Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well no matter what re the thread idea only... theres a problem with cosmic god. If cosmic God is going to deliberately replace some fair sincerely honest representation of a fully known bible god of sorts, there would need to be evidence to support the wild claim, iow the position automatically has cosmic god in full conscientious argument with bible god.
For instance where are cosmic god's commandments if so true. And there is no escaping cosmic's gods responsibility in manner of existence on behalf of the proposition to clearly show how exactly cosmic god is justified in manner of existence, rationally ahead of bible god.
Therefore all cosmic god represents is the greatest profound deliberate and intentional heresy from bible itself. ( not speaking of many religions who have constructive idea's.
Cosmic god : A decision to make self God, by making god, man's biggest mistake and a known blunder in so many ways including social progress.
As far as science is concerned, we know less and less at an accelerating rate with respects to this subject, a God. Relativity being the wake up call of the century. Any argument can simply result in a suggestion to check out a book, how about Davies the great physicist..About Time, for the lay people like myself, a good wake up call on the science and this subject. He discuss's time from the scientific and its def not a rel book.
Its amazing, bible god of sorts ( all constructive faiths) gets replaced by the chief complaint and everybody knows what it is, which cannot be anything but greater, in the new cosmic god.
One can't credibly use a book as evidence to prove the book. Also, creation (which is not proven) is not evidence of a god, but less evidence of the Christian god. Have anything else?
It's not about the book.
It's not about the book.
It's not about the book.
Got it?
It's about the evidence that convinces one God does exist. Evidence that I've presented a 1000 times only to have it summarily dismissed by skeptics who believe God and the spiritual do not exist.
I think it would foolish and delusional to believe in God without any sort of evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
Stargazzer again....Persistent little devil isn't he?
It's about the evidence that convinces one God does exist. Evidence that I've presented a 1000 times only to have it summarily dismissed by skeptics who believe God and the spiritual do not exist.
I think it would foolish and delusional to believe in God without any sort of evidence.
Right, but you have NO evidence...No empirical evidence for the existence of any deity has ever been found.
You know what I say is the truth, otherwise you would present your empirical, testable evidence wouldn't you....So either present it or stop claiming that you have it.
I don't know why anyone would want to believe in a God that would
have a system set up that caused Him to send His son to brutally die...or have blood sacrifices of animals, period.
If you want to believe in a God of love, but have no evidence...that's sweet.
But, wouldn't u like to experience Him yourself?
Sit, be still, meditate, ask, wait...then you will know there is a Divine Presence under
you, in you, above you, breathing you, digesting your food and making your fingernails grow.
Knowing is better than blind belief...believe that "He" is able to be experienced for those that seek Him with a quiless heart.
My opinion.
Too many are locked into a belief "He' can not be felt or seen...that is nonsense
and contributes to the paperchains that bind us from such transcendent experiences of the heart and soul.
Good luck.
I read more posts...a book is not evidence...it is scratchings on the cave wall,
There might even be a finger pointing to an escape out of the cave...but
the finger drawing
is not evidence of anything.
Anyone that thinks so is not thinking with all oars in the water...
Let's say you want to believe that a supreme, supernatural being known as God did the following:
- created the heavens and earth and all life on earth
- made humans in his image
- sent his only Son to die for the sins of humanity
- will give humans eternal life after they die
However, you can find absolutely zero evidence that any of this is true. So, is it still okay to believe in all of this in spite of the absence of evidence?
Does evidence matter at all in deciding whether or not someone should believe in God?
Please lay out exactly what you want for evidence so that a) your OP makes sense and b) we can see if Bible God is so ridiculous....fair is fair and you all clicked on Spirituality forum together with the proposition no one else, over to you or anyone else who thinks they have a better idea for a God to interact with the known creation then Bible god....also the question assumes a god of some kind. Go ahead people.
Last edited by macpherson; 07-25-2013 at 08:00 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
