U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-30-2017, 05:59 PM
 
Location: Western Washington
7,814 posts, read 7,568,036 times
Reputation: 13553

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER View Post
Well - that's true. I get far less flyers for religious assemblies and meetings than for pizza and take -away curries.
Mmmm. Curry. Much better than religion. Looking forward to a good curry or three next time I am in the UK.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-30-2017, 06:11 PM
 
Location: Western Washington
7,814 posts, read 7,568,036 times
Reputation: 13553
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule View Post
You own nothing.
Except a mastery of an Argument From Ignorance/Silence that has its basis in the flawed "No Evidence" premise of the "LOBBUNE (Lack of Belief Based Upon No Evidence) DOCTRINE"
The God I perceive by way of Pantheism..."ALL THE ENERGY/MATTER THAT EXISTS AND HAS EXISTED"...comports definitively as "G-O-D", and objectively exists unequivocally & irrefutably. It is also self-substantiating.
This renders the concept of Atheism null and void.
Also, all you have is Faith & Belief...nothing is infallible.
No info, no data, no facts can ever be "absolutely for certain"...thus, no evidence based upon them.
You just have Faith in your Belief of their veracity and merit...but that's all you got.
Happy New Year TRAWK!!
BTW...why is it gonna be "2018"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
So say you stick to your guns and you demand an evidence of God before you believe in it, or else it does not exist.
Good enough!

Now, you meet a Hindu person who has faith and he believes in the existence of a God.

You both start a conversation about faith in God.
So you demand an evidence.

And he tells you, "Forrget the mental gymnastics of dwelling into proofs and evidence, here is God, right in front of you", he points his finger to a cow or a statue with 10 arms and 16 legs.

Now, do you have any more defence left not to believe in a God? It's right in front of you, what more do you want for evidence? Is there anymore need left for evidence?
These are essentially saying the same thing.

Of course I believe in all the master and energy that has ever existed. Of course I believe in a carved statue.

If you want to call either or both god, you are welcome to it, however that is a substantial redefinition of the word god as we typically use it. Most people conceive of some sort of Omni-agent, a thing with self knowledge and power. Simply using the word god to be roughly synonymous with the universe, or a reference to an icon, does not mean that I am incorrect when I say I donít believe in god.

We are using the same word to refer to different things.

If you wish to define or describe what you mean by god, I may in fact agree with you that it exists. If golden wants to stop at ďall the energy/matter that exists or has existedĒ, I will agree that things that exist, do exist, and things that have existed, have existed. I sim0ly donít think that helps us much, and takes me not one step closer to believing in a god as conceived of by most people/religions.

Having read Goldenís posts, it wonít be long before he tries to slide in other attributes, and those remain unproven.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 06:43 PM
 
9,841 posts, read 13,932,158 times
Reputation: 10729
God is creation.
Hence, anything existing is god.
this is why in Hinduism pantheon is limitless, as anything is god. A Hindu simply chooses any random object as point, aim of prayer to same creator. This Hindu may pray to god through a rock and one sitting next to him will pray to same god via tree, rock is positioned under.
It is the AIM that matters, not the mean.

Two of FAITH will not TALk about faith. They don't need to. They are both in SAMENESS. They both EXPERIENCED. All it takes is to look into each other eyes, bow, and carry on on each own way. What are the words for? Words are for those who have "beliefs", not faith. They use words, fountains of them, to dull their doubts into beliefs that they have faith.
But they have none. All they have is empty words, symbols, rites, shrines, temples, dead books that carry no soul in them, happy songs, keep the list going..... But, in reality, they have NOTHING as they have never EXPERIENCED. Oh, surely, their imagination and self hypnosis may give them all kinds of "experiences" to talk and brag about. But all that is bunk.
As one who really experienced, will never again return to bunk, as he was stung by The Truth and saw The Lie. Matter of fact, I absolutely doubt, such person will ever go to any public forum and post there. As why?

Ihi Passico.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 07:03 PM
 
6,638 posts, read 3,864,148 times
Reputation: 654
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
These are essentially saying the same thing.

Of course I believe in all the master and energy that has ever existed. Of course I believe in a carved statue.

If you want to call either or both god, you are welcome to it, however that is a substantial redefinition of the word god as we typically use it. Most people conceive of some sort of Omni-agent, a thing with self knowledge and power. Simply using the word god to be roughly synonymous with the universe, or a reference to an icon, does not mean that I am incorrect when I say I don’t believe in god.

We are using the same word to refer to different things.

If you wish to define or describe what you mean by god, I may in fact agree with you that it exists. If golden wants to stop at “all the energy/matter that exists or has existed”, I will agree that things that exist, do exist, and things that have existed, have existed. I sim0ly don’t think that helps us much, and takes me not one step closer to believing in a god as conceived of by most people/religions.

Having read Golden’s posts, it won’t be long before he tries to slide in other attributes, and those remain unproven.
Been down this road many times before.
"G-O-D" is defined by experts known to provide the meaning and definitions of words and terms.
"G-O-D" is not definitively limited to just metaphorical Deities in religious writings.
Then, the question is...is this just a metaphorical character in a book or a cast/carved representation of something that does not literally exist...or is this something that comports with the known, expert provided definition of "G-O-D", AND objectively exists?
This sums up my position. It is based upon only what is known, and what is reasonable:
I view "God" from a Pantheist perspective (ALL THE ENERGY MATTER THAT EXISTS AND HAS EXISTED...aka The Universe).
The God I perceive...ALL THE ENERGY/MATTER THAT EXISTS AND HAS EXISTED (The Universe)...has all the attributes definitive of a God Entity...and thus IS GOD.
We KNOW:
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, has rearranged itself so as to produce everything that has ever existed in Reality...from the smallest particle to the biggest Galaxy.---SOURCE/CREATOR 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, possess knowledge of all that is known at any given time.---ALL KNOWING 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, occupies all places in Reality.---ALL PRESENT 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, accounts for all the energy and force that exists in, acts upon, and controls, Reality.---ALL POWERFUL 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, is capable of all the seeing that has ever occured. ---ALL SEEING 100%
I could go on...but these are the attributes known to be definitive, demonstrative, and indicative of a God Entity.
Religions use metaphorical and allegorical characters and stories to describe all of this.
THE UNIVERSE is as "Godly" as it gets...from ANY reasonable assessment.
We DO KNOW that the ENERGY/MATTER that DOES IN FACT EXIST...rearranges itself so as to create all Reality, and can do this through indigenous power, without assistance or accomplice from any other force...."controls" that which is created by and through "laws" and "processes", that we do IN FACT know to exist...and also maintains and sustains or eliminates that which has been created by it.

We also know that these are the attributes known to define a "God".
Regardless of what ever anyone wants to call the KNOWN, EXISTING ENERGY/MATTER...it is, by its KNOWN ATTRIBUTES, definitively a God.

It doesn't matter whether this creation, control, and maintaining/sustaining, and eliminating happened out of what some believe to be "chaos", and organized itself by "random chance"...it is an OBJECTIVE FACT that that has happened, and is still happening.
It also doesn't matter if this ENERGY/MATTER was never itself "sourced", has always existed, and was never itself created (or is a "multiverse")....it is an OBJECTIVE FACT that it DOES EXIST...AND...by its KNOWN ATTRIBUTES (as opposed to "assigned attributes")...is definitively a God...without it existing in any other state than just the way it is, and has been known to be.

THIS is the evidence that "God Exists" that everyone asks for.
But by refusing to acknowledge the merited title, and insisting that the only reference is by name only ("Nature", "The Universe", etc) to identify that which has been shown to be, by known attributes and definition, a "God" entity....some then turn around and deny the existence of GOD.
No matter..."GOD" by any name is still "GOD".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 07:10 PM
 
Location: Texas
60 posts, read 27,549 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule View Post
Been down this road many times before.
"G-O-D" is defined by experts known to provide the meaning and definitions of words and terms.
"G-O-D" is not definitively limited to just metaphorical Deities in religious writings.
Then, the question is...is this just a metaphorical character in a book or a cast/carved representation of something that does not literally exist...or is this something that comports with the known, expert provided definition of "G-O-D", AND objectively exists?
This sums up my position. It is based upon only what is known, and what is reasonable:
I view "God" from a Pantheist perspective (ALL THE ENERGY MATTER THAT EXISTS AND HAS EXISTED...aka The Universe).
The God I perceive...ALL THE ENERGY/MATTER THAT EXISTS AND HAS EXISTED (The Universe)...has all the attributes definitive of a God Entity...and thus IS GOD.
We KNOW:
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, has rearranged itself so as to produce everything that has ever existed in Reality...from the smallest particle to the biggest Galaxy.---SOURCE/CREATOR 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, possess knowledge of all that is known at any given time.---ALL KNOWING 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, occupies all places in Reality.---ALL PRESENT 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, accounts for all the energy and force that exists in, acts upon, and controls, Reality.---ALL POWERFUL 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, is capable of all the seeing that has ever occured. ---ALL SEEING 100%
I could go on...but these are the attributes known to be definitive, demonstrative, and indicative of a God Entity.
Religions use metaphorical and allegorical characters and stories to describe all of this.
THE UNIVERSE is as "Godly" as it gets...from ANY reasonable assessment.
We DO KNOW that the ENERGY/MATTER that DOES IN FACT EXIST...rearranges itself so as to create all Reality, and can do this through indigenous power, without assistance or accomplice from any other force...."controls" that which is created by and through "laws" and "processes", that we do IN FACT know to exist...and also maintains and sustains or eliminates that which has been created by it.

We also know that these are the attributes known to define a "God".
Regardless of what ever anyone wants to call the KNOWN, EXISTING ENERGY/MATTER...it is, by its KNOWN ATTRIBUTES, definitively a God.

It doesn't matter whether this creation, control, and maintaining/sustaining, and eliminating happened out of what some believe to be "chaos", and organized itself by "random chance"...it is an OBJECTIVE FACT that that has happened, and is still happening.
It also doesn't matter if this ENERGY/MATTER was never itself "sourced", has always existed, and was never itself created (or is a "multiverse")....it is an OBJECTIVE FACT that it DOES EXIST...AND...by its KNOWN ATTRIBUTES (as opposed to "assigned attributes")...is definitively a God...without it existing in any other state than just the way it is, and has been known to be.

THIS is the evidence that "God Exists" that everyone asks for.
But by refusing to acknowledge the merited title, and insisting that the only reference is by name only ("Nature", "The Universe", etc) to identify that which has been shown to be, by known attributes and definition, a "God" entity....some then turn around and deny the existence of GOD.
No matter..."GOD" by any name is still "GOD".
So the answer to my question is yes? You believe in the same God atheists believe in?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 07:14 PM
 
Location: Colorado Springs
18,958 posts, read 8,900,001 times
Reputation: 18330
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule View Post
...but these are the attributes known to be definitive, demonstrative, and indicative of a God Entity.
...
No. Just no. They are not definitive and they are not demonstrative. Or, if they are, demonstrate NOW.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 08:04 PM
 
6,638 posts, read 3,864,148 times
Reputation: 654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salis-N View Post
So the answer to my question is yes? You believe in the same God atheists believe in?
No..."Atheism" ('A'=No...'Theos'=God) necessarily works off the concept that there exists "No God" in which to believe.
I do believe that "God Exists"...and exists as "ALL". That does not comport with a "No God" notion.
If anything that objectively exists is "God"...Atheism is nullified.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 08:06 PM
 
Location: Texas
60 posts, read 27,549 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule View Post
No..."Atheism" ('A'=No...'Theos'=God) necessarily works off the concept that there exists "No God" in which to believe.
I do believe that "God Exists"...and exists as "ALL". That does not comport with a "No God" notion.
If anything that objectively exists is "God"...Atheism is nullified.
What I'm getting at is... you are both talking about the universe (which you accurately point out undeniably exists). You just call it God, an atheist calls it the universe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 08:19 PM
 
6,638 posts, read 3,864,148 times
Reputation: 654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salis-N View Post
What I'm getting at is... you are both talking about the universe (which you accurately point out undeniably exists). You just call it God, an atheist calls it the universe.
If I refer to the highest political official in the United States only as "Donald Trump"...does that now divest him of his title of "President", simply because I didn't use it?
He is "President" based upon known attributes (he won the election, and took the Oath of Office) known to define the President...regardless of what he is called.
"God", like "President", is a title, not a name. Nobody and/or nothing is named "God".
The Universe, Nature, All That Exists, etc...IS God, based upon known attributes that define a God Entity. That the title is not used by some is inconsequential...it is still God, regardless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-30-2017, 08:22 PM
 
Location: Texas
60 posts, read 27,549 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule View Post
If I refer to the highest political official in the United States only as "Donald Trump"...does that now divest him of his title of "President", simply because I didn't use it?
He is "President" based upon known attributes (he won the election, and took the Oath of Office) known to define the President...regardless of what he is called.
"God", like "President", is a title, not a name. Nobody and/or nothing is named "God".
The Universe, Nature, All That Exists, etc...IS God, based upon known attributes that define a God Entity. That the title is not used by some is inconsequential...it is still God, regardless.
But you do acknowledge that your beliefs are essentially the same as atheism? Just different titles?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top