i don't think i could have said it better myself, and i'm not sure i would have if i could. i decided to back away from these discussion for a while because i was getting a little too zealous about such misconceptions (on science's side of things).

i crossed a line. i've said repeatedly that i think it's important to understand an idea on its own terms before you criticize it. i still think that's true, but somewhere my attempts to explain science turned into attempts to explain why the truth of science should be self-evident. i apologize to anyone i've offended or helped to push this discussion in a distasteful direction. consciously my biggest goal is to find common ground, but i'm human, and my emotions can have other things to say about such issues.

I certainly dont believe there is any conspiracy afoot, but I do think there is an element of what some may consider to be naivity in the standards of explanations people will accept in this day and age. I consider myself fortuate to have a number of clerics amongst my closest friends from the days when I was in the Army, we have many sensible and lively discussions on the topic naturally, and each time we have one, I learn more.

However, from my perspective, despite looking for, and sifting through what I do find out there, I still have not found any evidence that passes the test:

"what additional information is available that will help me discern fact from fiction that does not in itself, depend for its credibility, on the assumnption of the existence of a Supreme Deity"

All explanations offered to me to date, do in themselves depend on the existence of a Supreme Deity for the offered explanations to be valid. That is not therefore a credible explanation from my viewpoint. Harsh? Maybe, but why should I committ myself to something for which I feel, despite genuine and long lasting searching - with a very open mind - there appears to be no Credible evidence that stands in its own right.

Regards
Zy

I have nothing against God, to have something against him would be to believe in him in some way. As I said, If I turn out to be wrong, and there is a God, then simply being sent to a place where God is not, is just the same as my life now. And I lose nothing, though I gain nothing either, but it makes no difference...except i'll be dead.

Also, you say those who fear God.... Why would I fear a being that does not exist to me? How can I know someone, who I know does not exist. Is it not religious people that are described as "God Fearing"? In fact, it would seem the term is one that denotes "good" people.
And what makes your God the One I should follow? What About Jehova, Allah, Brahama, Shiva, Kali, Britannia, Epona, Arwn, Bran, Llyr, Manawyddan? What makes your God worth knowing, Any more than these others?... Let me guess.... it's because they don't exist, but yours does?

If that's the case, you'll need to come up with some other reason because it won't wash with me.... though, no argument that you give would convince me. God himself could appear to me, with all his supposed power, and still i'd class him as an Alien intelligence that is simply more advanced than me. No more worthy of worship as the next creature.

Is it possible for people to make their points in smaller posts??

I would love to read what people have to say,,,, but i don't have time to read such large posts!

A fair comment from your perspective. When i read revelations and come to the part where humans try to fight God,,,, i wonder if this same thing is what they will be thinking? Independance day gone wrong!! woops.

I wonder about the story of Abraham, when God asked him to sacrifice his son.... if that was me, i would just think it was the devil pretending to be God and i would refuse. my point is, how did Abraham know it was God?

On the other hand even if i knew it was God commanding me, i do not think i could consider doing somthing evil? I mean isn't that kind of faith - the same faith Abraham had, what leads to suicide bombers etc etc. What is the difference between a suicide bomber who thinks God is commanding him and Abraham walking up the hill to sacrifice his son?

It is puzzling to me?

I guess for those of us who do not believe, it is puzzling. I can read the bible and understand it all, but wihtout the faith, it has no true "meaning". I think it is the same for those with faith, they can see why ( I hope ) we don't believe, but can't understand the real "why" so to speak.

Yet Christians will more happily arue matters of faith etc, with Atheists, but I doubt the majority would stand toe to toe with a Muslim, Jew, Hindu,Sikh (sp?) and debate such things. They all agree a God or Gods exist, so that must give them some common ground, but they won't argue about whose God is the real one.

The only relgious group they will debate with are pagans, be that wicca or some other type. They like to throw the name Pagan as an insult.... not thinking that they are beliefs that predate their own by thousands of years, and that pagans are proud of what they are. lol

My Personal view is that those who are truly relgious should get rid of the organised aspect of their faith, and follow their holy book as the personally see it, while leaving those who don't beleive alone. In the UK, 70% or so class themselves as Christian, yet about 60% of those on average would say that they put Christian down because they either didn't want to leave the faith box blank or because their parents ot grandparents believed, so they felt it was a tradition to say so. The UK really is more secualr and non religious than almost any other nation on earth. As a people, we just don't need it. And we got to this point wihtout communism and social engineering, we just saw sense.

so

actually i do believe, i'm Christian, but that dousn't mean i won't discuss things about religion that puzzle me.

Allot of Christians are quick to dismiss doubts/questions because they are scared it may be negative to their faith. My faith is strong, and i am not afraid to ask questions or listen to other peoples opinions.

IS that a question that asking for me to expand on that comment, or are you just saying "so" as a way of saying that my view is irrelivent?

Or perhaps you intend to make an apparently random comment that is open to interpretation?

Or perhaps you'd like to comment on my view that

"I guess for those of us who do not believe, it is puzzling. I can read the bible and understand it all, but wihtout the faith, it has no true "meaning". I think it is the same for those with faith, they can see why ( I hope ) we don't believe, but can't understand the real "why" so to speak.

Yet Christians will more happily arue matters of faith etc, with Atheists, but I doubt the majority would stand toe to toe with a Muslim, Jew, Hindu,Sikh (sp?) and debate such things. They all agree a God or Gods exist, so that must give them some common ground, but they won't argue about whose God is the real one.

The only relgious group they will debate with are pagans, be that wicca or some other type. They like to throw the name Pagan as an insult.... not thinking that they are beliefs that predate their own by thousands of years, and that pagans are proud of what they are. lol"

Perhaps if you disagree with something i'd said, you'd like to say why you do. Though I can't see why because as I quoted above here, i'm quite happy to live alongside faith in general.

One thing that religions don't seem to preach is the idea of " each to their own ".
Thankfully there are Liberal christians/muslims etc.. who are willing to be more tolerant to other people. My issue are with the conservative ones who take stuff like Romans 1:26-27 and see that it is Gods direct word that Homosexuality is wrong for example.

That is the kind of stuff where I say "so". It has no effect on christians, worry about your own soul, let others worry about theirs.

Has anyone looked into the behaviours of Christian missionaries in the Pacific during the Colonial Era? Or Muslim slave raiders of the late medeavil? Shocking behaviour.

i am saying so because anyone who reads the bible knows that god is an alien intelligence. ie not of this earth.

but then again so are we.


we live on the planet but we are not a part of it.

if we were a part of it where are our predeters.

everything has something that preys on it. except maybe polar bears.

oh wait polar bears pray on polar bears. usually males on young but still.

Right, now I get you
It was kind of hard to get that from "so"... sorry if I came across a bit harsh in response.

I'd say that we are our own predators, at least now. Before we had the tools to defend/hunt etc, we were at the mercy of many animals.

sorry about leaving you guys on the hook specifically those of you who don't believe.


i don't believe either because i have knowledge of god.


i broke the first law. and that is the one where you are supposed to forget ever thing about the preexistence.

i don't remember what it was like i just remember there was something

A convenient cop-out. You said:



This question presumes that there is a God, and you explicitly said, regardless of your actual belief in God, that if there were a God, you would prefer existence without God.

So, I ask again, what do you have against the mere idea of God?



Point being that if you don't want to be with God, you must have a perspective of God that is unappealing to you, and you, for lack of a better word, fear this God.

God, by definition, is a perfect being. Now, while none of us can conceive objectively of "perfection", subjectively we all have our own images of perfect qualities. Each person's conception of a perfect being would reflect qualities that that person values, and one would be instinctively drawn to such a person, for that reason.



Correction: you believe he does not exist.



Yes, that is the archaic phrase. I however was speaking literally, sorry for the confusion.



One unfortunate side-effect of Judeo-Christianity is that they rarely refer to God with a name. When I say "God", I don't necessarily mean the God described in the Bible. I mean my own conception of God, as I described above. I never said you should follow my God. You should follow your God, the "perfect being" that you conceive. I doubt that we would see eye to eye on what defines a perfect being, though we could certainly start a morality thread, if you wish.



Certainly. God isn't an explanation for physical phenomena, I would first look for a logical solution to physical experiences I have.



I sure as hell wouldn't sacrifice my son (not that I have any anyways). But my God would never demand the sacrifice of my son.



Don't disillusion yourself into thinking atheism is "non-belief", it is a definite belief that God doesn't exist (a- : no, theos : deity, -ism : belief)



I more or less agree with this. I am under the impression that everyone here is so of their own free will, correct? No one feels oppressed?



I agree with this except to the point where one tries to justify wrongdoing with religion alone. Like Muslim terrorist bombings, for example.

P.S. Sorry for being a little behind. Internet connection has been funky lately.

What I find even more puzzling, is why, when the question of where is the evidence / facts for the existence of a Supreme Deity - what ever phrase you want to use - is asked by anyone genuinely seeking to find out and evaluate, the ensuing discussion always plunges into the philosophical merits / background - whatever - of religion. Anything but answer the question. The closest I get it is examples of "evidence" that in themselves depend on the pre-existence of a Supreme Deity for that evidence to be valid - ie its immediately discredited as evidence.

I have often asked this of cleric friends of mine, and frankly never get a straight answer. I usually follow that up with the inevitable reply / conclusion, that if individuals who profess a passionate and devout belief and Faith, either cant or wont give help in pointing to the "evidence", how or why should I join them in that Faith?

One even said "You are assuming that all Priests, Clerics - whatever, formal representatives of the various Faiths - believe in it themselves.

He was right, I do, and that was a scary thought .....

To virtually every other aspect of our lives, the average passionate person would reply (to the effect) "dont be daft, look here, here and here" (etc).

If anyone can answer that without body swerving into philosophical theory of whatever nature, I'd be all ears. Because mine is a genuine quest for facts with open mind and genuine willingness to believe, and until I get them, noone in their right mind can expect me to "See the Light".

Regards
Zy

1989 earthquake in san fransico man survives for four days in about 10 inches of space. did i mention he was diabitic. a diabitic cannot survive 4 days without food.

same quake 2 kids survive in a car that is crushed and their mom and aunt/friend are killed. yes one losses his leg. but the point is that they survived.

each and every new born.

I see your point: what kind of deity would cause an earthquake to hit a major city like that? If such an evil god exists, he doesn't deserve worship; he deserves destruction.

Or, we can look at it rationally. Fancy that.

Heheheh. lol. Good response. Made me laugh.

One thing is for certain: there is no stopping them; the polar bears will soon be here. And I, for one, welcome our new polar bear overlords. I’d like to remind them that as a trusted Internet personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves.

You cannot give evidence for matters of faith. Period. Can't happen. Sorry. Metaphysical things are, by definition, outside the physical realm. Evidence/facts are, by definition, restricted to the physical realm. There's a chasm here that cannot be crossed, like in the mind/body problem. The real question, then, is why people should/could believe in something that by its very nature can have no evidence. That's why these conversations turn to philisophical merits.

Let me give an analogy for religious belief reconciled with empiricism:

When I learned Karate, I noticed that there was a metaphysical slant to it. My Sensei would talk about "drawing life force from the floor" and "shifting your Chi through your body" and "releasing spiritual energy through your hands" and whatnot. I thought this was silly, but eventually I tried to accept the things he was talking about. Eventually, it really did feel like I had a spiritual energy flowing around that I could control.

Do I believe that there is a mystical aura around me, with magical energy that I control? No, not really. I know that Karate is really about aligning your muscles in ways that increase striking power. But what's wrong with referring to that muscle alignment, and resulting power, as spiritual energy? Just call it that. Then this "spiritual energy" certainly exists. Also, it's USEFUL to refer to it this way, since while you don't have conscious control of each individual muscle you do have a semi-conscious notion of the kinetic energy throughout your body.

So now with this new terminology we can use to use, discuss, and improve aspects of our bodies that we couldn't before. It's not just a semantic issue -- our brains are wired to think about it this way, so by keeping the image of a spiritual force in our minds we can do things that we otherwise couldn't. In other words, the mental image of an aura is a metaphor, but the "spiritual force" itself is real. It's just real in a way that I may not fully understand.

i think you missed something

the day and hour that that earthquake hit there was supposed to be 100,000 people on that road. there was about 100.

why weren't there more becouse there was a stupid baseball game

please ask away, and i will try and give some unconventional answers?

i finally figured it out.


it has been staring us in the face the whole time.


one of gods day is equal to the length of time that the sun takes to orbit the galaxy.

which i believe we are now on the 13th orbit. don't know where in that orbit we are.



sorry had no other place to put this.

Too many cults, not enough deprogrammers....