One of the following MUST be true about God

[PratchettFan]

Since I just thanked someone who doesn't share my beliefs I guess that sort of kills your whole theory of me "rejecting other answers because they did not fit my beliefs".

But keep thinking you actually answered anything.

Actually, that poster chose one of your three options - which you believe to be the only possible options. Any suggestion that other options might exist you have rejected out of hand - solely because they are not one of your three.

So tell me what options I left off. Let me guess

D) We aren't meant to understand Gods motives

Right?

Ok. Life is an illusion. We experience pain and pleasure, suffering and joy, for the purpose of understanding the nature of our being. But all of that is purely transitory. You cannot understand joy unless you have experienced suffering. You cannot understand the essence of what you are unless you have experienced all facets of that essence. Thus the baby dying in pain receives an insight into that essence which it would not othewise have recieved. It dies in this manner because it needs that experience in order to move on to a greater understanding of existence. Consider life as a school and you tend to learn more in the hard classes than the easy ones.

I hold that out not as a particular belief, but as another option outside of the ones you have listed. I could provide you with others if you please. And, of course, that is all predicated upon the notion that the options are limted to ones we can think up. Which is itself an absurd idea based on the philosophy that humans are omniscient.

Your irrationality is that you think you have an understanding of the subject matter when, in fact, you are as blind ignorant as the rest of us. You have not the slightest idea of what is going on or even if anything is going on. The example you use is not one to illiict logical discourse but to engage emotion and is directed to a very specific concept of a deity which you fail to support beyond your insistence that it is the only possibility to consider. You are a believer and you are reacting to heretics.

 

[PratchettFan]

Which part of my reasoning is illogical? Be specific.

You arrive at a conclusion in the absence of information and claim evidence you cannot produce. What part of that is logical?

I have information.....The world around me. I gave examples that support my statement. You chose to ignore them. That's your issue to work out.

"The world around me" is precisely the same evidence used by many to prove the existence of God. The only thing that proves is that there is a world around you. It is not evidence of the existence or non-existence of God, or of the nature of God should there be one. Beyond that, you provided claims - not support. I did not ignore them, I refuted them.

Let me give you an example of what I am looking for. Suppose I were to claim there is not a planet identical to earth but on the other side of the sun - so we could not see it. How could I prove it does not exist? Well, knowing the effect the mass of the earth has on other bodies in the solar system, I could predict how an identical planetary body in the location of the supposed "Earth B" would impact the movement of other objects. If I did not see any impact on those movements, I could present that as evidence of the absence of Earth B.

Do you see how that works?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Which part of my reasoning is illogical? Be specific.

I was, and you pretended you were smarter than Aristotle.

I didn't realize you were Aristotle. And I wasn't pretending, I know I'm smarter than you. You've proven that all by yourself.

Aristotle is the guy that laid out the basic rules of logic most people still use. You made up your own rules to claim your post made sense under the rules of logic, yet you won't explain to anyone else what they actually are.

That has nothing to do with how smart I am.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Which part of my reasoning is illogical? Be specific.

You arrive at a conclusion in the absence of information and claim evidence you cannot produce. What part of that is logical?

I have information.....The world around me. I gave examples that support my statement. You chose to ignore them. That's your issue to work out.

I have a few questions that would help people understand your superior level of intellect.

• Explain to me exactly why babies dying proves God does not exist.
• Is it specific babies dying, or all of them, that proves it?
• If no baby ever died, but children did, would that still prove God does not exist?
• Does He have to keep everyone alive forever in order to prove that He exists?
• Would you use the evidence that no one ever died, which would result in massive overcrowding, to prove that god did not exist if that is the way the world worked?

 

[HUGGY]

Perhaps therin lies the problem. Maybe some people pop out of the womb hard wired to be "told" who to be and some, fewer, arrive with a quest to discover who they might be letting the chips fall where they may.

I was lucky in that I had very little "pounded" into my head and at a very eary age asked the right questions to my parents... answers to they could not supply. I was taken to church up to around age 5 and asked mom and dad what exactly people were doing when they prayed. They told me they were acting on faith. I responded that..that was not an answer to my question. I told them that I was uncomfortable being asked to do something that did not make any sense. They honored my discomfort and started to leave me home when they went to church. I assume they figured out if I was meant to discover "god" and Jesus that I would come around on my own time. I never looked back although I did read most of the major religions books as time went on out of curiosity.

I had serious hobbies and studies far beyond my years with chemistry sets and a photography set up including my own film and print proccessing. These advanced directions were offered by my folks as a test to see if I was indeed as smart as I claimed. I showed I was a lot more interested in chemistry and other topics than they both were even as graduates of the U of W. My mom graduated college at age 19. She wasn't a dummy. My dad graduated at 21 and joined the Army to make films for the war effort at the end of WWII and Korea. They both came from well to do families and bought a chunk of land on Orcas Island where thier kids didn't have to suffer the influence of the city. I learned a lot more about life operating a farm than I ever learned in public school although I did attend public schools thuout my childhood and teens. And yes...I operated the farm as my dad was working for Boeing making sales movies for them and only visited Orcas about twice a month.

So that's how HUGGY became an atheist. Lucky me...I avoided being brainwashed. These converations are entertaining to me only because there is an off chance that I can encourage someone to think for themselves therefor making this world a tiny bit more sane.

If I have a drop to offer let it fall in an ocean of truth and not an ocean of ignorance.

Just need to point out the distinction between those who are religious, and those who are simply spiritual (and believe in a higher power/order in our universe).

Personally, I consider most world religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) WAY too specific and therefore very difficult to jump on board with. Most have a rather "man made" feel to them (which makes sense as the Bible, Koran were written by man).

However, I consider Atheists (ie people who don't even consider the possibility of a god or higher power) to be in the same boat with regards to their lofty assumptions. With the extraordinarily limited view we have into our universe, and our extraordinarily short lifespans, I'm sort of baffled by folks who believe absolutely that there exists no god.

To me, the only rational explanation is "I don't know".

If you know nothing about baseball, and someone asks you about a player you're unfamiliar with, do you say "I'm certain he doesn't exist", or do you stick with "I don't know"?
.

Bad analogy. If you read my post I was clear about having read the bible and other religious documents. Aside from halucinations that's all the information anyone has. Based on the rediculous stories in the bible it is easy to say that Christianity is not based on fact or even comon sense and therefore god is a myth.

 

[KevinWestern]

Perhaps therin lies the problem. Maybe some people pop out of the womb hard wired to be "told" who to be and some, fewer, arrive with a quest to discover who they might be letting the chips fall where they may.

I was lucky in that I had very little "pounded" into my head and at a very eary age asked the right questions to my parents... answers to they could not supply. I was taken to church up to around age 5 and asked mom and dad what exactly people were doing when they prayed. They told me they were acting on faith. I responded that..that was not an answer to my question. I told them that I was uncomfortable being asked to do something that did not make any sense. They honored my discomfort and started to leave me home when they went to church. I assume they figured out if I was meant to discover "god" and Jesus that I would come around on my own time. I never looked back although I did read most of the major religions books as time went on out of curiosity.

I had serious hobbies and studies far beyond my years with chemistry sets and a photography set up including my own film and print proccessing. These advanced directions were offered by my folks as a test to see if I was indeed as smart as I claimed. I showed I was a lot more interested in chemistry and other topics than they both were even as graduates of the U of W. My mom graduated college at age 19. She wasn't a dummy. My dad graduated at 21 and joined the Army to make films for the war effort at the end of WWII and Korea. They both came from well to do families and bought a chunk of land on Orcas Island where thier kids didn't have to suffer the influence of the city. I learned a lot more about life operating a farm than I ever learned in public school although I did attend public schools thuout my childhood and teens. And yes...I operated the farm as my dad was working for Boeing making sales movies for them and only visited Orcas about twice a month.

So that's how HUGGY became an atheist. Lucky me...I avoided being brainwashed. These converations are entertaining to me only because there is an off chance that I can encourage someone to think for themselves therefor making this world a tiny bit more sane.

If I have a drop to offer let it fall in an ocean of truth and not an ocean of ignorance.

Just need to point out the distinction between those who are religious, and those who are simply spiritual (and believe in a higher power/order in our universe).

Personally, I consider most world religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) WAY too specific and therefore very difficult to jump on board with. Most have a rather "man made" feel to them (which makes sense as the Bible, Koran were written by man).

However, I consider Atheists (ie people who don't even consider the possibility of a god or higher power) to be in the same boat with regards to their lofty assumptions. With the extraordinarily limited view we have into our universe, and our extraordinarily short lifespans, I'm sort of baffled by folks who believe absolutely that there exists no god.

To me, the only rational explanation is "I don't know".

If you know nothing about baseball, and someone asks you about a player you're unfamiliar with, do you say "I'm certain he doesn't exist", or do you stick with "I don't know"?
.

Bad analogy. If you read my post I was clear about having read the bible and other religious documents. Aside from halucinations that's all the information anyone has. Based on the rediculous stories in the bible it is easy to say that Christianity is not based on fact or even comon sense and therefore god is a myth.

Well, if no living human has explored the universe, how can you say that god is without a doubt a myth?

Wouldn't it be more rational to say I "simply don't know"?

 

[HUGGY]

Just need to point out the distinction between those who are religious, and those who are simply spiritual (and believe in a higher power/order in our universe).

Personally, I consider most world religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) WAY too specific and therefore very difficult to jump on board with. Most have a rather "man made" feel to them (which makes sense as the Bible, Koran were written by man).

However, I consider Atheists (ie people who don't even consider the possibility of a god or higher power) to be in the same boat with regards to their lofty assumptions. With the extraordinarily limited view we have into our universe, and our extraordinarily short lifespans, I'm sort of baffled by folks who believe absolutely that there exists no god.

To me, the only rational explanation is "I don't know".

If you know nothing about baseball, and someone asks you about a player you're unfamiliar with, do you say "I'm certain he doesn't exist", or do you stick with "I don't know"?
.

Bad analogy. If you read my post I was clear about having read the bible and other religious documents. Aside from halucinations that's all the information anyone has. Based on the rediculous stories in the bible it is easy to say that Christianity is not based on fact or even comon sense and therefore god is a myth.

Well, if no living human has explored the universe, how can you say that god is without a doubt a myth?

Wouldn't it be more rational to say I "simply don't know"?

We can't rationally comment on what we do not know. If a god shows up and it is obvious that it is a god I will be the first to eat my words. Based on what the Christians and others use as a working theory I can say that they are full of Ca-Ca and thier "evidense" is nonsense. I reject the known "evidense" of a god totally. If a real god shows up I'm open to that but so far that has not happened.

 

[PratchettFan]

Just need to point out the distinction between those who are religious, and those who are simply spiritual (and believe in a higher power/order in our universe).

Personally, I consider most world religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) WAY too specific and therefore very difficult to jump on board with. Most have a rather "man made" feel to them (which makes sense as the Bible, Koran were written by man).

However, I consider Atheists (ie people who don't even consider the possibility of a god or higher power) to be in the same boat with regards to their lofty assumptions. With the extraordinarily limited view we have into our universe, and our extraordinarily short lifespans, I'm sort of baffled by folks who believe absolutely that there exists no god.

To me, the only rational explanation is "I don't know".

If you know nothing about baseball, and someone asks you about a player you're unfamiliar with, do you say "I'm certain he doesn't exist", or do you stick with "I don't know"?
.

Bad analogy. If you read my post I was clear about having read the bible and other religious documents. Aside from halucinations that's all the information anyone has. Based on the rediculous stories in the bible it is easy to say that Christianity is not based on fact or even comon sense and therefore god is a myth.

Well, if no living human has explored the universe, how can you say that god is without a doubt a myth?

Wouldn't it be more rational to say I "simply don't know"?

IMO, there are two approaches which can (and probably should) be taken at the same time. The first is as you suggest. The only rational response to the question is "I don't know". Until such time as we have some relevant information to base a conclusion, there should be no conclusion.

At the same time, we are clearly a species of believers. It is unreasonable to expect us not to believe. Therefore, since there is no rational conclusion but we still believe, the second rational approach is to pick a belief you like and go with it. It need not be supported, only believed. In the absence of information, any belief is as good as another. If you can't be certain, you can at least be happy.

 

[PratchettFan]

Bad analogy. If you read my post I was clear about having read the bible and other religious documents. Aside from halucinations that's all the information anyone has. Based on the rediculous stories in the bible it is easy to say that Christianity is not based on fact or even comon sense and therefore god is a myth.

Well, if no living human has explored the universe, how can you say that god is without a doubt a myth?

Wouldn't it be more rational to say I "simply don't know"?

We can't rationally comment on what we do not know. If a god shows up and it is obvious that it is a god I will be the first to eat my words. Based on what the Christians and others use as a working theory I can say that they are full of Ca-Ca and thier "evidense" is nonsense. I reject the known "evidense" of a god totally. If a real god shows up I'm open to that but so far that has not happened.

You act as if "the Christians" are different from you. Your belief there is no God is no less a belief. It is just the one you like. You have no more support for that belief than the Christians do for theirs.

 

[KevinWestern]

We can't rationally comment on what we do not know. If a god shows up and it is obvious that it is a god I will be the first to eat my words. Based on what the Christians and others use as a working theory I can say that they are full of Ca-Ca and thier "evidense" is nonsense. I reject the known "evidense" of a god totally. If a real god shows up I'm open to that but so far that has not happened.

I think my analogy was going at this:

Instead of definitively claiming that something does/does not exist in an area that you have not yet explored and are unfamiliar with, one should take the route "I don't know".

You know what I mean?

I'm basically just laying out my personal criticism of atheism.

.

 

[KevinWestern]

Bad analogy. If you read my post I was clear about having read the bible and other religious documents. Aside from halucinations that's all the information anyone has. Based on the rediculous stories in the bible it is easy to say that Christianity is not based on fact or even comon sense and therefore god is a myth.

Well, if no living human has explored the universe, how can you say that god is without a doubt a myth?

Wouldn't it be more rational to say I "simply don't know"?

IMO, there are two approaches which can (and probably should) be taken at the same time. The first is as you suggest. The only rational response to the question is "I don't know". Until such time as we have some relevant information to base a conclusion, there should be no conclusion.

At the same time, we are clearly a species of believers. It is unreasonable to expect us not to believe. Therefore, since there is no rational conclusion but we still believe, the second rational approach is to pick a belief you like and go with it. It need not be supported, only believed. In the absence of information, any belief is as good as another. If you can't be certain, you can at least be happy.

Totally agree with you Pratchett. In short, I have generally observed that the Atheists sometimes claim that their way is the "rational", "logical" approach whereas (in my view) I see their belief that there is absolutely no god in the same bucket at "Jesus was the Son of God and died for our sins" (ie an absolute belief on a subject we have very little evidence on).

Both sides are totally entitled to their opinion, and I respect them both. However, (as you mention) I think they fall into the same category.

This is a good situation that the "horseshoe model" can apply to (ie total atheists and total Christians are NOT on opposite ends of the spectrum)



.

 

[hortysir]

Of course I don't understand it. Because it doesn't make any sense. Explain to me how you can believe in an all loving god that still manages to let infants suffer and die from cancer.

There's my proof, go ahead and use your infinite wisdom to explain it to me.

Until a certain age parents are accountable for the sins of their children.

Everything is for a reason.
Just because something happens doesn't mean it happens TO you.
It may happen FOR someone else.

So you can't explain it. Got it.

You can't understand it. Got it.

 

[Agent.Tom]

We can't rationally comment on what we do not know.

Of course we can. As suggested, the rational thing to say is, "I don't know."

If a god shows up and it is obvious that it is a god I will be the first to eat my words.

Strictly out of curiosity, can you lay out a reasonable, succinct list of requirements that--if satisfied--would convince you beyond any doubt that the God of the bible exists?

Based on what the Christians and others use as a working theory I can say that they are full of Ca-Ca and thier "evidense" is nonsense. I reject the known "evidense" of a god totally.

Other than creation itself and the logical deduction that all the matter in the universe didn't spring forth from nothing; I can't think of any bona fide, convincing evidence any person could present. But just because believers in the past have tried to convince you using evidence that you reject, it doesn't mean that a Creator doesn't exist.

If a real god shows up I'm open to that but so far that has not happened.

Key phrase is "so far." I'm just excited that you are open minded enough to discuss the possibility.

 

[Avatar4321]

Until a certain age parents are accountable for the sins of their children.

Everything is for a reason.
Just because something happens doesn't mean it happens TO you.
It may happen FOR someone else.

So you can't explain it. Got it.

You can't understand it. Got it.

It's quite amazing that as many times as it's been explained to him, he has to pretend as if there is no answer.

 

[Avatar4321]

We can't rationally comment on what we do not know. If a god shows up and it is obvious that it is a god I will be the first to eat my words. Based on what the Christians and others use as a working theory I can say that they are full of Ca-Ca and thier "evidense" is nonsense. I reject the known "evidense" of a god totally. If a real god shows up I'm open to that but so far that has not happened.

I think my analogy was going at this:

Instead of definitively claiming that something does/does not exist in an area that you have not yet explored and are unfamiliar with, one should take the route "I don't know".

You know what I mean?

I'm basically just laying out my personal criticism of atheism.

.

I tried to explain that to many of them before. They don't see anything illogical about claiming there is no God from an argument of silence. (in there opinion obviously because there is plenty of evidence).

The ironic thing is in order to know there is no God, you would have to have all knowledge and be aware of everything going on in every part of the universe, past, present and future.

In other words, to know there is no God, you would have to be a god.

Meanwhile, all a believer has to do to know there is a God is have a personal experience with Him. I know there is a God because of my experience. I've recieved a witness of the Holy Spirit. Something everyone else who has ever and will ever live could likewise obtain if they are humble, prayerful, and sought the truth.

Man can learn more about Providence in 5 minutes by the Holy Spirit than a life time searching in books. And far more than sitting back and doing absolutely nothing other than arrogantly proclaiming you cant learn anything.

 

[HUGGY]

We can't rationally comment on what we do not know. If a god shows up and it is obvious that it is a god I will be the first to eat my words. Based on what the Christians and others use as a working theory I can say that they are full of Ca-Ca and thier "evidense" is nonsense. I reject the known "evidense" of a god totally. If a real god shows up I'm open to that but so far that has not happened.

I think my analogy was going at this:

Instead of definitively claiming that something does/does not exist in an area that you have not yet explored and are unfamiliar with, one should take the route "I don't know".

You know what I mean?

I'm basically just laying out my personal criticism of atheism.

.

I tried to explain that to many of them before. They don't see anything illogical about claiming there is no God from an argument of silence. (in there opinion obviously because there is plenty of evidence).

The ironic thing is in order to know there is no God, you would have to have all knowledge and be aware of everything going on in every part of the universe, past, present and future.

In other words, to know there is no God, you would have to be a god.

Meanwhile, all a believer has to do to know there is a God is have a personal experience with Him. I know there is a God because of my experience. I've recieved a witness of the Holy Spirit. Something everyone else who has ever and will ever live could likewise obtain if they are humble, prayerful, and sought the truth.

Man can learn more about Providence in 5 minutes by the Holy Spirit than a life time searching in books. And far more than sitting back and doing absolutely nothing other than arrogantly proclaiming you cant learn anything.

I've recieved a witness of the Holy Spirit. Sure you did Sparky! You people are certifiabled insane. Anywhere but in your church that passes for a trip to the padded room in a state mental institution.

True story.

 

[Avatar4321]

I've recieved a witness of the Holy Spirit. Sure you did Sparky! You people are certifiabled insane. Anywhere but in your church that passes for a trip to the padded room in a state mental institution.

True story.

What's more insane? Believing what you experience or telling people they haven't experienced something because you haven't?

Just because you want to persecute people different than you, doesn't mean they are less sane. Just that you are a heartless bigot.

 

[HUGGY]

I've recieved a witness of the Holy Spirit. Sure you did Sparky! You people are certifiabled insane. Anywhere but in your church that passes for a trip to the padded room in a state mental institution.

True story.

What's more insane? Believing what you experience or telling people they haven't experienced something because you haven't?

Just because you want to persecute people different than you, doesn't mean they are less sane. Just that you are a heartless bigot.

Is that what you call it? "persecuted"? Not so Whackamo... I just call a spade a spade. Truth is you are one of two things...a liar or you are crazy...no other possible explaination.

 

[PratchettFan]

I've recieved a witness of the Holy Spirit. Sure you did Sparky! You people are certifiabled insane. Anywhere but in your church that passes for a trip to the padded room in a state mental institution.

True story.

What's more insane? Believing what you experience or telling people they haven't experienced something because you haven't?

Just because you want to persecute people different than you, doesn't mean they are less sane. Just that you are a heartless bigot.

Is that what you call it? "persecuted"? Not so Whackamo... I just call a spade a spade. Truth is you are one of two things...a liar or you are crazy...no other possible explaination.

You have evidence to support that claim?

 

[numan]

Well, if no living human has explored the universe, how can you say that god is without a doubt a myth?

Good grief!! Don't tell me you think God occupies some particular region of physical space?!! Like those Mormon savages who think God occupies a human body on some particular planet?

That's pretty primitive, even for someone suffering from religious mania.

Even the Pope is more sophisticated than that !!
.