• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are you Certain There is no God?

Love God

Member


Are you saying that all and any one writer of science books are equal?
I could write a science book, or even you, and it would be good enough.
In that vein of thought, all books being equal, why bother, the books have no ‘difference’. Same teaching in all of them.

If the books are all good and equally the ‘same’, sounds more like someone is lying and possibly propaganda is being the goal.

May be no choice is given to think ‘freely’ but only what the herd approves...

All science book writers being equal and all...
What is your mother language? Any European high school book would do.


By using a discipline that assumes naturalism in the premises.called science. Amazing what you can achieve when you assume naturalism. You can pray for eons without achieving anything close to what scientists achieve in one day.



Tautologically true.




Now, who is losing touch with humility? Do you really think that générations of scientists missed something as trivial as the first, or second, principle of thermodynamics, and that you killed decades of cosmology based on something so obvious?

now, humility would suggest that you are missing something. Specially since you appear to not have he necessary scientific background to even judge those things.

and by the way, 5 + (-5) = 0, too. So you can have 5 and -5, popping out from nowhere, and still satisfy the first principle. :)



well. I need to repeat myself.

if losing your faith tomorrow will turn you into Hannibal the Cannibal, Then keep believing whatever you believe, by all means.

Ciao

- viole


Are you saying that all and any one writer of science books are equal?

You could write a science book, or even me, and it would be good enough?

In that vein of thought, all science book writers being equal, why bother, the books have no ‘difference’. Same teaching in all of them.

If the books are all good and equally the ‘same’, sounds more like someone is lying and possibly propaganda is being taught...

All science book writers being equal and all

I am trying not to sound snarky. It happens sometimes.
The problem is not science. Or math. Or physics.
The problem is all people sin.
What can be done about that? What should be done about that? How long before people evolve into perfect beings? Why is science the final authority on anything spiritual? If science is the only authority on all being, how does science explain morality? Can morals be studied?

Clever does not change nothing into something. If I give you nothing, nothing is what you have.

Joy

P.S. Does the phrase ‘different school of thought’ mean anything to the world of science? Or must one teaching rule? The last I understood is that science is not concrete. Old ‘theories’ pass, new theories happen...
Do I disbelieve science. No.
Science is most creative. Fascinating and beautiful and endless.
O. Kind of like God.


“Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.”
‭‭Job‬ ‭38:4‬ ‭KJV‬‬
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Are you saying that all and any one writer of science books are equal?
I could write a science book, or even you, and it would be good enough.
In that vein of thought, all books being equal, why bother, the books have no ‘difference’. Same teaching in all of them.

If the books are all good and equally the ‘same’, sounds more like someone is lying and possibly propaganda is being the goal.

May be no choice is given to think ‘freely’ but only what the herd approves...

All science book writers being equal and all...
What I am saying is that biology would not make sense without evolution. Ergo, evolution can be expected to be found on every standard biology book.

a bit like we can expect to find Newton in a standard Physiscs book.

ciao

- viole
 

Love God

Member
What I am saying is that biology would not make sense without evolution. Ergo, evolution can be expected to be found on every standard biology book.

a bit like we can expect to find Newton in a standard Physiscs book.

ciao

- viole

In all sincerity, how does evolution explain the existence of necessary matter to begin with?

Evolution seems to ignore ‘beginnings’. Where did the elements needed for the process of life to happen to begin with come from?

So while you can state evolution ‘makes sense’, you have failed to answer the obvious. Where did it all come from?...

So again, I ask: where did it all come from?

What is it that convinces you, Viole, that life started by ‘random matter’ that just so happened to exist without any explanation ‘of being’ necessary?

Do you accept the notion of matter always existing without anything necessary to ‘make’ (create, transfer) it? (Thermodynamic laws...)

I would love YOUR understanding. Not some other guy’s book.
Surely, from your life’s experiences, you came to some understanding/belief about life. ?

You cannot tell me that you have never asked yourself ‘where did this all come from’?
That maybe, possibly, the notion of nothing being the source of all things existing, is in any way a satisfactory answer?

How do you, Viole, view intelligent life apart from what some ‘random’ biology books teach?

I would be more interested in your beliefs than any biology book written by nameless, faceless councils/boards...

I can pick up those books anywhere. But your ideas, that I cannot.

Joy


“Finally, brethren,
whatsoever things are true,
whatsoever things are honest,
whatsoever things are just,
whatsoever things are pure,
whatsoever things are lovely,
whatsoever things are of good report;
if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise,

think on these things.”
‭‭Philippians‬ ‭4:8‬ ‭KJV‬‬
 
Last edited:

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
In all sincerity, how does evolution explain the existence of necessary matter to begin with?

Evolution seems to ignore ‘beginnings’. Where did the elements needed for the process of life to happen to begin with come from?

So while you can state evolution ‘makes sense’, you have failed to answer the obvious. Where did it all come from?...

So again, I ask: where did it all come from?

What is it that convinces you, Viole, that life started by ‘random matter’ that just so happened to exist without any explanation ‘of being’ necessary?

Do you accept the notion of matter always existing without anything necessary to ‘make’ (create, transfer) it? (Thermodynamic laws...)

I would love YOUR understanding. Not some other guy’s book.
Surely, from your life’s experiences, you came to some understanding/belief about life. ?

You cannot tell me that you have never asked yourself ‘where did this all come from’?
That maybe, possibly, the notion of nothing being the source of all things existing, is in any way a satisfactory answer?

How do you, Viole, view intelligent life apart from what some ‘random’ biology books teach?

I would be more interested in your beliefs than any biology book written by nameless, faceless councils/boards...

I can pick up those books anywhere. But your ideas, that I cannot.

Joy


“Finally, brethren,
whatsoever things are true,
whatsoever things are honest,
whatsoever things are just,
whatsoever things are pure,
whatsoever things are lovely,
whatsoever things are of good report;
if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise,

think on these things.”
‭‭Philippians‬ ‭4:8‬ ‭KJV‬‬
You, like virtually all creationists, confuse evolution with abiogenesis. In your case, you even confuse evolution with the origin of matter.

But that is kind of normal. Because in order to differentiate those, a very basic scientific knowledge would be required. But who would still be such a creationist, after having acquired some basic scientific knowledge?

ciao

- viole
 

Love God

Member
You, like virtually all creationists, confuse evolution with abiogenesis. In your case, you even confuse evolution with the origin of matter.

But that is kind of normal. Because in order to differentiate those, a very basic scientific knowledge would be required. But who would still be such a creationist, after having acquired some basic scientific knowledge?

ciao

- viole

But you still did not answer?

And then not including the ‘basics’ that I seem to lack... :(

You give some beating around the bush scientific jargon about how I do not understand and lack intelligence ...

What is it that you, Viole, believe that makes you think that science explains where matter comes from?

Again, where does anything come from? From your, Viole’s understanding. It is a straightforward question... how does your belief in science satisfactorily answer where it all started?


Joy



“Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power:
for thou hast created all things,
and for thy pleasure they are and were created.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭4:11‬ ‭KJV‬‬
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
It is not a jump. There is a gradual increase that we can see in various life forms. We are not all that much more intelligent than other apes. And there are other fairly intelligent species out there right now. We are merely the current winner in intelligence among living organisms.

Human intelligence is very different from ape intelligence. Can the IQ of an adult and a child be compared?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Human intelligence is very different from ape intelligence. Can the IQ of an adult and a child be compared?
Human intelligence is not that much different than that of other apes and in some tasks they can do better than humans. Why do you keep making claims that you cannot support:

Is your toddler really smarter than a chimpanzee?

Apes Can Solve Some Brain Puzzles Faster Than Humans

"Apes keep surprising us, sometimes even in direct comparison with humans. There is the example of Ayumu, a young male chimpanzee at the Primate Research Institute of Kyoto University, in Japan. I watched Ayumu’s incredibly rapid decision-making on a touch screen the way I admire my students typing 10 times faster than me. In 2007, he managed to put human memory to shame by recalling a series of numbers from 1 through 9. He tapped them in the right order, even though the numbers appeared randomly on the screen and were quickly replaced by white squares. Having memorized the locations of all numbers, Ayumu touched the squares in the right order. Reducing the amount of time the numbers flashed on the screen didn’t bother him in the least, even though humans become less accurate the shorter the interval. Trying the task myself, I was unable to keep track of more than five numbers after staring at the screen for many seconds, while Ayumu did the same after having seen the numbers for just one-fifth of a second—literally the bat of an eye. One follow-up study managed to train humans up to Ayumu’s level with just five numbers, but the ape remembers up to nine with 80 percent accuracy, something no human has managed to do so far. Taking on a British memory champion known for his ability to memorize an entire stack of cards, Ayumu emerged the “chimpion.”"
 

night912

Well-Known Member
Atheists are some of the most closed-minded people I encounter in my journey.
The very idea of [an] absolute God makes them angry.

I usually avoid the ‘argument’ with atheists, due to the fact that their mind is made up beforehand. And even if I possessed the Lord on video, atheists would claim it somehow ‘fake’.

No amount of evidence would convince a mind that is already ‘made up’.

Go watch this video and come back and tell me that you have converted to Hinduism.

And since you're not a closed-minded atheist, I know that you will do the right thing and convert. After all, only a mind that is already ‘made up’ can't be convinced if evidence is presented, but a mind that have not already ‘made up' such as yours, can still be convinced, correct?

Joy, Love, and Wisdom be with you and your Gods Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu. ;)

 

Love God

Member
Go watch this video and come back and tell me that you have converted to Hinduism.

And since you're not a closed-minded atheist, I know that you will do the right thing and convert. After all, only a mind that is already ‘made up’ can't be convinced if evidence is presented, but a mind that have not already ‘made up' such as yours, can still be convinced, correct?

Joy, Love, and Wisdom be with you and your Gods Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu. ;)


I suppose I would have to convert if I believed in signs and wonders...


“But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭12:39‬ ‭KJV‬‬

I know you think ‘faith is blind’. I agree...
Faith in man made religion is blind. Roman Catholicism, being the world’s largest religion, expects blind faith.
Faith in Jesus is not blind.
Jesus’s ministry is healing the blind.

The thing is, I could give you so many evidences of why I believe what I came to know as the only truth.

But what happens from the unbelieving side (as I once was) is the name calling, mocking, berating... which closes off any potential dialogue.
Instead of asking who, what, why, how....

I was 47 years old before I was saved. I did not go into salvation ‘blindly’. I wanted to understand the fuss about religions claiming the truth, and why they had it, and more importantly, how did they prove it.

I went to where all religions claim: the bible. I bought a bible, (by chance, the most scorned bible in the world today). Aka KJV.

I was determined to know what others claim they know. Why the book is full of fairytales. Why the book is full of errors. Why the book needs updated. How the Romans know they alone have the truth. And the Methodists, Lutherans, Hindus, Mohammedans, Atheists, Humanists, and the rest...
They all claim that the bible is false, or truth, or above knowing, or tampered with, or ______ (insert belief here).

Are you able to learn?

My determination to understand what others claimed they understood about the bible has been a journey of epic proportions. Full of truth, mercy, and grace.

That stuff is only found in one place. Given by one God. In one book.

Would you care to hear any of the evidences that convinces me?

Joy


“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.”
‭‭1 Thessalonians‬ ‭5:21‬ ‭KJV‬‬


“Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭35:5‬ ‭KJV‬‬
 
Last edited:

night912

Well-Known Member
So the video evidence isn't enough to convince you? Now replace YOU, with atheist, and you will understand why an atheist does not believe.

I suppose I would have to convert if I believed in signs and wonders...

“But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭12:39‬ ‭KJV‬‬

What is your reason and/or goal for cherry picking bible verses that's irrelevant to the discussion?

I know you think ‘faith is blind’. I agree...
Faith in man made religion is blind. Roman Catholicism, being the world’s largest religion, expects blind faith.
Faith in Jesus is not blind.
Jesus’s ministry is healing the blind.
You agree that faith is blind, and yet, you blindly have faith in jesus.

The thing is, I could give you so many evidences of why I believe what I came to know as the only truth.
Sure, that's possible, but atm, there's a big indication (AKA evidence) that is pointing towards the direction that says you can't. Dodging, stalling, and/or making excuses for not wanting to, are all strong reasons to suggest that you can't.

But what happens from the unbelieving side (as I once was) is the name calling, mocking, berating... which closes off any potential dialogue.
Instead of asking who, what, why, how....
Point proven.

I was 47 years old before I was saved. I did not go into salvation ‘blindly’. I wanted to understand the fuss about religions claiming the truth, and why they had it, and more importantly, how did they prove it.

I went to where all religions claim: the bible. I bought a bible, (by chance, the most scorned bible in the world today). Aka KJV.
This reeks of dishonesty, intellectually, truthfulness and/or both. Apparently, it does show that you did blindly believe it to be true ahead of time before deciding to buy a bible. And all you were looking for was a reason to convince yourself that your beliefs are not based on blind faith. So you went and buy a bible, the religious texts of your religion, solely for the reason so you can tell yourself that you did read your religious texts. My reason for thinking this way is what you said that's in bold.


I was determined to know what others claim they know. Why the book is full of fairytales. Why the book is full of errors. Why the book needs updated. How the Romans know they alone have the truth. And the Methodists, Lutherans, Hindus, Mohammedans, Atheists, Humanists, and the rest...
They all claim that the bible is false, or truth, or above knowing, or tampered with, or ______ (insert belief here).

Are you able to learn?

My determination to understand what others claimed they understood about the bible has been a journey of epic proportions. Full of truth, mercy, and grace.

That stuff is only found in one place. Given by one God. In one book.
This is more evidence for what I've said.

Are you able to learn?
Yes I am and have learned quite a lot about your way of thinking. And I also think that you are able to learn. What's hindering you from actually learning and/or getting closer to the truth is your methodology. Continuously trying to find evidence for what you already believe is the truth, is the wrong way to get closer to the truth.

Would you care to hear any of the evidences that convinces me?

Joy


“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.”
‭‭1 Thessalonians‬ ‭5:21‬ ‭KJV‬‬
You've stopped proving all things when you're fast to hold on to things which is good.


“Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭35:5‬ ‭KJV‬‬
The blind cannot see the truth whether or not their eyes are opened or closed. The dead cannot hear the truth even if they believe that they can hear. But the blind can hear the truth and the deaf can see the truth.

You getting angry and/or upset because your way of thinking and the reason(s) were used on you, resulting in you seeing that there are flaws. So you are either wrong about and misjudged atheists or you correct about them, in which proving that you are closed-minded and have already made up your mind, especially in regards to the video I presented.

Please present the evidence where I was name calling, mocking, berating you. Just because you liked doing that before bring a believer and apparently still do even as a believer, doesn't mean that everyone else who oppose your beliefs are the same. And playing victim and/or shifting the burden of proof doesn't help your arguments and claims. What does help, is present the evidences, which you have failed to do so.

Would you care to hear any of the evidences that convinces me?
Been waiting for you to present the evidence. So if you are done stalling, can you provide your evidence.

Trying to convince a nonbeliever that the bible is true by posting cherry picked bible verses will not in any way, miraculously convince them to believe. You're better off providing the evidence. And trying to "prove" a claim by presenting a reworded version of the same claim, is not evidence and will not increase the weight of the claim.
 

Love God

Member
So the video evidence isn't enough to convince you? Now replace YOU, with atheist, and you will understand why an atheist does not believe.



What is your reason and/or goal for cherry picking bible verses that's irrelevant to the discussion?


You agree that faith is blind, and yet, you blindly have faith in jesus.


Sure, that's possible, but atm, there's a big indication (AKA evidence) that is pointing towards the direction that says you can't. Dodging, stalling, and/or making excuses for not wanting to, are all strong reasons to suggest that you can't.


Point proven.


This reeks of dishonesty, intellectually, truthfulness and/or both. Apparently, it does show that you did blindly believe it to be true ahead of time before deciding to buy a bible. And all you were looking for was a reason to convince yourself that your beliefs are not based on blind faith. So you went and buy a bible, the religious texts of your religion, solely for the reason so you can tell yourself that you did read your religious texts. My reason for thinking this way is what you said that's in bold.



This is more evidence for what I've said.


Yes I am and have learned quite a lot about your way of thinking. And I also think that you are able to learn. What's hindering you from actually learning and/or getting closer to the truth is your methodology. Continuously trying to find evidence for what you already believe is the truth, is the wrong way to get closer to the truth.


You've stopped proving all things when you're fast to hold on to things which is good.



The blind cannot see the truth whether or not their eyes are opened or closed. The dead cannot hear the truth even if they believe that they can hear. But the blind can hear the truth and the deaf can see the truth.

You getting angry and/or upset because your way of thinking and the reason(s) were used on you, resulting in you seeing that there are flaws. So you are either wrong about and misjudged atheists or you correct about them, in which proving that you are closed-minded and have already made up your mind, especially in regards to the video I presented.

Please present the evidence where I was name calling, mocking, berating you. Just because you liked doing that before bring a believer and apparently still do even as a believer, doesn't mean that everyone else who oppose your beliefs are the same. And playing victim and/or shifting the burden of proof doesn't help your arguments and claims. What does help, is present the evidences, which you have failed to do so.


Been waiting for you to present the evidence. So if you are done stalling, can you provide your evidence.

Trying to convince a nonbeliever that the bible is true by posting cherry picked bible verses will not in any way, miraculously convince them to believe. You're better off providing the evidence. And trying to "prove" a claim by presenting a reworded version of the same claim, is not evidence and will not increase the weight of the claim.
 

Love God

Member
So the video evidence isn't enough to convince you? Now replace YOU, with atheist, and you will understand why an atheist does not believe.



What is your reason and/or goal for cherry picking bible verses that's irrelevant to the discussion?


You agree that faith is blind, and yet, you blindly have faith in jesus.


Sure, that's possible, but atm, there's a big indication (AKA evidence) that is pointing towards the direction that says you can't. Dodging, stalling, and/or making excuses for not wanting to, are all strong reasons to suggest that you can't.


Point proven.


This reeks of dishonesty, intellectually, truthfulness and/or both. Apparently, it does show that you did blindly believe it to be true ahead of time before deciding to buy a bible. And all you were looking for was a reason to convince yourself that your beliefs are not based on blind faith. So you went and buy a bible, the religious texts of your religion, solely for the reason so you can tell yourself that you did read your religious texts. My reason for thinking this way is what you said that's in bold.



This is more evidence for what I've said.


Yes I am and have learned quite a lot about your way of thinking. And I also think that you are able to learn. What's hindering you from actually learning and/or getting closer to the truth is your methodology. Continuously trying to find evidence for what you already believe is the truth, is the wrong way to get closer to the truth.


You've stopped proving all things when you're fast to hold on to things which is good.



The blind cannot see the truth whether or not their eyes are opened or closed. The dead cannot hear the truth even if they believe that they can hear. But the blind can hear the truth and the deaf can see the truth.

You getting angry and/or upset because your way of thinking and the reason(s) were used on you, resulting in you seeing that there are flaws. So you are either wrong about and misjudged atheists or you correct about them, in which proving that you are closed-minded and have already made up your mind, especially in regards to the video I presented.

Please present the evidence where I was name calling, mocking, berating you. Just because you liked doing that before bring a believer and apparently still do even as a believer, doesn't mean that everyone else who oppose your beliefs are the same. And playing victim and/or shifting the burden of proof doesn't help your arguments and claims. What does help, is present the evidences, which you have failed to do so.


Been waiting for you to present the evidence. So if you are done stalling, can you provide your evidence.

Trying to convince a nonbeliever that the bible is true by posting cherry picked bible verses will not in any way, miraculously convince them to believe. You're better off providing the evidence. And trying to "prove" a claim by presenting a reworded version of the same claim, is not evidence and will not increase the weight of the claim.




I would be interested to know if you have ever read, let alone studied, the bible?

Many people give a book report (meanwhile passing blind judgment) on the bible without ever having read it...
Fascinating that you find it good to reject the good...? Why is the good bad?

You sent me a link saying I should convert to Hinduism because signs exist. (The mocking came in that form.) When the bible clearly states that signs are not necessary for faith.
I said faith in Jesus is not blind.
I also said Jesus’s ministry is about healing the blind [i.e. blind faith in man-made religions, such as Hinduism, Mohammedism, Romanism, and all the rest.]

Why does quoting scripture bother you?
If you do not believe the bible is needed to state my case of why I believe what I believe then answer this:

2+2=?

And don’t use any numbers to figure out the equation.

Of course I need the bible to state my case. The whole hot mess is about God, truth, and if he wrote/said anything and who controls it if it does exist.

So if my ‘cherry picking’ bible verses bothers you, I am sorry. I do not know of any other way to speak about the bible without using the bible.

What is your field of study/profession? Science, math, law, teaching, history, medical, languages?
It is obvious that you have an higher degree of education.
And that you have studied English. But it is obvious that English is your ‘second’ language.
With your education, I am convinced that you had to study in order to earn your degree(s).
If one wants to know God, study must be done.
Just as you had to study your science, law, medical, history book(s) to get knowledge.

Have you ever told a lie?
Have you ever met any person who has not?
The bible states ALL people lie.
Guess what. They do.

Here is something that may be of interest. One of the many proofs that convinced me.

The birth, life, death of Jesus was prophesied over 400-2000 years before he was born on 48 points.
All 48 came to pass.

The odds of that happening are something like this:

You go out and cover the entire surface of the moon 4” deep in numbered coins.

You tell me to go find the coin numbered 34.

I pick it up first try.

The chances of me picking up the coin numbered 34 on the first try are as close to nil as nil is.

Let me point out that the Jewish scripture was written and established 400 years before Jesus was born. The Jews did not change, conspire, nor collaborate on writings to ‘make it fit’ with Jesus. It is well documented that Jews hate Jesus.

I would like you to prophesy 10 points on one person’s birth, life, and death in one lifetime.

Prophesy and write down name of parents, place of birth, date, sex of child, time of birth, hometown, education, manner of death, time of death, and what age at time of death.

Make those 10 predictions ‘fit’ any child born in your lifetime. If you can. I will even let you have an hundred more lifetimes to get your 10 predictions...!

Joy


“Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort;”
‭‭2 Corinthians‬ ‭1:3‬ ‭KJV‬‬
 
Last edited:

PureX

Veteran Member
I am certain there is no good reason for me to believe in God.
Certaity can only be achieved by humans via delusion.
I see no reason to believe anything in the Bible.
I see no reason to believe that God communicates to us either individually or through messengers.
It would appear illogical for God to do so. But then, I see no reason for God to "communicate" with us at all.
The choice to believe in these things, like the Bible, is purely arbitrary.
No, it isn't. It's based on personal needs, desires, ethics, and so on.
Why I don't believe is the same reason I don't believe Harry Potter is anything more than a fictional character, I've no reason to.
You have many existential reasons to presume Harry Potter to be a fictional character. You have no existential reasons to presume God to be a fictional character.
Do you feel compelled to believe in God?
I am not compelled to believe anything. What you or I or anyone believes is not relevant to what is.
Do you feel belief is necessary?
I feel belief in egocentric nonsense, mostly. I choose to trust that certain propositions are true, and others are not. I don't presume them to be true (belief) just because I chose to trust in them being true.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Certaity can only be achieved by humans via delusion.

So that means you are not certain this is true.
It would appear illogical for God to do so. But then, I see no reason for God to "communicate" with us at all.

Then it would seem we are in agreement on this.
No, it isn't. It's based on personal needs, desires, ethics, and so on.

That is what I mean by arbitrary, it's a matter of personal preference.

You have many existential reasons to presume Harry Potter to be a fictional character. You have no existential reasons to presume God to be a fictional character.
I was referring to the lack of belief, not about Harry being fictional.

I am not compelled to believe anything. What you or I or anyone believes is not relevant to what is.

Another thing we can agree on.
I feel belief in egocentric nonsense, mostly. I choose to trust that certain propositions are true, and others are not. I don't presume them to be true (belief) just because I chose to trust in them being true.

If you prefer to use the word trust over belief, I'm ok with that.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Thanks for your response.

So what does it mean for something to be a "higher power?" For example, is it enough to say that a higher power is something more powerful than a human?

An entity that can act beyond what humans are capable of.
Do all higher powers require worship?

I'm not aware of any higher powers so I'm not aware of anything they'd require.
Further, do all higher power beleivers worship what they consider to be a higher power

You'd have to ask the individual believer.
and how do you define worship?

Ritualistic reverence.

Lastly, in your estimation how did the various worshipers of a higher power or higher powers determine that a higher power even existed?

Thanks.
That is kind of the issue, I don't think they could determine this.

Ancients felt there were forces controlling what happened in their life because they could see patterns but not understand what caused them. So they created stories about gods which fit what they observed. Since it was a pattern, it continued to fit the story and became more of a reality to them.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
So that means you are not certain this is true.
We can know THAT we don't know without knowing WHAT we don't know.
That is what I mean by arbitrary, it's a matter of personal preference.
That's quite a wrong and insulting term to use in that case. It's like claiming that anything anyone cares about, or finds meaning and purpose in, is just random existential 'noise': is insignificant. I dare say you don't consider your own needs, desires, ethics, etc., "arbitrary".
I was referring to the lack of belief, not about Harry being fictional.
"Lack of belief" is just meaningless negative gibberish. Either assert something, or don't.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
But you still did not answer?

And then not including the ‘basics’ that I seem to lack... :(

You give some beating around the bush scientific jargon about how I do not understand and lack intelligence ...

What is it that you, Viole, believe that makes you think that science explains where matter comes from?

Again, where does anything come from? From your, Viole’s understanding. It is a straightforward question... how does your belief in science satisfactorily answer where it all started?


Joy

‬‬
OK, I am a bit reluctant since usually creationists are all guilty of ultracrepidarianism. And they tend to be scientific illiterate, while keeping the arrogance of pontificating about things they never studied seriously. They would not be creationists, otherwise.

But I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Therefore, I need to set my parameters right, in order to give an answer: what is your knowledge of modern physics. For instance, relativity, quantum mechanics, inflation theory, etc? For instance, do you understand how permanent new matter can be generated by vacuum fluctuations near a strong gravitational source?

“Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power:
for thou hast created all things,
and for thy pleasure they are and were created.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭4:11‬ ‭KJV
These are just nice stories in an ancient book written by people with vastly more knowledge of goats than basic physics, you know? Also creationists. I would not take them too seriously as explanation of anything.

Ciao

- viole
 
Last edited:

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
...
By using a discipline that assumes naturalism in the premises.called science. Amazing what you can achieve when you assume naturalism. You can pray for eons without achieving anything close to what scientists achieve in one day.
...
Yeah, but how does that get you to gnostic atheism?
 
Top