Is god pissed?

[Commodus]

It's maybe a bit hard to explain. I see can't help but see hatred for religion being the result in no small measure due to a schism in the self that happened in childhood. Once, before we learned language and divided ourselves from the world and took on the a capacity to feel guilt, there was no difference between our potential to love and what religion describes as God's love for us. We were whole and at one. We were removed from that natural state of bliss at great cost and great pain. I think that the awareness of that loss via the call of religion to reunite with God brings up all of the rage we feel, felt long ago, at our loss. Nobody suffers from great existential suffering that the Easter Bunny isn't real like the loss we felt when we were kicked out of heaven. We feel rage at even the mention that we can find that place again. Not going to be fooled by that again. Never going to trust, never going to surrender, never going to really vulnerably love again. Fool me twice shame on me.

His rage only tells me, then, that God is real because were that not so there wouldn't be the violent protest that we see. How would you feel if the most valuable thing in the universe, your true self, were taken from you by being told you don't deserve it. I know that rage and behind it is grief unimaginable but grief is a real feeling, one that leads to healing.

In this world what makes a person worthless in my opinion, is feeling that way and acting in a way that causes others to see it. That feeling is a lie. It is important, I think, to keep in mind however difficult people try to make it, to see the god within them, to remember it is there and to try to honor that. People may act poorly, but only because they were made to forget who they really are. It is worth trying to remember, I think.

You're overthinking this, I'm afraid.

It doesn't really have to do with the rage of being separated from our existing view of the world as a religious whole. It's more that some people have different backgrounds that lead them to deal with perceived injustices more angrily than others.

Me? I'm non-religious and don't like how religion shuts off avenues of critical thinking and scientific pursuit. I know it has a caustic effect on society in some ways. But I don't like to get angry about it and push it hard, in part because I want to lead by example. I also know that religion has sometimes led to kindness, even though it's not necessary to be kind.

 

[Pohemi]

You do not know what you feel because you are afraid. Therefore for you logic is that which is safe.

You will find this illogical.

I do, but can you hook me up with your guy? You be smokin' some good shit.

 

[Moonbeam]

You're overthinking this, I'm afraid.

It doesn't really have to do with the rage of being separated from our existing view of the world as a religious whole. It's more that some people have different backgrounds that lead them to deal with perceived injustices more angrily than others.

Me? I'm non-religious and don't like how religion shuts off avenues of critical thinking and scientific pursuit. I know it has a caustic effect on society in some ways. But I don't like to get angry about it and push it hard, in part because I want to lead by example. I also know that religion has sometimes led to kindness, even though it's not necessary to be kind.

I do, but can you hook me up with your guy? You be smokin' some good shit.

The truth is simple but it turns things inside out and upside down. Everything is exactly the same but attitude. That is the perception that has to be experienced to become real. You don’t smoke something. You let go of that you don’t even know you cling to. The clinger is ego. The clung to are the identifications the ego makes that clingers think make for self importance. The fear is universal insignificance. The realization is that one is the universe. One is one’s awareness. If you want to get high, love more of what is. There is only love.

 

[njdevilsfan87]

As an agnostic who leans theist because I best like a modified version of the ontological argument, I don't think God is pissed. Everything we are seeing is self-inflicted. And as people become more desperate, they also become more radical - which unfortunately is always for the worse, historically speaking. And so the events get worse with them as we continue down the path of rapid climate collapse.

 

[Moonbeam]

As an agnostic who leans theist because I best like a modified version of the ontological argument, I don't think God is pissed. Everything we are seeing is self-inflicted. And as people become more desperate, they also become more radical - which unfortunately is always for the worse, historically speaking. And so the events get worse with them as we continue down the path of rapid climate collapse.

We create what we fear.

 

[arredondo]

<Part I of III>
It's a good thing I don't believe in the Bible, then, so there's nothing to contradict.

Again, you don't understand: if you're non-religious, the Bible's interpretations of life don't hold sway. Claims about having "never been saved" don't matter, because you're trying to shoehorn me into a worldview that I no longer accept and know isn't supported by evidence. I am a former Christian, however much you might like to pretend I'm not.

"It's a good thing I don't believe in the Bible, so there's nothing to contradict."
"I am a former Christian"

That's literally a shining example of a contradiction. The primary source we have for details of Jesus Christ, His love for all, as well as His sacrifice for the world comes from the bible. To claim to have been a Christian and not believe in the bible, especially when Jesus Himself said that it is impossible to lose one's relationship with Him (as I showed in my last post to you), is just bizarre opposite talk. As I phrased it in another post, it's like someone claiming to have been an expert swimmer at one time but has never entered into a body of water to do it.

Christianity, as has been pointed out in this thread by referencing God's word, is all about a relationship with Jesus. For there to be a relationship, one that you claim to have had with Him at one point, means that there was more than you alone involved.

No one can say they were in a relationship by themselves. So the question in your case then is, what does Jesus say about your claim that He was once a part of your life? On judgement day, He will STRONGLY disagree, directly to your face even, with these words below if you don't finally and sincerely accept His free gift of salvation in your heart before you die:

~~~~~
Matthew 7:21-23
“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to Me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and cast out demons in Your name, and do many mighty works in Your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness.’"
~~~~~

What actually happened was that you merely invented your own religion back in the day, because it had nothing to do with a permanent relationship with Christ that all of His true flock accepted (as described in His word).

<Part II of III>
Here's the thing, though: there's strong evidence that being LGBT is genetic or otherwise baked in. In your view of the world, then, that means God made their sexuality sinful before they were even born. I know the Bible claims we're all born sinful, but this would mean that any expression of sexuality for them would be a sin where it wouldn't be for most people. Why would God slap extra sinfulness on a significant portion of the population (5.6% of the US, according to 2021 data) before they could even make a choice?

The demonstrable truth is that being LGBT is a healthy and fine thing when society accepts it and cares for these people as equals. I know many LGBT people who are wonderful, upstanding people; they're just hardwired to love someone other than a cisgender person of the opposite sex, and that's something that occurs naturally across many species. Likewise, non-religious (or, for that matter, non-conservative religious) people know that sex outside of marriage and porn aren't wrong by themselves; it's when that behavior is hurtful that it becomes a problem. Don't cheat, don't give a partner false expectations or bully them into sex, don't watch porn that's either non-consensual or serves as a replacement for an existing partnership.

And thanks for divulging your background... suddenly, your ignore-what-others-are-saying approach makes more sense. I've seen your kind before — the sort whose life went off the rails, and became a born-again Christian because it was an easy way to regain a sense of moral structure. You cling to it because it's what prevented a bad situation from getting worse. But you don't need to "see the light" to put your life back on track; it's entirely possible to remain secular while being a kinder, more self-disciplined person. It just requires more work, as real-life morality is not simple or static.

So now I'm "ignoring what people are saying"? Lol... I guess all my posts and detailed responses I've written here for weeks to a ton of different people has simply been my imagination.

As to the main point of this section you've expressed, the write-up assumes that God put us on this earth to just do what makes us feel good. That pursuit of happiness apart from the Lord can exist in many different forms, but nothing can be further from the truth according to the bible.

No, I am not saying God never wants people to be happy, but happiness comes and goes with circumstances. Instead, the Lord values something infinitely greater for us on earth than happiness: obedience.

~~~~~
Jeremiah 7:23
"But this command I gave them: ‘Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be My people. And walk in all the way that I command you, that it may be well with you.’ "

James 1:22-25
"But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves."

Psalm 112:1
"Praise the Lord! Blessed is the man who fears the Lord, who greatly delights in His commandments!"

John 14:21
"Whoever has My commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him.”

Luke 6:46
“Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do what I tell you?"
~~~~~

It is through following His word (after one is saved) that we can achieve things far greater than the short-lived bouts of happiness we chase in life on our own, including joy through good and bad times (i.e. Nehemiah 8:10), peace beyond all human understanding (i.e. Philippians 4:6-7), and experiencing the truest form of "agape" love that exceeds any type of low level "eros" lusts that many of us have engaged in (I wrote more about that here).

Of course sexuality (or "eros" love) is a fantastic, incredible, wonderful gift from God, but like anything else that is good from Him in this life, it is only fantastic, incredible and wonderful if the act adheres to His will in our lives. According to the word of God, it is only reserved for one man and one woman joined in holy matrimony. Any other expression of intimacy to another that doesn't fall under that guideline (according to Him) is fornication and a sin, whether it is heterosexual or not.

You wrote up one of many alternative views in this world to God's expressed will. What doesn't work, however, is using society's definitions and "logical" conclusions to prove what He said in His word is wrong. For instance, you have a stat for an estimated number of gay people in the U.S... true or not, what does that have to do with what God is concerned with, which is whether or not those who willfully engage in related acts are offending Him or not?

Using the same approach, couldn't one say that because the overwhelmingly vast majority of heterosexual males in all of history have felt a strong desire to be close to and be intimate with multiple women means that God must approve of their efforts to make it happen whenever and with whoever?

Of course not, because nowhere... ABSOLUTELY NOWHERE... are there verses in the bible that encourage people to act primarily on their feelings. Obedience to God's word in many different aspects of life often conflict with our feelings. One's faith in Him is the only way it becomes clear to each of us as individuals that He is right and we are wrong when there is conflict between the two sides, no matter what the topic is.

Real life example of what I just wrote: My mom's best friend from pre-school had a daughter with her husband. This daughter grew up, moved to another state, opened her own business and pursued a lifestyle opposed to the bible when she joined up with another woman as her life partner (even adopting two kids from another country since they couldn't have their own naturally).

Her parents weren't church go-ers, and as far as I know they never "preached" to her about the morality of her situation one way or another. She was just doing what she felt was right. As it turns out, the Holy Spirit wouldn't allow her to be at peace with the situation.

However it happened, she heard a message or two about the gospel and ultimately started going to a bible-believing church on her own. She accepted Jesus in her life, and decided down the line to end her relationship with the other woman as she grew in her relationship with Jesus Christ. Over time she met and grew close to a fellow Christian guy in the church and they began to date. She is now studying to become a bible teacher to share God's word with others.

I told my own, similar story from a heterosexual's POV about sexual rebellion while being apart from God's will earlier in the thread, but the outcome for us was the same... the Holy Spirit convicts our hearts of not doing what God wants from us. When we humbly submitted and accepted salvation for the sins we committed (sins of all types, not just sexually), the blessings of life REALLY opened up in ways we didn't know existed (especially internally), and that's just a small taste compared to our reward waiting for us in heaven.

<Part III of III>
Who said I was expecting mercy? I don't believe any god exists, so there's nothing to resent and no mercy to expect.

I also have to giggle at your saying "it literally makes zero sense." You can't complain about my logic or reason when your beliefs, by their nature, require you to suspend logic and critical thinking (that's what faith is, after all — unquestioning belief). To me, the nonsensical thing is to put all your trust in a book written thousands of years ago by people who had basic misunderstandings of science (just look at how they treated menstruation), who didn't witness the events they wrote about and frequently made claims uncorroborated elsewhere.
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/is-god-pissed.2600352/post-40688571
Nonsensical is twisting yourself into knots to deny the strong evidence life and the universe existed billions of years before humans did. Nonsensical is refusing to ask whether the things you believe are real or just the product of someone's imagination (including your own). Sense means exercising your critical thinking skills for all topics, not just convenient ones; it means having the freedom to change your answer, and to admit you don't have an answer.

Isn't everything you wrote an example of the pot calling the kettle black in a sense? In the religion of Humanism that you boldly claim to be your own (whether by name or not), it is clearly just another way of putting faith in something for the same reasons that you accuse me of doing... faith that humans themselves have the true answers for almost anything, and then have the faith that they can collectively save themselves (with no input from God) as a result. Here's your stated definition of faith:

"require(s) you to suspend logic and critical thinking (that's what faith is, after all — unquestioning belief)"

Then you go on to do exactly that...

>>>>
"Nonsensical is twisting yourself into knots to deny the strong evidence life and the universe existed billions of years before humans did."
"...who didn't witness the events they wrote about..."
>>>>

Aren't you doing that as well for any number of explanations out there for our universe and ancient history past? You have faith that it is correct, right? I'm not even saying it's all wrong, but clearly you can't use this phrase as a valid tool for both supporting what you think and also as a weapon against those you argue against.

Of course the response from you is that there is all kinds of evidence pointing to this theory or that one. I understand what you are saying, especially the part you added about changing one's mind on certain aspects of things as more info becomes available.

The point, however, is that God and everything about Him works the same way when it comes to faith in Him. He gives us PLENTY (at a personal level even) in evidence to believe in Him. It's just not done in the way that you or anyone else He created wants Him to.

I went into detail why the Lord doesn't "prove" Himself the way some people want Him to in this post, but please consider what this particular verse is saying as well:

~~~~~
Hebrews 11:3
By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.
~~~~~

With that in mind, what are your objective thoughts to an issue that has been on my mind for a long time (especially as it relates to the underlined part)? There's no need for video and article links and such because I've read and watched a ton of content on this topic over the years, but how do you think everything came from nothing?

When I say everything, I mean EVERYTHING, including space, time, matter, energy, gravity, physics, light, darkness,... the works. Sure, I'm aware of the big bang theory and its singularity event where space and time didn't even exist before it happened (even though "before" time is an oxymoron ), but broadly speaking, doesn't one have to have faith of some sort to accept any kind of explanation like that?

Essentially, one has to believe that everything came from nothing, whether it is from God or from some galactic event, right? I mean, it's not even possible to replicate absolutely "nothing" today, so there cannot even be experiments done to try to make something from nothing. That's because something exists everywhere since even light/darkness, etc. is "something".

So it takes a kind of faith to think it is possible. The only alternative is faith in the idea that everything existed in some form or another forever, which still requires some belief without seeing. Though God explained Himself in the verse I quoted above (as well as other places of the bible that I will post below), that hasn't stopped me from looking at alternative explanations. Not because I doubt God's word, mind you, but it fascinates me how various write ups try to explain stuff on this topic. In the end though, they never seem to offer an answer to everything coming from nothing.

Follow up question.... why does so much in the universe make sense? There is far more order than chaos, and even a lot of the chaos has some type of predictable order to it. Again, it is absolutely fascinating to me how things just naturally "work" in some way.

The human brain is soooo intricately complex for its function and uses, and beyond the "mechanics" of it all it definitely serves an important purpose in life overall. There are a bajillion of other examples like this, aren't there? To me it is really amazing.

Of course my belief is that God put all of the science together to make it happen, but with that said, how do you think things come together so often in ways that just make sense? Yes, I'm aware of theories on survival of the fittest, natural selection, etc., but again it comes down to faith at some level to believe that no deity is involved, right?

You can't even have an eyeball function the way it does without certain components being present inside of it (rods, cones, iris, cornea, etc.), each of which has its own complex contribution to the puzzle that eventually becomes what it is as a whole. Not to mention how water, blood, nutrients, veins, the brain, life itself, etc, play a role in making it work.

The answer from some is simply that given enough time, these things evolve into what they are. But consider this... if you take a zillion Scrabble pieces, each tile with a letter of the English alphabet, put them in the largest sack ever made and have it hover over an area of flat land high above before releasing them all down to the ground, how many times would this process have to be done before the entire works of Shakespeare are spelled out perfectly?

We are talking about 38 plays and over 150 short and long poems that are completely lined up with perfect spacing and formatting between words, paragraphs, chapters and all content. How long would it take to achieve it from each drop attempt? Millions of years? Billions? A google multiplied by 100 trillion?

Is it impossible? I'd say so, yet isn't the DNA that serves as the blueprint for each person's physical profile far more complex than simple wooden tiles? Doesn't DNA tell the partial story of each unique individual's life in a way that is more special than the invented words of the Bard?

If you were hiking in a valley and saw those tiles on the ground spelling out all of his works as described above, wouldn't you say someone consciencely put it together as such instead of claiming time and randomness did all the work? By comparison, is it more accurate to say that you as a person are not just an evolved, naturally selected accident when you are infinitely more detailed in many, many ways (mentally, emotionally, physically, spiritually) than some printed sonnet or romantic comedy?

The physically invisible God is spiritually real, and He takes all of the credit. The presence of logic itself in all that is, all that was, and all that ever will be yells out that a logical Maker was behind everything:

~~~~~
John 1:1-3
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made."

Colossians 1:16
"For by Him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through Him and for Him."

Romans 1:20
"For His invisible attributes, namely, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse."

Revelation 4:11
“Worthy are You, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for You created all things, and by Your will they existed and were created."

Psalm 19:1
"The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims His handiwork."

Isaiah 40:22
"It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in"

1 Corinthians 8:6
"Yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist."

Hebrews 3:4
"For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God."

Psalm 8:3-4
"When I look at Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars, which You have set in place, what is man that You are mindful of him, and the son of man that You care for him?"

Psalm 139:13-14
"For You formed my inward parts; You knitted me together in my mother's womb. I praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are Your works; my soul knows it very well."
~~~~~

 

[arredondo]

Thank you for your post. I would like to share with you some thoughts from someone I think is a real Christian, someone transformed by the Christian faith, in the hope his words may also mean something to you:

If you are interested do a search for 'Sayings of Meister Eckhart'

Honestly, I'm just interested in your thoughts (as well as the others here).

 

[dank69]

All logic is dependent on first princples, things of which we have an innate understanding.

okay

Any idiot can tell that the reason a dog looks up to a man is because the dog seen the god within him.

no

A snake has a different logical understanding because it lacks a capacity for feeling. A human with snake understanding simply has been conditioned to not expose itself to the pain of feeling. Logic, in that case then means that what is considered as logical is thinking devoid of feeling.

Your premise is flawed and so these conclusions of yours are unsupported.

You do not know what you feel because you are afraid.

According to whom? I know what I feel. I also know that what I feel means nothing to anyone else. They are busy feeling whatever they feel, which very well may be the opposite of what I feel in any given circumstance. That doesn't make it right or wrong, it just shows that feeling cannot and should not be relied upon for public policy because what might be great for one person might also be hell for another.

Therefore for you logic is that which is safe.

Yes, repeatability is comforting. Does that somehow make it wrong? Incomplete?

You will find this illogical.

Well, yeah. You need to at least attempt to support your statement that "a dog looks up to a man is because the dog seen[sic] the god within him."

 

[Moonbeam]

okay

no

Your premise is flawed and so these conclusions of yours are unsupported.

According to whom? I know what I feel. I also know that what I feel means nothing to anyone else. They are busy feeling whatever they feel, which very well may be the opposite of what I feel in any given circumstance. That doesn't make it right or wrong, it just shows that feeling cannot and should not be relied upon for public policy because what might be great for one person might also be hell for another.

Yes, repeatability is comforting. Does that somehow make it wrong? Incomplete?

Well, yeah. You need to at least attempt to support your statement that "a dog looks up to a man is because the dog seen[sic] the god within him."

okay

no

Your premise is flawed and so these conclusions of yours are unsupported.

According to whom? I know what I feel. I also know that what I feel means nothing to anyone else. They are busy feeling whatever they feel, which very well may be the opposite of what I feel in any given circumstance. That doesn't make it right or wrong, it just shows that feeling cannot and should not be relied upon for public policy because what might be great for one person might also be hell for another.

Yes, repeatability is comforting. Does that somehow make it wrong? Incomplete?

Well, yeah. You need to at least attempt to support your statement that "a dog looks up to a man is because the dog seen[sic] the god within him."

I understand.

Imagine if you didn’t know what you feel, though, then you would not know why you feel it. Could it be then that there is a branch of medicine or psychiatry devoted to the health restoring properties of getting in touch with them. The whole concept of the unconscious mind would just be about, if it exists, having feelings we are not aware we are feeling. In analysis there is the concept of transference, where the psychiatrist is a blank slate onto whom the patient projects. In this way the unconscious can come to light.


Any proof that any of this might have some real world validity would only be known by anecdotal evidence. One would presumably undergo behavioral changes as a result of no longer responding to unconscious inner content and only the patient and perhaps those closest who know him could report a difference in behavior.

For these reasons and others I am aware I can’t reach you logically. So I am happy to throw stuff at that wall to see if anything sticks. Logic cost me everything I held sacred. It led to despair. I didn’t know that was what I felt until the armor began to fall.

 

[Commodus]

"It's a good thing I don't believe in the Bible, so there's nothing to contradict."
"I am a former Christian"

That's literally a shining example of a contradiction. The primary source we have for details of Jesus Christ, His love for all, as well as His sacrifice for the world comes from the bible. To claim to have been a Christian and not believe in the bible, especially when Jesus Himself said that it is impossible to lose one's relationship with Him (as I showed in my last post to you), is just bizarre opposite talk. As I phrased it in another post, it's like someone claiming to have been an expert swimmer at one time but has never entered into a body of water to do it.

Christianity, as has been pointed out in this thread by referencing God's word, is all about a relationship with Jesus. For there to be a relationship, one that you claim to have had with Him at one point, means that there was more than you alone involved.

No one can say they were in a relationship by themselves. So the question in your case then is, what does Jesus say about your claim that He was once a part of your life? On judgement day, He will STRONGLY disagree, directly to your face even, with these words below if you don't finally and sincerely accept His free gift of salvation in your heart before you die:

What actually happened was that invented your own religion back in the day, because it had nothing to do with a permanent relationship with Christ that all of His true flock accepted as described in His word.

Please don't tell me I'm contradicting myself based on your narrow, rigid interpretation of how Christianity works. I once was a Christian. Now I'm not. My statement is not a tacit acknowledgment that God exists and that I'm just rejecting Him; it's a recognition that, based on evidence, my past beliefs were fabrications. Think of it more as losing belief in the tooth fairy... it's a realization that the fairy never existed in the first place.

As I've said before, you need to snap out of this bubble where you assume every human being accepts Christianity as true and just chooses to act differently. As a non-religious person, I exist wholly outside your bubble; I don't believe I ever had a relationship with Jesus, as there's no real evidence to suggest he was divine (or even that he existed, apart from the sheer volume of stories). Warning me of judgment day means nothing, because there's no evidence to suggest one is coming. You see what I mean? Your worldview is based on premises I have no logical or evidentiary reasons to accept; please don't debate with me as if I accept them.

Isn't everything you wrote an example of the pot calling the kettle black in a sense? In the religion of Humanism that you boldly claim to be your own (whether by name or not), it is clearly just another way of putting faith in something for the same reasons that you accuse me of doing... faith that humans themselves have the true answers for almost anything, and then have the faith that they can collectively save themselves (with no input from God) as a result. Here's your stated definition of faith:

"require(s) you to suspend logic and critical thinking (that's what faith is, after all — unquestioning belief"

Then you go on to do exactly that...

>>>>
"Nonsensical is twisting yourself into knots to deny the strong evidence life and the universe existed billions of years before humans did."
"...who didn't witness the events they wrote about..."
>>>>

Aren't you doing that as well for any number of explanations out there for our universe and ancient history past? You have faith that it is correct, right? I'm not even saying it's all wrong, but clearly you can't use this phrase as a valid tool for what you think and a weapon against those you argue against.

Of course the response from you is that there is all kinds of evidence pointing to this theory or that one. I understand what you are saying, especially the part you added about changing one's mind on certain aspect as mode info becomes available.

The point, however, is that God and everything about Him works the same way when it comes to faith in Him. He gives us PLENTY at a personal level even, in evidence to believe in Him. It's just not done in the way that you or anyone else He created wants Him to.

You fundamentally misunderstand the nature of science if you think it's a matter of faith.

I don't have to have faith in the Big Bang, evolution or other scientific theories (keep in mind a theory in science is an established model, not a guess or hunch). If I'm uncertain, I can go back to the raw evidence, the peer-reviewed papers, the calculations that are being repeatedly verified by real-world data to this day. And I don't have unquestioning trust that these theories will always hold up. If someone can present testable evidence to the contrary, I'll be happy to alter my views. They just haven't, and there's no reason to expect them to any time soon (if at all).

The view is not that humans have knowledge of everything, or even can know everything — including important things. We'll likely never know the true size of the universe, because the limits of light and cosmic expansion prevent that. We might never know what dark matter is, or exactly how life got started on Earth. Instead, the view is that humans should try to pursue the truth as best they can, and to accept that the answers may change.

And here's where you and I, faith and science, differ. When presented with evidence that directly contradicts your views, you either ignore it or try to shoehorn it into those existing views. I can say "I was wrong," "I don't know," or "is this really true?" where you can't. And when I don't know, I can be happy not knowing even as I look for an answer; I don't have to rush to provide an explanation like "God did it." Science isn't a religion, it's a basic stance that one should only act on evidence that survives scrutiny.

With that in mind, what are your objective thoughts to an issue that has been on my mind for a long time (especially as it relates to the underlined part). There's no need for video and article links and such because I've read and watched a ton of content on this topic over the years... how do you think everything came from nothing?

When I say everything, I mean EVERYTHING, including space, time, matter, energy, gravity, physics, light, darkness,... the works. Sure, I'm aware of the big bang theory and its singularity event where space and time didn't even exist before it happened (even though "before" time is an oxymoron ), but broadly speaking, doesn't one have to have faith of some sort to accept any kind of explanation like that?

Essentially, one has to believe that everything came from nothing, whether it is from God or some galactic event, right? I mean, it's not even possible to replicate absolutely "nothing" today, so there cannot even be experiments done to try to make something from nothing. That's because something exists everywhere since even light/darkness, etc. is "something".

So it takes a kind of faith to think it is possible. The only alternative is faith in the idea that everything existed in some form or another forever, which still requires some belief without seeing. Though God explained Himself in the verse I quoted above (as well as other places of the bible that I posted below), that hasn't stopped me from looking at alternative explanations. Not because I doubt God's word, mind you, but it fascinates me how various write ups try to explain this stuff on this topic. They never seem to offer an answer to everything coming from nothing.

Follow up question.... why does so much in the universe make sense? There is far more order than chaos, and even a lot of the chaos has some type of predictable order to it. Again, it is absolutely fascinating to me how things just naturally "work" in some way.

The human brain is soooo intricately complex for its function and uses, and beyond the "mechanics" of it all it definitely serves an important purpose in life overall. There are a bajillion of other examples like this, aren't there? To me it is really amazing.

Of course my belief is that God put all of the science together to make it happen, but with that said, how do you think things come together so often in ways that just make sense? Yes, I'm aware of theories on survival of the fittest, natural selection, etc., but again it comes down to faith at some level to believe that no deity is involved, right?

You can't even have an eyeball function the way it does without certain components being present inside of it (rods, cones, iris, cornea, etc.), each of which has its own complex contribution to the puzzle that eventually becomes what it is as a whole. Not to mention how water, blood, nutrients, veins, the brain, life itself, etc, play a role in making it work. The answer from some is simply that given enough time, these things evolve into what they are.

But consider this... if you take a zillion Scrabble pieces, each tile with a letter of the English alphabet, put them in the largest sack ever made and have it hover over an area of flat land high above before releasing them down to the ground, how many times would this process have to be done before the entire works of Shakespeare are spelled out perfectly?

We are talking about 38 plays and over 150 short and long poems that are completely lined up with perfect spacing and formatting between words, paragraphs, chapters and all content. How long would it take to achieve it from each drop attempt? Millions of years? Billions? A google multiplied by 100 trillion?

Is it impossible? I'd say so, yet isn't the DNA that serves as the blueprint for each person's physical profile far more complex than simple wooden tiles? Doesn't DNA tell the partial story of each unique individual's life in a way that is more special than the invented words of the Bard?

If you were hiking in a valley and saw those tiles on the ground spelling out all of his works as described above, wouldn't you say someone consciencely put it together as such instead of claiming time and randomness did all the work? By comparison, is it more accurate to say that you as a person are just an evolved, naturally selected accident when you are infinitely more detailed in many, many ways (mentally, emotionally, physically, spiritually) than some printed sonnet or romantic comedy?

The physically invisible God is spiritually real, and He takes all of the credit. The presence of logic itself in all that is yells out that a logical Maker was behind everything:

This is an elaboration on what I just wrote... but no, it doesn't require any level of faith. For instance, the origins of the universe. I don't blindly trust that the Big Bang happened; I can point to the reams of evidence and verified models indicating that this is likely what happened (the properties of light and gravity, the nature of primordial galaxies, that sort of thing). Will we ever know if the universe flashed into existence from nothing, was always there, or emerged from a multiverse? Probably not, but science also won't make presumptions on that front; science-driven people operate based on what they can observe and verify.

The universe makes sense because there are basic 'laws' of behavior (physics, etc.) that we can observe applying to everything. That doesn't mean they were divinely created, just that there's a consistency that explains why things behave the way they do.

And it's really not hard at all to accept that so many natural things work so well. According to all the evidence, the universe started around 13.8 billion years ago, the Solar System formed about 4.6 billion years ago, and basic life started 4 billion years ago. That is an extremely long amount of time for more complex elements to form, for the conditions needed for life to manifest, for life to evolve from basic bacteria to sentient beings with highly advanced brains and senses. We have evidence of evolution happening even in short human time scales; it's not any stretch to show that larger changes happen on longer timelines.

Yes, I'm quite fine with being the product of natural selection. I don't need to feel like I have a special place or purpose in the universe; in fact, all evidence suggests humans are a largely insignificant speck. But it would be more accurate to say I'm the result of Earth's greatest relay race, as species fight to survive and pass their genes along to generation after generation. That, to me, is extremely beautiful and humbling.

The funny thing is that I see a part of my teenage self in you. I read books claiming "irreducible complexity" (they'd often cite the eye in their flawed reasoning, somewhat like you did) was 'proof' life was the result of divine creation, that the lack of a thick layer of dust on the Moon was 'proof' it was too young to fit scientists' models. And like you, I believed them because they told me not the truth, but what I wanted to hear: that I was a special creation, with an important role to play, and that my life wouldn't be over when my body ceased functioning. I even bought into irrational leaps, like the claim that logic can only exist because of a logical creator (really? What's your evidence for that?).

The thing is, though... I grew out of that phase. I looked at the real science and realized that there's actually an extensive, well-supported trail of evidence showing how the universe and life developed through purely natural processes. We know a great deal about how eyes evolved; we know why the Moon doesn't have much dust; we know that logic is a survival instinct that isn't unique to humans and has been refined over many millions of years. Instead of simply waving your hands and shouting "God must have done it," please look into the science and open your mind to the pursuit of real truth, no matter how uncomfortable it might make you feel.

 

[Moonbeam]

You fundamentally misunderstand the nature of science if you think it's a matter of faith. ETC..........

When I look at science as you do I see this. The laws of the universe are such that on one planet in 4 billion years chemicals that could copy and duplicate themselves evolved into beings capable of an expression of cosmic love and the joy of being, or if you will, God realization. Who can say if wha is possible to realize is actually real? What I know is that what is possible to realize is realizable. What more would you need. What I know then is that in this universe it is possible to realize God via a God conscious state. Why that is so I have no idea. It seems it is the result of the evolution of consciousness.

 

[hal2kilo]

"It's a good thing I don't believe in the Bible, so there's nothing to contradict."
"I am a former Christian"

That's literally a shining example of a contradiction. The primary source we have for details of Jesus Christ, His love for all, as well as His sacrifice for the world comes from the bible. To claim to have been a Christian and not believe in the bible, especially when Jesus Himself said that it is impossible to lose one's relationship with Him (as I showed in my last post to you), is just bizarre opposite talk. As I phrased it in another post, it's like someone claiming to have been an expert swimmer at one time but has never entered into a body of water to do it.

Christianity, as has been pointed out in this thread by referencing God's word, is all about a relationship with Jesus. For there to be a relationship, one that you claim to have had with Him at one point, means that there was more than you alone involved.

No one can say they were in a relationship by themselves. So the question in your case then is, what does Jesus say about your claim that He was once a part of your life? On judgement day, He will STRONGLY disagree, directly to your face even, with these words below if you don't finally and sincerely accept His free gift of salvation in your heart before you die:

~~~~~
Matthew 7:21-23
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’"
~~~~~

What actually happened was that invented your own religion back in the day, because it had nothing to do with a permanent relationship with Christ that all of His true flock accepted as described in His word.


So now I'm "ignoring what people are saying"? Lol... I guess all my post quoting and detailed responses here for weeks to a ton of different people has simply been my imagination.

As to the main point of this section that you expressed, the write-up assumes that God put us on this earth to just do what makes us feel good. That pursuit of happiness apart from the Lord can exist in many different forms, but nothing can be further from the truth according to the bible.

No, I am not saying God never wants people to be happy, but happiness comes and goes with circumstances. Instead, the Lord values something infinitely greater for us on earth than happiness: obedience.

~~~~~
Jeremiah 7:23
"But this command I gave them: ‘Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be My people. And walk in all the way that I command you, that it may be well with you.’ "

James 1:22-25
"But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves."

Psalm 112:1
"Praise the Lord! Blessed is the man who fears the Lord, who greatly delights in His commandments!"

John 14:21
"Whoever has My commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him.”

Luke 6:46
“Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do what I tell you?"
~~~~~

It is through following His word (after one is saved) that we can achieve things far greater than the short-lived bouts of happiness we chase in life on our own, including joy through good and bad times (i.e. Nehemiah 8:10), peace beyond all human understanding (i.e. Philippians 4:6-7), and experiencing the truest form of "agape" love that exceeds any type of low level "eros" lusts that many of us have engaged in (I wrote more about that here).

Of course sexuality (or "eros" love) is a fantastic, incredible, wonderful gift from God, but like anything else that is good from Him in this life, it is only fantastic, incredible and wonderful if the act adheres to His will in our lives... according to the word of God, it is only reserved for one man and one woman joined in holy matrimony. Any other expression of intimacy to another that doesn't fall under that guideline (according to Him) is fornication and a sin, whether it is heterosexual or not.

You wrote up one of many alternative views in this world to God's expressed will. What doesn't work, however, is using society's definitions and "logical" conclusions to prove what He said in His word is wrong. For instance, you have a stat for an estimated number of gay people in the U.S... true or not, what does that have to do with what God is concerned with, which is whether or not those who willfully engage in related acts are offending Him or not?

Using the same approach, couldn't one say that because the overwhelmingly vast majority of heterosexual males in all of history have felt a strong desire to be close to and be intimate with multiple women means that God must approve of their efforts to make it happen whenever and with who ever?

Of course not, because nowhere... ABSOLUTELY NOWHERE... are there verses in the bible that encourage people to act primarily on their feelings. Obedience to God's word in many different aspects of life often conflict with our feelings. One's faith in Him is the only way it becomes clear to each of us as individuals that He is right and we are wrong when there is conflict between the two sides, no matter what the topic is.

Real life example of what I just wrote: My mom's best friend from pre-school had a daughter with her husband. This daughter grew up, moved to another state, opened her own business and pursued a lifestyle opposed to the bible when she joined up with another woman as her life partner (even adopting two kids from another country since they couldn't have their own naturally).

Her parents weren't church go-ers, and as far as I know they never "preached" to her about the morality of her situation one way or another. She was just doing what she felt was right. As it turns out, the Holy Spirit wouldn't allow her to be at peace with the situation.

However it happened, she heard a message or two about the gospel and ultimately started going to a bible-believing church on her own. She accepted Jesus in her life, and decided down the line to end her relationship with the other woman as she grew in her relationship with Jesus Christ. Over time she met and grew close to a fellow Christian guy in the church and they began to date. She is now studying to become a bible teacher to share God's word with others.

I told my own, similar story from a heterosexual's POV about sexual rebellion while being apart from God's will earlier in the thread, but the outcome for us was the same... the Holy Spirit convicts our hearts of not doing what God wants from us. When we humbly submitted and accepted salvation for the sins we committed (sins of all types, not just sexually), the blessings of life REALLY opened up in ways we didn't know existed (especially internally), and that's just a small taste compared to our reward waiting for us in heaven.


Isn't everything you wrote an example of the pot calling the kettle black in a sense? In the religion of Humanism that you boldly claim to be your own (whether by name or not), it is clearly just another way of putting faith in something for the same reasons that you accuse me of doing... faith that humans themselves have the true answers for almost anything, and then have the faith that they can collectively save themselves (with no input from God) as a result. Here's your stated definition of faith:

"require(s) you to suspend logic and critical thinking (that's what faith is, after all — unquestioning belief"

Then you go on to do exactly that...

>>>>
"Nonsensical is twisting yourself into knots to deny the strong evidence life and the universe existed billions of years before humans did."
"...who didn't witness the events they wrote about..."
>>>>

Aren't you doing that as well for any number of explanations out there for our universe and ancient history past? You have faith that it is correct, right? I'm not even saying it's all wrong, but clearly you can't use this phrase as a valid tool for what you think and a weapon against those you argue against.

Of course the response from you is that there is all kinds of evidence pointing to this theory or that one. I understand what you are saying, especially the part you added about changing one's mind on certain aspect as mode info becomes available.

The point, however, is that God and everything about Him works the same way when it comes to faith in Him. He gives us PLENTY at a personal level even, in evidence to believe in Him. It's just not done in the way that you or anyone else He created wants Him to.

I went into detail why the Lord doesn't "prove" Himself the way some people want Him to in this post, but please consider what this particular verse is saying as well:

~~~~~
Hebrews 11:3
By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.
~~~~~

With that in mind, what are your objective thoughts to an issue that has been on my mind for a long time (especially as it relates to the underlined part). There's no need for video and article links and such because I've read and watched a ton of content on this topic over the years... how do you think everything came from nothing?

When I say everything, I mean EVERYTHING, including space, time, matter, energy, gravity, physics, light, darkness,... the works. Sure, I'm aware of the big bang theory and its singularity event where space and time didn't even exist before it happened (even though "before" time is an oxymoron ), but broadly speaking, doesn't one have to have faith of some sort to accept any kind of explanation like that?

Essentially, one has to believe that everything came from nothing, whether it is from God or some galactic event, right? I mean, it's not even possible to replicate absolutely "nothing" today, so there cannot even be experiments done to try to make something from nothing. That's because something exists everywhere since even light/darkness, etc. is "something".

So it takes a kind of faith to think it is possible. The only alternative is faith in the idea that everything existed in some form or another forever, which still requires some belief without seeing. Though God explained Himself in the verse I quoted above (as well as other places of the bible that I posted below), that hasn't stopped me from looking at alternative explanations. Not because I doubt God's word, mind you, but it fascinates me how various write ups try to explain this stuff on this topic. They never seem to offer an answer to everything coming from nothing.

Follow up question.... why does so much in the universe make sense? There is far more order than chaos, and even a lot of the chaos has some type of predictable order to it. Again, it is absolutely fascinating to me how things just naturally "work" in some way.

The human brain is soooo intricately complex for its function and uses, and beyond the "mechanics" of it all it definitely serves an important purpose in life overall. There are a bajillion of other examples like this, aren't there? To me it is really amazing.

Of course my belief is that God put all of the science together to make it happen, but with that said, how do you think things come together so often in ways that just make sense? Yes, I'm aware of theories on survival of the fittest, natural selection, etc., but again it comes down to faith at some level to believe that no deity is involved, right?

You can't even have an eyeball function the way it does without certain components being present inside of it (rods, cones, iris, cornea, etc.), each of which has its own complex contribution to the puzzle that eventually becomes what it is as a whole. Not to mention how water, blood, nutrients, veins, the brain, life itself, etc, play a role in making it work. The answer from some is simply that given enough time, these things evolve into what they are.

But consider this... if you take a zillion Scrabble pieces, each tile with a letter of the English alphabet, put them in the largest sack ever made and have it hover over an area of flat land high above before releasing them down to the ground, how many times would this process have to be done before the entire works of Shakespeare are spelled out perfectly?

We are talking about 38 plays and over 150 short and long poems that are completely lined up with perfect spacing and formatting between words, paragraphs, chapters and all content. How long would it take to achieve it from each drop attempt? Millions of years? Billions? A google multiplied by 100 trillion?

Is it impossible? I'd say so, yet isn't the DNA that serves as the blueprint for each person's physical profile far more complex than simple wooden tiles? Doesn't DNA tell the partial story of each unique individual's life in a way that is more special than the invented words of the Bard?

If you were hiking in a valley and saw those tiles on the ground spelling out all of his works as described above, wouldn't you say someone consciencely put it together as such instead of claiming time and randomness did all the work? By comparison, is it more accurate to say that you as a person are just an evolved, naturally selected accident when you are infinitely more detailed in many, many ways (mentally, emotionally, physically, spiritually) than some printed sonnet or romantic comedy?

The physically invisible God is spiritually real, and He takes all of the credit. The presence of logic itself in all that is yells out that a logical Maker was behind everything:

~~~~~
John 1:1-3
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made."

Colossians 1:16
"For by Him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through Him and for Him."

Romans 1:20
"For His invisible attributes, namely, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse."

Revelation 4:11
“Worthy are You, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for You created all things, and by Your will they existed and were created."

Psalm 19:1
"The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims His handiwork."

Isaiah 40:22
"It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in"

1 Corinthians 8:6
"Yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist."

Hebrews 3:4
"For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God."

Psalm 8:3-4
"When I look at Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars, which You have set in place, what is man that You are mindful of him, and the son of man that You care for him?"

Psalm 139:13-14
"For You formed my inward parts; You knitted me together in my mother's womb. I praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are Your works; my soul knows it very well."
~~~~~

My scroll wheel is wearing out.

 

[Commodus]

When I look at science as you do I see this. The laws of the universe are such that on one planet in 4 billion years chemicals that could copy and duplicate themselves evolved into beings capable of an expression of cosmic love and the joy of being, or if you will, God realization. Who can say if wha is possible to realize is actually real? What I know is that what is possible to realize is realizable. What more would you need. What I know then is that in this universe it is possible to realize God via a God conscious state. Why that is so I have no idea. It seems it is the result of the evolution of consciousness.

Think you're stressing yourself out more than necessary! To me, it's simple: the only grounding we have in life is observable evidence... and the universe is enjoyable and marvellous by itself.

 

[Pohemi]

Think you're stressing yourself out more than necessary! To me, it's simple: the only grounding we have in life is observable evidence... and the universe is enjoyable and marvellous by itself.

But you didn't drink the wine and feel inebriation in order to remember the hatred you felt as a child and the way you were forced to forget your true self and it made you fearful and now you project everything you hate and and and and...

...amidoinitrite?

 

[MtnMan]

You sure know how to kick a guy when he’s down. I confess, I didn’t look it up. I did, however look up how many times Stockholm appears in your posts. Seems you mentioned twice here and once in 2021. Did you do a search to see how many times Stockholm appears in my posts? Dollars to doughnuts you first learned about Stockholm Victimization from me.

Of course, it doesn't appear in your posts, simply because you don't have a clue about it... and yet...

 

[Moonbeam]

Of course, it doesn't appear in your posts, simply because you don't have a clue about it... and yet...

Haha, I told you to do a search. I mention Stockholm related to Syndrome or victimization by name in 208 posts going back to 2001.

 

[vjeltz]

arredondo,

I am a rare poster but have been an avid reader of this forum for many years. However, I felt the need to reply to you in particular.

You follow your path with strength and fortitude. Many wonder what your motivations are, they fear because that is their nature. However, many are open to your message.

Someone else here suggested that the way you deliver your message may make it difficult to digest. I know you found the truth of “Christ” through Christianity. But realize the verses that you quote are meaningful to you in a way that the English language cannot properly represent. The others that you are trying to help seem deaf to your words because the quotes you display are too quickly glossed over without diving into their deeper meaning. Unfortunately, when you attempt to present a deeper meaning you are again regurgitating your own comprehension, which can be meaningless to others. Although I do appreciate your dark interpretation. Understand also, that even if you delve into the deeper meaning the symbiology may not be universally represented.

You have come to a technical forum, so I will try to speak to you in a technical way. If you want your message to be better understood you will first need to convey the symbols you wish to discuss through our shared reality. We must grok them in the same way you do. Then from these symbols we can begin to converse. From our conversation we can then begin to understand. However, I am unsure if you wish your message to be better understood or if the act of presenting your epiphany is the entire point of your posts.

Please know there are no real battles between us. What you see and what Moonbeam see’s are the same. All adversaries are simply an illusion, all beliefs are only beliefs in an illusion.

I wish you well on your path.

 

[sportage]

,
You have come to a technical forum, so I will try to speak to you in a technical way.

Oh wow. That's right. I almost forgot why I came here in the first place. For me, to determine the best motherboard.
Wha hath happened to me?

 

[MtnMan]

Haha, I told you to do a search. I mention Stockholm related to Syndrome or victimization by name in 208 posts going back to 2001.

68,000+ posts... you need a life, keyboard commando.

 

[Commodus]

arredondo,

I am a rare poster but have been an avid reader of this forum for many years. However, I felt the need to reply to you in particular.

You follow your path with strength and fortitude. Many wonder what your motivations are, they fear because that is their nature. However, many are open to your message.

Someone else here suggested that the way you deliver your message may make it difficult to digest. I know you found the truth of “Christ” through Christianity. But realize the verses that you quote are meaningful to you in a way that the English language cannot properly represent. The others that you are trying to help seem deaf to your words because the quotes you display are too quickly glossed over without diving into their deeper meaning. Unfortunately, when you attempt to present a deeper meaning you are again regurgitating your own comprehension, which can be meaningless to others. Although I do appreciate your dark interpretation. Understand also, that even if you delve into the deeper meaning the symbiology may not be universally represented.

You have come to a technical forum, so I will try to speak to you in a technical way. If you want your message to be better understood you will first need to convey the symbols you wish to discuss through our shared reality. We must grok them in the same way you do. Then from these symbols we can begin to converse. From our conversation we can then begin to understand. However, I am unsure if you wish your message to be better understood or if the act of presenting your epiphany is the entire point of your posts.

Please know there are no real battles between us. What you see and what Moonbeam see’s are the same. All adversaries are simply an illusion, all beliefs are only beliefs in an illusion.

I wish you well on your path.

This is... not really why we're not taking in the message. And I haven't really seen anyone open to that message besides you.

Arredondo isn't regurgitating comprehension so much as he (I'm guessing it's a he) is assuming everyone accepts his worldview as inherently true. To him, all atheists quietly know God exists — they just pretend otherwise.

If Arredondo wants to have a real discussion, he has to accept that non-religious people operate completely outside of his worldview. You won't persuade us by warning us of judgment or insisting that you can never let go of a "relationship" with Jesus. How can we be afraid of something that we've said doesn't exist? It's like telling a middle-aged person to behave if they want presents from Santa Claus... the threat is toothless.

The tricky part, of course, is that he's unlikely to convert anyone (and despite his claims, he's trying to convert people) when stepping outside of that bubble. How do you persuade someone to become Christian knowing they will only accept tangible, verifiable evidence? Well, you don't.

 

[vjeltz]

Commodus, it sounds like you want to explore this idea further. So I will offer the best analogy I can produce.

Let’s say you’re a programmer, you love to program, in fact you have been programming computers since you were a small child. You realize that nothing happens on a computer without programming and it’s really the key to getting the most out of your computer. Soon you want to tell everyone how much they have been missing using off the shelf software and how much more they could get from their computer if they also knew how to program. But they seem disinterested, they truly feel that the software that came with their machine is perfectly fine and they really don’t care how it works or to make it better.

So you go off to find other programmers and start writing code together. However, when you reach out to different groups you realize that each group writes code with a different combination of languages and tools. Some of these other programmers are adamant that their language and dev tools are the best and the others are all junk. There are even claims that some languages aren’t even real programming and are just scripting.

Now Commodus, you have no interest in programming. But to a young programmer who wants to write code, where do they begin? What programming language do they learn? Do they even know English yet? So much programming is based in English. What a mess and we are only talking about computers.

And again, this is a technical forum. So what is happening here is akin to trying to find programmers on a home and gardening forum. The only reason I originally posted was to provide my message to Arredondo who might be a little confused.

 

[Commodus]

Commodus, it sounds like you want to explore this idea further. So I will offer the best analogy I can produce.

Let’s say you’re a programmer, you love to program, in fact you have been programming computers since you were a small child. You realize that nothing happens on a computer without programming and it’s really the key to getting the most out of your computer. Soon you want to tell everyone how much they have been missing using off the shelf software and how much more they could get from their computer if they also knew how to program. But they seem disinterested, they truly feel that the software that came with their machine is perfectly fine and they really don’t care how it works or to make it better.

So you go off to find other programmers and start writing code together. However, when you reach out to different groups you realize that each group writes code with a different combination of languages and tools. Some of these other programmers are adamant that their language and dev tools are the best and the others are all junk. There are even claims that some languages aren’t even real programming and are just scripting.

Now Commodus, you have no interest in programming. But to a young programmer who wants to write code, where do they begin? What programming language do they learn? Do they even know English yet? So much programming is based in English. What a mess and we are only talking about computers.

And again, this is a technical forum. So what is happening here is akin to trying to find programmers on a home and gardening forum. The only reason I originally posted was to provide my message to Arredondo who might be a little confused.

The metaphor seems apt, and that is Arredondo's issue in a way.

Mind you, that takes the wind out of religion's sails, doesn't it? Every devout follower of every religion is just as convinced as Arredondo that they follow the only true faith, and that they can convert you simply by stating their dogma and quoting their religious texts. But if you ask them to prove their religion is true where someone else's is false, they can't; they have no real evidence.

To abuse the metaphor, it's akin to finding out that all programming is useless, and that you should have joined a home and gardening forum years ago.

 

[pmv]

Is this evidence for "yes"?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1494656352236486657

 

[Commodus]

Is this evidence for "yes"?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1494656352236486657

I'd argue no, since God wouldn't deface a church that way if he existed!

I still find it funny how people will "thank God" for avoiding a calamity when, in their worldview, God also caused or allowed that calamity. Logically, they're either unappreciative of many of God's works or don't believe God is responsible for everything. The truth is that it's really just a secular sigh of relief, but they wouldn't publicly admit that...

 

[GodisanAtheist]

In response to the OP: Since Trump got elected?

As an elder millennial it feels like life was grand until I woke up one morning and saw 3000 people die on live TV and basically everything went to shit and we've been lurching from one crisis to the next since then...