Do You Believe In God, Why? Don't You Believe In God, Why?

[rational experiences]

What is this evidence?

Why do the gods of the Bible do, command or endorse so many things we'd condemn as monstrous if they were done by someone today? Where's the morality -- or is morality, by definition, anything God does?

Science never involved morality in its thinking spiritual concepts. Origin human practice.

God O earth natural history heavens supported his highest living conditions.

O God did not historic own his harm. O maths satanic cause change God did.
Not sacrificed. As origin self with God natural history.

How did or would you feel when life sacrificed as a self man human question to self man? Science wrong.

You were not copying natural. God was not in a state of fission.

Brother to Brother as group agreed choice?

Would you express anger at yourself as a spiritual thinker asking why your brother in science sacrificed murdered your spirit yet you the science aware advised wisdom was telling the story!

Father said the concept of your own male from baby male self deceit

His life memory told you spiritually not to do or choose conver Sion. You however chose it.

Blame was always human.
Lying blamed God.

 

[Trailblazer]

Do they always? No. But the level of specificity and accuracy is *far* beyond anything any religious leader can claim.

For example, there is a prediction that there will be a total eclipse of the sun on April 8, 2024. The path of the eclipse is known, the duration is known, At any point on the path, the times when it starts and stops are known to the minute.

Give *any* prophecy from any religious figure that comes anywhere close to that.

Instead, what you will find is generalities that can be interpreted multiple ways, are true for most periods of time, and/or are common knowledge. That isn't a prophecy; it is a smokescreen.

Religion is not science so there is no reason it would have to be that precise, but if one really wants to know when Christ was prophesied to return, they can find out by doing the proper research.

Bible prophecies point to the year 1844.

Great Disappointment - Wikipedia

What hath God Wrought? 24 May 1844

We live in the most remarkable of times. The transformation of the material conditions of humanity has a cause. Do we really believe that the human beings who came before us were incapable of what we see in the world today? Great civilizations have come before in history – yet none of them broke out of the same reality that has existed since the dawn of agriculture.

It is only in this time that humanity has passed into an entirely new reality. It has a cause. A cause larger than humanity itself.

In 1844, in Shiraz, the Bab, Baha’u’llah’s immediate forerunner, spoke these words:

The secret of the Day that is to come is now concealed. It can neither be divulged nor estimated. The newly born babe of that Day excels the wisest and most venerable men of this time, and the lowliest and most unlearned of that period shall surpass in understanding the most erudite and accomplished divines of this age.[1]

A short time before, on the other side of the planet on 24 May 1844, within a day of the Bab’s declaration of his mission, Samuel Morse, the inventor of the telegraph sent its first message from Washington to Baltimore. The message read as follows: What hath God Wrought? , citing a passage from the Bible.

 

[Trailblazer]

I would say that the quality of the evidence is the same for both.

How could you know if you haven't looked at the evidence for both?

 

[Valjean]

So why do beneficial traits "evolve"? Why is survival something that organisms strive for? Where do instincts come from? Doesn't sound like something that would come from a meaningless universe.

Seriously?!

You really don't know this? Did you never learn about natural selection and how it works?

There is no striving. Natural selections selects beneficial traits and eliminates non-beneficial ones -- all automatically. For stone age man living in small bands of hunter-gatherers, strong group solidarity, altruism and co-operation was beneficial. These traits, values and attitudes were selected for.

 

[rational experiences]

One word. One meaning.

No man. Is God.

No means not
Not man.....is God.

Hence no man is God as you are not God.

Is God means not God.

Is being a question.

Is or was God to blame.

Conscious advice questioner.

Asks the questions as a writer of information.

Does not write his questions as he thinks...just equated the answers.

Already knew no man is God.

Man his owned human life.
God O the one stone planet.

His God theme in O maths only. Not owner natural form. Stone presence history.

Yet his story. History is always stated by a male thinking even when he personally did not exist.

What he lied about.

 

[Valjean]

Really? why? why should anything evolve past chemical reactions?

If you understood some of the mechanisms you wouldn't ask that question. It's either adapt or become extinct. No choice.

 

[Valjean]

I guess you would have to experience the divine to know it.

Our conscience is the evidence of a God with morals.

Our conscience is evidence of natural selection.

Why would something want to pass on their genes? or live, even? Why would random, or even non random, chemical systems want anything at all?

Organisms that don't reproduce die out. Those with no will to live die out. The ones born with reproductive urges and a will to live are the only ones that survive and pass on the genes for these traits to the next generations.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I was talking about messengers from pixies, not Messengers from God.
Of course there were Messengers from God before I sought them out. There have been Messengers from God since the dawn of human history.

I was talking about messengers from pixies as well. You claim that there are no messengers from pixies, but what effort have you made to seek them out?

I suspect your answer is fairly obvious. You have absolutely no reason to believe that pixies exist, so it makes no sense for you to seek out messengers from pixies. Perhaps if you had some sort of verifiable evidence that pixies existed then you might feel compelled to look for people that have messages from these pixies, but it would be rather ridiculous for you to seek out such messengers before you had any evidence.

The exact same holds true for me when it comes to the god claim.

 

[Valjean]

No, conscience is knowing right from wrong.

If that's the case consciences aren't very reliable, and seem to differ considerably between cultures.

No, all conscience is the same. There is only one right and wrong way of thinking. And God gave us the way to figure out the difference.

If consciences were the same values and morals would be universal as well, but, as Subduction Zone and Polymath pointed out, they're not. Different cultures can have very different ideas of right and wrong.

Because I am a self conscious being

So is my cat.

Completely wrong. Conscience is IN YOU. No one teaches it.

So why do feelings of right and wrong vary so much between cultures?

The entirety of the universe is structured along the canonical laws.

Huh? What are you talking about? Canonical laws = the laws and constants of physics?

 

[Trailblazer]

I was talking about messengers from pixies as well. You claim that there are no messengers from pixies, but what effort have you made to seek them out?

I suspect your answer is fairly obvious. You have absolutely no reason to believe that pixies exist, so it makes no sense for you to seek out messengers from pixies. Perhaps if you had some sort of verifiable evidence that pixies existed then you might feel compelled to look for people that have messages from these pixies, but it would be rather ridiculous for you to seek out such messengers before you had any evidence.

The exact same holds true for me when it comes to the god claim.

The hundred-dollar difference is that there is a REASON to think that Messengers of God might exist, whereas there is no REASON to think that messengers of pixies might exist.

The evidence that Messengers of God exist are of religions and the civilizations that were established by Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad, etc. Great civilizations can be traced back to these men.

RELIGION AND CIVILIZATION

However, there is no evidence that religions or civilizations were established by pixies, who cannot even be proven to exist.

 

[Valjean]

I suspect you are an atheist. You don't want to take responsibility for your actions.

What's that got to do with atheism?

 

[Valjean]

We can determine if a Messenger had any such motives by investigating His life.

There's nothing to preclude a sincere and righteous person believing he's a prophet.

 

[Trailblazer]

There's nothing to preclude a sincere and righteous person believing he's a prophet.

That's right, but if he claimed to be and wasn't he would either be lying, thus not sincere, or he would be delusional.

 

[QuestioningMind]

The hundred-dollar difference is that there is a REASON to think that Messengers of God might exist, whereas there is no REASON to think that messengers of pixies might exist.

The evidence that Messengers of God exist are of religions and the civilizations that were established by Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad, etc. Great civilizations can be traced back to these men.

RELIGION AND CIVILIZATION

However, there is no evidence that religions or civilizations were established by pixies, who cannot even be proven to exist.

I can agree that religions exist because of claims that there are messengers from god, but that hardly constitutes evidence that actual messengers from god exist.

However, there is no evidence that religions or civilizations were established by pixies, who cannot even be proven to exist.

And there is also absolutely no evidence that religions or civilizations were established by any god, who cannot even be proven to exist.

 

[Trailblazer]

I can agree that religions exist because of claims that there are messengers from god, but that hardly constitutes evidence that actual messengers from god exist.

There is evidence that actual messengers from God exist, but there is no proof. Evidence is not the same as proof.

Evidence: anything that helps to prove that something is or is not true: EVIDENCE | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid: https://www.google.com/search

Proof: evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement: https://www.google.com/search

However, there is no evidence that religions or civilizations were established by pixies, who cannot even be proven to exist.

And there is also absolutely no evidence that religions or civilizations were established by any god, who cannot even be proven to exist.

There is no evidence that religions and civilizations were established by God, because God did not establish them.

There is evidence that indicates that religions and civilizations were established by Messengers of God, even though these men cannot be proven to be Messengers of God. If they could be proven to be Messengers of God, then there would be proof that shows that religions and civilizations were established by Messengers of God.

 

[Skywalker]

There is evidence that actual messengers from God exist, but there is no proof. Evidence is not the same as proof.

Evidence: anything that helps to prove that something is or is not true: EVIDENCE | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid: https://www.google.com/search

Proof: evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement: https://www.google.com/search

There is no evidence that religions and civilizations were established by God, because God did not establish them.

There is evidence that indicates that religions and civilizations were established by Messengers of God, even though these men cannot be proven to be Messengers of God. If they could be proven to be Messengers of God, then there would be proof that shows that religions and civilizations were established by Messengers of God.

I believe that only Christianity and Judaism and any beliefs people had between Genesis and Jesus, who passed down belief Christianity before Jesus to their descendants, like a tribe a Native American person told me about who believed in the Trinity, are religions who were established by messengers of God. The Bible talks about having a relationship with God.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Here is the question! What do you think?

I don't, for the simple reason that I have no rational justifiable reason to.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Asking the question 'Who created God?' is nonsensical because we humans cannot
imagine anything outside of time and space, let alone God.

Then by the same token, it follows that asking "who created the universe" is an equally nonsensical question.
That is, unless you wish to engage in special pleading next to your ginormous argument from ignorance off course...

Kind of like "doubling down" on the fallacies.

EITHER the universe created itself when it didn't exist (ie no physics, no mathematics,
no space etc..) or it was created by an external agency.

False dichotomy.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

But as I said, the existence of God can’t be proved.

It can't even be rationally supported.

It's, as an entity, entirely indistinguishable from a thing that doesn't exist.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So how did the impersonal give rise to the personal?

Physics followed by chemistry followed by biology.

I would like you to only do your life in impersonal terms and only use science. So if you answer no personal words!

Not make any sense, this does.