Atheist Realism?

[ronan]

If I need to learn gibberish, and lunacy, I will join the school of Ronan.
But has of now, I am very happy with reality, thanks anyway.
just remember to stay off the drugs.

Maybe you should try some drugs, it will probably helps you, did you already tried thinking and self-observation ?

There is no school, learning is a drug that you can try of your own.

 

[audible]

Maybe you should try some drugs,

Don't drink don't smoke and I don't take drugs.

it will probably helps you, did you already tried thinking and self-observation ?

Oh yes! but I would need a major trauma or blow to the head, to think you are right.

There is no school,

Isn't there, I thought you were the principal of the gibberish university.

learning is a drug that you can try of your own.

perhaps it is, but what your teaching is gibberish and not worth learning, it's that simply.

 

[ronan]

Don't drink don't smoke and I don't take drugs. Oh yes! but I would need a major trauma or blow to the head, to think you are right.Isn't there, I thought you were the principal of the gibberish university.perhaps it is, but what your teaching is gibberish and not worth learning, it's that simply.

It is because you are form some school

 

[Old man]

Well i can't speak for anyone else, but not believing in god qualifies me as an athiest. i think organisms are equipped with the ability to experience sensations and lead meaningful lives,...

A few observations if I may. If an organism, be it amoeba or man, comes into existence accidentally through some blind process, lives its life, then departs into nothingness, then it can have no meaning. If man is only a genetic accident then there can be no ultimate authority. The will of the strongest prevails. In such a system the correct procedure would be to claw your way as close to the top of the food chain as you can get without regard for anyone else because all other people are as meaningless as yourself. And in such a system what is the basis for laws against, say, murder? In a meaningless universe the individuals within it are meaningless as well, so what does it matter if you off a few of them if they get in your way?

I've heard some religious people saying 'isn't it worth the risk of getting into heaven? why don't u just come to church?'.

Being religious is not to be confused with having saving faith. One does not go to church "to avoid risk" because those who belong to God are no longer at risk. Church is supposed to be a place to hear the truths of God, though many churches haven't the least idea what they are talking about.

I don't like God's abandoning of everyone to hell, for the sake of them choosing their own life, when he was the one who gave them free will. its like pulling a trigger then not taking responsibility for the bullet. What right does lucifer have to torment our eternal souls? why has god given him such power? what crime deserves eternal damnation?

Here I will give a nut-shell answer because there is a lot more to it.

First, God does not abandon men to hell. Men consign themselves to hell by refusing to recognize His Son. The Bible is crystal clear about this. "No one comes to the Father but by means of Me (Jesus)". And it is equally clear that men have all the evidence they need right in front of their eyes (Romans) , but they will not have it. And yes, we have free will, but only up to the point where that will conflicts with the will of God. The problem is that man's will is so utterly corrupt by virtue of Adam's sin that despite the bountiful proofs of God men remain blind, slaves to their fallen natures.

The correct question is not "why does God allow some men to perish eternally?", but "Why does He save any at all?". As a race we have rebelled against Him in all things. We scorn His commandments, we pay not the slightest heed to His Word. He owes us nothing. But by His very nature God is merciful. For no other reason than that it pleases Him to do so He calls and redeems a people for Himself. The Bible is also clear about that. "By grace you are saved through faith, and that (the faith) (is) not of yourself. It is the gift of God". God is not responsible, man is, because the thing that is created answers to the creator not the other way around.

Lucifer himself, being a created fallen being, will be in the lake of fire, but not in charge. And you ask "what crime deserves eternal damnation?" The answer is really quite simple. God's standard is perfection. Nothing short of perfection will do. The first time a man transgresses the least of God's laws the game is over because you can not be better than perfect to make up for it. It is all or nothing. And that is why we so desperately need an atonement; someone who does meet God's perfect standard, to stand in our place to receive the judgment that rightly falls on us. In the absence of an atonement our debt is not payable, therefor eternal. But keep in mind that there is but one sin that God will not forgive, and that is the failure to recognize His Son. That, and that alone, is the "sin which is unto death".

just wanting to point out athiests don't really have gatherings, scriptures etc. yet we're seen as the opposite side to religion, and as such have to compete with your collection of works, clergy etc.. i'm not trying to make a point of my athiesm, i just think religion is a crock of shit. am currently studying religion at uni, so call my opinion foolish but not uneducated.

Studying Religion is not the same as studying Theology. The two are only tenuously related. Religion is an invention of man. Theology is the study of God. If one only studies man's invention, religion, then one has small hope of uncovering much useful knowledge of God.

 

[Simon Anders]

The correct question is not "why does God allow some men to perish eternally?", but "Why does He save any at all?".

First it would not be some men, but most men alive now and most men who have died. Women also.

As a race we have rebelled against Him in all things. We scorn His commandments, we pay not the slightest heed to His Word. He owes us nothing.

Owing us nothing has very little to do with creating things and then torturing them for all time.

You have come up with a bit of mental sleight of hand that makes you feel ok about what would have to be a very cruel God. But anyone with a working mind or, more importantly a loving heart will hear your explanation for the rationalization it is.

There is no excuse for torturing someone for all time.

 

[Old man]

First it would not be some men, but most men alive now and most men who have died. Women also.


Owing us nothing has very little to do with creating things and then torturing them for all time.

You have come up with a bit of mental sleight of hand that makes you feel ok about what would have to be a very cruel God. But anyone with a working mind or, more importantly a loving heart will hear your explanation for the rationalization it is.

There is no excuse for torturing someone for all time.

Thank you for illustrating my point.

 

[Simon Anders]

Thank you for illustrating my point.

See in a mature discussion you actually say what you mean. Care to elucidate? You made, in fact, many points. If you think you made only one point you need to reread you own post.

You have also not acknowledged my correction. Most people have not accepted Jesus. I am not sure why you said 'some'.

 

[Old man]

See in a mature discussion you actually say what you mean. Care to elucidate? You made, in fact, many points. If you think you made only one point you need to reread you own post.

No need to quibble, The many points are all a sub set of this one, which relates to the topic of the thread:

And it is equally clear that men have all the evidence they need right in front of their eyes (Romans) , but they will not have it."

And I get that from here:



Rom 1:16-23, For I am not ashamed of the gospel: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is revealed a righteousness of God from faith unto faith: as it is written, But the righteous shall live by faith. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hinder the truth in unrighteousness; because that which is known of God is manifest in them; for God manifested it unto them. For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse: because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. [/i/[/quote]

You have also not acknowledged my correction. Most people have not accepted Jesus. I am not sure why you said 'some'.

I was being charitable. But you are correct, most have not and will not. But a great many out of every tongue and nation will.

You said,

Owing us nothing has very little to do with creating things and then torturing them for all time.

You have come up with a bit of mental sleight of hand that makes you feel ok about what would have to be a very cruel God. But anyone with a working mind or, more importantly a loving heart will hear your explanation for the rationalization it is.

There is no excuse for torturing someone for all time.

I have come up with a bit of mental slight of hand? Hardly. We are apparently in different worlds, you and I. I gave a sound theological reason for it. Whether or not you accept it is your choice. Free will in action.

And isn't it interesting that you imply that I have neither a working mind nor a loving heart, and that explanations drawn from scripture are mere rationalizations.

The Bible is like a mirror. You may look into it and immediately forget what you see. If you will, look into this:

1 Corinthians 2:11-14, For who among men knows the things of a man, save the spirit of the man, which is in him? even so the things of God none knows, save the Spirit of God. But we received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is from God; that we might know the things that were freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Spirit teaches; combining spiritual things with spiritual words. Now the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged.

 

[Old man]

,,,

 

[Simon Anders]

I have come up with a bit of mental slight of hand? Hardly. We are apparently in different worlds, you and I. I gave a sound theological reason for it.

You quoted your Bible, written by people who were doing their best, often, but were people of their times and psychologies.

Whether or not you accept it is your choice. Free will in action.

This is stating the obvious.

And isn't it interesting that you imply that I have neither a working mind nor a loving heart, and that explanations drawn from scripture are mere rationalizations.

Primarily sad. Explanations drawn from scripture can be from loving hearts and good minds. I love the liberation theologists and what they did and tried to do in South America. It is possible. But justifying eternal torture takes self-delusion. As it did for those who wrote certain texts.

The Bible is like a mirror.

No. We are like mirrors for each other. And you reflect back to me old ideas about God that we all need to move past based on fear and confusion. The atheists reflect certain things to me and people like you reflect other things.

And all through it you get off on not being one of the damned. You might want to recheck what it is to look in the mirror.

 

[Old man]

Y I love the liberation theologists and what they did and tried to do in South America.

That figures. Liberation theology has vanishingly little to do with Christian theology. It is merely a pragmatic social movement masquerading as Christian.

It is possible. But justifying eternal torture takes self-delusion.

I didn't justify it. I explained it. But no amount of explanation can ever be sufficient to a mind that wishes to remain closed.

... you reflect back to me old ideas about God that we all need to move past based on fear and confusion.

Based on fear and confusion? If you think so then you really do not know anything useful about God. No wonder you cherish your atheism. How about giving us your take on something I said before, copied below for your convenience:

If an organism, be it amoeba or man, comes into existence accidentally through some blind process, lives its life, then departs into nothingness, then it can have no meaning. If man is only a genetic accident then there can be no ultimate authority. The will of the strongest prevails. In such a system the correct procedure would be to claw your way as close to the top of the food chain as you can get without regard for anyone else because all other people are as meaningless as yourself. And in such a system what is the basis for laws against, say, murder? In a meaningless universe the individuals within it are meaningless as well, so what does it matter if you off a few of them if they get in your way?

And all through it you get off on not being one of the damned. You might want to recheck what it is to look in the mirror.

You understand nothing, and apparently do not care to understand anything, of real Christian theology yet you have made several pronouncements concerning my integrity and motives. That isn't helpful.

 

[Simon Anders]

That figures. Liberation theology has vanishingly little to do with Christian theology. It is merely a pragmatic social movement masquerading as Christian.

Jesus was viewed the same way by the religious authorities.

I didn't justify it. I explained it. But no amount of explanation can ever be sufficient to a mind that wishes to remain closed.

Nor a heart. You consider the God you believe in to be merciful and loving. You have judged you idea of God as loving despite what you assert he does: torture people for all time.

This tells me a lot about what you approve of and most likely what you would approve of on earth with despotic regimes.

Based on fear and confusion? If you think so then you really do not know anything useful about God. No wonder you cherish your atheism.

I am not an atheist.

How about giving us your take on something I said before, copied below for your convenience:

If an organism, be it amoeba or man, comes into existence accidentally through some blind process, lives its life, then departs into nothingness, then it can have no meaning. If man is only a genetic accident then there can be no ultimate authority. The will of the strongest prevails. In such a system the correct procedure would be to claw your way as close to the top of the food chain as you can get without regard for anyone else because all other people are as meaningless as yourself. And in such a system what is the basis for laws against, say, murder? In a meaningless universe the individuals within it are meaningless as well, so what does it matter if you off a few of them if they get in your way?

I am not an atheist.

You understand nothing, and apparently do not care to understand anything, of real Christian theology yet you have made several pronouncements concerning my integrity and motives. That isn't helpful.

See you do not understand that you have judged many loving people who are not Christians and said it is alright for God to torture them for all time. It does not register in your mind that not being bothered by what you think God does is an approval for the most horrible crime imaginable. It means you think people like my father, for example, deserve to suffer for all time.

How silly, in the first place.
How judgmental of his and God's integrity, in the second place.
And how inhuman and offensive.

Your position contains such disdain for most humans and you are not even willing to admit it. Not to mention the disgusting portrait of God you refuse to let go of.

 

[Myles]

That figures. Liberation theology has vanishingly little to do with Christian theology. It is merely a pragmatic social movement masquerading as Christian.



I didn't justify it. I explained it. But no amount of explanation can ever be sufficient to a mind that wishes to remain closed.



Based on fear and confusion? If you think so then you really do not know anything useful about God. No wonder you cherish your atheism. How about giving us your take on something I said before, copied below for your convenience:

If an organism, be it amoeba or man, comes into existence accidentally through some blind process, lives its life, then departs into nothingness, then it can have no meaning. If man is only a genetic accident then there can be no ultimate authority. The will of the strongest prevails. In such a system the correct procedure would be to claw your way as close to the top of the food chain as you can get without regard for anyone else because all other people are as meaningless as yourself. And in such a system what is the basis for laws against, say, murder? In a meaningless universe the individuals within it are meaningless as well, so what does it matter if you off a few of them if they get in your way?


You understand nothing, and apparently do not care to understand anything, of real Christian theology yet you have made several pronouncements concerning my integrity and motives. That isn't helpful.

You are taking too narrow a view. You are overlooking the period between appearance and disappearance in which we can and do give meaning to our lives. We have art, literature ans so on in additrion to loving relationships with others. So we are not meaningless. We also have laws and clear definitions of crime. Murder is unacceprtable because we value human life.

Your whole attitude is negative which is why you need to invoke a god to make sense of things. You are wrong to assume that we all share your problem.

Finally, when you speak of Christian theology it is not clear what you have in mind. How many sects march under a Christian banner, each claiming to be the only one in step ?

 

[Old man]

Nor a heart. You consider the God you believe in to be merciful and loving. You have judged you idea of God as loving despite what you assert he does: torture people for all time.

I made no such assertion. I explained in some detail that men consign themselves to hell by their unbelief.

This tells me a lot about what you approve of and most likely what you would approve of on earth with despotic regimes.

It matters not in the least if I approve. I am not God, neither have I the full mind of God so as to judge Him.

I am not an atheist.

Really? You said, ".. you reflect back to me old ideas about God that we all need to move past based on fear and confusion."What god do you follow? From what you have written it looks to be the god of secularism.

See you do not understand that you have judged many loving people who are not Christians and said it is alright for God to torture them for all time.

Again, I said no such thing. Go back and read my exact words.

It does not register in your mind that not being bothered by what you think God does is an approval for the most horrible crime imaginable. It means you think people like my father, for example, deserve to suffer for all time.

How is it that you think that God is accountable to me? I told you why judgment comes, and I told you what God, the one who made you, and whose sovereign property you are, requires. Yet you continue to find fault with me because you consider that God is not worthy of your attention.

How silly, in the first place.
How judgmental of his and God's integrity, in the second place.
And how inhuman and offensive.

Your position contains such disdain for most humans and you are not even willing to admit it. Not to mention the disgusting portrait of God you refuse to let go of.

And you say you are not an atheist? I tell you the truth: you can construct a god of your own devising if you wish, which is evidently what you have done, but that god will only be a reflection of you.

 

[Old man]

You are taking too narrow a view. You are overlooking the period between appearance and disappearance in which we can and do give meaning to our lives. We have art, literature ans so on in additrion to loving relationships with others. So we are not meaningless. We also have laws and clear definitions of crime. Murder is unacceprtable because we value human life.

I have not overlooked anything. You say, "Murder is unacceptable because we value human life". How can something that is a mere accident be valuable? What is it about men that makes them more valuable than field mice? What intrinsic property of man makes "human life" valuable, apart from being made in the image of God? There isn't one.

Your whole attitude is negative which is why you need to invoke a god to make sense of things. You are wrong to assume that we all share your problem.

First, I was conversing with one man, not 'you all'. Second, I do not have a problem unless you wish to define faith as a mental illness. Do you?

Finally, when you speak of Christian theology it is not clear what you have in mind. How many sects march under a Christian banner, each claiming to be the only one in step ?

Now here you make a good point. There are myriads of divisions, and not one of them is in possession of the complete truth. There is room for disagreement on some points, but not on the points that scripture is plain on such as that salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. That will do for starters, and any church body that misses that foundational point has missed the mark completely no matter what else they might teach. Please also keep in mind that any group can appropriate the appellation "Christian" without regard to what they teach. Saving faith, the genuine article, is a gift that is bestowed by God through the Holy Spirit when, where, and to whom He pleases. It is not something that a man can just decide that he has.
There are churches that teach that salvation is up to the individual, and there are churches that teach that it is a co-operative effort between man and God. Both of those positions are, and have always been, heretical because they both deny the sovereign power of God. The only other option, and the one that scripture clearly teaches is that it is the work of God alone.

 

[Simon Anders]

I made no such assertion. I explained in some detail that men consign themselves to hell by their unbelief.

And a loving father pulls his child out of the burning oil. Period. Poor God, with his hands tied. Give me a break.

It matters not in the least if I approve. I am not God, neither have I the full mind of God so as to judge Him.

But you do approve him. You read this book and believe, yes, this is a loving God and they are getting what they deserve. God gave us our emotional reactions for a reason. God gave us feelings of sympathy for a reason. It is not God you believe in and follow.

Really? You said, ".. you reflect back to me old ideas about God that we all need to move past based on fear and confusion."What god do you follow? From what you have written it looks to be the god of secularism.

Nothing in that quote means that I do not believe in God. The God I believe in does not mete out eternal torture. That would be a sick and evil deity and I have the courage to oppose such a creature.

I have a different sense of God than you and one that fits with the adjective 'loving'.

As for your assumptions here about what my god must be...I would look to your own mind to see if it is closed if you know so little about beliefs.

Again, I said no such thing. Go back and read my exact words.

Or God to stand idly by and let them be tortured in the hell he made. In the hell he made for that purpose. Poor God, unable to do anything while his children suffer for all time. And if you read your earlier posts you will see how guilt everyone is. This means that you think they deserve what they get. Because they don't follow his commandments. Or, actually, rules that one Jewish man thought came from God and others followed suit.

How is it that you think that God is accountable to me? I told you why judgment comes, and I told you what God, the one who made you, and whose sovereign property you are, requires. Yet you continue to find fault with me because you consider that God is not worthy of your attention.

I find fault with you because you cannot see that the God you believe in is an evil deity. I can understand how scary it might be for you to notice this. Or perhaps you like the idea consciously or unconciously that other people suffer. I do not know what keeps you from noticing the obvious...A God who makes a hell to torture people for all time and, in your version, allows them to suffer this fate, is not a loving God. And we would spit on a father here on earth who acted in this way.

And you say you are not an atheist? I tell you the truth: you can construct a god of your own devising if you wish, which is evidently what you have done, but that god will only be a reflection of you.

Keep guessing. It only shows how little you know, despite what you think I evidently have done. Wrong again.

Your heart is clear in what you think of as a loving God. We are each open to judgments that we have devised our God or are believing in a God devised by others. The God you think of as loving allows his children, most of them, to suffer for all time. In fact he made a place expressly for that purpose.

I think that is sick. The least you could do is take responsibility for your approval which is implicit in earlier posts describing a world of sinners. But you cannot do that.

 

[Myles]

I have not overlooked anything. You say, "Murder is unacceptable because we value human life". How can something that is a mere accident be valuable? What is it about men that makes them more valuable than field mice? What intrinsic property of man makes "human life" valuable, apart from being made in the image of God? There isn't one.



First, I was conversing with one man, not 'you all'. Second, I do not have a problem unless you wish to define faith as a mental illness. Do you?



Now here you make a good point. There are myriads of divisions, and not one of them is in possession of the complete truth. There is room for disagreement on some points, but not on the points that scripture is plain on such as that salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. That will do for starters, and any church body that misses that foundational point has missed the mark completely no matter what else they might teach. Please also keep in mind that any group can appropriate the appellation "Christian" without regard to what they teach. Saving faith, the genuine article, is a gift that is bestowed by God through the Holy Spirit when, where, and to whom He pleases. It is not something that a man can just decide that he has.
There are churches that teach that salvation is up to the individual, and there are churches that teach that it is a co-operative effort between man and God. Both of those positions are, and have always been, heretical because they both deny the sovereign power of God. The only other option, and the one that scripture clearly teaches is that it is the work of God alone.

Something that is a mere accident can have value, which is what you cannot accept. My life has value because I give it value. My family has value because I value them and so on. What additional value does our lives have if we invoke a creator ? Things will go on as usual without one. To talk of being made in the image of god is nonsense. If a god powerful enough to create the universe existed, he would be nothing like us.

Your reference to field mice reminds me that life is rich and varied. Children, among others, have pets which they cherish and this gives value to the lives of such animals. Admittedly, there are entities we could well do without but it's your job to explain why your god created them. Why did he create deadly viruses ? Did he make them in his image and likeness ?

We disagree because you want to believe that humans are more than part of life. What evidence do you have for this view ?

And yes, I do hold the view that people who believe in a god for which there is not the slightest bit of objective evidence have a problem; it's an inability to cope with reality. What a sad state of affairs that some of us have scarcely moved on from the time when gods were invoked to account for natural phenomena which we did not understand.

I regard your talk of God, the Holy Spirt, salvation and so on as nonsense because you have nothing other than personal belief to support you. The notion that a god created imperfect creatures who can grovel their way back into his favour and be be saved, whatever that is supposed to mean, is bizarre.

 

[Old man]

And a loving father pulls his child out of the burning oil. Period. Poor God, with his hands tied. Give me a break.

Have you ever seen a coin with only one side? Everyone wants to talk about a loving merciful God, and get all bent out of shape when they find out that the flip side of mercy is justice. Again, sir, men are the ones who insist on telling God to take a hike, to leave them alone to do things their own way, and not to dare make any demands of them.

But you do approve him. You read this book and believe, yes, this is a loving God and they are getting what they deserve.

In point of fact I do approve because it is not wise to do battle with God. God does some things that are really difficult to understand, but men, who are very limited in their understanding, are on untenable ground when they dare to call their maker on the carpet.

God gave us our emotional reactions for a reason. God gave us feelings of sympathy for a reason. It is not God you believe in and follow.

Ah. Now we are getting somewhere. You think that God is a subjective concept amenable to being shaped and molded to fit your individual requirements. Wrong. He is objective reality with a capital "O".

Nothing in that quote means that I do not believe in God. The God I believe in does not mete out eternal torture. That would be a sick and evil deity and I have the courage to oppose such a creature.

Is God a smorgasbord that you may pick and choose what parts you like? Apparently, since you "have the courage to oppose" Him?

I have a different sense of God than you and one that fits with the adjective 'loving'.

I hate to tell you this, but the god you have fashioned for yourself is not the God of the Bible, your god is your own creation, designed according to your own specifications. You presume to tell the potter what he may or may not do with his own clay, you reject God to His face and call it "courage". That is atheism.[/quote]

As for your assumptions here about what my god must be...I would look to your own mind to see if it is closed if you know so little about beliefs.

I assume nothing. I merely compare your self made god with the God of the Bible. They are not the same. I know your god. I served him for forty years.

Or God to stand idly by and let them be tortured in the hell he made. In the hell he made for that purpose. Poor God, unable to do anything while his children suffer for all time. And if you read your earlier posts you will see how guilt everyone is. This means that you think they deserve what they get. Because they don't follow his commandments. Or, actually, rules that one Jewish man thought came from God and others followed suit.

Some receive mercy, some receive justice. No one receives injustice. "The wages of sin is death". Someone is going to pay the wages. Either Jesus pays them for you, or you are left holding the bag and will pay them yourself.

I find fault with you because you cannot see that the God you believe in is an evil deity.

I believe what God has said about Himself. You don't. You think He is "evil", yet claim not to be an atheist. You are fooling yourself.

Your heart is clear in what you think of as a loving God. We are each open to judgments that we have devised our God or are believing in a God devised by others. The God you think of as loving allows his children, most of them, to suffer for all time. In fact he made a place expressly for that purpose.

Do you think that by your refusal to acknowledge God's right to run His universe His own way that that changes anything? The lake of fire was created for the devil and his followers.

I think that is sick. The least you could do is take responsibility for your approval which is implicit in earlier posts describing a world of sinners. But you cannot do that.

I wrote what the scripture says. You don't like that, and reject it out of hand. Fine. That is your choice.

 

[Old man]

We disagree because you want to believe that humans are more than part of life. What evidence do you have for this view ?

This topic has been beaten to death. The evidence is all around you, but you will not see it. The arguments from math alone are devastating to the naturalistic world view. I will not be drawn into an endless pointless discussion.

And yes, I do hold the view that people who believe in a god for which there is not the slightest bit of objective evidence have a problem; it's an inability to cope with reality. What a sad state of affairs that some of us have scarcely moved on from the time when gods were invoked to account for natural phenomena which we did not understand.

Your saying that there is "not the slightest bit of objective evidence" for God is just plain foolish.

I regard your talk of God, the Holy Spirt, salvation and so on as nonsense because you have nothing other than personal belief to support you. The notion that a god created imperfect creatures who can grovel their way back into his favour and be be saved, whatever that is supposed to mean, is bizarre.

You might want to take the time to inform yourself before making pronouncement on a topic about which you know nothing. But then again, you might not because then you run the risk of having your world view shaken.

 

[Myles]

This topic has been beaten to death. The evidence is all around you, but you will not see it. The arguments from math alone are devastating to the naturalistic world view. I will not be drawn into an endless pointless discussion.

The arguments from maths may devestate you but that is your affair. Are you a mathematician ? What sources can you quote ?



Your saying that there is "not the slightest bit of objective evidence" for God is just plain foolish.

It's all too easy to say a statement is foolish. Let's have some evidence to show why I am mistaken !


You might want to take the time to inform yourself before making pronouncement on a topic about which you know nothing. But then again, you might not because then you run the risk of having your world view shaken

So, in addition to knowing about god, you are a mind reader. You know nothing of my background, so you are doing no more than using an ad hom to bolster what you regard as an argument. You have said nothing to support your statements. Is that because you have nothing to offer other than personal conviction ?