Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
Joined: 6/27/2007
Msg: 176
view profile
Does God exist?Page 3 of 245    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41)
Einstein did believe in God - and spend the ending years of his life trying to prove the same.

Some believe that the creative and driving force of the universe is pure energy. Since energy is present in every living creature and all around us and throughout the universe, some see God, not as a separate being but as the energy force or perhaps the conduit from which all energy imparts and returns. Therefore any physical thing that includes energy as part of it's nature is part of God. When the physical is no longer the energy does not die, it returns to the freedom of it's true essence.

I guess in this way, the energy or that which gives us life can be referred to as the soul, it does not degrade and it does not die. Perhaps the energy within us chose to be created in the physical, for the experience of being so. This makes our own energy our god. It also means that every creature with energy within it, is also part of us the one whole God.

With this in mind read the ten commandments again, brings a whole new view of them, doesn't it. It also makes the gospels of Thomas more complete and makes one wonder what Jesus actually intended to be teaching. Imagine what life would be like today had the Christian religion developed as a gnostic faith instead of a separate, singular, outside force, God faith.
Joined: 9/8/2006
Msg: 191
Does God exist?
Posted: 7/19/2007 11:49:04 AM
I was reading a friends posts and saw this topic -
And seriously felt the need to chime in ::

the points I want to make deal with Probability & Language / Continuity

first Probability ::
Imagine TEN coins in your pocket-
they are numbered 1-10 in such a way that you distinguish then by feel-
try to remove them from your pocket in the exact order 1-10 in one try...
I believe your chances of doing this on one try are 10 to the 10th power
that is 10 followed by 10 zeros 100,000,0000,000 to 1

How many things from Big Bang to our Speaking today needed to happen
in an EXACT Sequence in order for us to exists ..............
Millions if not Billions of variables and possibilities
the idea of Random Chance is crazy --
You would write your #1 followed by as many Zero's as you could write the rest of your life............

Maybe we should all play the lottery in our cities today and we would ALL expect to win,,,,

Language / Continuity

the Bible as a complete work of history is the INSPIRATION OF GOD--
the Language skills used in each verse were skillfully thought out and exact-
The Grammar & Articulation perfection and way beyond most well educated
a people even from today can express needless to say from 6000 years ago ...
Where did Moses find the time to write so much ?
There is reference to writing is found in Genesis 5:1 which says:
"This is the book of the generations of Adam."
This suggests that the that art of writing was known within the lifetime of Adam,
which could make writing as old as the human race itself !
What School did Adam attend ?

Each of the 66 books of the Bible written over a period of Thousands of years
are unique in how continuous they are -- like a giant literary jigsaw puzzle..
Is not God's hand on each of these books ?

2 Timothy 3:16 says "All scripture is inspired by God."

Transitional Fossils -
The fossil record is so incomplete in order to prove evolution
ONE missing link ??? no there needs to be thousands

We have fossils from before the Ice Age ,,,, Dinosaurs and the like
many tens of thousands of years old....

where are the fish with feet ?? with billions that must have lived we can not find one..
Where are all the lost transitional fossils ??

Evidence of a Planned Creation Maybe ?

In the end it is all about FAITH

without FAITH there is nothing
without FAITH GOD can not exists !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 thesecret rawme
Joined: 7/16/2007
Msg: 193
Does God exist?
Posted: 7/21/2007 3:28:35 AM
No clue.... really...

(and I am not trying to be "flip") - I guess it is all relative,and how much u lean towards the empirical tilt on life (such as it is------- and the mysteries within...)
Joined: 6/30/2007
Msg: 195
Does God exist?
Posted: 7/21/2007 10:49:18 PM
You Bet He Does Have You Ever Tried Reading The BiBle? But I Know he exists from personal experience.
Joined: 6/30/2007
Msg: 196
Does God exist?
Posted: 7/21/2007 11:07:54 PM
Faith simply is believing something you cannot see, hear, touch or experiance with your say 5 senses. God can exist even if you cannot experiance him. I find it takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe in God.
Joined: 3/22/2006
Msg: 199
Does God exist?
Posted: 7/23/2007 11:07:05 AM
GOD: Gas, Oxygen, DNA.
Joined: 3/22/2006
Msg: 201
Does God exist?
Posted: 7/24/2007 11:25:43 AM
It came to me in one of my movie theatre dreams. Also a few years ago I had some strange dreams about the Maya Indians. Woke up wondering wtf I was dreaming about them for?

Also in college had some strange dreams about the Ice Age coming in our lifetime, Then the next day there would be a blizzard and school was cancelled.

Also had some dreams about Earth becoming a spaceship in the future. There's more then enough metal on it and other stuff to make it one. Maybe as the universe keeps expanding and earth may move away from the sun, maybe that is what we have to do?

I tell ya, some pretty strange dreams, lol.

Joined: 3/22/2006
Msg: 203
Does God exist?
Posted: 7/25/2007 8:46:23 AM
Lol Trust me I already did............I go back to sleep now, wasn't finished my stories......errrrrrrrr dreams.

Had the God dreams too.
Joined: 3/22/2006
Msg: 204
Does God exist?
Posted: 7/25/2007 2:36:15 PM
Guess that's what I need a man for, poor a bucket of water on me or jump and down on the bed and sing "Rise and Shine and Give God the Glory Glory" till I wake up out of my comatose slumber. Sometimes the alarm clock turns into a dream too. Course funny enough if there's money to be made I wake up no probs.

Joined: 8/1/2007
Msg: 209
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/16/2007 5:33:05 PM
If you say that God doesn't exist,then how did you get here? Remember God made heaven and earth,man woman,child!Read the Bible,the oldest literature known to man,God is my best friend and I praise his name.We shall never doubt God's word or his existance.We should love God more than ourselves and our loved ones.Without God I wouldn't have a life.Or know the meaning of love,friendship,respect,etc.
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 211
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/16/2007 9:29:03 PM

If you say that God doesn't exist,then how did you get here?

The fact that we, or anything, exists is not compelling evidence that God exists. Otherwise, we are left asking how did God get "here"? If your answer is that God is eternal, then why can't existence itself be eternal?

IMO, if the answers come easily, you're probably not digging deep enough... this is a philosophy forum, after all.
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 212
view profile
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/16/2007 9:43:38 PM
Read the Bible,the oldest literature known to man

Wow. If this is what you believe, you have some studying to do. And not the scriptures this time.

The Bible is less than 2000 years old. The Old Testament is older [2200-3100 years, edited together from older pieces], the Torah 2450 with parts closer to 3000. The Iliad is 2700 years old [roughly]. The Art of War is about 2600 years old. The Twelve Labours of Hercules is about 2600 years old. The Epic of Gilgamesh is over 4000 years old [and we know that Gilgamesh actually existed]. That's just the classic literature. There's plenty of writing which is much older, though apparently, the Epic of Gilgamesh is actually considered the oldest "literature" [literature selected by me, dates verified with Wikipedia]. The Art of War has a single author. The Labours of Hercules, the Iliad, and the Epic of Gilgamesh draw on older tales, but are single works, the former two having single authors. The Bible is a compilation which includes the Old Testament [Tanakh]. The Old Testament is a compilation which includes the Torah. The Torah is a compilation of still smaller tales... In that light, I'd be reluctant to consider the Bible a literary work [authored book], so much as an edited book.

Apparently, Gilgamesh is older than God! If he were still alive, he'd feel pretty darn old! Hm...maybe he IS God...Gilgamesh...Gilg...God? If so, he died about 4500 years ago [before he created the Earth, ironically], and we won't get to meet him :(
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 216
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/20/2007 1:54:59 AM
I think God's existance is entirely dependent on one's beliefs. Personally, I don't believe there is a God.

Wrong. God either exists or does not exist. I know, I know, these days everyone has their own personal jesus like Cash says. But this just esn't true.

Time to wake up now. Either god exists or doesn't exist. and, if it does exist there are not personal versions of it. It is what it is: A real sick **stard.

@$@$*^%*% YOU GOD!
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 217
view profile
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/20/2007 2:45:21 AM
More preaching. More claims to exclusive knowledge of unknowable truths. Might as well shout "BAN ME FIRST!!" There is no single concept of God, so good luck showing that yours is correct and any other is wrong. There may only be one correct answer, but the number of possible answers is infinite, and no-one has proof of even one of those.
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 218
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/20/2007 2:54:29 AM
Before you go being hypocritical.

Make sure you actually have some evidence backing the (claim) that there are infinate possibilities.

I stated that god either exists or doesn't exist do you agree or disagree? And this statement is hardly preachy. I call it a sick **stard because of well, all the evidence to be had. Even this statement isn't preachy. It's merely an opinion based on evidence.

When did i ever claim that my knowledge was exclusive? Be careful. The knowledge is there for anyone to see.

Also nothing that i stated in my post is grounds for banning. Your logic is disappearing with every post you make in response to mine and being replaced with illogical emotion.

Oh and head back over to appeal to reason i have questions there that you haven't seen/ have yet to address/choose not to respond to.
Joined: 9/8/2006
Msg: 219
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/20/2007 3:27:08 AM
steelstar are you serious ?

i. Does god believe in a being that is greater than himself?

ii. No of course he doesn't.

iii. Since he holds there's no being greater than himself God is therefore an atheist.

iv. And so, if atheism is good enough for God it's good enough for us.

How sophomoric of you to pull this type of logic
out of a, elementary school debate class ..your example is called:::::

Post hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for "after this, therefore because of this", is a logical fallacy (of the questionable cause variety) which assumes or asserts that if one event happens after another, then the first must be the cause of the second. It is often shortened to simply post hoc and is also sometimes referred to as false cause or coincidental correlation. It is subtly different from the fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc, in which the chronological ordering of a correlation is insignificant.

Post hoc is a particularly tempting error because temporal sequence appears to be integral to causality. The fallacy lies in coming to a conclusion based solely on the order of events, rather than taking into account other factors that might rule out the connection. Most familiarly, many superstitious beliefs and magical thinking arise from this fallacy.
The form of the post hoc fallacy can be expressed as follows:

A occurred, then B occurred.
Therefore, A caused B.

and :::
during the cold war ,,,,
a) Russian Threats were No News
b) we all know "no news is good news"
c) therfore Russian Threats are good news

Also Known as: Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, False Cause, Questionable Cause, Confusing Coincidental Relationships With Causes

Description of Post Hoc
A Post Hoc is a fallacy with the following form:

A occurs before B. Therefore A is the cause of B.

The Post Hoc fallacy derives its name from the Latin phrase "Post hoc, ergo propter hoc." This has been traditionally interpreted as "After this, therefore because of this." This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that one event causes another simply because the proposed cause occurred before the proposed effect. More formally, the fallacy involves concluding that A causes or caused B because A occurs before B and there is not sufficient evidence to actually warrant such a claim.

It is evident in many cases that the mere fact that A occurs before B in no way indicates a causal relationship. For example, suppose Jill, who is in London, sneezed at the exact same time an earthquake started in California. It would clearly be irrational to arrest Jill for starting a natural disaster, since there is no reason to suspect any causal connection between the two events. While such cases are quite obvious, the Post Hoc fallacy is fairly common because there are cases in which there might be some connection between the events. For example, a person who has her computer crash after she installs a new piece of software would probably suspect that the software was to blame. If she simply concluded that the software caused the crash because it was installed before the crash she would be committing the Post Hoc fallacy. In such cases the fallacy would be committed because the evidence provided fails to justify acceptance of the causal claim. It is even theoretically possible for the fallacy to be committed when A really does cause B, provided that the "evidence" given consists only of the claim that A occured before B. The key to the Post Hoc fallacy is not that there is no causal connection between A and B. It is that adequate evidence has not been provided for a claim that A causes B. Thus, Post Hoc resembles a Hasty Generalization in that it involves making a leap to an unwarranted conclusion. In the case of the Post Hoc fallacy, that leap is to a causal claim instead of a general proposition.

Not surprisingly, many superstitions are probably based on Post Hoc reasoning. For example, suppose a person buys a good luck charm, does well on his exam, and then concludes that the good luck charm caused him to do well. This person would have fallen victim to the Post Hoc fallacy. This is not to say that all "superstitions" have no basis at all. For example, some "folk cures" have actually been found to work.

Post Hoc fallacies are typically committed because people are simply not careful enough when they reason. Leaping to a causal conclusion is always easier and faster than actually investigating the phenomenon. However, such leaps tend to land far from the truth of the matter. Because Post Hoc fallacies are committed by drawing an unjustified causal conclusion, the key to avoiding them is careful investigation. While it is true that causes precede effects (outside of Star Trek, anyways), it is not true that precedence makes something a cause of something else. Because of this, a causal investigation should begin with finding what occurs before the effect in question, but it should not end there.
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 220
view profile
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/20/2007 3:29:27 AM


Exclusive truth. Your view is right, his is wrong.

Time to wake up now


Either god exists or doesn't exist

Or a different god exists [for which their as many definitions as there are people to make the definitions], or multiple gods exist. To deny these possibilities requires showing that your definition is the only correct one, which you cannot do.

there are not personal versions of it

There is at least one definition for which there are personal versions of it. I'm inclined to think that a significant part of the concept though, is that everyone has their own belief [concept, version] of exactly what God is. Conceivably, all are correct, especially if God is as expansive as often believed. Again though, you've claimed exclusive knowledge - you're right, anyone else is wrong.

oh yes...

Before you go being hypocritical

Responded a half hour before you asked.
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 221
view profile
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/20/2007 3:36:07 AM
BajaJohn - I saw that error. I ignored it because it was an obvious joke. Actually, I noted item ii), which was an assumption about what God might or might not believe. A complicated assumtion actually, given that regardless of many humans believing and defining God as ultimate, there's nothing to preclude God believing in something great which He has no evidence of. Note also that no atheist would care what God believes, since they don't believe God exists!

Regardless, it was a joke, and even *I* caught it.
 natural energy
Joined: 9/23/2006
Msg: 226
view profile
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/26/2007 3:08:39 PM
This is a very difficult question…… very deep ….
I have promised a few of my friends here on POF that I would post here.
… but only after I have gone through the posts here on this thread, which I finally have.

I have noticed that most people posting here either are not religious, or are of “another religion” ......

I personally accept all religions, atheists, agnostics, etc.

I have observed that Christianity, as well as the Islamic religions seem to be the most criticized of all religions …. and Catholic being the worst, as far as Christianity.

A few years ago, I attended a study group about the Islamic religion given through a local United Church. Even though we discussed the acceptance of all religions, the members of this united church were putting down Catholics. How hypocritical.
Some Catholics were afraid that I was going to become Islamic.
Yes, there are some very narrow-minded people around.

A colleague of mine once told me about his religion which he called “Christian”.
At which I responded that I am a Christian as well.
When I asked what was the basis of his belief, he explained that they believed the bible word for word, that their religion is the only correct religion, and that people are born evil. It is only by the word of god, that they become good people. All people are forgiven for their wrong doing.

The issues I have with this belief are:
1. I take issue with those who feel that their religion is the only “correct” religion.
2. Along with the people being forgiven for their wrong doing, there must be a desire to do “good”, and not get into the mentality that if “I do wrong, that is all right. God will forgive me.” So, I can continue to do “wrong”

I do not consider myself to have a strong commitment to my Catholic religion. I was actually considered a rebel in my high school in a catholic school. But I don’t plan to change my religion unless I see a better one. I haven’t seen a better one yet.
I am not an expert on all religions though ……. but, in time I will learn about them all … I have a strong interest to, among my many other interests. I do believe in spirits and reincarnation ............ to what extent is not very clear yet! I continue to learn and keep an open mind to many possibilities.

As with some posters here:
1. I do believe that God exists.
2. I do believe that this means the God or Gods of the various religions.
3. God takes many forms.
4. This belief is based on faith, not science, since science does not explain God.

Regarding what callmefish wrote on May 4/2007 in msg 27, it is a very interesting perspective on what God is. The problem I have with what you wrote there, is that you say that you learn through experiences. For example we only identify good from evil by experiencing both so we are then able to differentiate. I don’t agree. You can use your logic and brain power to discern good from evil. You don’t have to actually experience it.

For example. I do not require to see people killed to know that to take someone’s life (kill) is evil and devastating. My logic and brain power tells me that.

Yes, the human race allowed Hitler to get away with his atrocities.
But, he was a powerful person who had the skill to lead people into his way of thinking …. An unfortunate skill of any dictator, which ends up in a horrific controlling and powerful situation. There is NO EXCUSE for his actions!

I agree with Ahoytheredave when he wrote:

Religion is about beleifs that do not require definition, observation, and conclusion nor does it have to be flexible as science is. Science makes conclusions based on evidence but is always open to change those conclusions. Religion may change due to influence from science but it doesn't have to as it is a belief system. Science and religion both serve society for good and bad.

Savanna1 shows great insight in msg 121 on page 5

Is LOVE "real"? Not in a scientific sense. It is not empirical, not observable, not verifiable, not repeatable, not explicable. It is internal and personal.
But does it exist? Is Love real? To those who feel and experience it - Of course..
How is "God" any different? Real enough to those who feel and experience "Him" And you have no more information, proof or authority to tell them or prove otherwise...

Just because man is ill equipped and lacks the mental and emotional capacity at this stage in his development to fully comprehend, explain or even understand by our limited scientifc capabilities to date, is not in anyway confirmation that it therefore ceases to exist.

Any true scientist will remember that nothing in science is ever truly FACT. It only remains the best explaination we can provide at the time - within our capabilities until the next scientific breakthrough claims to be the new "fact".....

….. If Ive only learnt one thing in my scientific studies over the years it is this....
Never be inflexible or close your mind to infinate possibilities beyond our current comprehension... To do so is to cease to progess as a every way.

It is those "crazy" forfathers of ours who dared to imagine and think in concepts so extreme to everyone else that has led us to all our greatest scientific, spiritual, physical and emotional discoveries to date........

My mind is as wide open as Stephen Hawkins imagination..!! :o)
…… Do not let religion its practice and ritual blind you to the truths that exist in life and the universe. It like science only strives to offer an explanation for the same "unknown" entity....
….. Its irrelvant that we cannot yet understand, explain or prove it within our limited capacity.

How arrogant of mankind to assume that in our "millisecond"(?) of time in existance in this universe that has existed for billions of years, that we have "evolved" so much in such a short period of time with sufficient mental and emotional capacity to understand that which has existed an eternity.....

Man's ego... WILL be his downfall. As we can already see...........

I love Buddha’s quote that 1toadore cited in msg 149 on page 6

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. –Buddha

I watched the video on youtube that Mark II referred to in msg 207 regarding the
10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer.
…. I am intelligent …. I am Christian …….. and I don’t feel I need to answer the questions! I do not take the bible word for word. It was written as a series of parables!
I believe I have covered my beliefs well enough here.

Bajajohn …………. Great post in msg 220 to correct the logic flaw, even if Frogo sloughed it off as being an obvious joke ……….. I am sure that it was not obvious to all!

Namaste to all!
Let us continue to seek to explain all that we are capable of .....
A wise man/woman knows that there is so much more to learn!
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 227
view profile
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/26/2007 7:10:21 PM

I am sure that it was not obvious to all!

That was apparent, which was the point of my comment. It WAS obvious, and I'm incredulous some promptly just didn't get it. Even my rather staid sense of humor got it immediately!

Is LOVE "real"? Not in a scientific sense. It is not empirical, not observable, not verifiable, not repeatable, not explicable. It is internal and personal.
But does it exist? Is Love real? To those who feel and experience it - Of course..
How is "God" any different? Real enough to those who feel and experience "Him" And you have no more information, proof or authority to tell them or prove otherwise...

Pardon my French, but this oft-repeated argument is crap. "Love" and any other emotional experience is an entirely internal experience which can be experienced and compared by pretty much anyone. Emotional experiences also have measureable physiological correlates. God, on the other hand, has no two identical definitions, and many definitions are vastly different or completely nebulous. Most of the commonly discussed concepts of God do NOT consider Him to be an entirely internal experiential concept, but rather an external one with a more or less physical component. If one wishes to define God as "pain", fine. We'll measure Him and prove He exists. If you want to call Him "hate", fine. We have some consistant definitions of hatred, and by those definitions, we can show He exists. Alas, He does not have such a rigid and measureable definition. Apples and...lettuce. Not an appropriate comparison.
 natural energy
Joined: 9/23/2006
Msg: 228
view profile
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/26/2007 8:52:30 PM

That was apparent, which was the point of my comment. It WAS obvious, and I'm incredulous some promptly just didn't get it. Even my rather staid sense of humor got it immediately!

Dr. FrogO, if it WAS so obvious to you, then how can you be incredulous when increduous is an adjective? I guess we are not all so "all-knowing" as you?

Regarding the quote I have of Savanna's: you said similarly after Savanna posted this originally.

I liked how Savanna explained how everything cannot be explained in a scientific manner. In this manner she appropriately used LOVE as an example.

I see your point, as I did the first time you stated this, that LOVE is an internal emotional concept wheras most concepts of God are external physical concepts.

But, you yourself state that the concepts of God have been expressed as both an internal experiential concept and an external physical concept. Thus, Savanna's example referring to the internal concept is appropriate.
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 229
view profile
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/26/2007 9:51:23 PM
I don't claim to be infallible. A simple sentence rewording would correct the usage.

My apologies for saying the same thing twice. I didn't look to see what I had already written, but it did bear repeating. Savanna's example did not show any evidence of being used for one particular concept. It is a frequent argument used for any concept of God, and I can't say that I have ever seen anyone restrict the comparison to the internal concept. The argument usually begins with a Biblical concept of God [which is not an exclusively internal concept], and leads to someone using "love" as a comparison to show "proof" of God existing. F-

Anything real can be explained scientifically, though there are many examples which are too complex for a fixed and final result. They still have identifiable real world components. God is not one of these things because He lacks a real world testable definition. This has no bearing on His existence, as His definition precludes testing or proof either way. There is no amount of logic or science which can prove God. You believe or you do not, but trying to show evidence is a waste of effort.
 natural energy
Joined: 9/23/2006
Msg: 230
view profile
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/26/2007 10:04:44 PM

It is just that you came off a bit condescending.

There is no amount of logic or science which can prove God. You believe or you do not, but trying to show evidence is a waste of effort.


Which is why I also had quoted what Ahoythredave had said:

Religion is about beleifs that do not require definition, observation, and conclusion nor does it have to be flexible as science is. Science makes conclusions based on evidence but is always open to change those conclusions. Religion may change due to influence from science but it doesn't have to as it is a belief system. Science and religion both serve society for good and bad.

I apply this to the existence of God as well.
Joined: 8/20/2007
Msg: 231
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/28/2007 7:06:39 PM
With a just a few basic fundamentals of "God" I can prove he cannot exists. It contridicts itself.

1)God Supreme and all powerful
2)God is eternal
3)God was here since the begining , some say before the begining
4)God created all

if i take idea 4 and 3 together i can logically assume that he knows everything if he created all and knows all because he was here since the beginning. he must know how everything works, breaks, and fixes and of all time.

So if this is so why is God having such a tough time "defeating evil"
He should know how, because he should know how it works, what makes it tick, how it can break or fix.
If he created all he should be able to create oppertuniy to do so if he can create oppertunity for other things. I mean us lower lifeforms can create oppertunity. Why not the"supreme" being.

He is all knowing , knowing that free will woud only cause lots of problems for management. Why not take away free will and make us be robots enjoying pleasure for eternity and playing with God all day? talking and stuff? Why did he put us in a imperfect world instead of just placing us in heaven where it is supposed to be great and perfect already?
Why would he intentionally wantus to suffer on Earth first instead of live in heaven where it is safer and we can be happier?

He is supposed to be supreme but cannot manage his own creations, cannot manage the world, and he is supposed to have created it all? Is he incompetent and irresponsible then? how is he supreme if does not control all and rein supreme above all others then? He should have no one being able to challange him and be effectively go againts him at all. he should be able to over power and rule all if he is real. Is he really supreme if he doesn't rein supreme to all people? or is he only supreme to you because you want to beleive and accept?

A supreme god that does not rein supreme? I mean if he were truely supreme he would have to be accepted and everyone would have to awknowldge him existing as a real entity. A all powerful God that cannot over power his own creations and enemies? A all knowing that does not know, or know how to overcome his obsticles yet create everything and the world? Despite him being since or before the beginning does not make sense at all.

It goes againts what god is supposed to be like

And for those who beleive God is loving, how can he be loving if he lets you suffer? is he careless? that means he is not caring then. To care is to love and if he does not care he does not love.

It is like saying the Rapists let his victim give consent. Or the murderer saved his victims from death. or a racists is tolerant. Does not make sense goes againts what it supposed to mean. A square has no sides or a circle has sides. No sense. We cannot physically prove these things, but we don't have to. We know because of the obvious common sense of what it's supposed to be like and mean.
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 232
view profile
Does God exist?
Posted: 8/28/2007 8:51:21 PM
Your "proof" requires too many assumptions, limited by human thought. Why would a supreme being actually give a damn what a mortal thought? He's got countless billions of them ranging from the smallest Archaeobacteria to the blue whale - and that's just on this planet. Only human ego requires particular personality traits of deities, when their very nature makes them mentally nothing like us.

To the limits of supremacy, it could easily be argued that complex thought processes are an emergent property. It would be possible for deity to create all, set it all in motion, watch all, tinker here and there...and still be unable to predict or know everything. That much, we can do, on a much smaller scale - we create things, make them interact, but can't predict every result with perfection. The interactions create emergent properties, and the myriad interactions are far more complex than the basic structures and laws underlaying them all

It goes againts what god is supposed to be like

One concept, and one limited by human thought. Doesn't make it the right concept.

And for those who beleive God is loving, how can he be loving if he lets you suffer? is he careless? that means he is not caring then. To care is to love and if he does not care he does not love.

Again, this is a human thought limitation. Care and love are OUR concepts, and they are only points on a scale. There wouldn't be words for these if the scale didn't exist. They are also consequences of life. Life without "badness" just wouldn't be life. The universe we know has 'finite' resources [at least, within reach of most life forms]. For any life to continue, other life has to end at some point. That makes death a requirement for continued life, and what we call evil is just extreme cases of individuals trying to guarantee their own survival. THEN, there's the matter of a deity which can see or plan the future... We often hear arguments regarding the deaths of children - "she could have been the one to cure cancer"... or she might have been the next Stalin...or the cruelty imposed on one might be the key event which leads to someone else not becoming the next Stalin. The only one who knows - is the deity.

"Logic" regarding the behavior of a deity depends far too much on assumptions made by non-deities.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >