[Poll] Do you believe in God?

[Lightbringer]

I'm going to make some quick points so I can get to bed ill elaborate more later in the day.

First thing scientific proofs aren't the only ways of teaching truth and science requires rationalizing at times to get to conclusions. It seems to me your saying anything you can't be physically verified can't be logically deduced so pretty I don't see it it's not real.

Let's take an example let's say you have three roommates every room in the house there's no mirrors so no way any one get in and out instead of through the front door. Your home the entire time with your roommates in the room which you can't see you walk in the door and see one roommate dead the other bloody can we rationale deduced only one those two can be responsible what happened in the room.

And the key to any logic is causality there needs to be a trail leading back and this trail doesn't have to be directly physically verifiable but can be inferred with general truths.

Also everyone believes something even if you view your position is factual for example you believe being a liberal is factually correct position? There's physically verifiable aspect to my beliefs. But I'm showing you there's solid logic to belief in GOD where physical evidence isn't end all be all and reason is as weighty evidence as scientific. Everyone can give rationale like anyone can provide what they view as legitimate physical evidence doesn't mean it's true.

I'm not assuming what GOD is I'm saying what we can say that rationally has to be true of the origins of reality GOD fits.

But simply we have two general options of the universe we currently see either it always existed or it had a beginning and the implications of this beginning. Which I explain in last post.

I'll address the rest of the points later on today I'll say it's one thing to be skeptical but you've already closed yourself to the possibility that there's a legitimate rationale to GODS existence but instead of assuming it address it maybe my points haven't been simplistic enough but you've made it clear that your firm on your belief that no rationale explanation of GOD'S possible.

I'm hoping to hear a more comprehensive response to my comment when you have time then. This didn't really address some of the points I've made. So I'll respond to when you get the chance to more aptly address them.

And please, if you do decide to continue this discussion, I would ask that you would respond to the points in the format of my own comments, where each section is broken down.

 

[Shunsin no Shisui]

You're using the same logic as the people who tried to explain thunder being the hammering of Thor's anvil or the Sun rising because Ra pulled it every morning.

The unexplained doesn't mean God.

But do they not seem like illogical explanations to you? Whereas the belief such as "God is the source of everything" is more sound, broad and general, thus it applies to pretty much everything. :hmm:

no. why? look around you , where's god to you?

So you are judging everything based on observation? What if you were blind? Would you also believe then that the Sky, the Sun, the Trees and the Buildings around you do not exist as well, just because you wouldn't see them? U_U

I wholeheartedly believe in God. After conducting endless scientific search hoping to find the answer in life through logic and deducing quotations of the most brilliant scientists and inventors of history, I came to conclusion there is no doubt God exists and He proves it with everyday signs. Who created the universe out of nothing? Who created the stars and planets? Who created mankind? Who cultivated plants to grow food? Who bestows His blessings whether be through trials or good? God does all of this yet mankind still lives in denial and ungratefulness. I actually have daily personal experience with God and I've been through personal circumstances always coming out that God is without a doubt there.

Well said, and I agree. *_*

People asked similar questions which lead to the creation of religion.

Who created thunder? It must be Thor hammering on his Anvil.

Who created the night? It must be Nyx covering the sky with her cloak.

Why is the sky blue? We must be inside the head of a Frost Giant.

Stars and planets are created from Nebulas and space debris. They collide and gather, eventually forming into solid structures. They don't just pop into existence.

You asked who created the universe, but if God was behind the wheel, then who created God? If no one created God, then why can't the answer be the same for what created the universe?

And if the universe was indeed created by a higher power, then what is the point of so many empty planets without life? Is that really intelligent design?

Asking who created the Creator, would be beyond our understanding... even if there were an answer to it. I mean let's be honest here. What good is there in receiving an answer which you are not capable of grasping? The fact that it is beyond your comprehension? Nobody knows everything and nobody ever will know everything that exists in the World right now. History is enshrouded with countless inconsistencies and the future is always ahead of us. Life is also temporary, because one day we will cease to exist in this World and nobody knows for certain when a person will die. So just how much will you learn, in a short space of time which itself is limited and unknown? We could keep going, continue pondering over life... :yeah:

What makes you so sure that the planets are "empty" and "without life"? Is it worth having so much faith in modern technology? Are you really convinced that Science can answer all of your questions and doubts?

Why can't matter and energy be eternal?

Who ever said they were not eternal? According to our understanding, they are eternal since energy must exist for matter to form and continue shaping itself. I believe that energy and matter were indeed both created, by God. The energy was then combined with matter to form other creations. But God was the originator of both energy and matter. God alone is the source from where everything came from. Although it's possible that energy and matter, as we know, will both be destroyed. However, it will not at all happen in our life time. That's what I believe.

As it stands, there is no tangible evidence to the existence of God. Yet we are still able to explain much of the workings of the universe without his input.

Your whole notion to God's existence stems from your awe at the universe. God is a simple explanation to things you don't understand.

Would it not be the only and most logical explanation to many things which we don't understand? :yeah:

That's not true. We actually don't know what came before the Big Bang. So to say that energy never existed before the big bang is inaccurate.

I agree with this. The big bang was created from a reaction produced from energy and matter. This is a logical explanation. Other details are not really that important tbh. :erm:

Do you guys ever get tired of posting this topic?

It's an interesting topic. You should make a contribution. Your thoughts/ideas may help us in our hot debate. You might even learn something new yourself. *_*

Then who created God?

If you say that no one created God, then you're argument of everything needs a designer wouldn't apply.

God is supposedly omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent; that is a being infinitely more complex than our universe. But in his case nothing "designed" him, yet a far less complex thing in comparison (our universe) needs a "designer" for it to make sense?

But why would God need to have been created if He alone is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent? :|

Those religious examples you brought up worship multiple Gods, whereas I believe in only one true God, so the distinction is pretty clear.

1. You ask me I'm assuming God created it, but you're assuming God didn't create it, so I'll raise your question to yourself: Do you have a scientific proof God doesn't exist?

2. Science is explaining the process of the natural world, either through observation, experiments or fossil. That's all it does. Nothing scientific suggests God didn't create everything, or God doesn't exist. You could say, in other words, science is an explanation of what God creates and maintains. So as my previous question: You ask me what proof do I have that God exists; I'll ask you what proof do you have God doesn't exist? It works both ways, and I'll admit mine is a conviction but so is yours.

3. So your conviction revolves around popular belief? That's a quite silly if you excuse my saying. Less people believe in God because they think science is contradictory to theism, whereas I believe science is actually explaining God's creation.


1. Is a programmer affected by the game's laws he makes?

2. I think you're confused with what fact, theory and faith are in science. Scientific fact is either observable or tested. Scientific theory is merely an idea, which still draws faith to it. Just in case you didn't know, faith isn't strictly religion; it can be anything that isn't factual. So if you believe the universe occurred randomly, then you have faith in that by definition, regardless of you saying no.

So don't reference me theories that are not observable or tested, especially not recognized by international scientific community. I want facts. Does science say matter can create itself from nothing? No, it doesn't thus universe did not randomly occurs, invalidates your conviction.

I believe the Quran is the word of God not changed for 1400 years, and some verses are scientifically proven. Ancient civilizations from 1400 years ago couldn't have discovered a recent biological fact, like this one as an example:

"And Allah has created every animal from water. Of them there are some that creep on their bellies, some that walk on two legs, and some that walk on four..." (24:45)

Then how did a book from 1400 years ago not been changed whatsoever did?

Asking a questions human and science can't comprehend isn't an answer. Your quest for certain answers is a good quality, but when you try ask questions you can't comprehend, then you won't find answers. That's where faith comes from.

1. Jupiter protects earth from comets is an astronomic fact.

2. God can create and will for anything He wants.

3. God created mankind for the purpose of worshipping him, and he tests us by our conviction harshly. Why make it direct knowing everyone will adhere straight away? Why do you think schools put exams?

What ''seems'' illogical to you can seem logical to someone else. Your whole faith against God's non-existence rises from questions you could never comprehend. Anyway, this wall of text argument is going on for too long.

Truly inspirational points, my friend. May God bless us all with good, beneficial knowledge.

 

[Lightbringer]

But do they not seem like illogical explanations to you? Whereas the belief such as "God is the source of everything" is more sound, broad and general, thus it applies to pretty much everything. :hmm:

My point still stands; you're just not seeing it. You don't understand something so you immediately rationalize it as God's work.

In every single instance that we learn more about how the world works, there's always another explanation that doesn't include God. So to say it is more logically sound that God is the source of everything, when the trend has been discovering the complete opposite since the dawn of scientific research, no it is is not logical.

So you are judging everything based on observation? What if you were blind? Would you also believe then that the Sky, the Sun, the Trees and the Buildings around you do not exist as well, just because you wouldn't see them? U_U

You could feel the sun's warmth, touch trees, and buildings. You can't physically touch God, see him, or hear him.

Asking who created the Creator, would be beyond our understanding... even if there were an answer to it. I mean let's be honest here. What good is there in receiving an answer which you are not capable of grasping? The fact that it is beyond your comprehension? Nobody knows everything and nobody ever will know everything that exists in the World right now. History is enshrouded with countless inconsistencies and the future is always ahead of us. Life is also temporary, because one day we will cease to exist in this World and nobody knows for certain when a person will die. So just how much will you learn, in a short space of time which itself is limited and unknown? We could keep going, continue pondering over life... :yeah:

Well if God needs no creator, then why does the universe need a creator? God is infinitely more complex than the universe, but yet he needs no creator and the universe does? That's flawed reasoning.

What makes you so sure that the planets are "empty" and "without life"? Is it worth having so much faith in modern technology? Are you really convinced that Science can answer all of your questions and doubts?

So Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus all have life on them?

Who ever said they were not eternal? According to our understanding, they are eternal since energy must exist for matter to form and continue shaping itself. I believe that energy and matter were indeed both created, by God. The energy was then combined with matter to form other creations. But God was the originator of both energy and matter. God alone is the source from where everything came from. Although it's possible that energy and matter, as we know, will both be destroyed. However, it will not at all happen in our life time. That's what I believe.

Key word: Believe.

And you just said that they could be eternal and proceed to say that they were created by God. That's a juxtaposition. If energy could be eternal, then it needs no creator, just like your concept of God.

Would it not be the only and most logical explanation to many things which we don't understand? :yeah:

No, because there is no basis for it. It's just an irrational rationality. By saying it's all God's work, you're dismissing that the universe could potentially not have a God.

But why would God need to have been created if He alone is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent? :|

And how do you intimately know God's characteristics?

What if God isn't omnipotent?

What if God isn't eternal?

What if God is dumb and blind, and merely sneezed out the universe?

How do you know what God is?

 

[Sagebee]

Key word: believe.

You believe without evidence.

No, I'm not assuming, I'm being pragmatic. Currently, there is no scientific basis which suggests that a magical being that we can't see and is able to do anything and everything that it wants exists. That is fact.

Now, you can rationalize God's existence however you want, but that is once again, not scientific. It's merely an assumption.

More importantly, you're assuming that you know intimately the characteristics of God.

What if God isn't omnipotent?

What if God isn't intelligent, but merely a blind and dumb God who had the power to create and accidentally sneezed us out?

What if God isn't connected to us at all and our existence holds no value to him?

What if God exists but there is no afterlife?


You don't know anything about God or what he is like. So to say that you know how the universe is tied to God and how you know that everything he does is divine wisdom is a logical fallacy. That is not rational.

I partially responded to this portion earlier so with these addition please address my earlier points


I'm going to elaborate how I know who GOD is in more detail for one we are suppose to know who GOD is because he describes himself with attributes or characteristics that differeniate the creator from the creation. And thats the point of religion GOD passes down to his creation revelation describing who he is and whst he wants and thats how we know his will. And you can verify his attributes to see if such entity is out their and his characteristics make sense. For example one of GOD'S attributes shared in the abrahimic faiths is that GOD is one and uniquely one. While we look in the universe and everything's many and not unique so that pretty much means GOD is the only thing that's nothing's like. GOD is eternal and independent while his creation is finite and dependant GOD is the only thing in existence that's constant while everything else is constantly changing and etc...

But if parts of the religion are not meant to be true, then how does it make that source credible? How do you know what the writers' intentions were? Perhaps he meant everything to be taken literally, but because some things are contradictory, you instead say it's not meant for proof. There was a time when these texts were taken literally and always have been interpreted in different ways. They're all vague in the way they're written, and you're merely assuming that your own interpretation of these texts is how they were meant to be read.

You misunderstood what I'm saying I'm not saying not that these stories aren't meant to be believed they are but that's it and thats not what serve as proof for my beliefs so these miraculous stories aren't something that discredits my faith. Like I said some things are just meant to be tennants of faith a belief can't be your foundation for a belief. And point I was making to you about why I believe in the story of Adam when the physical evidence paints the story of human evolution is in my paradigm world view of reality i believe miracles are possible or pretty much things we wouldn't think possible can happen and it's based on how we view the world. If you view reality as a constant unchanging thing that reality is purely predestined where you think intelligent intervention of a higher power is possible.

Sorry, but I'm simply unable to follow your logic here. I don't see how me being able to decide what I have for breakfast opens up the door for the divine.

If you're saying that we need an eternal will in order for us to be able to decide in the first place, well that's just an unfounded hypothesis.

You're moving deep into philosophy and straying away from reality as we know it. As I've said, philosophy and hypotheticals can be argued indefinitely.

I'm going to try to break it down simply point by point if your still not understanding try to elaborate based on my explanation what you don't get.

First thing to generally understand when I give my reasoning for creator bring or discuss free will it's to simply show a paradigm of an intelligent free reality is possible and that there is rationale necessity for it.

Let's first consider is a creator being possible and or necessary for existence and extrapolate what qualities does the origins of reality need to have. Also like I explained earlier is we know and perceive GOD by his attributes and one of those is the creator so we should consider the likelyhood of a creator agency existing.

Do you agree that the origin of existence has to be eternal and independent? I say it has to be eternal since the origin couldn't of had a beginning and popped out of nothing and I when I say this origin is independent I mean it can't have previous set conditions to exist or it wouldn't be eternal so time can't infinitely stretch back it would have a beginning. It's like if you had a infinite series of parents would you be born and the answer is no. So since the universe is time based or casual it has a beginning or origin. Now we consider options for this origin one option is could the universe always existed and thats a maybe but it would have to be a version of the universe not subject by time so the universe might be an eternal sea of atoms nothing more nothing less but what you have to understand that's an assumption. It's just as likely the entirety of thus universe we see around us has a point of origin where everything began. We see so far the universe is a series of creating forces showing it's need for greater creating first agency since the universe we see so far is finite and dependant showing it requires a creating agency.

Like I said earlier you could assume this creating agency is the universe might be an unintelligent sea of atoms which again is just an assumption. But like I said to you earlier how we know and differeniate GOD is by characteristics that seperate and differeniate the creator from his creation like I said the creator is one and unique while his creation is many and similar, GOD is independent free and eternal while his creation is dependant and finite pretty much meaning he's the master of reality while we are slaves to it.

So what I wanted you to take from that is belief in creator agency is rationale and likely and understand the creator creation dichotomy to perceive and differentiate GOD that this creator agency is uniquely different and seperate from his creation. So things like there's no true unique oneness in this universe or nothing's in it is eternal everything here has a beginning and end. And GOD is the only thing without absolute true freedom and independance while have minor and conditional freedom. So again to clarify it's logical belief in creator agency and that these GOD traits don't exist in this universe but outside it with the creator.

I also bring up the topic of free will because for one belief in the free will is to awknowledge a supernatural reality where free agency in the universe is possible. People's general view and outlook on like is it's deterministic which pretty much means choice shouldn't exist sentience doesn't exist and the universe is a strictly predetermined thing. To the question of does free will well consider this if you believe humans are accountable for their actions you believe in free will. And to believe in free will means that you believe true sentience, awareness, intelligence exists in the universe being intelligent beings that can differeniate choices and freely make decisions and choose what stimuli or reasoning to follow. And we aren't robots who you will be is decided by you and that we don't make random unintelligent reasoning but everything we do has a basis. The belief true sentience, awareness, intelligence, free will exists in the universe which is denied by the naturalistic model of the universe. In my worldview of reality I believe in that the universe is deterministic and predestined but that free intelligent agency exists aswell. So you can subscribe to believing your strictly a robot to the universe and that there's no true you and your choices aren't your own if you choose to believe that's there's nothing more to us then flesh and bones that's devoid of true sentience and choices were accountable to or are we more than animals and there's a spiritual dimension to us where we are more than animals and have true free agency.

So you have to understand the implications of a purely materialistic world view and spiritual one where we have choice and how it effects how we see and act in the world around us of what's possible if there's free agency in the universe and that we are accountable since we are aware of our choices and can rationalize and decide the right choices to make. Simply im saying free will opens door to the supernatural because naturalistically we shouldn't be able to have it where choice is seen as an illusion and no free will no accountability your choices everything you are is the result of genetics and environmental stimuli nothing more so belief no true sentience exists or is possible in the universe.

This isnt toward the free will point but from the perspective of nature you can witness intelligence and might consider sentience in the regulatory force in nature in how the organism of life operates with purpose and reason.

Various experiences where you thought to have seen the divine could be something completely different. The mind is a fickle thing and we can fool ourselves into believing we saw something or rationalizing something we didn't understand at that time as supernatural. I know I've had those experiences myself.

A somewhat relevant example would be when there was a video of a spiraling light in the sky which made people think it was a dimension opening or something of alien origin. That light turned out to be a missile that leaked certain chemicals which created that phenomenon. People rationalize what they don't understand to the first thing they are familiar with. That's how religion started. When people didn't understand what lighting or the sun was, they explained it as best they could as supernatural forces.

Saying you "listened to your heart" as a way to understand that's the place where your soul resides is reverse thinking, because when you "listened to your heart" you already had prior knowledge of the concept of the soul. That idea lead to the search of where it resides in your body and you simply thought it was in your heart.

It's not like you had absolutely no prior knowledge of the concept of the soul and discovered that essence through zero bias.

And if the soul can be monitored we would have already been able to discover it.

It's true people can see hear and assume things that didn't happen that doesn't mean true supernatural occurrences arent possible or ever think there's good reason to believe a supernatural occurencr is true. There are spectacular phenomenon that can be explained naturalistically but there's things you can observe and verify if it's real but shouldn't be naturalistically possible.

Let's say you wished for gold and literal gold popped out in thin air you think you've went insane and think your imagining it and show your friends verifying the occurrence deed occurred and you still have the gold.

Again your coming from the assumption that supernatural occurrences aren't real and your reasoning is because none of the scientific verifications has shown supernatural claim to be true. For one supernatural occurrences aren't meant to be scientifically verifiable if they were GOD would just reveal himself and like I said earlier that's not the rationale basis of my belief it's just personal confirmation that the supernatural is real and possible. Let's say you and your friends witnessed a religious supernatural event and you all were there all seeing the same thing verifying it happened but it will only be a story.

GOD demons and angels might present themselves to you in life in different forms but it's not center to my belief to rationale know they can exist the supernatural is that fantastical when you realize free agency exists in the universe opening the door to the divine a person could have a legitimate supernatural experience and still deny there's a divine reality based on viewing the world strictly materialistically. Going supernatural chasing won't give you rational certainty in the divine but could do the opposite. That's why I explained in earlier post it's just a personal confirmation not my real rationale for what I believe.

And to the heart and soul part again I explained this isn't central reason for my belief just personal confirmation where my mind heart and experience align with GOD'S truth but I explain in earlier post my belief in free will is my reason for believing in the soul and again the soul isn't meant to be physically verifiable by everyone that doesn't mean you can't see rational in its existence and point I was making to you is to make a personal verification the state of your heart and see how doing things conducive to GOD and spirituality would effect it. But its best to start with considering the rationality of GOD first.

Well, I don't like to speculate without data, so I'm not going to theorize on the nature of the universe. It was just a counterpoint to your idea that it could only be God who came before the universe.

If you prescribe to me that your only proof is your own personal experience and a feeling that only you posses that can't be presented to other individuals to be shared and challenged, then that is in fact blind faith.

I addressed the universe origin in earlier post.

Also I explained in earlier posts my basis of belief in GOD and my religious views is I think the proposition of GOD is likely and rationale as I explain in earlier post and the religion I subscribe to I examined all there truth claims and every of there claims and positions are true of the ones that are meant to be rationally verifying any supernatural experiences and internal spiritual experiences are just personal icing on the cake where I have absolute certainty in my views.

You also ignored this point a second time about the substance of God. This is what I said in my last comment:


"Nothing and God can't exist at the same time; it's a paradox. And if God is not nothing, then he is made from a substance. And if God is omnipresent, meaning he is literally everywhere, then there would be evidence of God's existence.

But if you say God is not a substance and is not made from anything, then he is made from nothing, which means God is nothing."

As for the substance of GOD were not suppose to know we just perceive him by his traits that he uniquely has as I explain earlier. We don't have to see GOD to deduce his existence. It's like we don't need to see gravity to be cognizant of it's effects.

And GOD is seperate from his creation his omnipresence comes in the form of perceiving and controlling everything on reality he doesn't need to be of it for his influence to be present everywhere.

 

[UchiGOD]

My point still stands; you're just not seeing it. You don't understand something so you immediately rationalize it as God's work.

In every single instance that we learn more about how the world works, there's always another explanation that doesn't include God. So to say it is more logically sound that God is the source of everything, when the trend has been discovering the complete opposite since the dawn of scientific research, no it is is not logical.

God is not only an explanation to what we don't know,but what we know too. God and logic are not against each other,so is science. Yes,science does explain many things,but just because it's explained that,doesn't mean that God was not included.

You could feel the sun's warmth, touch trees, and buildings. You can't physically touch God, see him, or hear him.

I don't see,hear,touch,or smell feelings. So they don't exist?
Humen have more than just one side(physical).

Well if God needs no creator, then why does the universe need a creator? God is infinitely more complex than the universe, but yet he needs no creator and the universe does? That's flawed reasoning.

What makes you think the universe doesn't need creator?

So Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus all have life on them?

"having life" is not the only thing that makes a planet's being reasonable. Ever single thing in this world has a use,and because we don't comprehend it,doesn't mean it's useless. All of these galaxies,stars,planets,etc,were made to balance our world,and teach us about the universe. Had they not been there,many mathematical and physical laws and formulas would become meaningless.

what if God isn't omnipotent?

You have the universe in your hand,and you can do whatever you want. As small as an atom's moves,to as big as making this universe grow.
This person is not omnipotent?

What if God isn't eternal?

Eternity is a concept of time. And time,is one of God's creatures.He cannot be limited to his own creatures,or be fullyexplained by them.

What if God is dumb and blind, and merely sneezed out the universe?

To see how smart a creator is,you can judge his creations. Are we humen dumb? We have this strong sense of awareness,feelings,logic,science,etc etc, and the one who created us has put these in our souls. I don't really need to mention how unbelievable and complex our body is. This guy who created a masterpiece like us... I can't believe he is blind or dumb.
How do you know what God is?[/QUOTE]

That's when religion enters....

 

[Lightbringer]

god is not only an explanation to what we don't know,but what we know too. God and logic are not against each other,so is science. Yes,science does explain many things,but just because it's explained that,doesn't mean that god was not included.

Well, I've said in my previous comments that I'm not arguing that God can't exist as an absolute. I'm just saying that we don't have any evidence of his existence, so you can't simply assume that he exists and know first-hand what his qualities are.

By saying that God explains everything impedes on the progress of understanding. It's reverse-science because you are starting at that top, which is knowing that God exists, and making your way down to the explain everything else by factoring in God.

Whether or not God exists is not the argument here; the argument is that it's irrational to hold that belief as a certainty since we simply don't know. You can have faith in God, but you must acknowledge that he might not exist in order to be rational.

I don't see,hear,touch,or smell feelings. So they don't exist?
Humen have more than just one side(physical).

You can feel feelings. You know what being happy and sad feels like; and yes we can technically see feelings as scientists can determine what you're feeling through brain activity.

You don't know what God feels like nor can we determine it.

What makes you think the universe doesn't need creator?

The lack of evidence for one and the illogical aspects of the universe which contradict the idea of intelligent design.

"having life" is not the only thing that makes a planet's being reasonable. Ever single thing in this world has a use,and because we don't comprehend it,doesn't mean it's useless. All of these galaxies,stars,planets,etc,were made to balance our world,and teach us about the universe. Had they not been there,many mathematical and physical laws and formulas would become meaningless.

But that makes no sense because if God wrote those laws in the first place, then he could have wrote them in a more practical way. Saying if a star wasn't there would make physical laws meaningless is a moot point because of the fact that God can make anything in any way he wants, but he chose to make our universe illogical in many aspects.

So what is the use of empty husks of planets that can't sustain life?

And if you say that we can't comprehend the reasoning of something illogical, well that is the definition of being illogical. You can't simply credit it to being divine wisdom.

You have the universe in your hand,and you can do whatever you want. As small as an atom's moves,to as big as making this universe grow.
This person is not omnipotent?

Can God make an object so heavy he can't lift it?

Eternity is a concept of time. And time,is one of god's creatures.he cannot be limited to his own creatures,or be fullyexplained by them.

That is assuming that God exists and is eternal. How do you intimately know what qualities God has?

To see how smart a creator is,you can judge his creations. Are we humen dumb? We have this strong sense of awareness,feelings,logic,science,etc etc, and the one who created us has put these in our souls. I don't really need to mention how unbelievable and complex our body is. This guy who created a masterpiece like us... I can't believe he is blind or dumb.

So humans can't be dumb? Human's can't be born with mental inadequacies? It depends on how you judge intelligence. Sure, we've created impressive technology, but we're also ignorant of the fact that we're literally destroying the world we live on. It's like setting your own house on fire. Is that smart?

If humans were a masterpiece, then we would be flawless. But we are susceptible to disease, cancer, mutation, birth defects, etc.

We aren't that physically strong compared to other mammals and we aren't as resistant. Our bodies are also not the most optimal form.

As for other things in the cosmos, space is full of radiation, galaxies constantly clash and destroy one another, and most of the universe is lifeless. In such as chaotic universe, you're telling me that a sovereign order like God created it?

 

[Wolves]

Yeah I believe in myself

 

[UchiGOD]

Well, I've said in my previous comments that I'm not arguing that God can't exist as an absolute. I'm just saying that we don't have any evidence of his existence, so you can't simply assume that he exists and know first-hand what his qualities are.

Well to me,there are lots of evidence,but they seem to be unconvincable to you.

By saying that God explains everything impedes on the progress of understanding. It's reverse-science because you are starting at that top, which is knowing that God exists, and making your way down to the explain everything else by factoring in God.

well yes,I wanted to imply that in case God existed,it would make sense about those I'd mentioned.

Whether or not God exists is not the argument here; the argument is that it's irrational to hold that belief as a certainty since we simply don't know. You can have faith in God, but you must acknowledge that he might not exist in order to be rational.

Why is irrational to be certain that he exists?

You can feel feelings. You know what being happy and sad feels like; and yes we can technically see feelings as scientists can determine what you're feeling through brain activity.

Exactly. You can feel God.

You don't know what God feels like nor can we determine it.

I guess this is in your case only. Ask people who[truly] believe in him,and you'll get the same answer I said.

The lack of evidence for one and the illogical aspects of the universe which contradict the idea of intelligent design.

For lack of evidence: this world(not just cosmics,but even things as little aa cells)is working by rules, and our science is discovering it. This rules could not be created accidentally(as they are RULES and they are complicated enough that make us sure that some kind intelligence must've thought of this....because even little things might coz our universe to go extinct).
The illogical aspects that contradict the idea of intelligent design?
I guess one of your reasons is ,those lifeless planets. Well I did explain above.
I'm saying once again, that because it doesn't make sense to us/we haven't discovered it yet doesn't mean it's illogical. For example if you were born about 80-90 years ago, saying that the universe is expanding would be illogical. Or even simpler, 400 years ago, the idea of Earth rounding around Sun was illogical... But they all make sense now. Same can be said about today. Things that might seem illogical or useless,might one day be discovered to be important and meaningful.
So saying that there are many unnecessary or illogical things in the universe is a weak reason to deny the intelligence creation. Even Isaac newton has accepted the fact that,"This regularity, needs a regulator".

But that makes no sense because if God wrote those laws in the first place, then he could have wrote them in a more practical way. Saying if a star wasn't there would make physical laws meaningless is a moot point because of the fact that God can make anything in any way he wants, but he chose to make our universe illogical in many aspects.

You just answered yourself. God can male anything in anyway he wants,and he decided to male it the way it is now.

So what is the use of empty husks of planets that can't sustain life?

I'm no astronomer,but I'm saying again, because we have not found the reason yet, doesn't mean it's meaningless and illogical.It's rather unknown,not illogical.

And if you say that we can't comprehend the reasoning of something illogical, well that is the definition of being illogical. You can't simply credit it to being divine wisdom.

It depends. You are basing you logic on science, but I'm basing it on what God has said. That's why what I believe is logical/illogical is different than yours.
I'd explain this further if you want.

Can God make an object so heavy he can't lift it?

Heaviness is how much mass and weight does something hold,but God is not made of material,but is the creator.
What you said is a weakness that we humen have(we've made mega machines we can't lift,right?).
Those weaknesses do not apply to God as he has no one.

That is assuming that God exists and is eternal. How do you intimately know what qualities God has?

I explained(somehow)that he exists. Eternal? I'll say again, eternal is a concept of time which is one of his creatures, and he is not limited to them(his creations).

So humans can't be dumb? Human's can't be born with mental inadequacies? It depends on how you judge intelligence. Sure, we've created impressive technology, but we're also ignorant of the fact that we're literally destroying the world we live on. It's like setting your own house on fire. Is that smart?

I guess you are trying to find exceptions/holes in what I said, and digress from the point
People are not born dumb, and it can be fixed/healed by knowledge and medication.Same can be said about mental inadequacies.(yeah I know some of them don't ,I'm saying in general).
My point was,that no other creature has the intelligence we have, and they don't feel things as much as we do(haven't seen an in love animal or plant) . And none of them have access to science like us. The most complex thing is this world , are not beautiful galaxies or black holes,it's our brain(science has said that not me). Isn't it amazing that you can see with the quality of 135 MP with a peace of fat,can hear with 3 tiny bones,can talk with a peace of muscle,think and feel with a wizened piece of meat? Yes,animals are almost the same, but it's even comparable to us.

If humans were a masterpiece, then we would be flawless. But we are susceptible to disease, cancer, mutation, birth defects, etc.

being a masterpiece doesn't mean being perfect. Those you mentioned can be cured(not all, but biologists are discovering new things everyday). Unlike any other, we are able to improve our weaknesees/things we can't do.Couldn't fly? Invented plane,gliders,spaceships,etc. Couldn't swim and go deep in waters? Made Ships,submarines,etc. You sick? Made medicines,do surgerys,etc. What else can do this other than us?

We aren't that physically strong compared to other mammals and we aren't as resistant. Our bodies are also not the most optimal form.

Explained above.

As for other things in the cosmos, space is full of radiation, galaxies constantly clash and destroy one another, and most of the universe is lifeless. In such as chaotic universe, you're telling me that a sovereign order like God created it?

Yes, all of these chaos you mentioned, are happening by rules. You can google that. The fact that we can predict the reasons and time of those flashings,means they're happening on order.

 

[Robbiebah]

Humans will never be able to locate God with some grand maths equation. God is a set of actions you take to better yourself and your envoirnment for as long as possible (eg. quit smoking, feed the homeless, get married and raise kids, cut the grass for you neighbours etc lol). That is essentially the judaic-christian concept of God and the idea is much older than the religion itself it goes back tens of thousands of years. If you want real thought out answers to questions like these look up Dr. Jordan Peterson or even Jordan Peterson vs Sam Harris.

 

[Lightbringer]

I'm going to elaborate how I know who GOD is in more detail for one we are suppose to know who GOD is because he describes himself with attributes or characteristics that differeniate the creator from the creation. And thats the point of religion GOD passes down to his creation revelation describing who he is and whst he wants and thats how we know his will. And you can verify his attributes to see if such entity is out their and his characteristics make sense. For example one of GOD'S attributes shared in the abrahimic faiths is that GOD is one and uniquely one. While we look in the universe and everything's many and not unique so that pretty much means GOD is the only thing that's nothing's like. GOD is eternal and independent while his creation is finite and dependant GOD is the only thing in existence that's constant while everything else is constantly changing and etc...

What do you mean everything in the universe is not unique? Are you identical to someone else in every conceivable way? There is also a square shaped galaxy which is unique to all other galaxies we've discovered so far. The universe is full of uniqueness.

And how do you know that the universe wasn't a "project" crafted by multiple Gods or that there are multiple universes made by different Gods?

Creation and art can also be accidents. Stainless steel, as an example, was an accidental creation.

We don't really know if the universe is really finite or not. There are theories that suggest that the universe has an origin and end, is eternal, or is a cycle.

Saying your source is Abrahamic religion is not credible as there are tons of things within those sacred texts that are debunked, which discredits the validity of those texts as being the words of the divine.

You misunderstood what I'm saying I'm not saying not that these stories aren't meant to be believed they are but that's it and thats not what serve as proof for my beliefs so these miraculous stories aren't something that discredits my faith. Like I said some things are just meant to be tennants of faith a belief can't be your foundation for a belief. And point I was making to you about why I believe in the story of Adam when the physical evidence paints the story of human evolution is in my paradigm world view of reality i believe miracles are possible or pretty much things we wouldn't think possible can happen and it's based on how we view the world. If you view reality as a constant unchanging thing that reality is purely predestined where you think intelligent intervention of a higher power is possible.

So you are essentially picking and choosing what stories to believe based on your own world view?

So if you believe in the story of Genesis, then you believe everything that happened within Genesis, correct?

I'm going to try to break it down simply point by point if your still not understanding try to elaborate based on my explanation what you don't get.

First thing to generally understand when I give my reasoning for creator bring or discuss free will it's to simply show a paradigm of an intelligent free reality is possible and that there is rationale necessity for it.

Let's first consider is a creator being possible and or necessary for existence and extrapolate what qualities does the origins of reality need to have. Also like I explained earlier is we know and perceive GOD by his attributes and one of those is the creator so we should consider the likelyhood of a creator agency existing.

Do you agree that the origin of existence has to be eternal and independent? I say it has to be eternal since the origin couldn't of had a beginning and popped out of nothing and I when I say this origin is independent I mean it can't have previous set conditions to exist or it wouldn't be eternal so time can't infinitely stretch back it would have a beginning. It's like if you had a infinite series of parents would you be born and the answer is no. So since the universe is time based or casual it has a beginning or origin. Now we consider options for this origin one option is could the universe always existed and thats a maybe but it would have to be a version of the universe not subject by time so the universe might be an eternal sea of atoms nothing more nothing less but what you have to understand that's an assumption. It's just as likely the entirety of thus universe we see around us has a point of origin where everything began. We see so far the universe is a series of creating forces showing it's need for greater creating first agency since the universe we see so far is finite and dependant showing it requires a creating agency.

Like I said earlier you could assume this creating agency is the universe might be an unintelligent sea of atoms which again is just an assumption. But like I said to you earlier how we know and differeniate GOD is by characteristics that seperate and differeniate the creator from his creation like I said the creator is one and unique while his creation is many and similar, GOD is independent free and eternal while his creation is dependant and finite pretty much meaning he's the master of reality while we are slaves to it.

So what I wanted you to take from that is belief in creator agency is rationale and likely and understand the creator creation dichotomy to perceive and differentiate GOD that this creator agency is uniquely different and seperate from his creation. So things like there's no true unique oneness in this universe or nothing's in it is eternal everything here has a beginning and end. And GOD is the only thing without absolute true freedom and independance while have minor and conditional freedom. So again to clarify it's logical belief in creator agency and that these GOD traits don't exist in this universe but outside it with the creator.

I also bring up the topic of free will because for one belief in the free will is to awknowledge a supernatural reality where free agency in the universe is possible. People's general view and outlook on like is it's deterministic which pretty much means choice shouldn't exist sentience doesn't exist and the universe is a strictly predetermined thing. To the question of does free will well consider this if you believe humans are accountable for their actions you believe in free will. And to believe in free will means that you believe true sentience, awareness, intelligence exists in the universe being intelligent beings that can differeniate choices and freely make decisions and choose what stimuli or reasoning to follow. And we aren't robots who you will be is decided by you and that we don't make random unintelligent reasoning but everything we do has a basis. The belief true sentience, awareness, intelligence, free will exists in the universe which is denied by the naturalistic model of the universe. In my worldview of reality I believe in that the universe is deterministic and predestined but that free intelligent agency exists aswell. So you can subscribe to believing your strictly a robot to the universe and that there's no true you and your choices aren't your own if you choose to believe that's there's nothing more to us then flesh and bones that's devoid of true sentience and choices were accountable to or are we more than animals and there's a spiritual dimension to us where we are more than animals and have true free agency.

So you have to understand the implications of a purely materialistic world view and spiritual one where we have choice and how it effects how we see and act in the world around us of what's possible if there's free agency in the universe and that we are accountable since we are aware of our choices and can rationalize and decide the right choices to make. Simply im saying free will opens door to the supernatural because naturalistically we shouldn't be able to have it where choice is seen as an illusion and no free will no accountability your choices everything you are is the result of genetics and environmental stimuli nothing more so belief no true sentience exists or is possible in the universe.

This isnt toward the free will point but from the perspective of nature you can witness intelligence and might consider sentience in the regulatory force in nature in how the organism of life operates with purpose and reason.

Well I've looked up the arguments for free will today, and I have to say there's a lot of holes in it and it's not compelling argument to the existence of God in any capacity. Based on what I've read, the world follows determinism. Everything in the universe is a reaction to something, whether it be chemical reactions of the brain or particles hitting one another. There is no such thing as free will because external forces influence what you're thinking, feeling, and what you are going to do next. The physical world is deterministic. If you knock down a domino, the rest will follow. So yes, technically everything is predetermined.

It's true people can see hear and assume things that didn't happen that doesn't mean true supernatural occurrences arent possible or ever think there's good reason to believe a supernatural occurencr is true. There are spectacular phenomenon that can be explained naturalistically but there's things you can observe and verify if it's real but shouldn't be naturalistically possible.

Things happening that we don't understand yet is not the same as something that never happened and have no evidence to, such as the soul or God.

Let's say you wished for gold and literal gold popped out in thin air you think you've went insane and think your imagining it and show your friends verifying the occurrence deed occurred and you still have the gold.

Ok, but nothing like that has ever happened, so your example falls flat of reason.

Again your coming from the assumption that supernatural occurrences aren't real and your reasoning is because none of the scientific verifications has shown supernatural claim to be true. For one supernatural occurrences aren't meant to be scientifically verifiable if they were GOD would just reveal himself and like I said earlier that's not the rationale basis of my belief it's just personal confirmation that the supernatural is real and possible. Let's say you and your friends witnessed a religious supernatural event and you all were there all seeing the same thing verifying it happened but it will only be a story.

Simply because you witness an event that you didn't understand doesn't mean it can't be explained without God.

An example would be there was a video of what looked like a rings of light opening in the sky, and people assumed that this light was an opening of another dimension or something extraterrestrial. It turned out that this ring of light was simply a chemical leak from a missile test which produced the effect.

So claiming that an unexplained phenomenon is divine by default is a naive way of thinking.

GOD demons and angels might present themselves to you in life in different forms but it's not center to my belief to rationale know they can exist the supernatural is that fantastical when you realize free agency exists in the universe opening the door to the divine a person could have a legitimate supernatural experience and still deny there's a divine reality based on viewing the world strictly materialistically. Going supernatural chasing won't give you rational certainty in the divine but could do the opposite. That's why I explained in earlier post it's just a personal confirmation not my real rationale for what I believe.

Well, like you said, it's your own personal belief. It's not something that can be proven or tested.

And to the heart and soul part again I explained this isn't central reason for my belief just personal confirmation where my mind heart and experience align with GOD'S truth but I explain in earlier post my belief in free will is my reason for believing in the soul and again the soul isn't meant to be physically verifiable by everyone that doesn't mean you can't see rational in its existence and point I was making to you is to make a personal verification the state of your heart and see how doing things conducive to GOD and spirituality would effect it. But its best to start with considering the rationality of GOD first.

I've responded to the free will argument above, which I do not find compelling in the slightest. If that is your strongest foundation in the belief of God, then I would strongly advise you to broaden your horizon and look at the counter-arguments.

I addressed the universe origin in earlier post.

Also I explained in earlier posts my basis of belief in GOD and my religious views is I think the proposition of GOD is likely and rationale as I explain in earlier post and the religion I subscribe to I examined all there truth claims and every of there claims and positions are true of the ones that are meant to be rationally verifying any supernatural experiences and internal spiritual experiences are just personal icing on the cake where I have absolute certainty in my views.

Which religion and which claims are true?

If you're citing a holy text, it'd have to be consistent. A broken clock is right twice a day. So a religious text having some truth to it doesn't validate it as a divine piece of work, especially when there is so much contradiction and falsehoods within them.

As for the substance of GOD were not suppose to know we just perceive him by his traits that he uniquely has as I explain earlier. We don't have to see GOD to deduce his existence. It's like we don't need to see gravity to be cognizant of it's effects.

And GOD is seperate from his creation his omnipresence comes in the form of perceiving and controlling everything on reality he doesn't need to be of it for his influence to be present everywhere.

This really just sounds like a convenient excuse. This goes back to my earlier point about how you will always rationalize a way for God to exist, not matter the illogical aspects or the data that is provided.

But you just made a contradiction. You said God is separate from his creation, but yet we are supposed to perceive him? That is a logical fallacy.

So God made himself separate from creation in attempt to hide his presence, yet he expects us to believe in him? Makes no sense.

Omnipresence means being literally everywhere and in everything. If God is omnipresent, then all of matter is part of God, and if God is not a substance then how did he create something from nothing?

If you say that God is able to create a universe out of nothing, then you must also acknowledge that the universe can come from nothing.



Let me ask you this, what sort of scientific discovery would make you question the existence of God?

 

[Lightbringer]

Well to me,there are lots of evidence,but they seem to be unconvincable to you.

Is that evidence physical in nature? If not, then it's not evidence.

well yes,I wanted to imply that in case God existed,it would make sense about those I'd mentioned.

But all you said was that God is science and tried to make the analogy about how we can't see feelings, even though we could.

That's not an argument.

Why is irrational to be certain that he exists?

Because there is no evidence.

If you say believing something as a certainty is rational, then would you wager your entire wealth on winning the lottery the next day? Would you be certain that you would win without any sort of evidence?

If the answer is no, then that same principle is applied to you believing God is a certainty.

Exactly. You can feel God.

And what does God feel like?

And if you can feel God, then that would be a monumental discovery that would leave your name etched in all of history.

So if you can feel God, then provide the evidence to science.

I guess this is in your case only. Ask people who[truly] believe in him,and you'll get the same answer I said.

And what about those that truly believed in other Gods? Do they not count? Their Gods turned out to be not real, but yeah they sacrificed their lives for them.

Belief is not reality. People are able to convince themselves of falsehoods that didn't occur. The mind is susceptible to all sorts of deceit, especially from your own bias.

For lack of evidence: this world(not just cosmics,but even things as little aa cells)is working by rules, and our science is discovering it. This rules could not be created accidentally(as they are RULES and they are complicated enough that make us sure that some kind intelligence must've thought of this....because even little things might coz our universe to go extinct).
The illogical aspects that contradict the idea of intelligent design?
I guess one of your reasons is ,those lifeless planets. Well I did explain above.
I'm saying once again, that because it doesn't make sense to us/we haven't discovered it yet doesn't mean it's illogical. For example if you were born about 80-90 years ago, saying that the universe is expanding would be illogical. Or even simpler, 400 years ago, the idea of Earth rounding around Sun was illogical... But they all make sense now. Same can be said about today. Things that might seem illogical or useless,might one day be discovered to be important and meaningful.
So saying that there are many unnecessary or illogical things in the universe is a weak reason to deny the intelligence creation. Even Isaac newton has accepted the fact that,"This regularity, needs a regulator".

If we follow your example, the universe expanding being thought to be illogical would be because there was no evidence to support that idea. Even if it's true, you can't claim something as a certainty without a provable basis.

We have no evidence of God. And even IF he exists, saying that he exists as a certainty without any sort of tangible evidence to suggest this, then that is illogical because you're essentially just saying your imagination is real.

You are rationalizing illogical aspects of the universe into the form of divine wisdom. You'll never be convinced otherwise, because you'll always twist the logic to formulate around your preconceived notion of God.

You just answered yourself. God can male anything in anyway he wants,and he decided to male it the way it is now.

I'm no astronomer,but I'm saying again, because we have not found the reason yet, doesn't mean it's meaningless and illogical.It's rather unknown,not illogical.

Crediting illogical parts of the universe to a supreme intelligence of which there is no proof of, is illogical no matter how you slice it.

It depends. You are basing you logic on science, but I'm basing it on what God has said. That's why what I believe is logical/illogical is different than yours.
I'd explain this further if you want.

@Bold: And which religious text are you referring to when you say that?

So if you believe your holy book is the word from God, then it must be flawless and without error, correct?

Heaviness is how much mass and weight does something hold,but God is not made of material,but is the creator.
What you said is a weakness that we humen have(we've made mega machines we can't lift,right?).
Those weaknesses do not apply to God as he has no one.

Let me rephrase the question. Can God create something he can't uncreate?

I explained(somehow)that he exists. Eternal? I'll say again, eternal is a concept of time which is one of his creatures, and he is not limited to them(his creations).

Again, how do you know this?

I guess you are trying to find exceptions/holes in what I said, and digress from the point
People are not born dumb, and it can be fixed/healed by knowledge and medication.Same can be said about mental inadequacies.(yeah I know some of them don't ,I'm saying in general).
My point was,that no other creature has the intelligence we have, and they don't feel things as much as we do(haven't seen an in love animal or plant) . And none of them have access to science like us. The most complex thing is this world , are not beautiful galaxies or black holes,it's our brain(science has said that not me). Isn't it amazing that you can see with the quality of 135 MP with a peace of fat,can hear with 3 tiny bones,can talk with a peace of muscle,think and feel with a wizened piece of meat? Yes,animals are almost the same, but it's even comparable to us.

Well you just said that some of these mental handicaps can't be fixed and happen at birth. Why would God not give an unborn child a chance at intelligence or life?

We're not that advanced when it comes to the potential of what we could have accomplished. Humans aren't even classified as a Type 1 civilization, which is the lowest of the categorized technological tiers.

How do you know that there isn't life in other solar systems that are similar to our own or more intelligent?

You're not giving me evidence to God, you're simply saying that you're amazed at how complex our world is and give that credit to God with no actual proof of his existence.

This goes back to an early analogy I've made about the way you rationalize God and Pagan beliefs and how they were amazed at the world and credited its wonders to Gods, just like you are doing.

being a masterpiece doesn't mean being perfect. Those you mentioned can be cured(not all, but biologists are discovering new things everyday). Unlike any other, we are able to improve our weaknesees/things we can't do.Couldn't fly? Invented plane,gliders,spaceships,etc. Couldn't swim and go deep in waters? Made Ships,submarines,etc. You sick? Made medicines,do surgerys,etc. What else can do this other than us?

Again, what you're presenting is not an argument for the existence of God. You're at awe at our reality and default to thinking it's the work of a Divine being. That is not logical.

Yes, all of these chaos you mentioned, are happening by rules. You can google that. The fact that we can predict the reasons and time of those flashings,means they're happening on order.

And what rules are those? What flashbangs are you referring to?

Let me ask you this. Is there any scientific discovery that would lead you to question the existence of God?

 

[Sagebee]

What do you mean everything in the universe is not unique? Are you identical to someone else in every conceivable way? There is also a square shaped galaxy which is unique to all other galaxies we've discovered so far. The universe is full of uniqueness.

And how do you know that the universe wasn't a "project" crafted by multiple Gods or that there are multiple universes made by different Gods?

Creation and art can also be accidents. Stainless steel, as an example, was an accidental creation.

We don't really know if the universe is really finite or not. There are theories that suggest that the universe has an origin and end, is eternal, or is a cycle.

Saying you're source is Abrahamic religion is not credible as there are tons of things within those sacred texts that are debunked, which discredits the validity of those texts as being the words of the divine.

You misunderstood what i meant by uniqueness, I mean uniqueness in the sense that nothing exists similar to it or shares any traits with attributes GOD solely has that his creation doesnt.

And based on the creator creation dichotomy I've explained to you reason GOD is only one because that's a unique trait of his like everything else is many. While creation is many and shares traits.

You can assume a creator agency wouldn't be intelligent but I explain in my free will explanation existence of free will would show intelligence exists. Also we know universe as we know it had a beginning what's before that is debatable but whatever the origin it would have to be eternal and independent. I explain that I believe this creator agency has unique attributes not in this universe as explained in the creator creation differences. And that existence of free will would be of reality intelligence and sentience exists that's not allowed in a materialistic world view of reality.

As for your belief that all religions have been debunked can you acknowledge the possibility your reaffirming a bias? That you only know of information debunking it or that you prefer explanations that do. Again in my belief I believe the majority of religions have been corrupted but I believe one hasn't and I've researched it's truth claims to see if it's true and consistent and I've looked at explanations for and against and seeing things like if there's scientific validity to it and I digged and was critical to see if that was the case. Let me ask you this in your personal opinion how in depth has your research of the validity of all religions been? If I had to guess and this is for most people you looked at convenient explanations that they're false or in all honesty most people don't evenly biasly research but assume whatever opinion they have in the case anything you think debunking my religious inclination I've thoroughly looked over. But consider this you want to keep assuming that I'm just biasly believing what I want believe and seeking rationality to it but can't you acknowledge the same could be true for you? Let's say when you die you find out GOD was real and shows you the truth was out there if you were willing to find it? In the end of the day the truth isn't what we decide there's an objective one out there and we have to be honest and critical to find it.

So you are essentially picking and choosing what stories to believe based on your own world view?

So if you believe in the story of Genesis, then you believe everything that happened within Genesis, correct?

Nope that's not what I'm saying im saying certain things are just meant for belief and to test people many people will superficially assume these stories aren't possible based on the materialistic naturalistic outlook most people have that doesn't mean GOD doesn't offer proofs and he puts it in his revelation.

I don't subscribe to the Christian belief of genesis specially the belief that they believe the earth some thousand years old other than that I believe the rest in it's entirety.

Well I've looked up the arguments for free will today, and I have to say there's a lot of holes in it and it's not compelling argument to the existence of God in any capacity. Based on what I've read, the world follows determinism. Everything in the universe is a reaction to something, whether it be chemical reactions of the brain or particles hitting one another. There is no such thing as free will because external forces influence what you're thinking, feeling, and what you are going to do next. The physical world is deterministic. If you knock down a domino, the rest will follow. So yes, technically everything is predetermined.

No that's an assumption you assuming for your own convenience that the universe is purely deterministic. It's in sciences it has a deep founded bias to assume that there's nothing more to the universe than the universe that's why the assumption exists atoms can't be created or destroyed. That's why before the theory if the big bang existed it was assumed that the universe was infinite so no supernatural entity or GOD could be invoked for the beginning of existence. Like I said if you believe as humans were accountable you believe free will exists.

Things happening that we don't understand yet is not the same as something that never happened and have no evidence to, such as the soul or God.

I've explained the existence of free will is best explanation for existence of the soul and regardless if you believe I'm saying has rationality to it you've made it clear your set on the position that a rationality can't exist.

Ok, but nothing like that has ever happened, so your example falls flat of reason.

That's the thing how do you know it hasn't happened or cant happen?

Simply because you witness an event that you didn't understand doesn't mean it can't be explained without God.

An example would be there was a video of what looked like a rings of light opening in the sky, and people assumed that this light was an opening of another dimension or something extraterrestrial. It turned out that this ring of light was simply a chemical leak from a missile test which produced the effect.

So claiming that an unexplained phenomenon is divine by default is a naive way of thinking.

First thing is in my case im not assuming events are supernatural or divine in origin im explaining to you if you witness something it's possible to personally verify what you witnessed is real and rationalize based on the circumstance this is only possible divine in origins. Let's take for example demon possessions in many cases people that think they are possessed are going through mental issues but you can distinguish true demon possessions where the person makes unhumanly voices and speak in languages ancient ones they don't know and say information that it shouldn't be possible to know. Some seemingly amazing things are just good tricks take magic for example doesn't mean true magic isn't real or possible (sidenote magic or dark magic is really calling on demons to do things for you like psychics many of them are just tricksters but some invoke demons for answers)

Well, like you said, it's your own personal belief. It's not something that can be proven or tested.

As far as personal experiences goes some else can't verify for you if it occurred doesn't mean you can't verify yourself in that instance. There are things that shouldn't be regularly naturalistically possible like turning a stick into a snake it comes down to what you view,possible of reality and if you believe reality is controlled by an intelligent force which I've given my rationale why then you would think its possible.

I've responded to the free will argument above, which I do not find compelling in the slightest. If that is your strongest foundation in the belief of God, then I would strongly advise you to broaden your horizon and look at the counter-arguments.

Can you elaborate why I've actually looked at the reasoning for and against and in my opinion the logic for no free will is flimsy. If you've found the opposite let me know so I can look at it.

Which religion and which claims are true?

If you're citing a holy text, it'd have to be consistent. A broken clock is right twice a day. So a religious text having some truth to it doesn't validate it as a divine piece of work, especially when there is so much contradiction and falsehoods within them.

As of yet I don't want to get into my religious proofs for now I want to stick with the rationality of GOD'S existence because if we go into it now it won't be fruitful because right now your minds closed to the possibility a rationality exists and you'll say im just rationalizing I do have scientifically verifiable basis of belief aswell and I believe I'm 100% scientifically compatible if a religion has one falseness to it which is exceptionally good but still makes the entire religion false but let's reach a conclusion to if there's a legitimate rationale basis to believe a GOD entity could exist.

This really just sounds like a convenient excuse. This goes back to my earlier point about how you will always rationalize a way for God to exist, not matter the illogical aspects or the data that is provided.

But you just made a contradiction. You said God is separate from his creation, but yet we are supposed to perceive him? That is a logical fallacy.

So God made himself separate from creation in attempt to hide his presence, yet he expects us to believe in him? Makes no sense.

Omnipresence means being literally everywhere and in everything. If God is omnipresent, then all of matter is part of God, and if God is not a substance then how did he create something from nothing?

If you say that God is able to create a universe out of nothing, then you must also acknowledge that the universe can come from nothing.



Let me ask you this, what sort of scientific discovery would make you question the existence of God?

Why do you say it's an convenient excuse in my worldview in this life GOD isn't meant to be seen and that's to test us but if you want to know he exists you can people that don't believe reasoning dwindles down to since I can't see him he either doesn't exist or can't know he exists.

About his omnipresence I already explained GOD is separate and different from his creation so he's not omnipresent as you think.

On how he created I dont know GOD says he is separate from his creation so whatever manner he creates I know it's separate from him I don't need to understand how he created to know there's a creator and chalk it to it's not meant to be humanly understood. If your saying GOD can't manifest something separate to himself we don't know what reality is to him from his perspective the logic we operate by is one of this universe did GOD create from himself maybe I'm not sure if he did does that mean he's separate from his creation it could in the end of the day we don't know what existence is to him doesn't mean he hasn't let signs indicating his existence.

As for what would it take for me not to believe in GOD I would need to be shown to me rationally GOD entity doesn't exist. But for my perspective to make the questioning of the the existence of GOD possibly pointless if every religion was proven to be verifiably false then if GOD does or doesn't exist there wouldn't be any stakes in knowing the truth. Scientifically the existence of GOD can't be proven unless there 100% absolute irrefutable proof that the beginning of reality was just only atoms or some other materialistic explanation and that's what the beginning of existence truly is. I'm not sure how you can absolutely refute the existence of free will. Like I said the accumulation of all my proofs point to divinity. If there's a singular thing you want point to take free will.

But I had to guess what it would take for you to believe GOD exists he would have to reveal himself because you assume there's no rationality in his existence and if scientific proof were provided you said it's coincidence and if you saw a miracle you would assume it's false or your crazy or maybe even say aliens did it. There's credible scientists who believe the origin of life is aliens point I'm making ispeople can choose to believe what they want doesn't mean there isn't an objective truth that can be found and whatever perspective you come from you shouldn't assume and everyone's susceptible to bias and irrationality even if you don't know or believe GOD exists and science and scientists can be susceptible to it aswell.

 

[Lightbringer]

This will be my last response.

You misunderstood what i meant by uniqueness, I mean uniqueness in the sense that nothing exists similar to it or shares any traits with attributes GOD solely has that his creation doesnt.

And based on the creator creation dichotomy I've explained to you reason GOD is only one because that's a unique trait of his like everything else is many. While creation is many and shares traits.

Or it simply means that nothing like the concept of God exists....

So God can't create duplicates of himself?

As for your belief that all religions have been debunked can you acknowledge the possibility your reaffirming a bias? That you only know of information debunking it or that you prefer explanations that do. Again in my belief I believe the majority of religions have been corrupted but I believe one hasn't and I've researched it's truth claims to see if it's true and consistent and I've looked at explanations for and against and seeing things like if there's scientific validity to it and I digged and was critical to see if that was the case. Let me ask you this in your personal opinion how in depth has your research of the validity of all religions been? If I had to guess and this is for most people you looked at convenient explanations that they're false or in all honesty most people don't evenly biasly research but assume whatever opinion they have in the case anything you think debunking my religious inclination I've thoroughly looked over. But consider this you want to keep assuming that I'm just biasly believing what I want believe and seeking rationality to it but can't you acknowledge the same could be true for you? Let's say when you die you find out GOD was real and shows you the truth was out there if you were willing to find it? In the end of the day the truth isn't what we decide there's an objective one out there and we have to be honest and critical to find it.

Once again, you're giving me nothing but hypotheticals. Ifs and buts don't support that God is real.

And as I've stated many times in my comments, I'm basing my argument on what we currently know. If it turns out that we discover some fundamental truth to the existence of God, then my position will change as well. But as it stands, no such evidence to suggest his existence exists.

My research into the validity of religion has been pretty substantial as I used to study religion back when I had faith in the divine. The whole reason I stopped believing in any religion was due to what I've uncovered in my research .

Let me give you an example. In the Abrahamic religions, it is taught that Moses freed the enslaved Jews from Egypt, split the sea, and crossed the desert for 40 years.

Yet there is absolutely no archaeological evidence of millions of Jews ever being enslaved or even being in Egypt at all, let alone a mass migration from Egypt to Israel. No evidence. None!

This is the single most important story of the Torah and also incorporated within the bible. Also the texts of the Exodus were examined and determined to have been written a thousand years after the described events of the Exodus.




Another example would be this passage from the bible:


Matthew 27:50-54:

"And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.

At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people."


So dead saints were resurrected and went into a crowded city for many people too see, yet once again there is no historical records or archaeological evidence of this ever happening. I'm pretty sure seeing the undead walk around in a major city would be something that history would remember.

So no, there is no validity.

Nope that's not what I'm saying im saying certain things are just meant for belief and to test people many people will superficially assume these stories aren't possible based on the materialistic naturalistic outlook most people have that doesn't mean GOD doesn't offer proofs and he puts it in his revelation.

So God intentionally makes stories up and is intentionally wrong? Again, do you not see how you're being irrational and how you will always justify God no matter what?

I don't subscribe to the Christian belief of genesis specially the belief that they believe the earth some thousand years old other than that I believe the rest in it's entirety.

Well I already gave you two examples above, but here's one for Genesis specifically since you said you believe the rest of it in its entirety.


GENESIS 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."


GENESIS 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

"And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof."

No that's an assumption you assuming for your own convenience that the universe is purely deterministic. It's in sciences it has a deep founded bias to assume that there's nothing more to the universe than the universe that's why the assumption exists atoms can't be created or destroyed. That's why before the theory if the big bang existed it was assumed that the universe was infinite so no supernatural entity or GOD could be invoked for the beginning of existence. Like I said if you believe as humans were accountable you believe free will exists.

I've explained the existence of free will is best explanation for existence of the soul and regardless if you believe I'm saying has rationality to it you've made it clear your set on the position that a rationality can't exist.

You're claiming science has deep founded bias, yet you are avidly defending how God is real without any sort of basis of proof.

We live in a physical reality and we operate under physical laws. Newtons law, for one, states that an object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force; and the universe is in constant motion, whether it be gravity, planets, neutrons, or our cells. We simply can't act without external force and each external force (which there are millions of) influences our actions and thoughts.


I'll link a video which I think did a pretty good job at describing why determinalism is logical and free will is not.


[video=youtube;vCGtkDzELAI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCGtkDzELAI&t=362s&ab_channel=CrashCourse[/video]

That's the thing how do you know it hasn't happened or cant happen?

Because there is no record of anything similar happening and it would be a baseless speculation for me to say that something impossible like Gold popping out of thin air could happen in the future. It's a silly argument.

Again, you're giving hypethical scenarios. There are an infinite amount of things we can say "could happen" or "could exist" but just because it "could" doesn't mean it does.

First thing is in my case im not assuming events are supernatural or divine in origin im explaining to you if you witness something it's possible to personally verify what you witnessed is real and rationalize based on the circumstance this is only possible divine in origins. Let's take for example demon possessions in many cases people that think they are possessed are going through mental issues but you can distinguish true demon possessions where the person makes unhumanly voices and speak in languages ancient ones they don't know and say information that it shouldn't be possible to know. Some seemingly amazing things are just good tricks take magic for example doesn't mean true magic isn't real or possible (sidenote magic or dark magic is really calling on demons to do things for you like psychics many of them are just tricksters but some invoke demons for answers)

Ok, but that is why we follow the trend. If the trend is, every time someone thought an unexplained phenomenon was divine in nature, but it has always been discovered to be more conventionally explained, then rationalizing that everything that you are amazed by is divine in origin is irrational thinking.

As far as personal experiences goes some else can't verify for you if it occurred doesn't mean you can't verify yourself in that instance. There are things that shouldn't be regularly naturalistically possible like turning a stick into a snake it comes down to what you view,possible of reality and if you believe reality is controlled by an intelligent force which I've given my rationale why then you would think its possible.

Not really sure how to respond. This is your personal belief based solely on your personal experiences. But you are not doubting that you could be wrong in what you thought to have experienced.

Can you elaborate why I've actually looked at the reasoning for and against and in my opinion the logic for no free will is flimsy. If you've found the opposite let me know so I can look at it.

Well I think my reply about Newtons Law and the video I've linked should be enough. There are tons of videos that do a better job than I can in refuting free will thinking.

The arguments for Free Will are not strong, and if they were, then it'd be easier to persuade others of it. The idea of free will is not rooted in reality and the laws of physics as we know them. It's a philosophical assumption vs founded knowledge. The debate is not evenly scaled.

As of yet I don't want to get into my religious proofs for now I want to stick with the rationality of GOD'S existence because if we go into it now it won't be fruitful because right now your minds closed to the possibility a rationality exists and you'll say im just rationalizing I do have scientifically verifiable basis of belief aswell and I believe I'm 100% scientifically compatible if a religion has one falseness to it which is exceptionally good but still makes the entire religion false but let's reach a conclusion to if there's a legitimate rationale basis to believe a GOD entity could exist.

Let me just say this; if you have a scientifically verifiable basis for the existence of God, then you should present this to a science academy. Because if your claims are true and are as strong as you affirm, then you would make a revolutionary breakthrough in the way we interpret science and your name will be etched in the annals of history.

Considering that no scientist within a relative field has ever held these beliefs, then I find your scientifically verifiable basis to be very unlikely.

Why do you say it's an convenient excuse in my worldview in this life GOD isn't meant to be seen and that's to test us but if you want to know he exists you can people that don't believe reasoning dwindles down to since I can't see him he either doesn't exist or can't know he exists.

So if God is testing humans because we are special, then why does he create miscarriages or mental retardation where the individual has no chance at being tested?

And why did God take so long to create humans or life for that matter?

Humans have only existed for roughly 200,000 years....

Humans weren't even the first species on this planet. It took billions of years for us to finally show up on Earth.

And it took about 8 billion years after the Big Bang for Earth to even be created.

What was God doing all of that time, taking a nap? Why didn't he just pop us into existence and the rest of the world in 6 days, like the Bible says, instead of dragging over billions and billions of years?



Again, this is just your belief with no proof of anything you say. You just think you're being tested, but you really don't know. For all you know, you have no purpose and are just a cosmic accident.

About his omnipresence I already explained GOD is separate and different from his creation so he's not omnipresent as you think.

No, that's what you think. Again, you don't know God. You don't know what he's like or what he's thinking. So to say that you know how omnipresent he is, is a fairytale.

Besides, you already said that you can feel your soul. The soul is part of God. So your own statement falls apart.

On how he created I dont know GOD says he is separate from his creation so whatever manner he creates I know it's separate from him I don't need to understand how he created to know there's a creator and chalk it to it's not meant to be humanly understood. If your saying GOD can't manifest something separate to himself we don't know what reality is to him from his perspective the logic we operate by is one of this universe did GOD create from himself maybe I'm not sure if he did does that mean he's separate from his creation it could in the end of the day we don't know what existence is to him doesn't mean he hasn't let signs indicating his existence.

Again, that phrase is indicative of what I've been telling you this entire time. You're just rationalizing everything, no matter how illogical or scientifically unsound to justify God existing.

You don't know how, but he did it, and it can't be understood. There is no room for anything else in your mind.

As for what would it take for me not to believe in GOD I would need to be shown to me rationally GOD entity doesn't exist. But for my perspective to make the questioning of the the existence of GOD possibly pointless if every religion was proven to be verifiably false then if GOD does or doesn't exist there wouldn't be any stakes in knowing the truth. Scientifically the existence of GOD can't be proven unless there 100% absolute irrefutable proof that the beginning of reality was just only atoms or some other materialistic explanation and that's what the beginning of existence truly is. I'm not sure how you can absolutely refute the existence of free will. Like I said the accumulation of all my proofs point to divinity. If there's a singular thing you want point to take free will.

"That which is asserted without evidence can be rebuked without evidence"


It is up to you to provide the tangible evidence for the existence of God in order for it to be challenged and disproved. You can't disprove an idea that is infinite in concept. But as I've said, there is no physical proof of his existence, so the indication should be clear.

But I had to guess what it would take for you to believe GOD exists he would have to reveal himself because you assume there's no rationality in his existence and if scientific proof were provided you said it's coincidence and if you saw a miracle you would assume it's false or your crazy or maybe even say aliens did it. There's credible scientists who believe the origin of life is aliens point I'm making ispeople can choose to believe what they want doesn't mean there isn't an objective truth that can be found and whatever perspective you come from you shouldn't assume and everyone's susceptible to bias and irrationality even if you don't know or believe GOD exists and science and scientists can be susceptible to it aswell.

I've never heard a credible scientific theory about the origin of Life being aliens.

It would take some physical evidence of God in order for me to believe in him; whether it would be the discovery of the soul or some sort of imprint that can be attributed to God creating the universe.

Well, anyways, I think you've said it yourself that you can't be dissuaded from the idea of God existing, so there's really nothing more for me to say that would make you change your mind.

So we'll end the discussion here. You can have the last word if you like.

 

[Edogawa]

I won't reply for every single point, but I'll reply to the main ones.

The burden of proof lies on you, not me. I have basis to say there is no tangible evidence of God, which there isn't.

Burden of proof doesn't work that way. A possibility of something raises two questions: if and if not. You said nothing in science (your perception) states God, but there is also nothing in science states God doesn't exist. Burden of proof is just like that. By the way, I just realized you've repeating no tangible evidence of God, but you haven't referenced a single evidence so far. If there is actually a tangible evidence, please post it. And read the word carefully: Tangible which in other words observation or something seen or felt.

I have no idea how you came to that conclusion? Science is not a belief, it is accumulative research that is tested and verified. It is physically there for all to see, unlike God.

Yet there is not a single scientific fact contradict theism.

The problem with this analogy is that the programmer still abides by his own universal laws in order to be able to create the game in the first place.

You're not getting the idea. The perspective inside the game would mean the programmer doesn't need laws to exist, since game laws in the game are created by the programmer which do not affect him. Similarly, universe came to beginning and will end in the same manner as a game comes to existence.

Faith is a belief not based in proof. I reiterate, I do not have faith. I'm merely relaying information based on what the science says which can be observed, tested, and challenged.

But you do actually have faith. I'll quote your words:

''So you think it's more logical to believe that there is a being with absolute omnipotence/omniscience/omnipresence that simply always existed and created a universe, as opposed to the universe simply being a random occurrence in a vacuum of space with particles clashing together? New theories suggest that multiple Big Bangs happened before one was able to create our universe.''

Since you believe the universe randomly came to existence, then you have faith that universe came to existence randomly, but you can't physically prove it. That is faith by definition. Saying it's not like you said before is self-delusion. Every human being has faith in something and you're no exception. I already said before my belief in God is faith-based, and your non-belief in God is faith-based. You don't need to be religious to have faith.

What you're doing is cherry-picking passages that fit a certain framework and disregard or even dismiss the vague rest, saying that those are meant to be figuratively and loosely interpreted.

If timeline was your issue, then I'll quote this one:

“And the heaven We created with might, and indeed We are (its) expander.” (Quran 51:47)''

Big Bang Theory was only discovered recently.

Quran is reformation of the original message sent to humanity 200,000 years ago. It's not actually a new message. It's a continuation the original messages each time after humans worshiped made-Gods.

Let me ask you this. Is there any sort of evidence that would lead you to question the existence of God, because it seems like there can't be? You've created this notion that God can't be disproved because he is infinite and thus there will always be a way to convince yourself of his existence no matter what sort of new data arises.

Because it's more logical for me to believe in an almighty being than to believe random occurrences, which are scientifically false to begin with.

 

[Edogawa]

Btw, I've realized something so far. You don't have a problem with the notion of eternity, since you supposedly believe in eternity as you believe the universe happens to be eternal (had no beginning and no end). So perhaps the problem isn't with the concept itself, but the problem lies within yourself.

Since you clarify yourself as a materialist and only believe in tangibility and science, you should know energy and matter are not and could never be eternal, according to science which you say you're part of, then you are forced to believe there is something eternal outside of energy and matter, since you said you believe in eternity. If you say yes, then you do believe in God and not necessary man-made Gods people worship, but you believe in an infinite power and intelligence that created the universe, are attributes of God. Infinity is a mathematical and scientific concept, which is a factual concept which is an attribute of God that God is infinite in power, intelligence, eternity and etc. If you say you believe in infinity then you believe in God.

This is the issue with atheists. They become atheists because of religious institutions or religious environment they grew up with, not because there is a problem with God's existence. Atheism isn't even a thing. It's a belief system that dwells in delusion scientifically speaking.

 

[Vulpini]

Nope, I don't think there is a god. And if there is, I don't think it would really change anything so I don't really care.

The only god I believe is myself.

 

[Sagebee]

This will be my last response.




Or it simply means that nothing like the concept of God exists....




Once again, you're giving me nothing but hypotheticals. Ifs and buts don't support that God is real.

And as I've stated many times in my comments, I'm basing my argument on what we currently know. If it turns out that we discover some fundamental truth to the existence of God, then my position will change as well. But as it stands, no such evidence to suggest his existence exists.

My research into the validity of religion has been pretty substantial as I used to study religion back when I had faith in the divine. The whole reason I stopped believing in any religion was due to what I've uncovered in my research .

Let me give you an example. In the Abrahamic religions, it is taught that Moses freed the enslaved Jews from Egypt, split the sea, and crossed the desert for 40 years.

Yet there is absolutely no archaeological evidence of millions of Jews ever being enslaved or even being in Egypt at all, let alone a mass migration from Egypt to Israel. No evidence. None!

This is the single most important story of the Torah and also incorporated within the bible. Also the texts of the Exodus were examined and determined to have been written a thousand years after the described events of the Exodus.




Another example would be this passage from the bible:


Matthew 27:50-54:

"And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.

At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people."


So dead saints were resurrected and went into a crowded city for many people too see, yet once again there is no historical records or archaeological evidence of this ever happening. I'm pretty sure seeing the undead walk around in a major city would be something that history would remember.

So no, there is no validity.





So God intentionally makes stories up and is intentionally wrong? Again, do you not see how you're being irrational and how you will always justify God no matter what?





Well I already gave you two examples above, but here's one for Genesis specifically since you said you believe the rest of it in its entirety.


GENESIS 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."


GENESIS 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

"And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof."








You're claiming science has deep founded bias, yet you are avidly defending how God is real without any sort of basis of proof.

We live in a physical reality and we operate under physical laws. Newtons law, for one, states that an object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force; and the universe is in constant motion, whether it be gravity, planets, neutrons, or our cells. We simply can't act without external force and each external force (which there are millions of) influences our actions and thoughts.


I'll link a video which I think did a pretty good job at describing why determinalism is logical and free will is not.


[video=youtube;vCGtkDzELAI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCGtkDzELAI&t=362s&ab_channel=CrashCourse[/video]








Because there is no record of anything similar happening and it would be a baseless speculation for me to say that something impossible like Gold popping out of thin air could happen in the future. It's a silly argument.

Again, you're giving hypethical scenarios. There are an infinite amount of things we can say "could happen" or "could exist" but just because it "could" doesn't mean it does.





Ok, but that is why we follow the trend. If the trend is, every time someone thought an unexplained phenomenon was divine in nature, but it has always been discovered to be more conventionally explained, then rationalizing that everything that you are amazed by is divine in origin is irrational thinking.






Not really sure how to respond. This is your personal belief based solely on your personal experiences. But you are not doubting that you could be wrong in what you thought to have experienced.




Well I think my reply about Newtons Law and the video I've linked should be enough. There are tons of videos that do a better job than I can in refuting free will thinking.

The arguments for Free Will are not strong, and if they were, then it'd be easier to persuade others of it. The idea of free will is not rooted in reality and the laws of physics as we know them. It's a philosophical assumption vs founded knowledge. The debate is not evenly scaled.




Let me just say this; if you have a scientifically verifiable basis for the existence of God, then you should present this to a science academy. Because if your claims are true and are as strong as you affirm, then you would make a revolutionary breakthrough in the way we interpret science and your name will be etched in the annals of history.

Considering that no scientist within a relative field has ever held these beliefs, then I find your scientifically verifiable basis to be very unlikely.




So if God is testing humans because we are special, then why does he create miscarriages or mental retardation where the individual has no chance at being tested?

And why did God take so long to create humans or life for that matter?

Humans have only existed for roughly 200,000 years....

Humans weren't even the first species on this planet. It took billions of years for us to finally show up on Earth.

And it took about 8 billion years after the Big Bang for Earth to even be created.

What was God doing all of that time, taking a nap? Why didn't he just pop us into existence and the rest of the world in 6 days, like the Bible says, instead of dragging over billions and billions of years?



Again, this is just your belief with no proof of anything you say. You just think you're being tested, but you really don't know. For all you know, you have no purpose and are just a cosmic accident.






No, that's what you think. Again, you don't know God. You don't know what he's like or what he's thinking. So to say that you know how omnipresent he is, is a fairytale.

Besides, you already said that you can feel your soul. The soul is part of God. So your own statement falls apart.





Again, that phrase is indicative of what I've been telling you this entire time. You're just rationalizing everything, no matter how illogical or scientifically unsound to justify God existing.

You don't know how, but he did it, and it can't be understood. There is no room for anything else in your mind.





"That which is asserted without evidence can be rebuked without evidence"


It is up to you to provide the tangible evidence for the existence of God in order for it to be challenged and disproved. You can't disprove an idea that is infinite in concept. But as I've said, there is no physical proof of his existence, so the indication should be clear.




I've never heard a credible scientific theory about the origin of Life being aliens.

It would take some physical evidence of God in order for me to believe in him; whether it would be the discovery of the soul or some sort of imprint that can be attributed to God creating the universe.

Well, anyways, I think you've said it yourself that you can't be dissuaded from the idea of God existing, so there's really nothing more for me to say that would make you change your mind.

So we'll end the discussion here. You can have the last word if you like.

I will make a few clarifications you don't need to respond but I hope you read it. Thanks.

First I provided a logical and likely rational for creator exists, about the differences of creator and creation differences what is to be understood is such traits aren't present from this reality but can only exist outside this reality and traits only s creator entity can have which are divine traits only supernatural entity the yin yang dichotomy differeiate what GOD is and isn't so GOD isn't a concept where it can be anything hes the universal creating force of reality with unique traits all his own with strict definition of being a unique and opposite entity to his creation. The point of existence of free will I was trying getting across to you is that is its existence would mean a sentient intelligent reality so openning a seperate world view than pure naturalism also freedom in it's true sense only exists to this creator and is purely a divine trait meaning we are only free if GOD exists or creator creation relationship i speak of is true.

As for reasoning for free will do you believe in accountability why does such a concept exists in a reality absent of free will?

I'll check out your video and make some responses later.

Also I'm saying that science has deep founded bias in the sense because the pursuit of science isn't for truth exactly but creating a working naturalistic explanation of reality to do that you have to assume nothing can exist outside the universe and universe we know is eternal.

Another thing your misunderstanding what I'm saying is when I say certain things are purely for belief im not saying it's wrong or GOD'S having us believe wrong things or not that it's just convenient excuse to say just beliefs. I believe miracles are possible I believe they are possible based on a rational examination of what reality truly is and what we truly are. There's rational and verifiable proofs but it comes down to if you want to see and accept it. So certain things are meant for the purposes of just to be believed that are supernatural in basis but there's proofs to justify these beliefs.

It goes to the point I was explaining about the supernatural for one if someone does have an experience it will be anecdotal and personal. And in most cases it wouldn't serve as satisfactory basis of belief because even if the experience is legitimate a person would naturally question is this real and question if there faculties right. So such experiences should serve as supplementary proofs not your foundation because even if it's satisfactory to you others can't appreciate and verify it. If you think it's rationally impossible for such experiences to be possible then experiencing it would serve you no good.

So to believe in the supernatural and miracles you need a rational basis for it to exist and be possible the issue is you want and expect scientifically verifiable proof for it to exist which pretty much means you want the world to witness such experiences and like I've explained to you physically verifying isn't only source of truths but you can use logic to indirectly arrive at conclusions and in this instance biasly denying it's use or validity by saying anyone can use rational everyone uses reason doesn't mean everything is reasonable and if it has faulty logic you should be able to point it out which till this point your critiques have consisted of either saying im believing what i want to believe or to dismiss an argument as just as a personal belief. Also there are scientific views and studies with contradictory results even tho same test does that make science invalid.

To your point how do I know what GOD is which I've previously explained to you the only way you know who GOD is if he tells you and that's the point of religion which would bring revelation of who GOD is explaining he is different from his creation and what he wants. He would said prophets with revelation since the beginning of our existence with the prophet coming with his proofs which would be corrupted when new prophets and revelation has came through the ages. I personally subscribe to Islam which states it's self to be the last in the series of revelation and unlike other holy books this is the same one that existed at their time.

Lastly I gave a reasonable explanation of what it would take for me not to believe which you didn't make a reasonable attempt to address. It might be true I'm just want to believe but I try to make an honest attempt to be critical and look at all sides and I attempted dialogue and would address any refutations and open to being wrong which I did but the majority of your criticisms consisted of just saying i wanted to believe what I want to believe without really addressing my points and misunderstanding them. Again I fully would acknowledge a bias pointed out to me but it has to be done with substance instead of just saying im being bias and I dont know isn't the correct answer it's the placeholder till an answers available don't assume answers can't be reached because that's not true and it's a bias because your experience till this point has shown your conclusion to be true doesn't mean it is and you shouldn't close yourself to new information. And dialogue is for the purpose of understanding others positions we may not agree but we should attempt to understand you should be open to the possibility being wrong in every new conversation and not assume there's nothing new to learn point being as I should be wary of bias and self confirmation so should you.

 

[Sagebee]

This will be my last response.




Or it simply means that nothing like the concept of God exists....

So God can't create duplicates of himself?



Once again, you're giving me nothing but hypotheticals. Ifs and buts don't support that God is real.

And as I've stated many times in my comments, I'm basing my argument on what we currently know. If it turns out that we discover some fundamental truth to the existence of God, then my position will change as well. But as it stands, no such evidence to suggest his existence exists.

My research into the validity of religion has been pretty substantial as I used to study religion back when I had faith in the divine. The whole reason I stopped believing in any religion was due to what I've uncovered in my research .

Let me give you an example. In the Abrahamic religions, it is taught that Moses freed the enslaved Jews from Egypt, split the sea, and crossed the desert for 40 years.

Yet there is absolutely no archaeological evidence of millions of Jews ever being enslaved or even being in Egypt at all, let alone a mass migration from Egypt to Israel. No evidence. None!

This is the single most important story of the Torah and also incorporated within the bible. Also the texts of the Exodus were examined and determined to have been written a thousand years after the described events of the Exodus.




Another example would be this passage from the bible:


Matthew 27:50-54:

"And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.

At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people."


So dead saints were resurrected and went into a crowded city for many people too see, yet once again there is no historical records or archaeological evidence of this ever happening. I'm pretty sure seeing the undead walk around in a major city would be something that history would remember.

So no, there is no validity.





So God intentionally makes stories up and is intentionally wrong? Again, do you not see how you're being irrational and how you will always justify God no matter what?





Well I already gave you two examples above, but here's one for Genesis specifically since you said you believe the rest of it in its entirety.


GENESIS 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."


GENESIS 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

"And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof."








You're claiming science has deep founded bias, yet you are avidly defending how God is real without any sort of basis of proof.

We live in a physical reality and we operate under physical laws. Newtons law, for one, states that an object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force; and the universe is in constant motion, whether it be gravity, planets, neutrons, or our cells. We simply can't act without external force and each external force (which there are millions of) influences our actions and thoughts.


I'll link a video which I think did a pretty good job at describing why determinalism is logical and free will is not.


[video=youtube;vCGtkDzELAI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCGtkDzELAI&t=362s&ab_channel=CrashCourse[/video]








Because there is no record of anything similar happening and it would be a baseless speculation for me to say that something impossible like Gold popping out of thin air could happen in the future. It's a silly argument.

Again, you're giving hypethical scenarios. There are an infinite amount of things we can say "could happen" or "could exist" but just because it "could" doesn't mean it does.





Ok, but that is why we follow the trend. If the trend is, every time someone thought an unexplained phenomenon was divine in nature, but it has always been discovered to be more conventionally explained, then rationalizing that everything that you are amazed by is divine in origin is irrational thinking.






Not really sure how to respond. This is your personal belief based solely on your personal experiences. But you are not doubting that you could be wrong in what you thought to have experienced.




Well I think my reply about Newtons Law and the video I've linked should be enough. There are tons of videos that do a better job than I can in refuting free will thinking.

The arguments for Free Will are not strong, and if they were, then it'd be easier to persuade others of it. The idea of free will is not rooted in reality and the laws of physics as we know them. It's a philosophical assumption vs founded knowledge. The debate is not evenly scaled.




Let me just say this; if you have a scientifically verifiable basis for the existence of God, then you should present this to a science academy. Because if your claims are true and are as strong as you affirm, then you would make a revolutionary breakthrough in the way we interpret science and your name will be etched in the annals of history.

Considering that no scientist within a relative field has ever held these beliefs, then I find your scientifically verifiable basis to be very unlikely.




So if God is testing humans because we are special, then why does he create miscarriages or mental retardation where the individual has no chance at being tested?

And why did God take so long to create humans or life for that matter?

Humans have only existed for roughly 200,000 years....

Humans weren't even the first species on this planet. It took billions of years for us to finally show up on Earth.

And it took about 8 billion years after the Big Bang for Earth to even be created.

What was God doing all of that time, taking a nap? Why didn't he just pop us into existence and the rest of the world in 6 days, like the Bible says, instead of dragging over billions and billions of years?



Again, this is just your belief with no proof of anything you say. You just think you're being tested, but you really don't know. For all you know, you have no purpose and are just a cosmic accident.






No, that's what you think. Again, you don't know God. You don't know what he's like or what he's thinking. So to say that you know how omnipresent he is, is a fairytale.

Besides, you already said that you can feel your soul. The soul is part of God. So your own statement falls apart.





Again, that phrase is indicative of what I've been telling you this entire time. You're just rationalizing everything, no matter how illogical or scientifically unsound to justify God existing.

You don't know how, but he did it, and it can't be understood. There is no room for anything else in your mind.





"That which is asserted without evidence can be rebuked without evidence"


It is up to you to provide the tangible evidence for the existence of God in order for it to be challenged and disproved. You can't disprove an idea that is infinite in concept. But as I've said, there is no physical proof of his existence, so the indication should be clear.




I've never heard a credible scientific theory about the origin of Life being aliens.

It would take some physical evidence of God in order for me to believe in him; whether it would be the discovery of the soul or some sort of imprint that can be attributed to God creating the universe.

Well, anyways, I think you've said it yourself that you can't be dissuaded from the idea of God existing, so there's really nothing more for me to say that would make you change your mind.

So we'll end the discussion here. You can have the last word if you like.

Just watched your video will give my critique on it on how it doesn't disprove free will hope you read.

So the video explains philosophically thinkers of free will didn't have a rational basis on why free will should exist since the universe is deterministic and so didn't know of any basis where free will could exist in a deterministic reality instead of just thinking they're free. And that's the thing naturalistically free will can't exist the concept of freedom can't be explained like knowing how GOD creates because GOD'S above naturalistic comprehension. As humans we can make intelligent and stupid decisions when knowing all the info we can learn lessons or we cant. In a deterministic model a person would be purely reactionary but as humans we can make aware decisions and contemplate the options. It's funny so pretty much assume the universe is like westworld where an unintelligent universe creates entities that think they're free and others that don't and laugh at the irony of it others having existential angst and me aware of all them:lol.

You don't need to understand the mechanisms of why there's free will to know it exists. It's like why scientist believe dark matter exists which was inferred from the discrepancies in the universe's mass. Naturalistically free will can't be accounted for but if you believe we're accountable you believe free will.

Also determinism and free will aren't necessarily incompatible aswell as alluded by the speaker I believe the universe is deterministic but as humans we have free agency. And while central basis of civilization is belief in free will which can only exist supernaturally. Again I've looked at the options and through my personal deduction as explained free will and GOD are most rational options for reality.

 

[Clown World]

Please provide the links. *_*

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

 

[Lightbringer]

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

Ontological arguments are not science and have many criticisms ranging from humans knowing God's nature, to denying evidence, to basing their arguments on old theories.

If ontological arguments were such strong arguments to the existence of God, then God would be recognized by Science as a certainty already.

Philosophical "evidence" is not real evidence.