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.
I do not think that a definition of the word God will either prove that he or she exists at all. This topic has been discussed so many times in this forum to no end.
Which is why so many competing religions exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo
Instead of using the word God, I will use what I think would be a more neutral term, maker. Maybe, there is a better neutral term I admit.
Yeah that's a long way from neutral, as it generally carries a payload of purpose & intelligence. But yes if we could start with something truly neutral, before assigning or implying other attributes, to open the topic, it would be a great start.
Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo
I use this term because unfortunately the word God tends to put in people's mind the sapient being as described in the Bible or any other source that tends to invoke negative reactions from other people that do not believe of his or her existence.
Also, I noticed that some an ulterior motive is behind those that try to argue against such lifeform to exist, their upbringing. They try to use logic, but as you read between the lines, they tend to express their negative feelings because they were raised in what they consider an oppressive religious environment. Their negativism finds ways to rationalize against the possible existence of such being. They may not realize it, but they also base their views on faith because in actuality they cannot prove their point with 100 percent certainty. Just as their theistic opponents, they are convinced of their beliefs with no solid proof also.
In general very few argue no god lifeform can or does exist, most atheists don't. Instead they simply point out the evidence presented to backup the claim such a lifeforce does exist, is insufficient. That requires ZERO faith, only inspection of the claim and the evidence. Yes there are a small number that make the positive claim no god exists, and you are correct there is no way to disprove a thing that does not exist, in fact, does not exist. So it should be far easier to prove a thing exists that does, yet that has not happened as relates to all claims one does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo
I will not say that a categorical statement that such lifeform exists. However, I believe that there is enough logic and indicators of the possible existence of this superior lifeform with higher intellect, and more powerful than us.
Now, I will be more specific in another area that I noticed in other discussions on the same topic. The discussion tends to go into evolution. Well, because someone believes in what they call God, that does not necessarily mean he or she does not believe in evolution. Also, I noticed that there are atheists that as soon they see someone claiming that there is a God, they immediately go into discussing evolution. They are two different topics in my opinion. Someone may be able to prove that we evolved, but that does not prove that a maker does not exist. Which method did he or she use? That is a different topic for another forum.
To me that maker could have designed life and the material universe by either evolution or not. I do not know for sure, and I do not care which way he or she did it.
In conclusion, I believe there is a good enough argument to say that it is possible that a maker exists.
You have a great day.
elamigo
It looks like we agree that belief is the replacement for evidence. And I agree that conflating or at least confusing the topic of defining god with that of evolution is entirely frivolous.
I understand what you are trying to highlight about the dangers of certain beliefs, but I guess I am less willing to believe that those who hold them are not sincere. I doubt that many of them are just capriciously believing what they want to believe. I could be wrong but religious beliefs do not strike me as something capriciously adopted.
Perhaps this is an opportunity to pull on the PhD in the room, and poke at that one.... A lot of thought and observation has gone into the topic of 'belief'. I am of the present persuasion that we don't choose our beliefs in most cases, at least not those we hold most intimately. Instead I'm inclined to think beliefs are the product of the evidence we individually find most compelling, which is where anecdotal evidence gets a giant lift in its credibility. Just as you perceived new evidence you didn't choose to believe in god you were compelled to, by what you accept as reliable evidence. And just as I did not choose to release my belief in god, it gently slipped away as the confidence I had in the supporting evidence I held as credible was eroded.
This is far more your field of expertise than mine, thoughts?
Perhaps this is an opportunity to pull on the PhD in the room, and poke at that one.... A lot of thought and observation has gone into the topic of 'belief'. I am of the present persuasion that we don't choose our beliefs in most cases, at least not those we hold most intimately. Instead, I'm inclined to think beliefs are the product of the evidence we individually find most compelling, which is where anecdotal evidence gets a giant lift in its credibility. Just as you perceived new evidence you didn't choose to believe in god you were compelled to, by what you accept as reliable evidence. And just as I did not choose to release my belief in God, it gently slipped away as the confidence I had in the supporting evidence I held as credible was eroded.
This is far more your field of expertise than mine, thoughts?
I completely agree that our most firmly held beliefs are NOT CHOSEN. We cannot choose what we truly believe although we CAN claim to believe what we do NOT truly believe for all manner of reasons based on our existing needs, fears, and desires.
I completely agree that our most firmly held beliefs are NOT CHOSEN. We cannot choose what we truly believe although we CAN claim to believe what we do NOT truly believe for all manner of reasons based on our existing needs, fears, and desires.
Virtually everyone knows the story of the burning bush. This fascinating article (I'll send if you're interested and paywalled with DM of email address) creates a strong implication that Moses may well have seen a bush not consumed by fire, or a natural phenomena that creates that appearance. My Rabbi posits that there was no Egypt-Israel migration. I was never sure of that and am less so.
Often, the gloss on a story is more important than what actually happened. The gloss or spin may be more important for their lessons, but it would be even nicer if a lot of it turned out to be based on fact.
There is an outer manifestation and an inner (shall I say) manna-festation, or dawning on you. And to hearken back to my previous post to you in this thread, there is also the jar of manna in the Ark of the Covenant, the manna or food that does not spoil. The inner manifestation.
In knowing the story and the manifestation of releasing the Israelites from bondage is inherently present in Moses just as God spoke to Abraham, and it is in fulfillment of God's word to Abraham.
You can see the inherently inner burning in Moses in what he did as he took up the fight himself before fleeing Egypt. In due time it is God who (draws) Moses, as that is the inherent meaning of the name given him as he was drawn from the water, first by the Egyptians and then by God at the burning bush and to his rightful heritage. Which also hearkens to Joseph in many ways.
The outward manifestation of the burning bush that was not consumed is confirmation of the inner burning inherently present in Moses heart. And after 40 years out there, you can see why Isaiah shares God's word saying a smoldering flax I will not extinguish. Moses knew from birth the inner manifestation of his calling, and at the burning bush it was time for him to know and walk in the outer manifestation.
I completely agree that our most firmly held beliefs are NOT CHOSEN. We cannot choose what we truly believe although we CAN claim to believe what we do NOT truly believe for all manner of reasons based on our existing needs, fears, and desires.
We can certainly choose how we go about coming to believe what we do.
I completely agree that our most firmly held beliefs are NOT CHOSEN. We cannot choose what we truly believe although we CAN claim to believe what we do NOT truly believe for all manner of reasons based on our existing needs, fears, and desires.
Oh, one more quick comment; if proof, credible proof, as you experienced on a personal basis could be presented in response, when I've asked for it, I would not choose to believe in god, I would be compelled to. So far that has not happened, just the opposite, every 'proof' I used to believe in, upon reexamination, failed to be sufficient, as my ability to evaluate matured.
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.
A lot of thought and observation has gone into the topic of 'belief'. I am of the present persuasion that we don't choose our beliefs in most cases, at least not those we hold most intimately. Instead I'm inclined to think beliefs are the product of the evidence we individually find most compelling, which is where anecdotal evidence gets a giant lift in its credibility. Just as you perceived new evidence you didn't choose to believe in god you were compelled to, by what you accept as reliable evidence. And just as I did not choose to release my belief in god, it gently slipped away as the confidence I had in the supporting evidence I held as credible was eroded.
