Atheists: What would you consider credible communication from God?

[dianaiad]

I would consider any communication in which a deity claimed that belief was important to them to be an hallucination. I cannot imagine a true deity caring at all about whether or nor anyone believes in him or her -- or it.

that doesn't prove that there is no god, y'know. It only proves that your imagination is lacking.

I can imagine all sorts of versions of deity in which belief in him/her/it would not only be important, but that he/she/it would want to let us know that belief is important.

I believe that what you have done is define deity for yourself, so that anything/one/One who doesn't abide by your qualifications can't be deity. I mean, that's fine...pretty much everybody does that to one degree or another.

The problem, of course, is that since you can't know anything about deity, then putting restrictions on what he/she/it must be in order to BE deity seems, er.....silly.

BTW, you aren't the only person I've come across that uses the particular bit of circular reasoning, (the bit about any communication from God being a hallucination) which I think is right up there with the usual example of circular reasoning given in definitions of that fallacy. You know the one, I'm sure. It goes:

The Bible is the Word of God
Because God wrote it, and I know God wrote it because
The Bible says so.


Well, you have just committed the 'atheist' version of it. This goes:

God does not exist because if God did, He would tell me so.
However, ANY visit from God to me personally telling me He exists would be a hallucination because
God doesn't exist.

I honestly don't see a difference in the fallacy, do you?

 

[Revoltingest]

all channels at all the same time...no matter where you tune, you're hearing the message...

And where necessary, God could turn rocks or trees into radios.

 

[sun rise]

all channels at all the same time...no matter where you tune, you're hearing the message...

Just like the Vogons?

 

[YmirGF]

The analogy does not work because God is not a human being.

OK. Now, how do you know that to be the case? You are making the mistake of pretending your assumption is true or reflects reality. The reality is, we have no way of knowing, currently. For that matter, it does not matter if god is a human being or not. In theory, God created human beings (and everything else), so he should be able to relate to his creations on some level. I do not see how that is an unrealistic expectation.

In theory, what we are, came from god. Is it logical to assume God would harbor similar traits found in human animals, his creations, or the "god equivalent" of those limited human traits? Perhaps God used an aspect of itself as a blueprint to make us? Like, you're god, how the hell else would you do it even allowing for being able to magically poof things into existence.

God cannot speak to ordinary people such that they would understand that communication.

So, the Origin of Communication itself is not a very good communicator. Makes sense.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Just like the Vogons?

Yes, but I would hope without the poetry...

 

[masonlandry]

There is evidence for a mark of extraterrestrial intelligence left in our genetic code as evident by how the numeric and semantic message of 037 appears in our genetic code. Each codon relates to 3 other particular codons having the same particular type of initial nucleobase and sequential nucleobase subsequently then followed by a different ending nucleobase. Half of these 4 set of codon groups ( whole family codons ) each code for the same particular amino acid. The other half of those 4 set of codon groups ( split codons ) don't code for the same amino acid. So then, in the case of whole family codons, there are 37 amino acid peptide chain nucleons for each relevant nucleobase determinant of how a particular amino acid gets coded. Start codons express 0 at the beginning of 37 Hence, the meaningful numeric and semantic message of 037 gets unambiguously and factually conveyed to us descendants of our cosmic ancestor(s) with our genetic code invented by a superior intelligence beyond that of anybody presently bound to Earth.

“There is no plausible chemical logic to couple directly the triplets and the amino acids. In other words, the principles of chemistry where not the sought essence of the genetic code”

“The zero is the supreme abstraction of arithmetic. Its use by any alphabet, including the genetic code, can be an indicator of artificiality.”

"The place-value decimal system represented through digital symmetry of the numbers divisible by prime number (PN 037). This arithmetical syntactic feature is an innate attribute of the genetic code. The PN 037 notation with a leading zero emphasizes zero's equal participation in the digital symmetry. Numbers written by identical digits are devised by PN 037*3=111 and 1+1+1=3 and appear regularly [from the figure: 037*6 =222 and 2+2+2=6, 037*9=333 and 3+3+3 =9, 037*4=444 and 4+4+4=12, 037*15=555 and 5+5+5=15, 037*18=666 and 6+6+6=18, 037*21=777 and 7+7+7 =21. 037*24 =888 and 8+8+8=24, 037*27=999 and 9+9+9=27.)"

"There is a complete set of information symbols utilizing the decimal syntax 111, 222, 333, 444, 555, 666, 777, 888, 999 in the genetic code. Each of these symbols consists uniformly of a carrier (balanced nucleons) and a meaning (the decimal syntax)."

Reference: The "Wow! signal" of the terrestrial genetic code. Vladimir l. shCherbak and Maxim A. Makukov. Redirectinghttps://www.scribd.com/document/35302916...netic-Code

"The first information system emerged on the earth as primordial version of the genetic code and genetic texts. The natural appearance of arithmetic power in such a linguistic milieu is theoretically possible and practical for producing information systems of extremely high efficiency. In this case, the arithmetic symbols should be incorporated into an alphabet, i.e. the genetic code. A number is the fundamental arithmetic symbol produced by the system of numeration. If the system of numeration were detected inside the genetic code, it would be natural to expect that its purpose is arithmetic calculation e.g., for the sake of control, safety, and precise alteration of the genetic texts. The nucleons of amino acids and the bases of nucleic acids seem most suitable for embodiments of digits. These assumptions were used for the analyzing the genetic code.

The compressed, life-size, and split representation of the Escherichia coli and Euplotes octocarinatus code versions were considered simultaneously. An exact equilibration of the nucleon sums of the amino acid standard blocks and/or side chains was found repeatedly within specified sets of the genetic code. Moreover, the digital notations of the balanced sums acquired, in decimal representation, the unique form 111, 222, …, 999. This form is a consequence of the criterion of divisibility by 037. The criterion could simplify some computing mechanism of a cell if any and facilitate its computational procedure.

Reference: Biosystems Volume 70, Issue 3, August 2003, Pages 187-209
"Arithmetic inside the universal genetic code" Author: Vladimir I. shCherbak
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar...4703000662

"Numerous arithmetical regularities of nucleon numbers of canonical amino acids for quite different systematizations of the genetic code, which are dominantly based on decimal number 037, indicate the hidden existence of a more universal ordering principle. Mathematical analysis of number 037 reveals that it is a unique decimal number from which an infinite set of self-similar numbers can be derived with the nested numerical, geometrical, and arithmetical properties, thus enabling the nested coding and computing in the (bio)systems by geometry and resonance. The omnipresent fractal structural and dynamical organization, as well as the intertwining of quantum and classical realm in the physical and biological systems could be just the consequence of such coding and computing."

Reference: NeuroQuantology | December 2011 | Vol 9 | Issue 4 | Page 702-715 Masic, Natasa Nested Properties of shCherbak’s PQ 037 and (Biological) Coding/Computing Nested Numeric/Geometric/Arithmetic Propertiesof shCherbak’s Prime Quantum 037 as a Base of (Biological) Coding/Computing
http://Nested Numeric/Geometric/Arithmetic Properties

Exactly who/what left its/their mark in our genetic coding might not ever get determined by anybody presently bound to Earth. The search for our cosmic relatives and cosmic common ancestor likely then needs to be done with advanced space exploration. I'd like to urge you then to please advise our Senate, Congress and President to expand our tax-payer funded resources for advance space exploration.

This is not evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence. This is evidence of an unexplained phenomenon.

 

[Jollybear]

Well, you do seem to know an awful lot about God! I find that, given His chosen inscrutability, to be quite surprising. How is it, do you think, that you became privy to so much intimate knowledge about God? Are you one of those few special humans He likes to have chats with?

Its not about knowledge. Im not any more special then anyone else. I also make no claims to having any special prophet or relation status with God. Its about the most logical explanation for our reality we all share.

But, on top of it, i have had my share of spiritual experiences which convince me of the reality. And thousands of others have too. These range from NDEs, OBEs, ESPs, spiritual regenerations and apparitions.

Also, might i add. Do you also not assert to know what God would do when you think he should communicate a certain way? So, why do you then question my assertion when i give reasons why God would not communicate the way you think he should?

 

[masonlandry]

Feeings, dreams, signs, inner communication and dialogue, reflection, emotions of connection and wellbeing, feeling of a higher calling, reading scripure as god speaking to them, and a boat load of other ways people communicate with god and vis versa.

Some say that god only communicates through scrpture, prophets, angels, and so forth. Communication is multifacted. When it is from god, who is to say one person hears god and another person does not based on how they feel god should communicates with them.

The problem with all those methods is that there is no way to know the difference between what is actually communication with/from God or just you mistaking them for communication with/from God. At the very minimum, I would personally need at least one other person, preferably three or more, to be able to verify receiving the samem message in the same format, without any of us telling each other first. That would pretty strongly convince me I'd been contacted by something, but I still don't know how I'd be sure it was God and not something else.

 

[Salvador]

This is not evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence. This is evidence of an unexplained phenomenon.

 

[Polymath257]

I never said anything about God being incapable. I said "If an omnipotent God needed everyone to believe in Him, He could have communicated directly to everyone." That indicates that God is capable.

Give me one good reason why God should communicate directly to everyone.

But the point is that if that deity *wanted* to communicate its existence directly, then it would do so. It isn't a matter of 'need', but of desire.

And, since direct communication is the way that most assures that people *will* believe, that deity doesn't really *want* people to believe.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The problem with all those methods is that there is no way to know the difference between what is actually communication with/from God or just you mistaking them for communication with/from God. At the very minimum, I would personally need at least one other person, preferably three or more, to be able to verify receiving the samem message in the same format, without any of us telling each other first. That would pretty strongly convince me I'd been contacted by something, but I still don't know how I'd be sure it was God and not something else.

What do you feel qualifies as communication from god?

If you look deeper into christian explanation of god, you can plug in a lot of ways god speaks is not through a supernatural cosmic being in the sky. It's something very subjective and though they externalize it their description and testimony is always internal. I have yet to find any believer from any religion on RF that experiences god outside the norms of human conduit of somesort.

I realize this after going into Catholicism. You're asking the wrong questions.

 

[masonlandry]

What do you feel qualifies as communication from god?

If you look deeper into christian explanation of god, you can plug in a lot of ways god speaks is not through a supernatural cosmic being in the sky. It's something very subjective and though they externalize it their description and testimony is always internal. I have yet to find any believer from any religion on RF that experiences god outside the norms of human conduit of somesort.

I realize this after going into Catholicism. You're asking the wrong questions.

If there is a god, I do think all those ways would qualify as communications, but that doesn't remove the problem of distinguishing a communication from a mistaken perception of communication. I don't know if there could be a way to know a real communication from a mistaken perception. It's too subjective and our brains are too prone to **** up a million different ways. What would convince me of God's existence, even if I experienced it personally and vividly, likely wouldn't convince anyone else I wasn't just crazy. Actually, I have taken DMT multiple times, and that's probably the closest thing I can imagine from communication with God, but there is the entire problem of "I was literally on drugs." So I believe it was something, but I don't know what it was and I can't trust the experience to be more than an astonishing illusion.

 

[Twilight Hue]

God does talk to His children, all of them, through His Messengers.

With all of them having a different confusing message to share.

 

[Polymath257]

This is a carryover from a dialogue that has been ongoing between me and an Atheist on another forum for about five years... Yes, five years and we are still going around in the same circles. I posted something about this about six months ago but I am back with a slightly different slant.

Synopsis: The issue at hand is that this Atheist thinks that God should communicate directly to everyone in the world (all 7.4 billion people) because that is “what he considers” the only credible method of communication. In his opinion, if God does not communicate directly to everyone, that is evidence that God does not exist. One of his premises is that a God would want everyone to believe in Him, and direct communication to everyone would be “the only way” to accomplish that.

My position is that God wants everyone to believe in Him but God does not need everyone to believe in Him because an omnipotent/omniscient/fully self-sufficient God does not need anything from anyone. If an omnipotent God needed everyone to believe in Him, He could have communicated directly to everyone. So, since God does not do that, there are only three logical possibilities to choose from:

1. God uses Messengers, knowing that not everyone will believe in them.
2. God does not communicate at all.
3. God does not exist.

There is no option #4, that if God exists, God would communicate directly with everyone, because God has not communicated directly with everyone.

In other words, since there is no evidence that God has ever communicated directly to everyone we can assume that is not what God wants to do, if God exists.

Credibility is not the issue here, this issue is the best way to communicate to accomplish what God is trying to accomplish.

Who would know the best way to communicate to humans in order to accomplish what God wants to accomplish, humans or God?

I personally like the example of a written message on the moon, readable in all languages, that claims that some particular set of beliefs is valid. Each person sees the message as being in their language (with those who are blind getting the message a different way).

I would find that pretty convincing. Mass hallucination of that scale would be a poor explanation.

 

[Trailblazer]

Sorry, but there's no reason at all to believe such a thing. You cannot possibly demonstrate that any of those who claim to have had "real communications" from God are anything other than ordinary human beings, and there have been literally thousands of them.

No, there have not been thousands, only a numbered few. Anyone can claim anything but ones that can support their claim with evidence are real Messengers of God. I never said that could be proven. Nobody can prove it.

This is something, by the way, that a God ought to know, since it is something that I -- and exceedingly ordinary human being -- know.

God does know who the false messengers were because God knows everything. God also knows who the real Messengers werre because He sent them.

I get so tired of the continual attempt by believers in God to find excuses for why God can't do pretty much anything that's actually "god-like." The "god" that needs such excuses doesn't seem very "god-like" to me...

I never said that God cannot do anything. I said that God only does what God wants to do....Omnipotence cuts both ways, logically speaking.

An Omnipotent God does not need to make excuses to humans for not doing what they want Him to do.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well, what definition of god are you using. Is your take on god that god is all powerful, and can do anything?

Yes. God can do anything, but God only does what God wants to do, not what humans think He should do.

 

[Trailblazer]

And I think we can all infer from that, since you claim to know what God wants to do, that you are omniscient. Congratulations...I suppose....

I do not know what God wants to do. I said that God only does what God wants to do. That is based upon logic. An omnipotent God does only what He wants to do. He does not take orders from humans.

 

[Trailblazer]

But the point is that if that deity *wanted* to communicate its existence directly, then it would do so. It isn't a matter of 'need', but of desire.

Correct.

And, since direct communication is the way that most assures that people *will* believe, that deity doesn't really *want* people to believe.

And, since direct communication is probably the way that most assures that people *will* believe, that deity doesn't really *want* all people to believe.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If there is a god, I do think all those ways would qualify as communications, but that doesn't remove the problem of distinguishing a communication from a mistaken perception of communication. I don't know if there could be a way to know a real communication from a mistaken perception.

It's too subjective and our brains are too prone to **** up a million different ways. What would convince me of God's existence, even if I experienced it personally and vividly, likely wouldn't convince anyone else I wasn't just crazy. Actually, I have taken DMT multiple times, and that's probably the closest thing I can imagine from communication with God, but there is the entire problem of "I was literally on drugs."

So I believe it was something, but I don't know what it was and I can't trust the experience to be more than an astonishing illusion.

By the nature of the belif, it is subjective. You would need to go deeper and understand it from your observation. Christians will tell you a dime a dozen experiences and "facts" so its best to draw your own conclusions.

What type of god do you want them to convince you of? It isnt a man in the sky.

DMT? Thats nothing close. Do you have a passion that you cant live without? or family members the essence of your life or so have you?

That feeling of connection you cant live without is what people call god.

I like how Father Brian puts it in Keeping the Faith movie:

The truth is, I don't really learn that much about your faith by asking questions like that... because those aren't really questions about faith, those are questions about religion. And it's very important to understand the difference between religion and faith. Because faith is not about having the right answers. Faith is a feeling. Faith is a hunch, really. It's a hunch that there is something bigger connecting it all... connecting us all together. And that feeling, that hunch, is God.​

Scripture and culture puts context to god. As Bahai say, they cant know god without his prophets. Christians cant know god without jesus. and so forth.

You believe in something?

Are you trying to find a christian definition for the feeling you know? Maybe christianity isnt your thing. God isnt christian.

 

[Trailblazer]

With all of them having a different confusing message to share.

They are different because the people that were addressed in different ages were different.
They were confusing because the scriptures were written by men.
But all that is water over the bridge now because we are living in a new age.