posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 01:59 PM
reply to post by GafferUK1981
TextConsidering the vastness of the universe and all the materials on our planet don't you find it strange that the religious can only offer proof of
god in their minds? If he created everything then how come we can offer more believable and realistic theories of creation?
I offer you the same as I offer others. As you make a statement of seemingly factual composition, then it is your responsibility to prove your
statement if challenged. There are no rules that obligates the god believer to shoulder the prove it game. The players must be on the same footing
else it is not a game. Therefore I challenge your statement of having more realistic theories of creation. What are those realistic theories of
creation that you have to offer me? You also realize that your theories are also theories by your own admission and that they are also of creation
by your very own admission.
I offer my logic as proof that there is a god. In order for you to prove me wrong you must play the game. The proof that I offer is simply the fact
of death. In death is my proof that God does exist. The next move is for you to prove me wrong. There are several ways for you to do this and those
are to enter death and testify your findings to us or simply admit that my opinion is as valid as yours.
The latter is the more sensible for the present although the day will come that you will have no choice in this matter and the proof will be forced
upon you. In death you will no longer have your universe and all of its splendor. The universal laws will still exist and you will become part of
the imagery of those laws as you return to its elements from which you came. But that is only the image of your existence. You have not addressed
the consciousness of your present day existence. Does this consciousness exist after the image has been changed
or is the consciousness an individual structure that has a continued existence? That is the question that can only be answered by death of the image.
You and I both understand that proof is nothing more than understanding a problem. As proof also changes so does the problem change. Nothing of the
universe is unchangeable simply because it is of a different substance than consciousness. If consciousness is destroyed with the image then it has
always been the image and we need not go any further with this discussion but if not then we have the same problem that has vexed the living for many
eras. If consciousness is a continuous existence then it also is not of the terrestrial order and must be independent of the universe. Then of what
order is it? It is independent of the scientific understanding simply because science (by your own admission) is of terrestrial substance. We simply
call this consciousness as being created by a Creator.
A Christian believes that the terrestrial body has no value after it has died but that the consciousness of that terrestrial body is a celestial
entity which continues to exist. That is a theological statement by me. It is strictly a belief. Science can verify my demise by the body that died
but it cannot verify the existence of the consciousness of my body which has died. If this consciousness has indeed passed out of the jurisdiction of
the universal laws then it also has nothing in common understanding with our science. Science only uses the material which is available in this
universe. Truth only exists in this discussion by proof and proof is only shown by death. There is no other solution to this problem.