Why would theists talk about God to non-theists, if not to proselytize?

God was a wish from the past . Am I the only one who sees that . Prophets rise up and make the wishes of the past come true by determination . That is what the Pharaohs wish is all about . The God Person comes into being by the wishes from the past . I know you all have a hard time with believing in spirits and ghosts . Consider this : You read a book written by a dead person . Does that dead person become part of you and your personal thinking? The dead person lives and the possessions of that dead person are in you .

Within a Parentheses of Eternity

The ancients just found themselves here as there,
Most of science yet to come of earth, fire, water, and air,
And wondered how all could be both square and fair.

They looked unto their harsh world, the calamities,
Cause and effect, their powerful rulers and enemies,
Their slaves, and even to their own family structure’s way,
Many of those having a strict father and a mother of no say.

They came up with a simplistic notion based on themselves,
Though they thought it the most wonderful answer ever delved,
Of a terrible and demanding male being called God,
An idea for some unto this very day to further plod.

Having an answer was important for them to exist,
And they extended this notion with various myths
And legends into many more structures layered upon,
Inventing and writing all the scrolls of scripture on.

It brought both fear and comfort in those days,
Making people better through some fearsome ways,
Although worse in others, as to the unchosen tribes,

Protecting their notion, at least, as taught by scribes.

There were some alterations and modifications,
Yet the main concept of a Creator remained as one.
Only scientific understanding really progressed,
Leaping much ahead of the dogmatical rest.

Thousands of years came to pass in stories,
And then Austin/Nobody solved all of the mystery,
Irrefutable now and ever gone beyond,
So utterly not of any magical wand.

There could not only be no First Complexity’s shove;
But there was also nothing to make anything of;

And that this nothing basis was forever, beyond creation—
This infinite and eternal nothing being the prime motion,
The only possible candidate, infinitely,
And so the cosmos was seen that it could be
No other way but than it is, eternally.

Amen.

P.S. Then the world ended, within a year,
The final benediction for all of us here.
Yet, the cosmos continued on, as it ever had done,
And always will, all of nothing balanced as one,
Heeding not the puff of smoke of rot
That was once a tiny pale blue dot.
 
Signal,

By not being sure about God (by your own admission), and yet discussing about God and accusing people of this and that in relation to God (especially atheists)
you behave like a cheater.


Examples please?

You come here talking about God, and as if you knew the solution to mankind's problems - but then you don't give it to them. This is cheating.


As above.


jan.
 
Jan,

We have to believe something.
Claiming ''agnosticsm'' is purely an intellectual position and cannot function.
You real position is atheist, as you do not believe in God.

There are two questions here. Do you believe and do you know. The first is settled by your belief postion (yes or no) the second is settled by agnosticism.

I do not believe in god but I can not say for sure there is none. or I believe in god but I can not say for sure there is one. Both are fair.

Then we can discuss why we each believe or not, and that is fair as well.

There are no in-betweens.

Incorrect, you said so yourself. Here:

Just for the record, nobody actually knows.

I believe in God for many reasons, it's not just an intellectual pursuit.
For me it makes complete sense (simply put).

Yet you can not answer how god came to be without there first being life. So it doesn't make sense.


You may not believe for your own reasons, but it is not for me push my belief
on to you. And guess what? I don't.

I am not going to go in the past and look up all of your posts to either agree with that or not. But I agree that we shouldn't be pushing beliefs on each other. I believe the best way to have such a conversation is to ask questions, questions that the person either as a believer or non-believer should be asking themselves.

Why don't you believe in God?

Based on me questioning my understanding of all of my experiences of what I deem as reality, the only god that I could believe exists is one that would be indistinguishable from the universe itself. No other separate entity within or outside of it that has power or control over our lives exists without so many contradictions to make the mathematical likelihood non-existent.

So if we called the universe god I can go along with that, but that's not what most people would accept as a definition, why not just call it the universe.
 
We have to believe something.
Really? Why? Who says so?

Claiming ''agnosticsm'' is purely an intellectual position and cannot function.
You real position is atheist, as you do not believe in God.
You seem to be under some conmfusion as to the meaning of "agnostic".

There are no in-betweens.
Because you say so?
You're wrong. Try looking up, for example, apatheism. Or even atheism - it ranges from not believing to denying.
 

all you're ever interested in doing is looking for someone to blame, and signal, YOU WILL NEVER BLAME ME.

all i've ever told you is to take it to god. you're the one who wants to play politics.

and btw, if you're going to have me on ignore, then leave me out of your conversation altogether.
 
Last edited:
jpappl,


There are two questions here. Do you believe and do you know. The first is settled by your belief postion (yes or no) the second is settled by agnosticism.


Okay.

I do not believe in god but I can not say for sure there is none. or I believe in god but I can not say for sure there is one. Both are fair.

But in the mean time the way we live our life and conduct ourself expresses our
position of belief or lack of. We cannot live agnosticaly.


Then we can discuss why we each believe or not, and that is fair as well.


Our intellectual position differs from our day to day, moment to moment position regarding our status.
Actions speaks louder than words.


Incorrect, you said so yourself. Here:

I meant there are no in-betweens in how we live our life.
How we live reflect the real situation in spite of what we say.


Yet you can not answer how god came to be without there first being life. So it doesn't make sense.


I don't believe God came into being.
You do. Which is why you keep bringing this up.
The question is; why do believe this?
Why can't you accept that, as a concept, God does not come into being?


I am not going to go in the past and look up all of your posts to either agree with that or not. But I agree that we shouldn't be pushing beliefs on each other. I believe the best way to have such a conversation is to ask questions, questions that the person either as a believer or non-believer should be asking themselves.


You're asking me, but you're not accepting my answers.
Why?


Based on me questioning my understanding of all of my experiences of what I deem as reality, the only god that I could believe exists is one that would be indistinguishable from the universe itself. No other separate entity within or outside of it that has power or control over our lives exists without so many contradictions to make the mathematical likelihood non-existent.


Then you've changed the concept of God to suit your world view (materialism).
I believe there is more to me than my physical body, and while my body
undergoes changes, I do not. I see the universe as a body, and God as the soul within the body. That makes sense to me.


So if we called the universe god I can go along with that, but that's not what most people would accept as a definition, why not just call it the universe.


Because of your world view, you cannot accept anything except the physical
world as the be all end all. I don't.
That is the fundamental difference in our positions.

jan.
 
Jan,

But in the mean time the way we live our life and conduct ourself expresses our
position of belief or lack of. We cannot live agnosticaly.

If you are living your life based on this belief than you know longer view it as a mere belief of possibility. There is no agnosticism in your position, you believe it as fact. Otherwise there is no reason to submit to living your life as if it was a fact.

This is the difference between someone who believes ET aliens exist somewhere because of the probabilities and someone who is convinced that the earth is being visited by Reptilian like humanoids today.

You don't have to take it that far, you are choosing to go there, out of what need ? What has driven you to accept this belief as fact ?

I meant there are no in-betweens in how we live our life.
How we live reflect the real situation in spite of what we say.

For you there are not, by your choice. For me there is. I don't live my life a certain way because there is a god or not. I can not know this answer with the information we have available, but the fact that I don't believe there is one based on my reasoning has no bearing on how I live my life because I am not following the belief in any particular god or religion.

You have chosen to do so, which is fine but that's what creates the absolute for you, it's your choice not one that has been forced on you.

Yet you can not answer how god came to be without there first being life. So it doesn't make sense. ”


I don't believe God came into being.
You do. Which is why you keep bringing this up.
The question is; why do believe this?
Why can't you accept that, as a concept, God does not come into being?

If god did not come into being at some point there is no god.

“ I am not going to go in the past and look up all of your posts to either agree with that or not. But I agree that we shouldn't be pushing beliefs on each other. I believe the best way to have such a conversation is to ask questions, questions that the person either as a believer or non-believer should be asking themselves. ”


You're asking me, but you're not accepting my answers.
Why?

Because they aren't answers. Or more to the point they are answers to questions you can't possible know and therefore can't answer.

Your simply making up answers to fit your belief and then you go from there.

The point of the question is, if we can't answer this, then why place something there that doesn't need to be there. Which in this case is a god.

What god are you believing in ? Can you define this god ?

Then you've changed the concept of God to suit your world view (materialism).
I believe there is more to me than my physical body, and while my body
undergoes changes, I do not. I see the universe as a body, and God as the soul within the body. That makes sense to me.

Ok, that is your belief and if that makes sense to you so be it.

This belief doesn't force you to behave in any specific way or does it ? IOW, do you follow any religion and if so why is that needed when what you describe above is fairly generic, nothing specific there. Maybe you can elaborate.

“ So if we called the universe god I can go along with that, but that's not what most people would accept as a definition, why not just call it the universe. ”


Because of your world view, you cannot accept anything except the physical
world as the be all end all. I don't.
That is the fundamental difference in our positions.

Not quite true. There is no evidence for me to add that which does not have evidence of. If it can be shown that there is more to something I am willing to change my beliefs. In a way, I do believe that if life can come from what you would consider non-life then maybe we are all just energy transforming from different forms over billions of years. Maybe there are many versions of me in different dimensions as we speak. Who knows. We all get to find out at some point.
 
All you accomplish with such talk is that I am put off.
No matter what I say, you spin it so that it is to my disadvantage.

Well it is pretty much common sense though. If someone likes cars they will talk about cars. That said, all atheists are agnostics only they dont realise it.
 
all atheists are agnostics only they dont realise it.

Nothing more than an argument from personal incredulity. You can't (or don't want to) conceive of an impersonal god therefore you've concluded that it's impossible to legitimately do so. All atheists are doing (with varying degrees of philosophical lucidity and sophistication) is assigning to the universe the same ontological status that you assign to your god. In other words, even though a typical atheist might not describe the universe as god, that's essentially what they believe it to be. Instead of a great I AM it's simply a great IT IS.

A personal god is an extraneous concept. Unless you can demonstrate why one is needed, you're full of shit.
 
jpappl,


jan said:
But in the mean time the way we live our life and conduct ourself expresses our position of belief or lack of.

If you are living your life based on this belief than you know longer view it as a mere belief of possibility. There is no agnosticism in your position, you believe it as fact. Otherwise there is no reason to submit to living your life as if it was a fact.

I said that our beliefs are expressed through the way we live, not that
we live our lives based on our beliefs.
Actions speak louder than words.


This is the difference between someone who believes ET aliens exist somewhere because of the probabilities and someone who is convinced that the earth is being visited by Reptilian like humanoids today.


How is this relevant?


You don't have to take it that far, you are choosing to go there, out of what need ? What has driven you to accept this belief as fact ?


We have to live via the way we are. That is reality.
If you want to change how you are, then you have to do a whole
lot more than talk about it.



I meant there are no in-betweens in how we live our life.
How we live reflect the real situation in spite of what we say.

For you there are not, by your choice. For me there is.


The kind of choosing you are talking about is surface, not deep.


I don't live my life a certain way because there is a god or not. I can not know this answer with the information we have available, but the fact that I don't believe there is one based on my reasoning has no bearing on how I live my life because I am not following the belief in any particular god or religion.


You say that because you are not aware of God, or any reasons for God.
That is why you are called ''atheist'' because you are without God.
Your insistance is you trying to impose your atheism on me.

You have chosen to do so, which is fine but that's what creates the absolute for you, it's your choice not one that has been forced on you.

I am a theist, so I have a capacity to believe in God.
This capacity is not based on because I say so, and neither is your lack of belief. That's just the way we are. We can change if we choose, but it has
to be done realistically, not through intellectualising (although that does add to the overall process of change).


If god did not come into being at some point there is no god.

Again, you are using your world view to determine what is God, or what
God should be. We cannot go any further because of this.


Because they aren't answers. Or more to the point they are answers to questions you can't possible know and therefore can't answer.


I don't think you understand your own question, let alone the answers given.
The reason for this is most probably because you are not sincere in your enquirey. You seek only to trap your opponent so you can claim a victory.

Your simply making up answers to fit your belief and then you go from there.


I know that I'm not.
And I can see that you haven't understood my answers, because you
haven't understood your questions.

The point of the question is, if we can't answer this, then why place something there that doesn't need to be there. Which in this case is a god.


Again, this is your worldview.
Stop imposing it on me.


What god are you believing in ? Can you define this god ?


There's no point in answering these questions, because you're not really interested. You only want some material to once again impose your world view on.
We cannot go any further, untill you open you mind to other possibilities.


This belief doesn't force you to behave in any specific way or does it ? IOW, do you follow any religion and if so why is that needed when what you describe above is fairly generic, nothing specific there. Maybe you can elaborate.

It means I see life from a perspective, just as you see life from your perspective. Religion is an educative process where one is taught how to live, in order to realise the true self (moment to moment reality). From this position one can understand God, and develop a relationship.

Not quite true. There is no evidence for me to add that which does not have evidence of.

God is not matter, and as such there is no physical evidence.

If it can be shown that there is more to something I am willing to change my beliefs.


You cannot change your core with words and demonstrations, only your surface ones. Your surface beliefs are based on who you think you are.

In a way, I do believe that if life can come from what you would consider non-life then maybe we are all just energy transforming from different forms over billions of years. Maybe there are many versions of me in different dimensions as we speak. Who knows. We all get to find out at some point.

You are, in the words of Dickie Dawkins, in light of Darwins theory of evolution, an intellectually fullfilled atheist. Congratulations.

jan.
 
Last edited:
Nothing more than an argument from personal incredulity. You can't (or don't want to) conceive of an impersonal god therefore you've concluded that it's impossible to legitimately do so. All atheists are doing (with varying degrees of philosophical lucidity and sophistication) is assigning to the universe the same ontological status that you assign to your god. In other words, even though a typical atheist might not describe the universe as god, that's essentially what they believe it to be. Instead of a great I AM it's simply a great IT IS.

A personal god is an extraneous concept. Unless you can demonstrate why one is needed, you're full of shit.

Do you need your body?
If you do, can you demonstrate why?

jan.
 
By not being sure about God (by your own admission), and yet discussing about God and accusing people of this and that in relation to God (especially atheists)
you behave like a cheater.

Examples please?

You come here talking about God, and as if you knew the solution to mankind's problems - but then you don't give it to them. This is cheating.

As above.

From this thread alone:


"It is merely the only alternative explanation, and as such, has to be believed." #10


"Because you cannot respond."
"Bullshit statement."
"You're not interested in how ''supernaturalists'' think (if I understand you correctly), you only want to win." #15


"Just for the record, nobody actually knows." #29


"The difficulty comes from yourself."

"You've been given enough answers, enough time, over many years, yet
you ask the same old questions as if for the first time.
Accept the answers, because they are always the same (dead givaway), and
come to some conclusions."

"Stop generalising.
Not all theists are ''sure'' about God.
Try and listen.
For example I have just said ''Not all theists are sure about God'', so now you
shouldn't ever generalise that again." #34


"You real position is atheist, as you do not believe in God.

There are no in-betweens.
/.../ but it is not for me push my belief
on to you. And guess what? I don't." #39


"You say that because you are not aware of God, or any reasons for God.
That is why you are called ''atheist'' because you are without God.
Your insistance is you trying to impose your atheism on me.
/...
Again, you are using your world view to determine what is God, or what
God should be. We cannot go any further because of this." #50
 
Signal,

Well of course I'm discussing God. This is a religion forum. :rolleyes:

I get accused by atheists just as much as I accuse them. The only reason
it stands out is because this is an atheist hang out. And some aren't used to being handled like that, by theists.

Now where in your list is your accusation of
cheating, and knowing the solution to mankinds problems?

jan.
 
I get accused by atheists just as much as I accuse them. The only reason
it stands out is because this is an atheist hang out. And some aren't used to being handled like that, by theists.

It certainly isn't my understanding of what a theist would be like.
I would think that a proper theist would be beyond all anger, all hatred, with no grudges, no use of foul language or calling people names, no hasty accusations.
Instead, most theists here behave just like all other people - except that theists supposedly have God Himself on their side.
Which is a dynamic I don't understand.

If I'd be a theist, I'd be enlightened and I would talk to people only in such a manner that would not aggravate them and would lead them toward God.


Now where in your list is your accusation of
cheating, and

"Just for the record, nobody actually knows." #29


knowing the solution to mankinds problems?

"It is merely the only alternative explanation, and as such, has to be believed." #10

We have to believe it, but nobody actually knows??
 
Jan,

I said that our beliefs are expressed through the way we live, not that
we live our lives based on our beliefs.
Actions speak louder than words.

What's the difference ?

“ This is the difference between someone who believes ET aliens exist somewhere because of the probabilities and someone who is convinced that the earth is being visited by Reptilian like humanoids today. ”


How is this relevant?

It's an analogy

“ You don't have to take it that far, you are choosing to go there, out of what need ? What has driven you to accept this belief as fact ? ”


We have to live via the way we are. That is reality.
If you want to change how you are, then you have to do a whole
lot more than talk about it.

:shrug: Your born either a believer or not ?

“ For you there are not, by your choice. For me there is. ”


The kind of choosing you are talking about is surface, not deep.

And this is what I believe Signal is talking about Jan, when pressed and you don't have answers to questions you should have been asking yourself, you resort to a false high ground.

If only you would try harder to understand, or your not spiritual enough to get it.

Accusing me of not being deep enough, lacking in the willingness to contemplate other scenarios, lacking in introspection such that I can not fathom the concept of god.

I've spent many years doing just that. Including months alone in the woods thinking about the world, why we are here, trying to understand the possibilities and I have asked myself these questions and answered them honestly. This is the difference, you have not, because there is only one honest answer to these questions and you briefly let your guard down here:

Just for the record, nobody actually knows.

and answered it honestly.

But then you go back in your protective shell.

It's not about winning or losing, nobody has these answers, so nobody wins or loses. However, and why I offered the above analogy regarding the idea of aliens and/or alien visitation.

It's one thing to believe in god or aliens and quite another to claim to know how, when, who and why. Which is where religion comes in.

I am trying to determine from you if you can believe in the concept of god without a definition or more to the point your own.

Your insistance is you trying to impose your atheism on me.

Nope, just asking questions. If your belief is based on reason it should be able to stand on it's own.

“ If god did not come into being at some point there is no god. ”

Again, you are using your world view to determine what is God, or what
God should be. We cannot go any further because of this.

Not an answer. Just avoiding the questions.

“ Because they aren't answers. Or more to the point they are answers to questions you can't possible know and therefore can't answer. ”


I don't think you understand your own question, let alone the answers given.
The reason for this is most probably because you are not sincere in your enquirey. You seek only to trap your opponent so you can claim a victory.

See above. I do understand the question. I have asked them of myself and answered honestly. Not trying to claim any victory, there is none to claim.

“ The point of the question is, if we can't answer this, then why place something there that doesn't need to be there. Which in this case is a god. ”


Again, this is your worldview.
Stop imposing it on me.

I'm not, but I point out again that you have previously agreed with this:

Just for the record, nobody actually knows.

So how do you go from not knowing to knowing ?

The reality is it's all in your mind, you choose to believe, for whatever reason and that's ok, it's called faith. I don't understand why theists can't accept this. Does it cheapen the belief in your opinion ?

This belief doesn't force you to behave in any specific way or does it ? IOW, do you follow any religion and if so why is that needed when what you describe above is fairly generic, nothing specific there. Maybe you can elaborate. ”

It means I see life from a perspective, just as you see life from your perspective. Religion is an educative process where one is taught how to live, in order to realise the true self (moment to moment reality). From this position one can understand God, and develop a relationship.

But how can anyone understand that which nobody can know ?

How can anyone define god without making claims of knowledge ?

Not quite true. There is no evidence for me to add that which does not have evidence of. ”

God is not matter, and as such there is no physical evidence.

Claim of knowledge ! You can't know this.

You are, in the words of Dickie Dawkins, in light of Darwins theory of evolution, an intellectually fullfilled atheist. Congratulations.

Actually I am atheist to the question of whether I believe in god. But agnostic in that I realize I can't know for sure. I have no problem with those who believe, but do with those who claim they know because they tend to want to force their particular idea of god on others not their general belief or faith.
 
It certainly isn't my understanding of what a theist would be like.
I would think that a proper theist would be beyond all anger, all hatred, with no grudges, no use of foul language or calling people names, no hasty accusations.
Instead, most theists here behave just like all other people - except that theists supposedly have God Himself on their side.
Which is a dynamic I don't understand.

If I'd be a theist, I'd be enlightened and I would talk to people only in such a manner that would not aggravate them and would lead them toward God.


lol. i guess signal doesn't realize that it's him. he should, because he knows he's an evasive, dishonest troll. i suppose he'll act surprised then, when god smites him worse than any theist dare to.
 
Back
Top