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.
If there is a God and God is all powerful, how hard would it be for this God to control all thoughts and all actions if it were so desired?
The fact that there are so many people running around with the notion that there is no God and all thoughts and actions are free, says something about God's desire to control - does it not?
The God I believe in is not restricted to using a book in order to initiate thought control. How totally inept would that be?
Obviously, those denying God's existence would simply assert that all is based on chance and an individual human's exercise of free choice.
This entire thread is summed up in the red highlighted words. It's all about what YOU believe, which is fine --- for YOU.
There are many who do not share your belief. To say they are in denial is inaccurate - they are not refusing to acknowledge what is self-evident.
It takes faith to believe in a God, something that non-believers do not have.
Obviously, those confirming God's existence would simply assert that God is real because they believe her to be real, which is a circular definition and makes no sense at all to non-believers.
"This entire thread is summed up in the red highlighted words. It's all about what YOU believe, which is fine --- for YOU."
Where have I ever asserted an expectation that everyone should believe as I do? I have asserted and continue to assert that everyone has a world view and all world views incorporate faith (belief in the unprovable- depending on one's view of proof) at some level.
"There are many who do not share your belief. To say they are in denial is inaccurate - they are not refusing to acknowledge what is self-evident."
On the few occasions that I have asserted someone as being in denial, I was speaking to their own reluctance to accept that which has been shown to be patently obvious. It had nothing to do with sharing my own world view/notions of morality and ethics.
"It takes faith to believe in a God, something that non-believers do not have."
It takes faith to believe in anything that cannot be empirically proved - such as the asserted nonexistence of a transcendent and eternal being.
"Obviously, those confirming God's existence would simply assert that God is real because they believe her to be real, which is a circular definition and makes no sense at all to non-believers."
Fine. OK. Please provide a reason for our existence that makes more sense than creation. If you can, I will be more than happy to chuck the Bible and Christianity.
"This entire thread is summed up in the red highlighted words. It's all about what YOU believe, which is fine --- for YOU."
Where have I ever asserted an expectation that everyone should believe as I do? I have asserted and continue to assert that everyone has a world view and all world views incorporate faith (belief in the unprovable- depending on one's view of proof) at some level.
"There are many who do not share your belief. To say they are in denial is inaccurate - they are not refusing to acknowledge what is self-evident."
On the few occasions that I have asserted someone as being in denial, I was speaking to their own reluctance to accept that which has been shown to be patently obvious. It had nothing to do with sharing my own world view/notions of morality and ethics.
"It takes faith to believe in a God, something that non-believers do not have."
It takes faith to believe in anything that cannot be empirically proved - such as the asserted nonexistence of a transcendent and eternal being.
How many times do you have to told that one cannot prove a negative. It is incumbent upon those who are stating the positive (there is a supernatural God) to provide the proof. You cannot prove a nonexistence! And it takes no faith to believe in nothing.
"Obviously, those confirming God's existence would simply assert that God is real because they believe her to be real, which is a circular definition and makes no sense at all to non-believers."
Fine. OK. Please provide a reason for our existence that makes more sense than creation. If you can, I will be more than happy to chuck the Bible and Christianity.
What's wrong with saying you just don't know?
To create an entire mythology to provide answers to currently unanswerable questions is to put yourself in league with the ancient Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, etc.
To create an entire mythology to provide answers to currently unanswerable questions is to put yourself in league with the ancient Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, etc.
We all know what happened to their "religions."
You're making my point by asserting the impossibility of proving a negative statement. To state that there is no God (or nothing, as you term it) is to make a NEGATIVE statement. Faith is to believe in that (God's asserted nonexistence) which cannot be empirically proved. It has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not one proves God's existence even though, in my opinion, God's existence is well established and easily proved. Mythology makes for interesting reading and a nonsense world view. If you want to hear nonsense, just ask any atheist to explain our existence or how it is possible to have morality and justice in a world with no transcendent eternal being.
To create an entire mythology to provide answers to currently unanswerable questions is to put yourself in league with the ancient Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, etc.
Or, looked at another way, it's to put oneself in league with the vast majority of mankind since the beginning of time, or since the last spaceship left the planet -- depending on one's point of view.
Quote:
We all know what happened to their "religions."
In the case of the Greeks, they formed the basis of much of Western aesthetic and psychological thought, as well as the important ethical underpinnings of many of our collective social values.
In the case of the Romans, they gave us the names for our months and for Saturday, the best day of the week.
In the case of the Egyptians, they gave us Steve Martin's walk, and The Rock fighting mummies.
You're making my point by asserting the impossibility of proving a negative statement. To state that there is no God (or nothing, as you term it) is to make a NEGATIVE statement. Faith is to believe in that (God's asserted nonexistence) which cannot be empirically proved. It has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not one proves God's existence even though, in my opinion, God's existence is well established and easily proved. Mythology makes for interesting reading and a nonsense world view. If you want to hear nonsense, just ask any atheist to explain our existence or how it is possible to have morality and justice in a world with no transcendent eternal being.
Humans are not born with a belief in God, it is taught to them. Before one can state there is no God, the notion of a God must be introduced. He who introduces the notion of a God is burdened with the task of proving he exists, which of course cannot be done. The existence of God is dependent on faith. The contrary requires no faith and no proof.
Or, looked at another way, it's to put oneself in league with the vast majority of mankind since the beginning of time, or since the last spaceship left the planet -- depending on one's point of view.
In the case of the Greeks, they formed the basis of much of Western aesthetic and psychological thought, as well as the important ethical underpinnings of many of our collective social values.
In the case of the Romans, they gave us the names for our months and for Saturday, the best day of the week.
In the case of the Egyptians, they gave us Steve Martin's walk, and The Rock fighting mummies.
Quite the contrary, in the case of the Greeks, at least, if one remembers how those ancients thought of "religion", and how much their conception of it is reminiscent of, for example, Jung's idea of the "collective unconscious", and the very real and very much living universal human hunger for metaphorical means to describe and to experience a meaningful life.
What is that Jospeh Campbell said? "People aren't looking for 'the meaning of life.' People are looking for the experience of being alive."
Humans are not born with a belief in God, it is taught to them. Before one can state there is no God, the notion of a God must be introduced. He who introduces the notion of a God is burdened with the task of proving he exists, which of course cannot be done. The existence of God is dependent on faith. The contrary requires no faith and no proof.
You mean you haven't heard about children, some barely at the age to communicate, who have told their parents about the God the parents didn't believe in?
Your knowledge about "faith", "God", and "not born with the knowledge of God" is severely limited.
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.
r
