What’s your Best EVIDENCE ‘FOR’ or ‘AGAINST’ God? Intellectual debate, please…

See, www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by the_grand_pooh-bah

[With comments already embedded, from Pachomius.]

A few of the major problems I have with the concept of a god.

1. define god.If (christian)god is so powerful why did he NEED his son's blood to wash away the sins of mankind,why wouldn't water do it?

• Answer from Pachomius: That is the anthropomorphic drama God loves to play.

2. Why bother with the whole no other gods before me thing if there are no other gods. that would be like telling your gf she can't date other men even though you are the only man in existence.

• Answer: The reference is to false gods.

3. why only one?I have never heard of a life form that had only one member of it's species.did he/she not have a mother and or father?

• Answer: That is the Christian belief and reasoning.

4. I imagine i am god in the void,I get bored,lonely,whatever.I create a universe.I create people.I wouldn't want them running around shouting how great i am all day.I'd want a friend to talk to even disagree with me at times,you know a friend.not a servant.

• Answer: That is the anthropomorphic drama God loves to play with mankind.

[...]

You see, God just loves to play the anthropomorphic drama with mankind, how else to deal with mankind?


Pachomius

See, www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by rhinoceros
The best evidence against God is that there's no evidence at all for God. It's the same with Santa Claus too..

That is the pseudo reasoning which is equivalent in real life to hollering as a way of substituting genuine rational communication.


Pachomius

See, www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by john124
reply to post by OldThinker

 

What’s your Best EVIDENCE ‘FOR’ or ‘AGAINST’ God?

Hmmm, no evidence for a god, so let me see............. nope! Nada!!! All hypothesis state null!

Intellectual debate, please…

Intellectual debate with a theist! That never happens! ...

[...]

That goes to show most glaringly that you are not informed about the wealth of debate among intellectuals in the history of Christianity, on God, even and specially to the present times.


Pachomius

See, www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by bargoose

I can't really present any evidence for god, apart from saying take a deep, deep look at the cosmos and everything in it then ask yourself "why".
My faith teaches that god is literally infinite in the true sense of the word, and is therefore inconceivable, unfathomable. Every time something about him is perceived there will be something else to perceive because he/his energies go on forever and are inexhaustable .I'll end by saying that DNA is a program. therefore there must be a programmer.

There is conspicuously a program so gigantic and so exquisite running the order and stability of the whole totality of existence that is the universe created by God, and man has learned from this program to also write programs to operate automation machines and do so much works for mankind today.

But atheists have one pseudo answer: it is all appearance of program.

Still, if it is all appearance of program why see a doctor when you have chest pain that hearkens to your heart's difficulty in following the cardiac program as it should, owing to some trouble on your part from neglect of sound nutrition, exercise, and abstemious lifestyle?

That you have to check in with a heart doctor to bring your heart back to the programming that God has put in it, when He did design and contrive the heart to work as a pump more durable than any and efficient made by man.



Pachomius

see, www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by john124
reply to post by bargoose

 

therefore there must be a programmer.

I agree there's much more than we currently understand, but who programmed the "programmer"? Is the concept of a god for us the same for "god", and so it goes on with an infinite number of gods?

because he/his energies go on forever and are inexhaustable

The concept of an infinite existence of a multiverse may be plausible, but a being that created each universe that lives forever does not seem plausible.

[edit on 23-11-2009 by john124]

Infinite regress is an argument against atheism.

Multiverse is not plausible except in science fiction.

Just keep to the universe we reside in, that is enough for everyone to think about in regard to God's existence, and is no science fiction.

No need to conjure other universes which cannot communicate among themselves and are loaded with their own kinds of laws of physics, etc., whatever, it is all cop-out thinking, and we here in our universe cannot either communicate with them and cannot even ascertain their existence if any at all.

So, what do these science fiction universe(s) serve, except as a science fiction escape valve for people who choose not to engage in genuine thinking on the baseline of reality, in our actual universe where we reside in and are parts of?



Pachomius

Miracles like stigmata, incorruptable corpses, eucharist miracles, and apparitions.

Those who have not witnessed these things for themselves will try to claim lies or delusion.

I believe the "god" that created our physical bodies and the "god" that created our spirit are two seperate entities.

It doesn't take a "god" to create a biological human, we can do that in labs.

See, www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by texas-pete

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
You're really clutching at straws on this one are you not?

You are being way too ridiculous for me to even respond to you. I digress.

And this is the theist way... You cannot respond to that! It is a valid question. Either way, whether the question was rather jovial or not it still leaves the question unanswered, if God was prepared to sacrifice his son to wash away the sins of mortals, why wouldn't he have done it again before major atrocities of our times. Some of which caused by the catholic church the Malleus Maleficarum anyone?

The way I see it, God in the Bible is into an anthropomorphic drama with man, but of those times and climes.

Today, we have got to get the thoughts of God for mankind without some of the anthropomorphic drama of Biblical times and climes.

We have got to update the Biblical anthropomorphic drama, and upgrade.

But even without updating and upgrading, if you be literate and intelligent you have got to know what is drama and drama.

All existence is drama. starting with God, and then with God and man. but God is the dramaturgist even today, and this drama is not like as in our theater stage where if you don't like it you can leave it.


Now, atheists don't like the divine drama, why? They have to examine their own heart and mind why.

But they put up their own drama founded on socalled randomness and natural selection leading to the grand panache of evolution, the beginning and end all explanation for everything except it is no genuine explanation -- absolute randomness an explanation?

More likely and most certainly you mean act of God.


But why posit randomness of the absolute kind obviously, and then slip in order and stability in socalled natural selection, leading to as I said, the grand panache of evolution?

It's all so shallow and incoherent though it serves their convenience whatever.



Pachomius

reply to post by NuclearPaul

It doesn't take a "god" to create a biological human, we can do that in labs.

No, what we can do is reproduce. Start with nothing and create life ? You wouldn't make such a claim as this would you ?

Originally posted by texas-pete

See, www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
reply to post by texas-pete

We'll never come close to realising whether or not the Universe is infinite. How does one perceive infinity?

I think infinity can be perceived simply by saying that the universe (thereby time and space) is never ending. The systems in the universe however are not. Maybe thinking of it as a huge indestructable office building with different workers and furniture every few years? Who knows. I am by the way not trying to say the laws of thermodynamics are wrong, they have more or less been proven correct, by (as you say) many revered scientists. My stance is though that because the universe is so uncertain, maybe the laws which we have developed would need rethinking in order to apply it to something with the complexity and scale (if finite) of the universe.

Pete

Edit to improve the mood - TIME WILL TELL

[edit on 23-11-2009 by texas-pete]

The concept of infinity is not really in the mind of man, insofar as the etymological definition of infinity is concerned, namely, without end.

Because man ends with death, and every man dies.

Now, is there a reality outside man's mind that is without ending?

The way I see it, and correct me if I am not so subtle and acute as some others claim to be, infinity cannot exist, because existence is off-set by in a way non-existence, again in a way.

So, with things that have a beginning as with the universe where we have our existence, and life, and movement, it is already off-set by nothingness at the beginning, at the point of the socalled Big Bang, when time and space and everythiing had its starting line.

So, the universe as a whole and as parts and parcels are not infinite.

Now, is God infinite, the maker of everything that is not God Himself?

My own opinion and I will accept correction, is that God is immense but not infinite.

God is as immense as He needs to be in order to be God, namely, insofar as man is concerned, God is the creator of everything that has a beginning and that means everything in the Big Bang universe [please don't bring in the science fiction universe(s) whatever].

I have to do more thinking, and of course reading of better minds.

I will just say that infinity is more of human psychology than of objective reality.

God is not bounded by space and time and existence, but not infinite, like say a sphere can be said to be unbounded but not infinite, and still immense?



Pachomius

See, www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by 2000 Yards
The biggest single argument against "God" is that nobody can even define it/Him/Her/whatever without the definition itself becoming paradoxical and meaningless.

For instance, it's just not possible for something to be both infinite and all-encompassing, yet still have a need to create. It can't be everything, yet still lacking.

And until somebody comes up with a functional definition of "God," any kind of debate is completely pointless.

Here is my fundamental concept of God in the Christian faith in relation to the universe:

Maker of everything that is not God Himself.

Infinity does not exist in reality.

God is not infinite but immense, He's got everything that qualifies Him to be God as maker of everything that is not God Himself in the universe.

Infinity is a pseudo concept without any corresponding object in reality; it is formed by affixing in to finity, but this is a wrong process in the particular instance because in objective reality existence is finite.

That is why you are having all these paradoxes of God, for imposing on Him the quality but false one of infinity.

God is immense but not infinite.

Even mathematicians don't really work on the infinite, they switch it into finity when they manipulate socalled infinity in their mathematical processes; otherwise, it is impossible to manipulate the literal but pseudo concept of infinity.

How can you even in your mind handle something that is not yet stabilized for still expanding or dividing or recurring or succeeding, etc.


Pachomius