THE QUESTION OF WHETHER ANY GODS EXIST...

[Frank Apisa]

...cannot be answered using logic, reason, science, or math.

It just cannot be done...or at least, I am asserting that it cannot. I've tried...never come close. I've challenged hundreds of others to give it a shot...none has ever come close.

I am inviting anyone who can prove the assertion wrong...or show substantially that it most likely is wrong...to do so.

To make my assertion even more specific...and more encompassing...I'm going to expand it:

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "At least one god exists."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "No gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that at least one god exists...than that no gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that no gods exist...than that at least one god exists."

Comments would be appreciated.

Proving me wrong would be even more appreciated.

[ThatOwlWoman]

Wait. You want there to be gods? I'm not real sure that's a good idea!

[Frank Apisa]

Nah...I don't WANT there to be gods.

If there are...fine with me; if there are none...also fine.

But both sides of the question often seem so sure.

I do not see why either side is "sure."

[CFM]

...cannot be answered using logic, reason, science, or math.

It just cannot be done...or at least, I am asserting that it cannot. I've tried...never come close. I've challenged hundreds of others to give it a shot...none has ever come close.

I am inviting anyone who can prove the assertion wrong...or show substantially that it most likely is wrong...to do so.

To make my assertion even more specific...and more encompassing...I'm going to expand it:

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "At least one god exists."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "No gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that at least one god exists...than that no gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that no gods exist...than that at least one god exists."

Comments would be appreciated.

Proving me wrong would be even more appreciated.

I don't need to prove you wrong. At your advanced age, God will get his chance soon enough. It would be interesting to see your reaction when you get the proof.

[PostmodernProphet]

Frank appears to have discovered the meaning of faith.....it would have been so much easier just to use a dictionary.....

[MAGA MAN]

I don't need to prove you wrong. At your advanced age, God will get his chance soon enough. It would be interesting to see your reaction when you get the proof.

:rofl2:

[MAGA MAN]

...cannot be answered using logic, reason, science, or math.

It just cannot be done...or at least, I am asserting that it cannot. I've tried...never come close. I've challenged hundreds of others to give it a shot...none has ever come close.

I am inviting anyone who can prove the assertion wrong...or show substantially that it most likely is wrong...to do so.

To make my assertion even more specific...and more encompassing...I'm going to expand it:

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "At least one god exists."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "No gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that at least one god exists...than that no gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that no gods exist...than that at least one god exists."

Comments would be appreciated.

Proving me wrong would be even more appreciated.

Ever hear of Google?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/01/mathematical-proof-of-gods-existence/

[iolo]

Given the vast complexities of the universe(s), the incredible computer needed to look after it all would seem not much to resemble our usual idea of a father.

[PostmodernProphet]

Given the vast complexities of the universe(s), the incredible computer needed to look after it all would seem not much to resemble our usual idea of a father.

doesn't resemble the usual idea of "computer" either......

[Frank Apisa]

Ever hear of Google?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/01/mathematical-proof-of-gods-existence/

I've heard of Google.

I want the opinions and thoughts of people in this forum.

Ever hear of this forum?

[Frank Apisa]

Given the vast complexities of the universe(s), the incredible computer needed to look after it all would seem not much to resemble our usual idea of a father.

Okay.

But my point is that any comment about the existence or non-existence of gods...or the likelihood of the existence or non-existence of gods...

...essentially is a guess.

That is an important point...if correct.

Just looking for the opinion of others about whether it is or isn't...and why the others think that way.

[Frank Apisa]

doesn't resemble the usual idea of "computer" either......

What about you, PP.

Do you think any of those things can be established using logic, reason, science or math?

[countryboy]

...cannot be answered using logic, reason, science, or math.

It just cannot be done...or at least, I am asserting that it cannot. I've tried...never come close. I've challenged hundreds of others to give it a shot...none has ever come close.

I am inviting anyone who can prove the assertion wrong...or show substantially that it most likely is wrong...to do so.

To make my assertion even more specific...and more encompassing...I'm going to expand it:

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "At least one god exists."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "No gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that at least one god exists...than that no gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that no gods exist...than that at least one god exists."

Comments would be appreciated.

Proving me wrong would be even more appreciated.

Oh look, another leftist loon excuse to bash Christians. How original.

[CFM]

Okay.

But my point is that any comment about the existence or non-existence of gods...or the likelihood of the existence or non-existence of gods...

...essentially is a guess.

That is an important point...if correct.

Just looking for the opinion of others about whether it is or isn't...and why the others think that way.

You do know there is a difference between having an opinion and guessing?

[Frank Apisa]

Oh look, another leftist loon excuse to bash Christians. How original.

So...best you can do is to rant about me wanting to "bash Christians"...even though nothing of what I wrote does that in any way?

C'mon, CB...you can do better than that.

[CFM]

So...best you can do is to rant about me wanting to "bash Christians"...even though nothing of what I wrote does that in any way?

C'mon, CB...you can do better than that.

Again, at your age, you'll get your answer soon enough. The sooner the better.

[countryboy]

So...best you can do is to rant about me wanting to "bash Christians"...even though nothing of what I wrote does that in any way?

C'mon, CB...you can do better than that.

You're as transparent as glass Frank. Let's go over the check list, shall we?

1. Leftist loon makes a thread challenging others to prove the existence of God. Check.

2. See 1.

[ThatOwlWoman]

I do not see why either side is "sure."

Ditto. It can't be proven nor disproven that a god/gods do or do not exist.

I like the cosmology of the indigenous ppl where we live. The Anishinaabeg (Ojibwe) refer to Gichi-Manidoo, which we Europeans translate to "Great Spirit" and think of as God. However, the concept is far more complicated. The meaning assigned to the term is more accurately translated to "great mystery" because it's acknowledged that we cannot know for sure. Almost all that we see, hear, touch, interact with contains this mystery. That's reflected in the language, as the verbs indicate whether something is animate (possesses mystery/spirit) or inanimate. It gets even more complex as the cosmology includes our place within all that is here, rather than the more Western way of considering ppl as somehow distinct and part from creation, looking on and discussing it as though we are in a different room.

[ThatOwlWoman]

Oh look, another leftist loon excuse to bash Christians. How original.

Pretty sure that Christians aren't the only ppl who believe in god/gods.

Why not add your opinion/beliefs rather than starting a spat?

[CFM]

Ditto. It can't be proven nor disproven that a god/gods do or do not exist.

I like the cosmology of the indigenous ppl where we live. The Anishinaabeg (Ojibwe) refer to Gichi-Manidoo, which we Europeans translate to "Great Spirit" and think of as God. However, the concept is far more complicated. The meaning assigned to the term is more accurately translated to "great mystery" because it's acknowledged that we cannot know for sure. Almost all that we see, hear, touch, interact with contains this mystery. That's reflected in the language, as the verbs indicate whether something is animate (possesses mystery/spirit) or inanimate. It gets even more complex as the cosmology includes our place within all that is here, rather than the more Western way of considering ppl as somehow distinct and part from creation, looking on and discussing it as though we are in a different room.

Sure it can.

[Celticguy]

Thats why its called faith

[Frank Apisa]

You're as transparent as glass Frank. Let's go over the check list, shall we?

1. Leftist loon makes a thread challenging others to prove the existence of God. Check.

Actually, I made no such challenge.

I merely asked if anyone COULD establish any of the four items.

And the request went out to atheists who think they can do it also.

Try to keep up.


2. See 1.

See my response above.

[CFM]

Actually, I made no such challenge.

I merely asked if anyone COULD establish any of the four items.

And the request went out to atheists who think they can do it also.

Try to keep up.



See my response above.

Many atheists believe they have proven God doesn't exist and use the theory of evolution to back up their claim. The problem is none of them have ever been able to provide me with the actual picture of my great, great, great, great . . . . great, great, great . . . . grandfather they claim I evolved from millions of years ago.

[PostmodernProphet]

What about you, PP.

Do you think any of those things can be established using logic, reason, science or math?

I know that they are matters of choice.....those that demand proof have already made their choice not to have faith.......

[PostmodernProphet]

Oh look, another leftist loon excuse to bash Christians. How original.

I don't think he's bashing Christians.....I just think he's finally realized something the rest of the world has known for millennia.....now is he trolling Christians?.....without a doubt......however he lacks the skill to set the hook.....

[Frank Apisa]

I know that they are matters of choice.....those that demand proof have already made their choice not to have faith.......

Wouldn't it have been easier...and more honest, to just say, "No?"

[Frank Apisa]

I don't think he's bashing Christians.....I just think he's finally realized something the rest of the world has known for millennia.....now is he trolling Christians?.....without a doubt......however he lacks the skill to set the hook.....

I was a "Christian" myself...and consider myself closer to the teachings of Jesus than most supposed Christians of the American Christian persuasion.

I am not trolling them...and I am not bashing them

I've asked some questions that seem upsetting some of you.

You would do well to ask yourself why those questions upset you.

[MAGA MAN]

I've heard of Google.

I want the opinions and thoughts of people in this forum.

Ever hear of this forum?

Nice try at avoiding the point, that the link provided proves you wrong.

[Frank Apisa]

Nice try at avoiding the point, that the link provided proves you wrong.

C'mon, Ooda...you might get away with that kind of crap with an amateur...but you won't with me, because I not an amateur.

So anyway...'splain the math to us, Lucy!

Jeez...I am beginning to think YOU are an amateur.

[evince]

na its just Putin dosent pay him enough for him to really try

[evince]

Many atheists believe they have proven God doesn't exist and use the theory of evolution to back up their claim. The problem is none of them have ever been able to provide me with the actual picture of my great, great, great, great . . . . great, great, great . . . . grandfather they claim I evolved from millions of years ago.

in your case evolution is not a factor


your blood line never evolved

[evince]

Nah...I don't WANT there to be gods.

If there are...fine with me; if there are none...also fine.

But both sides of the question often seem so sure.

I do not see why either side is "sure."

I have no reason to believe gods or monsters exist.


the evidence of their existence is absent from anything mankind has proof of


what is a GOD?


what is monster?


we might be best served in this discussion to properly define these ideas in a mutual way.


can you give a definition for both so we can begin agreeing on what it is we are actually pondering here?

[evince]

if we cant all agree on what these things are

they cant exist

they don't exist

[evince]

Maybe we should take EVERY religions definition of god separately and examine if those separate things exist


which religion do you want to start with?

or do you just take all of their separate definitions collectively and claim that is what GODs and MONSTERS are?

[Frank Apisa]

First of all...thank you for taking the thread seriously...and for treating it seriously, Evince.


I have no reason to believe gods or monsters exist.

Neither do I.

I also have no reason to "believe" no gods or monsters exist.



the evidence of their existence is absent from anything mankind has proof of

That may or may not be correct.



what is a GOD?

For the purposes of this discussion...I think I'll use whatever you want to use (within reason). My feelings, though, are that IF A GOD EXISTS...it is a part of nature. Obviously it is a part of nature that we do not understand. But calling anything that exists outside of what exists...makes no sense to me.



what is monster?

For the purposes of this discussion...I'll use whatever you want to use . My feelings, though, are that if we limit our definition to only entities that exist here on planet Earth...we ought specify that. To say, "Unicorns seem not to exist", is substantively different from "Unicorns seem not to exist here on planet Earth." (That holds whether you define unicorn as an equine with a single horn extending from its forehead or not.)



we might be best served in this discussion to properly define these ideas in a mutual way.

I agree. Tell me if you disagree with the general comments I've made above...and we can work toward something we can both agree on.



can you give a definition for both so we can begin agreeing on what it is we are actually pondering here?

Done. I think I am willing to accept whatever you propose...unless it is off-the-wall.

[MAGA MAN]

C'mon, Ooda...you might get away with that kind of crap with an amateur...but you won't with me, because I not an amateur.

So anyway...'splain the math to us, Lucy!

Jeez...I am beginning to think YOU are an amateur.

Dude, you ax'd for anyone to prove it to you, and someone already has, mathematically, scientifically. You haven't bothered to look at the mathematical proof at the link provided, but you want me to explain it to you. What's your specific question?

[Frank Apisa]

Dude, you ax'd for anyone to prove it to you, and someone already has, mathematically, scientifically. You haven't bothered to look at the mathematical proof at the link provided, but you want me to explain it to you. What's your specific question?

My specific question?

Actually, if you read my comments...it is not an actual question. It a request.

Here is my "specific" request of you:

Explain the mathematical proof to us...unless, of course, you are just taking the word of that blog that what the guy claims he did...he actually did.

Should be no problem for you. Right? (He asked with a healthy dose of sarcasm!)

Or...you could stop the bullshit and join evince and moi in a discussion of the topic. Love to have you as part of it. You seem like you may have interesting stuff to contribute.

[evince]

Dude, you ax'd for anyone to prove it to you, and someone already has, mathematically, scientifically. You haven't bothered to look at the mathematical proof at the link provided, but you want me to explain it to you. What's your specific question?

what post number ?

[Frank Apisa]

what post number ?

He's talking about his #7.

Essentially it is Ooda, linking to a blog, that describes what Godel supposedly did (proved that GOD...a specific god...exists.) It is one of those supposed ontological proofs for the existence of god (meaning the Christian god.)

Look it over if you want...but if it doesn't seem nuts within two minutes...you have more staying power than I.

[evince]

First of all...thank you for taking the thread seriously...and for treating it seriously, Evince.



Neither do I.

I also have no reason to "believe" no gods or monsters exist.




That may or may not be correct.




For the purposes of this discussion...I think I'll use whatever you want to use (within reason). My feelings, though, are that IF A GOD EXISTS...it is a part of nature. Obviously it is a part of nature that we do not understand. But calling anything that exists outside of what exists...makes no sense to me.




For the purposes of this discussion...I'll use whatever you want to use . My feelings, though, are that if we limit our definition to only entities that exist here on planet Earth...we ought specify that. To say, "Unicorns seem not to exist", is substantively different from "Unicorns seem not to exist here on planet Earth." (That holds whether you define unicorn as an equine with a single horn extending from its forehead or not.)




I agree. Tell me if you disagree with the general comments I've made above...and we can work toward something we can both agree on.




Done. I think I am willing to accept whatever you propose...unless it is off-the-wall.

I am an atheist


in my definition ( due to the facts that are known in this momment in time) god is an idea.


it is the manifestation of how some human minds understand their existence in relevance to the world arround them.


are ideas real ?


only in the sense that someone can think them and utter them to others.


that means if you can think it or utter it is real in a sense.


that means any monster you can imagine is real in a sense


that means the gods and monsters any human (or maybe even other animals) can imagine exist in a thought form exist


Now if you want to go where a god or monster that can independently effect the world without being merely a thought passed from one to another living being we may have a problem of proof.


Gods cant exist if they cant be demonstrated to exist in a physical manner.

the same with monsters


did you know what people thought was a unicorn actually exists?


desert sheep viewed from the side.

mythical creatures


Dragons were thought to exist due to huge reptile skeletons found

imagine a person finding a nearly intact teradactile skeleton?


The Cracken was kniwn science at the time


It was a real as a cow to sailors


things like giant octopie being heaved onto a ship in a great storm and slithering off the deck back into the sea pushing men off the deck while doing so


so monsters do not exist


they are merely uneducated descriptions of unknown species


now what is GOD?


something different in each mind that conceives it


uneducated minds trying to precieve things they have no full understanding of



can it be they are each individual minds attempt to understand the very complex interwiring of the human mind?


education can effect the wiring of the mind


if you teach a child more than one language from birth that childs brain will have a more complex and advantageous language wiring system


( I Believe this is why the right hates kids knowing more than one language from birth, they are easier to manipulate and not as adept at language)



brain wiring studies have documented these improved wiring systems in childrens brains.


they have also found that GOD believers have a certain wiring that is different than nonbelievers.


that may be aguired the same way the language thing is huh.


so the fact that people BELIEVE in god has no bearing on a physical existence of God or monsters


Gods and monsters are thoughts and will be embraced by individuals depending on their brain wiring.


that means they are thoughts not physical beings

[evince]

Ever hear of Google?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/01/mathematical-proof-of-gods-existence/
r Gödel’s model uses mathematical equations that are extremely complicated, but the essence is that no greater power than God can be conceived, and if he or she is believed as a concept then he or she can exist in reality
Read more at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2017/01/mathematical-proof-of-gods-existence/#947uoMWxqDscHfxg.99



one word was all it took to dispel this idea


the math says CAN not does

[Frank Apisa]

I am an atheist


in my definition ( due to the facts that are known in this momment in time) god is an idea.


it is the manifestation of how some human minds understand their existence in relevance to the world arround them.


are ideas real ?


only in the sense that someone can think them and utter them to others.


that means if you can think it or utter it is real in a sense.


that means any monster you can imagine is real in a sense


that means the gods and monsters any human (or maybe even other animals) can imagine exist in a thought form exist


Now if you want to go where a god or monster that can independently effect the world without being merely a thought passed from one to another living being we may have a problem of proof.


Gods cant exist if they cant be demonstrated to exist in a physical manner.

the same with monsters


did you know what people thought was a unicorn actually exists?


desert sheep viewed from the side.

mythical creatures


Dragons were thought to exist due to huge reptile skeletons found

imagine a person finding a nearly intact teradactile skeleton?


The Cracken was kniwn science at the time


It was a real as a cow to sailors


things like giant octopie being heaved onto a ship in a great storm and slithering off the deck back into the sea pushing men off the deck while doing so


so monsters do not exist


they are merely uneducated descriptions of unknown species


now what is GOD?


something different in each mind that conceives it


uneducated minds trying to precieve things they have no full understanding of



can it be they are each individual minds attempt to understand the very complex interwiring of the human mind?


education can effect the wiring of the mind


if you teach a child more than one language from birth that childs brain will have a more complex and advantageous language wiring system


( I Believe this is why the right hates kids knowing more than one language from birth, they are easier to manipulate and not as adept at language)



brain wiring studies have documented these improved wiring systems in childrens brains.


they have also found that GOD believers have a certain wiring that is different than nonbelievers.


that may be aguired the same way the language thing is huh.


so the fact that people BELIEVE in god has no bearing on a physical existence of God or monsters


Gods and monsters are thoughts and will be embraced by individuals depending on their brain wiring.


that means they are thoughts not physical beings

Thank you, Evince.

I will respond to many of the things you said here, but I would like to have you extend one thing you mentioned that is nebulous.

You wrote:


I am an atheist.

Not sure what that means. It is a descriptor...a label...that means many different things to many different people.

On the question of whether any gods exist, I am an agnostic...but I use that descriptor only as a shortcut. What I actually mean is:


I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...

...so I don't.

Please give me a better idea of your atheism...even if it is just explaining why you differ from my agnosticism.

[evince]

A theist

without theism


My beliefs do not include an all powerful all knowing being running everything


the typical description of a god


the word God is not really defined the same from one religion to another

[evince]

there are world religions that don't need a god

they currently exist and people believe them as deeply as the god centered ones most people think of.


existance does not require an all powerful being to make sense and function

[evince]

an agnostic is a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena, a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.


I don't believe God is anything beyond a concept

I have never seen anything in my 60 years to point to a physical existence of god


there are gases that I have never seen, smelt, tasted, felt or been effected by.


there is evidence they exist even though I have never encountered them.


Not the same with god huh


I cant believe in God simply because somone I may even love insists god came to them.


It can be perfectly explained by their mind wiring.


I would need to see the science that proves that gas indeed exists on planet X34B and is provable by light refraction.

science is far more reliable than monsters

[MAGA MAN]

My specific question?

Actually, if you read my comments...it is not an actual question. It a request.

Here is my "specific" request of you:

Explain the mathematical proof to us...unless, of course, you are just taking the word of that blog that what the guy claims he did...he actually did.

Should be no problem for you. Right? (He asked with a healthy dose of sarcasm!)

Or...you could stop the bullshit and join evince and moi in a discussion of the topic. Love to have you as part of it. You seem like you may have interesting stuff to contribute.

You and desh obviously enjoy wasting people's time on this forum and until you prove me otherwise by ax'ing a specific question on the math, then sorry, I won't be entertaining your request.

[leaningright]

...cannot be answered using logic, reason, science, or math.

It just cannot be done...or at least, I am asserting that it cannot. I've tried...never come close. I've challenged hundreds of others to give it a shot...none has ever come close.

I am inviting anyone who can prove the assertion wrong...or show substantially that it most likely is wrong...to do so.

To make my assertion even more specific...and more encompassing...I'm going to expand it:

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "At least one god exists."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "No gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that at least one god exists...than that no gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that no gods exist...than that at least one god exists."

Comments would be appreciated.

Proving me wrong would be even more appreciated.

I agree with the above.

[Frank Apisa]

You and desh obviously enjoy wasting people's time on this forum and until you prove me otherwise by ax'ing a specific question on the math, then sorry, I won't be entertaining your request.

Careful of the door!

[Frank Apisa]

I agree with the above.

Thank you, Leaning.

I'm not trying to get over on anyone here...so if you get a chance, join the discussion that I hope ensues.

[MAGA MAN]

Careful of the door!

Just as I predicted. Enjoy your mental masturbation.

[Frank Apisa]

Just as I predicted. Enjoy your mental masturbation.

Enjoy you actual masturbation, Ooda. Remember to buy you fist flowers. It IS Valentine's Day.

[Leonthecat]

https://media.giphy.com/media/4TpYO0l5TsLS0/giphy.gif

[Leonthecat]

https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7qj6JIEgic14p0vC/giphy.gif

[MAGA MAN]

Enjoy you actual masturbation, Ooda. Remember to buy you fist flowers. It IS Valentine's Day.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm happily married to a young, beautiful, sensual woman, and still have my virility. We have a date tonight, dinner at home, then drive the '64 to dance lessons. What happens after that I'll leave up to your fertile imagination.

[Leonthecat]

http://i.imgur.com/w36YKXj.gif

[Leonthecat]

https://6544-presscdn-0-22-pagely.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/God.jpg
https://m.popkey.co/f3c5f3/KM40D_s-200x150.gif

[Frank Apisa]

Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm happily married to a young, beautiful, sensual woman, and still have my virility. We have a date tonight, dinner at home, then drive the '64 to dance lessons. What happens after that I'll leave up to your fertile imagination.

Buy your fist flowers anyway. It's earned them.

[CFM]

in your case evolution is not a factor


your blood line never evolved

Yet I'm still on a higher level than you, NL.

[MAGA MAN]

Buy your fist flowers anyway. It's earned them.

:okjen:

[Frank Apisa]

:okjen:

That's what I like...when you agree with me.

[Frank Apisa]

http://i.imgur.com/w36YKXj.gif

Excellent!

And a very important point was made there.

Thanks.

I'm hoping an actual discussion of the topic gets going.

The fact that some people guess there is at least one god...and some guess there are none...IS IMPORTANT.

[MAGA MAN]

That's what I like...when you agree with me.

You must be really dim to think that wasn't sarcasm. "rofl2:

[Frank Apisa]

You must be really dim to think that wasn't sarcasm. "rofl2:

You must be even dimmer to think my comment wasn't!

You are not really good at this, Ooda. You do realize that, don't you?

[PostmodernProphet]

Wouldn't it have been easier...and more honest, to just say, "No?"

if you were looking for easy you wouldn't have started this stupid thread......

[PostmodernProphet]

You would do well to ask yourself why those questions upset you.

that's easy.....I find stupid questions from idiot trolls upsetting......

[Frank Apisa]

if you were looking for easy you wouldn't have started this stupid thread......

Yeah...yer right about that also.

[Frank Apisa]

that's easy.....I find stupid questions from idiot trolls upsetting......

Oh...okay. That's why.

But since this is not a stupid question...and I am not an idiot or a troll...

...why are you so upset?

[Frank Apisa]

One of the problems with this site is that so many topics go off the track because of people who only have derailing in mind.

Hope there are some people who really want to discuss the issue raised.

[PostmodernProphet]

But since this is not a stupid question..


why is it not a stupid question?.......it has no answer.....everyone knows that the question of "is there a God" is intentionally a faith choice which cannot be proven in any manner.....

[PostmodernProphet]

I was a "Christian" myself...and consider myself closer to the teachings of Jesus than most supposed Christians of the American Christian persuasion.


how close are you to his teaching that the only way to the Father is through him?.......

[Frank Apisa]

why is it not a stupid question?.......it has no answer.....everyone knows that the question of "is there a God" is intentionally a faith choice which cannot be proven in any manner.....

Since it is a question the finest minds that have ever lived on this planet have contemplated and dealt with...

...I IS NOT A STUPID QUESTION.

Why not just express a YES to the part of my OP with which you agree...which seems to be the entire OP?

[Frank Apisa]

how close are you to his teaching that the only way to the Father is through him?.......

Not very.

Most reasonable scholars think Jesus NEVER SAID THAT.

[MAGA MAN]

You must be even dimmer to think my comment wasn't!

You are not really good at this, Ooda. You do realize that, don't you?

:okjen:

[ThatOwlWoman]

Pretty sure that today's school shooting (the 18th this year, according to Everytown) puts to rest this question once and for all. There are no gods.

[evince]

https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7qj6JIEgic14p0vC/giphy.gif

reminds of a dog I was priveledged to be family with


she was more delicate looking than that one


she was the most intelligent animal I have ever known.

she would sit in front of me and talk to me.

I would have her do the

Do you want such and such


a woof meant yes


just looking me in the eye and not saying anything meant No


she had the power to make clear what she wanted by us just knowing each other so well


she was beautiful

she looked like a black wolf with a docked tail


but her coat was soft as feathers


what a girl she was


stunning


and found at the pound

rescue


go there and let some dog steal your heart


then take care of them for their entire life


you will remember them as one of your best friends ever in life

[evince]

Pretty sure that today's school shooting (the 18th this year, according to Everytown) puts to rest this question once and for all. There are no gods.

why would an all knowing all seeing being allow such a thing


if you say God gave people free will then why aren't the religious people helping us END these things with their FREE WILL

do they misunderstand their own God?

[evince]

One of the problems with this site is that so many topics go off the track because of people who only have derailing in mind.

Hope there are some people who really want to discuss the issue raised.

we will try to keep it going


its a great exersize to help people re evaluate their morals


this is a national time of moral confusion


time to go back over the basics of belief

what ever you believe


there is always the now

to quote another great man of peace


"a mighty god


is a living man"


which means to me


whatever you believe that makes you the ambassador of your own beliefs.


make your life the tool of what you believe

that is truly giving your life to god IF you truly believe in GOD

Jesus was a great human philosopher

he spoke of a beautiful mankind we could create


he said nothing of letting children die so people could have guns they don't need


what would make you think he would back not feeding hungry children because you thought their Mom was lazy.


American Christians sometimes seem to want they shame their faith

[evince]

Just as I predicted. Enjoy your mental masturbation.

do you believe in a God?

[evince]

if you were looking for easy you wouldn't have started this stupid thread......

well he was looking for honest here

something you never seem to manage

[Ralph]

...cannot be answered using logic, reason, science, or math.

It just cannot be done...or at least, I am asserting that it cannot. I've tried...never come close. I've challenged hundreds of others to give it a shot...none has ever come close.

I am inviting anyone who can prove the assertion wrong...or show substantially that it most likely is wrong...to do so.

To make my assertion even more specific...and more encompassing...I'm going to expand it:

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "At least one god exists."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "No gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that at least one god exists...than that no gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that no gods exist...than that at least one god exists."

Comments would be appreciated.

Proving me wrong would be even more appreciated.

Logically speaking....answer this one question. Can you explain via using the laws of physics just what Caused the physical universe to come into physical reality? In other words if there is no "SUPER(superior) Natural (to nature) cause of the creation....where did the required products of the BIG BANG come from....mass/matter, it is beyond the capacity of natural physics to define its own creation then by logic....it must be a product of a superior force than physical reality. If not...why not? Did the universe create itself from NOTHING? Even if you attempt to theorize countless and untold "parallel" realities/universes...i.e., the multiverse theory....there must have been a beginning because physical science proves that the Universe is expanding and dying.

Call it what you will.....but according to the law of causality....SOMETHING SUPERIOR to the natural universe is responsible for its creation its physical existence...THE EFFECT known as physical reality. I simply accept my place as the inferior to that creating force an live my life as directed by both science and logic.

And by use of deductive reasoning based upon simple logic....that supernatural creating force is ETERNAL...unlike its product....the physical universe.

You may not be able to explain creation by science....but that does not stop the reality from existing, nor does your ignorance prohibit a supernatural force from existing...as its beyond the laws of physical science to quantify or calibrate. The created can never be greater than the whole from which it was subtracted......You might have a paradox....but I do not, I simply define truth via the prima facie evidences that surround us on a daily basis. Unlike you.....who needs to measure something he/she is incapable of measuring....I DO NOT need such objective evidence in oder to define truth beyond the reason of doubt....until YOU or anyone can scientifically present the objective, testable, reproducible, constant facts that debunk the existence of a supernatural creating force.....the prima facie evidence stands unchallenged by physics that cannot even comprehend the reasons that physical laws are as they are.......\

FYI: its not a matter of "blind faith"....its a matter of truth as defined via circumstantial evidences. Its exactly because you can't prove that God does not exist...that grants me the continued use of these prima facie evidences that are yet to be debunked by REAL PHYSICAL SCIENCE. Its nothing but pseudo science to suggest that theory, conjecture, and or speculation stands as scientific fact...when in reality its nothing but HUMAN PHILOSOPHY that exists only in one place...between the ears of someone who is suggesting it as truth that is yet to be proven....that my friend is the very definition of BLIND FAITH....propagating something as a HOPED FOR TRUTH void of having the physical factual evidence to support it. Yet your philosophy is superior those who use circumstantial evidences in order to test anything for truth?

Even in a court of law....prima facie evidences stand as valid evidence of convection until some Objective Testable Evidence is presented that proves the circumstantial evidence to be false.


There is no "rabbit hole" to enter.....when all the proof one requires is all around them. Simple things, like Love.....the inability of science to create life from nothing as they claim happened in the past...yet cannot reproduce today, if indeed it were a fact of science. Even a simple term like gravity.....as the only thing that can be defined about gravity is its quantifiable effects.....we know it exists by the fact its effects are subject to quantifiable reality...but some attempt to claim that GRAVITY preexisted the big bang and caused everything to come from nothing. Well....Mr. Hawking ....is GRAVITY nothing or is it Something? If it has the power to create...then it must be physically quantifiable and it is SOMETHING....where did gravity come from? Its your guild that has the paradox....not those who accept their place in this physical realm as being INFERIOR to that creating force....whether its called God or Nature.

[PostmodernProphet]

Since it is a question the finest minds that have ever lived on this planet have contemplated and dealt with...

...I IS NOT A STUPID QUESTION.

Why not just express a YES to the part of my OP with which you agree...which seems to be the entire OP?

because its an obvious troll.....no one has contemplated and dealt with the question of whether the existence of God can be proved.....except perhaps a few daft folks who challenge people to prove it to them......one isn't convinced to believe in God........one simply chooses whether or not to believe.....

[PostmodernProphet]

Not very.

Most reasonable scholars think Jesus NEVER SAID THAT.

well no....everyone who studies the scriptures knows he said that.....only people who reject scripture, and therefore reject Christ think he didn't say it....those folks aren't scholars.....they are simply atheists......

[Leonthecat]

reminds of a dog I was priveledged to be family with


she was more delicate looking than that one


she was the most intelligent animal I have ever known.

she would sit in front of me and talk to me.

I would have her do the

Do you want such and such


a woof meant yes


just looking me in the eye and not saying anything meant No


she had the power to make clear what she wanted by us just knowing each other so well


she was beautiful

she looked like a black wolf with a docked tail


but her coat was soft as feathers


what a girl she was


stunning


and found at the pound

rescue


go there and let some dog steal your heart


then take care of them for their entire life


you will remember them as one of your best friends ever in life

http://www.justviral.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/My-wife-and-I-found-out-black-dogs-dont-get-rescued-as-often-so-we-rescued-this-sweet-little-girl..jpg

[Leonthecat]

well no....everyone who studies the scriptures knows he said that.....only people who reject scripture, and therefore reject Christ think he didn't say it....those folks aren't scholars.....they are simply atheists......

Atheists are more intelligent than religious people, say researchers

New paper sets out to explain negative correlation between faith and intellect found in dozens of past studies
Religious people are less intelligent on average than atheists because faith is an instinct and clever people are better at rising above their instincts, researchers have claimed.

The theory — called the 'Intelligence-Mismatch Association Model' — was proposed by a pair of authors who set out to explain why numerous studies over past decades have found religious people to have lower average intelligence than people who do not believe in a god.

A 2013 analysis by University of Rochester found “a reliable negative relation between intelligence and religiosity” in 53 out of 63 historic studies.

A negative correlation between intelligence and religion makes sense if religion is considered an instinct, and intelligence the ability to rise above one's instincts, say researchers Edward Dutton and Dimitri van der Linden in their new paper published today.Rising above instincts is advantageous, they said in a statement, because it helps people to solve problems.

“If religion is an evolved domain then it is an instinct, and intelligence — in rationally solving problems — can be understood as involving overcoming instinct and being intellectually curious and thus open to non-instinctive possibilities,” explained Mr Dutton.

According to the 2013 review, the more intelligent a child is — even during early years — the more likely it is to turn away from religion.

In old age, above-average-intelligence people are less likely to believe in a god.

They argue that being intelligent helps people during stressful times to weigh up their options and act rationally rather than give in to knee-jerk responses.

“If religion is indeed an evolved domain — an instinct — then it will become heightened at times of stress, when people are inclined to act instinctively, and there is clear evidence for this,” said Mr Dutton.

“It also means that intelligence allows us to able to pause and reason through the situation and the possible consequences of our actions.”

The researchers believe that people who are attracted to the non-instinctive are potentially better problem solvers.

“This is important, because in a changing ecology, the ability to solve problems will become associated with rising above our instincts, rendering us attracted to evolutionary mismatches,” said Mr van der Linden.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/atheists-more-intelligent-than-religious-people-faith-instinct-cleverness-a7742766.html

[ThatOwlWoman]

why would an all knowing all seeing being allow such a thing


if you say God gave people free will then why aren't the religious people helping us END these things with their FREE WILL

do they misunderstand their own God?

Seems like mostly all the "religious" ppl do is offer "thoughts and prayers."

[Leonthecat]

Seems like mostly all the "religious" ppl do is offer "thoughts and prayers."

https://pics.me.me/named-my-cats-thoughts-and-prayers-because-they-re-useless-19768204.png

[PostmodernProphet]

is there anything that demonstrates the ignorance of atheists better than BucKKKle stating he's an atheist?.......

[Leonthecat]

is there anything that demonstrates the ignorance of atheists better than BucKKKle stating he's an atheist?.......

https://image.slidesharecdn.com/goddoesntexist-110715233512-phpapp02/95/god-doesnt-exist-52-728.jpg?cb=1310773003

[iewitness]

by your words ... verses 31-37 http://biblehub.com/kjv/matthew/12.htm.. this is why I call the damned the damned. their testimonies are 100% consistent: condemned.

[Leonthecat]

by your words ... verses 31-37 http://biblehub.com/kjv/matthew/12.htm.. this is why I call the damned the damned. their testimonies are 100% consistent: condemned.

https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/500x/59246835/gomer-says-hey.jpg

[TrippyHippy]

Oh look, another leftist loon excuse to bash Christians. How original.

Come on man, he's not "bashing" anyone.

[Frank Apisa]

Pretty sure that today's school shooting (the 18th this year, according to Everytown) puts to rest this question once and for all. There are no gods.

Or...there are gods...and the gods do not give a damn about what we do.

The notion of praying to a god to stop the carnage...of praying to a god willing to allow the carnage to take place...does seem futile.

[Frank Apisa]

reminds of a dog I was priveledged to be family with


she was more delicate looking than that one


she was the most intelligent animal I have ever known.

she would sit in front of me and talk to me.

I would have her do the

Do you want such and such


a woof meant yes


just looking me in the eye and not saying anything meant No


she had the power to make clear what she wanted by us just knowing each other so well


she was beautiful

she looked like a black wolf with a docked tail


but her coat was soft as feathers


what a girl she was


stunning


and found at the pound

rescue


go there and let some dog steal your heart


then take care of them for their entire life


you will remember them as one of your best friends ever in life

I really like that dog that is your avatar, Evince. A beauty.

[Frank Apisa]

we will try to keep it going


its a great exersize to help people re evaluate their morals


this is a national time of moral confusion


time to go back over the basics of belief

what ever you believe


there is always the now

to quote another great man of peace


"a mighty god


is a living man"


which means to me


whatever you believe that makes you the ambassador of your own beliefs.


make your life the tool of what you believe

that is truly giving your life to god IF you truly believe in GOD

Jesus was a great human philosopher

he spoke of a beautiful mankind we could create


he said nothing of letting children die so people could have guns they don't need


what would make you think he would back not feeding hungry children because you thought their Mom was lazy.


American Christians sometimes seem to want they shame their faith

Unless the god is one that does not care.

There may be gods...but just not the kind we humans favor for "worshiping."

We'll get back to the discussion...although the distraction will probably remain for a while.

[Frank Apisa]

Logically speaking....answer this one question. Can you explain via using the laws of physics just what Caused the physical universe to come into physical reality?

No...it is unknown to me.

I cannot even understand why you suppose it "came into" physical reality.

Suppose it didn't?



In other words if there is no "SUPER(superior) Natural (to nature) cause of the creation....where did the required products of the BIG BANG come from....mass/matter, it is beyond the capacity of natural physics to define its own creation then by logic....it must be a product of a superior force than physical reality. If not...why not? Did the universe create itself from NOTHING? Even if you attempt to theorize countless and untold "parallel" realities/universes...i.e., the multiverse theory....there must have been a beginning because physical science proves that the Universe is expanding and dying.

Beats the hell of me. I do not know seems the only reasonable, logical answer to those questions.

Your "it must have had a beginning" is an interesting guess, though.





Call it what you will.....but according to the law of causality....SOMETHING SUPERIOR to the natural universe is responsible for its creation its physical existence...THE EFFECT known as physical reality. I simply accept my place as the inferior to that creating force an live my life as directed by both science and logic.

And by use of deductive reasoning based upon simple logic....that supernatural creating force is ETERNAL...unlike its product....the physical universe.

I thank you for those guesses...but nothing you said there is logical...or deductive reasoning.


You may not be able to explain creation by science....but that does not stop the reality from existing, nor does your ignorance prohibit a supernatural force from existing...as its beyond the laws of physical science to quantify or calibrate. The created can never be greater than the whole from which it was subtracted......You might have a paradox....but I do not, I simply define truth via the prima facie evidences that surround us on a daily basis. Unlike you.....who needs to measure something he/she is incapable of measuring....I DO NOT need such objective evidence in oder to define truth beyond the reason of doubt....until YOU or anyone can scientifically present the objective, testable, reproducible, constant facts that debunk the existence of a supernatural creating force.....the prima facie evidence stands unchallenged by physics that cannot even comprehend the reasons that physical laws are as they are.......\

You seem intent on your conclusion...which I think came before all the reasoning. I find that with atheists also.

I cannot "objective, testable, reproducible, constant facts that debunk your guesses...but I don't think the burden of proof is on me.


FYI: its not a matter of "blind faith"....its a matter of truth as defined via circumstantial evidences.

I think you are guessing...and claiming your guesses are not guesses.



Its exactly because you can't prove that God does not exist...that grants me the continued use of these prima facie evidences that are yet to be debunked by REAL PHYSICAL SCIENCE. Its nothing but pseudo science to suggest that theory, conjecture, and or speculation stands as scientific fact...when in reality its nothing but HUMAN PHILOSOPHY that exists only in one place...between the ears of someone who is suggesting it as truth that is yet to be proven....that my friend is the very definition of BLIND FAITH....propagating something as a HOPED FOR TRUTH void of having the physical factual evidence to support it. Yet your philosophy is superior those who use circumstantial evidences in order to test anything for truth?

The burden of proof, Ralph, is on the person making the assertion. You are asserting "all this" had a beginning...and the beginning was caused by a god.

Where is the proof?

Even in a court of law....prima facie evidences stand as valid evidence of convection until some Objective Testable Evidence is presented that proves the circumstantial evidence to be false.



There is no "rabbit hole" to enter.....when all the proof one requires is all around them. Simple things, like Love.....the inability of science to create life from nothing as they claim happened in the past...yet cannot reproduce today, if indeed it were a fact of science. Even a simple term like gravity.....as the only thing that can be defined about gravity is its quantifiable effects.....we know it exists by the fact its effects are subject to quantifiable reality...but some attempt to claim that GRAVITY preexisted the big bang and caused everything to come from nothing. Well....Mr. Hawking ....is GRAVITY nothing or is it Something? If it has the power to create...then it must be physically quantifiable and it is SOMETHING....where did gravity come from? Its your guild that has the paradox....not those who accept their place in this physical realm as being INFERIOR to that creating force....whether its called God or Nature.

Thank you for all this. You put lots of effort into this. I'll read other reactions to it...and then maybe get back to you.

[Frank Apisa]

because its an obvious troll.....no one has contemplated and dealt with the question of whether the existence of God can be proved.....except perhaps a few daft folks who challenge people to prove it to them......one isn't convinced to believe in God........one simply chooses whether or not to believe.....

I am not a troll.

If you think the question is stupid...fine. You've mentioned that...so move on.

"The question" is one that has been contemplated and discussed by people throughout history...an, in my opinion, is anything but stupid.

But I understand that you do not want to be involved.

Okay...we will try to make do without you.

[iolo]

Okay.

But my point is that any comment about the existence or non-existence of gods...or the likelihood of the existence or non-existence of gods...

...essentially is a guess.

That is an important point...if correct.

Just looking for the opinion of others about whether it is or isn't...and why the others think that way.

Well, I was brought up Christian Socialist, my father a clergyman, my Mother an atheist, and I was always a bit dubious about 'gods', but went along with the opinion of Jesus of Nazareth, whom, as one of the first socialists, I greatly admire. I came to the conclusion that everyone thought that way back then but it is not a concept we would come up with nowadays if we weren't taught it in youth.

[countryboy]

Come on man, he's not "bashing" anyone.

Dude, I know Frank. Trust me. ;)

[Frank Apisa]

well no....everyone who studies the scriptures knows he said that.....

KNOWS???

There are many people who study scripture who suppose he said it.

There are MANY who think he did not.

Members of the Jesus Seminars...which included bishops and clergy as well as lay religious scholars, have concluded that almost none of the supposed quotes from Jesus in the Gospel of John...were actually uttered by Jesus. That includes the John 14 verse you are speaking of.

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Jesus_Seminar

Overall reliability of the five gospels

The Seminar concluded that of the various statements in the "five gospels" attributed to Jesus, only about 18 percent of them were likely uttered by Jesus himself (red or pink). The Gospel of John fared worse than the synoptic gospels, with nearly all its passages attributed to Jesus being judged inauthentic.[14] The Gospel of Thomas includes just two unique sayings that the seminar attributes to Jesus: the empty jar (97 percent) and the assassin (98 percent). Every other probably-authentic or authentic saying has parallels in the synoptics.





only people who reject scripture, and therefore reject Christ think he didn't say it....those folks aren't scholars.....they are simply atheists......

I am not an atheist.

The clergy and scholars of the Jesus Seminar were not atheists either.

Respectfully as possible...you are simply are wrong here.

[Frank Apisa]

http://www.justviral.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/My-wife-and-I-found-out-black-dogs-dont-get-rescued-as-often-so-we-rescued-this-sweet-little-girl..jpg

Absolutely gorgeous dog.

GORGEOUS!

[Ralph]

No...it is unknown to me.

I cannot even understand why you suppose it "came into" physical reality.

Suppose it didn't?




Beats the hell of me. I do not know seems the only reasonable, logical answer to those questions.

Your "it must have had a beginning" is an interesting guess, though.





I thank you for those guesses...but nothing you said there is logical...or deductive reasoning.



You seem intent on your conclusion...which I think came before all the reasoning. I find that with atheists also.

I cannot "objective, testable, reproducible, constant facts that debunk your guesses...but I don't think the burden of proof is on me.

.

I think you are guessing...and claiming your guesses are not guesses.




The burden of proof, Ralph, is on the person making the assertion. You are asserting "all this" had a beginning...and the beginning was caused by a god.

Where is the proof?

Even in a court of law....prima facie evidences stand as valid evidence of convection until some Objective Testable Evidence is presented that proves the circumstantial evidence to be false.




Thank you for all this. You put lots of effort into this. I'll read other reactions to it...and then maybe get back to you.

So....in spite of Physical Science and he evidence that the Universe is dying a slow expanding death.....IT NEVER CAME INTO EXISTENCE IT IS ETERNAL YET HAS AN ENDING? Really? I lost interest in your snowflake defections on the very first "impossible hypothetical". Its no wonder you are stuck in a paradox.....you have no articulative cognitive logical thought patterns in your mind. (:

And the fact that you exist, and the Universe exists....does not constitute the prima facie evidence that your very existence requires a CAUSE to that scientific fact? You're not much of a scientist are ya sport? FYI: its not a "guess" when you can objectively reach out and touch the reality that surrounds you. If nature is not capable of defining its own existence....then LOGICALLY there must be a SUPER FORCE TO NATURE...i.e., a Supernatural Force/Cause to the effect known as physical reality.

As I said....until you present evidence that God is not that supernatural force (prima facie/circumstantial truth).....My faith stands firm on the physical law of causality.

[Frank Apisa]

Well, I was brought up Christian Socialist, my father a clergyman, my Mother an atheist, and I was always a bit dubious about 'gods', but went along with the opinion of Jesus of Nazareth, whom, as one of the first socialists, I greatly admire. I came to the conclusion that everyone thought that way back then but it is not a concept we would come up with nowadays if we weren't taught it in youth.

I personally think there are more people who do not identify as Christian...who live lives according to the way Jesus wanted people to live them...

...than there are people who identify as Christian...who do.

Some of the most vocal and vehement of American Christians...seem to live lives that show contempt for the teachings ascribed to Jesus.

[Frank Apisa]

Dude, I know Frank. Trust me. ;)

I am asking for a discussion. If you want to think having that discussion means I am bashing people...nothing I can do about that.

[Frank Apisa]

So....in spite of Physical Science and he evidence that the Universe is dying a slow expanding death.....IT NEVER CAME INTO EXISTENCE IT IS ETERNAL YET HAS AN ENDING?

YOU do not KNOW the universe is approaching death. All you can talk about is the part of the universe we can see.

The greatest scientists in the world CANNOT say for certain that the universe (EXISTENCE) had a beginning...nor that it will have an end.




Really? I lost interest in your snowflake defections on the very first "impossible hypothetical". Its no wonder you are stuck in a paradox.....you have cognitive logical thought patterns in your mind. (:

Thank you for sharing your rude considerations of me.




And the fact that you exist, and the Universe exists....does not constitute the prima facie evidence that your very existence requires a CAUSE to that scientific fact? You're not much of a scientist are ya sport?

No, I am not a scientist.

I am a person will to acknowledge that I do not know the stuff I do not know.

You ought to give that a try.

[Ralph]

YOU do not KNOW the universe is approaching death. All you can talk about is the part of the universe we can see.

The greatest scientists in the world CANNOT say for certain that the universe (EXISTENCE) had a beginning...nor that it will have an end.





Thank you for sharing your rude considerations of me.




No, I am not a scientist.

I am a person will to acknowledge that I do not know the stuff I do not know.

You ought to give that a try.

I have one suggestion. "IF" you do not want to know the answer, don't ask the question. As all Christians are commanded to give a defense as to why their faith not only rests within their heart but grows with each challenge to that faith. "But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, AND ALWAYS BE READY TO GIVE A DEFENSE to WHO ASKS YOU ARE REASON FOR THE HOPE THAT IS IN YOU...with meekness and fear." -- 1 Peter 3:15

That's why I address the fools who actually do not want to learn but simply stir up strife....in an attempt to rob others of a faith they themselves do not posses. I guess its true, "misery loves company..." yet.... I am commanded to defend MY FAITH. As for your faith or the lack thereof, that's for you work out....or not, as I have no dog in your personal hunt.

Yes indeed....If you accept physical science as Objective Truth.....the Universe is dying according to the Laws of Physics. Its not a guess its a quantified reality based upon the potential of the elements that make up this physical reality...all of which are commanded by the LAWS OF PHYSICS. As I said.....you're not much on Science are you sport?

Perhaps your "atheistic" cohorts can explain the simple in a method that a 5 year old can comprehend it. www.cnn.com/2015/08/10/us/universe-dying/index.html

[ThatOwlWoman]

Or...there are gods...and the gods do not give a damn about what we do.
The notion of praying to a god to stop the carnage...of praying to a god willing to allow the carnage to take place...does seem futile.

I think if I was one of the parents who lost a child in this carnage, and someone said "I'll pray for you," I'd spit in their face.

When my oldest daughter, who will be 40 this year, was a senior in high school, a kid brought a gun to school. I heard about it on the noon news broadcast. All I remember was grabbing the car keys, running out in my bare feet to the car, rushing to the school. The police had the road blocked off so all the parents had just sort of careened off the road onto the sidewalks, filled up the McDonald's parking lot by the school, and were milling around sobbing and hand-wringing. I joined them. I cannot describe how unbearable the terror was. Thankfully although he held his algebra class hostage for a time, they were able to talk the kid into surrendering and no one was harmed. My daughter said that she was at her locker between classes and she and her friend saw the kid walk by and turn the corner, carrying the pistol. As you can imagine, every time there is another school shooting I relive that day. I'm sure all the parents involved do too.

https://www.questia.com/newspaper/1P2-32984600/south-student-who-held-class-hostage-with-gun-is-certified

[PostmodernProphet]

Members of the Jesus Seminars...which included bishops and clergy as well as lay religious scholars, have concluded that almost none of the supposed quotes from Jesus in the Gospel of John...were actually uttered by Jesus. That includes the John 14 verse you are speaking of.



as I said.....the only people who deny he said it are people who deny scripture......people who deny the Bible are hardly biblical scholars......that would be like saying experts in evolution deny the existence of fossils.......

[Frank Apisa]

Yes indeed....If you accept physical science as Objective Truth.....the Universe is dying according to the Laws of Physics.

Even IF one accepts physical science as Objective Truth...(not sure I would do that)...all science can do is to tell us WHAT THE PART OF THE UNIVERSE WE NOW KNOW...is doing.

It would be presumptuous of any scientist to suppose we know ALL OF THE UNIVERSE.

This thing we see supposedly expanding and dying...may be a pimple on the actual universe...and the actual universe may be eternal and undying.




Its not a guess its a quantified reality based upon the potential of the elements that make up this physical reality...all of which are commanded by the LAWS OF PHYSICS. As I said.....you're not much on Science are you sport?

You are not much on reason, Ralph. Scientists are more than willing to acknowledge that what we know about the universe...may be just a tiny fraction of what can be known.




Perhaps your "atheistic" cohorts can explain the simple in a method that a 5 year old can comprehend it. www.cnn.com/2015/08/10/us/universe-dying/index.html

I'll let the atheists deal with that.

In any case, "the universe" they are talking about is only the part of what exists that we know about. A mere century or so ago...we thought the Milky Way Galaxy was the ENTIRE UNIVERSE. Right now, we know it is but a tiny part of the universe. A hundred years from now...we may find that what we now think of as "THE UNIVERSE" is but a tiny part of what really is the universe.

[Frank Apisa]

I think if I was one of the parents who lost a child in this carnage, and someone said "I'll pray for you," I'd spit in their face.

When my oldest daughter, who will be 40 this year, was a senior in high school, a kid brought a gun to school. I heard about it on the noon news broadcast. All I remember was grabbing the car keys, running out in my bare feet to the car, rushing to the school. The police had the road blocked off so all the parents had just sort of careened off the road onto the sidewalks, filled up the McDonald's parking lot by the school, and were milling around sobbing and hand-wringing. I joined them. I cannot describe how unbearable the terror was. Thankfully although he held his algebra class hostage for a time, they were able to talk the kid into surrendering and no one was harmed. My daughter said that she was at her locker between classes and she and her friend saw the kid walk by and turn the corner, carrying the pistol. As you can imagine, every time there is another school shooting I relive that day. I'm sure all the parents involved do too.

https://www.questia.com/newspaper/1P2-32984600/south-student-who-held-class-hostage-with-gun-is-certified

I agree, OW.

That "I'll pray for you" can have a stinging sound to it.

Mostly...I accept it as a kindness from those who think it is important. But in a situation like you mentioned above...I might react with anger.

[Frank Apisa]

as I said.....the only people who deny he said it are people who deny scripture......people who deny the Bible are hardly biblical scholars......that would be like saying experts in evolution deny the existence of fossils.......

That is NOT what you said.

What you said was:

well no....everyone who studies the scriptures knows he said that.....only people who reject scripture, and therefore reject Christ think he didn't say it....those folks aren't scholars.....they are simply atheists......



If you want to think that the 150 or so bishops, clergymen, and religious scholars are atheists...think it.

It is a rather absurd thought...but you are entitled to think it.

[PostmodernProphet]

That is NOT what you said.

What you said was:

well no....everyone who studies the scriptures knows he said that.....only people who reject scripture, and therefore reject Christ think he didn't say it....those folks aren't scholars.....they are simply atheists......



If you want to think that the 150 or so bishops, clergymen, and religious scholars are atheists...think it.


okay, good point......some of them may believe in deities other than the God worshiped by Christianity......but it remains that one who rejects the Bible is not a biblical scholar........I ignore the opinions of nonChristians about Christianity.........just as you would reject the opinion of evolutionists who rejected fossils as evidence.......

[evince]

Unless the god is one that does not care.

There may be gods...but just not the kind we humans favor for "worshiping."

We'll get back to the discussion...although the distraction will probably remain for a while.

what makes them GODs then

if they are just other beings who have some powers over us due to their innate nature they are not gods anymore than we are the gods of ants

[evince]

I think if I was one of the parents who lost a child in this carnage, and someone said "I'll pray for you," I'd spit in their face.

When my oldest daughter, who will be 40 this year, was a senior in high school, a kid brought a gun to school. I heard about it on the noon news broadcast. All I remember was grabbing the car keys, running out in my bare feet to the car, rushing to the school. The police had the road blocked off so all the parents had just sort of careened off the road onto the sidewalks, filled up the McDonald's parking lot by the school, and were milling around sobbing and hand-wringing. I joined them. I cannot describe how unbearable the terror was. Thankfully although he held his algebra class hostage for a time, they were able to talk the kid into surrendering and no one was harmed. My daughter said that she was at her locker between classes and she and her friend saw the kid walk by and turn the corner, carrying the pistol. As you can imagine, every time there is another school shooting I relive that day. I'm sure all the parents involved do too.

https://www.questia.com/newspaper/1P2-32984600/south-student-who-held-class-hostage-with-gun-is-certified

wholey crap

sorry to hear you had to bare that one too girlfriend


It irks me every time I hear it said to me.

I cant help it

it just does

my next thoughts are deliberate

I chastise myself for feeling that and remind myself that they are merely saying

they will be thinking about me and hoping in the best way they know how to


to wish me well

they are sending me good thoughts and feelings

good thoughts are good for everyone involved


but if you are trying to console people there may be better mire personal things to say than to announce your chosen religion and its practices that are not a part of the consoled persons life.


christians often forget other people may not share their religion

or they look at every situation as a chance to convert you


it a symptom of the way organized religion sees its self


as a competition to be the last religion standing

they all seem to think the world will end and "god' will punish those who chose the wrong one

[evince]

I really like that dog that is your avatar, Evince. A beauty.

he is now 90 lbs of long tall lean beautiful man dog

I always feel kinda guilty calling an adult dog a girl or a boy

they are adults of their species

So I often tell my girl dog she is a beautiful woman dog

and my boys I call man dogs

like my adult son

they are all still my babies though

that boy is a bernese mountain dog/ border collie

at least that is my best guess


like all my dogs they are from the pound or found outright

[Frank Apisa]

okay, good point......

Thank you for that, PP.


...some of them may believe in deities other than the God worshiped by Christianity......but it remains that one who rejects the Bible is not a biblical scholar........I ignore the opinions of nonChristians about Christianity.........just as you would reject the opinion of evolutionists who rejected fossils as evidence.......

One of them is an Episcopal Bishop. If you want to claim that an Episcopal Bishop IS NOT A CHRISTIAN...not much can be accomplished.

And they are not "rejecting" the Bible...they are merely saying that humans sometimes make mistakes...even when putting a Bible together.

[Frank Apisa]

what makes them GODs then

Let me be sure I am understanding you correctly. Are you saying that there cannot be gods...unless the god are like the gods we humans have worshiped?






if they are just other beings who have some powers over us due to their innate nature they are not gods anymore than we are the gods of ants

If they are gods...they are gods whether the insignificant dominant beings on this relatively insignificant planet realize it or not.

[Frank Apisa]

wholey crap

sorry to hear you had to bare that one too girlfriend


It irks me every time I hear it said to me.

I cant help it

it just does

my next thoughts are deliberate

I chastise myself for feeling that and remind myself that they are merely saying

they will be thinking about me and hoping in the best way they know how to


to wish me well

they are sending me good thoughts and feelings

good thoughts are good for everyone involved


but if you are trying to console people there may be better mire personal things to say than to announce your chosen religion and its practices that are not a part of the consoled persons life.


christians often forget other people may not share their religion

or they look at every situation as a chance to convert you


it a symptom of the way organized religion sees its self


as a competition to be the last religion standing

they all seem to think the world will end and "god' will punish those who chose the wrong one

That OW story scared the crap out of me. I cannot imagine what it is like being terrified like that.

[evince]

So....in spite of Physical Science and he evidence that the Universe is dying a slow expanding death.....IT NEVER CAME INTO EXISTENCE IT IS ETERNAL YET HAS AN ENDING? Really? I lost interest in your snowflake defections on the very first "impossible hypothetical". Its no wonder you are stuck in a paradox.....you have no articulative cognitive logical thought patterns in your mind. (:

And the fact that you exist, and the Universe exists....does not constitute the prima facie evidence that your very existence requires a CAUSE to that scientific fact? You're not much of a scientist are ya sport? FYI: its not a "guess" when you can objectively reach out and touch the reality that surrounds you. If nature is not capable of defining its own existence....then LOGICALLY there must be a SUPER FORCE TO NATURE...i.e., a Supernatural Force/Cause to the effect known as physical reality.

As I said....until you present evidence that God is not that supernatural force (prima facie/circumstantial truth).....My faith stands firm on the physical law of causality.

supernatural force?


you mean all undiscovered scientific facts are what?

[Frank Apisa]

he is now 90 lbs of long tall lean beautiful man dog

I always feel kinda guilty calling an adult dog a girl or a boy

they are adults of their species

So I often tell my girl dog she is a beautiful woman dog

and my boys I call man dogs

like my adult son

they are all still my babies though

that boy is a bernese mountain dog/ border collie

at least that is my best guess


like all my dogs they are from the pound or found outright

I can see the Border Collie in him. We have some on our golf courses...to get the Canada Geese moving. We try to keep the mementos geese leave behind at a minimum. Really interferes with the putting!

Border collies seem to have no end to energy.

[evince]

I have one suggestion. "IF" you do not want to know the answer, don't ask the question. As all Christians are commanded to give a defense as to why their faith not only rests within their heart but grows with each challenge to that faith. "But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, AND ALWAYS BE READY TO GIVE A DEFENSE to WHO ASKS YOU ARE REASON FOR THE HOPE THAT IS IN YOU...with meekness and fear." -- 1 Peter 3:15

That's why I address the fools who actually do not want to learn but simply stir up strife....in an attempt to rob others of a faith they themselves do not posses. I guess its true, "misery loves company..." yet.... I am commanded to defend MY FAITH. As for your faith or the lack thereof, that's for you work out....or not, as I have no dog in your personal hunt.

Yes indeed....If you accept physical science as Objective Truth.....the Universe is dying according to the Laws of Physics. Its not a guess its a quantified reality based upon the potential of the elements that make up this physical reality...all of which are commanded by the LAWS OF PHYSICS. As I said.....you're not much on Science are you sport?

Perhaps your "atheistic" cohorts can explain the simple in a method that a 5 year old can comprehend it. www.cnn.com/2015/08/10/us/universe-dying/index.html

you are shaming your religion


this is America

we are allowed to not believe YOUR religion


when we discuss what WE BELIEVE it is not an insult of YOUR beliefs


it is the only way to tell others what we believe and why


you just think people should not have discussions that don't PRAISE what you believe.

I don't believe in a god


that is not an attack on you


its stating what I believe

further discussion of why I came to believe what I believe will have to include why I found god centered religion lacking


others who do not believe what you believe are allowed to discuss what they believe


you see threats everywhere

grow up


and be a better representative of the great philosopher your religion is based on

[evince]

I can see the Border Collie in him. We have some on our golf courses...to get the Canada Geese moving. We try to keep the mementos geese leave behind at a minimum. Really interferes with the putting!

Border collies seem to have no end to energy.

and are brilliant

the beautiful, brilliant, black talking girl I spoke of earlier was a border collie mix

[evince]

Let me be sure I am understanding you correctly. Are you saying that there cannot be gods...unless the god are like the gods we humans have worshiped?





If they are gods...they are gods whether the insignificant dominant beings on this relatively insignificant planet realize it or not.



then they are not gods


they are merely a unknown species that is more powerful than us


we don't care much about ants and if we step on them


that doesnt make us gods


it merely makes us a much more powerful species that does not care and can cause death or misery to ants on a whim

[Frank Apisa]

then they are not gods


they are merely a unknown species that is more powerful than us


we don't care much about ants and if we step on them


that doesnt make us gods


it merely makes us a much more powerful species that does not care and can cause death or misery to ants on a whim

I think you are being much more dismissive than necessary, but it goes to the topic...so I'd like to discuss it.

And once again, I'll ask a question first (If you have any for me, please ask them):

Are you saying something as complex as a "GOD"...even a CREATOR GOD...is something that we humans must be able to understand in order to exist? If we cannot understand it...or even conceive of it...it cannot exist?

Do you think, for instance, that ants recognize what we humans are the dominant species on planet Earth...or have any comprehension of the vastness of what we humans call the universe? Because they don't (I'm assuming that would be your answer)...would that mean that we cannot exist?

By the way (as an aside)...I would never intentionally step on an ant...or destroy an ant hill...or kill a spider...or unnecessarily kill or "torture" any of the lesser animals with whom we share the planet.

I just don't. No moral compulsion...I just prefer not to do it.

At times I have to...because I deem it necessary. (The yellow jackets who insist on making their nest alongside the plank supporting our hot tub realize this too late each year.)

[evince]

we are smarter than ants

that is true

we can conceive of a more powerful being

that is why we ponder the ideas of God

man created the idea of god at a time when mankind had very limited knowledge of the things around us


man has a brain designed to question the things around them

man invented the idea of god to explain all the unexplained things in their lives


we are at a point now that that old myth is beginning to have facts to explain what it was designed to do.... soothe the minds...that conflict with the old myth


religion has changed its self to stay relative (flat earth) and it can do so again if it wants to survive.


stop wishing for a complete destruction of this world


quit telling everyone who doesn't share your religion that they will BURN IN HELL FOREVER.


its evil stuff

[Frank Apisa]

we are smarter than ants

that is true

we can conceive of a more powerful being

that is why we ponder the ideas of God

man created the idea of god at a time when mankind had very limited knowledge of the things around us


man has a brain designed to question the things around them

man invented the idea of god to explain all the unexplained things in their lives


we are at a point now that that old myth is beginning to have facts to explain what it was designed to do.... soothe the minds...that conflict with the old myth


religion has changed its self to stay relative (flat earth) and it can do so again if it wants to survive.


stop wishing for a complete destruction of this world


quit telling everyone who doesn't share your religion that they will BURN IN HELL FOREVER.


its evil stuff


Not sure to whom this was directed, Evince...but I hope not to me.

[evince]

sorry I did diverge on that one

I ended by speaking to the Christians I run across to life

[Ralph]

you are shaming your religion


this is America

we are allowed to not believe YOUR religion


when we discuss what WE BELIEVE it is not an insult of YOUR beliefs


it is the only way to tell others what we believe and why


you just think people should not have discussions that don't PRAISE what you believe.

I don't believe in a god


that is not an attack on you


its stating what I believe

further discussion of why I came to believe what I believe will have to include why I found god centered religion lacking


others who do not believe what you believe are allowed to discuss what they believe


you see threats everywhere

grow up


and be a better representative of the great philosopher your religion is based on

Don't believe.....its your soul not mine, you are endowed with free will....but your NON FAITH effects my faith....how? You are hardly defined (according to your inarticulate records) as a brilliant philosopher. Anyone that claims that such as this (*) disgraces all formats of Physical Science.

*: the UNCAUSED CAUSE..i.e., the Universe. Just like all atheists you attempt to discredit those of faith by declaring your NON-FAITH ....by attempting to side step the actual question (FYI: the topic of this thread) and ignoring 2 primary laws of Logic and Physics 1. The Law of Cause and Effect which has never in history been breeched in its logical statement by men such as PLATO, etc., great minds of history all agree in relation to the Law of Cause and Effect when it comes to physical science. 2. The Law of Thermodynamics.

Example: W.T. Stace, a professor of philosophy at Princeton University authored "A Critical History of Greek Philosophy"....is quoted as such, "Every student of logic knows that this is the ultimate cannon of the sciences, THE FOUNDATION OF THEM ALL. If we did not believe the truth of causation, namely, everything which has a beginning has a cause, and that in the same circumstances the same things invariably happen, all the sciences would at once crumble to dust, every scientific investigation this truth is assumed...." i.e., THE LAW OF CAUSE AND EFFECT.

Now you are deflecting away from the science of asking the question....what caused the effect known as the physical universe by suggesting the UNIVERSAL was an effect caused by an unknown and Uncasued cause? Really?

But then again....I suppose you are much more intellectual than either Plato or Aristole.....no? :laugh: Reality: The Universe physical exists therefore it must have CAUSE. 2. The Laws of thermodynamics demonstrate that the energy that drives the universe is slowly decaying/dying. Yet you can't explain nature via natural laws.....in essence making anyone's claim of being an atheist.....a laughable scam. If everything were natural as your personal philosophy suggests...then nature could explain and define its own CAUSE. Logically speaking......only a Super (natural) to Nature caused the effect of physical reality.

Who Caused God? God is not physical, he's a spiritual entity and therefore not bound by natural laws. As I said....until you or anyone can prove beyond doubt there was no supernatural Cause....the prima facie evidence of existence stands as truth to a creating cause. My personal faith is not BLIND like yours.

[Frank Apisa]

The Universe physical exists therefore it must have CAUSE.

First of all, Ralph, thank you for taking the topic seriously...and for contributing.

That said, if I may intrude on this comment you made to Evince, with a question about your comment above:

Let me preface the question by saying that I do not agree with the underlying assumptions you made to get here...namely that the physical universe exists as a result of having "begun" to exist...thereby necessitating a "cause."

The assumption is gratuitous. Everything that EXISTS...may always have existed. The conservation of mass and energy theorems of the scientists you cite...indicate that this may well be the case. Mass and energy in a closed system cannot be created or destroyed...and "all of existence" may well be a closed system. It may be that everything always was...even if in a different form.

Anyway, putting that aside...let us suppose you are correct that it came into existence...and that it had a cause...

...the agnostic position would be: "And we do not know what that cause is."

You seem to be headed toward, "The cause was a god...and a particular god at that...the god of Abraham."

If I am wrong about that, I apologize.

If I am correct...why would you not adopt the agnostic position, which appears to be markedly superior?

[Ralph]

First of all, Ralph, thank you for taking the topic seriously...and for contributing.

That said, if I may intrude on this comment you made to Evince, with a question about your comment above:

Let me preface the question by saying that I do not agree with the underlying assumptions you made to get here...namely that the physical universe exists as a result of having "begun" to exist...thereby necessitating a "cause."

The assumption is gratuitous. Everything that EXISTS...may always have existed. The conservation of mass and energy theorems of the scientists you cite...indicate that this may well be the case. Mass and energy in a closed system cannot be created or destroyed...and "all of existence" may well be a closed system. It may be that everything always was...even if in a different form.

Anyway, putting that aside...let us suppose you are correct that it came into existence...and that it had a cause...

...the agnostic position would be: "And we do not know what that cause is."

You seem to be headed toward, "The cause was a god...and a particular god at that...the god of Abraham."

If I am wrong about that, I apologize.

If I am correct...why would you not adopt the agnostic position, which appears to be markedly superior?


Again....you don't accept Physical Science as a reality....do you? Science proves that the universe had a beginning as evidenced via the demonstrable fact that it is dying. Nothing eternal dies. Emotion and Logic never serve one another....its like water and oil. You either believe in Science Actual as I do....or you do not, nothing is more objectively quantifiable than SCIENCE ACTUAL.

I am not much on the pseudo sciences that live within the realms of philosophy...i.e., theory, conjecture and speculation..... Science never contradicts truth...it confirms it. This circular ride is now officially over. There is nothing within the laws of physics that prohibits my faith (as its based upon evidences not blindly) in the God of Creation, call it what you want. But the Scriptures within the Chistian/Judea philosophies are the only scriptures that remain "UNBORKEN" after 3500 years of existence.

[Frank Apisa]

Again....you don't accept Physical Science as a reality....do you?

Sure I do. I have some problems with the way you are interpreting it, but....I do.



Science proves that the universe had a beginning as evidenced via the demonstrable fact that it is dying.

Existence may not be dying. This thing we humans call "the universe" MAY be dying...but if it is, that does not mean that everything is dying.



Nothing eternal dies.

Okay.



Emotion and Logic never serve one another....its like water and oil. You either believe in Science Actual as I do....or you do not, nothing is more objectively quantifiable than SCIENCE ACTUAL.

If you think science works...stop distorting it. There is no way for any scientist of today to know whether the entirety of the universe is "dying"...even if they could prove without a doubt that this thing we humans call "the universe" is dying. They cannot prove the universe is dying...it may be in a stage that we have no way of knowing anything about.



I am not much on the pseudo sciences that live within the realms of philosophy...i.e., theory, conjecture and speculation..... Science never contradicts truth...it confirms it. This circular ride is now officially over. There is nothing within the laws of physics that prohibits my faith (as its based upon evidences not blindly) in the God of Creation, call it what you want. But the Scriptures within the Chistian/Judea philosophies are the only scriptures that remain "UNBORKEN" after 3500 years of existence.

Go back to my question. Make the assumption that "the universe" came into existence.

Then tell us why the god you think exists was the cause...rather than "I have no idea of what the cause was."

And for the sake of everything reasonable...stay away from talking about science...and "the God of Creation" and scripture.

[evince]

Don't believe.....its your soul not mine, you are endowed with free will....but your NON FAITH effects my faith....how? You are hardly defined (according to your inarticulate records) as a brilliant philosopher. Anyone that claims that such as this (*) disgraces all formats of Physical Science.

*: the UNCAUSED CAUSE..i.e., the Universe. Just like all atheists you attempt to discredit those of faith by declaring your NON-FAITH ....by attempting to side step the actual question (FYI: the topic of this thread) and ignoring 2 primary laws of Logic and Physics 1. The Law of Cause and Effect which has never in history been breeched in its logical statement by men such as PLATO, etc., great minds of history all agree in relation to the Law of Cause and Effect when it comes to physical science. 2. The Law of Thermodynamics.

Example: W.T. Stace, a professor of philosophy at Princeton University authored "A Critical History of Greek Philosophy"....is quoted as such, "Every student of logic knows that this is the ultimate cannon of the sciences, THE FOUNDATION OF THEM ALL. If we did not believe the truth of causation, namely, everything which has a beginning has a cause, and that in the same circumstances the same things invariably happen, all the sciences would at once crumble to dust, every scientific investigation this truth is assumed...." i.e., THE LAW OF CAUSE AND EFFECT.

Now you are deflecting away from the science of asking the question....what caused the effect known as the physical universe by suggesting the UNIVERSAL was an effect caused by an unknown and Uncasued cause? Really?

But then again....I suppose you are much more intellectual than either Plato or Aristole.....no? :laugh: Reality: The Universe physical exists therefore it must have CAUSE. 2. The Laws of thermodynamics demonstrate that the energy that drives the universe is slowly decaying/dying. Yet you can't explain nature via natural laws.....in essence making anyone's claim of being an atheist.....a laughable scam. If everything were natural as your personal philosophy suggests...then nature could explain and define its own CAUSE. Logically speaking......only a Super (natural) to Nature caused the effect of physical reality.

Who Caused God? God is not physical, he's a spiritual entity and therefore not bound by natural laws. As I said....until you or anyone can prove beyond doubt there was no supernatural Cause....the prima facie evidence of existence stands as truth to a creating cause. My personal faith is not BLIND like yours.

I am telling people what I believe


you declaring your belief would be an INSULT to me then too huh


you are a faith fascist


if god is not physical why is it a he?

[evince]

remember why its been declared a FAITH folks


because to believe you have to use faith huh

[PostmodernProphet]

One of them is an Episcopal Bishop. If you want to claim that an Episcopal Bishop IS NOT A CHRISTIAN...not much can be accomplished.

if you are telling me he rejects what is found in the Bible I have no choice but to claim he's not a Christian.......of course I have only your word that he rejects it.....was the conclusion of this agency unanimous or was the the bishop merely out voted?.....

[Frank Apisa]

if you are telling me he rejects what is found in the Bible I have no choice but to claim he's not a Christian.......of course I have only your word that he rejects it.....was the conclusion of this agency unanimous or was the the bishop merely out voted?.....

I gave you a link to an article detailing how the decisions were made.

You will find that most of the words of Jesus from the Gospel of John...is suspect. But that is to be expected,because that is the opinion of most scholars. John is a very unreliable source, differing drastically from the synoptic gospels.

Read it, PP...it is interesting.

[PostmodernProphet]

I gave you a link to an article detailing how the decisions were made.

You will find that most of the words of Jesus from the Gospel of John...is suspect. But that is to be expected,because that is the opinion of most scholars. John is a very unreliable source, differing drastically from the synoptic gospels.

Read it, PP...it is interesting.

the article doesn't state how the Bishop voted, only that a majority of those who voted didn't believe the Bible's statements to be true.......the article also did not state how many attendees were atheists or whether any of them had degrees in theology or even graduated from high school.........it does not surprise me that you do not believe the gospel of John.....as I recall you are on record as not believing in beliefs.........

correction......I did find this in the article linked by the OP....

Of the 74 [scholars] listed in their publication The Five Gospels, only 14 would be leading figures in the field of New Testament studies. More than half are basically unknowns, who have published only two or three articles. Eighteen of the fellows have published nothing at all in New Testament studies. Most have relatively undistinguished academic positions, for example, teaching at a community college.

[Frank Apisa]

the article doesn't state how the Bishop voted, only that a majority of those who voted didn't believe the Bible's statements to be true.......the article also did not state how many attendees were atheists or whether any of them had degrees in theology or even graduated from high school.........it does not surprise me that you do not believe the gospel of John.....as I recall you are on record as not believing in beliefs.........

I cannot help you with how the group voted.

I do know I have read many scholarly assessments of the gospel of John...and most regard it as an unreliable source.

Deal with it as you will.


correction......I did find this in the article linked by the OP....

I get what you are saying, but there is something incongruous in "only 14!"

Type "reliability of gospel of John" into Google...and you will get tons of links questioning all of the gospels, but particularly John. That was my point, since Ralph and you brought up the "the only way to the Father is through me" thing.

[PostmodernProphet]

I cannot help you with how the group voted.

I do know I have read many scholarly assessments of the gospel of John...and most regard it as an unreliable source.

.

fair.....most of the attendees were unreliable sources as well......

[PostmodernProphet]

Type "reliability of gospel of John" into Google...and you will get tons of links questioning all of the gospels, but particularly John.

I know.....atheists-R-us websites are a dime a dozen......

[PostmodernProphet]

That was my point, since Ralph and you brought up the "the only way to the Father is through me" thing.

well, to be fair, that IS the underlying essence of Christianity.........if you reject that you are some other religion.......

[Frank Apisa]

well, to be fair, that IS the underlying essence of Christianity.........if you reject that you are some other religion.......

That is not the way it was raised, PP. If I made a mistake in its application...I apologize. Perhaps you made a mistake in what I was saying...that caused you to ask me how close I was to that "dogma."

My comment that I am as close or closer to the teachings of Jesus than some of the most vocal American supposed Christians was not said as a function of "dogma" and I thought that was obvious. It certainly was not a function of "I am a Christian."

The teachings of Jesus, as I see them, seem a LOT closer to the essence of socialism or even communism than to the unfettered capitalism that is the mainstay of the party most often supported by CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVES.

We can certainly discuss that...I'd welcome it with you or anyone else.

[Frank Apisa]

I know.....atheists-R-us websites are a dime a dozen......

Well...most of those sites are not the home of atheists, PP. The gospel of John IS pretty far out...and even when I was a Christian, a Catholic (I know, some American Christians do not consider Catholics to be Christians)...I had my negative considerations about that book.

[PostmodernProphet]

The teachings of Jesus, as I see them, seem a LOT closer to the essence of socialism or even communism than to the unfettered capitalism that is the mainstay of the party most often supported by CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVES.

perhaps because you misunderstand Jesus, socialism and capitalism......as I recall he made no mention of the proper method of economic endeavor.......I suspect your error lies in attributing certain moral characteristics to one system or the other......

[PostmodernProphet]

Well...most of those sites are not the home of atheists, PP. .

the ones that deride the gospel of John are, again with the caveat that some may be proponents of some anti-Christian deity......

[Frank Apisa]

perhaps because you misunderstand Jesus, socialism and capitalism......as I recall he made no mention of the proper method of economic endeavor.......I suspect your error lies in attributing certain moral characteristics to one system or the other......

I think I am not in error.

It is my opinion that anyone who considers the political philosophy of the typical American "Christian" conservative to be closer to the teachings of Jesus than much of the stuff Karl Marx suggested...

...is doing so because of a gross misunderstanding of the teachings and principles of Jesus...and a gross misunderstanding of the tenets of socialism and capitalism.

[Frank Apisa]

the ones that deride the gospel of John are, again with the caveat that some may be proponents of some anti-Christian deity......

I suggest most are not atheists...and I doubt most are proponents of anti-Christian deities.

Mainstream Christians can aver that the gospel of John does more damage to Christianity and the teachings of Jesus...than good.

Some of the thoughts of John...are barbaric.

[PostmodernProphet]

I think I am not in error.

It is my opinion that anyone who considers the political philosophy of the typical American "Christian" conservative to be closer to the teachings of Jesus than much of the stuff Karl Marx suggested...

...is doing so because of a gross misunderstanding of the teachings and principles of Jesus...and a gross misunderstanding of the tenets of socialism and capitalism.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on whether you're a brainless fool......

[PostmodernProphet]

Mainstream Christians can aver that the gospel of John does more damage to Christianity and the teachings of Jesus...than good.

Some of the thoughts of John...are barbaric.

feel free to give an example not pasted from an atheists-R-us website......

[Frank Apisa]

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on whether you're a brainless fool......

There was no need for that, PP.

Why is there so much of that in this forum?

We can agree to disagree on the question of whether atheists are the reason John is questioned. We can do it like reasonable adults.

How can you claim to be a champion of the teachings of Jesus and treat other human the way you so often do, PP?

[Scrubbaloe]

Jews.

[Frank Apisa]

feel free to give an example not pasted from an atheists-R-us website......

Okay...I give one from the Bible itself. I hope you can agree that the Bible is not an atheists-R-us website.

John 3:16...

..."For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Here your god is saying that he is willing to forgive humans for offending him...but only if they first torture and kill his son!

This is one of the most barbaric concepts ever dreamed up.

I suspect we might not agree on this.

Any chance you can disagree with a bit of class this time?

[PostmodernProphet]

How can you claim to be a champion of the teachings of Jesus and treat other human the way you so often do, PP?

because you spread lies about the teachings of Jesus.......how else should I treat you?.....

[PostmodernProphet]

John 3:16...

..."For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Here your god is saying that he is willing to forgive humans for offending him...but only if they first torture and kill his son!




your error is in believing that Jesus was not the incarnation of God........he didn't torture and kill a son, he sacrificed himself........is giving your life for others barbarian?.......

[Frank Apisa]

because you spread lies about the teachings of Jesus.......how else should I treat you?.....

You should treat me as Jesus would have treated everybody.

With a bit more dignity and class.

By the way, I have never "spread lies about the teachings of Jesus."

I respect many of the teachings of Jesus. I wish some American conservative Christians did also.

I have mentioned that the gospel of John is not held in especially high regard by religious scholars.

[Frank Apisa]

your error is in believing that Jesus was not the incarnation of God........he didn't torture and kill a son, he sacrificed himself........is giving your life for others barbarian?.......

The passage claims a son was sacrificed. If there is an error...the error is in the passage.

[PostmodernProphet]

With a bit more dignity and class.



actually I recall that he said the disciples should brush the dust off their feet when leaving the town of those who rejected what he taught.......


By the way, I have never "spread lies about the teachings of Jesus."

you lied about what he taught in the book of John.....


I respect many of the teachings of Jesus.

and claim others are barbarous......


I have mentioned that the gospel of John is not held in especially high regard by religious scholars.

now you're admitting it.....

[PostmodernProphet]

The passage claims a son was sacrificed. If there is an error...the error is in the passage.

lol.....no, the error is in ignoring everything else in the Bible so you can pretend Christianity doesn't believe Jesus is God incarnate.......even atheists, if they have any knowledge of theology are aware of the things they refuse to believe.........if you refuse to believe but don't even know what you are refusing to believe you are an idiot.........

[PostmodernProphet]

You should treat me as Jesus would have treated everybody.

.

as evil, disobedient creatures in need of redemption?......

[Frank Apisa]

lol.....no, the error is in ignoring everything else in the Bible so you can pretend Christianity doesn't believe Jesus is God incarnate.......even atheists, if they have any knowledge of theology are aware of the things they refuse to believe.........if you refuse to believe but don't even know what you are refusing to believe you are an idiot.........

And you are a Christian.

If being like you is what it means to be a Christian...

...I'd rather be an idiot.

But actually, I am neither. I am, however, a lot closer to acting as Jesus would have us act...than YOU.

[Frank Apisa]

as evil, disobedient creatures in need of redemption?......

No...as fellow humans.

You really are an horrendous example of a Christian!

[CharacterAssassin]

because you spread lies about the teachings of Jesus.......how else should I treat you?.....

Why do you gleefully piss in the face of Christ and reject the teachings attributed to him?

[CharacterAssassin]

And you are a Christian.

If being like you is what it means to be a Christian...

...I'd rather be an idiot.

But actually, I am neither. I am, however, a lot closer to acting as Jesus would have us act...than YOU.

He's actually not a Christian and is clearly ignorant of the contents of the bible.

[USFREEDOM911]

...cannot be answered using logic, reason, science, or math.

It just cannot be done...or at least, I am asserting that it cannot. I've tried...never come close. I've challenged hundreds of others to give it a shot...none has ever come close.

I am inviting anyone who can prove the assertion wrong...or show substantially that it most likely is wrong...to do so.

To make my assertion even more specific...and more encompassing...I'm going to expand it:

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "At least one god exists."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "No gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that at least one god exists...than that no gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that no gods exist...than that at least one god exists."

Comments would be appreciated.

Proving me wrong would be even more appreciated.

But if one believes, then they know.
<couldn't resist>

[Frank Apisa]

He's actually not a Christian and is clearly ignorant of the contents of the bible.

I hope so.

If he actually is a Christian...he shames Christianity.

[Frank Apisa]

But if one believes, then they know.
<couldn't resist>


"Couldn't resist" what?

I have no idea of what you are trying to say here.

You ought really to have an adult conversation about this issue...although that would require you acting like an adult.

[USFREEDOM911]

"Couldn't resist" what?

I have no idea of what you are trying to say here.

You ought really to have an adult conversation about this issue...although that would require you acting like an adult.

I understand your confusion; but it's not necessary for you to understand, because there are plenty of JPP posters who do understand.

[Frank Apisa]

I understand your confusion; but it's not necessary for you to understand, because there are plenty of JPP posters who do understand.

Ahhh...so you can't explain. Just shooting your mouth off again.

Okay. That's allowed.

[USFREEDOM911]

Ahhh...so you can't explain. Just shooting your mouth off again.

Okay. That's allowed.

Well; you started it and if you wanted a higher degree of debate, then you should have done so from the get go. :D

[Frank Apisa]

Well; you started it and if you wanted a higher degree of debate, then you should have done so from the get go. :D

You started the nonsense...and as I told you...I will finish it.

[USFREEDOM911]

You started the nonsense...and as I told you...I will finish it.

No, you started it and you aren't able to finish it.

[Frank Apisa]

No, you started it and you aren't able to finish it.

YOU started it...and not only am I ABLE to finish it...I will.

[USFREEDOM911]

YOU started it...and not only am I ABLE to finish it...I will.

No, you started it and you won't finish it; because you can't.

[Frank Apisa]

No, you started it and you won't finish it; because you can't.

YOU started it...I most assuredly CAN finish it...and I certainly WILL finish it.

I need your help. You gotta stick around. Can't have you run and hide. That would be a forfeit.

[PostmodernProphet]

...I'd rather be an idiot.

you are certainly in luck.....

[USFREEDOM911]

YOU started it...I most assuredly CAN finish it...and I certainly WILL finish it.

I need your help. You gotta stick around. Can't have you run and hide. That would be a forfeit.

Well then, shit!!

I'll stick around, just to help you. :)

But:
You started it, you can't finish it, and you won't finish it.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

Well then, shit!!

I'll stick around, just to help you. :)

Yup...I've insured that.




But:
You started it, you can't finish it, and you won't finish it.

I did not start it...I can finish it...and I will finish it.

You'll see.




This is fun. :D

How wonderful to end these things with an agreement.

This is fun.

[USFREEDOM911]

Yup...I've insured that.



I did not start it...I can finish it...and I will finish it.

You'll see.



How wonderful to end these things with an agreement.

This is fun.

No, I insured it. :)

You did start it, you can't finish it, and you won't finish it.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

No, I insured it. :)

You did start it, you can't finish it, and you won't finish it.

This is fun. :D

You started this nonsense...I can finish it...and I most certainly will.

You'll see.

We'll have lots more fun on the way there. ;)

[USFREEDOM911]

You started this nonsense...I can finish it...and I most certainly will.

You'll see.

We'll have lots more fun on the way there. ;)

Nope - you're the one who started it - you won't and can't finish it - so there is no certainty, except your powerless.

Haven't seen any possibility of you doing anything.

This is fun. :D

[PostmodernProphet]

do you guys think that if you go on for two more pages and lightning does not strike you down, that it proves God does not exist?....

[USFREEDOM911]

do you guys think that if you go on for two more pages and lightning does not strike you down, that it proves God does not exist?....

Well; he started this and then issued a challenge.
I just accepted it. :D

[ThatOwlWoman]

*wipes the sandbox grit off her keyboard*

Oh goodie. Look! It's the Nutless Ones proclaiming that mygodsbetterthanyergod. Most of them are on ignore so I'm just guessing.... but yeah.

I'm sure your god(s) were there in FL two days ago. Locked and loaded.

[USFREEDOM911]

For someone who continually makes a point as to who she has on IA, Owl also seems to spend a lot of time talking "about" those posts that she says she can't see. :palm:

[Frank Apisa]

Nope - you're the one who started it - you won't and can't finish it - so there is no certainty, except your powerless.

Haven't seen any possibility of you doing anything.

This is fun. :D

Your memory is failing you.

YOU started it...and I will finish it.

I will continue to have fun...even after I have finished it.

[Frank Apisa]

do you guys think that if you go on for two more pages and lightning does not strike you down, that it proves God does not exist?....

Not at all.

I do not think it is possible to prove either things.

You don't either.

We can guess there IS at least one god...or we can guess there are none.

I prefer not to do either.

[Frank Apisa]

Well; he started this and then issued a challenge.
I just accepted it. :D

See my comments to you above.

[Frank Apisa]

For someone who continually makes a point as to who she has on IA, Owl also seems to spend a lot of time talking "about" those posts that she says she can't see. :palm:

She may be reading my quotes. Ever think of that?

[PostmodernProphet]

Not at all.

I do not think it is possible to prove either things.

You don't either.

We can guess there IS at least one god...or we can guess there are none.

I prefer not to do either.

you do believe in trying his patience, though......

[Frank Apisa]

you do believe in trying his patience, though......

I do not do "believing"...and I have no idea of to whom you refer with the "his" in that sentence.

[ThatOwlWoman]

She may be reading my quotes. Ever think of that?

Yeah. Unfortunately when you respond to the moron, the stupid is displayed with your quote. lol

[Frank Apisa]

Yeah. Unfortunately when you respond to the moron, the stupid is displayed with your quote. lol

Yup.:thumbsup:

[PostmodernProphet]

I do not do "believing"...and I have no idea of to whom you refer with the "his" in that sentence.

again, if you know so little about Christian theology, why do you waste your time discussing it?.....

[Frank Apisa]

again, if you know so little about Christian theology, why do you waste your time discussing it?.....

My guess is that I know more than you about Christian theology.

I've studied it.

I also conduct myself closer to the teachings of Jesus than you. That should count for something in this discussion.

[ThatOwlWoman]

My guess is that I know more than you about Christian theology.

I've studied it.

I also conduct myself closer to the teachings of Jesus than you. That should count for something in this discussion.

I know that this is rightfully a point of pride for you. However I feel obligated to point out that it is not all that hard to follow Christ more closely than most of the self-appointed Xtians on the forum. My husband the life-long atheist behaves in a more Christ-like manner than most of these sad sacks.

[Frank Apisa]

I know that this is rightfully a point of pride for you. However I feel obligated to point out that it is not all that hard to follow Christ more closely than most of the self-appointed Xtians on the forum. My husband the life-long atheist behaves in a more Christ-like manner than most of these sad sacks.

I get what you are saying, OW.

Whenever I get one of those posts from PP, however, I feel almost compulsive about mentioning it.

I also like to dismiss his notion that I know so little of Christian theology. Fact is...I know quite a bit about it...not world-class, but quite a bit.

I have no doubt your husband does behave in a way more consistent with the teachings of Jesus than many professed Christians. MANY atheists and agnostics do!

[Cypress]

...cannot be answered using logic, reason, science, or math.

It just cannot be done...or at least, I am asserting that it cannot. I've tried...never come close. I've challenged hundreds of others to give it a shot...none has ever come close.

I am inviting anyone who can prove the assertion wrong...or show substantially that it most likely is wrong...to do so.

To make my assertion even more specific...and more encompassing...I'm going to expand it:

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "At least one god exists."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "No gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that at least one god exists...than that no gods exist."

One cannot use logic, reason, science, or math...to substantiate "It is more likely that no gods exist...than that at least one god exists."

Comments would be appreciated.

Proving me wrong would be even more appreciated.

Since science does not deal with truth, it deals with knowledge --- the scientific method is really not a school of thought designed to answer or examine these types of theological questions.

Is God an objective reality? Or is God a perception of the individual? Is there really such a thing as an objective, idealized truth independent and outside human perception. Obviously, these questions go back to Plato and the Sophists. And I would like to study these philosophical schools of thought more!

I am not going to begrudge anyone who - based on their personal perceptions and creed - thinks that there is an all knowing God, who takes a special interest in watching over humanity. A Jeffersonian approach to Deism seems eminently reasonable to me.

I do think that those who assert with certainty an objective form of truth; that their religious truth should apply to everyone else....are generally affiliated with religious zealotry, and are a potential danger to human freedom and to western liberal democracy.


"Neither a person nor a nation can exist without some higher idea. And there is only one higher idea on earth, and it is the idea of the immortality of the human soul, for all other higher ideas of life by which humans might live derive from that idea alone." - Fyodor Dostoyevsky

[Frank Apisa]

Since science does not deal with truth, it deals with knowledge --- the scientific method is really not a school of thought designed to answer or examine these types of theological questions.

Is God an objective reality? Or is God a perception of the individual? Is there really such a thing as an objective, idealized truth independent and outside human perception. Obviously, these questions go back to Plato and the Sophists. And I would like to study these philosophical schools of thought more!

I am not going to begrudge anyone who - based on their personal perceptions and creed - thinks that there is an all knowing God, who takes a special interest in watching over humanity. A Jeffersonian approach to Deism seems eminently reasonable to me.

I do think that those who assert with certainty an objective form of truth; that their religious truth should apply to everyone else....are generally affiliated with religious zealotry, and are a potential danger to human freedom and to western liberal democracy.

Thank you for those thoughts, Cypress.

If I read you correctly, we are not far apart in our thoughts on this matter,

My point here is there are people who assert, "There is at least one god...or it is more likely that there is at least one god)...and I respectfully suggest that the assertion is a guess. It is not a result of logic, reason or the other things.

There also are people who assert, "There are no gods...or it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one. I respectfully suggest that assertion is as much a guess as the previous guess.

That's all.

[Cypress]

Thank you for those thoughts, Cypress.

If I read you correctly, we are not far apart in our thoughts on this matter,

My point here is there are people who assert, "There is at least one god...or it is more likely that there is at least one god)...and I respectfully suggest that the assertion is a guess. It is not a result of logic, reason or the other things.

There also are people who assert, "There are no gods...or it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one. I respectfully suggest that assertion is as much a guess as the previous guess.

That's all.

Someone's assertion is obviously someone else's faith.

I do not begrudge personal faith.

I do find inserting religious zealotry into science and politics to be problematic.

We used to have a Republican poster here who would argue for hours that biological evolution was not possible. It was even possible that dinosaurs and humans lived together! Hilarious and harmless in the context of a message board. But much more pernicious when used to fund pseudo-educational farces (aka, the Creation Science Museum) or to influence public policy.

[Frank Apisa]

Someone's assertion is obviously someone else's faith.

I do not begrudge personal faith.


Just want to be sure I am clear on this, Cypress, because it is an important part of the dynamic of why I started this thread.

I also have no problem with a person’s personal “faith.”

But if you agree with me on the OP items…it puts the notion of “beliefs” and “faith” into a different light.

If a person (person #1) chooses to say, “There is at least one god”…that is their right; and if a person (person #2), on the other hand, chooses to say, “There are no gods”…that is their right. But to suggest that either assertion is the result of logic or reason…is not. The assertions, “There is at least one god” or "there are no gods"…are the result of a choice. I could, if I wanted, make one or the other choice by flipping a coin and declaring “heads” to decide one way…and “tails” the other.

There would be no substantive difference between the way person #1 and person #2…and I… arrived at our assertion either way.

Person #1 and often person #2 express their ideas as “beliefs.” They say, “I believe there is a god” or “I believe there are no gods.” Calling it a “belief”, as far as I am concerned, disguises what it actually is. Not making a judgment about people who do that…it is a right they have. Just calling attention to what is actually happening.

“Faith”…seem to me a way of saying, “I am just guessing there is a god…but I am going to be stubborn about it.” Nothing wrong with that. It is a right everyone has. Not making a judgment about people who do that…it is a right they have. Just calling attention to what is actually happening.

I do not do it. My choice, which is my right, is to not make a choice…and disguise the choice with the words “believe” or “belief.”

That is why I say I do not do “believing.”

On minor matters, I could easily and reasonably use “believe” the way most people do. For instance, I could guess that there are people living on planets close enough to Earth who are sufficiently advanced as to be able to visit and observe our planet and its life. I could say, “I believe aliens from other planets have visited our planet” (or “I believe no aliens have ever visited our planet”)…BUT I DO NOT.

I choose not to do “believing"...I choose not to do any "believing" so I do not fall into the trap of doing so on the question of the existence or non-existence of gods.

We’re having a discussion about that right now as you may have noticed. I'm delighted you've given me the opportunity to expand on my thoughts on the issue.

[evince]

I don't believe there are any Gods Or Monsters


I used facts and science to come to that determination


people who believe in gods and monsters don't do that

[Frank Apisa]

I don't believe there are any Gods Or Monsters

Are you actually saying, "I don't believe there are any Gods or Monsters"...or are you actually saying, "I believe there are no Gods or Monsters?"

They are not the same thing.

I do not do "believing"...and I can agree with the former. I also do not believe there are any Gods or Monsters. But if you are actually saying the second thing...I cannot agree.

In the former...you are telling us one of the things you DO NOT BELIEVE. IF it is the latter...you are telling us something you BELIEVE.

If it is the latter...I thank you for sharing your guesses about gods and monsters.


I used facts and science to come to that determination

If you mean what you wrote...rather than what I suspect you were saying...fine.

If you mean the latter, though, you most assuredly did not use facts and science. You may have used the absence of facts to make the guess you are making...but all it is...is a guess.


people who believe in gods and monsters don't do that


Neither do people who believe there are no gods or monsters.

[evince]

none of the natural systems on this planet require a being to make them function


why should we believe the larger system needs one?

[evince]

that is science my friend

[Frank Apisa]

none of the natural systems on this planet require a being to make them function

Correct...but so what?

Gnats are not needed. We have gnats.





why should we believe the larger system needs one?

We shouldn't...but so what?

Gnats are not needed, but we have gnats.

[USFREEDOM911]

Your memory is failing you.

YOU started it...and I will finish it.

I will continue to have fun...even after I have finished it.

No, YOU started it and you can't / won't finish it; no matter how much you believe you can.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

that is science my friend

If you are saying that science shows that no gods exist...or that no monsters exist...

...you do not understand science, Evince.

It is very, very, very difficult to prove that something does not exist.

A logical person does not make blanket statements about what does not exist...except for definitionally impossible things. (A triangle is defined as a geometric shape with three sides. One can make a blanket statement that there are no four sided triangles.)

At best, you might be able to show that no unicorns, for instance, exist here on planet Earth. (Not that easy to do even that!) But if you say no unicorns (equine type animals with a horn jutting out of its forehead) do not exist...you got an entire universe to check out in order to make that proof.

[Frank Apisa]

No, YOU started it and you can't / won't finish it.

This is fun. :D

You started it...I can finish it...I will finish it.

This is FUN.

[USFREEDOM911]

See my comments to you above.

See my comments to you above.

This is fun. :D

[USFREEDOM911]

She may be reading my quotes. Ever think of that?

Do you believe she is??

[USFREEDOM911]

you do believe in trying his patience, though......

He really needs to try harder then. :D

[Frank Apisa]

See my comments to you above.

This is fun. :D

I can and will finish this.

It is fun.

[Frank Apisa]

Do you believe she is??

Nope. She mentioned she is...and I am guessing she is telling the truth.

[Frank Apisa]

He really needs to try harder then. :D

That doesn't make any sense.

You forgot the "This is fun."

Allow me to add it: THIS IS FUN.

[USFREEDOM911]

You started it...I can finish it...I will finish it.

This is FUN.

You started it...you won't finish it...you can't finish it.

This is fun. :D

[USFREEDOM911]

I can and will finish this.

It is fun.

You can't and won't finish it.

This is fun. :D

[USFREEDOM911]

Nope. She mentioned she is...and I am guessing she is telling the truth.

But you don't know; because you don't believe she is.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

You started it...you won't finish it...you can't finish it.

This is fun. :D

You started it...I can finish it...I WILL finish it.

This is FUN.

[USFREEDOM911]

That doesn't make any sense.

You forgot the "This is fun."

Allow me to add it: THIS IS FUN.

I wasn't replying to you, so need for the inclusion.

So you don't believe you need to try harder??

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

You can't and won't finish it.

This is fun. :D

See above.

[USFREEDOM911]

You started it...I can finish it...I WILL finish it.

This is FUN.

You started it...You can't finish it...You WON'T finish it.

This is fun. :D

[USFREEDOM911]

See above.

See above.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

But you don't know; because you don't believe she is.

I do not do "believing"...but, as I said, I think she is telling the truth.

Telling the truth seems to bother you, USF. Maybe that is the reason for that thread devoted to what you should do was posted. (Just discovered that today.)




This is fun. :D

Yep!

[Frank Apisa]

I wasn't replying to you, so need for the inclusion.

So you don't believe you need to try harder??

This is fun. :D

Oh...you think I cannot reply because you did not address that remark to me???

Oh, well...another example of you being wrong.

This is great fun.

[Frank Apisa]

You started it...You can't finish it...You WON'T finish it.

This is fun. :D

Nope...you started it...I can finish it...I WILL finish it.

This is lots of fun.

[USFREEDOM911]

I do not do "believing"...but, as I said, I think she is telling the truth.

Telling the truth seems to bother you, USF. Maybe that is the reason for that thread devoted to what you should do was posted. (Just discovered that today.)



Yep!

So you think she is telling the truth; but you don't know for sure; because you don't believe her.

I haven't lied, so why would the truth bother me; but it seems that you believe it bothers me.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

See above.

This is fun. :D

Already covered.

This is lots of fun.

[USFREEDOM911]

Oh...you think I cannot reply because you did not address that remark to me???

Oh, well...another example of you being wrong.

This is great fun.

Now you believe that I suggested you couldn't reply, when what I was addressing was the inclusion you spoke of.

Oh, well...another example of you believing you're right.

This is fun. :D

[USFREEDOM911]

Nope...you started it...I can finish it...I WILL finish it.

This is lots of fun.

Nope..You started it...You can't finish it...You WON'T finish it.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

So you think she is telling the truth; but you don't know for sure; because you don't believe her.

Nope. I think she is telling the truth. No way I can KNOW if anyone is telling the truth. The fact that I do not do "believing" has nothing to do with it.




I haven't lied, so why would the truth bother me; but it seems that you believe it bothers me.

Telling the truth does seem to bother you.




This is fun. :D

Yup, we agree here.

[USFREEDOM911]

Already covered.

This is lots of fun.

So you believe is was already covered.

This is fun. :D

[USFREEDOM911]

Nope. I think she is telling the truth. No way I can KNOW if anyone is telling the truth. The fact that I do not do "believing" has nothing to do with it.




Telling the truth does seem to bother you.



Yup, we agree here.

Since you just think she is telling the truth, shows that you do believe she is; but you don't know.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

Now you believe that I suggested you couldn't reply, when what I was addressing was the inclusion you spoke of.

I do not do believing. Didn't I mention that?


Oh, well...another example of you believing you're right.

Nope. Another example of me suggesting something.

I do not do "believing." Wonder why that upsets you so?




This is fun. :D
Yes it is.

[Frank Apisa]

Nope..You started it...You can't finish it...You WON'T finish it.

This is fun. :D

You started it...I can finish it...I most assuredly will finish it.

[Frank Apisa]

So you believe is was already covered.

This is fun. :D

I know it was already covered.

This is fun.

[USFREEDOM911]

I do not do believing. Didn't I mention that?



Nope. Another example of me suggesting something.

I do not do "believing." Wonder why that upsets you so?


Yes it is.

Then how could you know that I was suggesting you couldn't reply?

True; because you were suggesting something that you believed you knew.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

Since you just think she is telling the truth, shows that you do believe she is; but you don't know.

It doesn't show I "believe" anything.




This is fun. :D

Yup.

[Frank Apisa]

Then how could you know that I was suggesting you couldn't reply?

True; because you were suggesting something that you believed you knew.

This is fun. :D

Doesn't show I "believe" anything...because I do not do "believing."

Great fun.

[USFREEDOM911]

You started it...I can finish it...I most assuredly will finish it.

I'm having tons of fun.

ftfy

You started it...you can't finish it...you most assuredly won't finish it.

This is fun. :D

[USFREEDOM911]

I know it was already covered.

This is fun.

Thanks for agreeing that you did believe is was covered; because it's the only way you could know.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

ftfy

You started it...you can't finish it...you most assuredly won't finish it.

This is fun. :D

It was you who started it...and I am the person who will finish it.

[USFREEDOM911]

It doesn't show I "believe" anything.



Yup.

It does; because you apparently believe in what she said.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

Thanks for agreeing that you did believe is was covered; because it's the only way you could know.

This is fun. :D

I know it was covered. I do not do "believing."

It is fun.

[USFREEDOM911]

Doesn't show I "believe" anything...because I do not do "believing."

Great fun.

But you did believe in it; because you stated it as something you knew, even though you were wrong and can't admit it.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

It does; because you apparently believe in what she said.

This is fun. :D

No...I do not do "believing."

I'm pretty sure she is telling the truth.

Lots of fun.

[Frank Apisa]

But you did believe in it; because you stated it as something you knew, even though you were wrong and can't admit it.

This is fun. :D

I do not do "believing."

This is fun.

[USFREEDOM911]

It was you who started it...and I am the person who will finish it.

It was you who started it, which I've already shown...and you won't be the person who will finish it, no matter how much you believe you will; because you can't.

This is fun. :D

[USFREEDOM911]

I know it was covered. I do not do "believing."

It is fun.

The only way you would know it was covered, is if you believe it to be so.

This is fun. :D

[Frank Apisa]

It was you who started it, which I've already shown...and you won't be the person who will finish it, no matter how much you believe you will; because you can't.

This is fun. :D

You started this mess...I will finish it.

This is fun.

[Frank Apisa]

The only way you would know it was covered, is if you believe it to be so.

This is fun. :D

I do not do "believing."

I KNOW it was covered.

This IS fun.

[USFREEDOM911]

No...I do not do "believing."

I'm pretty sure she is telling the truth.

Lots of fun.

But you do do believing, otherwise you won't know.

Does "pretty sure" mean you believe she could be lying?

This is fun. :D

[USFREEDOM911]

I do not do "believing."

This is fun.

Then you can't know.

This is fun. :D