Is there a god?

[ding]

I first came here, to see if there was anything concrete that people believed in. Apparently, there's not. Not here, anyways.

Curious why you say that? Of course there is! But it is unique to every individual and you must find your own way. The spiritual path isn't like a diet that someone can recommend and you simple follow steps A, B and C and get there. The soul measures progress in its own way---- for some it might take many lifetimes; for others, they might realize God in an instant. The best way to find God is to first find someone else who has found God, a bonafide aspirant you have faith in who can guide you.

They’re just going to spout a bunch of bible stuff without any serious proof. I have yet to find anyone who has actually found god, they might say they have, but when questioned, it’s obvious that they haven’t found shit.

they think they've found him--in their minds only

I have chosen the better portion. I hope you find half as much happiness in life as I have.

 

[ding]

Great question. One people usually aren't willing to explore. I see gods as social "memes" of a sort. A god is a construct representing a set of values, beliefs and goals shared by believers.

Great question. One people usually aren't willing to explore.

As shown by many of the responses so far.

So, assuming there is a god of some sort, what does that mean? By which I mean, "What does that mean to you in your life?"

Love God’s creation and God will love you.

Nature Is Not Supernatural

Tree-hugging nature-worship by misfits who know they don't belong is actually primitive and pagan.

Atheist Liberals hug trees.

what about atheist conservatives?

What about them? If they try to subordinate religion like their leftist counterparts do then they are effectively no different and are just as complicit.

 

[ding]

I, too, live in reality. Sadly it is a reality where some people, like you, refer to my beliefs as "fantasy" simply because you do not agree, or understand. Sad really. When one stops to really think about it, what do you really know, and what do you believe because of the "proof" you have be presented with? Take, for instance, any event that you did not personally witness. Did it happen? Well, one can show lots of "proof" that it did, one can also show "proof" that it did not, hence the abundance of "conspiracy theories".

I believe that this is an accurate depiction of the pyramids of giza:
View attachment 188383
However, as I have never been there, I have little choice but to either believe the evidence, or disbelieve it. All the photos I have ever seen may well be part of a huge "fake news" conspiracy, but the evidence is quite substantial that that is untrue, so I believe. How is that any different from faith in a higher power, or god? I cannot prove, nor disprove the existence, but I choose to believe the evidence that there is. You choose to disbelieve the evidence. How does that equate to one being the truth, and one being a "fantasy"?

sad??!! sad?? !!! what??? sad??
..no--you are wrong--we know the Twin Towers were destroyed on 9-11--there is video proof as well as chain of custody witnesses
...we know the A bombs destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki
..we know the Titanic sank
..
fan·ta·sy
ˈfan(t)əsē/
noun

1. 1.
   the faculty or activity of imagining things, especially things that are impossible or improbable.

until you can prove there is a god, your beliefs are fantasy

the pyramid analogy is so ridiculous
the pyramids are REAL

Well, prove it then, not with pictures (that can be doctored) but with hard, irrefutable evidence. Did you SEE any of those things happen? Are you a witness? No? Then you are taking other peoples' word for it, plain and simple. The fact that there are far more people saying one thing than the other does not make it true. If you recall your history, it was once the consensus that the Earth was flat. The vast majority of people said so, and believed it. Did that make it true? Of course not. Thus, my point. Anything you did not, personally, experience/witness, you have to have a certain amount of faith to believe. Same is true for religious/spiritual faith.

The difference here is that you CHOOSE to believe that 9/11 happened, the Atomic bombs were dropped, and the Titanic sank. It is a well informed choice, as there is quite a bit of evidence that those things happened. There is also quite a bit of evidence that there is a god. You just choose not to believe it.

travel to Egypt for one
I can't travel somewhere to see god
start being reasonable --the pyramid analogy is nonsensical

You are completely missing my point here. Yes, I could travel to Egypt and, supposedly, see the pyramids. I can also look outside and see what I believe is evidence that there IS a god. The point I am trying to make here is that we believe what we do based on the evidence we have been presented with. For you, it would seem, you have not been presented with the evidence you desire to believe there is a god. Yet, I have no doubt, there are things that you have been provided with similar evidence of that you do believe. I have no doubt that there have been cases in which you believe someone has seen something/someone that can provide no further evidence than their word, and yet you believe them. Why, then, do you not believe those who say they have "seen" their god? What is the difference?

Omniscience Is an Insult to Human Intelligence

Witnesses from a primitive era aren't worth paying attention to. Besides, the narrative comes to illogical conclusions. If so many people had seen Jesus's miracles, certainly they would have stopped his crucifixion. They would have believed they'd go straight to Heaven if they lost their lives doing so. Yet even his apostles chickened out. And how can you explain Judas, supposedly seeing all the proof of JC's divinity and yet still betraying Him? Doesn't add up. As with many other useless degrees, those who aren't good at math go into Theology.

And yet here we are 2000 years later where over a billion people still follow his teaching. Not bad for a convicted criminal who was put to death by the superpower of the day whose ministry only last 3 1/2 years. Talk about logically inexplicable, but there it is nonetheless.

 

[ding]

I, personally, believe that there is a god. What that means, though, I have been struggling with for quite some time. Therefore, I pose the questions:

1. If there is a god, what does that mean?
2. If there is not a god, what does that mean?

I am looking for opinion, obviously, I do not believe there will ever be proof, or empirical evidence (at least not until rapture, assuming that there is a god). What I am looking for here is what people believe. What leads you to believe what you do? Why?

Let me be clear, I am NOT looking for evangelism of any kind here. I am looking for what the presence of god (or lack of a god) means to you. I know this is a pretty ambiguous thread, and I do that on purpose, because I do not ant to influence the way anyone responds. I want to open a discussion about what your beliefs (whatever they are) have shaped who you are, how you look at religion (in general), and how you look at the world.

"God Wouldn't Let Us Believe in Him If He Didn't Exist"

No true God would let people do evil in His Name. Low-IQ preachers would excuse it as free will, but that does not apply to allowing the freedom of taking advantage of believers. Which illustrates another reason for disbelieving: too much stupidity by His apologists. A true God would be disgusted by all that.

The moral law is what we ought to do not what we do.

 

[ding]

Well, prove it then, not with pictures (that can be doctored) but with hard, irrefutable evidence. Did you SEE any of those things happen? Are you a witness? No? Then you are taking other peoples' word for it, plain and simple. The fact that there are far more people saying one thing than the other does not make it true. If you recall your history, it was once the consensus that the Earth was flat. The vast majority of people said so, and believed it. Did that make it true? Of course not. Thus, my point. Anything you did not, personally, experience/witness, you have to have a certain amount of faith to believe. Same is true for religious/spiritual faith.

The difference here is that you CHOOSE to believe that 9/11 happened, the Atomic bombs were dropped, and the Titanic sank. It is a well informed choice, as there is quite a bit of evidence that those things happened. There is also quite a bit of evidence that there is a god. You just choose not to believe it.

travel to Egypt for one
I can't travel somewhere to see god
start being reasonable --the pyramid analogy is nonsensical

Do you usually argue about things you don't believe exist?

I point out idiocy--
this is USMB?? isn't that what the forum is for?
hahhahahaa .....
do you usually argue about things that don't exist?

Pardon me, I think I tripped over your rationalization.

No, I don't waste my time arguing about things that I don't believe exist. That's what you are doing.

What is it that you have accomplished in life that makes you believe you are more intelligent than others?

please provide your evidence

My evidence is that you are here arguing about something you don't believe exists.

Now what evidence do YOU have that you have accomplished anything in life that would justify your irrational behavior to look down upon others.

 

[sparky]

hate to break it to ya's but.....
https://www.theonion.com/god-diagnosed-with-bipolar-disorder-1819566045


~S~

 

[ding]

I think we'll live.

~D~

 

[toobfreak]

sad??!! sad?? !!! what??? sad??
..no--you are wrong--we know the Twin Towers were destroyed on 9-11--there is video proof as well as chain of custody witnesses
...we know the A bombs destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki
..we know the Titanic sank
..
fan·ta·sy
ˈfan(t)əsē/
noun

1. 1.
   the faculty or activity of imagining things, especially things that are impossible or improbable.

until you can prove there is a god, your beliefs are fantasy

the pyramid analogy is so ridiculous
the pyramids are REAL

Well, prove it then, not with pictures (that can be doctored) but with hard, irrefutable evidence. Did you SEE any of those things happen? Are you a witness? No? Then you are taking other peoples' word for it, plain and simple. The fact that there are far more people saying one thing than the other does not make it true. If you recall your history, it was once the consensus that the Earth was flat. The vast majority of people said so, and believed it. Did that make it true? Of course not. Thus, my point. Anything you did not, personally, experience/witness, you have to have a certain amount of faith to believe. Same is true for religious/spiritual faith.

The difference here is that you CHOOSE to believe that 9/11 happened, the Atomic bombs were dropped, and the Titanic sank. It is a well informed choice, as there is quite a bit of evidence that those things happened. There is also quite a bit of evidence that there is a god. You just choose not to believe it.

travel to Egypt for one
I can't travel somewhere to see god
start being reasonable --the pyramid analogy is nonsensical

You are completely missing my point here. Yes, I could travel to Egypt and, supposedly, see the pyramids. I can also look outside and see what I believe is evidence that there IS a god. The point I am trying to make here is that we believe what we do based on the evidence we have been presented with. For you, it would seem, you have not been presented with the evidence you desire to believe there is a god. Yet, I have no doubt, there are things that you have been provided with similar evidence of that you do believe. I have no doubt that there have been cases in which you believe someone has seen something/someone that can provide no further evidence than their word, and yet you believe them. Why, then, do you not believe those who say they have "seen" their god? What is the difference?

Omniscience Is an Insult to Human Intelligence

Witnesses from a primitive era aren't worth paying attention to. Besides, the narrative comes to illogical conclusions. If so many people had seen Jesus's miracles, certainly they would have stopped his crucifixion. They would have believed they'd go straight to Heaven if they lost their lives doing so. Yet even his apostles chickened out. And how can you explain Judas, supposedly seeing all the proof of JC's divinity and yet still betraying Him? Doesn't add up. As with many other useless degrees, those who aren't good at math go into Theology.

And yet here we are 2000 years later where over a billion people still follow his teaching. Not bad for a convicted criminal who was put to death by the superpower of the day whose ministry only last 3 1/2 years. Talk about logically inexplicable, but there it is nonetheless.

Actually, Jesus was put to death by his own followers who turned on him in the final moments when given the choice whether to set him free or not by Pilate.

 

[sparky]

Well, prove it then, not with pictures (that can be doctored) but with hard, irrefutable evidence. Did you SEE any of those things happen? Are you a witness? No? Then you are taking other peoples' word for it, plain and simple. The fact that there are far more people saying one thing than the other does not make it true. If you recall your history, it was once the consensus that the Earth was flat. The vast majority of people said so, and believed it. Did that make it true? Of course not. Thus, my point. Anything you did not, personally, experience/witness, you have to have a certain amount of faith to believe. Same is true for religious/spiritual faith.

The difference here is that you CHOOSE to believe that 9/11 happened, the Atomic bombs were dropped, and the Titanic sank. It is a well informed choice, as there is quite a bit of evidence that those things happened. There is also quite a bit of evidence that there is a god. You just choose not to believe it.

travel to Egypt for one
I can't travel somewhere to see god
start being reasonable --the pyramid analogy is nonsensical

You are completely missing my point here. Yes, I could travel to Egypt and, supposedly, see the pyramids. I can also look outside and see what I believe is evidence that there IS a god. The point I am trying to make here is that we believe what we do based on the evidence we have been presented with. For you, it would seem, you have not been presented with the evidence you desire to believe there is a god. Yet, I have no doubt, there are things that you have been provided with similar evidence of that you do believe. I have no doubt that there have been cases in which you believe someone has seen something/someone that can provide no further evidence than their word, and yet you believe them. Why, then, do you not believe those who say they have "seen" their god? What is the difference?

Omniscience Is an Insult to Human Intelligence

Witnesses from a primitive era aren't worth paying attention to. Besides, the narrative comes to illogical conclusions. If so many people had seen Jesus's miracles, certainly they would have stopped his crucifixion. They would have believed they'd go straight to Heaven if they lost their lives doing so. Yet even his apostles chickened out. And how can you explain Judas, supposedly seeing all the proof of JC's divinity and yet still betraying Him? Doesn't add up. As with many other useless degrees, those who aren't good at math go into Theology.

And yet here we are 2000 years later where over a billion people still follow his teaching. Not bad for a convicted criminal who was put to death by the superpower of the day whose ministry only last 3 1/2 years. Talk about logically inexplicable, but there it is nonetheless.

Actually, Jesus was put to death by his own followers who turned on him in the final moments when given the choice whether to set him free or not by Pilot.

ah, but it was that last exchange that really said it all >>>

When Pontius Pilate interrogated Jesus before his crucifixion, Jesus proclaimed that "Everyone on the side of truth listens to me." (John 18:37). To this, Pilate replied "What is truth?" and immediately left Jesus to address the Jews who wanted Christ crucified (v. 38). As Francis Bacon wrote in his essay "On Truth," "'What is truth?' said jesting Pilate; and would not stay for an answer." Although we have no record of any reply by Jesus, Christians affirm that Pilate was staring Truth in the face, for Jesus had earlier said to Thomas, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life" (John 14:6).

This exchange raises the perennial question of the nature of truth. What does it mean for a statement to be true? This has been a subject of much debate in postmodernist circles, where the traditional view of truth as objective and knowable is no longer accepted. Many even outside of academic discussions may be as cynical about truth as Pilate. "What is truth?" they smirk, without waiting for an answer. But unless we are clear about the notion of truth, any religious claim to truth--Christian or otherwise--will perplex more than enlighten. Before attempting to determine which claims are true, we need to understand the nature of truth itself.


source>

What is Truth

~S~

 

[ding]

Well, prove it then, not with pictures (that can be doctored) but with hard, irrefutable evidence. Did you SEE any of those things happen? Are you a witness? No? Then you are taking other peoples' word for it, plain and simple. The fact that there are far more people saying one thing than the other does not make it true. If you recall your history, it was once the consensus that the Earth was flat. The vast majority of people said so, and believed it. Did that make it true? Of course not. Thus, my point. Anything you did not, personally, experience/witness, you have to have a certain amount of faith to believe. Same is true for religious/spiritual faith.

The difference here is that you CHOOSE to believe that 9/11 happened, the Atomic bombs were dropped, and the Titanic sank. It is a well informed choice, as there is quite a bit of evidence that those things happened. There is also quite a bit of evidence that there is a god. You just choose not to believe it.

travel to Egypt for one
I can't travel somewhere to see god
start being reasonable --the pyramid analogy is nonsensical

You are completely missing my point here. Yes, I could travel to Egypt and, supposedly, see the pyramids. I can also look outside and see what I believe is evidence that there IS a god. The point I am trying to make here is that we believe what we do based on the evidence we have been presented with. For you, it would seem, you have not been presented with the evidence you desire to believe there is a god. Yet, I have no doubt, there are things that you have been provided with similar evidence of that you do believe. I have no doubt that there have been cases in which you believe someone has seen something/someone that can provide no further evidence than their word, and yet you believe them. Why, then, do you not believe those who say they have "seen" their god? What is the difference?

Omniscience Is an Insult to Human Intelligence

Witnesses from a primitive era aren't worth paying attention to. Besides, the narrative comes to illogical conclusions. If so many people had seen Jesus's miracles, certainly they would have stopped his crucifixion. They would have believed they'd go straight to Heaven if they lost their lives doing so. Yet even his apostles chickened out. And how can you explain Judas, supposedly seeing all the proof of JC's divinity and yet still betraying Him? Doesn't add up. As with many other useless degrees, those who aren't good at math go into Theology.

And yet here we are 2000 years later where over a billion people still follow his teaching. Not bad for a convicted criminal who was put to death by the superpower of the day whose ministry only last 3 1/2 years. Talk about logically inexplicable, but there it is nonetheless.

Actually, Jesus was put to death by his own followers who turned on him in the final moments when given the choice whether to set him free or not by Pilot.

But administered by the superpower of the day, right?

But putting that aside are you suggesting that Pilot did not have the authority himself to free Jesus?

The author of Christ's death is all of us.

 

[ding]

travel to Egypt for one
I can't travel somewhere to see god
start being reasonable --the pyramid analogy is nonsensical

You are completely missing my point here. Yes, I could travel to Egypt and, supposedly, see the pyramids. I can also look outside and see what I believe is evidence that there IS a god. The point I am trying to make here is that we believe what we do based on the evidence we have been presented with. For you, it would seem, you have not been presented with the evidence you desire to believe there is a god. Yet, I have no doubt, there are things that you have been provided with similar evidence of that you do believe. I have no doubt that there have been cases in which you believe someone has seen something/someone that can provide no further evidence than their word, and yet you believe them. Why, then, do you not believe those who say they have "seen" their god? What is the difference?

Omniscience Is an Insult to Human Intelligence

Witnesses from a primitive era aren't worth paying attention to. Besides, the narrative comes to illogical conclusions. If so many people had seen Jesus's miracles, certainly they would have stopped his crucifixion. They would have believed they'd go straight to Heaven if they lost their lives doing so. Yet even his apostles chickened out. And how can you explain Judas, supposedly seeing all the proof of JC's divinity and yet still betraying Him? Doesn't add up. As with many other useless degrees, those who aren't good at math go into Theology.

And yet here we are 2000 years later where over a billion people still follow his teaching. Not bad for a convicted criminal who was put to death by the superpower of the day whose ministry only last 3 1/2 years. Talk about logically inexplicable, but there it is nonetheless.

Actually, Jesus was put to death by his own followers who turned on him in the final moments when given the choice whether to set him free or not by Pilot.

ah, but it was that last exchange that really said it all >>>

When Pontius Pilate interrogated Jesus before his crucifixion, Jesus proclaimed that "Everyone on the side of truth listens to me." (John 18:37). To this, Pilate replied "What is truth?" and immediately left Jesus to address the Jews who wanted Christ crucified (v. 38). As Francis Bacon wrote in his essay "On Truth," "'What is truth?' said jesting Pilate; and would not stay for an answer." Although we have no record of any reply by Jesus, Christians affirm that Pilate was staring Truth in the face, for Jesus had earlier said to Thomas, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life" (John 14:6).

This exchange raises the perennial question of the nature of truth. What does it mean for a statement to be true? This has been a subject of much debate in postmodernist circles, where the traditional view of truth as objective and knowable is no longer accepted. Many even outside of academic discussions may be as cynical about truth as Pilate. "What is truth?" they smirk, without waiting for an answer. But unless we are clear about the notion of truth, any religious claim to truth--Christian or otherwise--will perplex more than enlighten. Before attempting to determine which claims are true, we need to understand the nature of truth itself.


source>

What is Truth

~S~

What theeee....

Excellent post. There is only one way to see truth (i.e. objective truth which is reality), one must die to self. Specifically, one must have no preference for an outcome or the consequences of the outcome especially to himself.

 

[sparky]

lofty concept, and i do thank you for your grasp of it ding
~S~

 

[ding]

We live in a deterministic universe where every cause has an effect which means everything happens for a reason. For any given thing there will be a final state of fact which is called reality. Once discovered it will be known that it was always that way and will always be that way. Which means that truth is eternal and unchanging. This is the definition of God. Eternal and unchanging, ergo God is truth. Ergo God is reality.

 

[ding]

What is your name? I Am.

I Am = to exist

ergo I Am = existence

 

[toobfreak]

Now what evidence do YOU have that you have accomplished anything in life that would justify your irrational behavior to look down upon others.

Perhaps the better question would be to ask this:

EVERYTHING in this universe had a beginning and a cause. Wouldn't it be the height of arrogance to then suggest that the biggest and most important thing of all, the Universe itself didn't? And we call that cause "God." Whether you choose to believe "God" is an intelligent supernatural being or just a fluctuation of Branes within an alternate quantum dimension, perhaps the real burden of proof lies on those questioning God to prove he DOESN'T exist? In other words, before some arrogant jackass comes here to proclaim no proof of God exists, the real challenge ought to be on them to show proof that our phenomenal universe could have come about WITHOUT a God.

 

[ding]

So when people say where is your proof of God.

I think to my self... you want me to prove existence exists?

 

[ding]

Now what evidence do YOU have that you have accomplished anything in life that would justify your irrational behavior to look down upon others.

Perhaps the better question would be to ask this:

EVERYTHING in this universe had a beginning and a cause. Wouldn't it be the height of arrogance to then suggest that the biggest and important thing of all, the Universe itself didn't? And we call that cause "God." Whether you choose to believe "God" is an intelligent supernatural being or just a fluctuation of Branes within an alternate quantum dimension, perhaps the real burden of proof lies on those questioning God to prove he DOESN'T exist? In other words, before some arrogant jackass comes here to proclaim no proof of God exists, the real challenge ought to be on them to show proof that our phenomenal universe could have come about WITHOUT a God.

I agree. We have all the proof we need in his creation. We know that space and time had a beginning and that that beginning came about through the laws of nature which existed before space and time itself. The same laws which predestined that intelligence would eventually arise. And that it is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence. And we know from our own experiences as creators that what we create can be used as evidence to learn things about us.

I can't tell you how sick and tired I get arguing these lofty concepts with people who have an IQ of 100. People who think they are better than others. All I can say about that is dunning effect.

 

[ding]

Right about now that intellectual powerhouse, Taz, is going to say... but what about deformed babies. lol.

 

[toobfreak]

I can't tell you how sick and tired I get arguing these lofty concepts with people who have an IQ of 100.

You're being generous. In many cases, I'd put many IQs here closer to 85.

 

[Taz]

I have yet to find anyone who has actually found god, they might say they have, but when questioned, it’s obvious that they haven’t found shit.

Really! So you haven't "found God," so don't know the first thing about Him, but you sure as hell know when someone else tells you they did and are lying?" Gee.

The funny thing about threads like this is that even when presented with a genuine opportunity to learn, none of the people actually asking the questions want to take advantage of the opportunity when presented to them! Proof positive that those claiming "a lack of evidence" are really just saying: "a lack of desire" on their part. You don't want to know, you just want to try to discredit and knock holes in anyone who says that religion and faith are not a waste of time. In other words, YOU are a waste of time.

I know all about the god believers talk about, I just don't see any real plausibility in what they tell me. Simply never makes any sense.

I'd like to learn about a real god, not some make up brah who drowned nearly all of humanity in his flood, he also helped the Israelites murder everyone in Jericho, Heshbon, Bashan and many more, usually killing women, children and animals at the same time. God once helped some Israelites kill 500,000 other Israelites. Totally cartoonish.