Reason and Experience tell us that there is Evidence for a Creator

[yiostheoy]

Reason and experience tell us that there is evidence for a Creator.

Ok it looks like you are going to try this thread again.

Philosophical reasoning does indeed give us reason to conclude that a God or Gods must exist.

In a nutshell, the argument and reasoning go that something had to exist endlessly for the creation of matter to occur at some point.

Experience is anecdotal and subject to reasonable or unreasonable self determination.

If God appeared to you, as in the reputed cases of Moses, Elijah, Mary, John The Baptist, Jesus, Peter, James, John the Apostle, and Paul the Apostle, then you can say that in your experience you KNOW there is a living God or Gods.

Any other type of delusion such as self delusion is not valid. Unless you have seen with your eyes, heard with your ears, and touched with you hands, you do not know for yourself.

Faith is what comes into play if you do not know. Faith is the criterion that Jesus gave us for knowing God.

If this is what you are trying to say then I agree.

You are missing the point.

If you are going to allege that I am missing a point then STATE YOUR POINT and demonstrate how I am missing it, Child.

 

[yiostheoy]

V'Ger seeks the creator......also, to merge.....

The Voyager spacecraft is out there somewhere, yes.

I doubt it will get close enough to the center of The Milky Way Galaxy to ever give us any evidence of God however.

We don't even know Who or What exists at the center of The Milky Way or any other galaxy for that matter.

Hubble has shown us that there are almost endless galaxies in The Deep Field.

So I would not put too much trust in Voyager.

 

[yiostheoy]

Now, about this evidence that there is a creator? Maybe there is more than juan?

Philosophy asserts that there must be at least one.

If there are more, that raises the question of Who was the First One?

Those are tricky questions.

In the case of more than one, then you need to redefine your definition of "god".

Does god then mean merely an immortal being, or does it mean the first Immortal Being?

The ancient Greeks noticed the same issue. In their pantheology, Gaia (GA-EE-AH) was the first god, a goddess. She then conceived Uranos (OO-RAH-NOS) the heavens. They conceived the 12 Titans. Two of them conceived the 12 Olympians. Zeus (ZAY-OS) then usurped the thrones of his fathers Cronos and Uranos.

It gets really complicated fast.

 

[BULLDOG]

Continue.If I find a misunderstanding, I will point it out.

Great. Have you ever been to court? Whether it is a criminal case or a civil case or a regulatory proceeding, they all have one thing in common. Evidence will be presented. The interesting thing is that opposing sides will almost have a different interpretation of what that evidence means, right? Do you agree with that?

Continue. Yes opposing parties will have different opinions of what the facts present.

Great and the judge or the jury must weigh the evidence and testimony to decide which interpretation is the one they will choose, right?

Continue.

Right. So each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

You have been a great sport. I appreciate your honesty. Do you have any questions for me?

So you chose to believe that there is a creator. What is that supposed to mean to me? You can believe any silly thing you want. I don't care. Just don't expect me to make that choice without some reason to believe it. You haven't presented anything to convince anything to anybody. I already knew you believed in a creator. What were you trying to prove?

 

[ding]

...people claim there is no evidence of a Creator.

Can I use something you created to learn things about you?

When people make these claims they are called Atheists.

Atheism is a belief system it is not a school of rational thought.

It is an anguish and hate for a God of any kind.

I disagree. Many atheists do not fit that description. What you are describing are militant atheists and their hate is not directed aat God but His followers.

 

[ding]

Reason and experience tell us that there is evidence for a Creator.

Ok it looks like you are going to try this thread again.

Philosophical reasoning does indeed give us reason to conclude that a God or Gods must exist.

In a nutshell, the argument and reasoning go that something had to exist endlessly for the creation of matter to occur at some point.

Experience is anecdotal and subject to reasonable or unreasonable self determination.

If God appeared to you, as in the reputed cases of Moses, Elijah, Mary, John The Baptist, Jesus, Peter, James, John the Apostle, and Paul the Apostle, then you can say that in your experience you KNOW there is a living God or Gods.

Any other type of delusion such as self delusion is not valid. Unless you have seen with your eyes, heard with your ears, and touched with you hands, you do not know for yourself.

Faith is what comes into play if you do not know. Faith is the criterion that Jesus gave us for knowing God.

If this is what you are trying to say then I agree.

You are missing the point.

If you are going to allege that I am missing a point then STATE YOUR POINT and demonstrate how I am missing it, Child.

I did already. It was in post #98.

Each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

 

[yiostheoy]

...people claim there is no evidence of a Creator.

Can I use something you created to learn things about you?

When people make these claims they are called Atheists.

Atheism is a belief system it is not a school of rational thought.

It is an anguish and hate for a God of any kind.

I disagree. Many atheists do not fit that description. What you are describing are militant atheists and their hate is not directed aat God but His followers.

To be an atheist is to reject the possibility of a God or Gods.

This requires a malevolent heart.

Agnostics are simply on the fence -- they don't swing either way -- they simply confess they do not know one way or the other.

Perhaps you are confusing agnostics and atheists?

The whole family consists of deists, theists, atheists, and agnostics.

 

[ding]

Great. Have you ever been to court? Whether it is a criminal case or a civil case or a regulatory proceeding, they all have one thing in common. Evidence will be presented. The interesting thing is that opposing sides will almost have a different interpretation of what that evidence means, right? Do you agree with that?

Continue. Yes opposing parties will have different opinions of what the facts present.

Great and the judge or the jury must weigh the evidence and testimony to decide which interpretation is the one they will choose, right?

Continue.

Right. So each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

You have been a great sport. I appreciate your honesty. Do you have any questions for me?

So you chose to believe that there is a creator. What is that supposed to mean to me? You can believe any silly thing you want. I don't care. Just don't expect me to make that choice without some reason to believe it. You haven't presented anything to convince anything to anybody. I already knew you believed in a creator. What were you trying to prove?

We just went through this. I have evidence that I accept. That's what I have proved.

 

[yiostheoy]

Reason and experience tell us that there is evidence for a Creator.

Ok it looks like you are going to try this thread again.

Philosophical reasoning does indeed give us reason to conclude that a God or Gods must exist.

In a nutshell, the argument and reasoning go that something had to exist endlessly for the creation of matter to occur at some point.

Experience is anecdotal and subject to reasonable or unreasonable self determination.

If God appeared to you, as in the reputed cases of Moses, Elijah, Mary, John The Baptist, Jesus, Peter, James, John the Apostle, and Paul the Apostle, then you can say that in your experience you KNOW there is a living God or Gods.

Any other type of delusion such as self delusion is not valid. Unless you have seen with your eyes, heard with your ears, and touched with you hands, you do not know for yourself.

Faith is what comes into play if you do not know. Faith is the criterion that Jesus gave us for knowing God.

If this is what you are trying to say then I agree.

You are missing the point.

If you are going to allege that I am missing a point then STATE YOUR POINT and demonstrate how I am missing it, Child.

I did already. It was in post #98.

Each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

Restate your thesis.

The numbering system is different for everyone due to people on "ignore".

Use a multi quote if you need to.

 

[ding]

V'Ger seeks the creator......also, to merge.....

The Voyager spacecraft is out there somewhere, yes.

I doubt it will get close enough to the center of The Milky Way Galaxy to ever give us any evidence of God however.

We don't even know Who or What exists at the center of The Milky Way or any other galaxy for that matter.

Hubble has shown us that there are almost endless galaxies in The Deep Field.

So I would not put too much trust in Voyager.

We are the evidence of God. All of Creation is the evidence of God.

 

[ding]

Reason and experience tell us that there is evidence for a Creator.

Ok it looks like you are going to try this thread again.

Philosophical reasoning does indeed give us reason to conclude that a God or Gods must exist.

In a nutshell, the argument and reasoning go that something had to exist endlessly for the creation of matter to occur at some point.

Experience is anecdotal and subject to reasonable or unreasonable self determination.

If God appeared to you, as in the reputed cases of Moses, Elijah, Mary, John The Baptist, Jesus, Peter, James, John the Apostle, and Paul the Apostle, then you can say that in your experience you KNOW there is a living God or Gods.

Any other type of delusion such as self delusion is not valid. Unless you have seen with your eyes, heard with your ears, and touched with you hands, you do not know for yourself.

Faith is what comes into play if you do not know. Faith is the criterion that Jesus gave us for knowing God.

If this is what you are trying to say then I agree.

You are missing the point.

If you are going to allege that I am missing a point then STATE YOUR POINT and demonstrate how I am missing it, Child.

I did already. It was in post #98.

Each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

Restate your thesis.

The numbering system is different for everyone due to people on "ignore".

Use a multi quote if you need to.

Each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

 

[yiostheoy]

We'll get to God soon enough, pussy.

No we won't fucktard. You do not get to "prove" your creator, by forcing me to concede that there is a creator. Either present your prove, or admit that you can't.

I'm not the fucktard who won't admit that tangible items can be used as evidence, lol.

Wash your foul mouth out with soap.

 

[ding]

Now, about this evidence that there is a creator? Maybe there is more than juan?

Philosophy asserts that there must be at least one.

If there are more, that raises the question of Who was the First One?

Those are tricky questions.

In the case of more than one, then you need to redefine your definition of "god".

Does god then mean merely an immortal being, or does it mean the first Immortal Being?

The ancient Greeks noticed the same issue. In their pantheology, Gaia (GA-EE-AH) was the first god, a goddess. She then conceived Uranos (OO-RAH-NOS) the heavens. They conceived the 12 Titans. Two of them conceived the 12 Olympians. Zeus (ZAY-OS) then usurped the thrones of his fathers Cronos and Uranos.

It gets really complicated fast.

Is philosophy your God?

 

[yiostheoy]

Ok it looks like you are going to try this thread again.

Philosophical reasoning does indeed give us reason to conclude that a God or Gods must exist.

In a nutshell, the argument and reasoning go that something had to exist endlessly for the creation of matter to occur at some point.

Experience is anecdotal and subject to reasonable or unreasonable self determination.

If God appeared to you, as in the reputed cases of Moses, Elijah, Mary, John The Baptist, Jesus, Peter, James, John the Apostle, and Paul the Apostle, then you can say that in your experience you KNOW there is a living God or Gods.

Any other type of delusion such as self delusion is not valid. Unless you have seen with your eyes, heard with your ears, and touched with you hands, you do not know for yourself.

Faith is what comes into play if you do not know. Faith is the criterion that Jesus gave us for knowing God.

If this is what you are trying to say then I agree.

You are missing the point.

If you are going to allege that I am missing a point then STATE YOUR POINT and demonstrate how I am missing it, Child.

I did already. It was in post #98.

Each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

Restate your thesis.

The numbering system is different for everyone due to people on "ignore".

Use a multi quote if you need to.

Each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

Each of us IS ... not ARE ... where did you go to high school ?? An inner city public school ??

 

[ding]

We'll get to God soon enough, pussy.

No we won't fucktard. You do not get to "prove" your creator, by forcing me to concede that there is a creator. Either present your prove, or admit that you can't.

I'm not the fucktard who won't admit that tangible items can be used as evidence, lol.

Wash your foul mouth out with soap.

Funny how you singled me out for that and not the one who did it first, isn't it?

 

[ding]

You are missing the point.

If you are going to allege that I am missing a point then STATE YOUR POINT and demonstrate how I am missing it, Child.

I did already. It was in post #98.

Each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

Restate your thesis.

The numbering system is different for everyone due to people on "ignore".

Use a multi quote if you need to.

Each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

Each of us IS ... not ARE ... where did you go to high school ?? An inner city public school ??

You have something against inner city kids?

 

[BULLDOG]

Continue. Yes opposing parties will have different opinions of what the facts present.

Great and the judge or the jury must weigh the evidence and testimony to decide which interpretation is the one they will choose, right?

Continue.

Right. So each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

You have been a great sport. I appreciate your honesty. Do you have any questions for me?

So you chose to believe that there is a creator. What is that supposed to mean to me? You can believe any silly thing you want. I don't care. Just don't expect me to make that choice without some reason to believe it. You haven't presented anything to convince anything to anybody. I already knew you believed in a creator. What were you trying to prove?

We just went through this. I have evidence that I accept. That's what I have proved.

As I said. Believe what you want. If you want me to agree with you, I'll need some reason to do so. You have not presented anything near that.

 

[yiostheoy]

Is philosophy your God?

Philosophy helps me to understand God.

God is a Deist God.

He has created us and then left us on his own.

If there are other Gods then He created them as well through a process we cannot easily understand.

It is likely that Jesus his Son was created in this manner.

It is likely that Mary who is Jesus' Mother is also a Goddess.

If you read the story in the Greek New Testament carefully in Greek that 's what it will tell you -- marriage, childbirth, godliness, all those words are hidden in there in Greek (not English).

The Greek New Testament is completely consistent with a Deist God.

Philosophy is simply the best way to understand it all.

 

[yiostheoy]

As I said. Believe what you want. If you want me to agree with you, I'll need some reason to do so. You have not presented anything near that.

ding has a very bad habit of trapping himself that way, yes, you are right BULLDOG .

I wonder if he will ever see his way out of his recurring dilemma?

 

[BULLDOG]

Ok it looks like you are going to try this thread again.

Philosophical reasoning does indeed give us reason to conclude that a God or Gods must exist.

In a nutshell, the argument and reasoning go that something had to exist endlessly for the creation of matter to occur at some point.

Experience is anecdotal and subject to reasonable or unreasonable self determination.

If God appeared to you, as in the reputed cases of Moses, Elijah, Mary, John The Baptist, Jesus, Peter, James, John the Apostle, and Paul the Apostle, then you can say that in your experience you KNOW there is a living God or Gods.

Any other type of delusion such as self delusion is not valid. Unless you have seen with your eyes, heard with your ears, and touched with you hands, you do not know for yourself.

Faith is what comes into play if you do not know. Faith is the criterion that Jesus gave us for knowing God.

If this is what you are trying to say then I agree.

You are missing the point.

If you are going to allege that I am missing a point then STATE YOUR POINT and demonstrate how I am missing it, Child.

I did already. It was in post #98.

Each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

Restate your thesis.

The numbering system is different for everyone due to people on "ignore".

Use a multi quote if you need to.

Each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

Ok. I'll change that to you have no evidence that a sane person would accept.