Atheists what is your proof?

[birch]

OR... That God finds all of it beautiful. Parasites are living creatures as well. They in turn contribute to the circle of life, and anyone who has seen The Lion King knows how beautiful that is. We have a tendency to place a specific value to comfortable living that is not reflected Biblically. Biblically speaking, life isn't meant to be all rainbows and butterflys. So those who would think it is a sadistic God that creates misery just don't see the greater beauty that such complexity adds to creation as a whole. IOW, humans need to get over themselves. They aren't that special, the universe doesn't care if they live or die, and as Christ himself taught - neither does God.

do you realize how absurd your whole rant was?

the beauty of the world is a subjective perception. creatures are just trying to survive. also, people are not the only ones who suffer. you obviously have no idea how bad the suffering is and focus on some overall beauty while the pawns are suffering. what a jerk way of interpretation.

do you know that right now there are over 500 million stray dogs or cats worldwide (this doesn't even include humans or other lifeforms) that are suffering? they suffer from parvo, injury, cold, starvation, poisoning, disease homelessness, car accidents etc and live very short, suffering and brutal lives. there is no beauty in that. if there was a god, it's very guilty and deserves zero respect or admiration for this and a lot more.

yet, you just like the other person just focuses on the so-called beauty of it all.

well, you know what? drug kingpins live very beautiful lives and have the best of everything but their methods cause so much suffering and evil to get it! see how that works.

 

[SolusCado]

That just doesn't follow at all. You've decided there is a deity to attribute it to, without providing a logical reason to hold that belief.

I feel like we are going in circles here. I never said the initial faith in a deity WAS based on logical deduction. There are SOME reasons for which it makes more sense to me, but those are not the source of my faith. The source of my faith is "spiritual" whatever that may mean (it is different for everyone). However, once that faith is establised, it is foolish to not constantly re-evaluate as one's knowledge of other areas advances. Frankly, I don't see how you could argue that, unless it is just to be argumentative.

What actual 'knowledge' do you have?

I am referring to the latest scientific theories in evolutionary psychology, cosmology, physics, relativity, evolution, astrobiology, etc.

No, we start with an observation. An apple falls, why? It's not an idea, but an observed phenomenon.

Likewise, the initial ideas for God would based on observations. Again, something atheists claim all the time. It REALLY seems like you just want to argue for the hell of it man.

Give up, you have Occam's Razor wrong.

You seriously don't see the difference between a simple solution and a simple answer? In IT as an example, sometimes the simplest solution is to just check a box somewhere. However, that checkbox actually effects a long chain of modifications that ultimately result in a problem getting solved. The checkbox is the simplest answer, but it only works because of a complex chain of events in the background. Newbies in the field though will often times try to make a dozen different changes to solve a problem, not realizing the complexity in the background. Sometimes, they may actually work around the problem in their variety of changes. So, which is correct? The "simplest" answer is the single checkbox, but it only works through a much more complex mechanism.

And quantum mechanics tells us some events are random. And your grasp of relativity isn't very sound.

Whatever. Either object with reason or don't object at all. I am tired of your pointlessness. If there is something I have wrong, I would love to learn where and how. But you don't do that. You make claims that people don't know what they are talking about, but never explain how. You argue opposing points depending on which one helps you "win" an argument. By all outward appearances, you have no interest in knowledge or truth, just in making yourself feel better by calling others stupid. I would be an idiot to continue wasting my time with you.

 

[SolusCado]

do you realize how absurd your whole rant was?

the beauty of the world is a subjective perception. creatures are just trying to survive. also, people are not the only ones who suffer. you obviously have no idea how bad the suffering is and focus on some overall beauty while the pawns are suffering. what a jerk way of interpretation.

do you know that right now there are over 500 million stray dogs or cats worldwide (this doesn't even include humans or other lifeforms) that are suffering? they suffer from parvo, injury, cold, starvation, poisoning, disease homelessness, car accidents etc and live very short, suffering and brutal lives. there is no beauty in that. if there was a god, it's very guilty and deserves zero respect or admiration for this and a lot more.

yet, you just like the other person just focuses on the so-called beauty of it all.

well, you know what? drug kingpins live very beautiful lives and have the best of everything but their methods cause so much suffering and evil to get it! see how that works.

With every death comes new life. From suffering there is always somethine or someone who benefits. With the destruction of every atom there is immense energy released. There is beauty in everything, whether you see it or not. That you think the health of creatures on this little planet in a tiny corner of a galaxy in a universe of countless galaxies is significant shows just how small your point of view is. It is really no different than when man thought Earth, and later the solar system, and after that our galaxy, was somehow at the center of things.

 

[Yosef]

Excellent quote.

OR... That God finds all of it beautiful. Parasites are living creatures as well. They in turn contribute to the circle of life, and anyone who has seen The Lion King knows how beautiful that is. We have a tendency to place a specific value to comfortable living that is not reflected Biblically. Biblically speaking, life isn't meant to be all rainbows and butterflys. So those who would think it is a sadistic God that creates misery just don't see the greater beauty that such complexity adds to creation as a whole. IOW, humans need to get over themselves. They aren't that special, the universe doesn't care if they live or die, and as Christ himself taught - neither does God.

I agree a great deal with you. And that quote of phlogistician is wonderful, I agree. As to life on earth, it is temporary. It is a gateway to eternal and perfect life by side of God Himself. God compares this life on earth to a drop of water while life in paradise is like the seas and oceans. Unfortunately, many people don't realize how generous God is. There is no reason to not believe.

 

[spidergoat]

He told you that?

 

[The Esotericist]

I have proof.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYb35Qid51k&feature=related

 

[SolusCado]

I have proof.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYb35Qid51k&feature=related

Now see, this is what makes atheists look at theism as superstition. Nothing in that accident contradicted physics. For every guy that survives something like that, there are hundreds if not thousands that die. Because this particular guy was lucky doesn't necessarily mean anything. If everything that occurred in that accident was measured and repeated a million times, the driver would survive a million times. You can't call it a miracle just because it is rare.

 

[birch]

That you think the health of creatures on this little planet in a tiny corner of a galaxy in a universe of countless galaxies is significant shows just how small your point of view is. It is really no different than when man thought Earth, and later the solar system, and after that our galaxy, was somehow at the center of things.

No, it's you who don't understand. I know exactly what you are talking about but it does not make insignificant or nonexistant the reality of the suffering of life here. neither here nor there is not the issue as you make it seem.

it does matter to living beings even if it does not matter to the universe. you are confusing context and equating the 'system' to negate the suffering as if it's unimportant.

what your point is makes no sense in the way you are presenting it. it doesn't matter if there is other life or other galaxies as if you are insinuating that it may be different so it makes insignficant what happens here. totally devious logic.

furthermore, i never stated that humans or lifeforms are the center of the universe. i am questioning the system and how that system works in light of a supposed creator responsible for it. just because something has power to do as it wishes whether it be god or man, doesn't mean one has to appreciate it or even agree with it. you seem to think one has to or it's a foregone conclusion. lol

As to life on earth, it is temporary. It is a gateway to eternal and perfect life by side of God Himself. God compares this life on earth to a drop of water while life in paradise is like the seas and oceans. Unfortunately, many people don't realize how generous God is. There is no reason to not believe.

it doesn't seem you agree with him exactly. solscado even defends the laws of nature or creation as it is when even the bible cites the devil as the cause of the problem. he directly contradicts the bible but professes to be a christian.

interesting you suppose there is a "perfect" life beside god after this life. what if there wasn't? lol.

 

[SolusCado]

No, it's you who don't understand. I know exactly what you are talking about but it does not make insignificant or nonexistant the reality of the suffering of life here. neither here nor there is not the issue as you make it seem.

Let me put it another way. What makes the reality of suffering of life here on Earth significant?

it does matter to living beings even if it does not matter to the universe. you are confusing context and equating the 'system' to negate the suffering as if it's unimportant.

But if you are going to "judge God" for it, you can't do so in the context of your local concerns. He is the creator of the universe, not your personal genie.

what your point is makes no sense in the way you are presenting it. it doesn't matter if there is other life or other galaxies as if you are insinuating that it may be different so it makes insignficant what happens here. totally devious logic.

No, what I am saying is that the universe is much, much bigger than life on this little planet - so given its insignficance in the context of the entirety of space and time... it is, well - insignificant.

furthermore, i never stated that humans or lifeforms are the center of the universe. i am questioning the system and how that system works in light of a supposed creator responsible for it. just because something has power to do as it wishes whether it be god or man, doesn't mean one has to appreciate it or even agree with it. you seem to think one has to or it's a foregone conclusion. lol

To suggest that the suffering of life on Earth is significant, given the overall INSIGNIFICANCE of Earth compared to the rest of the universe, is INDEED stating that humanity or life is somehow of particular relevance.

 

[AlexG]

the snow globes that you're familiar with, that is.

If you want to hypothesis about a snow globe over 28 billion light years across, go ahead. But don't expect anybody to take you at all seriously.

 

[birch]

Let me put it another way. What makes the reality of suffering of life here on Earth significant?



But if you are going to "judge God" for it, you can't do so in the context of your local concerns. He is the creator of the universe, not your personal genie.



No, what I am saying is that the universe is much, much bigger than life on this little planet - so given its insignficance in the context of the entirety of space and time... it is, well - insignificant.



To suggest that the suffering of life on Earth is significant, given the overall INSIGNIFICANCE of Earth compared to the rest of the universe, is INDEED stating that humanity or life is somehow of particular relevance.

your responses don't make any sense. what is the importance of the universe to an individual? why does it have to be important? you say our lives are insignificant. it is insignificant in the context of the universe and we have no power over it's creation but our experiences are not insignificant to us. you are confusing individual life to the universe as a whole. the universe as a whole doesn't negate or make obsolete or insignificant the experiences to the individual.

and you can judge a creator based on your local concerns. why not? your local concerns as well as your reality is just as real. it is happening. what is happening a hundred light years away doesn't negate what happens where you are. if it created you and you can sense, feel and think. you most certainly can.

basically, what you are saying is what god or a creator does is what it is. since we have no power over that, it is a moot point. that is true but doesn't mean that one agrees with it on a conceptual level. that is a personal point of view.

 

[AlexG]

I'm afraid you still aren't getting what I am trying to say. Scientifically, our universe is a static object. Time exists as a dimension similar to the three dimensions of space. It isn't a timeline upon which space moves, but together with the three dimensions of spaces makes up a fourth dimension.

I think you've taken Brian Greene's analogy of the space/time loaf far too literally.

 

[iceaura]

.

Scientifically, our universe is a static object. Time exists as a dimension similar to the three dimensions of space. It isn't a timeline upon which space moves, but together with the three dimensions of spaces makes up a fourth dimension.

? You are claiming the physical entities of the universe exist, "static", on one point of time - an eternal now. You might as well claim that because the universe isn't moving left to right along that dimension that travel along that dimension does not exist - that we and everything else we can possible know about are "really" just sitting on one point of each of the three dimensional axes.

Theologically, for a deity to have created this entire universe, the would have to exist outside of both time and space, which means anything we experience that is time-related would not apply to the deity.

Neither would anything we experience space-related.

This would include thoughts, imaginings, voices in heads, etc. Nothing you experience as a thought applies to any such deity.

He created the entire universe, start to finish, at once.

There is no such thing as the creation of a span of time "at once". It's like the creation of a span of distance in one spot.

 

[AlexG]

You can't really argue with SolusCado. He's already decided what he believes without recourse to any evidence. He has established his position, and will simply claim that anything and everything can be explained by his belief, which is true if you simply disregard reason and accept his chosen belief.

 

[The Esotericist]

Now see, this is what makes atheists look at theism as superstition. Nothing in that accident contradicted physics. For every guy that survives something like that, there are hundreds if not thousands that die. Because this particular guy was lucky doesn't necessarily mean anything. If everything that occurred in that accident was measured and repeated a million times, the driver would survive a million times. You can't call it a miracle just because it is rare.

Sure, what ever man. But I'll lay odd's to you, 100 to one, that this dude believed in some form of consciousness higher than his own. Whether it be a universal consciousness or some form of deity, I am sure he believes he is part of something grander than himself.

An atheist is never going to walk away from something like that. I've been to university, I've taken advanced statistics, I've heard and understood your arguments. . . but I am telling you, I understand how consciousness works and interacts with string theory, (or how Dr. Haglin believes it does at any rate) and "god" if you will; and in my opinion, it isn't the atheist that is walking away from that.

 

[SolusCado]

it doesn't seem you agree with him exactly. solscado even defends the laws of nature or creation as it is when even the bible cites the devil as the cause of the problem. he directly contradicts the bible but professes to be a christian.

interesting you suppose there is a "perfect" life beside god after this life. what if there wasn't? lol.

The very term of the devil (Satan), in its original Hebrew, actually reflects "temptation", not necessarily a separate being. In Judaism, there isn't even the concept of a devil; the word is used in reference to obstacles, an adversary, or temptation itself. Furthermore, the Bible does actually say that God creates evil. Don't say I directly contradict the Bible unless you can provide a direct reference.

 

[SolusCado]

You can't really argue with SolusCado. He's already decided what he believes without recourse to any evidence. He has established his position, and will simply claim that anything and everything can be explained by his belief, which is true if you simply disregard reason and accept his chosen belief.

If you are going to make such a claim, it would be good to provide an example of where disregarding reason is necessary to accept my chosen belief. (With that said, I have freely stated that my belief in God is based on faith, not evidence... Is that what you are referring to when you say it is necessary to disregard reason?)

 

[SolusCado]

your responses don't make any sense. what is the importance of the universe to an individual? why does it have to be important? you say our lives are insignificant. it is insignificant in the context of the universe and we have no power over it's creation but our experiences are not insignificant to us. you are confusing individual life to the universe as a whole. the universe as a whole doesn't negate or make obsolete or insignificant the experiences to the individual.

How many times do I need to say it? You are judging God for the significance of life to an individual. But God is the creator of the universe. So the important of the universe isn't to an individual, but to God.

and you can judge a creator based on your local concerns. why not? your local concerns as well as your reality is just as real. it is happening. what is happening a hundred light years away doesn't negate what happens where you are. if it created you and you can sense, feel and think. you most certainly can.

OK; you CAN do anything you like. But it seems childish to me to think everything is about you, and if you aren't comfortable then it must mean God is mean.

basically, what you are saying is what god or a creator does is what it is. since we have no power over that, it is a moot point. that is true but doesn't mean that one agrees with it on a conceptual level. that is a personal point of view.

Agreed.

 

[SolusCado]

I think you've taken Brian Greene's analogy of the space/time loaf far too literally.

Well, it's more than just Briane Greene's books that describe the universe this way. Granted, I DON'T know all the mathematics behind it all, but everything I've ever read on the subject would seem to support the idea of a complete space/time universe, and I have yet to read anything that would contradict it (except for outdated views on time as a timeline across which the entirety of space moves, which don't account for special relativity at all).

 

[AlexG]

If you are going to make such a claim, it would be good to provide an example of where disregarding reason is necessary to accept my chosen belief. (With that said, I have freely stated that my belief in God is based on faith, not evidence... Is that what you are referring to when you say it is necessary to disregard reason?)

Yes. I do not consider faith to lie within borders of reason. And if there is no reason forming the base of an argument, then all that follows is also sans reason.