavery is a different thing.


jan.

 

[arfa brane]

God can't show himself because if he were known to exist, like proof and everything everyone would be trying to get into Heaven even the people who truly don't belong there.

"God can't draw us a diagram" huh?

How is it that you're sure God can't show "himself"? Would that mean, since you're sure, that even if you could see God you wouldn't acknowledge what you were seeing?

i tend to think that the idea that a singular god is responsible for all that occurs to be rather slim.

Me too. I tend to think that if there is a God, responsibility, being a human concept, just doesn't apply. God is not "responsible" because God doesn't really "do" anything, except exist. We're the ones who do things, including making ourselves aware of God.

 

[Jan Ardena]

birch,

i tend to think that the idea that a singular god is responsible for all that occurs to be rather slim. this is because there are too many contradictory values that people gravitate to. it would be more likely that there are 'various' elements and forces in play.

Everything you just said is unrelated.

when a baby gets raped, a theist may reason that it was in god's plan or that it was the 'devil'.

Don't categorise these ''reasonings'' as theistic. A theist is not bound to think
that. Theists and atheists alike, are just people who ultimately are shaped by their experience. In a discussion, or debatse we may conclude something by looking at all the angles through our spectacles, and conclude what we see. But that isn't real life, and the chances are real experience would lead to different conclusions.

then there is the issue of how a god that is all powerful and the creator has a problem handling something he created, aka the devil or why he gives him that continued power or allows it. we all know where all this leads with one contrived excuse or rationale after another.

It's a problem to those of us who choose to see it that way. So the question is why do we see it that way. People who are ultra sensative to the rays of the sun, may ask the same question; why did the all powerful creator make the sun.

so, when people say they see 'god' everywhere, it really usually means they are being selective about what they are viewing as god or with rose-colored glasses.

Maybe, and, maybe not, so really you're just guessing, even hoping.

what's important is just that, focusing on what we do know and that is we're all in this together. we all want to survive, we all want to be safe, we all want to be loved or at least respected etc. no matter what abberant or evil exists within us as well as in others as well as the precariousness and indifference of the outside physical world, we know that love or caring is very important to our survival and well-being.

I agree, that is important. But on what scale do you suggest we focus on.
Eventually everyone dies individually, individuals get scared, greedy, hateful, and so on. Nothing remains the same.
The only thing that remains change-less, is God.


jan.

 

[Greatest I am]

Simply, you are all non sense in this..

When someone raise a thread trying to proove that God don't exist, he thinks everyone else (who try to proove the contrary) are non sense, and not really trying try to see what they are saying or what they mean, or try to think like they do..
Same thing when someone who beleive in God is trying to proove the existence of God to an atheist..most of you here, don't try to think, how the other think, i did try to think like atheist do in the matter of the existence of God, and didnt work for me, it wasnt convincing for me, I'm still a beleiver, and very sure about that, no doubts..

Simply, discussing the existence of God here, is an empty circle, leads to nowhere, no results at all, since when you start that, as usualy, many people go to the side way, wich is, known to everyone, using offences, irony, and also criticizing (sorry if it is wrong spelled) the person they are discussing with, or try to controll the path of the discussion, instead of concentrating on one point, wich effcorse one point leads to another..

But in a thread about a topic, "the existence of God", that shouldn't include relegions, but what is wanted discuss about..

Yet I am not an atheist and can easily think like a theist and still find that Christians cannot make a case for their God unless one is ready to ignore logic and reason and believe in fantasy, miracles and magic.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

My point is the only way to know of God is to see God, but as no one has ever seen him or ever will the best you can do is just keep the faith, and spread the love. Just live your life. We don't need to know everything.

The thing is though that the Bible God spread his love all over the earth in Noah's day. Unfortunately for man, he expressed that love with water and drowned damned near the whole earth and murdered many.

Take his love and -------
Noah, if cut from the same cloth as Jesus, would have told God and his ship building to-------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPrSVkTRb24

Regards
DL

 

[Shadow1]

God is what we beleive, is who started the univerce, created the univerce, the big bang didnt happen on it's own, God started it, and God created the laws of physics and time and etc.. so the univerce and life continue according to that, and as many atheist beleive evolution is random, and many creationist beleive evolution don't exist, I say it damn exist, and there's a hundred proof of that, even in relegion, but I'm not saying it's random, it's just us who don't understand it, but it work according to laws, that God created, and God leads it.
Since God created time, and since time is something relative too, you don't apply time on God, also we don't even know all what's in our own univerce, and only 4% of the universe consist of matter.

Besides, how can a big bang, creat all that on it's own, I mean, there was no laws at the point before the big bang (or I think there was, or else how would the previous univerce before the bigbang stay together, or even explode, or do any thing) so how did those laws formed? like time maybe? atoms cannot exist randomny without laws, so there must been there laws in the previous universe (the pre big bang universe) that can keep the atoms together and in one piece, well, and let's say laws didnt change and restarted, that leads that before this universe, there was another one, in another form, so the previous one, must have had some different laws, because of the different form.
Let's suppose it had the same laws, that may mean that the universe have a cycle, expand, then shrink to become a point, then explode, and expand again, and etc... But where's the starting point? and how can this cycle, be formed randomly, and during each cycle, laws "change" maybe? well, we have to keep in mind that there are other universe, that are like, bubbles of unvierses floating around somewhere, in, external space?

Well, my point is, there must be a starting point somewhere, and laws that appear, apparently not random laws, but, why wan't laws, just pop out randomy, just like the evolutionists' evolution ? that should be more realistic to that, I mean, the universe started as a coincidence? the laws have to start as a coincidence too, and random, also change all the time, inless all the laws are tide up together, one controll the other, and become extremly cooherant...

Btw, by God I don't mean Jesus christ, or any other human or even "aliens" or the "fother" of a human (wich that will make God a human too or something..), and God is beyong our univerce laws, and beyond the laws of time, sicne God created time.

Beleiving in God, doesnt come against scientific theories on how the univerce started or how life started, you can say evolution exist, etc... God created laws in this universe to let things work (like an automatic system) same for nature balence, but God still let things going and etc... that doesnt come against trying to find out how did life started and how did the universe started, God told us to search and look to find out how did life started (and etc...)

 

[Shadow1]

I can't sayhow God "look like" or etc.. since we can't even imagine something that is beyong what we saw or very far from it, God is beyong our understanding.
Besides, it's so prmitive to think of God as lion with two horns and a snake as a tale ... or as a shape we imagine...

 

[Greatest I am]

Greatest I am,

I asked you if ou believe in the trancendance of the soul, but you didn't respond to that part.

I did indirectly but yes, without defining it exactly, our essence, which is what I think you call a soul, does live on. All of us join the cosmic consciousness. In this, we have no choice. It is our next evolutionary step.

No, but they can keep the idea (at least) of God in our minds, and as long as
we have that there is always the hope of freedom. You can't control a free person.

Yes and no.

Yes. He can be asked or convinced to give it up. Or by force.

No. Not if he does not want to for whatever reason.

Do you seriously think that the powers that run this world couldn't get rid of
of poverty? Slavery is a different thing.


jan.

Both could be controlled if the powers that be decided en masse to do so.
The people would of course have to cooperate to some extent by will or by force.

Changing the socio-economic demographic pyramid is all that is required.
Simple. Except that the hard part, developing the political and social will is hard.
The more population control, in terms of numbers, the less poor would be those who are at the bottom of the demographic common.

Slavery would actually be easier. We presently give lip service to slaves in terms of making it illegal but I think that making slavery legal would be the way to go as then we could give them the same benefits under the law as we give all other workers.
The U S did this, in a fashion, by making laws for the protection of indentured workers.

Regards
DL