Atheism and Faith

[Eclogite]

Jolly unsporting of you InfiniteNow.:lightning - using facts and evidence to discount dogmatically held, yet unfounded beliefs. What will be next? Logic and reasoned argument? Surely a step too far.:eek_big:

[Boerseun]

As I (and others) have said nothing begins to exist without cause.Ahhh' that would include our universe.

And, of course, God Himself.

Which, of course, explicitly requires the existence of an Uber-God, who created God.

Which, of course, explicitly requires the existence of an Uber-Uber-God, who created the Uber-God.

Which, of course, explicitly requires the existence of an Uber-Uber-Uber-God, who created the Uber-Uber-God.

Which, of course, explicitly requires the...

Aah, what the hell - I'm sure you get the idea.

The universe exploding out of itself is just as improbable as requiring a God to kick-start it. There's just less redundant elements in the equation.

Saying that the universe must have a creator is logically inconsistent, as described above.

[Saitia]

Hello cwes99_03,

 

many scientists use the word truth to define SR and GR though no absolute proof of either has been set forth in stone.

 

Can you give me an example of anything set forth with "absolute proof"?

 

 

I believe you are actually pointing to the idea that nothing can be absolutely set in stone without knowing everything in the universe, and therefore truth can be treated relatively.

Um, no and yes. All truth comes from God, who is absolute, but when truth becomes allied with fact, it is conditioned by time and space; that makes all truth discovered in time and space relative and partial.

 

 

Please PM me for further discussion though of what you believe to be truth and I'll be happy to debate some topics as to how they relate to a true understanding of the Bible. :)

Thanks; but I think I would rather be force-fed refried beans and raw cabbage and involuntarily used to fill warehouses full of Boerseun's Macies' parade-size inflatable dachshunds with butt-gas until I expired, before I'd debate Bible verses with another human being. . .:eek_big: :lightning :singer:

 

(I'm just kidding.:kiss2: Where are you in central Illinois? I grew up in Springfield)

 

—Saitia

[InfiniteNow]

Can you give me an example of anything set forth with "absolute proof"?

EVERCLEAR? Oh... never mind. That's only 190. :steering:

 

 

EDIT: I just realized you were talking about vodka... in which case Absolute is 120. Cheers. :confused:

[C1ay]

All truth comes from God...

God only exists for dylexics and comes in many different forms, i.e. poodles, german shepherds, labradors, etc..

[Buffy]

Down boys! Bad doggies! Heel! <cracks whip>

 

Regain your decorum. Its *important*. Thank you for your cooperation.

 

Have a chocolate Pesach or Easter Bunny. It will calm you down.

 

Happy Passover and Merry Easter! :confused:

The Easter Buffy

[questor]

Boersun, do i read an anthropomorphic idea of God in this statement?:

''And, of course, God Himself.

Which, of course, explicitly requires the existence of an Uber-God, who created God.

Which, of course, explicitly requires the existence of an Uber-Uber-God, who created the Uber-God.

Which, of course, explicitly requires the existence of an Uber-Uber-Uber-God, who created the Uber-Uber-God.

Which, of course, explicitly requires the...

Aah, what the hell - I'm sure you get the idea.

The universe exploding out of itself is just as improbable as requiring a God to kick-start it. There's just less redundant elements in the equation''

does your mind tell you that God has human form or other human attributes?

why would there have to be an uber-God?

i am speaking to you on a god level because i can't get you on a creator level. are you saying there was no BB?

[Rsade]

And, of course, God Himself.

 

#1....No, you err. God is eternal and static. God said he has always been. the universe is not eternal its as mortal as we. Only the time of "death" is uncertain, Stephen Hawking said even the black holes will evaporate. With all due respect, try again.

 

Which, of course, explicitly requires the existence of an Uber-God, who created God.

Which, of course, explicitly requires the existence of an Uber-Uber-God, who created the

 

#2.....see above and read a bit about eternity and infinities.

 

Saying that the universe must have a creator is logically inconsistent, as described above

 

see reply #1

[Rsade]

Have a chocolate Pesach or Easter Bunny. It will calm you down.

 

 

yum! but chocolate makes me hyper, and it gumms up my nose...

[Rsade]

God only exists for dyslexics and comes in many different forms, i.e. poodles, german shepherds, labradors, etc..

 

If you say so, but God exists for people without hideous disabilities too. And those without compassion. And that would do him or his son harm, and he loves us all.

 

Sometimes I see God in my basset hounds eyes, when he goes to sleep looking at me. I see God in the fusion reactors hundreds of light years away, in the blue white stars, and in the brilliant greens yellows and reds, the media of Jesus, or colors of the horse head or crab Nebula, The remains of stars of self destruction called a Super Nova. I see God in the atom and the quarks and muons and the quantum weirdness that makes up these tiny time machines, God is in the singularity of a black hole where the tidal forces of gravity has crushed a million stars into a point so small that it cannot be measured.

 

I see God when I look at the seething ocean of humanity or one lone homeless person lying in his own vomit. I see God in you members here, and in the art of monet, or of a finger painting rendered by a K1 student...god is everywhere if you know how to look. And he cannot be found if you don't care to see him, The choice is yours. The choice is mine.And I see god as the creator and intellegent designer of our universe and everything in it.

[infamous]

If you say so, but God exists for people without hideous disabilities too. And those without compassion. And that would do him or his son harm, and he loves us all.

And in the creative style of prose; Excellent post Rsade, rather a calming interlude 'I must say'................Infy

[Saitia]

Please quote your source.

 

Originally from The Urantia Book

It states:

 

Knowledge is the sphere of the material or fact-discerning mind. Truth is the domain of the spiritually endowed intellect that is conscious of knowing God. Knowledge is demonstrable; truth is experienced. Knowledge is a possession of the mind; truth an experience of the soul, the progressing self. Knowledge is a function of the nonspiritual level; truth is a phase of the mind-spirit level of the universes. The eye of the material mind perceives a world of factual knowledge; the eye of the spiritualized intellect discerns a world of true values. These two views, synchronized and harmonized, reveal the world of reality, wherein wisdom interprets the phenomena of the universe in terms of progressive personal experience.

 

Intelligence grows out of a material existence which is illuminated by the presence of the cosmic mind. Wisdom comprises the consciousness of knowledge elevated to new levels of meaning and activated by the presence of the universe endowment of the adjutant of wisdom. Truth is a spiritual reality value experienced only by spirit-endowed beings who function upon supermaterial levels of universe consciousness, and who, after the realization of truth, permit its spirit of activation to live and reign within their souls.

 

The certainties of science proceed entirely from the intellect; the certitudes of religion spring from the very foundations of the entire personality. Science appeals to the understanding of the mind; religion appeals to the loyalty and devotion of the body, mind, and spirit, even to the whole personality.

 

 

According to my sources:

None of them limit truth to the faithful. Until such time that you can show that you are a higher authority, I'll take their definitions over yours.

The dictionary is of course a great place to go for a basic definition. But as Buffy has said, "life is messier." And life isn't the only thing that evolves, language must evolve, too. Sometimes that means allowing life to evolve our understanding of basic definitions and concepts. As an artist, I find the artistic triumph of truth to be the making of new pictures— new meanings— out of old facts; facts that are already well known.

 

I'll listen to anyone's truth, no matter how they acquire it, and weigh it against my highest understanding. But I don't put ultimate confidence in any external "higher authority"; I am my own "authority." When one grasps the notion of the Spirit of Truth, it doesn't take long to develop the skill necessary to hold any or all experience of reality up to your deepest understanding of truth, and see which is "higher." You might want to look at learning to recognize your own inner voice as the "higher authority" in any instance; a factor which becomes paramount in any life that has become dedicated to the personal discovery of truth. It works for dyslexics, too. ;)

[C1ay]

Originally from The Urantia Book

Not a book that I personally accept as proof of anything, except for the existance of the science fiction writer that created it.

[Abstruce]

some people seem quite proud that they are atheists and are eager to look with derision at those who have faith in a deity. the assumption seems to be that they are more intelligent than the faithful and have discovered the REAL

TRUTH. i would like to know why an atheist is, or becomes atheist and why some intelligent people are believers. for the sake of discussion, would some of you declare your belief and explain the reasons why?

 

Questor, you are Theist, I am Atheist.

 

As an Atheist, I can only speak for myself.

 

I do not consider myself to be any more intelligent than Theist.

 

If anything, I consider the opposite to be true.

 

Many Theist claim to know how the known universe was created, how it will end and what happens after one dies.

 

All of these things are unknown to me, In my case your claims are not valid.

 

"Considered logically this concept is not identical with the totality of sense impressions referred to; but it is an arbitrary creation of the human (or animal) mind."AE :hihi:

 

JQ

[Saitia]

Hello C1ay,

 

Not a book that I personally accept as proof of anything, except for the existance (sic) of the science fiction writer that created it.

I see. :hihi: :D I'm curious. Obviously you couldn't read the book this afternoon. Since you were able to conclude the "writer" that produced it wrote "science fiction," does that mean you reached your conclusions based on the thorough and rigorous scientific techniques you personally use to discover truth, or did you rely on another human being you've invested faith in as a "higher authority," and have assumed their experience is true?

 

—Saitia

:lol:

[C1ay]

I do not accept any claim of supernatural origins of such a book with absolutely no scientific proof of any supernatural existance. Without rigorous scientific proof of the supernatural I regard such claims as science fiction.

[Abstruce]

I do not accept any claim of supernatural origins of such a book with absolutely no scientific proof of any supernatural existance. Without rigorous scientific proof of the supernatural I regard such claims as science fiction.

 

C1ay

 

You might as well say the answer to everything is 42.

 

Write it in a book and someone, somewhere, will believe it.

 

JQ