If God Doesn’t Exist

[ding]

I wouldn’t accept the idea that one unthinkingly inherits the gods commonly associated with their familial / geographic location.

The same can be said about science. Or have you custom assembled your science? And then you custom assembled God so that you did not have to bother with God? Kind of like custom assembling a wardrobe so one doesn't have to bother with ironing...?

The same can’t be said about science. Science relies on a hypothesis, testing and evaluation of evidence to reach conclusions. Accepting culturally appropriate gods due to tradition and because those are the gods you inherited is like wearing a hand-me-down wardrobe.

Science is manifested by consciousness, Hollie. You can't get around the human element.

Science exists without man ever discovering any of it.

Yes, so does mathematics, music, love and truth. All of which are manifested by consciousness.

 

[justinacolmena]

If God doesn’t exist,

Cruel mothers and wicked doctors rationalize the murder and mayhem of unborn and newborn infants.

People have wild sex parties to satisfy the lusts of their flesh, and when they realize the consequences of procreation, that children will interfere with their adult lifestyle, they punish the innocent ones in order to appease a misguided inner sense of justice, and cruelty for the sake of cruelty takes the place of love-making and sex to satisfy their base carnal appetites.

 

[Hollie]

On the other hand, I’ve known a lot of believers who believe because they are fearful; fearful of the unknown and fearful of making decisions because decisions carry consequences. True believers don’t tell non-believers what to believe.

Are you angry because you’re not converting anyone?

Sigh. First, I do wish you would stop projecting your own emotions onto me. Second, I have never had any wish to convert anyone, which means another projection of you wishing to convert me to atheism? If so, I am sorry you are so angry about not being able to convert me to atheism.

Now, to your first paragraph. So, a true believer told you what to believe? Considering what it appears they told you to believe to take everything in the Bible literally, no wonder you objected. I would have rebelled as well.

One thing you should consider: Since I have numerous family members who are atheist and I am perfectly comfortable with their non-belief, why in the world would I have any emotion (let alone anger) over the non-belief of a perfect stranger? I am simply curious, Hollie. I have always been curious about things relating to science and things relating to religion. Both make me very happy. While you seem to be very happy about science, you do not seem to have the same ease with spiritual beliefs. Rather than jumping to conclusions about whether you once believed or whether you never believed, I thought I would ask.

The only emotion I post with is interest. So if you think you detect an emotion, look internally, because since it is not coming from me, it must be coming from from you.

Who is trying to convert you? You, among others, make claims to supernatural entities and realms. Such claims are rather extraordinarily and not consistent with any rational explanation that exists in nature so it’s not untoward that others would ask for an explanation of these supernatural entities and realms.

 

[ding]

On the other hand, I’ve known a lot of believers who believe because they are fearful; fearful of the unknown and fearful of making decisions because decisions carry consequences. True believers don’t tell non-believers what to believe.

Are you angry because you’re not converting anyone?

Sigh. First, I do wish you would stop projecting your own emotions onto me. Second, I have never had any wish to convert anyone, which means another projection of you wishing to convert me to atheism? If so, I am sorry you are so angry about not being able to convert me to atheism.

Now, to your first paragraph. So, a true believer told you what to believe? Considering what it appears they told you to believe to take everything in the Bible literally, no wonder you objected. I would have rebelled as well.

One thing you should consider: Since I have numerous family members who are atheist and I am perfectly comfortable with their non-belief, why in the world would I have any emotion (let alone anger) over the non-belief of a perfect stranger? I am simply curious, Hollie. I have always been curious about things relating to science and things relating to religion. Both make me very happy. While you seem to be very happy about science, you do not seem to have the same ease with spiritual beliefs. Rather than jumping to conclusions about whether you once believed or whether you never believed, I thought I would ask.

The only emotion I post with is interest. So if you think you detect an emotion, look internally, because since it is not coming from me, it must be coming from from you.

Who is trying to convert you? You, among others, make claims to supernatural entities and realms. Such claims are rather extraordinarily and not consistent with any rational explanation that exists in nature so it’s not untoward that others would ask for an explanation of these supernatural entities and realms.

What is so extraordinary about it? At the heart of this debate is whether or not the material world was created by spirit. If the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive. There's nothing extraordinary about this. It's just logic.

 

[Meriweather]

Who is trying to convert you?

I did not think anyone was, but you keep harping on me trying to convert you when it hasn't even occurred to me, the only alternative was that you were trying to convert me to atheism and was angry because I cannot. I know I am not angry,and I am not interested in converting anyone so the anger and conversion attempt had to be coming from you.

Either that, or you are confusing me with someone who is trying to convert you? Just to be clear, I am not that person.

 

[Meriweather]

You, among others, make claims to supernatural entities and realms. Such claims are rather extraordinarily and not consistent with any rational explanation that exists in nature so it’s not untoward that others would ask for an explanation of these supernatural entities and realms.

What claims? Specifically.

 

[Hollie]

Who is trying to convert you?

I did not think anyone was, but you keep harping on me trying to convert you when it hasn't even occurred to me, the only alternative was that you were trying to convert me to atheism and was angry because I cannot. I know I am not angry,and I am not interested in converting anyone so the anger and conversion attempt had to be coming from you.

Either that, or you are confusing me with someone who is trying to convert you? Just to be clear, I am not that person.

What anger and conversion attempt would that be?

 

[Hollie]

You, among others, make claims to supernatural entities and realms. Such claims are rather extraordinarily and not consistent with any rational explanation that exists in nature so it’s not untoward that others would ask for an explanation of these supernatural entities and realms.

What claims? Specifically.

Well, gods are a claim to supernaturalism.

 

[Meriweather]

What anger and conversion attempt would that be?

See the last sentence in your post #179, where you were projecting your emotions and assertions onto me. In the past I have politely asked you to refrain from that habit when in a conversation with me as I do not bring either emotion nor conversion into anything I post. I am just talking. Nothing more. Nothing less. Thank you.

 

[Meriweather]

Well, gods are a claim to supernaturalism.

What do you mean by "supernaturalism"?

 

[ding]

If God doesn’t exist, the universe came into existence by chance, the first living cell developed from non-living matter by chance, and all living things are the eventual product of the blind, undirected process of evolution. In such a case, human life is no more valuable than dust, and there is no basis for saying that any life matters. Only if there is an author of life who creates and imbues us with a meaning greater than our physical parts can lives actually matter, and in an equal way.

If God doesn’t exist, there’s also no objective standard for labeling an action—such as murder—wrong. If we’re all just the product of blind, purposeless forces, morality is just an opinion. Unless there is a higher-than-human moral authority, no one has a basis for claiming that murder is objectively wrong.

And finally, if God doesn’t exist, the concept of justice is meaningless because there can be no right or wrong in the first place to require justice. As C.S. Lewis famously said about his conversion to Christianity, “My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?” Justice requires a standard, and there is no objective standard in a purposeless universe.

5 Ways Christians are Getting Swept into a Secular Worldview in This Cultural Moment

Culture is influencing the church's response more than the church is influencing culture.

christianmomthoughts.com

There is zero evidence of any god

Why can't what was created be used as evidence?

 

[Hollie]

Well, gods are a claim to supernaturalism.

What do you mean by "supernaturalism"?

Supernaturalism. Outside of the natural.

What do you think supernatural means?

 

[Meriweather]

Supernaturalism. Outside of the natural.

What do you think supernatural means?

I am asking for your definition. For example, over-reacting may be outside what some consider natural, but do you consider it supernatural? Meditation and contemplation are often calming influences, but are they supernatural influences? John Dewey said, " Every great advance in science has issued from a new audacity of imagination." Is imagination supernatural?

Actually, I dismiss the term 'supernatural'. I think in terms of, What is physical and What is spiritual? What is the connection between the two?

 

[ChemEngineer]

What is so extraordinary about it? At the heart of this debate is whether or not the material world was created by spirit. If the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive. There's nothing extraordinary about this. It's just logic.

You wrote this? Utterly mind-boggling. Thoughtful, honest people will respect its elegant truth. But only thoughtful, honest people.

 

[Hollie]

Supernaturalism. Outside of the natural.

What do you think supernatural means?

I am asking for your definition. For example, over-reacting may be outside what some consider natural, but do you consider it supernatural? Meditation and contemplation are often calming influences, but are they supernatural influences? John Dewey said, " Every great advance in science has issued from a new audacity of imagination." Is imagination supernatural?

Actually, I dismiss the term 'supernatural'. I think in terms of, What is physical and What is spiritual? What is the connection between the two?

Supernaturalism. Outside of the natural.

What is spiritual? Are there spirit realms? Are spirit realms natural or supernatural.

 

[Taz]

If God doesn’t exist, the universe came into existence by chance, the first living cell developed from non-living matter by chance, and all living things are the eventual product of the blind, undirected process of evolution. In such a case, human life is no more valuable than dust, and there is no basis for saying that any life matters. Only if there is an author of life who creates and imbues us with a meaning greater than our physical parts can lives actually matter, and in an equal way.

If God doesn’t exist, there’s also no objective standard for labeling an action—such as murder—wrong. If we’re all just the product of blind, purposeless forces, morality is just an opinion. Unless there is a higher-than-human moral authority, no one has a basis for claiming that murder is objectively wrong.

And finally, if God doesn’t exist, the concept of justice is meaningless because there can be no right or wrong in the first place to require justice. As C.S. Lewis famously said about his conversion to Christianity, “My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?” Justice requires a standard, and there is no objective standard in a purposeless universe.

5 Ways Christians are Getting Swept into a Secular Worldview in This Cultural Moment

Culture is influencing the church's response more than the church is influencing culture.

christianmomthoughts.com

That's why being agnostic is the thinking person's position. We don't know either way whether a god exists or not but leave the door open in case someone finds real proof either way.

Actually thinking people see that DNA is a molecular computer code of unimaginable ability that could not from itself by itself in a dead pond because nothing does not write code

No proof that's it's your preferred invisible dude. Only a possibility.

Actually there is proof that you are there and I am here.

Grow up

That also doesn't prove your preferred invisible dude.

That's why being agnostic is the thinking person's position.

Some prefer not to sit and think, but to explore and discover.

That's what agnostic's do, I know I do, and if I ever come across any real proof either way, I'm open to changing my mind. Seems fair to me, what do you think?

You would not change your mind if God stood before you and cured your blindness. Yea I know that you have no clue that you are blind

Actually, I'm AM blind. To con jobs.

So explain how even one line of DNA could form itself without an intelligence writing it? Keeping in mind that thousands of genes are needed for a small primordial life form.

You can't so you are implying the supernatural.

I can't, meaning science is still trying to figure it out. You on the other hand, don't know, so you settle on your preferred invisible buddy. Quite illogical.

 

[Taz]

So if you discovered something, share it with science. Otherwise, you didn't discover squat.

Science deals with what is physical. Every time we have an emotion, a philosophy, or an insight should we run to science? Should we remain a one note people?

Emotions can be picked up by science. Philosophy is simply a bunch of opinions. An insight is something we deduce. All perfectly provable. Your invisible friend, not so much.

There are things that are outside the realm of science. That is what most atheists simply don't get. Science is just ONE way of discovering truth, not the only way.

For example, logic and mathematics cannot be proven by science, because science presupposes them. Morality and ethics are also outside the realm of science. There are other things as well.

Science only explains the physical world. There is so much more than just the physical. And personally I think it's a waste of time to be so focused on ONLY the physical. You are missing out on so much more.

ETA: So trying to "prove" God's existence in the same way you'd prove something physical (via science) is like trying to hear a taste with your ears, or smell something with your eyes. It's just not the way it works.

I'm agnostic so don't see proof either for or against the possibility of an invisible superbeing who cares what I do. But leave the door open in case anyone comes up with proof either way. Can't be any fairer than that.

 

[Taz]

I wouldn’t accept the idea that one unthinkingly inherits the gods commonly associated with their familial / geographic location.

The same can be said about science. Or have you custom assembled your science? And then you custom assembled God so that you did not have to bother with God? Kind of like custom assembling a wardrobe so one doesn't have to bother with ironing...?

The same can’t be said about science. Science relies on a hypothesis, testing and evaluation of evidence to reach conclusions. Accepting culturally appropriate gods due to tradition and because those are the gods you inherited is like wearing a hand-me-down wardrobe.

Science is manifested by consciousness, Hollie. You can't get around the human element.

Science exists without man ever discovering any of it.

Yes, so does mathematics, music, love and truth. All of which are manifested by consciousness.

Math is part of the matrix of time and space. Music can be said to exist independent of man because the universe makes sounds. More Aaron Copeland than anything by the Beatles, but still.
Love and truth are characteristics of humans and can't exist without them.

 

[ding]

So if you discovered something, share it with science. Otherwise, you didn't discover squat.

Science deals with what is physical. Every time we have an emotion, a philosophy, or an insight should we run to science? Should we remain a one note people?

Emotions can be picked up by science. Philosophy is simply a bunch of opinions. An insight is something we deduce. All perfectly provable. Your invisible friend, not so much.

There are things that are outside the realm of science. That is what most atheists simply don't get. Science is just ONE way of discovering truth, not the only way.

For example, logic and mathematics cannot be proven by science, because science presupposes them. Morality and ethics are also outside the realm of science. There are other things as well.

Science only explains the physical world. There is so much more than just the physical. And personally I think it's a waste of time to be so focused on ONLY the physical. You are missing out on so much more.

ETA: So trying to "prove" God's existence in the same way you'd prove something physical (via science) is like trying to hear a taste with your ears, or smell something with your eyes. It's just not the way it works.

I'm agnostic so don't see proof either for or against the possibility of an invisible superbeing who cares what I do. But leave the door open in case anyone comes up with proof either way. Can't be any fairer than that.

No. You are an atheist, Taz. You don't believe God exists. That's an atheist. If you say you don't know if God exists that's still an atheist because that's not believing in God.

 

[ding]

I wouldn’t accept the idea that one unthinkingly inherits the gods commonly associated with their familial / geographic location.

The same can be said about science. Or have you custom assembled your science? And then you custom assembled God so that you did not have to bother with God? Kind of like custom assembling a wardrobe so one doesn't have to bother with ironing...?

The same can’t be said about science. Science relies on a hypothesis, testing and evaluation of evidence to reach conclusions. Accepting culturally appropriate gods due to tradition and because those are the gods you inherited is like wearing a hand-me-down wardrobe.

Science is manifested by consciousness, Hollie. You can't get around the human element.

Science exists without man ever discovering any of it.

Yes, so does mathematics, music, love and truth. All of which are manifested by consciousness.

Math is part of the matrix of time and space. Music can be said to exist independent of man because the universe makes sounds. More Aaron Copeland than anything by the Beatles, but still.
Love and truth are characteristics of humans and can't exist without them.

Everything is discovered.