How can you honestly believe in God.

Originally posted by Valhall
What I don't enjoy are people who are militantly active in attacking me, and other believers, because they just can't seem to tolerate the opposing choice to the one they made.
[edit on 8-28-2007 by Valhall]

Ha you guys can talk. 'if you don't do this' etc...'You're going to hell' etc etc...
I'm not the one trying to print out pamphlet and converting everyone. Jezz, i just got one today, 'try Jesus'. Umm yes Mr pamphlet...

Whats with the abundance of people trying to disprove/prove any sort of god be it a bearded white guy or a flying pasta monster? Who cares? It just goes on and on and on and on....

I dont know what's more crazy, arguing with faith or arguing against faith.

This must be the single greatest waste of time on message boards everywhere.

Originally posted by AncientVoid

Ha you guys can talk. 'if you don't do this' etc...'You're going to hell' etc etc...
I'm not the one trying to print out pamphlet and converting everyone. Jezz, i just got one today, 'try Jesus'. Umm yes Mr pamphlet...

Find one single place I've ever said anything like that. And since you won't be able to find it, just cut to the chase and apologize to me now.

What the @#$%^ are you talking about? As you would know, i'm human and god is not. So why the hell are you comparing me to god? Hmmm maybe you think i'm god himself

... If god exist then he wouldn't be controlled by such things as love, 'mind-forged manacles'. Kind of sad how he has to makes thing to love him. How do you know love is the most beautiful experience? If you think there's a god, then you should consider there might be other feelings out there...

Your statement " wouldn't you think he would have better things to worry about?" is asking man to put himself in GODS shoes to answer the question. THAT'S WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT. Can you not see that? I mean it was YOUR QUESTION. To deny the position that one could only speculate answering should make you ask yourself "then why did you ask?" We have the Bible to explain GOD's love and the existence of multiudes of mammals that show and express love to there young. this was again,, INTELLIGENTLY PROGRAMMED into the design where infants or new borns that cannot fend for themselves, have that bond . It insures they will survive. Again just another cosmic happy accident?

since this seems to be such a problem with you superimposing MANS limitations on GOD I see how one of which is LOVE. Hey if you can't uinderstand that WE,, not GOD were made in his image. You want to see love as a weakness oh human frailty or too unimportant for God to mess with in the first place. You know the GOD you say doesn't exist. My question is what would YOU know about it? You can't conceive GOD even exists! So how can you ask a question regarding a GOD personality trait when you arer disengenuous. The idea of GOD as a concept is not understood by your limited natural finite mind yet the GOD you don't think exists is the one you want us to explain why he would love us if he did exist.

It would only be speculation to someone like you. To a believer it is seen as proof GOD exists because the alternative is to think LOVE is just an accident. If that is true so is Hate. So that excuses as a natural consequence of evolution every evil act carried out in the name of hate

Murder? Hey I couldn't help it it is part of evolution? pffft.

Sorry guy,, GOD created LOVE and the exteme so that we would know the difference and wouldn't live experiencing the wonders of life as a flatline.

We have wriiten on the heart the knowledge of right from wrong.

That is not something that requires teaching of any kind.

Now I get it that you also can't get the concept the REASON WE HAVE THE CAPACITY FOR LOVE in the FIRST PLACE is

BECAUSE HE DOES.

Answer this,, is LOVE a gas liquid or solid? I mean really if natural selection created it? WHY? If there IS a reason,, then it was NO ACCIDENT. Evolution is a self refuting concept.

Wouldn't it have to see it as something it shouldn't worry about? If it did, why would it lay it on us then?

If you fail to see the reasoning there then you should ask Darwinists they seem to know that all accidents of cosmic coincedence just happen to work out perfect. It's like it was PLANNED THAT WAY.

Mmmmmm



[edit on 28-8-2007 by Conspiriology]

-----------------------
Replaced 'code' with 'quotes' - stretching page

[edit on 29/8/07 by masqua]

To madisinmysoul;

After reading your rebuttal,, I got to say this for you,, you are the most determined to be ignorant person I have ever seen.

I Posted a verbatim quote from a globally recognised genius. He even makes the distinction clear as crystal in the request that YOU CALL HIM AN AGNOSTIC and that he does NOT subscribe to the professional atheist views. Then you say he uses GOD as a metaphor ?

Umm Gee I wonder why?

Could it be that he is AGNOSTIC?

It's like I said he REQUESTED YOU CALL HIM THAT !

That isn't MY request it was HIS!

Now I am to believe that if Einstien HIMSELF KNOCKED ON YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAID THAT YOU STILL WOULDN'T AGREE BECAUSE YOU KNOW HIM BETTER THEN HE DOES!

Then you call me RUDE for saying you are ignorant?

Hey guy you aren't ignorant because I said so, I am merely pointing it out. It isn't about a name I called you,, it is about a choice YOU MADE.

One you defend and remain the same. I think if anyone would know what an atheist is, it would be Einstien. I also see in his quote WHY he uses two seprate words ie; Atheist AND Agnostic. Obviously so that when he says which one you may call him THE DISTINCTION CAN BE IDENTIFIED THUS ALSO DEFINED.

You are the one that says you are a "percentage" atheist. A claim I was so entertained by it's sillyness that I let it slide.

In the light of this blockbuster new word you learned "metaphor" I will have to ask. Just what percentage of GOD believer and Atheist are you? It seems 50% would really have one confused? Or am I wrong and it is 50% agnostic and atheist?

You seem to change the rules of engagement as you go and when proof prima facia is given as clearly as that quote I gave,, YOU STILL WANT TO DENY IT! Then when someone says you are ignorant you call them rude?

HA HA HA well,,, what did I say about you that wasn't true?

I mean after all,,YOU ARE AN IDIOT IF YOU TELL EINSTIEN HE IS WRONG.

It was HIS statement you are arguing, not mine and I am assuming you saw the video of him saying it by now. If not then again,, DO IT or shut up. I would bring him here to tell you but that's impossible and I wouldn't want him knocking on your forehead asking is anyone home.

It's just rude.

Jeeez talk about rude next time you say it Ill just tell you it was a metaphor so it cancels it out. That seems to be the way you are using the word. You ever hear of this one? " if the shoe fits wear it. "

That goes for the dunce cap too.

Originally posted by Conspiriology
Answer this,, is LOVE a gas liquid or solid? I mean really if natural selection created it? WHY? If there IS a reason,, then it was NO ACCIDENT.

Love is a name we give to forms of bonding. It can be be shown through lust, attraction, or attachment.

All based in the brain, dear. No god's required.

The love between a human mother and baby is not much different than the love between a chimp mother and baby. Except we dress them up in silly little jumpsuits, stick dummies in their gobs to keep them quiet, and push them round in a small wheeled carriage.

Of course it can be explained by natural selection. But I suppose some think that love had to have been designed in the ACME god factory.

Well, I am alittle late joining this thread.
Apologies

When I was 14 years old I went on a missions trip to somewhere that is irrellevant. When I was there I saw lots of things that changed my opinion on welfare in our country as apposed to others. Anyways, a child that I had been seeing everyday of vacation bible school was brought in to church in his mothers arms sweating prefusely. The mom told us that the child was running a fever and when she took him to the doctor becaus ethey didn't have any money there was nothing that they could do for him.
Just was told to take him home and put him in an Ice Bath. So she brought him to church. We started to pray for him ... I must have been praying for him for 30 minutes when one of my friends came aroudn and was praying for everyone ... When she touched his forhead his fever relinquished; Instantly he turned cold in my arms.

Beyond what anyone else says no matter what ... I will always know that my god heals. Beyond the simple fact that he exists.

Even further more when I was 17 god touched me in a great way. A way that my body could not even begin to understand/comprehend. I was given one of the gifts of the spirit and when that presence came over me ... I never wanted to move never wanted to go anywhere ever again ... I wish I could have layed there with god untill eternity had come. But that was not his will in my life, and although I have fallen off the path and do not have a relationship with him like I used to .. I still know beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is the one and only maker of the universe.

quote]Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by Conspiriology
Answer this,, is LOVE a gas liquid or solid? I mean really if natural selection created it? WHY? If there IS a reason,, then it was NO ACCIDENT.

Love is a name we give to forms of bonding. It can be be shown through lust, attraction, or attachment.

All based in the brain, dear. No god's required.

The love between a human mother and baby is not much different than the love between a chimp mother and baby. Except we dress them up in silly little jumpsuits, stick dummies in their gobs to keep them quiet, and push them round in a small wheeled carriage.

Of course it can be explained by natural selection. But I suppose some think that love had to have been designed in the ACME god factory.


Love is a name we give to forms of bonding. It can be be shown through lust, attraction, or attachment.

Love is a chemical called phenylethlamine to answer your question. It is a naturally occuring process of the brains neurotransmitters. It is found in chocolate which as we know if derived from the cocoabean.

if you google it, I am sure you will find some fascinating information on it's effects on us. The Bible talks of three types of love.

Eros Philia and Agape.

Lust I suggest is the attraction type brining about sex and pro-creation. then brotherly love for us to get along. Then Agape which is unconditional love. The most difficult experience of love to attain. It is that I would extend acts of it under circumstances that dictate revenge more then compassion.

If I were to create a software program that would differentiate between to variables, one which it would get experience a biochemical reward for the event and everytime it got the reward it would spawn another small program with it's basic directives included ie: survive then procreate. vs the other variable where not much happens the program just runs an endless loop until it runs out of resources and quits. This would be a model for a simulatuion of love.

Would you agree that software is nothing but 1's and 0's?

Of course it is in it's basic machine language.

I write software for a living and this program I would create would run as a macro no longer needing me to display the simulation.

The bottom line is,, those ones and zeros if I just throw them out in random order then compiled them, what are the odds my program simulation would run?

I have a compassion for animals too and appreciate the comments made about chimps that perhaps you do too. I was very moved by the PBS documentary about the chimps our Government had used in so many tests to leave them to rot in cages. So we DO have something in common.

The point I am making is that WE are so much more complex then my software program simulation yet even my program requires a master coder ie GOD.

We use love to create more life but the reason is clear that life comes from life as in my simulation. It to can do the same.

The problem with evolutions programing us is simply this

THERE ARE NO 1'S ONLY ZERO'S

THAT LEAVES GOD AS
THE ONE

[edit on 28-8-2007 by Conspiriology]

Originally posted by Conspiriology
Love is a chemical called phenylethlamine to answer your question. It is a naturally occuring process of the brains neurotransmitters. It is found in chocolate which as we know if derived from the cocoabean.

I would think the neurochemistry of 'love' is a bit more complicated than a single neurochemical. It is very likely that oxytocin plays a big part in attachment, and numerous neurotransmitters and other neurochemicals would be involved in romantic love.

There is a growing neuroscience around love. They have even found particular nerve growth factors associated with romantic love. They only lasted a year though, heh, no wonder the divorce rate is so high.

If I were to create a software program that would differentiate between to variables, one which it would get experience a biochemical reward for the event and everytime it got the reward it would spawn another small program with it's basic directives included ie: survive then procreate. vs the other variable where not much happens the program just runs an endless loop until it runs out of resources and quits. This would be a model for a simulatuion of love.

I like the idea you have about reward and punishment, quite behaviourist in its viewpoint. According to some, emotion itself can be reduced to simple reward and punishment.

I tend to think it's a bit more complicated, but it's a simple model to work from.

Would you agree that software is nothing but 1's and 0's?

Aye, Binary code.

The bottom line is,, those ones and zeros if I just throw them out in random order then compiled them, what are the odds my program simulation would run?

I think a purely random method of designing software would have little chance of producing something useful.

But you do understand that evolution is not random? If you're a programming type, you should look into genetic programming, a growing field.

The point I am making is that WE are so much more complex then my software program simulation yet even my program requires a master coder ie GOD.

We use love to create more life but the reason is clear that life comes from life as in my simulation. It to can do the same.

The problem with evolutions programing us is simply this

THERE ARE NO 1'S ONLY ZERO'S

THAT LEAVES GOD AS
THE ONE

OK, each to their own. I disagree, but that's cool, no?

Originally posted by Methuselah
The answer is obvious, Man designed the programs, randomly generating numbers will not lead to Windows Vista, it wont lead to a MAC OS. it wont lead to Linux or Unix. heck it wouldnt even lead to a low level program like a device driver or even a script or batch file.

Of course not, programming code, along with radios and watches, are not biological. They do not reproduce, mutate, and are not subject to natural selection. Biological organisms however, are subject to natural selection, and they do reproduce and mutate.

Stop comparing inanimate objects to biological organisms, you look like a fool doing so.

Your argument is moot.

If there was an "intelligent" designer, it is either a madman or an incompetent. Trying to fit an omnipotent being into the gaps to make evolution fit in with religion reduces the god to a tinkering buffoon.

Why do I say this? What "perfect" god would have created (in people) the appendix? Male nipples? The occasional person born with a 13th set of ribs (humans usually have 12 but an occasional throwback is born with 13 - the same number as chimps have)? Knees that give out because bipedalism is hard on a body system?

Either god is perfect, or he is not. If he created all the creatures and other life seen today, he made a whole lotta mistakes.

You can't have it both ways. The way creationists try to fit god into science, he either does not exist, or he is a buffoon. Either there is a god behind evolution, making god a buffoon, or there is not, which means life started on its own and needs no god to create or sustain it.

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
Why do I say this? What "perfect" god would have created (in people) the appendix? Male nipples? The occasional person born with a 13th set of ribs (humans usually have 12 but an occasional throwback is born with 13 - the same number as chimps have)? Knees that give out because bipedalism is hard on a body system?

You miss a greater problem. Why would a perfect god create a world at all?

I absolutely believe in God, Jesus, & the entire Bible. Luckily, God WANTS to prove Himself to you, i.e. "Seek, and ye shall find." Unfortunately, the only way to truly find God is to HONESTLY, through FAITH open yourself up to receiving Him. Pray the Lord's prayer as sincerely as you can, (can prove to be difficult when you have a heart that's been so hardened by the world), and WAIT. God does and will answer your prayer. We are allowed to TEST God with sincerity, not TEMPT God with our own ideas of what we think He should do for us (God is perfect, human thinking is flawed). Now for more material evidence, I would like to offer this:
jesusphotos.altervista.org...
I wasn't a believer until my late twenties, but better late than never. I, too, thought I was too educated, too skeptical to believe...how wrong I was. Just another victim of lies and a hard heart. Once I believe I received the Holy Spirit, many aspects of my personality softened and changed inexplicably. Consider praying the Lord's prayer out loud, in private, WITH SINCERITY. Eternity is a loooooong time, my friend.

Originally posted by Tgal9
Eternity is a loooooong time, my friend.

Ah, you're calling up Pascal's Wager. It is a logical fallacy.

Why do you assume atheists have not "heard" the "good news" or searched for god? I did. The only thing that makes any sense at all is reason and science.

And I thought of another piece of anatomy I have to ask about:

Why did "god" create the foreskin on the human male penis, then demand that his faithful cut it off?

Wouldn't he have done better to just leave it off the chosen people in the first place? There'd be a lot less confusion that way.

I don't understand how a kind a loving god would make a piece of anatomy and then demand it be removed, which is bloody and painful.

Faith is a delusion. Believing in something without any actual evidence is primitive human behavior from a time when nobody knew how anything worked. Since humans have these big brains we need to know why. If we don't know why, up until the Enlightenment almost everybody used the god concept as a place filler.

Now we have science. Which explains things rationally, logically, and fully, without the need for a fairy tale god of the gaps.

The following is from soulpurpose.co.nz...
uid0] Controversy arose in the early church (Acts 10-15) as to whether Gentile converts need be circumcised. First century A.D. Jews disdained the uncircumcised. The leadership of the apostle Paul in the Jerusalem Council was crucial in the settlement of the dispute: circumcision was not essential to Christian faith and fellowship. Circumcision of the heart via repentance and faith were the only requirements (Rom. 4:9-12; Gal. 2:15-21)
Many non-jewish middle eastern tribes circumcised themselves in old testament times to distinguish themselves from other tribes who didn't practice it. In the Old Testament jewish circumcision had the same religious meaning as New Testament baptism. It meant you'd denied your fleshly (worldly) self and become "right" before God.
Why is it so impossible to believe God exists? There is supposed "proof" of UFOs, ghosts, chupacabras, you name it on this website, and yet so many refuse to believe in the possibility of the existence of a loving creator. How do you know when you're in love with someone? You know that you know that you know. How do you prove it? Through actions and words. FAITH IS AN ACTION. C'mon and step out of the boat! Don't you ever get bored with your own logic? I think God's logic is much more interesting.

reply to post by MajorMalfunction


just a lil something to clear up the whole male nipple thing


(quote from a moment of science.)

"""Male nipples aren't exactly a genetic glitch: they are evidence of our developmental clock. In the early stages of life from conception until about 14 weeks, all human fetuses look the same, regardless of gender. At the tender age of 14 weeks post-fertilization , genetically-male fetuses begin to produce male hormones including testosterone. These hormones turn the androgynous fetus into a bouncing baby boy.

Here's where the developmental clock comes in. By 14 weeks, when the hormones turn on, the nipples have already formed. So, while our male fetus goes on to become a baby boy, he keeps his nipples, reminding all of us that people, male and female, started off the same way."""

reply to post by MajorMalfunction


oh,and i've wondered about the creation and then cutting off of the foreskin too! as you say,it makes no sence to have it.you usually get ppl rambling on that its to show obedience to god.its just mutilation if you as me.and whats worse is female circumcision!! the clitoris is not like the penis,it has one function and one function only.and thats to give pleasure to women!! unlike the penis that has a duel function.

reply to post by MajorMalfunction


and,obviously,without the clitoris a woman cannot become aroused and therefore sex becomes very,very painful.whereas,without a foreskin sex is still pleasurable.
have you ever wondered why some ppl are born deformed,deaf or blind?
as we're all supposed to be innocent at birth it makes you wonder why god would allow that to happen!

apologies for the seperate messages,i keep getting booted off

Originally posted by Hexidecimal
Why do you, those that do, believe in God?

You cannot prove he exists. I know there's going to be people that say, "Well, you can't prove he dosn't either". So? I guess then I'll worship Bigfoot, The Easter Bunny, The Loch Ness monster, or any other mythical beast. You can't prove they dont exist either. Prove to me, your god. Why do you believe.

As far as your above mentioned items. I would disagree with you on the three. I think it is pretty safe to say that there is not an Easter Bunny. The Loch Ness monster could easily be some type of sea creature yet undiscovered and or a dinosaur. Bigfoot, who knows!

As far as God(to clearify Jesus) when someone has a relationship with God, that person knows He exists, because of the daily interaction that takes place between the two. For someone without that one on one relationship(that comes through receiving Christ as Savior) it is understandable that you can't believe He exists, because what we know to be true about Him, you regard as foolishness.

reply to post by Hexidecimal


Here is my definition of God. God is love, God is people who love one another unconditionally.

That is how I honestly believe in God.

Now all your alternative points of a "divide and conquer," strategies hanging on doubt and division are not relevant. Now what is the idea to get closer to God? Love unconditionally while your irrational thoughts of meaningless and non-survival related anger diminish. Anger is another dimension of love when it protects you, your family, and your larger spirited community. It can be quite consuming for people and nations, to such an extent they forget what they are really protecting. That is a caveat to historicity.

Enemies are next to impossible where there is unconditional love.

Now define love? You decide what is not, and avoid what it is not. You decide what it is and do it. When your decision does not work, then it is probably not really love. When it does work on a sustained basis, it probably is love. Unconditional love is to persist with it.

Love has a capacity for deep intellect and robust living.