Total posts: 2,869
-->
@WaterPhoenix
Lol, the jokes on Singularity, he's included in that....
I have mental illness.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DynamicSquid
1. Programming
Interesting, what about programming do you think attracts you so much?
2. My parents were atheists, so I kinda just grew into it. I'm not really into religious topics, however I think that my current understanding of science and way of thinking prevents me from believing in any form of religion
So, are you saying that science and religion/spirituality cannot be compatible? I for example, agree with science AND spirituality on most things (most things because neither are perfect). I think they can be in harmony with one another because they both study two different natures of our experience.
Now when you say your way of thinking prevents you from religious propositions that worries me lol, because you don't want conditioned thinking to get in the way of potential possibilities. Did you know you don't have to accept any form of religion to accept there is a Creator? religion studies the nature of God but God exists independent of any religions, they are just there to relay knowledge and information.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
From what I got from our dialogue (which has been quite enjoyable), I see that you were first a theist, and then you became a Christian. May I ask how you became a theist in the first place?
There was never a time where I became or converted to a Theist, as far back as I can recall I was thinking about God. It may sound strange but I had an image and understanding of God while I was still in diapers lol. I used to think about God all the time and then I would talk to God but my concepts were very limited obviously, if you asked me how that is possible I couldn't answer how, but it's true.
As time passed I had several spiritual encounters and was already somewhat familiar with the nature of what I observed as a transcendent reality before ever cracking the Bible.
When I was about 8 years old or so I was introduced to Christianity and the scriptures, it was at that time I fell in love with the Gospels and the teachings of Jesus and became very attracted to Jesus' passion for God because I related to it immediately. I was reading the scriptures of my own accord and practicing anything I thought was applicable. For a long, long time I studied every aspect of Christian teaching from a wide range of sources and basically submersed myself in spirituality.
As time passed my beliefs and experiences expanded in all directions and I began to become very interested in different sources of knowledge, insights and experiences and I soon realized to my delight the realty of God was much larger than I ever imagined, an eternal Creator was far more creative than I could have dreamed of.
Now, I do my best not to limit the Creator to any one religion or belief system (not really that I did before but the Bible was the only thing available to me) rather I study all forms and all paths of spirituality if they are legit sources. I keep myself flexible and applicable and open to God on any and all levels. In doing this I have learned a great deal about the Creator, the soul and how creation is put together. I never really became a Christian in the religious sense, that was never my motivation. Rather I learned from the Gospels through observation not through religions, I would be considered a heretic by the majority of Christianity I would guess. So my foundation was to simply follow the teachings of Jesus and apply it to myself and I did that because the account resonated with me on a deep level.
Sorry about all the extra rambling but not many people in this forum have sincere questions so feel free to ask me whatever interests you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
That's extremely convenient for you then , eh.. But then it does leave the question of how do you know that a god or gods exist if "the nature of the Creator eludes our immediate physical sense perceptions"?
Because that is only a fraction of what you are and what you can experience. When you leave this physical body you will understand what I mean, however you don't have to wait on that.
And did those biblical characters have special "sense perceptions" that we today no longer posses?
You have everything you need, but if your own perceptions and perspectives are in the way your experiences will follow that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
By the time I had begun reading the scriptures I was already a Theist, perhaps that's why when I read the teachings of Jesus not only did it make sense and resonate with me I thought Jesus was an extraordinary being. It was the passion behind what he was saying that drove me to want to learn and understand God more, it was his excitement that left me with more a perception that a Creator indeed exists (even though I was already convinced). That is the magic behind a good Master, like Bruce Lee for example....makes you want to get involved with what they are doing and saying, what they are practicing.
Perhaps if I had read them at some point when I was a non believer it may have not been worth much.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
It depends on what aspect of Christianity you're looking at. For some, it's a series of moral guidelines. For others, it's a way to explain the unknown. I consider it to be a religion, along with all of the other religions. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.
Those are the answers you would expect not believing God exists of course, but I'm trying to get you to switch your perspective to considering God exists and then evaluating the information. That may sound strange and don't take it the wrong way but it's the only way it may make any sense to you. I'm not saying to accept it or embrace it, I'm just saying the information would be a lot more useful if you were to approach them as if God does indeed exist. I think it would be more valuable that way and easier to decide whether or not Jesus had anything reasonable to add to your quest for truth.
And....any spiritual texts could be approached this way not just the Gospels.
I actually don't read the Gospels for a moral guideline and to explain the unknown, I'm looking for information that can connect me to that reality. Information that correlates with the spiritual nature of our experience. Many times I use my own observations and encounters as a cross reference to other sources of information. And cross examination between an array of sources when dealing with the spiritual goes a long ways. Because of the very nature of spiritual knowledge and experience we have to evaluate the evidence that correlates with that nature, this would move us over to testimonial based evidence rather than physical based evidence per say.
I agree that Jesus and his disciples, along with the other gospels do teach some good moral lessons. But if you're saying that Jesus (or the others) have proven God's existence, then I would need to see evidence of it, and scrutinize it.
Not saying that at all, but again the information therein would be useless if you always assume God does not exist correct? If you switch your perspective temporarily you may find it makes more sense. Like if you were reading material from someone you believed was a madman, it would be hard for you to accept any of it and you may perceive it all to be a little nutty or even extreme. You could even still scrutinize it all you want, but make sure your worldview and perceptions about life don't get in the way of judging the material.
I haven't read the gospels in their entirety, but I can say that they give good moral teachings.
I say just read the Gospel of John through, since they are all similar. But morality is the least of the lessons I would think. Do you need anyone to tell you or instruct you about how to live a moral life? I doubt it, rather the information is to connect you with the spiritual nature of yourself. Spirituality can certainly expand your sense of morals but that is not the point behind the texts.
So how exactly do the gospels prove God's existence?
Application, observation. If you want transcendent experiences you have to plug into that source. Many times when you read spiritual texts you look for anything that is applicable to yourself, then judge for yourself how worthwhile it is.
I don't disagree with the teachings. I'm just thinking about this thing from a neutral, critical perspective. I don't deny the possibility of God existing.
Awesome that's all that matters my friend.
I'll have to read into the teachings more, but thinking from a critical perspective, I don't see any evidence, yet.
Thinking from a critical perspective is fine and also necessary, but once again don't let it get in the way. Do you understand what I mean by that? and like I said in my last post, it's very unlikely you will find good evidence to persuade you to accept the Gospels. It's more likely that you would come to accept God exists through time, evidence and good reasoning, and then you might see how the teachings make sense, or how they are useful. But a good place to start if haven't come to that conclusion is to be willing to apply things to yourself rather than simply waiting to find some decent evidence or whatever sort of evidence you are looking for.
I haven't yet found good reasoning and evidence that God exists. That's why I'm here, to seek out the evidence for myself. But I can't jump to conclusions, and until I do find some good reasoning and evidence, I cannot say, with certainty, that God does exist.
Well perhaps consider my posts throughout this forum and in other threads, where I give good reasoning to not only consider the existence of God but also challenge a materialistic ideology. I do this by reminding you that processes are associated with intelligence, and asking you if you are comfortable with accepting that inanimate forces can produce intelligent processes such as evolution and the creation of solar systems and planets, habitations and then intelligent/sentient creatures. I will remind you of the very nature of energy and how it operates within creation and what it produces.
Correlation is key to gaining any confidence that God may exist.
In all of what I said here I'm not claiming that you need to accept the Gospels in order to believe that God exists or in order to be a Theist. The teachings of Jesus are simply to connect you to something real but it's not like you have to have it. But, like any form of learning or practicing you want to learn from a good Master.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Coming back for another spanking? do I have to spoon feed you commonsense the rest of your life?? grow up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
According to the very passage written.
Jesus takes three witnesses
Jesus walks a few feet away, falls down and prays for one hour
Disciples fall asleep within one hour,
"And he said to Peter, “So, could you not watch with me one hour?"
Obviously, three witnesses did not fall asleep as Jesus walked a few feet away and collapsed, and they heard what he prayed. Easy peeasy. Next
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
So you don't really have an educated or studied opinion on Jesus of the Gospels?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
How long would it take any of Jesus' company to fall asleep while he walked a little further away lol? nowhere does it say they fell asleep as he walked a few feet away and prayed. It says they were asleep when he came back, he went praying for ONE HOUR... Obviously one of the three heard each time, then falling asleep within one hour....But never mind you don't know what an answer is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
Before I lose you, I guess I was wondering if you had an opinion of the Gospels and the teachings of Jesus aside from any religious dogma. Have you ever read any of it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
The Orthodox Church teaches The Eternal Way.
No other way I had in mind, but thanks though.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Truly, it is really more Orthodox to preach through example than proselytizing.
Well in this instance no need for any "orthodox church", because we agree. I don't need to become anything to do that. If you claim I need to become something you have already missed the boat. Have already divided yourself from another God lover.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
There is no historical Church that's where we keep banging heads lol, the church are the true believers it has nothing to do with any organized groups or religions. I don't teach a different Jesus because the Jesus I teach is the Gospel. Nothing added nothing taken away, the pure Gospel.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
Lol just read the Gospels. Become a God lover not a religious thug/pusher.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
I have no problems with Christianity itself.
This is why I like you soo much lol. If I may interject, may I ask you what you consider Christianity? I would narrow it down to the Gospels themselves just curious what you think though, your thoughts on it minus all the dogma and interpretations.
When I was just a young kid there was something about the teachings of Jesus that made me want to love God and understand God more.
If I see good evidence and sound reasoning for the existence of the God of the Bible, then I would become a Christian. I haven't seen such things yet.
Here's a good way to look at it. Unlike Mopac I'll be taking Jesus' position and not trying to justify religion or any organized religious institutions. If you have no problem with say...the Gospels or the teachings of Jesus consider what he taught from somebody that was an expertise in the arena of understanding God and all that it implies, a teacher in other words and from teachers is how we gain knowledge and insights.
Expand that from just Jesus, and consider that there are many sources of information that can connect you with the understanding of God. Unfortunately, everyone wants to claim Jesus as the Author of their faith and their religious clubs. And of course that's because He was such a bad azz Master and an amazing example.
Erasing all the claims of religious institutions and everyone asserting they have some inerrant understanding of the Gospels, approaching them for yourself what is it that you gain from reading the Gospels? what do you think the message is? do you like it?
You see, the actual teachings and examples are there to connect you to that reality so the evidence is in the application of it. To wait for evidence that supports the Gospels is safe, but not smart. The evidence is in the teachings and the way Jesus exemplifies Himself, the teachings are to be applied and the principles observed that is how you come to the conclusion they are legit. If you wait for something that may never surface you may miss what's being taught, or you may overlook it because you are hesitating.
It's not that you need to become some Christian per say, especially some form of religious Christian like many proselytize rather it is another way of interacting with reality and what you think you know. The teachings of Jesus are there to help you understand the nature of spirituality vs the nature of the carnal mind and desires just like many other paths of spirituality.
They are there to help you transcend what you normally think and act on, what you normally experience. In this sense it's more an application and not a religion or set of beliefs. Religion is actually irrelevant, basically you replace Jesus with yourself when you read the Gospels....minus getting crucified lol.
Again, you have to treat the Gospels as if they are the source of evidence..... that's not circular reasoning because where you have application you also have observation. And where you have observation you have your evidence.
I think if you observe the teachings of Jesus you will also find sound reasoning therein, because therein is the wisdom of what it means to abide under the shadow of the Almighty. It would be like plugging directly into a power source but not through religion, not tradition and certainly not pressure from some silly so-called authority that you need to join or become a follower of. The only thing you would be obligated to do from a spiritual perspective is to apply things to yourself, to be flexible and teachable to truth outside of what you think you know. But that is how you learn and gain things and it's no different with spirituality you have to be willing to submit to another way of doing things.
More than likely you will never find any good reasoning or evidence for the God of the Bible, rather you will find good reasoning and evidence to accept God exists and then you will see that there is good reasoning behind what Jesus teaches, different approach with the same things in mind.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
You literally said "first focus on your own intuition". If that's not a foundation, I don't know what is.
In relation to whom I was speaking. Alec for example, might want to consider that if he is get outside conditioned thinking.
But that's beside the point. The point is: human intuition sucks and shouldn't be involved in any search for knowledge.
If you don't want to use your own intuition then that statement was not for you. Let Alec pick up where I left it. You are not a very intuitive person, your responses are quite robotic actually and I don't mean that as an insult.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
So Saddam Hussein for example was god like then when he also ordered the unprovoked genocide gassing against Kurdish women , children and infants in Halabja?
Are you forgetting that God has the ability to choose what It wants when It wants? isn't that part of "in his image"....to be able to consciously choose what path the soul wishes to go? without that ability, wouldn't we be more like in the image of a robot or machine? so yes, while Saddam was able to make his own decisions as God does, they were HIS decisions not Gods.
So according to the Bible, both God and Saddam are able to choose who they annihilate. What would make the difference of course, would be the perception of the two....God's perspective vs Saddam's. So while you can claim Saddam and his ability to choose is made in the image of God you can't equate his perspective to God's perspective, that would be dumb of course. They aren't the same in that sense, only the ability to choose what it wants not why it wants.
Then again, I'm under no obligation to accept any slaughter in the OT as God's doing either. However, I am obligated to know the difference between the two perspectives as you are.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DynamicSquid
Two questions since you asked...
What is your passion?
I noticed you are an Atheist, without claiming there is no evidence for God....including all you have thought of, what is it that has persuaded you to accept such an ideology? say...as opposed to agnosticism or a neutral position?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
You are limiting yourself by presuming the universe conforms to your intuition. It doesn't.
Surprisingly I don't think you are comprehending what I'm saying by this. And I'm not using intuition as a foundation, only as a means to expand from a limited perspective. Not only that I never said anything about the universe.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
The only thing that I'm saying is that we do not have collective consensus on this issue, and probably will not have consensus for a long time.
That depends on what source you are pulling from and how flexible you are. Are you not aware there is a Theistic foundation/proposition? what is it you think we have a consensus about?
I'm not disregarding your argument, nor do I think that it is completely wrong. I'm just saying that we do not currently have enough information to come to a conclusion.
I have plenty of information in case you haven't noticed lol. Isn't that the point in coming here to discuss it?
I'll have to do some research into this before I can answer this question.
You don't need to, it's called commonsense and correlation. That's how we arrive at conclusions with confidence. You're a good person though and I'm glad you are around in this forum.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Is there any evidence for God? It's what I'm trying to figure out.
Yes there is evidence but remember it's an interpretation of everything being put forward and all your abilities to reason and use logic, commonsense, correlation. In other words there isn't going to be some scientist that demonstrates God exists for you that is silly because the nature of the Creator eludes our immediate physical sense perceptions and so the scientific method is not for that purpose.
If you want evidence, which basically means that which indicates something true or valid, you have to put the pieces together for yourself....if you want evidence outside yourself and your own ability to reason you have to move over to spirituality, religious testimony, NDE's, spiritual experiences ect ect why? because now you're into the method that can reach that nature of God. That's kinda the point of spirituality, it's how we get to reach God from an unreachable position. If you want those types of experiences and knowledge you have to be willing to get into that field of expertise.
Through all my years of debating this topic I've concluded the best way to achieve any confidence of God's existence is through correlation, not focusing on the processes we observe in our universe alone, but asking yourself how any processes occur at all without intelligence and awareness behind it. Considering that intelligent processes are associated with a mind it is simple to see that awareness was first behind them. Basically you will be building for yourself a legit foundation by using your ability to see the whole picture and put it all together, then consider NDE's, spirituality and the nature of consciousness as a means to strengthen your case that there is a transcendent reality that exists beyond this planet and our limited senses.
Then you have more evidence than anyone could ever sift through in one lifetime, the fact that spiritual encounters, knowledge and experiences have pervaded our human experience here for so long, and through so many numbers it should be obvious.
But again, I challenge you to consider how energy operates in creation, ask yourself first and make sure you are comfortable with accepting that inanimate forces could ever produce intelligent processes and create sentient creatures, habitations, arrangements...and if it turns out you are not satisfied with that then now you have something to work with. You have a foundation that now proposes the processes we observe taking place within the universe come from intelligence aka God. You have to build your case from nothing to something, leaving no holes in your worldview and understanding. I can help you achieve that here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I agree that the universe "makes more sense" when you limit yourself to only examining it as far as your intuition goes.
Limit yourself?? are you kidding me? from your perspective that would be adding, expanding and considering a much more wholistic view rather than a limited one. Right now, if God exists you are limited by a materialistic perspective. So I don't see how this makes any sense. Even if I'm wrong how would I be limiting myself by expanding potential possibilities?
I brought in intuition to break the mold of limitations not set them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Is there any particular reason you never respond to me? have I ever offended you in any way? just curious...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
What makes you think the universe is consistent with our intuition?
Not really the universe per say, more like your conscious experience which would be the soul and that soul is in relation to God. So intuition would be on par with how you understand something immediately about yourself, with how you instinctively feel. That's hard to do if your mind has been used to conditioned thinking but it's not impossible.
The two most accurate scientific theories in all human history are basically summed up as: "the universe is much weirder than we think."
Haha the universe is much more simplistic when you understand its origins, at least it makes more sense. It may be weird to you because you think of it as some mystery, but on my end that wouldn't be the case. Actually it's quite genius how the Creator puts these worlds together for us to have an experience.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
“God exists” is a synthetic proposition.Logic alone is not proof, you still need evidence.
But, we begin with logic, commonsense and rationale. The evidence part is easy once you know what you are looking for and why. Non-believers always emphasize evidence not really knowing that evidence is simply that which indicates a proposition true or valid. In that sense I think logic, commonsense and rationale go further because they are used to articulate the existence of God and not just point to some indicator. So in actuality we have all of that not just one or the other.
Synthetic propositions are described in logical terms and substantiated by empirical evidence.You can propose “God exists”, but it is an unsubstantiated synthetic proposition.
On one hand empirical evidence and God are not compatible from a scientific method of observation and experimentation approach. On the other hand that doesn't mean God can't be experienced, known or observed. Through spirituality and inner consciousness God certainly can be experienced and known/understood. So, it's not a collective experience but an individual one (that can be personally substantiated). This of course is due to the very nature of God, how God eludes our physical sense perception (can't grab, touch or physically examine God), but not our inner conscious perceptions and observations. And while it may not be substantiated by the scientific method you would be stuck on....we are not restricted to only that approach thank God.
Our inner conscious awareness is not limited by any outside, material method of study we have a direct connection to God because your soul and consciousness are of the very same nature. A lot like tuning into radio frequencies you have to practice tuning your awareness to a different channel. This might sound a little bizarre (at first) but it should help explain spiritual experiences and religious claims a bit better rather than assuming people are hallucinating or are deranged. If people really want to know about God on a real level they are going to have to get used to the fact you can't reach God through science or empirical evidence and experimentation. God can't be lain in a lab or studied like anything within the universe.
Psalm 91
1 He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
John 4
23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
you still need evidence.
There's plenty of evidence for the Creator that correlates with the nature of God, that falls in the fields of spirituality, religion, spiritual encounters, spiritual texts, NDE's, OBE's and paranormal activity because again it's nonsensical to be looking for any other based evidence. And everyone should be aware of the fact there's more than enough evidence within those arenas to substantiate the existence of not only God, but a transcendent reality that exists beyond the physical sense perceptions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
"We" refers to all of us as a collective whole.
Then that would be an incorrect statement, because that only refers to a portion of the whole not the whole (I'm not alone in my evaluations sir). The other portions do not agree, however I appreciate the opinion.
If it comes down to individual acceptance or rejection of something, then it is no more than opinion. This means that more than one option is valid. The problem is, when/if we get down to the most basic, fundamental building blocks of the universe, there can't be more than one valid option. At the most basic level, either one or more gods exist, or none exist at all.
So why exactly are you not considering my argument? there is no real rebuttal here. If you think I'm wrong so be it but perhaps consider it anyways, or break down my position and debate it.
If awareness is not behind all things, then how do all things know what to produce? without awareness, where do processes come from?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Good points in the video. I guess I'll have to change my profile.
Instead of having someone try and convince you God exists why don't you first focus on your own intuition, if it leads you to accept God exists then no video could really persuade you either way rather it would just be a good lecture or a poor one. A person can debunk someone's argument for God (because not all arguments are put together all that well) but in reality they can't really debunk the Creator. I build my own arguments for God according to all the information available but I don't flip flop on it because my experiences and observations already have me persuaded and therefore I do not necessarily need anyone to do that for me.
The best thing a person can do is to look at the evidence that correlates with the nature of God, the nature of God transcends the human sense perception and our experience and observation of God transcends the material sense perception as well and in that you have to be willing to consider spirituality and spiritual encounters/sources. Beyond that any perspective about whether or not God exists is more of an opinion or an interpretation, like.... "it's obvious God exists when I observe life and the universe"..."it just makes sense"...."it fits better than any other proposition" ect ect.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
Yeah, I understand the processes broadly, sure. What I don't understand is if there's a process we can demonstrate in some way, like say the way gravity works on particles to form accretion disks and eventually planets, or stars form, I don't understand where you see the creator, definitively, as in why you're convinced besides "I just am." I'm not. There's no evidence for it.
Because you are accepting that inanimate forces create intelligent processes, that is absurd IMO. If you can demonstrate a process, you have to be able to also demonstrate why they occur, not just how. I can show you how a car engine works and how it's put together, but I can also point to the designer or creator of that engine because the engine didn't generate itself into existence alone. You should be looking at why planets form at all not just how, seriously ask yourself why and then look at what a planet is. It's a habitation for conscious beings I mean can we get anymore obvious? look at the arrangement of just our solar system, not to mention everything that takes place after that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
THe post says "life can only come from prior life." It's pretty clear.
And that's what I also said, pretty clearly.
Not "some forms of life come from prior life, as observed, others come from other life that isn't exactly like you think of life,
Excuse me?
but instead materialize out of a strange awareness no one has ever demonstrated, but I think it's there."
Strange awareness? what do you think the actual Theistic proposition is then? is God not aware or conscious? everywhere you look on Earth is awareness how is it strange, I'm extending that premise beyond this planet. We know that things materialize out of a strange energy....and you accept that, I'm saying it's not strange that energy does this because it occurs through an intelligent Source.
The statement life comes only from life is extremely clear. If you want to say God is Life, cool...
Awesome, then you get it?
where'd that life come from,
Since I've already clearly explained that I'd like you at least to read my posts and acknowledge the answers. Awareness doesn't come from anything just like energy does not come from anything. Energy and awareness co-exist, conscious activity generates energy. Both energy and God are not created, and not destroyed...hence eternal. If something is eternal it has no need to come from anything.
because now it's not coming from any prior life, as stated in the original proposition.
Are you kidding me or just not reading my posts?
It's coming from special pleading ("except when I bring in awareness which is life and that's eternal, and therefore no prior life is required.")
Where does energy come from Ludo? if you accept that energy does not come from something are you special pleading? then how am I special pleading when I say God does not come from anything, awareness is eternally existent. The life on Earth obviously had a beginning point, but I'm extending life beyond physical forms of earth. That is the reality of it.
The problem is that if you're using the word life, we have a common meaning for this term, and I'm using it in that context. Life = organic matter.
I said anything that is aware or conscious we would label life, is that incorrect? would you consider yourself life? if God is both aware and conscious is that not considered life? you consider life on earth when it comes to conscious beings but then you freak out when I say that God is also life?
Life-
"A principle or force that is considered to underlie the distinctive quality of animate beings."
"an animating and shaping force or principle"
"spiritual existence transcending physical death"
"The quality that distinguishes a vital functional being from a dead body"
Awareness
" the quality or state of being aware : knowledge and understanding that something is happening or exists"
"the state or condition of being aware; having knowledge;
Consciousness
"the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings."
"the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world"
All the terms I'm using for my position are legit.
You seem to want to use it to substantiate something else entirely that it does NOT mean, commonly.
Not true as I have shown above, however when we discuss Theistic premises it's only considered uncommon by a materialistic perspective. But in spirituality and religion what I'm saying is not uncommon.
As it exists with an unseen creator is meaningless, and then you switch to awareness and seem to say that life also means that, which it doesn't (trees are alive but not sentient).
Look at the definitions above, and yes trees have awareness Ludo. They respond to their environment.
You're saying this version of life arose from something that always existed,
Not arose, eternally existing awareness. That is what God is proposed as, and my arguments follow that. Out of awareness comes all things, processes are associated with intelligence. Basically I'm putting all the pieces together for you from the Creator all the way down to our experience here on this planet.
which is special pleading and exactly my point:
Are you special pleading when you accept that energy has always existed in one form or another? why when I bring in God to the equation I'm special pleading? why not just deal with the argument and move forward. We have specific premises and these have been known for a long time.
if life always existed, then it didn't always come from life.
Okay, it always existed then, how's that lol?
You're also adding something that's not demonstrated, a creator, to something that is demonstrated, that adds no value:
That is bull, because on your end you have many unanswered questions. Or at least you should, you should be asking why's and not how's. For example, how do you account for the way energy operates in creation? it just does right? magic perhaps? I'm saying energy acts as intelligence in the processes involved, that intelligence coming from the Creator. In other words God manipulates energy to create things. That has value sir.
if we can demonstrate BBC (through CMBR and other evidence), why is a creator necessary, what's it add?
Solid reasoning, commonsense and answers to unanswerable questions. They may explain how things occur but not why, I take you that step further... It being true, adds a lot to the world view doesn't it? that's a pretty drastic alternative I'd say from materialism not to mention the dynamics change drastically.
It doesn't answer any questions.
Then you aren't paying attention to what I'm writing.
you're moving it one step further back.
Correct, I'm looking at the entire picture not just the steps involved answering why things occur the way they do.
For thousands and thousands of years people thought some deity or other created the world in front of their eyes,
Irrelevant, they were not aware of any processes because they didn't have that ability to discover what we have.
then we make discoveries and figure things out, and you end up with God of the Gaps
Yes, God does fill the gaps because your premise has holes, if God fills the gaps that is the point behind what I'm saying. If God exists, then are not the processes we observe originate on the Creator's behalf? are you satisfied with gaps in your worldview? I wouldn't be...
And it doesn't connect to the biblical god at all.
That doesn't concern me, on the other hand there's no reason for me to believe that anything I'm saying contradicts the Biblical God, as I'm not a Biblical literalist.
I know you have some nebulous amorphous belief system I can't figure out, so I'll chalk it up to that, but you offer no evidence either, I'm sorry.
It's pretty straight forward dude. On top of that I'm using basic Theistic premises. Sorry.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
"a god did this" is exactly as explicable saying "magic did this," or " a god did this using magic."
No not at all, you're aware of the processes that occur in creation/universe correct? if you are aware of those processes why are you calling them magic?
We are correlating what takes place within the universe with the intelligence of the Creator, no magic needed. Processes are not magic my friend.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
That's a pretty good list and thank you for the high complement I'll just add a few...
Ethang5 - courageous, steadfast, witty sense of humor, quick sharp thinker, good judge of character
Casten - clear-headed, non-judgmental, funny, fun, smart
DebateArt.com - great guy, cool calm and collective
PressF4Respect - this member was already mentioned but one of the more sincere posters, open-minded and willing to leave pre-conceived notions at the door for the sake of convo. That is rare here.
Last but not least...
Disgusted - precious, extremely kind and sensitive, non-biased, delightful, mature, non-abrasive, excellent communication skills and just an all around great person to discuss things with (LOL)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Walk me through this: if life can only come from prior life, according to you
We are proposing two distinct things that are the same in nature, "life" as it appeared on Earth through the process of evolution AND...…..and......and....life as it exists with the Creator, life that is a part of God. Maybe it's the term "life" that's throwing you off? anything that is conscious or aware (God) is what we would label life, and since the conscious Reality of God precedes life on Earth our claim is that life does not arise from non-living matter...the awareness that exists in forms on Earth originates with God. And, no infinite regress needed because conscious awareness is the foundation and that foundation is what everything comes from not matter.
Here, let's break it down very simply...
God (life) exists eternally, it's a static stationary omnipresent, conscious Reality comparable to energy (same proposition involved). It exists independent of time, space, matter as well as within it = FIRST, original source of life
God begins the processes of creating = energy condensed and released =Big bang = processes of creating begin
Stars, moons, galaxies, solar systems and planets are arranged/formed = universe
Then comes the development of embodiments and forms on planets = next phase of life = same source of awareness only a restricted/limited form of it
Conclusion.....life as we observe it on this planet originated from the life and awareness of God = life never came from non-life = life preceded life on this planet.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
The entire crux of the fine-tuning argument is that if the variables were slightly different from what they are, life/stars/galaxies/etc. would not exist. Not just that the galaxies, the solar systems, and the lifeforms would be different, but that they wouldn't exist at all.
Perhaps, but that is my take on it, sorry. No need to be so rigid with it.
We currently do not know whether this is true or not.
Who is we?? that's why I'm bringing it to your attention the very nature of what has been produced. If you accept that processes can occur without there being an awareness that's your decision.
Created:
-->
@LordLuke
But I think talking with others plays a part in it, too.
Bingo that's correct, as well if you don't really like to read watching videos/lectures on subject matters by an expertise or teacher is very useful. One thing you always want to maintain is flexibility and sincerity in all your quests for knowledge.
Like, if you are trying to find the truth about a topic, you will naturally have a question about it, research it, and then become closer to the truth. And you probably will find a lot of interesting stuff you didn't even think or know about on your way.
Great point LordLuke
By the way I've been really disliking my life for like the past 3-and-a-half years, and I sometimes am just in the mood to complain and all...
Awe man sorry to hear that, I've had so many hard experiences in my time I feel ya. I see you're a Christian, I always submerse myself in God when I feel helpless or things falling apart..sometimes when things get stagnant you must try something different, getting out of yourself and the mind really does help, breaking up patterns of emotions and thoughts. Spirituality can help you transcend obstacles and mental/emotional blockages. I'd love to discuss it with you if you want.
I never did anything, including learning, video games, exercising, or just anything, and literally spent the past 3-and-a-half years doing I don't even know, complaining about how I don't do anything like I would do a lot? And touching myself all the time like I wish I didn't do and know I shouldn't do, also I have to watch my baby brother so much...
No need to let guilt hang over your head unless it's something you wish to change. You have a long journey ahead of you so there's plenty of time for adjustments, find subjects that really intrigue you and occupy your thoughts dwelling on them even when you watch your brother. All the time you spend with him will pay off when everything is said and done.
I also felt like I want time to actually focus, and also I plan what I think I should do and like feel like I have to do everything perfectly or else I'll tend not to do it ..., and when I don't feel like I have that time I don't really do anything but wish I had that time to get started on what I want.
Don't overload yourself, just focus on one thing at a time. I have four children so I know what you mean, a lot of times it's when I'm laying down for the night or just waking up I spend my time contemplating and thinking about the things I want to discover or understand since my days are packed. Try focusing your thoughts on a single subject for a time, it is not easy to do sometimes but practice quieting the mind, stop chasing random thoughts and just be the observer.
Once you gain control of your mind be more intuitive about what you wish to learn or know. Many times our thoughts have been conditioned, and just by being watchful and trusting your instincts you can know truth without anybody telling you it.
The answers are not in conditioned thinking, the answers exist outside of that and so does your state of consciousness and you can absorb truth without even being taught it by another party. And that is because all knowledge and truth already exist in God independent of any individual. Not that we don't need teaching but have the confidence and trust in yourself and the Creator first and foremost.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
The fine-tuning argument (the one that Dr.F is using) states that if any one of the (supposedly) millions of variables were altered slightly, then the universe/matter/life/etc. would not exist. In other words, there is one universe, and in this universe, these variables have to be just the way they are in order for anything to happen. If they changed (even by a infinitesimal amount), then these "processes" would collapse. That is his argument.
There's some truth to that obviously. Different arrangement different results? I mean we all should know that the arrangement of our solar system is why we have the results we do, if it were altered in any way the effects would be significant. It's because of the arrangement why we exist in the manner we do. However, I don't think that if the variables were altered then the universe would not exist, but the bodies we inhabit sure would cease to exist.
The question then is, "How do you know, for a fact, that these processes would all fail if the variables were (even slightly) different
They may not fail, I would imagine the results would be different though. Either way we are correlating "fine-tuning" with a Creator, but I'm focusing more on the processes and correlating that with intelligence. Looking at the whole picture it seems deliberate to me, it's more than obvious. My position is that no process or apparent fine tuning could occur without sentience (awareness). It just doesn't happen. Awareness is behind all things, all of creation period.
Created:
-->
@LordLuke
When I read other people talk, they will talk like they actually know the subject and have dealt with it it seems like.Like they feel confident that what they think is true, and they will say that x is a scam or that the problem with it isn't this but it's this.Like I get how to be confident with abstract stuff like philosophy, but where on the internet do you visit to know stuff like that.
Welcome to the nature of duality where there will always be opposing views, theories and opinions. Like Ethang5 stated, read a lot! Some things are a lot more black and white than other things and so you have to look at all the available information you can find on a particular subject, at the end you basically choose the side you feel has more evidence or truth....commonsense and logic. I do a lot of cross referencing, and don't assume the majority opinion.
An example is this that I had just heard someone say and paraphrased, that vaccines are some sort of scam that's being kept because it makes them a lot of money but that it doesn't cause autism or something.Like I don't get it. How do you not trust the government but you do trust a site on the internet or you trust these real-life experiences that how did you get and all this and everything I don't get it.
This is about simply educating yourself by looking into different sources of information, perhaps examining all claims involved. The Government is not an expert of health lol.
Vaccines are a touchy subject and I'd rather not go there, however I have looked at all sides and I do have my own opinion on the matter. I can give you a good source that I have been persuaded by.
There's many instances where we have been given vaccinations where we could have developed natural immunity against. Of course as all subjects go this is up for debate.....Another way to prevent "diseases", viruses and sicknesses is to improve the state of health in a given individual. Dealing with foreign invasions to the body the lymphatic system (immune system) plays a huge role in what stays in the body, persists or is eliminated. Since a baby is connected to the mother and it receives all her nutrition or lack thereof and develops the same condition of the lymphatic system there becomes the first problem. A baby or individual that has poor health becomes more susceptible or compromised than one of excellent health and the threat of foreign invasion is much more serious.
So in light of this there could be a misrepresentation that it's the threat of the virus or disease and not having a vaccination when in fact it's a malfunction of the body or compromised lymphatic system (which can be dealt with naturally). Clean the terrain of the body and nothing stays, the body will eliminate viruses and so-called diseases.
In a proper state of health the body always seeks to repair itself and remove unwanted problems.
Imagine for example a filter that has been clogged or stopped up, dirty and stagnant as opposed to a new filter or one that's been flushed or cleaned, which one do you think would eliminate better? which one do you think would back up and cause issues? the answer of course is obvious so compare the human lymphatic system to a filter where the state of the body depends upon the condition of the filter... what stays or leaves.
So the question becomes do we give a baby or child dangerous vaccines (which potentially causes seizures, autism, neurological conditions) or do we target the state of health of that person?
Created:
-->
@ethang5
You have the patience of a Godparent lol, thank God you're here to deal with the trolls. It would be nice to have a few more mature and serious posters here in this section who are interested in sincere debate and convo. There's a couple users who ruin it for everyone. I'm surprised Disgusted's brother stopped stalking us, he followed me around for like 7 years slandering me! he was old though, maybe his time was up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
It's more of an interpretation I believe. Taking into account everything that is happening and all the processes involved from the beginning to what we observe currently. More like stepping back and observing the whole picture instead of focusing on the steps. But even the steps and process should ring a bell for anyone TBH. Processes are associated with mind and intelligence....
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
The soul already exists, it just needs a place to have fun. But the forms that appear through evolution need to be specific, and specific to its surroundings so they can be sustained within that environment. The universe itself is a giant molding pot where all things can be experienced, people are going to be shocked when they realize we are not alone here lol. It is estimated that there are one to two TRILLION observable galaxies within the universe and anyone thinks or assumes that it's all vacant lol? I mean why would anyone assume that including believers? God is not limited to creation on Earth, God can produce anything in any number of galaxies and planets. That's why they exist.
When you leave this world it's actually the same deal, you have a parallel universe (or multiverse) stocked full of planetary systems, heavens, hells, paradises, ghettos, societies ect ect and things you could never dream of. God is a fun God and the journey of the soul is a long one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Hypothetically if we had a universe where 100% of it was habitable for human life would that be good evidence that said universe was created just for humans?Okay so we take HU-3, a universe that is much much better suited for human life than our own universe and it 'might' have been created for the purpose of human habitation? Yet when we look at the less-suitable-for-life universe you say 'definately yes'. Okay.
Suitable for life does not necessarily equate to human life or human bodies, God creates more than one kind of form or embodiment that corresponds with its planets environment and so the soul can exist anywhere in the universe where there is a formation inhabitable. There are countless galaxies, solar systems and planet arrangements we have no way of observing to testify if there is life elsewhere within the universe so to believe or assume it's all vacant is somewhat absurd (not saying that you do).
What happens is when God sets up an environment like say Earth so that there can eventually be inhabitants, the forms on that planet evolve and adapt to their surroundings. So while human bodies are sustained on Earth they are also limited to that particular planet. Likewise any forms that exist within our universe elsewhere they also are adapted in accordance to their environment and limited to their solar system.
Most people (Theists) assume that God made the entire universe for human forms no, that is a misconception even by believers.....actually God sets up the environment and then creates form, many kinds. The universe was not created just for human bodies...the universe was created for galaxies, solar systems and planets and then God develops the appropriate bodies so that the soul can experience through. So the forms created through processes vary according to the physics and arrangement of what part of the universe they are in.
If I were a non-believer I wouldn't be looking at how most of the universe is uninhabitable for human form, I would be looking at the planetary systems and how it could be inhabitable to another kind of form and why they even appear at all. Does it ever cross anyone's mind why on earth planets form in the first place (not how, but why)? I mean really look at it....you have a solar system where you find a light and heat source, you have the formation of planets....PLANETS for God's sake, planets that orbit and spin so everything stays put! then you have the appearance of life through embodiment, sentient beings. I mean it should be so obvious to anyone that there is a Creator and a Creator that utilizes intelligent processes everything from energy, the Big Bang, the arrangement of galaxies and planets and then evolution of embodiments.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Do you? Well, you seem to not know the difference between Goliath and brother of Goliath.
Lol this is where obsession will lead you.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
I would have expected this behavior from Disgusted. Oh, and of course Stevie wonder boy....Mr. can't find an actual contradiction to save his life.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Once again I fail to understand what point you are making and even if you have one at all, and now I'm wondering if you understood what I wrote. My point was that you don't need a version of Christianity you can go straight to the Gospels. By pastor I was referring to organized church, if you want to consider Jesus as my pastor that's perfect and that is confirming the point I was making in regards to the OP.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
You don't need to hate an enemy to not allow them to destroy creation, why you keep insisting that we must "beat the shyte out of them or kill them out of hate" in order to neutralize a given situation (without disturbing the principle of love) is rather immature and strange.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
To make a long story short, you are not required to believe in anything you find absurd or unacceptable. That's not the point behind spirituality or even an example like Jesus or any other spiritual Master or scriptures. What IS required of you is to be flexible and willing to apply things, DON'T just mock and look for things you believe are stupid. If something makes sense to you just apply it to yourself that's it. Give your all and refuse to be held down by any particular ideology like atheism, if you just did that you could make leaps and bounds. Hook up with a Theist that makes some damn sense and get involved, ask questions and be willing to do things differently.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
how do I know which parts are and which parts aren't?
Why don't you give it a shot, you seem like a pretty logical fella what's the problem? Or, rather than using common sense to figure out what the accounts are trying to convey you simply use what is useful? what do you think about the Gospel? before you recite how a dead man was raised from the grave or how Jesus walked on water why not look at everything else in between?? the miracle stuff is interesting but what about the subtle beautiful nuances and extreme passion for the Creator? what about all the cool examples and teachings of Jesus throughout the whole collection?? what about the courage and hero like qualities of Jesus?
Created: