|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Add your comment
 | | | | From: |
MadPole | 2002-06-13 15:12:13 | | Subject: | God Jesus Christ how many times.... | | Comment: | Eadon!
You make me angry... You believe in 2+2=4. That is an abstract human concept, introduced by humans for a purpose. You believe in parallel Universes and say they cannot exist here. You believe in science and a lot of human concepts. But You don't want to even consider that 'God' is a human concept, that God is '2+2' and was invented for a reason. You are bloody mad! You are waste of time. You contradict yourself all the time, and try to prove that your contradictions are actually 'the only truth' there is?! There is 'no truth' eadon. Life is relative. Everyting is relative. Gosh.. have You heard of Einstein?!!! | | | | | From: |
Maddie | 2002-06-13 15:30:02 | | Subject: | druggie.... | | Comment: | Eadon does not 'believe' in 'God'.. it is all crap, waste of time, not worth mentioning. Then he spends pages and pages of writings creating some fantasies he tries to disprove. Is he on magic mushromms or something? Sharing his halucigenic visions with us? Why doesn't he spend so much time and effort trying to prove that stones cannot fly? I am totally confused. The bottom line is .. if somebody talks about something, no matter in what terms - it is important to them. Otherwise they would not be talking about it, would they?!! HAR HAR HAR ( ask any psychiatrist - where do You think I got this valuable info from hehehe science rules lol) I wish Eadon was a bit more scientific, logical and practical about his obsession with God.. that would be a good start! | | | | | From: |
MadPole | 2002-06-14 17:06:33 | | Subject: | Answer... | | Comment: | I think I know what the answer is eadon. I think You are shitless scared. You see people believing in something, You see that it works for them, and You get scared, You feel left out. The discussion is never ABOUT the 'God'.. the discussion always is about what one DOES with 'God'. You claim to be practical man, and see 'impractical' people getting something out of life which You would like to have but don't. You get angry about that. Fair enough. Relax. Be practical about things. If believing in something does good for ya, what is wrong with that? Believing in shit and nothingness does not do any good for ya. You know it, your subconcious mind is telling You this. You are just scared to lose your face. | | | | | From: |
MadPole | 2002-06-14 17:15:46 | | Subject: | Spam | | Comment: | One has to know the subject before one can discuss it or reject its formulas. You would reject '2+2=5' straight away for You have studied maths. There is no proof that '2+2' equals '4' and there never will be. The only attempt to prove that was 300 pages book. If it takes 300 pages to prove that 2+2=4 then what a noncence it is! How much time and effort did You spend studying the religion? the Philosophy of religion, the mechanics of religion, the practical implementations of religion? How much time? I rest my case and hopefully will shut up lol | | | | | From: |
jon | 2002-07-02 05:52:58 | | Subject: | I suppose I will indulge | | Comment: | Sorry everyone seems to be so angry here. Anyway, I wandered on this site pretty much at random, and thought to ask a few statements. <br><br>
I believe in God, but am willing to disbelieve in him, given the proper evidence. A nice and utterly true logic proof; archeological proof Jesus didn't exist; a virus inflicts unneeded and horrible suffering on the earth for generations. What would it take for you to change your mind? If you had a vision tomorrow, would you call it a dream? <br><br>
One thing that helped change my mind was the realization that faith was inevitable. A good example: 'proove' the basic tenet of empirical science: Repeatability--that which hath happened in the past will happen in the future. In application, proove gravity will work tomorrow. <br><br>
The only argument is that gravity worked today and yesterday. And since that which hath happened in the past will happen in the future, so will gravity. And how do we know that Repeatability will hold true in the future? Because it always has in the past...<br><br>
Last question: if there is no God, where does free will come from? From the utterly unchanging, deterministic, and Repeatable laws of physics? Why do we have free will but a burning fire does not?
<br><br>
-jon | | | | | From: |
Black and Silver | 2002-08-11 08:39:54 | | Subject: | What is God was one of us? | | Comment: | I was brought up with 'toxic religion'. Fundemental, right wing baptist psychos. It helped me rationalize my drug use in the eighties. Now to believe an almighty Creator would put us here in this celestial boot camp, and then slap down these rules on us, and create us so unequally at that, and then when we pray he grants or denies our wants is absurd!Ever see two soccer teams pray before a game? Why should they practice? God already decided who's gonna win! OK this could go into a thesis but I'm going to go with the 'there's power in brevity' motto I rarely use. The doctrine which makes the most sense, seeing as some come into this world with severe handicaps, and some are born to Joan Crawford and can make money off their beatings, is the reincarnation theory, where we choose our lesson, parents, conditions for this life time, and move on to another level if we learn the lesson. Karmic debt is also valid as well as Universal Conciousness where we are all part of a whole, trying to get back to the source. An omnipotent being would not allow the injustice and crime we see daily. As for the devil its a cute outft for Halloween and Frederick's of Hollywood makes a great teddy in its image. | | | | | From: |
Carl Rofe | 2002-09-24 23:58:27 | | Subject: | This Disgussion!!!!!! | | Comment: | I am commenting on this topic NOT because it's important to me but because I thought 'f**k it!, what the hell!!'.
Here are a few pointers for those comments left in the duldrums (of which MOST are!):
Point one: 2 + 2 = Whatever you want it to equal...the human race created the concept, therefore we can do whatever we want with it...take away us and all our creation and you will find that 2 + 2 means nothing...why bother when the universe has no need for numbers...only civlisation that develop to NEED to use tools have a need for numbers.
The universe is physical...NOT literacle!!!
This is...of coarse...stating the obvious!!!
Point two: Very NASTY: Science involves physical meaurements and concepts, religion, which is based on the MIND, involves mental/psychological 'meaurements'!.
Implying - That religion is not a real world concept, but has evolved through time as a means to explain what we THINK is we can't explain, etc, etc! (Dangerous to stay that...no f**king kidding!...I did my homework!)
Challenge: MEASURE RELIGION...PHYSICAL...like you can meaure to distance from the earth to sun!!!???
...Conclusion...religion (belief) is IN the mind...man-made concept...NOT universal!!!!!!
Have I screwed with you mind yet!!??
...figure it out yourself...with an OPEN mind!!! | | | | | From: |
Carl Rofe | 2002-10-19 05:11:22 | | Subject: | Reasons...way of thinking...etc! | | Comment: | Okay...so my comment wasn't exaclty 100%. It was a bit dodgy...in my opinion! Wasn't good enough! Anyway...why are people bothering with this disgussion? It's going nowhere!
Why don't people look at the world from a different perpective...I mean...everything on the net has something it either about the human race or for a point of view...oh...I forget...everything is a point of view anyway...even bloody evidence! Now I'm getting somewhere!
Evidence...you 'sense' it. Prove it!!! Non-supernaturally, and non-religioussly...in fact...when proving something...don't even say 'I believe that blahblahblah'. That means you believe it...therefore it's a point of view...when you want something concrete. Okay...DON'T believe (that's one f**ker of a mind boggler) 'twang' 'Houston have a problem!' 'This species does not have the ability to NOT believe!' One flaw discover...how many more are there...have to eliminate human pychology!' BOOM...interesting...that's one HELL of a crater! Now all we are left with is the concept of YES or NO! OOOh...exciting!
Reach this stage of think and you're a fraction of the way there...though I have to admit...there are STILL a few YES's and NO's you can avoid...but they're special!
The human race has soooo many mind-bending flaws...but...hah...IS that JUST my point of view!?
Humans are a very imperfect species!
We ASSUME we HAVE to BELIEVE in SOMETHING...when we may not need to! BOOOOOM!!!!!!!
If you don't BELIEVE...it's not a point of view...therefore...you're not forcing a belief...because you don't have one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! oooh the wonders!! | | | | | From: |
RationalThinker | 2003-01-09 09:00:41 | | Subject: | Grah... | | Comment: | I'd like to thank who fellow who quoted Hume (a flaming moron of a philosopher) in an absurd context for making me lose 'faith' in the power of people to exercise their own rational volition. And also the person who said that he or she would stop believing in God if it was rationally proven to her that he did not exist. I suppose you believe in the Easter Bunny too, since no one's 'proven' that he does not exist. And the person who said that mathematics was an arbitary construct? Ow! You're so stupid it hurts! | | | | | From: |
Satish | 2003-01-20 10:29:51 | | Subject: | I dont have to take it | | Comment: | Eadon,
Nice to read some utter gibberish what you carefully crafted on your pages. Just for the sake of argument, wanted to ask you a simple question.
If life is created by atoms and genes and some whatever you call, which your so called science has 'scientifically', 'technically', 'bilogically', 'logically', and more '*cally', proved that it is so, why cant the same science create the sperm which creates us...why the hell can it not be done till date, with so many technologies and techies like you still existing in this goddammned earth...wake up my boy and try to rack your brains!!
Satish | | | | | From: |
Michael | 2003-02-22 12:39:22 | | Subject: | GOD | | Comment: | You are trying to describe infinity from the physical senses, the marvel of God is it defies logic and encompasses everything and even more.
You talk about proof, Science has never invented anything, It just eventually shows what already is in existence.
When a baby is born its mind is empty, Its mind is eventually created by Parental Influenze/values,Education,Tribal values,Culture,Tradition,Environment etc
Until all that crap is shed the meaning of God can not be experienced. | | | | | From: |
Shelly | 2003-03-01 07:44:16 | | Subject: | God | | Comment: | YOur argument is spotty at best and plenty of evidence can be shown to prove that there is in fact a God. Namely the person of Jesus Christ. The rejection of Christ is not so much an I can't but I won't. Your assumption that there is no God is nothing more than self imposed ignorance., Pride and moral problem are two Other of the most common reasons for discounting Christianity. First of all Christians do not 'exercise' blind faith. Secondly there is more than enough sufficient evidence to prove God's existance for any one who honestly wants to know the truth. My third point is that there is no historical or archeological evidence of tooth fairies, pixies, unicorns, ect, However God can be identified both historically, and archeologically namely in the Person of Jesus Christ and in the written Word.The reason we know God exists is because He has Told us so. Most of the people, places, of the bible have been identified. there is more than enough 'significant' evidence to Prove the bible. While were on the subject anyone who wants to discount Christianity as invalid would have to disprove the Reserection of Christ. Furthermore,Christianity is all based on the Person Of Christ.It is unique unlike all other religions which deny the deity of Christ. Bible authors spoke of hundereds of controversial subjects with harmony and continuity from Genisis to Revelation. Yet the Bible is in agreement dispite the fact that the authors were not only seperated by hundreds of miles but also hundreds of years. | | | | | From: |
Shelly | 2003-03-01 07:50:17 | | Subject: | God | | Comment: | Not only is it possible to logically prove God's existance. It is impossible to disprove God's existence using logic. Not only does evolution contridict the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It also contridicts the law of causuality. Can truth contridict itself? No!The universe did not just come into existance by hapinstance. something greater than the universe that is infinite in size, shape and duration, which also exists outside of time space continuim created the Universe Namely God of the Bible. Since God is a Immutable and a Soverign God It is plausible that He Created the Earth and the people and the animals. the Bible teaches that God transcends time, he said that creation was 'with time', not 'in time'. So the Bible's opening words, 'In the beginning', better express the idea than the traditional 'Once upon a time'. and Since it is impossible for man to fathom something that exists outside of time/space continuim,it is obvious that evolution is a man-made/taught concept. our physical body is not of any substance. the substance of who we are exists in the form of our conciousness. all of our experiences and the things we percieve are internalized into our conciousness. If evolutionists are right then when we die we cease to exist totally and completly, then the purpose of us existing is nothing and nothing has ever existed. | | | | | From: |
sharolyn | 2003-03-03 18:07:05 | | Subject: | i love God | | Comment: | You may not think you have ever seen evidence of God but everymorning when i wake up to the sun rising and birds singing- thats my evidence. a lady form our church had a stroke on sunday it was very sudden and shocking as she has a young family. the doctors said she didn't have much hope but she came through the operation and is looking great. the amazing thing was how our church rallied together, to pray and support the family. our prayers worked! i have faith that it was a miracle, you have to have faith. you have to believe in something, its just human. you can't see the wind can you? but have you ever denied it existed? - no - of course not, for me this is how i see GOD. i can see the results of his works, even though i have never seen him with my eyes. God loves you, has your interests at heart if you will only accept him. | | | | | From: |
jorge | 2003-03-09 22:12:01 | | Subject: | faith? [part1] | | Comment: | Quote: 'I see no reason to have faith in something existing for which there is no evidence.'
Definition of Faith: Belief; the assent of the mind to the truth of what is declared by another, resting solely and implicitly on his authority and veracity; reliance on testimony.
According to your quote, that means that you do not believe practically anything that anyone has ever told you - including everyone that you are close to.
It also means that you do not believe in emotions, such as love and all other ones, because there is no way to prove them.
Do not forget that believing what a scientist or anyone tells you they have found through THEIR observations, is having faith in them. You might argue that you can replicate all their experiments, but think about it - could you? I don't think so. Besides, there are many theories today that will be proven wrong tomorrow.
'The hazard of believing something that cannot be measured directly, indeed cannot be measured at all, is that one believes in something that is literally not based on reality.'
Two words: quantum physics. Enough said.
Quote: '...a Universe where there is no god at all. The latter conjecture is by far the simplest.'
To say a Universe with no God is the simplest explanation is only your opinion. A common analogy is the clock analogy. Is the simplest explanation for a clock to say that it has no maker?
Quote: 'Occam's razor slits the throat of god.'
Nice visual. My five year old nephew will never believe God again. | | | | | From: |
jorge | 2003-03-09 22:14:56 | | Subject: | faith? [part 2] | | Comment: | Quote: 'If a god created time then that god must transcend time, that is the god must be outside of time, if you can imagine what that means.'
The currently accepted theory and many theories for the existence of the Universe kind of imply - and this is accepted by many scientists, that there are many Universes. Each Universe with its own spacial and time dimensions. So UniverseS transcend time. Just because you can't imagine how God transcends time why can't you believe it just like you believe science?
Quote: 'There is no way out, the putative god that made the Universe must have created every action past and future simultaneously (recall that this god transcends time). There is no room for choice to be made by any being other than the god himself.'
Free will. Now that is the question isn't it! If there is no God then there is no 'Objective' to the Universe, so free will is supreme...
A good point is made by you in your quote above, if there is a God that created everything - including time - then there is no free will. Or is there?... If God can transcend time, why can't we? What tells you that we, as beings, do not transcend time? You might say, then we should remember our existence outside of this Universe.
Answer: Shirley Mclaine does! Seriously, can one remember every single day and event of one's own life? I would say one cannot remember most of it. One can only remember what is physiologically possible to remember - according with the rules of this Universe.
If you think about it, most religions do imply at some level that we transcend time just like whatever supreme being the religion believes in. | | | | | From: |
jorge | 2003-03-09 22:15:57 | | Subject: | faith? [part 3] | | Comment: | Quote: 'All it takes to get rid of the horrible paradox is to assume that the Universe was not created by a god in the first place.'
That paradox might only be horrible from your point of view.
I am not trying to convince you or anyone to believe in God or not. Heck, I don't even have a five year old nephew. | | | | | From: |
Layla Telcontar | 2003-03-11 05:39:31 | | Subject: | Pantheism | | Comment: | How about Pantheism? While I pretty much totally agree with most of the sentiments on this page, you have stuck largely to criticism of a Western, creator-type God. Leaving Polytheism to the side for the time being, Pantheism is about believing the God is (as opposed to is in) everything. God is the universe, the Universe is God. All organisms are part of this vast universal consciousness, indeed they comprise it. Pantheism accepts scientific rationalism - evolution is essential to its modern form. Different interpretations have different ideas about life after death - some think the soul is reabsorbed into the universal consciousness, others believe it retains a sperate identity, at least for a while, while others believe that cosciousness is entirely dependent on the body and at death ypur energy, like all your other components, dissipates. It allows entirely for rationalism and the scientific method, as well as phenomena such as the prayer/meditation one you have mentioned - communing with the universe in whatever form you choose to, opening yourself to it; also, it allows for certain paranormal phenomena such as telepathy and healing. Comments, please. | | | | | From: |
Pat | 2003-08-12 12:44:50 | | Subject: | More food for thought. (Part 1) | | Comment: | Post 1 of 3:
My Judeo-Christian God's gonna need a bigger box than the one you fit him in - he's a tad more complex in 'paradoxes' than that.
You have a very simply complex mind. All <i>human</i> logic may state one thing or another. I'll confront you with another paradox - Christians believe that all decision-making lies within the spirit - which does not rely on the rational of human logic to simply exist or function properly. With that said it would be easy to define it as a belief that is only explained by 'faith' or a higher being. I personally don't understand the intricacies and complexities of the human brain and/or mind. Much of us make the goal to define ourselves, to understand our cognitive existence - and with that, I wouldn't downplay it as just one big 'piss-off and die' theory. The way I see it and known it from mine own experiences and personality (regardless of my beliefs), it's far 'simpler' for any person to look around and recognize their existence and be completely amazed and conclude (thereby conforming, when using human logic that is) to the unified belief that, what we would define in our human English language as, this is 'God's doing'. I'm not going to call you wrong. I'll have to leave that up to you. It's not my 'decision', but it’s yours. Many of the quotes here are to point out not my idea of things, but to point out the ideas or feelings being portrayed or inferred by your article. Anyway, I don't find it simple at all to think on the many | | | | | From: |
Pat | 2003-08-12 12:46:53 | | Subject: | More food for thought. (Part 2) | | Comment: | Post 2 of 3:
theories of common science on the subject of our existence. Granted, Judeo-Christianity has many teachings and is complex in nature. But, in science and common human logic, there are unending and countless theories (which some consider Judeo-Christianity and other religions to be among) on the existence of the universe, which I find to be 'just too complex :)'.
Am I wrong that YOU, in conjunction with possibly a huge percentage of the entire population of the human race that has existed over time, are quite curious about your own existence? I assume the answer is yes, but I may be wrong. What I do know though is that the curiosity is definitely there in my own heart (or 'deep in my mind', 'in my own mind' Christian-speak) and it's apparent that I'm not unusual to feel that way. It's so normal, in fact, that it's almost completely natural for one person to question their existence. Well, almost as if it's instinct. It's one of our basic duties as human beings to question who we are and where we came from - and as such - we must side with those theories, and for those raised to, side with their respective religion and promote it as the fact.
I’m sure that my own beliefs stated here are flawed in one way or another, when analyzed and broken apart (because of either grammatical errors or conflicts arising from what I state as my own opinion, but there are none in the core statement). I may even have a few misspellings or even bad syntax in some of my | | | | | From: |
Pat | 2003-08-12 12:48:46 | | Subject: | More food for thought. (Part 3) | | Comment: | Post 3 of 3:
sentences which my spell-check didn't grab. In my universe, though, God exists and I believe in Him. I'm not going to dissect 'religion' because I'm not a religious person (by definition, and there are many definitions!), I only have that belief, or simply-put, I believe in Judeo-Christianity.
Let's re-cap:
My own statements may bring inner conflict (the text conflicts with text, etc) - I am Christian - I, as most do, questioned my existence as a human being. Now, covering the possibility of some blemishes in this statement, I can say 'All fall short of the Glory of God.', which is truth no matter how you translate it. And since I cannot cover everything and put God (my God) in a box, I'll just have to let all that is unknown to me be known by God who knows all things. So what's the point? I don't know you tell me. I said what I felt, just as you, and you read it. I guess you’re interested too.
- Pat | | | | | From: |
cosmicstargoat | 2003-08-16 23:20:49 | | Subject: | amusing | | Comment: | This is indeed amusing. Yes, there is a reason to fight superstition, religious extremism and bigotry. Scared of the truth? There is no group of sheep more terrifed of the truth than Christians. They must be, they avoid it so consistently. | | | | | From: |
Jeff | 2003-08-21 03:25:24 | | Subject: | a thought | | Comment: | Eadon, I disbelieve God and religion for many of the same basic reasons you do. However, I'm not sure I would say that believing in such things is dangerous. Religion is a good thing for some people. It does not suit me personally, but you cannot deny that it helps many people to lead happier lives. Would you take this from them? Would they be better off? I am not sure. Sometimes I envy them, and other times I pity them. They have something I don't, but I have something they don't. | | | | | From: |
MIP | 2003-08-22 14:21:02 | | Subject: | MADPOLE | | Comment: | Not scared of not sharing god. Scared in the way people were scared of Hitler--mindless dumb shits who follow religious dogma because they can't stand on their own two feet so they invent 'mythological' creatures (god) to lead the way. Religious people are just kids who never grew up and freed themselves from the virus that is religion.
Faith in objects or ideals is real. Faith in a spirit which can not be proven is blind fear--the fear of going to hell if they don't repent and follow.
A virus by definition infects it's host with it's own DNA and then reprograms the host cell to it's own satisfaction. That is the nature of religion. In a way, it's much like the Borg--resistance is futile. Either my way or no way.
Such hog wash is religion.
Sure stupidity and inability to be objective.
Sure wish a 6 mile meteor would hit earth and rid it of this stupid virus.
Maybe next time we will get it right and without the stupid wars and famine caused by religion. | | | | | From: |
cosmicstargoat | 2003-08-31 10:14:23 | | Subject: | Religion IS dangerous | | Comment: | Jeff, you are naive. One of my favorite quotes is from Richard Dawkins in an essay explaining why science is not a religion, and I quote....'We're content to argue with those who disagree with us. We don't kill them.' This quote says a lot about the religiously impaired, of which the most fanatical fringe does things like slamming airplanes into skyscrapers. Religion IS dangerous. It incubates hatred, bigotry, intolerance and violence. Here in the USA there are those in power who would undermine The Constitution to further their religious views. Religion stifles free thinking and initiative and denies reality. Religion is a poison that holds back our species from attaining new levels of understanding, both of the world around us and of each other. | | | | | From: |
bebop | 2003-09-19 10:45:21 | | Subject: | hmmm part 1 | | Comment: | Okay, nicely thought out...sounds like a carbon copy of what most of my friedns would say.
Specially liked the bit about free will.
Thing is, the way I see it, you're almost close on that..the general direction has been decided cos time doesnt exist in the way we thin of it. Our free will is only analoguous to the random movement of an electron round an atom.. you can never say where its going to be at any particular point, but you can draw a probability pattern saying where its most likely to go over time.
We dont worry about the possibility that very occasionally an electron may escape from its atomic orbit (unless we happen to be studying that phenomenon).. it happens from time to time..and?
We can say an electron forms part of a particular type of atom, and various types of atoms in a particular fomration form some material a piece of metal for instance, and that the metal is shaped and used for X purpose...
Likewise we as individuals occupy a similar scale in the sense of the universe..to us our actions are perfectly free, because we're observing them from a point many dimesnions smaller than that of the universe.
To assume that what happens to us as indiviuals is important on a universal level is arrongant in the extreme, and I'm afraid your reasoning makes us far more important that people with faith ever claim us to be.
The way I see it, we ARE 'God' (or rather part of them), all of us, in the same way that the organs, tissues, atoms, electrons that make up us ARE part of us for an amount of time, and likewise when they disassociate from our bodies for what ever reason and go do something else, thats exactly the same as when we die..off to elsewhere for another function. | | | | | From: |
Bebop | 2003-09-19 10:46:10 | | Subject: | hmmm part 2 | | Comment: | You also make an assumption that cos we cant measure something YET it cant exist, or that God needs to be outside of physical /nature laws. Why?
Was the general theory of relativity wrong in the 16th Century just cos we couldnt measure it?
Did the earth not travel round the sun in medieval ages because we measured stuff and believed Earth to be the bentral point of the universe?
All we can ever say through science is that in particular circumstances, and effect appears to exist, in so far as we can measure it. How can you therefore state that the idea of god breaks the laws of nature?
You talk of religion and the states praying putting you into the same place as meditation does in non-believers... thats MORE of an argument that this stuff does exist.. its not the faith in a particular 'god' thats important, but faith in energy, spirit, oneself if you will...which I think you'll find most meditators have in common. Dont even get me started on the evils of religion..in some places it can be a beautiful way of people realising their way through life, in the worst places its dogmatic nature can cause huge amounts of intolerance, pain suffering etc, all of which are against the basic nature of spiritualistic though anyway!!!
Still, at least you've bothered to think about it it, which is more than most people!!! | | | | | From: |
sinner_rob | 2003-10-04 23:36:29 | | Subject: | religions origin | | Comment: | Religion is the greatest bullshit story ever told. Religion has actually convinced people that there is an invisible man in the sky who watches everything u do every minute of every day. and the invisible man has a special list of ten things he doesnt want u to do. and if u do any of these ten things, he has a special place full of fire, torture, pain, and suffering where he will send u to live and burn and choke for ever and ever..... but he loves you.........Here is how religion probably started......thousands of years ago, a bunch of religious and political hustlers got together to try to figure out how to control people and how to keep them in line. They knew people were basically stupid and would believe anything they were told. So they announced that God have gave them some commandments, way up on a hill, when no one was around. That is my basic assumption for how it really got started. | | | | | From: |
Carrie | 2003-10-18 10:59:54 | | Subject: | What about... ? | | Comment: | I saw you mention unicorns, pixies and gods... but what about leprechauns??? You DO believe in leprechauns, don't you? I bet you're sorry right about now that you gave me the address to your website :) | | | | | From: |
DNA | 2003-12-30 01:38:48 | | Subject: | Ockhams razor | | Comment: | William of Ockham...(of Ockhams Razor)
'On the Nature of God'
In regard to the nature and attributes of God, he applies a critical solvent to the principal proof given by Scotus for God's existence. Ockham shows that the reality of God as the infinitus intensive can as little be demonstrated from efficientia, causalitas, eminentia, as from the divine knowledge of the infinite or from the simplicity of his nature. Nevertheless, he considers the recognition of God to proceed from the idea of causality. If not by strict syllogistic deduction, then ' by authority and reason.' In the same sort of way, the infinity of God is confirmed. As to his unbounded power and absolute will, Ockham distinguishes potentia absolute and potentia ordinate, the two being, however, only different modes of considering a power which is essentially one. In practice it is always ordinate, the absolute power being merely the hypothetical possibility of God's doing anything whatever which does not involve a contradiction in terms. The absolute freedom of God is the characteristic trait in the theology of Ockham. The entire scheme of salvation planned by the voluntas ordinate is based on no inner necessity, but is determined by the fact that it pleased God. As a matter of fact, to please God and nothing else. The distinction of the two aspects of the divine power comes in here. The merits of the saints, e.g., are accepted as valid only because it pleases God to accept them-but since it has pleased God to establish this system, merit is absolutely necessary. God and his grace do all, yet only in such a way that the cooperation of man is required. The freedom of the human will cannot be, strictly speaking, demonstrated, but is recognized as true by experience. | | | | | From: |
DNA | 2003-12-30 02:01:50 | | Subject: | Sir Isaac Newton | | Comment: | NEWTON ON PROPHECY AND THE APOCALYPSE
Holy writ testifies that we were created in God's image. And his image would shine more clearly in us if only he simulated in the faculties granted to us the power of creation in the same degree as his other attributes.
It is the same concept we have found in Tesauro, the theorist of Baroque eloquence. For Newton this similarity, neither a literary ornament alone nor a rhetorical effect, was to be the groundwork of his conception of matter, since God is to matter as man is to his body. The human will is the type of the divine one.
Newton goes even further. Every difficulty that concerns the nature of bodies may be reduced to our faculty of moving our bodies, that is, by virtue of analogy, to God's will:
Thus I have deduced a description of this corporeal nature from our faculty of moving our bodies, so that all the difficulties may at length be reduced to that.
The similarity between man and God occurs as well in the General Scholium of the Principia. Man is a type of God.
Isaac Newton author of 'The Principia' considered by Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking to be the greatest scientific book ever written. | | | | | From: |
Amy Petersen | 2004-01-23 18:26:45 | | Subject: | Why are you so focused on throwing God? | | Comment: | Why are you so focused on throwing God? Why throw Him out? The universe proves that He exists. ('The Chicken or The Egg', 'Seeing Is Believing','The Perfect Mom', 'The Watch And The Watchmaker', and 'The Post Office Line.') It is said that nature is God's second book and that the Bible is the first. Whether it is that way or the other way around is anybody's guess. I have so much to tell you about God since it appears that you honestly want to know whether or not He exixts and whether or not He cares. Email me. I insist on it. I am a living miracle and I would like to prove it to you, but I do not have enough time right now. In the meantime, read the Bible with an open mind. 'Bye. | | | | | From: |
Vincent Gucci | 2004-05-15 17:44:46 | | Subject: | Do we have the choice | | Comment: | My Granfather once told me, If you wanna make God laugh, Tell him you've got plans. In this life you can control some things and some other things you can not. For, example ' Me being in North america is something that i can not control coz i was born here after my father came from Italy, it was his choice to come here, but if he would have been prevented from entering the country for any reason by the responsible authorities then this wouldn't be something that he could control,,,then he wouldn't be here and i wouldn't be here,,here is were God decides for ya,,,but to choose whether to study engineering or marketing,,,this is a choice that you make,,,but whether to become the best in your field,,,it's god's choice to give ya the chances at the right time when u need it. | | | | | From: |
camille | 2004-05-29 19:28:06 | | Subject: | faith & choice | | Comment: | Eadon I have two things to argue about:
First it iis ur perception of faith. Faith does not concern people who need to believe that there is something more on this earth and who force themselves to believe in God. It is not neither about feeling something somewhere sometimes. Faith concerns people who have made a REAL and PERSONNAL experience ith God. An experience that might not make the earth shake, or defeat the laws of gravity nor nature or whatever, but it is an experience that is different and new and important to each life. Those experiences may be seen physically (a healing, praying for something and seeing it happen the next day) and I am the living testimony of it but some may be felt inside one's heart and life but you can't tell it. Tbat's why I call it personal experiences.
Secondly, you say that God doesn't give us the choice wether to follow him or not because he makes the future.
God gives us the choice wether to follow him or not and to chose the life hat we wanna live. If he forced us to live the life that we live everyday, wouldn't he have created us all believers since that's what he really desires ? | | | | | From: |
malio | 2004-06-28 09:07:39 | | Subject: | there is proof | | Comment: | the proof of all those things you aren't sure exist, do exist. the proof is in you. God is outside of time. time is a loop, just like the earth spinning in circles. All possiblities have been created, your free will comes in when you decide which possiblity you want to experience. The proof that these things exist is in the fact that nothing is made up. How could hue-mans (hue-man-uels) make anything up when all things have been created outside of time, and hue-mans exist in time? Time is for people to make many decisions, but ultimatly just one. Everything is first an idea, and than made physical. First you get an idea to paint an apple and see it in your mind, than you get the supplies you need and paint it. The 'otherside'/ spiritual, is all an idea, this idea is the creator, the source, this source created all of physical existence.
when you realize that being physical is only for a short ammount of time, you begin to search for something more. When you start to do that, it can feel very big, because your search can go anywhere, everywhere, all things, anything, all possiblities exist somewhere, and some time.
You are in the one you are in now, because you chose it.
and you have to be there, until you understand why you have made the choices you have made.
Peace
Mali
http://www.uneonentertainment.com
http://www.maliwoods.com | | | | | From: |
kinky boots | 2004-07-02 21:54:32 | | Subject: | LOGIC | | Comment: | If I was created by a god, then why did he give me the intelligence with which to question his existance? | | | | | From: |
nick crofts | 2004-08-16 12:02:52 | | Subject: | The Cosmos - A Cleaners Perspective | | Comment: | I'm going to give you my two cents as well, even though I'm fairly sure it's got to the point where no ones gonna read it. This kind of discussion always makes people angry doesn't it? Still, fun to have a go... The way I see it (and I am but a humble cleaner, so what do I know?) is the only thing we can be sure of is that we are conscious. I was about to say 'that we are here' but then, where is 'here'? This is the kind of unsolvable abstract thought I try to avoid discussing. So, anyway, I have two 'facts' (tell me if you diagree with any): 1. Conciousness does exist. I think therefor I am. Now, this I can only prove to myself, as I know I think, because I'm the one thinking about it. Each of you can prove this to yourself. 2. The cosmos exists. Note the usage of the word 'Cosmos' and not 'universe'. Here I have to get a bit foggy, because when you get down to it, most of what people believe about how everything works is based on faith. 'The Universe' is mostly thought of as the collection of spacial dimensions, plus time, and these threads of space and time are somehow knotted and twisted to make all the physical matter that exists. but no-one knows for sure. Yet. For all you out there who believe science doesn't hold all the answers; this is the only time you will here me say 'you're wrong'. If we can't explain it all, it's because we aren't smart enough. And I personally would be stupified if we ever came close to explaining any of it. | | | | | From: |
Nick Crofts | 2004-08-16 12:06:44 | | Subject: | The Cosmos - A Cleaners Perspective pt2 | | Comment: | Damn it, I'm distracted. 1. I think therefor I am. 2. I percieve things. So, while I haven't in fact said ANYTHING remotely decisive, here is my conclusion: God; in the traditional sense of the word (as in: an entity with values and concepts similar to our own) is unlikely. The closest thing I imagine to exist is this: Us. No, not humans. Entities. Consciosness exists, but you can't see it. And it is no more mysterious than, say, magnatism. No one knows how that works, either. Why should aligning all the molecules in an iron rod physically MOVE other iron rods in close proximity? Maybe the same reason that arranging molecules of organic matter a certain way seems to create a machine capable of pulling a new quality seemingly out of nowhere? As in, the brain and consciosness. Also, assuming that there are individual conciousnesses is just that. And assumtion. There are more than one magnetic rods around, but how many forces of magnatism are there? So, is conciosness god? Does it have free will as a whole? Can it interfere with the phsical universe other than as sentient beings? Does it mean that we live forever as one soul, does it mean that entities themselves do not have individual souls as they are just the equivilent of the magnetic rod anology? Who knows? Who cares? None of this affects my life as a human being, temporary or otherwise. I'm gonna have fun, keep wondering and learning, being a good person wherever I can, and then when the lump of matter I call 'nick' dies, then, like everybody else, the 'me' inside me will go back to whereever it came from, and I'll get to find out. Oh, that bit's faith, I suppose. Guess at some point during my life I picked up that bug, too. | | | | | From: |
ronald sampson | 2004-08-22 17:49:58 | | Subject: | YOU FORGET SOMETHING!! | | Comment: | I've been reading the god vs. freewill story and some of the posts and what bothers me is that the story and most of the posts (I didn't read them all so I apologize if one of them made this point) lack a few basic understandings. When arguing about freewill it's obvious that there has to be some fundamental ideas that everyone agrees on. First of all, we'll say hypothetically God is all powerful. We'll say he has control. He knows the future and the past. He's God. He can do (stressing this point!) 'WHATEVER' he wants to do. OK, so when you hear someone ask how god has control and yet we still have freewill, you say 'He's God.' BY AKNOWLEDGING THAT GOD IS ALL POWERFUL AND HAS TOTAL CONTROL, YOU FORFEIT THE OPPORTUNITY TO LIMIT HIS POWERS UNLESS HE SAYS OTHERWISE. Now unless we're talking about a God who isn't all powerful and can't do things that we don't understand, whose rules can be bent and broken, then hell we could philosophise about it forever and ever and keep coming up with worthless and boring arguments. But how? But could he do? But? Eadon you have great questions and ideas but you throw people off because you sort of 'throw' in the fact that God is all powerful and then overlook that main point in the rest of your arguments. When talking about things like how we don't have freewill, be sure and state that (a)God is not all powerful so he can't force us to have freewill or (b)God is all powerful and he chose to keep us from having free will because he 'said so somewhere.' I hope some one reads this and if you do please respond. | | | | | From: |
Eadon | 2004-08-28 21:20:46 | | Subject: | Freewill and all powerful deities | | Comment: | In reply to Sampson, I dissect the absurd, demonic paradoxes of All Powerful gods elsewhere on this site. In this context, an all powerful god leaves no room for freewill, because any freedom on our part must by definition come at the expense of the god's knowledge, foresight and control over the state and evolution of the Universe. So freewill is only compatible with gods that have limited powers (maybe they chose to relinquish some of their power, though, that in itself leads to ghastly paradoxes: can an All Powerful God make himself not all-powerful? If so, then his powers were always limited or he would have been all powerful forever (all powerful gods transcend time, don't forget). We are in a world of pain here :) So the existence of freewill (let's pretend for a moment that freewill is possible, which I doubt) demands either no god exists, or god(s) exists that are impotent in some respects. Many religions have gods with limited powers, but then the power of those religions to explain everything is limited. If gods have limited powers, then what created or explains those things they have no rule over? Suddenly the explanatory power of god(s) diminishes, and we are back to square one. But let me repeat, the concept of freewill creates paradoxes, and I discuss those elsewhere on this site also. Let me point out though, just because freewill is incompatible with an all powerful god doesn't mean that lack of freewill implies the existence of such a god, lol. - Eadon | | | | | From: |
TD | 2004-11-18 20:47:42 | | Subject: | God | | Comment: | Religion (the belief in supernatural forces and deities) exists for two reasons: 1) to attempt an explanation for life and 2) to attempt to alleviate anxiety (primarily anxiety of our mortality) by supplying believers with appropriate behaviors and consequenses. Science does a better job of explaining the origin and function of life (it's NOT perfect but it at least strives towards it) [let's momentarily dispense with the question of whether 'truth' is attainable for now]. As for our anxiety, a GOOD counselor and plenty of active reflectiveness will do. But, one can argue that if we can think it then it must be true. If we can think there is a god then it must be true. OK, we use language. Language is arbitrary. There is no connection between these words I'm writing and any concrete item or thought. The letters D-O-G do not look like or sound like a little fuzzy animal. Why is this possible? Because we have the ability for abstract thought. We can consider what is not here or has yet to happen. If we can imagine a 'tomorrow' and how today's actions will bring tomorrow's consequences then it is not a stretch to think that, in our confusion of how life works, we can consider an afterlife. And, of course, we can consider that our actions now will bring consequences after we're dead. Religion and the concept of god(s) is simply a combination of our ill attempts at trying to make sense of life and trying to deal with the anxiety of our inevitable death. | | | | | From: |
D. Hobson | 2005-01-26 21:00:03 | | Subject: | Food for Logic | | Comment: | Each and every one of you on this site seem to be highly intelligent individuals and so I will simply leave you with this and you can analyze it with your own human wisdom and logic.
'He that believeth on the Son (Jesus) hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son (Jesus) shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him (you).' John 3:36 KJV
Now, as a believer, if you are right, I have nothing to worry about, but if this is right and by believing I am right, then you certainly have something to worry about. | | | | | From: |
RampantPenguin | 2005-02-19 11:20:40 | | Subject: | God onTime | | Comment: | 'a god that created the Universe did create the future! Therefore the god, not the child, made the choice. There is no way out, the putative god that made the Universe must have created every action past and future simultaneously (recall that this god transcends time). There is no room for choice to be made by any being other than the god himself.''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
My reasoning about this that if god is outside of time then god has neither a future or past, he has only present only inside of time future exists, God would look at every point of time at the same moment everything is present, so when he sees us in the year 2006 he sees the present not the future and it is in the present that we make choices, so god does not see what we will do (he does not see our future.), but he sees us actually doing it, therefore we do have choices and life is not predestined to God it just seems it with our limited view of time. if god looks at any time in our lives it is always in the present not the past or future, to god we are still being born and also on our deathbed and always has been and always will be. to god we are in heaven already and also on earth to God this will never change. | | | | | From: |
TD | 2005-02-25 12:55:38 | | Subject: | RE: god and time | | Comment: | Please take a class in logic and reasoning, please! Know when you're being circular. Can I ask you something? How can you, or anyone, claim to 'know' what 'God' understands? Your belief that god sees and knows in past, present, and the future is absolutely founded in pure speculation. If, as you claim, that we have such a limited concept of time then how can you presume to understand that God's concept of time is so complex? Answer: because it makes your argument for 'God' concrete. Faith is just that, faith; and as such, is closed to open and honest discourse - an activity which threatens to shatter the fundamental paradigms your faith is based on.
'God,' and the whole complex of, is certainly a testament to human's vivid imagination - a remarkable element of the human condition and yet, a double-edged sword. ~TD | | | | | From: |
jorge | 2005-03-01 05:48:28 | | Subject: | religion | | Comment: | Religion doesn't kill people, people kill people | | | | | From: |
MG | 2005-04-16 08:50:12 | | Subject: | God is imaginary | | Comment: | When people of faith (mainly Islam and Christianity) truly understand the quote below, they will find enlightenment.
'I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.'
--Stephen Roberts-- | | | | | From: |
pete | 2005-05-05 17:27:11 | | Subject: | Free will and god | | Comment: | Since determinism and free will are different concepts and are logically expressed in different ways it is not clear there is a problem for god to give us free will in a preordained universe if he exists? | | | | | From: |
David | 2005-06-14 04:52:28 | | Subject: | Blind Man and what he sees | | Comment: | A man leads a blind man outside and looks up and says 'Look at
those beautiful stars' and the blind man answers 'I don't see any stars' so from the blind man's perspective the stars do not exist, but is he right? | | | | | From: |
grace | 2005-08-09 05:26:07 | | Subject: | God | | Comment: | Eadon, everyone has their own beliefs but to say that God doesnt exist and that you need evidence..well...take a look around....everything that happens, happens for a reason! i mean my dentist was just in a motorcycle accident, a women ran over him cleanly, he had No brain function he was on life support and in a coma..i prayed so much i prayed that if it was God's will then have way with it but if not just to heal him...a few weeks later we was moving his hands and communicating with his family...evidence,take a look around Eadon! One of these days why dont you just open your eyes and just accept the fact that God is real and if you dont boy are you gonna know it on judgement day! you all will see teh Truth and soon! i love Jesus and nobody can take that away from me, and nobody can change my mind! thank you for listening | | | | | From: |
Michael Allen | 2005-09-16 16:53:51 | | Subject: | Some ideas | | Comment: | The notion of a transcendent being cannot be subject to the usual rules of existential evidence. Given the assumption that this transcendent being, called 'God', is the creator of all existent things, we cannot then ask for any 'evidence' of an 'existing God'. The idea of 'God' either thrives or perishes on the assumption of the transcendent, independent of the actual state or order of existent things. In reality, the theist must 'ontologically' remove God from he natural order of existing things in order to be fundamentally correct in their own theological principles.
This is to say that both the 'evidential' challenge (as proposed by the atheist) and the answer (pettifoggery of the theists) cannot have any meaning whatsoever on the issue of existential evidence of a supernal.
The further application of pixies, fairies, and unicorns as an analogy to possible existential evidence of an assumed transcendent being is also incorrect, since pixies, fairies and unicorns (even as they are stated in myth and legend) do no bestow existence upon the whole of the universe--this in contradistinction the the 'correct' and 'proper' theological principle of existential transcendence of deity.
(1)God creates all existing things
(2)Therefore God does not exist.
QED
And therefore speaking of 'evidence' of God is meaningless (than speaking of 'evidence' concerning pixies, unicorns and the like).
MA | | | | | From: |
Tommy Grayson | 2005-10-02 06:51:45 | | Subject: | A different view. | | Comment: | I agree to disagree with your thoughts on God, and here's why.
First off, it can be scientifically proven that a being outside of physical reality exists. How? Matter can neither be created nor destroyed. If that is the case then how did anything ever exist? If matter made matter, what made the matter before it, and so on? Following this line of logic you will always end up back with empty nothingness. Common sense tells us that you cannot get something from nothing. Therefore, there must be a being capable of creating matter that exists outside of physical reality. Physical existence itself, due its very nature, is evidence of something beyond itself.
The question of can God create something more powerful than himself can be easily answered. No. Why? You cannot improve upon something that is already infinate. The point is moot. It would be unnecessary besides, being as how the first God was enough to create everything. One thing I know of God, there is done nothing without a purpose in mind. | | | | | From: |
Tommy Grayson | 2005-10-02 06:52:26 | | Subject: | A different view. | | Comment: | Now, as to the question, if God exists then why can't people see him? Well, for one, our eyes, being finite, are incapable of perceiving the infinate. We can however, see spiritual ideas present in physical things. For example, there was in the past an experiment conducted with chimps. They were given a choice between food and affection. Every single chimp choose affection over food, which logically, doesn't make much sense. Affection isn't necessary for physical development, but food is. These animals perceived affection as being a greater need than food. Also, those chimps who had been seperated from the group and given no affection but plenty of food ended up having severe disorders. Spiritual needs ultimately outweigh physical needs, and thusly alude to which is the greater of the two. Yes, that which cannot be seen, or the spiritual side of existence, has a direct impact upon the physical side of existence. Much like how a spiritual being caused physics to come into being. | | | | | From: |
Tommy Grayson | 2005-10-02 06:52:59 | | Subject: | A different view. | | Comment: | As to faith being a dangerous thing to have, well, then I guess every single person to ever live was dangerous. Even if you don't have faith in a God, that means you have faith in there not being a God. Have you traveled outside the bounds of physical existence to see for yourself? I think not. Therefore just as much as you say religion cannot prove the existence of God, you cannot disprove it.
You mentioned that people who claim to see God through events that happen are automatically wrong because those events took place in physical existence, which is subject to the laws of physics, which would rule out a deity. Are you trying to say that there have not been times where the event has defied the laws of physics? The bumblebee would be a quick example. Technically, according to the laws of physics, the bumblebee shouldn't be able to fly, and yet it does. Not to mention cases of people suddenly possessing the strength to lift a car off of someone when they technically shouldn't have been able to. There are a multitude of recorded cases in history where what took place technically should not have been able to happen. | | | | | From: |
Tommy Grayson | 2005-10-02 06:53:29 | | Subject: | A different view. | | Comment: | Occam's razor actually supports the belief in an intelligent deity. If there is no God who created matter than matter, according to your precious laws of physics, who were made by men no less, can't exist. Also, I dare to say that if God deemed this existence worthy of being created, then that same God would care about its condition.
Oh, yes it does make sense to think that the God who created the universe would have a continual active interest in it. As to God existing beyond time, very good! Time is the invention made to seperate God from his creation. If God is infinate and has always been, that means that he existed infinately into the past, is active in the present, and infinately into the future. This points to the fact that God does not change. Creation changes, but God does not.
Okay, now, if God is all-powerful, and he'd have to be to have the authority to create existence, as no other being has, he'd have the authority to give beings free will, or the right to decide for themselves. Now, to prove that such free will does exist, all you have to do is lift one hand or the other. Now, when you lifted one of your hands you choose which one you would lift. There was nothing to compel you in either direction. You choose. Still not convinced? If, according to you, only God could choose since he created the past and future, and if God is also all-powerful, could such a God not choose to give his creatures the ability to choose? He's all-powerful after all. | | | | | From: |
Tommy Grayson | 2005-10-02 06:53:55 | | Subject: | A different view. | | Comment: | The irony of your statements is this: You are demanding physical evidence that will identify a spiritual God. The two things are completely seperate in nature. The substance of God is beyond all physicall existence, and since we percieve reality by five senses that only pick up on things in the physical realm, its quite impossible for them directly percieve God.
Now, as to your question at the end, the thing is this. Who's logic are you referring to? Yours? But your a person, and therefore you have flaws. Therefore your logic is flawed. Therefore, to try to say that if the existence of God cannot be proven according your flawed logic than God must not then exist. I think it is clear where your faith lies, in yourself. The logic of God is often considered foolishness by man. | | | | | From: |
Pimp | 2005-11-19 07:57:53 | | Subject: | God | | Comment: | Your whole theory is based on einsteins theories, well he could be wrong , time might not go forward and backward. I dont believe in time travel . Why hasnt a time machine from 2050 popped up in the present. How do you know god can travel in time and can see in the future and past. iF god can see all and know all and created all then he is a bastard for letting all the bad things happen in the world. the pain and suffering . But maybe god just started the universe and cant control what happens here on out.
Just a thought , really I dont give a fuck ....
I try not to think about it. | | | | | From: |
Larry | 2005-12-02 20:05:24 | | Subject: | Free will | | Comment: | I saw a lot of emontional comments here. First, I like this article because it says exactly what I am thinking. Second, I hope there is a god, who will reveal to us someday.
If there is no god, my question is: what is the meaning of our lifes? | | | | | From: |
Simon | 2005-12-31 16:33:56 | | Subject: | Flaws in your argument | | Comment: | To start with I want to say that I do not believe in a creator or any sort of Gaseous Invertebrate that 'rules over' or watches over the universe.
You have one major flaw in your argument. You say that you will not have faith in anything, but you then go on to use examples and disciplines that are based solely on faith. Namely the so called proof of experiments and physics.
Using the scientific method you must accept that nothing can be proven only disproven, ergo you can not know anything. You can only have faith that something is true. Now while I would agree that this is a different form of faith than the religious zealots of this world have it is still faith.
The key to solving your problem is to stop stating anything as proof, and merely disprove the existence of God. Which none of the zealots will pay attention to.
Good luck to you to convert the masses to the religion of Science though, as it seems to be the religion least likely to start a war.
Simon | | | | | From: |
IAM Consciousness | 2006-01-27 11:22:06 | | Subject: | I bless you because I exist and can | | Comment: | A blessing is a form of thanking you. Thanks for worshiping truth (that which is objectively true) over fiction long enough to become one of the awakened minds to the point that you have reached. Man invented god in mans own magnified ego maniac image – no doubt about it. However, since so many and for so long have imagined it, and have been criminally programming it into the children minds, (religion is the ultimate child abuse that removes critical thinking capacity required for survival) there had to be a real place for it in a conscious universe as a location for the concept. I found it while I had my moment of critical mass, back when I had removed enough lies laid in by parents and church, when I crossed over to the half way point of evolution and could see the light at the other side of the tunnel - poetically speaking. The rush of truth flooding in cleaning the mind and making it function as it was designed as a truth detection device is something no one should miss out on in this life. It is impossible to become real and know what it is to be human with a core lie in the mind such as the human definition of god. The malfunctioning mind lies at the cause for early death of the body. All the mental resources wasted on these lies add up to enough wasted energy to cause the current extinction of 57 species a day and future extinction of all of us. continued... | | | | | From: |
IAM Consciousness | 2006-01-27 11:23:17 | | Subject: | I bless you because I exist and can | | Comment: | continued...
While rejections of the fantasy and acceptance of a conscious universe scientific cosmology will save us, the believe in miss-defined god concepts blind the mind so badly that people think it’s better to die with their insanity than come clean and stand on a reality based on that which is real. You sure don’t feel like saving them from themselves, if it were not for the face that their delusion is harming everyone and everything including the minority who are enlightened. Damn the lie to hell – once again poetically speaking.
Peace Out | | | | | From: |
a truth's seeker | 2006-02-05 23:08:47 | | Subject: | just a french point of view :) | | Comment: | ok, I'm a frenchy, my english may not be good, still my ideas are clear
I had quickly enough of reading all of these comments, people saying the author is afraid and so on...
First point : the author is just explaining HIS point of view, on HIS website, and the ones who obviously got something to prove and seem to be afraid of losing their beliefs, are the comment authors
Second point : I disagree with you Eadon, on 2 points so far
1) Faith is something some have, some don't, but no result of any proof or any scientific thought
2) there is one simple way to 'dismiss' the existence of a God, at least the one most of us believe in today (ie Chistians and Muslims and Jews (dunno if any of these words are offensive, if so, please excuse me))
and you've got this sort of thought in your essay.
If Faith is something unprovable, coming from the deepest and most unexplainable persuasion of the human heart, then God, made us not to believe in him, and others to believe in his holy presence. God would have made us unequal, if not so, why isn't there any proof to allow the sindwellers to change their mind?
I am most persuaded of the existence an pangenic entity created by none will, but created by the necessity, like air is sucked in an empty volume. And we are abnormalities of this entity, returning or not to the source. | | | | | From: |
a truth's seeker | 2006-02-05 23:09:27 | | Subject: | just a french point of view :) (2) | | Comment: | But still, I find no problem in accepting there is no need to answer the great question of Life's meaning, at least yet...Death will come soon enough, and believing in something 'til then just show no ability to grasp your life with an aim of your own...
So I loved the debate for the reasoning, but stay distant with the question itself. I liked thinking about something unreachable and mostfully unapprochable, but only for the challenge, i do not find it useful.
This is my only comment for all the site, which I find wonderful, I read only the comics and this essay so far, but that was certainly no waste of time.
Keep this site running, I'll come back : ) | | | | | From: |
a truth's seeker | 2006-02-05 23:14:30 | | Subject: | and some logics for final :) | | Comment: | 1)god is perfect
existence implies limits, ie, imperfection
god cannot exist
one more :)
1) god is omnipotent and omnipresent
2) so god is unable to create a place where he wouldn't be present
2) god is neither omnipresent nor omnipotent, the fall of one of his powers making him totally out of order
those were just for fun, nothing really serious, but the atmosphere needed to untense :) | | | | | From: |
God's Girl | 2006-07-06 22:02:45 | | Subject: | What is the point? | | Comment: | It has always been interesting to me to see the uproar that arises when people begin to talk about God. It's like people are so offended by the mere idea of Christianity or any religion for that matter...who cares what people believe?? I am a Christian, and i find it absolutely absurd that anyone COULD be atheist, but i will certainly never be-little them. i may give them my opinion, but other than that it is none of my business. it's not like Christians pose some sort of threat to society. it's not very often that you hear of a Christian who has gone on a murdering rampage. sure, Christians still sin, but true christians try NOT to hurt people.
I don't see anything wrong with believing in a God that will inevitably better society. even if some may say we are brain-washed, at least we are brain-washed to do what's right. we are repeatedly taught to love other people, even when they do not love us. we are taught to have patience and forgiveness and to live in peace with one another. what is so wrong with that??! we are encouraged to seek a life that honors ourselves and each other-and,of course,God-...Our purpose is to become people who are humble, hospitable, caring, compassionate, understanding, etc....how could this hurt anyone? i think i've proved this point...
there is no real way to end this, but i would like to add that many people have started to disprove the possibility of God and have ended up believing in Him. You should read The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel. | | | | | From: |
Heather | 2006-07-06 22:12:47 | | Subject: | Perceiving... | | Comment: | On the possibility of perceiving God...I have never 'perceived' God other than just feeling His presence. i have, however, been in the presence of a demon. my mother was possessed by a demon one night when i was at her house. she was completely trashed and could not even speak, but then she started speaking in tongues and i knew only people who believed in God could speak in tongues, so i called my pastor. he came over to the house and began praying for her. each time he said God or Jesus she started laughing. eventually her voice became a low, raspy tone-i could understand every word she said. she began kicking and writhing around on the floor. she began accusing us of not having the power to defeat her. she kept saying 'You don't even know my name. Tell me my name.' my pastor prayed for about 20 minutes and finally told her what her name was. she let out a horrific shriek-i have never heard anything like it. finally after 4 people holding her down (so she would not hurt herself) and praying for her, she passed out. The next morning she begged everyone to tell her what had happened to her bedroom because she had broken a lamp and things were all over the floor. Just out of curiosity, i recently watched The Exorcism of Emily Rose to see if my account was similar to that of her story. nearly everything that happened in the movie was what happened to me that night...
you may claim that my mom was so trashed that she didn't know what she was doing, but there is no way that a drunk, slurring woman could create such a scene. i will never forget that night, and if i didn't believe in God before, this would have definitely convinced me. | | | | | From: |
Jon T | 2006-10-18 22:27:15 | | Subject: | Time, Sperm, and Freewill | | Comment: | Well, having read the article, I can say that I agree on many points, but the bit on time and matter seemed a little self-dependent to me... but I do have a quicky idea to explain why, if the proverbial God did create all time and space, we still have free will that can deny the creator's will. One could say that Time and Space are not so much a hard-coded literal (sorry for the geekspeak allusiony stuff, just got out of programming class) as they are a dynamic framework. Look at a game. While the developers created everything in it, scripted future events, and planned the whole plot, they're incapable of foreseeing how a player will go through it. So, they create it with the capacity to adjust and react to player actions. So we're all walking around a dynamic engine...
Second thing. Someone went on about 'why can't we make the sperm that creates life, huh? blah blah damn you smart kids'... Well, that's fairly simple. It's the same reason they couldn't make a radio in 1492. We don't have the technology yet... or, actually, we almost do. We can manipulate cells to our whim now, as much as the general populace waves torches at the practice... and it's only a matter of time until we have the proper adhesion and manipulating equipment to handle and assemble molecules in a vacuum, for instance, to create what we need. All life breaks down, inevitably, to thoughtless matter. And don't pull the 'well, God made that' card. If you want to make that a question, then where'd God come from? If you say 'always there'... then I can just as well say matter was 'always there'. | | | | | From: |
Jon T | 2006-10-18 22:30:29 | | Subject: | Time, Sperm, and Free Will cont'd | | Comment: | Some other good points, because I just know someone will proclaim how evil Christianity is and how it has sanctioned the deaths of billions... Well, you're sort of right. While that it is a terrific basis, which I agree with, to not follow Christian beliefs, it's not a good one to combat the existance of a God, and if you mention it in front of one of the, while admittedly rare, studied and objective religious scholars, you'll get your arse kicked.
And for the record... my beliefs on the existance of a God are neither for nor against. I'm standing on the precipice of decision until the day I die, for until then I've got exactly as much hard evidence to prove that God exists as to prove he doesn't exist. | | | | | From: |
Speculator | 2007-01-12 00:49:44 | | Subject: | God | | Comment: | Only life can create life so we have to respect the fact that we have a creator, and the word for this creator is god,so he exists.
I think that religion is to complicated for you, and you don't have a spiritual site..
You can't picture how great this universe is, but look into a (micro)scope.
If you are a smart guy battle all these arguments.
.christiananswers. q-eden/origin-of-life.
(I think that there are one or more creators of this universe but they must come from somewhere too, adam and eva
is a nice story but that god created them and then played games with them is onacceptable, there is a chance too that biljons of years back some formes of life reached the earth because of his nature.
I respect the bible but some people look too far in it, and don't think of the fact that it could be a society formed rule and history book.(that prevents that people turn into savages)
And its not realy acceptable to believe everything you read
or hear cause if god wanted us to be like adam and eva before they ate that stupid apple, he had not put the three there in the first place.
I think the answer is in ourselves and in nature and how more we study it how more we learn, and maybe someday we can call ourselves GODS.!!!!! (cause we create life too)
(I have a lot of questions if there are gods for instant why do you make such tiny apelike things ruler of this earth and prevent is better then curse all of us!!!!! ) | | | | | From: |
klaas vaak | 2007-01-12 01:42:15 | | Subject: | God | | Comment: | Biologists who believe in materialism are particularly concerned with: (a) proving a purely materialistic origin of life, and (b) proving that life can be created in the laboratory.
Life rides upon matter, and matter has to be highly organized to carry life. The materialists say that life, since it's made up of atoms, molecules, and chemical reactions, is just simply chemistry and nothing else and that life originated by chance chemical reactions.
Now, if life consists merely of chemistry, and nothing but chemistry, the best way to understand its real potentialities is to look at some of the chemical substances of life. And we shall see that it is NOT merely a matter of chemistry.
o one has ever found an organism that never had a parent of some sort. Today, this is one of the most accepted facts in biology. All living things are produced from one or more parents. Surprisingly, however, many modern people still faithfully believe in a form of 'spontaneous generation.' | | | | | From: |
p | 2007-01-12 01:45:53 | | Subject: | god | | Comment: | Materialists assume life arose spontaneously somewhere in ancient Earth's water supply water which contained absolutely no life, just minerals and chemical substances used by living things. [119]
Because oxygen in the atmosphere would destroy all possibility of life arising by natural processes, materialists wrongly assumed the atmosphere had no oxygen.They also assumed it contained certain necessary ingredients, including ammonia, nitrogen, hydrogen, water vapor and methane. However, it is well known that mixing these ingredients does not create life. Therefore, materialists theorized something else must be needed perhaps a bolt of energy. | | | | | From: |
p | 2007-01-12 01:47:54 | | Subject: | god | | Comment: | No one has ever found an organism that never had a parent of some sort. Today, this is one of the most accepted facts in biology. All living things are produced from one or more parents. Surprisingly, however, many modern people still faithfully believe in a form of 'spontaneous generation.'
Materialists assume life arose spontaneously somewhere in ancient Earth's water supply water which contained absolutely no life, just minerals and chemical substances used by living things.
Because oxygen in the atmosphere would destroy all possibility of life arising by natural processes, materialists wrongly assumed the atmosphere had no oxygen. They also assumed it contained certain necessary ingredients, including ammonia, nitrogen, hydrogen, water vapor and methane.However, it is well known that mixing these ingredients does not create life. Therefore, materialists theorized something else must be needed perhaps a bolt of energy. | | | | | From: |
p | 2007-01-12 01:50:57 | | Subject: | god | | Comment: | The notion that… the operating programme of a living cell could be arrived at by chance in a primordial soup here on the Earth is evidently nonsense of a high order.
Many, if not most, origin-of-life researchers now agree with Hoyle: Life could not have originated by chance or by any known natural processes. [148] Many Evolutionists are now searching for some theoretical force within matter which might push matter toward the assembly of greater complexity. Most Creationists believe this is doomed to failure, since it contradicts the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
It is important to note that the information written on DNA molecules is not produced by any known natural interaction of matter. Matter and molecules have no innate intelligence, allowing self organization into codes. There are no known physical laws which give molecules a natural tendency to arrange themselves into such coded structures. | | | | | From: |
p | 2007-01-12 02:05:37 | | Subject: | god | | Comment: | Like a computer disk, DNA has no intelligence. The complex, purposeful codes of this 'master program' could only have originated outside itself. In the case of a computer program, the original codes were put there by an intelligent being, a programmer. Likewise, for DNA, it seems clear that intelligence must have come first, before the existence of DNA. Statistically, the odds are enormously in favor of that theory. DNA bears the marks of intelligent manufacture. | | | | | From: |
p | 2007-01-12 02:06:38 | | Subject: | god | | Comment: | THE BOTTOM LINE
on the origin of life
* During all recorded human history, there has never been a substantiated case of a living thing being produced from anything other than another living thing.
* As yet, Evolutionism has not produced a scientifically credible explanation for the origin of such immense complexities as DNA, the human brain, and many other complex elements of the cosmos.
* It is highly premature for materialists to claim that all living things evolved into existence, when science has yet to discover how even one protein molecule could actually have come into existence by natural processes.
* There is no scientific proof that life did (or ever could) evolve into existence from non-living matter. Further, there is substantial evidence that spontaneous generation is impossible. Only DNA is known to produce DNA. No chemical interaction of molecules has even come close to producing this ultra-complex code which is so essential to all known life. | | | | | From: |
Joop | 2007-04-21 10:10:56 | | Subject: | consider this | | Comment: | You say:
'
Where as we can simultaneously see the whole screen, a god would simultaneously see the whole Universe - our past and our future as he made it. The Universe is roughly 14 billion years old, so everything you are thinking and doing now would have been created by this god over half a billion generations before your birth. If such a god exists then logically we cannot have free will, because our thoughts and actions were already created aeons ago.
'
Consider the idea of this 'god' being US. And US being this god entity. Our thoughts and actions are indeed made with free will because wel.. WE as gods created it.
That would explain at least this paragraph ;-)
Cheers,
Joop | | | | | From: |
George Williams | 2007-11-14 23:22:41 | | Subject: | God exists? You've got to be kidding! | | Comment: | Of course there's no god--anybody with the least willingless to be honest with themselves can come to no other conclusion. We have to think that people really badly need to believe in one, and they aren't very good at distinguishing between 'wanting to believe' and actually 'believing'. This indicates a widespread lack of self-awareness among human beings. The inability to simply look at the world simply and clearly.
But this 'faith' people claim to have sure does lead to all sorts of absurd claims and behaviors, some of them really stupid and dangerous! | | | | | From: |
Howard Hicks | 2007-11-25 18:10:51 | | Subject: | GOD AND WHAT IS IT? | | Comment: | You brought out some great point's and I can not argue with any of it. It was very solid. I am still wateing for a answer my self.The only way i can see it that all of us is god so to speak.What ever term one might use god or life
or what ever term that seam's real. This only comes in existance when one is conseived, Then god or life has become reality to the one conseived.What i am saying is we are time beyound time and time beyound end. We are god if god is the term meant for life. Where we get lost is all the idols man has made and for that purpose we lose all understanding of what life is all about. The idol's is where the problem is at. Which one is the greatest as they were all made up by man. how ever all of them has some good
principles as well as bad. That is the reason we are in war today ((Fighting between Idols)) distroying life its self. ((God so to speak)) Forgive my spelling ((I mis more word's than I get right.((Thank you ever so much for all the knowledge you have handed down. ((I call that Logic)) | | | | | From: |
Dan Samson | 2008-03-23 06:24:41 | | Subject: | God and faith | | Comment: | Man, there's so much baggage with this topic, so much that we read into each other's arguments, so much that we believe and hold dear and refuse to cast aside to think new thoughts about this topic, that it's almost impossible to discuss the topic of god meaningfully.
But I would like to express a couple of ideas in reaction to your essay, Mike, and this with the express purpose of challenging you to consider that you may be too smug and perhaps even shallow in your stance:
First of all, god clearly does not exist, as you gracefully argued, but not for the reasons you stated, although these are true as well - it's just that the god you address in your rebuttal, is akin to Santa Claus - the one I want to address (and who I also believe does not exist) is much more interesting and far worthier of a discussion pertaining to his/her/its existence. That you and I and many others discuss god is already a proof of his existence - if not in the physical universe that you excluded him from - then somewhere else - at the very least on this page, in our minds as we imagined him in order to refute his existence outside of our minds. In fact that's the only god I believe any thinking person can accept to question the existence of. | | | | | From: |
Dan Samson | 2008-03-23 06:46:22 | | Subject: | God and faith | | Comment: | What I'm trying to say is that god is truly only a figment of our imagination - that its a truism that man created god and not the other way around - but that it is likewise a futile endeavor to try to explain (or explain away) a god who we claim to be omnipotent etc. and existing independent of our will or acknowledgment of him because that is intrinsically illogical. If you get this far on the topic, then I believe is born an interesting idea to debate: perhaps the god of the Hebrews (or whoever else imagined him) was never anything more than the tension within the following paradox: that god exist only and exactly to the degree that I grant him existence, and yet I grant him an existence that is omnipotent. To use terms you were set on bringing into the question, on the one hand I have free will, on the other hand I don't. Both aspects make up the god that we imagine - the god concept that ticks us off, is the long bearded guy seated on a throne or any other convoluted complex version of this, call it supreme being or super intelligence, whatever, it's just another word for Santa Claus - someone or something that I need to believe will bring me the goods I need for meaning in my life. this one clearly does not exist in the physical world. More interesting: is the one in my mind, the one I give existence to - he also doesn't exist outside of me, therefore he doesn't exist in the physical world as an independent being. But lastly, what about the one we don't know? The one we can't understand, attain, etc. The one we say is omnipotent, the one the Hebrews said you can't see, can't mention, can't fathom... for all intents and purposes he doesn't exist, since I cannot even begin to imagine him, but perhaps he does nonetheless... got that Jim? | | | | | From: |
Dan Samson | 2008-03-23 06:49:53 | | Subject: | God and faith | | Comment: | Sorry people, in my first post, I was referring to Jim's essay, not 'Mike', it's just that Jim's name escaped me as I was writing this. | | | | | From: |
USpace | 2008-07-07 04:11:58 | | Subject: | Absurd Thoughts About God... | | Comment: | I love your site! I of course had to link to it. Please keep up the good work!
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
don't pay attention
.
ignore absurd thoughts
that are uncomfortable
.
.
lulu DOT com SLASH uspace
. | | | | | From: |
RAZA 2009 | 2009-06-24 01:40:19 | | Subject: | All people have faith | | Comment: | Complete skepticism is impossible. If not then be skeptical of your skeptism. The fact is you ate some food today but you never bothered to check to see if it was poisoned. You had *faith* that your food was not poisoned.
All people have faith in something.... | | | | | From: |
Dennis | 2009-07-01 02:40:43 | | Subject: | Faith | | Comment: | RAZA 2009...what you describe is not faith. Every meal I have eaten in the past was not poisoned, so the probability of my next meal being poisoned is virtually nil, and so I KNOW my next meal will most likely not contain poison and to test for it would be to waste resources unnecessarily ... this is sound inductive reasoning based on an empirical data set. | | | | | From: |
manuel lorenzo | 2009-10-03 11:38:14 | | Subject: | god | | Comment: | At this point in time, it is absolutely absurd to debate about the existence of god, considering the fact, if it's truly supported by facts, that the universe is 14 billion years old since the BIG BANG yet there is not a single fact to prove that god exist. To those who do not agree that there is god, lets wait for another 14 billion years...who knows! I respect all ideas, anyway, penicilin was discoverd by accident. | | | | | From: |
lightbearer | 2010-02-10 19:14:06 | | Subject: | the absurd | | Comment: | How can a hypothetical god be absurd if one as an absolute yes or no answer to its existence? Is not ambiguity the benchmark of absurdity. I support a comic tragedy or a tragic comedy, depending on my mood. Different levels of ignorance without abandoning the good, beauty, justice and equality (Plato). Some levels of ignorance are worth fighting for, even though they still rest in ambiguity. I'd fight for democracy over neo-conservativism any day of the week. It's snowing today and I'm bored, so I found this page and commented, otherwise, please ignore this comment. Thanks. | | | | | From: |
maria | 2010-03-07 10:34:01 | | Subject: | reply to lightbearer | | Comment: | Hi, was bored too and found this page. Went through it quickly and saw your comment:
‘some levels of ignorance are worth fighting for, even though they rest in ambiguity’
I don’t know if you made that up or got it by someone else, I just have to say it’s one of the most… light-bearing ways to express something I feel deeply regarding God, but couldn’t put in so few words before. Thanks, be well!
(I'll come back to the site another time and read more comments, pity it's from years ago and not too alive at the moment) | | | |
Next: God of the absurd part
two
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
