God is strong

[Cyperium]

Something popped into my head just now.

God must be pretty strong, knowing everything and yet not changing it.

But then of course He knows how everything ends too...or begins?



Do you understand what I mean?


Then comes a new creation...which I think is hard to imagine by todays standards.

 

[Lemming3k]

Either that or he's pretty heartless and doesnt care, though why would he change any of it? If he created it all and is all knowing then he knew what would happen, he could have changed his ideas before his creation if he had wanted to change anything, simple explanation is he wants things to be the way they are, remember that if a loved one is ever in extreme pain for years on end.

 

[Cris]

Cyperium,

God must be pretty strong, knowing everything and yet not changing it.

Do you realize that this is fully consistent with a god that does exist, which you must agree is a far more credible explanation.

 

[Cyperium]

Cyperium,



Do you realize that this is fully consistent with a god that does exist, which you must agree is a far more credible explanation.

This IS fully consistent with God, that's why I mentioned it. Too bad that many things could be misinterpreted to mean another thing...but that's the way it is. I'm sure there are plenty of things that could be seen as true by two contradicting sets of beliefs, since the line is so thin each use the same argument (but maybe they won't use it just because of this...but I've decided that I'm going to use arguments which are usable for both, since I know what I mean by my argument).

The line is thin...

 

[robtex]

Something popped into my head just now.

God must be pretty strong, knowing everything and yet not changing it.

But then of course He knows how everything ends too...or begins?



Do you understand what I mean?


Then comes a new creation...which I think is hard to imagine by todays standards.

What you are saying is called Deism. It is the theory that God created the world and than observes it but does not interact.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/deism.htm

The oppossing theory is of course theism which contends that God directs the world.

Deism is important in the theory of gnosism in as far it gives another prespective to why their is death and suffereing if God is all powerful and benevolant in nature.

Also, Deism and Theism can both be put on an x and y axis and and theories can be deduced based on observation of how deistic or theistic God is in relation to the universe and or earth.

We do know that our existance and the earth's existance and the universe existance is formulaic in nature and as such all the varibles of the matrix function of the universe are interrelated meaning that one can not be changed without influencing others.

Because of this maybe Deism is neccessary in part to keep the universe running in a consistant fashion that maintains its present existance?

 

[SpyMoose]

Well I for one think that the slanted quasi-potato must be very strong, because it has all those extra dimentional tenticles, and yet never rapes us with them. It would be so easy for it, but it never does, and I think that says a lot.

 

[Cyperium]

What you are saying is called Deism. It is the theory that God created the world and than observes it but does not interact.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/deism.htm

The oppossing theory is of course theism which contends that God directs the world.

Deism is important in the theory of gnosism in as far it gives another prespective to why their is death and suffereing if God is all powerful and benevolant in nature.

Also, Deism and Theism can both be put on an x and y axis and and theories can be deduced based on observation of how deistic or theistic God is in relation to the universe and or earth.

We do know that our existance and the earth's existance and the universe existance is formulaic in nature and as such all the varibles of the matrix function of the universe are interrelated meaning that one can not be changed without influencing others.

Because of this maybe Deism is neccessary in part to keep the universe running in a consistant fashion that maintains its present existance?

I don't think we can simplify it that much as to put it on a x and y axis. Surely the variables in the universe depend on eachother, but there are also a deeper structure that changes the whole thing...noise we say...

It says that God is controlling the world with a light touch. The stronger someone is, the more careful he has to be. God is mighty.

In what way He is present with us I don't know...He might be looking at us from the beginning of time. He may change our destiny from the beginning...

It's so totally out of perspective for us.

Though the Bible say that we will "come into His rest". So maybe you have a point, but still God is beyond our understanding, we can't know how it works and I'm afraid to speculate too much, I don't want to get lost.

 

[mustafhakofi]

"Jesus' last words on the cross were, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" hardly seem like the words of a god who planned it that way. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure there is something wrong here.

I refuse to prove that I exist" says God, "for proof denies
faith, and without faith, I am nothing."

how can something, that does not exist, know all and be strong.

 

[Cris]

Cyperium,

This IS fully consistent with God, that's why I mentioned it.

But if it doesn’t do anything then it may as well not exist. How then can we tell the difference between this thing that you claim exists and the scenario where it doesn’t? Simply from the perspective of Occam’s razor there is no reason to conclude that a god should or need exist based on your observation.

Too bad that many things could be misinterpreted to mean another thing...but that's the way it is.

When there are multiple interpretations for a phenomena it has been found overwhelmingly that the simpler explanation more often tends to be the truth. In this case we have the concept of a vastly all powerful omnipotent and omniscient thing versus nothing – one couldn’t hope for a simpler choice.

The line is thin...

Umm well – the difference between an infinite super being and nothing makes your line far from thin but rather infinitely huge.

 

[Leo Volont]

Dear Cyperium,

Perhaps human beings have an impatient way of looking at Eternity. God's Creation of a Complete Universe, and then His sorting it out between Good and Evil is a Process that may take one Full Period of Time, however long that may be. Some People say that if God can do Anything, then why can't God do everything instantaneously? Well, since when has Cheating Time turned into a requirement for Omnipotence. God can be All Powerful even if it takes God Forever to do any particular thing... just as long as it finally gets done is all that is important.

 

[Cris]

Leo,

Perhaps human beings have an impatient way of looking at Eternity.

Some do, but not all.

God's Creation of a Complete Universe, and then His sorting it out between Good and Evil is a Process that may take one Full Period of Time, however long that may be.

The question becomes why he would need to sort it out if he is perfect and created the mess in the first place. The fact that there is confusion between humans as to how to live and grow is fully consistent with evolutionary processes and entirely inconsistent with the concept of an omniscient and omnipotent god.

Some People say that if God can do Anything, then why can't God do everything instantaneously? Well, since when has Cheating Time turned into a requirement for Omnipotence.

You miss the point – if he is omnipotent then cheating time has no meaning – if he wanted something a certain way then he could do it instantly. Again what we observe is consistent with undirected evolutionary processes and inconsistent with an intelligent designer.

God can be All Powerful even if it takes God Forever to do any particular thing... just as long as it finally gets done is all that is important.

And again, why? If the time is to allow people to learn then with his omnipotence he could give them that understanding perfectly and instantly. If he wanted company for himself then his omnipotence could create us instantly with all that he could desire. There is no reasonable answer to an omnipotent god not doing things instantly unless he is either not omnipotent or more likely simply does not exist.

And again I must emphasize that everything we observe about the universe and human endeavors is fully consistent with undirected evolutionary processes, and which are natural and significantly more credible than the concept of an invisible supernatural imaginary super being.

 

[Cyperium]

"Jesus' last words on the cross were, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" hardly seem like the words of a god who planned it that way. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure there is something wrong here.

I refuse to prove that I exist" says God, "for proof denies
faith, and without faith, I am nothing."

how can something, that does not exist, know all and be strong.

Jesus last words are a mystery to me and I can't comment them.

He exists whether we believe in Him or not.

 

[Cyperium]

Cyperium,



But if it doesn’t do anything then it may as well not exist. How then can we tell the difference between this thing that you claim exists and the scenario where it doesn’t? Simply from the perspective of Occam’s razor there is no reason to conclude that a god should or need exist based on your observation.

Occam's razor is a method of finding the best equation and best theory (to sort out variables that isn't necessary for the equation and I don't agree that everything could exist without God). Occam's razor can't be used to figure out whether God exists or not, Occam's razor isn't constructed to either.

Of course we would believe if we saw Him. Otherwise we would really be doomed.

Should or need exist? Doesn't work...the Truth exists whether something else needs it or not.

When there are multiple interpretations for a phenomena it has been found overwhelmingly that the simpler explanation more often tends to be the truth. In this case we have the concept of a vastly all powerful omnipotent and omniscient thing versus nothing – one couldn’t hope for a simpler choice.

And we have reality versus nothing...what would you choose? Yet you believe your eyes.

Umm well – the difference between an infinite super being and nothing makes your line far from thin but rather infinitely huge.

That wasn't what I described using the line. Sorry, won't work.

 

[Cyperium]

Dear Cyperium,

Perhaps human beings have an impatient way of looking at Eternity. God's Creation of a Complete Universe, and then His sorting it out between Good and Evil is a Process that may take one Full Period of Time, however long that may be. Some People say that if God can do Anything, then why can't God do everything instantaneously? Well, since when has Cheating Time turned into a requirement for Omnipotence. God can be All Powerful even if it takes God Forever to do any particular thing... just as long as it finally gets done is all that is important.

True. It's also true that God do whatever He wants to do, and whatever He do He can't do wrong, there is no higher authority.

Also, God is beyond time, it's said somewhere that our lifetime is but a piece of sand in the desert compared to the day of eternity.

 

[Cris]

Cyperium,

Jesus last words are a mystery to me and I can't comment them.

Very wise since it looks like no one can agree on what this alleged character might have said. Try this link on the multiple claims of his last words – all taken from what appears texts before the time of the alleged Jesus.

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/lastwords.html

He exists whether we believe in Him or not.

That’s an interesting claim but no one has yet proved that he actually ever existed.

 

[Cris]

Cyperium,

Occam's razor can't be used to figure out whether God exists or not, Occam's razor isn't constructed to either.

The razor is an excellent way to help you assess credibility but it is not offered as a proof. With everything being equal and there being no apparent interaction from a god in matters of good and bad on earth then there is no reason to believe that he exists. The simpler explanation of non existence is consistent with the razor guideline and provides a significantly more credible explanation.

Of course we would believe if we saw Him. Otherwise we would really be doomed.

I’ll believe warp drive if I ever see it but until then I’ve no reason to believe it exists or can ever exist. We can say the same thing about fairies and leprechauns, gods are simply other imaginative concepts.

Should or need exist? Doesn't work...the Truth exists whether something else needs it or not.

Quite right, but no one can prove that a god exists so no one can say that the existence of a god is a truth. All we can do is test to see whether it is credible that a god exists and whether there are simpler more credible and rational explanations for the universe. In this case a god is neither necessary nor needed to explain life or the universe. Why then insist that a god exists in the total absence of any credible evidence and where there are more credible natural and simpler explanations?

And we have reality versus nothing...what would you choose? Yet you believe your eyes.

Not sure what you mean by that or that you have understood my statement.
That there is no god (nothing) is consistent with our observations of the universe. That appears to be a real possible explanation of reality.

 

[Cyperium]

Cyperium,



The razor is an excellent way to help you assess credibility but it is not offered as a proof. With everything being equal and there being no apparent interaction from a god in matters of good and bad on earth then there is no reason to believe that he exists. The simpler explanation of non existence is consistent with the razor guideline and provides a significantly more credible explanation.

We don't understand it all, thus can only simplify and take away things to the degree of our understanding (we can't be sure that it doesn't exist just because it isn't needed for our theory and after all we cannot be sure that our theory however complete it may seem is the real description of reality).

Also, God may hold the existance of something, allthough every part is connected with everything else (thus making it seem like everything is solved and God is not needed). It's a possibility.

I’ll believe warp drive if I ever see it but until then I’ve no reason to believe it exists or can ever exist. We can say the same thing about fairies and leprechauns, gods are simply other imaginative concepts.

Just because something doesn't seem real to you doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. You aren't the only person in the world with a oppinion.

Quite right, but no one can prove that a god exists so no one can say that the existence of a god is a truth. All we can do is test to see whether it is credible that a god exists and whether there are simpler more credible and rational explanations for the universe. In this case a god is neither necessary nor needed to explain life or the universe. Why then insist that a god exists in the total absence of any credible evidence and where there are more credible natural and simpler explanations?

You can neither explain life or the universe to me, thus can't say what is needed or not.

Not sure what you mean by that or that you have understood my statement.
That there is no god (nothing) is consistent with our observations of the universe. That appears to be a real possible explanation of reality.

In the eye of the beholder.

 

[Cris]

Cyperium,

We don't understand it all, thus can only simplify and take away things to the degree of our understanding (we can't be sure that it isn't needed just because it isn't needed for our theory and after all we cannot be sure that our theory however complete it may seem is the real description of reality).

But then it is only necessary to introduce greater complexity to an explanation when the simpler ones prove to be inadequate. Starting out with the fantastic and incredulous speculations first is somewhat foolish.

However, theists are not offering gods as a possibility but as a definite truth that that is the way it is. That is fundamentally different to a discussion on various speculative theories.

Also, God may hold the existance of something, allthough every part is connected with everything else (thus making it seem like everything is solved and God is not needed). It's a possibility.

But you can’t prove it is a possibility, that again is only a speculation. Your claim equally applies to any imaginative idea, even super aliens might have had a hand. Without evidence of a god you don’t have anything other than your imagination. And until there is something more concrete the best possible explanation so far is that thee are no gods.

Just because something doesn't seem real to you doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. You aren't the only person in the world with a oppinion.

The thing that makes an opinion a truth is proof. Opinions are fine except when religionists insist their opinions are absolute truth. If you argue for god as a speculative hypothesis then fine and we could debate about credibility issues and possibilities, but that is different from blind, unproven, and hence irrational religious assertions.

You can neither explain life or the universe to me, thus can't say what is needed or not.

Well yes I can, but you might choose not to be open minded enough to consider any possibilities other than a god did it. Remember the theist is fundamentally closed minded to all other possibilities.

In the eye of the beholder.

No, it is reasoned argument. Without a proof you have no reason to assert that a god exists.

 

[Cyperium]

Cyperium,



But then it is only necessary to introduce greater complexity to an explanation when the simpler ones prove to be inadequate. Starting out with the fantastic and incredulous speculations first is somewhat foolish.

However, theists are not offering gods as a possibility but as a definite truth that that is the way it is. That is fundamentally different to a discussion on various speculative theories.

You can go whatever direction you want, there will allways be a higher order to things, the prophets spoke of things while being influenced by the holy spirit. This makes it understandable by those moved by the holy spirit. Understanding something doesn't make it correct. I can understand my viewpoint only to a certain guarantee, I must say that I believe in what I believe to be the truth, not saying that christianity is the only option, but it is for me. I can understand other options though, but they only become a hinderence in my search for truth.

We can't live life again. Jesus would be crucifixed twice and all hope would be lost, since He would turn into a ridicule.

We must seek God while we still have the ability to.

The Bible say (allthough maybe not word by word):

Don't be fooled, God is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living.

After we die, no one can hate life.

But you can’t prove it is a possibility, that again is only a speculation. Your claim equally applies to any imaginative idea, even super aliens might have had a hand. Without evidence of a god you don’t have anything other than your imagination. And until there is something more concrete the best possible explanation so far is that thee are no gods.

It is a possibility, whether or not I can prove that possibility to be true. There is no explanation so far that comprehends it all to that point as to even consider Gods existance as true or false. Gods existance is a blank to science. No explanation say that there is no God (not one that are correct) and no explanation say that there is a God (that are correct), the God issue is a blank to any scientific explanation (that's truly scientific) and cannot be proven by earthly science.

The thing that makes an opinion a truth is proof. Opinions are fine except when religionists insist their opinions are absolute truth. If you argue for god as a speculative hypothesis then fine and we could debate about credibility issues and possibilities, but that is different from blind, unproven, and hence irrational religious assertions.

I must agree to you on that. We can't say that God does exist, cause we haven't yet seen Him. The Bible also brings this matter up, saying that the God we believe in is a unknown God, he is invisible to us. But the prophets spoke with the spirit of truth when they said He existed.

Well yes I can, but you might choose not to be open minded enough to consider any possibilities other than a god did it. Remember the theist is fundamentally closed minded to all other possibilities.

Then do, I am open-minded enough. Are you?

I think that I am too open-minded though...sometimes I just can't stop myself. But what you say has to be trustworthy.

Remember, you are speaking to a person, not a religion.

No, it is reasoned argument. Without a proof you have no reason to assert that a god exists.

It's in the eye of the beholder how you choose to interpret the facts that you have. The facts aren't saying "God doesn't exist", they are saying "I don't see Him here either...".

Maybe I'm a fool for saying this though, but I'll say it anyway. Remember it's only a picture, whilst I think it's pretty drawn I can't guarantee that it speaks the truth.

If you make a chair, then it can't see you, you are on a completly different level. This is a picture of how we can't see God, because He is on a different level.

 

[Cris]

Cyperium,

You can go whatever direction you want, there will allways be a higher order to things,

Why? What’s your evidence for such an infinite series?

the prophets spoke of things while being influenced by the holy spirit.

Correction: Alleged prophets and alleged holy spirit. There is no proof of either.

This makes it understandable by those moved by the holy spirit.

Again – alleged holy spirit. There is no proof that anyone has ever been influenced by an alleged supernatural entity.

Understanding something doesn't make it correct.

What does that mean? Either you understand something or you don’t.

I can understand my viewpoint only to a certain guarantee, I must say that I believe in what I believe to be the truth, not saying that christianity is the only option, but it is for me. I can understand other options though, but they only become a hinderence in my search for truth.

But why believe anything as true until you have evidence to support the idea? Just because something appears like a good idea or that millions of others believe it in no way indicates its truth. The disciplined mind will withhold belief until there is credible evidence for a rational conclusion.

We can't live life again.

Agreed, and we should do our utmost to extend the life we have.

Jesus would be crucifixed twice and all hope would be lost, since He would turn into a ridicule.

I already find the concept of Jesus ridiculous as do many who view religions from the outside.

We must seek God while we still have the ability to.

Why? Because some ancient mythologists imagined such things in their ignorance. Why not search for cures to known diseases instead since that has real and provable value.

The Bible say (allthough maybe not word by word):

Don't be fooled, God is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living.

One could have said the same thing about the current redundant Greek and Roman gods. One myth is as good as another – meaningless.

After we die, no one can hate life.

Hmm yes very prophetic.

It is a possibility, whether or not I can prove that possibility to be true.

Why is it possible that a god could exist? What is your proof of such conditions?

There is no explanation so far that comprehends it all to that point as to even consider Gods existance as true or false.

That would be a rational conclusion so why do theists claim that God does exist despite lack of such knowledge?

Gods existance is a blank to science.

Science operates on anything no matter what or where if it can be detected. Imaginary objects such as gods are naturally undetectable and hence it is no surprise that science cannot detect any gods.

No explanation say that there is no God (not one that are correct) and no explanation say that there is a God (that are correct), the God issue is a blank to any scientific explanation (that's truly scientific) and cannot be proven by earthly science.

And so the conclusion is, as I keep saying, that the god concept is purely an imaginative fantasy. As with any such fantasy it is not possible to prove them or disprove them, as you have just stated.

We can't say that God does exist, cause we haven't yet seen Him.

Why yet? You speak as if such a discovery is inevitable when it isn’t.

The Bible also brings this matter up, saying that the God we believe in is a unknown God, he is invisible to us.

Compare that to any imaginary object that does not exist – what is the difference with an unknowable and invisible immaterial entity? None.

But the prophets spoke with the spirit of truth when they said He existed.

So we are back to basic proofs again. And what the heck is the spirit of truth and what proof do you have that such a thing exists?

Then do, I am open-minded enough. Are you?

Oh no you are definitely not ready yet, but I’ll get back to you when I think you have changed.

I think that I am too open-minded though...sometimes I just can't stop myself. But what you say has to be trustworthy.

Your approach and attitude here and tone are far more like those of an agnostic than a theist.

It's in the eye of the beholder how you choose to interpret the facts that you have. The facts aren't saying "God doesn't exist", they are saying "I don't see Him here either...".

But facts have no opinions. There is no fact that points to a god. The facts are simply silent on the matter. That you choose to look for an imaginary character from mythology is of course entirely up to you.

Maybe I'm a fool for saying this though, but I'll say it anyway. Remember it's only a picture, whilst I think it's pretty drawn I can't guarantee that it speaks the truth.

Then simply withhold belief until you have a guarantee. Why be in a rush to reach a positive conclusion without good reason?

If you make a chair, then it can't see you, you are on a completly different level. This is a picture of how we can't see God, because He is on a different level.

Then we have absolutely no basis on which to conclude that such a thing exists then right? That is the essential atheist position.