It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Atheist with a huge premise for the existence of a god.

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by TheProphetMark
 

Without faith, life has no meaning. There is a reason for everything. Cause and effect my friend. A universe so vast that we cannot see the end came into existance from nothing (effect). What do you believe the cause was?

Yes, the Bible was written by men (who were translating the word of God). Is it such a terrible thing to have faith in something that tells you how to live your life with peace, love, honesty, virtue, respect for others and yourself, and humbleness before this awesome universe we live in?

And here's something for those of you who think God is an alien. If they/she/ he is an alien and he left us with these words of wisdom. Well, then, kids, we're in a whole lotta trouble when he returns and finds that a large part of this alien earth culture decided to blow off his rules for building the kind of civilization they wanted to encounter when he came back. They left us with 10 simple rules that we crap on on a regular basis. Just think about that for a second.




posted on May, 12 2012 @ 06:51 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Man, since you put it that way, I'm totally playing my lotto numbers tonight.



Then I'm taking my winnings and buying scratch tickets with the whole thing. I can't lose!



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun
reply to post by TheProphetMark
 


I think there is proof for God. There are great arguments for a theistic God and furthermore the use of logic and math. Before we can even start the convo, we will have to determine what you consider proof and evidence.


Also, we have to ask just how many 'random' events does it take before we can start to consider that maybe those events are not so random after all.

Throughout mankind's history there have been stories of gods - thousands and thousands of them. From major societies to small, isolated tribes in the jungle, the idea of a god (or gods) has sprouted. Why?

Even if all the religions have reduced their gods to beings of illogical madness, the god-idea remains. Why?

The idea of the Easter Bunny is absurd, but it doesn't change the fact that bunnies exist.


edit on 5/12/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 07:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun
reply to post by TheProphetMark
 


I think there is proof for God. There are great arguments for a theistic God and furthermore the use of logic and math. Before we can even start the convo, we will have to determine what you consider proof and evidence.



edit on 5/12/2012 by jiggerj because: Lost in posting. Too tired to rewrite it.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun
reply to post by TheProphetMark
 


I think there is proof for God. There are great arguments for a theistic God and furthermore the use of logic and math. Before we can even start the convo, we will have to determine what you consider proof and evidence.


Also, we have to ask just how many 'random' events does it take before we can start to consider that maybe those events are not so random after all.

Throughout mankind's history there have been stories of gods - thousands and thousands of them. From major societies to small, isolated tribes in the jungle, the idea of a god (or gods) has sprouted. Why?

Even if all the religions have reduced their gods to beings of illogical madness, the god-idea remains. Why?



The existence of a survival imperative, the existence of contextual precedence, and the existence of residual information combine to explain the lack of randomness inherit within progressive development. The issue of the concept of a creator being is less natural in its clear incompatibility with what can reasonably be seen as the normal dynamic response to history-building ramification. The fact that such a concept exists is strong evidence that it is based on a fact in some way or another.

I don't agree that progressive development is a hands-on science-fair project that keeps some ultra-sophisticated deity-level entity from being bored out of its divine mind. Still, I do see our own limited edition of creation as being the initiated effort of a non-corporeal intelligent mind with its own reason and ultimate agenda for what it knows will be the net result of what it has initiated. I believe that this intent exists within this specific reality confine's Residual Informational Continuum (which is the eternal data mass that defines this confine), and that humans have tapped into bits of this information over the many thousands of years (either by chance or by having it fed to them by post-corporeal humans with their own specific agendas concerning how to leverage this information) and that this information has been translated and retranslated many times over until it's become the basis of the wide range of theologies, religions, superstitions, and spiritualisms that we fight over.

I have a much more natural and much less mystical explanation for why this intelligent being initiated this specific reality confine, and once you get past your psychological aversion to this mundane explanation for what's always been considered to be holy and transcendent, the obviousness of it becomes inescapable. Especially when you've taken the time and effort to examine what drives everything else that exists, and directly apply those same drivers to this thing that also exists. All driven by the very same imperatives and directed by the same qualifiers. The mystery of it all dissolves pretty readily after that.
edit on 5/12/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Man, since you put it that way, I'm totally playing my lotto numbers tonight.



Then I'm taking my winnings and buying scratch tickets with the whole thing. I can't lose!


If you're trying to win $$, I hate to tell you this, but money isn't real.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun
reply to post by TheProphetMark
 


I think there is proof for God. There are great arguments for a theistic God and furthermore the use of logic and math. Before we can even start the convo, we will have to determine what you consider proof and evidence.


Also, we have to ask just how many 'random' events does it take before we can start to consider that maybe those events are not so random after all.

Throughout mankind's history there have been stories of gods - thousands and thousands of them. From major societies to small, isolated tribes in the jungle, the idea of a god (or gods) has sprouted. Why?

Even if all the religions have reduced their gods to beings of illogical madness, the god-idea remains. Why?



The existence of a survival imperative, the existence of contextual precedence, and the existence of residual information combine to explain the lack of randomness inherit within progressive development. The issue of the concept of a creator being is less natural in its clear incompatibility with what can reasonably be seen as the normal dynamic response to history-building ramification. The fact that such a concept exists is strong evidence that it is based on a fact in some way or another.

I don't agree that progressive development is a hands-on science-fair project that keeps some ultra-sophisticated deity-level entity from being bored out of its divine mind. Still, I do see our own limited edition of creation as being the initiated effort of a non-corporeal intelligent mind with its own reason and ultimate agenda for what it knows will be the net result of what it has initiated. I believe that this intent exists within this specific reality confine's Residual Informational Continuum (which is the eternal data mass that defines this confine), and that humans have tapped into bits of this information over the many thousands of years (either by chance or by having it fed to them by post-corporeal humans with their own specific agendas concerning how to leverage this information) and that this information has been translated and retranslated many times over until it's become the basis of the wide range of theologies, religions, superstitions, and spiritualisms that we fight over.

I have a much more natural and much less mystical explanation for why this intelligent being initiated this specific reality confine, and once you get past your psychological aversion to this mundane explanation for what's always been considered to be holy and transcendent, the obviousness of it becomes inescapable. Especially when you've taken the time and effort to examine what drives everything else that exists, and directly apply those same drivers to this thing that also exists. All driven by the very same imperatives and directed by the same qualifiers. The mystery of it all dissolves pretty readily after that.
edit on 5/12/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)


Well, if you're going pose your arguments in such beautifully written sentences and masterful points of logic I am not going to talk you. LMAO!



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 



I would like to add "Boy we are sure lucky that after crawling to land and evolving teeth, we have this carrot to eat"

I don't hear much discussion about the "parallel evolution" of plants that just happen to benefit the biosphere with it's production of oxygen, medicine and food for the animal kingdom.



Good questions.




I don't know about any of you, but for me this is WAY WAY WAY too many lucky things to happen to be purely random events


Your statement reminds me of something I've heard before.

"The harder I work, the luckier I get"

What people call "luck" is often intent and hard work.





I am truly puzzled by the attitude of some atheist's on ATS. For many it seems to be a position based purely on emotion.

Many atheists in these threads scoff at the existence of a Creator.

From what I have observed, many on ATS deny a creator, because It, is not doing, what they want it to.



The Scientific Method is simply a tool to observe the observable.

A natural explanation for the existence of life will never be found.

Life springs from other life in the natural world.

If you rewind it all,

My opinion, is that Life, has to have been started by a source outside of nature.

Alien origins and space seeding are just kicking the can further down the road.


Science cannot observe something outside of nature, it simply denies it's existence.





The lack of a unifying theory, the apparent existence of Dark Energy and Dark Matter, and the need for "parallel universes" hint at the idea that something more than what we see, exists.

Many, have questions.

Many, have a "spiritual" need.




Boy, we sure were "lucky"...........


edit on 12-5-2012 by dusty1 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by dusty1
If you rewind it all,

Alien origins and space seeding are just kicking the can further down the road.



Very well put.


The ONLY way we can finally put the idea of a creator to rest is to figure out that first living cell received all that information for life. As far as I'm concerned we could take every element on the Periodic Table and mix them six ways to Sunday and we will NEVER conjure up information for life.



posted on May, 14 2012 @ 06:15 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 



Wow, um.....wow. Fear is NOT a good way to parent kids...neither is secrecy.....


It's amazing how little you know.

The Bible teaches to have no fear. It teaches that secrecy is really bad. That's something that has struck me as awkward, all you folk who are against the Bible, haven't even read it in the first place...tell me, ow great atheistic scientists...how does one refute that which one has not read or experienced?

reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 



I'll have to remember that the next time I read about a swimmer attacked by a shark and a tourist mauled on Safari by a lion. And if I ever somehow contract a tape worm it's clearly I who have dominion. Yes Randy, clearly, man has dominion


Now you're just being silly. What is a zoo? What are pets? What is cattle?



posted on May, 14 2012 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by TheProphetMark
 



Our modern humanity doesn't even come close to them.


Were you around then to claim this now? I don't think so. All you have is texts that were written and your interpretation of the interpretation of the writer at that time(your own logic). Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you saying that people who follow the Bible do the same? So what's the difference then? The Bible does not make you, personally, into some kind of hero, but your own theories do, correct?


When they didn't have technology, music, games, and all that other crap to keep themselves occupied with; they thought about life; talked about it among their people, pondered about it so much that it changed them deep inside in a positive way and made them appreciate life, a lot more than how much we appreciate it because nowadays we just take everything for granted.


Such ignorance...you don't know what they did back then because...YOU WERE NOT THERE. All you have is a glorified image of history, an image that is made up by you! Now...you talk about history but give no context. Which people where did what kind of thinking? If you can answer that, you'll find a little context and you could start making a little sense, but then you will find out; "maybe it wasn't as good as I thought it was."

Yes, the people you focus on, those are taking life for granted. But you tell that to the guy or gal working all day long to raise their kids that they take life for granted and I bet you'll feel stupid.


At least that's how most people are today.


Because most people do not read what they profess to follow. Most Christians have not read the Bible themselves and the same goes for Muslims. So how can you point your finger and say; "It's religion!" Without differentiating between those who have read their book, and those who haven't. Between those who do take life for granted, and those who don't? This leads me to believe that you haven't read the good book yourself and are only going by the interpretation of popular culture.

Also, why do you claim that people blindly follow the Bible? There is no blindly following the Bible. Either you read it and you're not blind, or you don't read it and follow others interpretations. You also talk about blind faith in the same context, which is very telling. Because blind faith has nothing to do with ANY religion.

Then for you to claim it's made up shows clear inexperience in life.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 05:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
Also, we have to ask just how many 'random' events does it take before we can start to consider that maybe those events are not so random after all.

A few more 'random' events for your list:


"There are 456 OLD TESTAMENT AND NEW TESTAMENT PROPHECIES about the Messiah that were fulfilled by the life of Jesus Christ. The Bible has many that were written thousands of years before Jesus was born! Precise, detailed prophecies such as; where He would be born (Micah 5:2), how He would be born, (Isaiah 7:14) how He would die (Psalm 34:20), etc. And history has PROVEN, without ANY doubt whatsoever, they were fulfilled EXACTLY as the Bible had prophesied, hundreds of years earlier!"


The chances of just 48 out of the 456 prophecies being fulfilled in one person are 1 in 10 to the 157 power.

That's — 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

"According to Emile Borel, once one goes past one chance in 10^50, the probabilities are so small that it is impossible to think that they will ever occur..." LINK


"...what's the likelihood of a person predicting today the exact city in which the birth of a future leader would take place, well into the 21st century? This is indeed what the prophet Micah did 700 years before the Messiah. Further, what is the likelihood of predicting the precise manner of death that a new, unknown religious leader would experience, a thousand years from now - a manner of death presently unknown, and to remain unknown for hundreds of years? Yet, this is what David did in 1000 B.C.

Again, what is the likelihood of predicting the specific date of the appearance of some great future leader, hundreds of years in advance? This is what Daniel did, 530 years before Christ. ...Indeed, it may be possible for someone to fake one or two of the Messianic prophecies, but it would be impossible for any one person to arrange and fulfill all of these prophecies." LINK


"Any man who rejects Christ as the Son of God is rejecting a fact, proved perhaps more absolutely than any other fact in the world. God so thoroughly vindicated Jesus Christ that even mathematicians and statisticians, who were without faith, had to acknowledge that it is scientifically impossible to deny that Jesus is the Christ."


Originally posted by jiggerj
I have never gotten an answer to questions like: Where is Egypt's historical NON-religious records of every firstborn dying? Sure seems like if there are historical accounts of the pharoahs dating back to that time, then the mass deaths of all the firstborns would surely have been written about other than in the bible.


"It was also illegal to record any history in Egypt that made the Pharaoh look bad. That is why they did not record the God of the slaves whooping their butts. If any scribe did that, he probably would have been killed. As an Atheist friend of mine who loved Egypt told me, Egyptian history was basically propaganda."
LINK



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
I don't consider anything "luck" in reference to the origination of life. If your odds of winning a game of chance are 1 in 100, and you play the game at 100 tables at once, there's a very good chance that one table will hit every time. Even if the odds of life are 1 in a million or greater, the universe is still vast enough to roll the cosmic dice enough times that it's pretty much guaranteed to exist.


Originally posted by InfoKartel
Were you around then to claim this now? I don't think so. All you have is texts that were written and your interpretation of the interpretation of the writer at that time(your own logic). Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you saying that people who follow the Bible do the same? So what's the difference then? The Bible does not make you, personally, into some kind of hero, but your own theories do, correct?

Are you seriously attempting to compare the bible with the scientific method of gathering facts? Last I checked, you weren't there either, so you should be agnostic at best, right? I trust people that have studied a subject and conducted experiments to test and falsify the theories for decades upon decades over somebody's opinion on how to interpret a series of ancient texts from thousands of years ago written by dozens of authors. I don't mean any offense by that, but that's the simple fact of the matter. Science = how things work. Religion = why things work. 2 very different, but not mutually exclusive concepts. If somebody wants to believe in god, that's fine, just don't go around telling people there's evidence or that proven science experiments are wrong. It's pure faith. You can't just plug your ears and yell "You weren't there!! Na na! You don't know!!!" That's silly.


Also, why do you claim that people blindly follow the Bible? There is no blindly following the Bible.

When you believe something for no reason other than because a book says so, then yes, that is blind allegiance. I'm sure he was referring to fundamentalists who take every passage literally.


Either you read it and you're not blind, or you don't read it and follow others interpretations. You also talk about blind faith in the same context, which is very telling. Because blind faith has nothing to do with ANY religion.

Ermmm. Blind faith has EVERYTHING to do with pretty much ALL religions. None of it can be proven, therefor the faith is blind aka unjustified aka no objective evidence. That is the definition of blind faith. It's about believing, not reading.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Dear OP,

I've read your post, and like you, I don't believe in coincidences, more so when there are too many of them. It would only be akin to living in denial when facts are before our faces.

No man is an island, and each human is born from loving parents, or we would never have existed,for no mother would suffer that 9mths of labour or parents sacrificed much for the rest of a child's live so that he/she may live and know life, protected and sheltered where possible.

Many of our fellow humans are religious, and would have passed on its civilisational teachings to the next generations, some more, some less, based upon circumstances and all mostly free will based, for the child to discern for himself/herself.

Some grow up touched by the gift of life, love and our common Creator's spirit in us, His name known across geological barriers, culture, social developement stages, time and space on our planet. Some have yet to know, not in our time but on their time and our Creator's time, for spirituality is a deeply personal issue.

But sadly are those whom had been touched, and yet turned away....

We flawed mortals place demands upon our Creator, without comprehending that there is a bigger picture involved that not every demand can be met on the spot, without us doing anything to assist it along. For example, a prayer to make one rich would mean depriving another of their hard earned wealth. Heaven has no US dollar printing press nor deals in chaos. To heal or even resurrect an old and dying man would be to prolong his eventual suffering, for that mortal body will still continue decay, and we mortals are not ready, nor had shown any sense of responsiblity, for advance sciences.

Our Creator loves us all, a testimonial of our species' survival till today, with many miracles and intervention on His part that went unlisted and unknown, as is His way, but felt by many whom know Him. May those whom had walked away...comprehend and return....on their own free will...The gift of life need not one to continously bang one's head against the wall. Comfort, solace, love and guidance is for ALL mankind...




posted on May, 15 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder
no harm fella, but that sort of interpretation, if anything, leads me to think there may be something more than the physical

I guess it depends on what you mean by "physical." It's all rooted squarely in quantum physics. Perception collapses a quantum wave function and turns possibilities/probabilities into actuality. But it doesn't just happen "forward" through time but also "backward."

You know why the universe is expanding? No, it's not dark matter. It's because all living things -- from the tiniest little bacteria to distant, massive alien brains the size of planets (if they're out there) -- are perceiving more things. And imagining more things, since imagination is also a process that makes virtual things actual, putting more energy/matter into this universe.

But there's no spooky magic or God involved. It's a quality of the universe. Things happen because we perceive them, we perceive things when they happen, and it all ripples forward and backward in time.



posted on May, 15 2012 @ 08:24 PM
link   
One quote above is incorrectly cited, below is the complete quote and the corrected link:


"It was also illegal to record any history in Egypt that made the Pharaoh look bad. That is why they did not record the God of the slaves whooping their butts. If any scribe did that, he probably would have been killed. As an Atheist friend of mine who loved Egypt told me, Egyptian history was basically propaganda.

Every question has an answer. Most of what has been told to you is just conspiracy theories. You would have to believe that Jesus copied Gandhi if these arguments were valid."

GreenSlugg 6 months ago Link



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfoKartel
reply to post by wildtimes
 



Wow, um.....wow. Fear is NOT a good way to parent kids...neither is secrecy.....


It's amazing how little you know.

The Bible teaches to have no fear. It teaches that secrecy is really bad. That's something that has struck me as awkward, all you folk who are against the Bible, haven't even read it in the first place...tell me, ow great atheistic scientists...how does one refute that which one has not read or experienced?

reply to post by Titen-Sxull
 



I'll have to remember that the next time I read about a swimmer attacked by a shark and a tourist mauled on Safari by a lion. And if I ever somehow contract a tape worm it's clearly I who have dominion. Yes Randy, clearly, man has dominion


Now you're just being silly. What is a zoo? What are pets? What is cattle?


This is just an observation, and not an attack. I have found that most atheists that debate the bible have studied it at great lengths while the religious merely take the words as truth without challenging the improbabilities and sheer impossibilities in the text.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 06:17 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 




This is just an observation, and not an attack. I have found that most atheists that debate the bible have studied it at great lengths while the religious merely take the words as truth without challenging the improbabilities and sheer impossibilities in the text.


WRONG.

Most atheists have not read the Bible at all. They pick and choose the parts they do not agree with to present those parts as proof that the Bible makes no sense, leaving all the other parts out of it - often repeating those parts they left unread as if it were of their own creation, never knowing they're making complete asses out of themselves. The atheists who do read the Bible and hold it up against other books will never ridicule what its message is if they are intelligent enough to see that love in intrinsic to its message.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 



Science = how things work. Religion = why things work.


Who is talking in defense of religion? I'm certainly not. Religion really explains nothing and puts people in shackles and servitude to churches, mosques, synagogues and what have you not.

Also, keep in mind that science is light years behind discovering many truths about life, rather, science as a field of research is divided into a couple of brackets( think of a pie chart ), and most brackets are researching viagra, make up, guns and bombs. So excuse me if I don't take folk like that all too serious. While, if you go out and ask some of the scientists with life experience who keep themselves busy with actual stars, rather than Hollywood stars your veil might be lifted some.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 06:46 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Maybe some additional study on the Holy Spirit will help you to understand.

Ephesians 3:3-5


3) How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, 4) Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) 5) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;


1 Corinthians 2:13


13) Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.


1 Corinthians 12:3


3) Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.


John 7:39


39) (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)


John 16:25


25) These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.


After Jesus died, rose, and then ascended to Heaven, it was left to the Holy Spirit to take over where Jesus left off to help lead them to God.

Believers already know and have experienced what the Holy Spirit can do due to their own personal experiences. This is why they believe in the Bible. It's not just because they are told to read it and believe it. They feel it. They feel the power of the Holy Spirit while they're reading the scriptures.

Also, we know that there is no such thing as improbabilities and impossibilities when it comes to God. Through God, ALL things are possible. Maybe you should read your own original post over again. You've only highlighted a few of them.

So, don't think that believers didn't study more than just the Bible before they became believers. Most of them probably did and realized that the Bible held SPIRITUAL truth for them where other religious texts did not.
edit on 16-5-2012 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join