This is why there's no proof of God

[turzovka]

I guess you were brainwashed because that is not what most Christians understand God to be.

It surely is not what Catholicism teaches. (note: purgatory is God's justice and mercy for so many souls)

Did they tell you who ends up in hell? Well they should not have because absolutely no one knows that or could even say hypothetically.

And neither can I account for why there are so many who declare there is no evidence for God. That totally astounds me. The very fact there is hyper-complex life and beauty on this earth is evidence all to itself. Or are you one of those who thinks if you stare at a beetle long enough it will turn into an ostrich all on its own?

Dunno much about Catholicism do you?

"Hell (infernus) in theological usage is a place of punishment after death. Theologians distinguish four meanings of the term hell:

* hell in the strict sense, or the place of punishment for the damned, be they demons or men;
* the limbo of infants (limbus parvulorum), where those who die in original sin alone, and without personal mortal sin, are confined and undergo some kind of punishment;
* the limbo of the Fathers (limbus patrum), in which the souls of the just who died before Christ awaited their admission to heaven; for in the meantime heaven was closed against them in punishment for the sin of Adam;
* purgatory, where the just, who die in venial sin or who still owe a debt of temporal punishment for sin, are cleansed by suffering before their admission to heaven."
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Hell

Love the part about how innocent babies go to Hell too if not baptized. Ya, that's fair, holding a helpless baby responsible for the actions of their parents. That's the religion for me.

No. It is more a case of your inability to comprehend either deeper meaning or technical differences.

Limbo for unbaptized babies was never a formal doctrine of the Church. Never. It was taught for centuries as such because the Church was concerned that so many parents took a very long time to get their child baptized or some not at all. So they did use it more as a scare tactic than an actual understanding of what happens to infants who die unbaptized. But they surely never referenced they go to hell, not in the same meaning as hell of damned souls.

Since then the Church has clarified what I just said and does not reference limbo in any way. But it was never a formal doctrine of the Church, which is of strict prominence.

 

[MaryL]

There are three alternatives going on here. A) God is real and religion has nailed his thoughts down pat. B) The universe is self starting and there is no god. C) The divine creator may or may not exist and it doesn't care a jot whether or not you believe in it or not, and religion is just arbitrary. I go with C.

 

[G.T.]

The odds of being one of those children means no, it's not that bad.

If your parameters for "good" are "perfection," then you'll never be happy. I don't live like that, it'll be a complete cynical waste of my very valuable life here. I cherish every moment and love it.

Perfection doesn't exist anywhere in the universe. A good thing too. If it did, the universe would never have even formed.

But in a time when we can easily prevent, and treat things like diarrhea and hunger, that we don't suggests we are as far from even being 'decent' or 'fair' as you can get.

No, it doesn't mean we are far from being decent.

It means that getting a cabal of 7billion people to come to the same conclusions in regard to right and wrong, and following that organizing the massive scale maneuvers it would take to rearrange the way civilization as a whole lives in general....................IS NOT EASY.

And that's ALL it means, quite frankly. Because the people I've ever met, i.e. "my world," were by and far MAJORITY compassionate and filled with empathy. Life savers themselves.

We are not perfect doesn't mean we are not good. Shit, we are great. More people as a percentage SURVIVE today and survive to be WAY older BECAUSE of how far we've come as a species. That's success, abeit not "perfection."

 

[Delta4Embassy]

No. It is more a case of your inability to comprehend either deeper meaning or technical differences.

Limbo for unbaptized babies was never a formal doctrine of the Church. Never. It was taught for centuries as such because the Church was concerned that so many parents took a very long time to get their child baptized or some not at all. So they did use it more as a scare tactic than an actual understanding of what happens to infants who die unbaptized. But they surely never referenced they go to hell, not in the same meaning as hell of damned souls.

Since then the Church has clarified what I just said and does not reference limbo in any way. But it was never a formal doctrine of the Church, which is of strict prominence.

Show me a link to Vatican City's Papal decree saying something about that and I'll believe you. Until then I'll assume you're Catholic and ignorant of your own faith just as many are in all religions.

 

[G.T.]

There are three alternatives going on here. A) God is real and religion has nailed his thoughts down pat. B) The universe is self starting and there is no god. C) The divine creator may or may not exist and it doesn't care a jot whether or not you believe in it or not, and religion is just arbitrary. I go with C.

C as well, with the exception that it's not necessarily divine if it exists, either.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

No, it doesn't mean we are far from being decent.

It means that getting a cabal of 7billion people to come to the same conclusions in regard to right and wrong, and following that organizing the massive scale maneuvers it would take to rearrange the way civilization as a whole lives in general....................IS NOT EASY.

And that's ALL it means, quite frankly. Because the people I've ever met, i.e. "my world," were by and far MAJORITY compassionate and filled with empathy. Life savers themselves.

We are not perfect doesn't mean we are not good. Shit, we are great. More people as a percentage SURVIVE today and survive to be WAY older BECAUSE of how far we've come as a species. That's success, abeit not "perfection."

The USA by itself could end global starvation if it wanted to. We throw away enough food to end world hunger outright. That we don't suggests we want it to happen. We drop bombs in Iraq to save a few thousand on a mountaintop, but can't be bothered to end hunger in a world where the richest nation (that'd be us) throws away the food to effect that?

No one's perfect, perfection's impossible. But we're not even decent either.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

C as well, with the exception that it's not necessarily divine if it exists, either.

Reminds me of Futurama where the monks at a monastery are looking fro God with a radiotelescope and one of them working hard suddenly says like, "Maybe the universe is good." To which the elder monks replies, "Oh isn't that convenient and here you've found him and can take a break. GET BACK TO WORK!"

 

[G.T.]

No, it doesn't mean we are far from being decent.

It means that getting a cabal of 7billion people to come to the same conclusions in regard to right and wrong, and following that organizing the massive scale maneuvers it would take to rearrange the way civilization as a whole lives in general....................IS NOT EASY.

And that's ALL it means, quite frankly. Because the people I've ever met, i.e. "my world," were by and far MAJORITY compassionate and filled with empathy. Life savers themselves.

We are not perfect doesn't mean we are not good. Shit, we are great. More people as a percentage SURVIVE today and survive to be WAY older BECAUSE of how far we've come as a species. That's success, abeit not "perfection."

The USA by itself could end global starvation if it wanted to. We throw away enough food to end world hunger outright. That we don't suggests we want it to happen. We drop bombs in Iraq to save a few thousand on a mountaintop, but can't be bothered to end hunger in a world where the richest nation (that'd be us) throws away the food to effect that?

No one's perfect, perfection's impossible. But we're not even decent either.

Well, "that we dont suggests we want it to happen" is where I will respectfully disagree.

We do try, many private organizations in America donate to those exact causes, in the BILLIONS OF $. And so does our Government.

That we dont succeed is another story. And you can claim its purposeful on the Gov't part. That's the Gov't. The population does just fine with charity.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Well, "that we dont suggests we want it to happen" is where I will respectfully disagree.

We do try, many private organizations in America donate to those exact causes, in the BILLIONS OF $. And so does our Government.

That we dont succeed is another story. And you can claim its purposeful on the Gov't part. That's the Gov't. The population does just fine with charity.

Throwing money around isn't fixing anything if corrupt officials and warlords are the only ones catching it. Wanna fix hunger in Africa you have to take food there yourself. Money isn't doing anything as evidenced by how we've been talking about African hunger for my entire life of 43 years.

 

[G.T.]

Well, "that we dont suggests we want it to happen" is where I will respectfully disagree.

We do try, many private organizations in America donate to those exact causes, in the BILLIONS OF $. And so does our Government.

That we dont succeed is another story. And you can claim its purposeful on the Gov't part. That's the Gov't. The population does just fine with charity.

Throwing money around isn't fixing anything if corrupt officials and warlords are the only ones catching it. Wanna fix hunger in Africa you have to take food there yourself. Money isn't doing anything as evidenced by how we've been talking about African hunger for my entire life of 43 years.

It still doesn't make earth or humans bad. I'm not seeing that. We could do better is all that entails, not that we're not good.

Sorry, but just yesterday probably 500 people in America died trying to protect another.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

It still doesn't make earth or humans bad. I'm not seeing that. We could do better is all that entails, not that we're not good.

Sorry, but just yesterday probably 500 people in America died trying to protect another.

America has less than 5% of the planet's population yet consumes 25% of its resources. We have a LONG ways to go before we get up to decent.

 

[G.T.]

How many life saving surgeries happened today?

How many paramedics responded to calls to save lives, or Cops were in the line of duty?

Shit, I did something very nice for tonight for my wife and I's 5th anniversary.

Sorry bud, I'm not "bad," and neither are MOST of my other fellow humans. I don't buy that line of thought. We could do better =/= we are bad.

We are good, we are great. We are not perfect.

 

[G.T.]

It still doesn't make earth or humans bad. I'm not seeing that. We could do better is all that entails, not that we're not good.

Sorry, but just yesterday probably 500 people in America died trying to protect another.

America has less than 5% of the planet's population yet consumes 25% of its resources. We have a LONG ways to go before we get up to decent.

That's a meaningless quote. You're referring to the paradigm of Governments. I'm referring to people as a whole, as a species.

I dont meet many bad people.

It's flat out fucking rare, actually.

 

[G.T.]

This too. We just rule.

We could do better, but damn dwelling on it and not living in a positive way is a waste of your precious life here. You should feel lucky you are breathing, and keep it moving. With a smile.

 

[turzovka]

No. It is more a case of your inability to comprehend either deeper meaning or technical differences.

Limbo for unbaptized babies was never a formal doctrine of the Church. Never. It was taught for centuries as such because the Church was concerned that so many parents took a very long time to get their child baptized or some not at all. So they did use it more as a scare tactic than an actual understanding of what happens to infants who die unbaptized. But they surely never referenced they go to hell, not in the same meaning as hell of damned souls.

Since then the Church has clarified what I just said and does not reference limbo in any way. But it was never a formal doctrine of the Church, which is of strict prominence.

Show me a link to Vatican City's Papal decree saying something about that and I'll believe you. Until then I'll assume you're Catholic and ignorant of your own faith just as many are in all religions.

Here is one reference. I pull out excerpts from the 2006 article below.

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0506867.htm
Closing the doors of limbo: Theologians say it was hypothesis

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- An international group of Vatican-appointed theologians is about to recommend that the Catholic Church close the doors of limbo forever.
Many Catholics grew up thinking limbo -- the place where babies who have died without baptism spend eternity in a state of "natural happiness" but not in the presence of God -- was part of Catholic tradition.

Instead, it was a hypothesis -- a theory held out as a possible way to balance the Christian belief in the necessity of baptism with belief in God's mercy.

Like hypotheses in any branch of science, a theological hypothesis can be proven wrong or be set aside when it is clear it does not help explain Catholic faith.

…But the church, "as mother and teacher," also must reflect on how God saves all those created in his image and likeness, particularly when the individual is especially weak "or not yet in possession of the use of reason and freedom," the archbishop said.

…In the 1985 book-length interview, "The Ratzinger Report," the future Pope Benedict said, "Limbo was never a defined truth of faith. Personally -- and here I am speaking more as a theologian and not as prefect of the congregation -- I would abandon it, since it was only a theological hypothesis.

…In "God and the World," published in 2000, he said limbo had been used "to justify the necessity of baptizing infants as early as possible" to ensure that they had the "sanctifying grace" needed to wash away the effects of original sin.

 

[turzovka]

complexity is not evidence

that is absurd

No, of course not. Otherwise godless evolution would fall like a house of cards.
You have no choice but to make such a claim.

Evolutionist high priest Richard Dawkins says in his book - - - "Natural selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan consequences, has no purpose in view. Yet the living results of natural selection overwhelmingly impress us with the appearance of design as if by a master watchmaker, impress us with the illusion of design and planning.”

What a cop out -- “the illusion of design.”

The difference between complexity and designed escapes you. It's alright little lemming, God did it.

Not to worry, friend. I am long used to cowardly non-answers from the godless evolution crowd.

Complexity suggests design and order... not chaos or random happenstance. One human cell has more than a thousand machines inside it working in harmony supporting the function of the others. Pretty complex for a bunch of mindless molecules just crashing against each other hoping something interesting pops up.

 

[Mojo2]

"Since I left the Hell-fire church and began to help people overcome the religious brainwashing they have been subjected to, I have gotten many letters, phone calls and emails from people whose experience in Christianity caused gentle-souled persons like this one to “vomit alone in my apartment, certain I was elected for damnation by a cruel God who would laugh at me hysterically while I was ripped apart, eaten, fried, raped, and in every other imaginable way, tortured in hell”? He writes further, “I had long seriously considered killing myself in order to get out from under the emotional oppression and desperation of thoughts of my own damnation. The fear drove me to the point of complete insanity. I blew a solid three years of my youth (21-23) continuously contemplating my damnation and meanwhile lost friends, burdened family members, and drove my girlfriend away. I have yet to regain even a slight measure of what I lost. I was downing antidepressants and curling up in fetal position most nights bawling and praying that God would have mercy on me and unharden my heart so that I might actually be granted faith in Him, instead of Him willing me into reprobation and, therefore, everlasting, merciless torment and pure insanity in hell. Even now my walk with God is weak.""
The Infamous Hall of

This poor guy suffered even absent proof for God existing. And bears out my point about how we'd be paralyzed with fear if we had such proof. Thus, if God does exist and hides all the evidence it does it's because He knows that that's best.

'God' doesn't exist because it doesn't exist, hence the lack of 'proof.'

Same basic argument can be made about you loving your Mother.

Prove you do.

If you can't, does that mean you don't love her?

 

[G.T.]

complexity is not evidence

that is absurd

No, of course not. Otherwise godless evolution would fall like a house of cards.
You have no choice but to make such a claim.

Evolutionist high priest Richard Dawkins says in his book - - - "Natural selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan consequences, has no purpose in view. Yet the living results of natural selection overwhelmingly impress us with the appearance of design as if by a master watchmaker, impress us with the illusion of design and planning.”

What a cop out -- “the illusion of design.”

The difference between complexity and designed escapes you. It's alright little lemming, God did it.

Not to worry, friend. I am long used to cowardly non-answers from the godless evolution crowd.

Complexity suggests design and order... not chaos or random happenstance. One human cell has more than a thousand machines inside it working in harmony supporting the function of the others. Pretty complex for a bunch of mindless molecules just crashing against each other hoping something interesting pops up.

How about this for a non answer, ready?


V




V



(keep going)

V





V


But in all seriousness, the complexity argument doesn't work because of how many of (aLLEGED) designs have FAILED.

 

[turzovka]

complexity is not evidence

that is absurd

No, of course not. Otherwise godless evolution would fall like a house of cards.
You have no choice but to make such a claim.

Evolutionist high priest Richard Dawkins says in his book - - - "Natural selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan consequences, has no purpose in view. Yet the living results of natural selection overwhelmingly impress us with the appearance of design as if by a master watchmaker, impress us with the illusion of design and planning.”

What a cop out -- “the illusion of design.”

The difference between complexity and designed escapes you. It's alright little lemming, God did it.

Not to worry, friend. I am long used to cowardly non-answers from the godless evolution crowd.

Complexity suggests design and order... not chaos or random happenstance. One human cell has more than a thousand machines inside it working in harmony supporting the function of the others. Pretty complex for a bunch of mindless molecules just crashing against each other hoping something interesting pops up.

How about this for a non answer, ready?


V




V



(keep going)

V





V


But in all seriousness, the complexity argument doesn't work because of how many of (aLLEGED) designs have FAILED.

= desperation on the godless evolutionist still trying to avoid the obvious.

You see a beautiful painting, even a 6th grader knows there had to be a creator, there is no chance it could have assembled itself. He did not have to see the painter creating it to know it as a fact. It had to be designed.

But now you look at the hyper complexity of an eyeball or a brain or a nervous system and the godless evolutionist says "oh sure, that could have just happened by chance."

At least Dawkins had the ridiculous attempt at an answer to say "it only appears as though it were designed. It gives off the illusion of design."

How asinine are those who are so desperate to run away from God.