God? What do you think:

[Malak]

Make the observation and back it up. You can't because you "see" God, you don't observe God.

I have no problem with your believing, but proving your existence is exponentially easier than proving Gods.

The observation has been made and expressed, many times. Not in my power to make you believe it, wouldn't presume to try. Never have and always I say that has never been my intention. It's funny that people like yourself always demand me to prove it. The burden of proof can't be on me because I never had any intention on proving anything except how close-minded people are. But since they are close-minded, they don't want to accept such an observation. I'd call it a waste of time if I didn't have some success, no matter how rare.

 

[Malak]

See, that's what people don't get; there is no why. None. The universe has been around for at least 14 billion years, and it probably has at least another 14 billion to go. The roughly half-million years the human species spends on this iron rock, tucked away in an infinitesimal corner of an average galaxy, is an imperceptible flash as far as the cosmos are concerned, your 80 years are even less significant. Just enjoy the ride.

There is no way to know anything you just said. None of it can be proven.

 

[Malak]

You tell me. You're the one that doesn't know whether the things he claims are true are actually true.

You show in a single sentence how you live your entire life blind. You don't see anything, you just pretend. Your assumptions are the reason you can't grasp anything I could say to you, which is why I just turn the conversation in circles. A simple rational observation is beyond your ability to understand it because your mind is cluttered with bias. You apply filters to everything so that nothing is really what it seems to you.

You will never see God, you will never know truth, until you empty your mind. Basic Zen 101, dude.

 

[bfdd]

The observation has been made and expressed, many times. Not in my power to make you believe it, wouldn't presume to try. Never have and always I say that has never been my intention. It's funny that people like yourself always demand me to prove it. The burden of proof can't be on me because I never had any intention on proving anything except how close-minded people are. But since they are close-minded, they don't want to accept such an observation. I'd call it a waste of time if I didn't have some success, no matter how rare.

How do you observe him? You feel him inside, you hear him in your head, etc etc, to you it's God to me it's me. I'm not knocking you at all for believing dude, that wasn't my intent. I'm just letting you know it's infinitely easier to prove you exist than God. You can't prove God exists, you have to believe he exists and that's it. If you had to prove him, then what good would your faith be?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

See, that's what people don't get; there is no why. None.

Well, yes and no. There is no "why" that is the same for everybody. There is no objective "why." We all live our lives and do the things we do for private reasons. There are subjective "whys."

Religion is the attempt to make the "why" the same for everyone. It attempts to establish an objective "why" -- and that's precisely why it fails.

Malak will swear up and down that he's not religious, but as long as he believes that ultimately the "why" is the same for everyone -- that we are put here by his god as sinners in need of redemption in Christ Jesus -- he is buying into the religious fallacy. Reality is not so trite and simplistic. It will not be so compartmentalized. It is far more diverse and extravagant than could ever be contained in a simple fable like Christianity.

So, no, there is no singular "why." There is rather no limit to the diversity of "whys" which compel the universe onward. It astounds me that an individual could possibly believe in a god supposedly superlative in every aspect who is yet apparently incapable of accommodating such diversity.

Small minds, I guess.

 

[Malak]

You have no idea what I believe.

 

[bfdd]

Well, yes and no. There is no "why" that is the same for everybody. There is no objective "why." We all live our lives and do the things we do for private reasons. There are subjective "whys."

Religion is the attempt to make the "why" the same for everyone. It attempts to establish an objective "why" -- and that's precisely why it fails.

Malak will swear up and down that he's not religious, but as long as he believes that ultimately the "why" is the same for everyone -- that we are put here by his god as sinners in need of redemption in Christ Jesus -- he is buying into the religious fallacy. Reality is not so trite and simplistic. It will not be so compartmentalized. It is far more diverse and extravagant than could ever be contained in a simple fable like Christianity.

So, no, there is no singular "why." There is rather no limit to the diversity of "whys" which compel the universe onward. It astounds me that an individual could possibly believe in a god supposedly superlative in every aspect who is yet apparently incapable of accommodating such diversity.

Small minds, I guess.

I just don't get the whole perfection creating imperfection thing. How does that work?

 

[Dr. Zaus]

I just don't get the whole perfection creating imperfection thing. How does that work?

This is an interesting question.

(I can't say for sure, but I can give you some quotes from the bible that seem to address the point, if you are interested)

some tangential thoughts:

What is perfection and by what basis to we judge it?

Same with right and wrong; we tend to agree that Arther C Clark being a pedophile was a bad thing, but on the other hand we also agree that such facts have no impact on the quality of his thoughts in other fields.

On what grounds to be come to those conclusions? By what is our basis for truth?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

You have no idea what I believe.

Neither do you, apparently.

 

[Malak]

Neither do you, apparently.

And in circles we go, traluhlaluhla...

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Neither do you, apparently.

It's right there in his sig:

It's news I'm most proud to proclaim, this extraordinary Message of God's powerful plan to rescue everyone who trusts him, starting with Jews and then right on to everyone else! God's way of putting people right shows up in the acts of faith, confirming what Scripture has said all along: "The person in right standing before God by trusting him really lives."

I don't see how this has lead both parties to so much confusion.

 

[bfdd]

This is an interesting question.

(I can't say for sure, but I can give you some quotes from the bible that seem to address the point, if you are interested)

some tangential thoughts:

What is perfection and by what basis to we judge it?

Same with right and wrong; we tend to agree that Arther C Clark being a pedophile was a bad thing, but on the other hand we also agree that such facts have no impact on the quality of his thoughts in other fields.

On what grounds to be come to those conclusions? By what is our basis for truth?

For sure and I've thought of that myself, it still doesn't answer my question though and if our species survives long enough to figure it out we won't be around anyways so who cares

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I just don't get the whole perfection creating imperfection thing. How does that work?

A fellow for whom I have a great deal of respect often would say that "perfect" is a humpty-dumpty word -- it can means whatever it's utterer wants it to mean.

When theists frequently declare that their god is "perfect," they are basically giving away the fact that they have created their own god in accordance with their private ideals -- that they have created their god in their own image, as it were, or rather the image of their idealizations of themselves. God is a projection, in other words, of an idealized and as yet un-actualized self.

I realize I haven't exactly answered your question, but I took it as rhetorical anyway, since it would be unreasonable to expect me to explain a patently nonsensical tenet of Christian dogma.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

And in circles we go, traluhlaluhla...

All you had to do was substantiate your claims, but instead you wandered off into crazy land. Whenever you want to get back on track, you can start by showing that your claims have some sort of basis in fact.

One wonders, if the things you say were thoroughly true, why would you try so very hard to avoid demonstrating their truth? :hmm:

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

It's right there in his sig:


I don't see how this has lead both parties to so much confusion.

You must've missed the part where he said he just makes it up as he goes. People that know what they believe don't have to do that.

 

[Malak]

All you had to do was substantiate your claims, but instead you wandered off into crazy land. Whenever you want to get back on track, you can start by showing that your claims have some sort of basis in fact.

One wonders, if the things you say were thoroughly true, why would you try so very hard to avoid demonstrating their truth? :hmm:

There's no point. Nothing is good enough for you. I have no reason to waste time proving every single thing I ever say, because everything I say is ignored unless I can come up with some mystical proof that cannot be defined by the requesters. You don't even bother to evaluate what I say at face value, you immediately reject it.

And the worst part of it all, is the reasons things are rejected. The assumptions constantly made about me even when I reject the assumptions 10 times in the same thread. Assumptions on what I believe, assumptions on my intentions. It's this crazy little imaginative world you live in where everything is only what you pretend it to be, and anyone who knows better is the crazy one. You immediately reject because you want to keep the walls up, too afraid of what it might mean if everything you believed in was a lie. And maybe it isn't all a lie, maybe it is all actually a lot simpler than you realize. But that too is far too scary to accept. That life could be simpler than it seems.

You want something from me but you don't even know what that is. You think I want something but it is only made up in your mind. I am not even here, all you see is a projection of your own thoughts.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

There's no point. Nothing is good enough for you.

Certainly false. I can be convinced of anything for which there exists compelling evidence.

I have no reason to waste time proving every single thing I ever say, because everything I say is ignored unless I can come up with some mystical proof that cannot be defined by the requesters. You don't even bother to evaluate what I say at face value, you immediately reject it.

Excuses.

And the worst part of it all, is the reasons things are rejected. The assumptions constantly made about me even when I reject the assumptions 10 times in the same thread. Assumptions on what I believe, assumptions on my intentions. It's this crazy little imaginative world you live in where everything is only what you pretend it to be, and anyone who knows better is the crazy one. You immediately reject because you want to keep the walls up, too afraid of what it might mean if everything you believed in was a lie. And maybe it isn't all a lie, maybe it is all actually a lot simpler than you realize. But that too is far too scary to accept. That life could be simpler than it seems.

Blah blah blah. You're still just making excuses for your inability to lend credence to the silly gibberish you say.

You want something from me but you don't even know what that is.

I know exactly what I want. The same thing I've asked for over, and over, and over again: substantiation. Give me a reason to believe that the things you claim to be true are actually true.

You think I want something but it is only made up in your mind. I am not even here, all you see is a projection of your own thoughts.

Still doing everything you can to avoid confronting the glaring fact: your claims have no basis in fact. Tapdance all you want, I'm just gonna keep bringing it right back in front of you until you deal with it.

 

[Onceler]

Why is it always Christianity that is attacked? Why not Islam?

 

[WildHorse]

``

 

[WildHorse]

``

 

[WildHorse]

``

 

[Minjin]

I just don't get the whole perfection creating imperfection thing. How does that work?

I think there's one thing we can all agree on. If God does exist, he's a dick.

 

[Blackjack200]

There is no way to know anything you just said. None of it can be proven.

lol, okay. If you can observe something moving away from you at 1 MPH, and it's 14 billion miles away, how many hours has it been moving away from you?

 

[Minjin]

lol, okay. If you can observe something moving away from you at 1 MPH, and it's 14 billion miles away, how many hours has it been moving away from you?

How do you know it has always been moving at the same speed or that it started at the same place? I agree with your conclusion but your way of getting there is very flawed.

 

[Juddog]

Why is it always Christianity that is attacked? Why not Islam?

You think Islam isn't up for scrutiny? Take a look at my avatar.