- I don’t know his plan and why he does this.
- Same as number one…We still don’t know his plan, and I’ll try and find out…seriously…my uncle, Ken Keathley, you can look him up…and I’m sure he can answer this for me…you’ll just have to give me time if you really care to know, or you can just email him.
- He’s never referred to as female because the bible say’s God created man in his image…not woman. Without the bible a God could very well be female.
well club, I don’t wish to be confrontational, and I do appreciate the fact that you care. I have absolutely no desire to use anything you’ve said as ammo against you. This is because I neither wish to hurt you nor convince you of anything.
That being said, I believe your analogy of the robots is problematic for the following reasons:
- Without an appeal to something like god’s plan, one cannot possibly adopt a position on whether or not robots will someday rule the earth. We can weigh a lot of factors, do some statistics, and maybe come up with a guess as to whether or not robots will rule the earth, but without a god to lean on, it seems entirely irrational to me to take a firm position on whether or not robots will actually rule the earth. The best we can do is guess. Any statement of “I believe” in this case is essentially a statement of “my best guess is…”
To me, your analogy of the robots can be broken down like this:
a) It is possible that someday robots may rule the earth
b) We will see someday whether or not robots do indeed rule the earth
c) I don’t believe that robots will rule because of god’s plan. (see below)
- The belief of god’s existence, and whether or not it will one day be proven that god exists is a very different question from what you stated above. I reduced it as follows:
a) It is possible that god exists.
b) I believe that some day it will be proven that god exists
conclusion:
c) therefore, I believe in god
Do you see how in b you’ve already accepted that god will be proven to exist at some point in the future? This is an example of the logical fallacy of begging the question. You accept as true, the very premise you’re trying to prove. It doesn’t make your belief wrong or stupid, it just means that this isn’t a very compelling argument as to why one should believe in god.
cheers,
gemty
I see what you are saying…but this analogy wasn’t an argument as to why someone should believe in God…It was an argument as to why it makes sense to me for someone not to believe in God.
Maybe I didn’t word it right but basically this is what I was trying to say broken down:
- We will know one day whether or not robots ruled the earth
- We will know one day whether or not God exists.
I have faith that 1 will never rule the earth until proven. And I believe that because of number 2.
And I saw this as an Atheist has a number 3 that acts just like a number 2 for number 1 which would be 2 switched to 1. lol is that making sense?
And so I for once can see how atheist “could” be similiar in how I believe in God…to disbelieve in God…as OPPOSED to I USED to think atheist were just denying atheist, denying what they can’t prove.
I just know now because of a number 2, whatever that may be for an atheist, it is possible to have faith against something.
Maybe this is still illogical but it makes sense to me…and you won’t hear me saying an atheist could be mentally ill anytime soon.
If a creature exists named God, to me, it is only a sentient being like us just with a longer life span and more knowledge. If it wants to be worshipped it surely created enough people for that. You all have a good time worshipping the way it makes you happy,you go for it. I would only be in the way, plus my knees don’t bend real easy, my mind locks them upright.
All folks need to believe in something. Religion is a very important part of humanity. It is needed.
Club29,
I’m glad that it makes sense to you, and no need to apologise if it seems illogical to me, if it works for you, that’s great. I’m glad you don’t think that atheists are mentally ill.
If I may be so bold, I would like to point out that my disbelief in god isn’t faith based. I don’t have faith that god doesn’t exist. If I ever felt god in my heart, I rather expect that I would admit his existence. After all, what have I to gain from being an atheist in face of that feeling? But, I have never felt god in my heart or in my intuition, or in any way whatsoever, and believe me, I’ve wanted to believe at some points. Since I have never even had a tingle of a feeling of god I have concluded that until I feel something, I cannot reasonably claim that he exists. If I felt something someday, all bets are off.
cheers,
gemty
====
Oldphil, how reliable are your physical senses? Do you rely on them all the time? You want material proof of God. When you say “I believe it is raining outside”, that statement is not the truth. Now when you step outside and declare, “I know it is raining outside”, then that statement is true because you are experiencing the rain. Like God, to know God is to experience God. Whether you believe or not that there is a god, your belief will not alter the fact. Ah, you even capitalized the G in god.
Justly - surely you have misspoken here. If one were to say “I believe it is raining outside” and was not deliberately misconstruing his belief about the time and location of the rain, then he would be speaking the truth, for he is only speaking about his belief, and not about rain. But we can see rain through windows, and do not need to be wet to make such a statement.
You have evidently had what we would normally call an extrasensory experience of god - if you mean that you know this god, but not through any of the five senses we usually recognise. If that is so, then any argument you have about the reliability of those five senses is extraneous to your point.
Capitalisation is a convention, and should not be taken as proof of god, or of God.
Hope that clears some things up for you.
But we can see rain through windows, and do not need to be wet to make such a statement.
What if it was only your water sprinkler?
Then you would be wrong. But you can always be wrong. Only God is always right.
I hate this site. I was a perfectly good person who believed in God and hugged trees and cuddly animals… now I am swaying toward being an agnostic and a Republican. It’s frightening.
By 2007, I should be worshipping Satan. News at 11. LMAO
I already pretty much answered this question in the ‘why’ thread, so I’ll just post it here, with a slight edit:
But we can see rain through windows, and do not need to be wet to make such a statement.
What if it was only your water sprinkler?
=======
Thank you Faust. That’s what I’m trying to say, you have to experience the rain before you can say it is raining because if you only look outside your window, the water you’re seeing could be from your sprinkler or your neighbor’s or teenagers on your rooftop having a contest on who can excrete water the longest.
Don’t write off the athiests as close minded, while ignoring the fact that your faith in God is equally narrow minded in that respect. You have a book written by humans 2000 years ago as a basis for your belief in god. Athiests don’t gel with the idea that some guy build a boat, and fit two of every lifeform in existance on it. If that story is rubbish, then they like to conclude that the rest is probably junk as well.
Woah woah woah…Of course as usual, I’m a subject of stereotyping once again.
Please read my whole post next time…instead of just picking out what you want me to say so you can argue. That’s close minded.
But as for the rest of what you said. My faith in God is not narrow minded, I’ve looked at a ton of evidence and it keeps pointing me straight to God. So what I have a book written 2000 years ago, I’ts pretty impressive for being that old isn’t it? Or maybe you should read it to figure that one out.
Some guy “Built” a boat… Just because you can properly use grammer doesn’t mean one man can’t build a boat and fit 2 of every creature into it. You going to deny the Pryamids existence just because you don’t know how they were built?
“Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:14 am” … drunk and tired. From the bottom of my heart, I apologize for that D that should have been a T.
You called athiests close minded on the grounds that they still remain unconvinced after you “showed them God’s evidence and proved to them he existed”. Please, prove the existance, in scientific terms, of a being that lives outside the realm of science in every aspect. I am sure if you were speaking to an atheist who was well versed in ontological arguments, he probably would have refuted each and every one of your “proofs”. It boils down to humans trying to explain the inexplicable, and when you call someone close minded for not sharing your opinion on a subject like that, you are calling the kettle black.
I didn’t mean to imply you were narrow minded for believing in God, that is anything but what I meant. I mean to say that you are just as narrow minded as an atheist if you cannot concieve the possibility that God does not exist.
The pyramids were builD with an endless supply of slaves. The ark was builD by one man, supposedly. Hell, I would pay money to see an ark being builD today. I think it is still beyond human ability right now.
Actually, it looks like the Pyramids were built by labourers on the off-season.
But that’s neither here nor there.
Justly - it is not what you are trying to say at all. Experience is sensual. We can be wrong even if we are getting wet. This does not refute your view - my only point is that it does not support it, either. You are purporting that some kind of experience is more authentic than others. While I have defined and described what experience is, you have not. That doesn’t mean that you have not had these experiences, it just means that you have said nothing descriptive about them.
Ok here again Mr. Stubborn minded. I said read all of my post instead of taking what I say out of context. Lay off the freakin kettle for one second and realize what I said. Before I used that quote I said, I USED TO ASK and then had an explanation afterwords as to why I used to think…so here again please read.
BuilD? I will not impose a stereotypical attitude on you as you have done me. But I will say someone like you who is stubborn minded has to much pride to admit when he’s wrong. So they either press forward blindly, or make a joke of it. Endless supply of slaves? Really? That’s profound…could you not of considered how these endless supply of slaves built the pryamids? You “Think” but you don’t think well enough. Do you not “think” a God exists because it seems unlikely? What makes that incorrect? I “think” it’s impossible for someone like you to grasp what I’m saying, but I know there’s a chance you will…so I cannot disprove it’s happening.
I never said we will ever have total proof to prove or disprove God’s existence did I? No, you see you brought this up because you knew it was the only thing you could argue with me. Let me defend what I say, and keep your arugments for those narrow minded people.
Most atheists were once theists.
Can you say the same about theists? Were they once atheists? Lets make this easier. Have most theists even looked beyond their own religion?
That’s not true.
I was raised atheist, and there are others who have been as well.