Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
Intelligent people usually have a better ability to understand holistic views and synergize more complex ideas, and not be so linear. Sequential and hierarchal thinking are usually based on simplistic thoughts.
-
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!
What proof would you want
- Thread starter Sabour
- Start date
Intelligent people usually have a better ability to understand holistic views and synergize more complex ideas, and not be so linear. Sequential and hierarchal thinking are usually based on simplistic thoughts.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
How to be trusted with greater things...when you cannot be trusted with something less?
Linear is good for now.....physically.
It might not 'carry over'.....spiritually.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
When smaller things together become complex, that's when you 'carry over' to something higher.
That makes no sense at all. The probability of Bigfoot's existence is unaffected by the number of people who go looking for it. 7 billion people on the planet and not one of them will ever find proof of Bigfoot? The problem is that there actually has to be a Bigfoot in order for proof to be found. If there is no Bigfoot, then you could have an infinite number of people look and it wouldn't matter. Same with an afterlife. The number of people alive has no effect. If there is nothing to crossover to, then numbers are irrelevant.
Also, there are probably trillions upon trillions of bacteria alive in the world today. Will not one of them make it to the afterlife?
Last edited:
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
Nothing ever just happens?
Not even your god?
So no, you claim science until it gets to the nitty gritty then you toss out science the second it gets in the way of your faith.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
I can deal with this.
something higher.....more defined....more disciplined....more able.....
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Is this a riddle?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
I grant you that science has a limit.
It can take you TO the singularity.....no further.
No numbers, no experiment, no means of observation....
You need some light for that.
You need more than one 'point'.
But at the 'point' of singularity there is no secondary.
It's not singular if there is two of anything.
There won't be a petri dish.
I have to let science go at that 'point'.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
The this life is worth nothing. Then what's the purpose of this life if the real purpose is the next life and not this one? There's no meaning to live this current life if all we're doing is waiting in the grande central station for the train to take us away?
For someone like me who believes that his is the only life I'll get, this life has become precious and important and much more filled with meaning than ever before. While I was Christian and waited for the end, I didn't care for this life and didn't give it my all. Everything I was doing was focus on improving the next life and not this one. But now, since I know this is it, I put in much more effort right here, right now, to improve what I have. Playing the hand that was dealt to my best ability.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
The body has five sense and a linear direction.
This will produce a unique soul.
If your soul develops what it takes to continue....fine....good.
If not, then the continuance won't happen.
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
Marisa
Well-Known Member
Hello guys.
Whenever I get a reply of " I didn't see enough proof to prove the existence of God", I begin wondering what kind of proof one would say okay that proves that God exists.
So here is my question, what would the proof be like so that you would be convinced?
Bonus question: On a scale of 10, 10 being the highest, how do you rate that there would come a time when you could possibly change your mind
Another Bonus Question. Have you ever been tempted or found something that could be convincing in that aspect?
This reminds of Clarke saying "any sufficiently advanced technology would be indistinguishable from magic" although I'm certain that's not the precise quote.
My take is that if gods are what men describe them as, then they know what it would take to convince me (or each individual) of their existence and I need not fret over it.
The bigger question for me would be if a god proved its existence, would I find that god worthy of my admiration, let alone worship?
Elusive Truth
Member
There is no infinite transgress, truth is objective and it's usually very simple and often overlooked.
One thing is for sure, atheism is a life not worth living.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
Sure.
You don't know that for sure at all. It's not worth it for you, that's the only thing for sure in your statement.
Bunyip
pro scapegoat
Other than as an insult, do you have a reason for saying that?
Elusive Truth
Member
Atheist are linguistically challenged that's all...
No reason not to love them, but I myself just wish they were a little less aggressive.
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
I've met plenty of atheists who are quite articulate and non-aggressive.
And I've met plenty of theists who struggle with English (and are supposedly native speakers) and quite aggressive in their argumentation.