Thank you "Life over Death", you might try bursting ego bubbles, but it's not me you should be after, but the topic.
This is really how you are going to start a rebuttal? By not even knowing how to properly quote or by not even mentioning my name properly? What are you 12? If you want me to take you seriously, you better put your head on straight, and start by calling me by my proper name.
We can only conjecture on what might be the reason for all of the apparent problems in the world, such as loss of limbs. But we might infer that, because He is a benevolent being, and yet these problems still exist, somehow these problems remain for a bigger purpose we don't understand.
Yet, you seem to understand all to well. So, how can you come here telling us that “god works in mysterious ways” while you are trying to tell us about this mysterious god, and in such intricate detail at that, pertaining to free will?
Still, it is obvious that he has given us intellect and drive. It could be that this supreme Being is influencing our discoveries through such processes as serendipity in order to help solve some of these problems (which we're doing a great job of so far). The "unheard" prayers for proof many on this forum talk of may have been answered after all, but not as one would wish for as in "I dream of Jeannie"--i.e. a wish + 2 blinks = "poof", your answered prayer.
Once again, using natural means to prove a supernatural god. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If you wish to prove your supernatural god, you need supernatural evidence, not evidence where there clearly is no evidence for a god. Saying god is responsible for your intelligence is like saying you are stupid because you can’t think for yourself. Saying god is responsible for Science is like saying Santa Claus is responsible for the presents underneath the Christmas Tree on Christmas Day. It is simply bullshit.
Also, to say that an omnipotent being must intervene in a more direct way is, by definition, limiting that omnipotence. That is, an omnipotent being can do whatever He wants, He doesn't have to conform to our limited concept of what the universe should be like.
Can this omnipotent being create himself a rock so heavy he can not lift it?
If you can come up with this answer in a logical way, I may be able to take you more seriously.
To begin with, eutheism does not make sense. Since we seem to be on differing ends and you have not spouted which god you worship, it may be of help, which god or goddess do you worship?
That is like saying "Which "infinity do you believe in? There are many!"
Well, there are only three possibilities, an infinite being, an infinite series of beings, or nothing. So it's the first one, since it makes the most sense.
So, I take it you can’t answer the question? I did not ask which form of theism you believe in, which is mono. I asked which SPECIFIC GOD do you worship? Do you worship Jesus Christ? Do you worship Allah? Do you worship Ahura Mazda? Do you worship the Muffin Man? Tell us which SPECIFIC GOD you worship please.
I can't show you definite proof, only He can, and then it would be a profoundly personal experience, probably in a way that wouldn't take your free will away. But since you demand 100% obvious proof, or should I say "poof", that's the moment you would lose your free choice. Do you really want that? Sounds innocuous, but in such scenarios, we'd end up no more than this supreme Being's puppets.
Running around in circles aren’t we? Chasing your own tail it seems. You have mentioned earlier:
The real miracle would be to one day achieve all things you ask for, including limb regeneration, without losing your free will.
So what's the big deal? It's what atheists are missing out on: the chance to grow by connecting to this infinite being. This takes a lifetime, it takes a great deal of humility to get started too. After all, you've been flying solo--it's easy to see why you wouldn't want somebody to influence you just now. But imagine the infinite possibilities. There is nothing to lose, and everything to gain!
So, if this god is omnipotent, why doesn’t he just do this real miracle claim that you claim he does anyway instead of playing games, kind of like what you are doing?
So, what’s the big deal? The big deal is you have some sort of “divine revelation” about knowing about this all-knowing mystery god that just in the snap of the fingers can change everything in one snippet of evidence, that as you said, is just around the corner, so we ask for it, and you turn around and say he can’t show it the way you are describing or us asking?
Speaking of Being’s Puppets, you do realize you are His puppet right? We atheists are the ones with free will where you need to bow down to your puppet master’s wishes, otherwise you wouldn’t even be bothering arguing with us about this supreme being, because you want us to be his bitch as well, and yet you are upset that we aren’t buying it.
News flash for you btw. In the Bible, God has 100% poof proved himself to a great many people, and people STILL chose to rebel against Him. Please show us how him “poof proving” His existence will take away from free will when it clearly didn’t in the Bible’s past? In addition, you yourself are limiting God’s omnipotence by saying and I quote you:
But since you demand 100% obvious proof, or should I say "poof", that's the moment you would lose your free choice.
So, we can’t not lose free will if God poof proves to us of His existence? You realize if what you said is True, then your god is not omnipotent do you?
Invalid evidence. To begin with, just because you say something doesn’t make it true. For evidence claims to be taken seriously, you need to show us step-by-step of such theories and provide links that helped you draw the conclusions that you have come to.
Ok, I found a number: one in 4^300: http://www.science20.com/stars_planets_life/calculating_odds_life_could_begin_chance
Ok, multiply this by this number, the chances of having a planet that could provide life in the first place, from the Rare Earth formula (which an atheist astronomy teacher taught me:
N = N* × fp × fpm × ne × ng × fi × fc × fl × fm × fj × fme is also on the order of 10exp(-12)
http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw102.html
In fact, "9.0 x 10 ^-12 is the probability that an intelligent civilization other than ours exists in our galaxy"
http://eo.ucar.edu/staff/dward/sao/dward617project.pdf
Not very big.
But I suppose in an infinitely old universe: no problem...except for the problem of entropy. In an infinitely old universe, all energy will have been expended; only chaos would remain (after give or take a few trillion years).
You have missed the claim that I was asking evidence for. Let me recap for you:
It's much more likely that this universe of order was designed by somebody infinitely smart. There is some evidence for this. For example, the chances of the strong nuclear force being exactly at its constant value is astronomically (or should I say atomically) small. The chances for the first proteins to develop RNA sequences that led to reproducible life is likewise incredibly small.
I maybe wasn’t specific enough so I’ll cut you some slack here. I was asking evidence for: It's much more likely that this universe of order was designed by somebody infinitely smart.
The problem is, you gave me evidence for: For example, the chances of the strong nuclear force being exactly at its constant value is astronomically (or should I say atomically) small. The chances for the first proteins to develop RNA sequences that led to reproducible life is likewise incredibly small.
This time I won’t knock on you, but I am asking for evidence this universe of order was designed by somebody infinitely smart.
Why schizophrenic? Sounds like you have a little pain associated with this topic.
No. I’m just down-to-earth, and I call it by what it is. If it is not schizophrenia, then it must have been drugs and hallucinations. If it is none of the above, then it must be real. The difference between real and drug hallucinations/schizophrenia, reality provides evidences for the claims it makes, as it is the evidence that allows us to scientifically test the evidence to validate or invalidate a theory that helps us better understand the universe, where as drug hallucinations and schizophrenia rely solely on faith and delusions for it to be valid. Reality can prove something is real. Hallucinations, who needs proof when you have faith? Why do you think we call those criminals crazy and deluded when they say “God/Satan told me to kill my children.”?
He, she, it, unpronounceable symbol, it matters little. "He" by tradition.
You are right, being infinitely powerful and unbound by time, the universe, or infinite universes and dimensions, could have existed forever as well, who knows. But not by themselves. But by that token, if "He" wished, it could have started, for example, with the "Big Bang". His choice.
Now, you are playing the logical fallacy of special pleading. You agree that with there being a god, existence itself could never have had a beginning, but you say it has to have a god. So, why does our universe have to have a god in order for the universe itself to never have a beginning?
Judeo-Christian, Zeus, caveman SunGod or gods, it makes no difference. Since you want a name, call him "Infinite one".
Well, this makes discussing with you about this “infinite one” much easier to discuss with!
Well, I'm not a biblical scholar, but I do know that most agree that this "Adam and Eve", (whoever the first humans to achieve this relation with God were) had a choice, and so the story goes, they chose to be independent of God, rather than to be very close and dependent on Him completely. That's the stuff of free will. Probably 100% of us would have done the same with some type of desire to obtain "more" of whatever we would have wanted, be it knowledge, independence, power...Still, they had the choice first, rather than after that incident.
The reality is no they did not. Good and evil did not exist in their time until it was after the eating. Because there was no good and evil at the time, there was no concept of reaction for the action, and there was no concept of consequences, simply because sin never existed at that time. If there was no such, then how could they chose to, being that they weren’t given the knowledge or ability to be able to comprehend or understand what is going on to make a logical, reasonable, and informed choice? This would equate Adam and Eve to that of a baby, which can not sin according to many theists, yet God wishes to punish 2 babies for their “sins” that they have committed.
I also wanted to acknowledge before Adam, Eve, and God, it was Zeus and Prometheus with Prometheus teaching us about Fire and how to create and use it, where Zeus punishes us for learning.
My understanding was that it wasn't so much a punishment, but a consequence. It was like they went outside of a protected, beautiful home, into a terrible blizzard or storm, because they wanted the taste of complete freedom, or whatever they sought. It must have been something very, very desirable. They probably knew the consequences would involve all of us as well. But these consequences weren't what God wanted.
I like the analogy because it goes hand in hand with what I said above. They aren’t responsible for it because they did not have the ability to understand consequence, because good and evil did not exist until after the fall. They could not have known about the consequence because they didn’t know, and consequence didn’t exist, and they couldn’t have known that it would involve all of us because it wasn’t until after the sin did they say they would procreate. But I like how you agree with me that God was about suppressing us and not allowing us to experience this “free will” that you are speaking of.
Yet, many religious traditions involve some type of hope to regain this lost relationship with the creator after some type of fall. This would logically involve some type of uncomfortable process, such as obedience, which doesn't feel "good". In "paradise", it wasn't "obedience", it was probably more like "communication". So, it's not that God demands retribution, rather this is the only way back to Him.
The only way? I thought you said earlier:
Also, to say that an omnipotent being must intervene in a more direct way is, by definition, limiting that omnipotence. That is, an omnipotent being can do whatever He wants, He doesn't have to conform to our limited concept of what the universe should be like.
So, if this omnipotent being can do whatever He wants, He doesn't have to conform to our limited concept of what the universe should be like, then why did you say that this is the only way back to Him? You are once again limiting your omnipotent “infinite one”.
Still, because we infer that because God loves us (as I concluded before), he wants us to be free. Providing absolute proof would take your freedom away, which is bad in itself,
So, please show us then how this God is a loving god, because all evidence that would exist shows us otherwise.
But as far as educating our children to love God and to love others...Why not? I'd venture to say it is psychologically healthy to provide this frame of mind for their mental well being anyway.
Why not? Well, come to one of the Bible Belt states like Mississippi or Texas or Florida or North Carolina, and you will see why not.
Why not is all about loving god btw, not about loving others.
I'd say don't ask for such hard evidence. It won't come in our lifetimes, anyway. Instead ask for some insight, something like "1+1=2". There is no proof, but you implicitly know it's right. But if you get this insight, don't stop there. Work to build your relationship with this God.
I know why you don’t want me to ask for hard evidence. It is because you know yourself god doesn’t exist and you know because if god were real, hard evidence would be there, and hard evidence shows you that you can and are indeed wrong, so it upsets you. Only an evil tyrant dictators will say don’t question me as that 1 sentence did.
When someone finds the cure for cancer, or poverty, or global peace, that this won't be by human effort alone--the chances are so against us. It will be more logical that we will be inspired to obtain this. The real miracle is that such smart persons such as Pasteur had the circumstances in his life that allowed him to finally achieve things like Pasteurization. When we go with God's flow, things just happen. In fact, I just found this about him, from his son-in-law:
You say when we go with God’s flow, things just happen. You are right, when we go with God’s flow, things just happen, like the entire annihilation of civilizations because of God’s chosen ones. Things just happen, like people dying, like enslavement, like oppression. Nowadays, God’s chosen ones have decided that women alone deserve death just for existing. To me, I think God’s chosen are just upset that women had the brains to say no to them. But then again, with God’s flow, things just happen, like rape, whether it’s a gang rape on a woman, or a priest with some little boys, things just happen!
I'm not sure what life is like in Godless countries. But his plans don't depend on our beliefs in him either. So it's possible that even in China, for example, good things can come from their works and discoveries too. But their personal relationship with Him is what they are missing.
Very valid question, thought actually. If you wish to know what Godless countries are like in the world, they are ranked among the most intelligent, most happy, most environmentally friendly, and most free economically ranked countries among the entire planet Earth. Examples? Denmark for #1, Switzerland for another, Sweden for another, Canada for another, and I think nogodsforme mentioned Japan in another thread.
Want to see where religion reigns supreme? We have the Middle-East as a supreme example. We have places in South America for example like Chile. Mexico is another great example!
If God himself came and showed you proof, you'd still ask for more. There will always be a reason not to believe, because your free will is and always will be there. Only a Beatific Vision will finally suffice, but this leads to instant death. Look for simple answers. They are in front of your nose.
Theists ALWAYS say this! Well, if this is true, let God show us and prove it, and then we will see if I’ll ask for more. Still waiting for god to do as such.
If this incarnation were repeated today, people 100 years from now, or especially today, would still doubt in any of these miracles, no matter how obvious. Any bets?
People in general are stupid. There are those who don’t even believe in Hitler, WWII, or the Holocaust despite all the empirical evidence we have for it, whether it was the rubble and uniforms in museums, or whether it is the video footage of the times when this occurred, or we could just ask Hitler’s very relatives like his nephew, and ask them why they need to live their lives in hiding from the planet.
Pascal's Wager is not a proof, but a logical choice, which all atheists should side with at first, until their hearts open until that one moment of revelation they are waiting for comes to them. You still have a choice to believe in nothingness, but it is a dark, lonely choice. There's better.
Everybody already answered this, so no need for me to bother. However there’s better? You mean like roasting over an open fire like I’m some sort of barbeque?
Oh yeah, you should know that if you are incorrect about your god, which is a very 99.99% chance you are, if you die and you are incorrect, all these posts and witnessing and enslavement you are doing for your god are in the end, worthless, and you will go down in history as one of the biggest fools on the planet! Pascal’s Wager reversed!
