If I Shake my Fist at the Sky

[AVG-JOE]

I believe in the existence of a Creator.

I have yet to find any reason to believe that a Being capable of creating the heaven and the Earth, the atoms, the Big Bang, life itself, the stars, the planets, the galaxies, black holes, gravity, time and space and everything in between would find it in any way necessary -- or even desirable -- to have us (human beings) "worship" Him.

what if "he" had a messiah complex?

What if we postulate that the Creator of All is also mentally unbalanced, you mean?

I dunno.

I doubt there's much we could do about it.

Why does there have to be an intelligent creator behind it all?

What if it just is?​

What if Semi-Sentient Monkeys are the inevitable result of really thick scum growing on a wet rock in space, existing only because of the Time allowed by Mom's Luck as a warm, wet planet?

 

[Derideo_Te]

what if "he" had a messiah complex?

What if we postulate that the Creator of All is also mentally unbalanced, you mean?

I dunno.

I doubt there's much we could do about it.

it would go along way in explaining some of the odder aspects of faith. don't ya think.?

Got to admit that Ilyar might be on to something there. It would explain a whole lot about why things are the way they are. Given that this "creator" never bothers to answer anyone's prayers (maybe he has them directly routed to his junk mail folder) he probably doesn't care if anyone is worshiping him.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

what if "he" had a messiah complex?

What if we postulate that the Creator of All is also mentally unbalanced, you mean?

I dunno.

I doubt there's much we could do about it.

it would go along way in explaining some of the odder aspects of faith. don't ya think.?

No.

I think most religion (possibly all of it?), and most doctrines of "faith" regardless of which "faith" we are talking about, come from human beings, not from the Creator.

 

[AVG-JOE]

One thing fo shizzle... if there is a God, there can be only One!
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRWH_seUNRo]There Can Be Only One! - Highlander (10/10) Movie CLIP (1986) HD - YouTube[/ame]

 

[IlarMeilyr]

what if "he" had a messiah complex?

What if we postulate that the Creator of All is also mentally unbalanced, you mean?

I dunno.

I doubt there's much we could do about it.

Why does there have to be an intelligent creator behind it all?

What if it just is?​

What if Semi-Sentient Monkeys are the inevitable result of really thick scum growing on a wet rock in space, existing only because of the Time allowed by Mom's Luck as a warm, wet planet?

NOTE: I don't believe I have expressed the belief that (as you couch it) there "does" have to be an intelligent creator behind it all.

I happen to believe it, but I don't see any reason why you cannot go, instead, with your pond scum theory.

For my part, I think life DID evolve from the primordial ooze. Then I ask myself "o.k. And where did all that primordial ooze stuff come from?"

And then I cogitate and read and so forth. And I come to decide that maybe it did all come from that original big bang thingamajig. But then, inevitably, I ask myself, "o.k.; and where did the original big bang micro-atom come from?"

THEN it starts to get complicated. For, I cogitate some more and decide that I accept as true the premise that nothing comes from nothing. For every "thing" that exists there has to be some something else from which it is derived. Some wise men once said it along these lines: "nothing can exist prior to itself."

It's that whole causation thing.

And yet, if God created the original micro atom from which all matter and energy and time and space eventually emerged, then who or what "created" God?

I dunno. Super God, maybe? Ah, but that just leads to a chain of causation. Super God is the Son of Super Duper God? And Super Duper God is the offspring of Super Super Duper God? Etc. Not an elegant or satisfactory solution.

And, naturally, having cogitated a bit more, I think: If God can exist prior to Himself, then maybe it is time/space/matter/energy that can spring into existence without any prior causation?

I wasn't there at the time, so far as I can recall, so I really can't say.

But it goes beyond just the unanswerable mystery.

For you see -- I perceive a pattern in the universe. These "rules." Laws. Science. Symmetries. Can it really be the case that some random sparking into existence of everything from essentially nothing comes with patterns and laws that we can discern and quantify! I think that's amazing and --

it leads me to believe that it didn't JUST "happen." It was a product of some larger design. It constitutes (to me) a trace hint of the notion that it is not "random." It was the product of a deliberate CREATION.

Of course, as I say, I wasn't there at the time. So I really cannot say for sure.

 

[Derideo_Te]

What if we postulate that the Creator of All is also mentally unbalanced, you mean?

I dunno.

I doubt there's much we could do about it.

it would go along way in explaining some of the odder aspects of faith. don't ya think.?

No.

I think most religion (possibly all of it?), and most doctrines of "faith" regardless of which "faith" we are talking about, come from human beings, not from the Creator.

Agreed, mankind came up with religions as a way to explain the unknown. We know more now than then but we are a long way from knowing all there is to know. Life is an adventure in learning new things. I was watching a Nova program about how the satellites can detect the influence of weather at one place on the planet changing what is happening thousands of miles away. (Nothing to do with GW.) It is fascinating just how interconnected all life is to the complex systems of water circulation around the globe. But I digress only slightly. What fell from the sky was taken as "signs from the gods" when religions were writing their "holy books". Now we can observe our planet from a "godlike" perch 25,000 miles up in the sky and see how it works. Truly awesome when you stop and think about it.

 

[BreezeWood]

well, the "engineering" (God) of the DNA molecule is not a random event in the creation of a new born life and is not the purview of anything known to mankind per its creation and certainly exists physically despite the absence of an observable example.

so, does Life not exist because it can not be seen - or an inclination for it to do so ?


this Thread has no merit.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

well, the "engineering" (God) of the DNA molecule is not a random event in the creation of a new born life and is not the purview of anything known to mankind per its creation and certainly exists physically despite the absence of an observable example.

so, does Life not exist because it can not be seen - or an inclination for it to do so ?

Huh?

this Thread has no merit.

heh?

 

[hortysir]

Fictitiously?

That depends on how a person chooses to view life. I view life as a gift that was given by a God that created the Earth, humans and a book (Bible) to help us understand it all.

How's that working out for you? Do you feel lucky?

huge Powerball jackpot tonight

 

[hortysir]

[

To the bold:
The way I have always been taught (not saying anyone is right or wrong, just trying to clarify a falsehood) is that; when we are brought to Judgement - whether we've been told of the Gospel or not - HIS glory and majesty will be revealed. THAT is when you are given the chance to 'recognize'. IF you choose to scoff at HIM, at that time, then your fate is your own.


In short, since I DO "buy Christian dogma", no one is in "hell".
Their bodies are in Hades (pit) awaiting Judgement.
And only two or three humans are "sitting on a cloud" somewhere.

No wonder you're so incensed by Christianity.
You don't even know what you're criticizing.

At least, talking with Joe, he's come from it and has more insight.

Guy, I was brought up Catholic. The ORIGINAL article, you might say. That is EXACTLY what they taught. The Bhuddists were going to hell. The Protestants were going to hell. YOu were going to hell if you ate meat during Lent.

Shit, man, Christianity can't fucking exist without threatening people with Hell.

Frankly, I have no use for a worthless, mean-spirited philosophy.

One doesn't have to be "threatened" with Hell/

Hell is (or will be) a conscience choice

 

[Agent.Tom]

The proof part.

Why can't God part a sea or drop a perfect pillar of fire in time for the 6:00 news?

Why does proof of God have to be impossible?

I have proof enough. I am utterly and completely convinced of God's existence. And yet, all the personal experiences I have had can only translate in me being convinced. It seems clear to me that, for whatever reason, God's intent is to reveal Himself to people, usually one person at a time, using His own time table. Now that I'm a believer, I don't get bogged down in questions like, "Why did God wait until 10 years ago to reveal Himself to me," or, "Why did God reveal Himself to me, but not others close to me?" Those are interesting questions, but what's important right now is that I'm a believer and that won't change. I talk to people; I try to remove the barriers they put between themselves and God; I try to help reveal the truth and dispel misconceptions and dishonest claims; I do what I can. But ultimately no one I speak with or try to convince, will truly believe until God--through what's called the "Holy Spirit," effectuates change within that person.

 

[Agent.Tom]

One thing fo shizzle... if there is a God, there can be only One!

Fo shizzle! Yo.

 

[Agent.Tom]

it leads me to believe that it didn't JUST "happen." It was a product of some larger design. It constitutes (to me) a trace hint of the notion that it is not "random." It was the product of a deliberate CREATION.

Of course, as I say, I wasn't there at the time. So I really cannot say for sure.

Yep, I think most of us who at least try to be intellectually honest have gone through the same back-tracking review in our minds.

Ultimately, if pressed long and hard enough, we ALL have to admit that either (a) something or someone has always existed, or (b) something came from nothing and without an antecedent cause.

Option (b) completely contradicts logic. Therefore (a) has to be assumed. Atheists can claim the universe in some form has always existed, but would obviously be hypocrites to then call out Christians for believing the Creator has always existed. Anyway, since the obvious conclusion is that something (be it an Entity or the universe) has always existed, the more important point is, the origin of reality stretches beyond the confines of science and therefore, science can never hope to answer the question, "How did all this begin?" If we want to attempt to answer the question, we can safely investigate resources outside the realm of science. Science is good at predicting future events based on experiments performed on existing things. Science will never be able to prove empirically what caused this universe to spring into existence, or, prove empirically that the universe has existed since time began.

 

[AVG-JOE]

That depends on how a person chooses to view life. I view life as a gift that was given by a God that created the Earth, humans and a book (Bible) to help us understand it all.

How's that working out for you? Do you feel lucky?

huge Powerball jackpot tonight

Looks like we're all buyin' another ticket for Wednesday, Bro'...

Good LUCK, Man!!​

 

[AVG-JOE]

The proof part.

Why can't God part a sea or drop a perfect pillar of fire in time for the 6:00 news?

Why does proof of God have to be impossible?

I have proof enough. I am utterly and completely convinced of God's existence. And yet, all the personal experiences I have had can only translate in me being convinced. It seems clear to me that, for whatever reason, God's intent is to reveal Himself to people, usually one person at a time, using His own time table. Now that I'm a believer, I don't get bogged down in questions like, "Why did God wait until 10 years ago to reveal Himself to me," or, "Why did God reveal Himself to me, but not others close to me?" Those are interesting questions, but what's important right now is that I'm a believer and that won't change. I talk to people; I try to remove the barriers they put between themselves and God; I try to help reveal the truth and dispel misconceptions and dishonest claims; I do what I can. But ultimately no one I speak with or try to convince, will truly believe until God--through what's called the "Holy Spirit," effectuates change within that person.

I like what you have to say, and what you say certainly explains some of the current conditions in evidence on the ground, but it still doesn't explain why God refuses to provide crowd-stunning proof of Himself, when the ancient stories are peppered with spectacular reveals.

I like what you have to say about your personal experience with Divine revelation, but the question remains:

Why does God refuse to reveal Himself in the here-and-now, given His supposed history of newsworthy events?​

 

[Derideo_Te]

it leads me to believe that it didn't JUST "happen." It was a product of some larger design. It constitutes (to me) a trace hint of the notion that it is not "random." It was the product of a deliberate CREATION.

Of course, as I say, I wasn't there at the time. So I really cannot say for sure.

Yep, I think most of us who at least try to be intellectually honest have gone through the same back-tracking review in our minds.

Ultimately, if pressed long and hard enough, we ALL have to admit that either (a) something or someone has always existed, or (b) something came from nothing and without an antecedent cause.

Option (b) completely contradicts logic. Therefore (a) has to be assumed. Atheists can claim the universe in some form has always existed, but would obviously be hypocrites to then call out Christians for believing the Creator has always existed. Anyway, since the obvious conclusion is that something (be it an Entity or the universe) has always existed, the more important point is, the origin of reality stretches beyond the confines of science and therefore, science can never hope to answer the question, "How did all this begin?" If we want to attempt to answer the question, we can safely investigate resources outside the realm of science. Science is good at predicting future events based on experiments performed on existing things. Science will never be able to prove empirically what caused this universe to spring into existence, or, prove empirically that the universe has existed since time began.

While your reasoning is sound it falls apart when you pose the question "How did all this begin?" Because if you only apply it to the physical universe you are neglecting to apply it equally to the supernatural entity. Either both have a beginning or neither of them do. For believers their deity has always existed. For Atheists the laws of physics state that matter/energy has always existed. Your question is based upon the fallacious assumption that there had to be a "beginning". Given that this is the question that the Christian bible attempts to answer on the first page it is taken as "gospel" by believers. But it requires the suspension of critical thinking and denial of the laws of physics.

So while your logic is sound in dismissing option (b) it makes an assumption in option (a) that has no basis in fact and pits it against one that does. Certainly believers are entitled to their faith and I will defend the right to those beliefs. But the facts as they stand today are irrefutable. We are only driving ourselves apart if we continue to try and impose our will on others to believe as we do. We need to respect each other enough to allow others their freedom to the point where it does not impinge on our own rights and vice versa.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

it leads me to believe that it didn't JUST "happen." It was a product of some larger design. It constitutes (to me) a trace hint of the notion that it is not "random." It was the product of a deliberate CREATION.

Of course, as I say, I wasn't there at the time. So I really cannot say for sure.

Yep, I think most of us who at least try to be intellectually honest have gone through the same back-tracking review in our minds.

Ultimately, if pressed long and hard enough, we ALL have to admit that either (a) something or someone has always existed, or (b) something came from nothing and without an antecedent cause.

Option (b) completely contradicts logic. Therefore (a) has to be assumed. Atheists can claim the universe in some form has always existed, but would obviously be hypocrites to then call out Christians for believing the Creator has always existed. Anyway, since the obvious conclusion is that something (be it an Entity or the universe) has always existed, the more important point is, the origin of reality stretches beyond the confines of science and therefore, science can never hope to answer the question, "How did all this begin?" If we want to attempt to answer the question, we can safely investigate resources outside the realm of science. Science is good at predicting future events based on experiments performed on existing things. Science will never be able to prove empirically what caused this universe to spring into existence, or, prove empirically that the universe has existed since time began.

While your reasoning is sound it falls apart when you pose the question "How did all this begin?" Because if you only apply it to the physical universe you are neglecting to apply it equally to the supernatural entity. Either both have a beginning or neither of them do. For believers their deity has always existed. For Atheists the laws of physics state that matter/energy has always existed. Your question is based upon the fallacious assumption that there had to be a "beginning". Given that this is the question that the Christian bible attempts to answer on the first page it is taken as "gospel" by believers. But it requires the suspension of critical thinking and denial of the laws of physics.

So while your logic is sound in dismissing option (b) it makes an assumption in option (a) that has no basis in fact and pits it against one that does. Certainly believers are entitled to their faith and I will defend the right to those beliefs. But the facts as they stand today are irrefutable. We are only driving ourselves apart if we continue to try and impose our will on others to believe as we do. We need to respect each other enough to allow others their freedom to the point where it does not impinge on our own rights and vice versa.

I don't know about that.

The natural comes complete with natural laws. It comes with "Science" and it comes with us having an ability to measure it and mark it and hypothesize about it and test it.

The "supernatural," by definition, would not necessarily be bound by the natural laws.

 

[Pop23]

If you shake your fist to the sky, make sure it's not during a thunderstorm

You might find the answer to your question sooner then you think

 

[Derideo_Te]

Yep, I think most of us who at least try to be intellectually honest have gone through the same back-tracking review in our minds.

Ultimately, if pressed long and hard enough, we ALL have to admit that either (a) something or someone has always existed, or (b) something came from nothing and without an antecedent cause.

Option (b) completely contradicts logic. Therefore (a) has to be assumed. Atheists can claim the universe in some form has always existed, but would obviously be hypocrites to then call out Christians for believing the Creator has always existed. Anyway, since the obvious conclusion is that something (be it an Entity or the universe) has always existed, the more important point is, the origin of reality stretches beyond the confines of science and therefore, science can never hope to answer the question, "How did all this begin?" If we want to attempt to answer the question, we can safely investigate resources outside the realm of science. Science is good at predicting future events based on experiments performed on existing things. Science will never be able to prove empirically what caused this universe to spring into existence, or, prove empirically that the universe has existed since time began.

While your reasoning is sound it falls apart when you pose the question "How did all this begin?" Because if you only apply it to the physical universe you are neglecting to apply it equally to the supernatural entity. Either both have a beginning or neither of them do. For believers their deity has always existed. For Atheists the laws of physics state that matter/energy has always existed. Your question is based upon the fallacious assumption that there had to be a "beginning". Given that this is the question that the Christian bible attempts to answer on the first page it is taken as "gospel" by believers. But it requires the suspension of critical thinking and denial of the laws of physics.

So while your logic is sound in dismissing option (b) it makes an assumption in option (a) that has no basis in fact and pits it against one that does. Certainly believers are entitled to their faith and I will defend the right to those beliefs. But the facts as they stand today are irrefutable. We are only driving ourselves apart if we continue to try and impose our will on others to believe as we do. We need to respect each other enough to allow others their freedom to the point where it does not impinge on our own rights and vice versa.

I don't know about that.

The natural comes complete with natural laws. It comes with "Science" and it comes with us having an ability to measure it and mark it and hypothesize about it and test it.

The "supernatural," by definition, would not necessarily be bound by the natural laws.

IOW logic does not apply to the supernatural either which would explain some of the more bizarre aspects of the supernatural.

 

[Agent.Tom]

Ultimately, if pressed long and hard enough, we ALL have to admit that either (a) something or someone has always existed, or (b) something came from nothing and without an antecedent cause.

Option (b) completely contradicts logic. Therefore (a) has to be assumed.

While your reasoning is sound it falls apart when you pose the question "How did all this begin?"

Oh?

Because if you only apply it to the physical universe...

... which I did not do...

you are neglecting to apply it equally to the supernatural entity.

I have no problem applying it to God, and never avoided doing so.

Either both have a beginning or neither of them do.

Incorrect. The biblical claim is God has no beginning, and the universe has a beginning.

For believers their deity has always existed. For Atheists the laws of physics state that matter/energy has always existed. Your question is based upon the fallacious assumption that there had to be a "beginning".

The conclusion that there had to be a "beginning," is hardly a fallacious assumption. In fact, the Big Bang Theory is based on the same premise. Are you prepared to accuse anyone who buys into the Big Bang Theory of making a fallacious assumption?

Given that this is the question that the Christian bible attempts to answer on the first page it is taken as "gospel" by believers.

The bible doesn't "attempt" to answer how or when the Creator came about. It simply states that the universe was created. If there is a creator of this universe, all biblical claims related to creation are completely logical.

But it requires the suspension of critical thinking and denial of the laws of physics.

Not so. In fact, what does require a denial of the laws of physics is to claim that the universe sprang into existence without an antecedent cause.