Evidence That the Absence of a God is Not Possible

[F1fan]

It's a term I grew up with,

So it was an idea that you adopted due to your social experience, thus indoctrinated. Haven't you subjected this idea to criticism and questioned whether it was true, as we critical thinkers do? If no, why not? If you did, where is the evidence and line of reasoning that would llow any rational mind to conclude a God exists?

so I utilize it in conjuntion with the universe. I sometimes utilize the term universe, also. Same meaning to me.

Why do this when it doesn't correlate to anything in reality? Why not just use words that have clear and unambiguous meanings?

 

[Balthazzar]

So it was an idea that you adopted due to your social experience, thus indoctrinated. Haven't you subjected this idea to criticism and questioned whether it was true, as we critical thinkers do? If no, why not? If you did, where is the evidence and line of reasoning that would llow any rational mind to conclude a God exists?

Why do this when it doesn't correlate to anything in reality? Why not just use words that have clear and unambiguous meanings?

We exist, we are made from the substance of the universe, we have utilized many terms in many languages to articulate an understanding of the data we have received from that substance, being made from that substance, living in and as a part or mechanism of that substance, which is the universe and in another self-chosen language, "God".

Gracias,
thank you,
merci,
dankie,
danke,
mahalo.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

God Bless You.

I have heard one has to know a mystic to become one, and mystics are Disciples that go one step further, pondering the Gift of The Holy Spirit and even the 277 or so dogmas of the faith. Your words ring true and are very special, thanks.

For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen.

The logic of the Trinity of the Universe becomes the logic of the Trinity of through The Christ in all mankind, becoming again the Image of Creation.

To me in logic, the god of infallibility is from the spirit that never fails in all of creation and is the spirit of immortality that becomes the New Reality manifesting eternity. To me in logic, the universe will be become static in unfailing yet dynamic in the becoming again from the fulfilled eternal love through His Passion for all.

Peace always,
Stephen

 

[Revoltingest]

In logic, the Soul is the Temple of the Flesh and the Spirit and logically is the Trinity of the Mortal Body.

What are your premises from which to logically arrive at those conclusions?

In Logic:
For from Him and through Him and for Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever! Amen. Romans, 11:36
In logic, the mind of God is delivered through The Power of the Holy Spirit Person as God through the Person of Jesus as God becoming The Christ for all mankind becoming again the image of the Creator God for God the Father in the intelligence of infallible eternity and one in being.

I'm seeing claims.
But no logical reasoning.

 

[F1fan]

We exist, we are made from the substance of the universe, we have utilized many terms in many languages to articulate an understanding of the data we have received from that substance, being made from that substance, living in and as a part or mechanism of that substance, which is the universe and in another self-chosen language, "God".

Gracias,
thank you,
merci,
dankie,
danke,
mahalo.

But why use the word at all when there are better and more accurate alternatives? Have you ever questioned your motives so you can better understand yourself? Could it be you are trapped in a certain illusion and feel comfortable there, but afraid of letting it go?

 

[firedragon]

Does this God of yours interact directly with humans .. like the anthropomorphic God YHWH ?

How do you deem the Jewish God anthropomorphic? Just curious. Thank you.

 

[Balthazzar]

But why use the word at all when there are better and more accurate alternatives? Have you ever questioned your motives so you can better understand yourself? Could it be you are trapped in a certain illusion and feel comfortable there, but afraid of letting it go?

Possibly, but I like the term, I'm accustomed to the term, and the term seems to be in need of use, so I utilize the term in reference. I also reference Einstein, and Darwin, and Newton, Jesus, Buddha, among others. God is a vague and general term, but so is the term universe. Each planet or galaxy, etc having their own unique qualities, contributing data from themselves to us for our processing pleasure.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

True, afraid of letting go of the Old Spirit making the jump, in what becomes autonomous, becoming the Will of Creation through the Power of The Holy Spirit, to stand self-righteos and justified before God. To me in logic all mankind is created mortal and corrupt from the spirit through the flesh and becoming sanctified immortal and incorruptibe to becoming again glorified and transfigered in the divine intelligence, in infallible certainty, the "language" that will never fail.

We know how to judge through the power, and we know we are not to judge others, and to preach to but ourselves through choice so we become.

To me in logic what is separated is unique characteristics. What is common for all spirit based religions is the Spirit. And ultimately what unites is the Common Spirit as the intelligence of Creation becoming the Pattern that will never fail in all cases.

Peace always,
Stephen

 

[Sargonski]

How do you deem the Jewish God anthropomorphic? Just curious. Thank you.

I didn't ? I have no idea who the God of the Jews (every Jew) is ? Nor was I talking about the God of Judaism. The God I mentioned who depicted in the Bible anthropomorphic was Lord YHWH - one of the main Gods of the Israelites

This God is described with numerous human attributes in the OT -- along with his Twin Lord Jealous. === "I am a Jealous God" the intro to the 10 commands .. the second set that ended up in the covenant box .. as opposed to the first set which most people are familiar.

Curious - how did you not know that YHWH of the OT was depicted as anthropomorphic --- a xenophobic - genocidal - flip flopping God with the most petty and nasty of human characteristics and flaws ?

 

[Sargonski]

Exactly, it wasn't that hard.
I've always thought that one could define a God into or out of existence.

Clearly it was quite difficult for some -- I stated this post one (1) .. and it has taken you how many posts to get it .. the whole point of my asking for a definition of God ... prior to which .. God is anything you want her - them - it , to be .. now isn't it .. and one can not make claims about any evidence .. presence .. absence or possibility of this thing .. until you define what this thing is .. Right !

 

[firedragon]

The God I mentioned who depicted in the Bible anthropomorphic was Lord YHWH

Well, that's the Jewish God.

Anyway, leave that aside. How is YHWH anthropomorphic? That's what I am interested in. Yes. Sometimes the Tanakh anthropomorphizes God. But it's very scarce.

Curious - how did you not know that YHWH of the OT was depicted as anthropomorphic --- a xenophobic - genocidal - flip flopping God with the most petty and nasty of human characteristics and flaws ?

At this moment, I will not address all of those things you are speaking about.

Thanks for responding.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

Adam and Eve chose the Figleaf as sacrifice for atonement and they were told to pick the chosen sacrifice of animals.

Peace always,
Stephen

 

[firedragon]

The God I mentioned who depicted in the Bible anthropomorphic was Lord YHWH

Well, that's the Jewish God.

Anyway, leave that aside. How is YHWH anthropomorphic? That's what I am interested in. Yes. Sometimes the Tanakh anthropomorphizes God. But it's very scarce.

Curious - how did you not know that YHWH of the OT was depicted as anthropomorphic --- a xenophobic - genocidal - flip flopping God with the most petty and nasty of human characteristics and flaws ?

At this moment, I will not address all of those things you are speaking about.

Thanks for responding.

 

[George-ananda]

That has nothing to do with "science" and everything with reason and logic...

That's what I'm saying too.

I grasp your opinion. The problem is just that this kind of reasoning is a very good way to believe things that aren't true.

Using reason and logic we hypothesize from best sources and refine that over time. That is how human reasoning addresses new things and grows in understanding.

From Vedic Science, Theosophy and modern parapsychology I am refining my worldview. That is better than not reasoning and waiting for proof. A scientific mind will create hypotheses in the face of things science doesn't currently understand.

 

[Nakosis]

2:164
Original Arabic narration/text from Muhammad's time:

وَاِلٰـہُکُمۡ اِلٰہٌ وَّاحِدٌ ۚ لَاۤ اِلٰہَ اِلَّا ہُوَ الرَّحۡمٰنُ الرَّحِیۡمُ ﴿۱۶۴﴾٪

2:164
And your God is One God; there is no God but He, the Gracious, the Merciful.

Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search

In Arabic, Chinese, English, French, German, Italian, Spanish and Urdu.

www.alislam.org

Above, G-d is well defined, right, please?

Regards

Well, it provides a couple of attributes. It describes a God that identifies as male, is singular, is gracious and merciful.

These are statements that you would have to take on faith unless you could provide some conclusive evidence to support them.

 

[Nakosis]

Every time I see the thread's title, it still looks
like a claim that there's evidence for....
Absence of a god isn't possible.

Better would be...
Evidence for the absence of a god is not possible.

Ok, I guess that makes sense.
We are asking folks to provide evidence for(that) the absence of a god is not possible.

 

[Nakosis]

Clearly it was quite difficult for some -- I stated this post one (1) .. and it has taken you how many posts to get it .. the whole point of my asking for a definition of God ... prior to which .. God is anything you want her - them - it , to be .. now isn't it .. and one can not make claims about any evidence .. presence .. absence or possibility of this thing .. until you define what this thing is .. Right !

However, how I defined or you defined God was not important as the logic would work the same. Only that some definitions of God couldn't be logically supported. We only showed a couple that could which wasn't really the point of the thread.

 

[Sargonski]

It appears you are asking if a tree that falls in the woods makes a sound if no one is there to hear it.

I did not ask anything of the sort .. yet another nonsensical made up strawman fantasy on your part to deflect away from answering the simple yes/no questions I asked. This thougt avoidance tactic you keep engaging in is reminiscient of those under cult mind control - implanted by the cult ldeader -- triggered when the adherents is confronted with ideas or information that conflicts with cult dogma. Understand that I do not think your symptoms are from Relligious Cult indoctrination. I am curious where this reaction is coming from .. this hard deflection from answering simple question..

How can one call themselves a believer something <X> when they don't know what <X> is .. are unable to define <X> in any rational way - such that they are are unable to differentiate the power of <X> from that of a human. ... such that there is no quantifiable benefit of <X> to a human nor a benefit from belief in X because belief in X is belief in nothing which contradicting this individual's claim that they do not believe in nothing because nothing does not exist.

The foundation of your belief is fallacy and contradiction. The question I am asking is why you refuse acknowledge these cracks in the foundation .. doing this dance of avoidance and disingenuous oblivion .. meandering on about the sound of one hand clapping .. pretending that was the question you were asked .. instead of addressing the question of whether or not this God you belief in has more power than a Human .. and if not .. what is the point of belief in such a God ... one you cannot describe and know nothing about. Please keep in mind that Everything is not a description of anything quantifiable .. quantify and differentiate mate .. that is the name of this game.

 

[Balthazzar]

I did not ask anything of the sort .. yet another nonsensical made up strawman fantasy on your part to deflect away from answering the simple yes/no questions I asked. This thougt avoidance tactic you keep engaging in is reminiscient of those under cult mind control - implanted by the cult ldeader -- triggered when the adherents is confronted with ideas or information that conflicts with cult dogma. Understand that I do not think your symptoms are from Relligious Cult indoctrination. I am curious where this reaction is coming from .. this hard deflection from answering simple question..

How can one call themselves a believer something <X> when they don't know what <X> is .. are unable to define <X> in any rational way - such that they are are unable to differentiate the power of <X> from that of a human. ... such that there is no quantifiable benefit of <X> to a human nor a benefit from belief in X because belief in X is belief in nothing which contradicting this individual's claim that they do not believe in nothing because nothing does not exist.

The foundation of your belief is fallacy and contradiction. The question I am asking is why you refuse acknowledge these cracks in the foundation .. doing this dance of avoidance and disingenuous oblivion .. meandering on about the sound of one hand clapping .. pretending that was the question you were asked .. instead of addressing the question of whether or not this God you belief in has more power than a Human .. and if not .. what is the point of belief in such a God ... one you cannot describe and know nothing about. Please keep in mind that Everything is not a description of anything quantifiable .. quantify and differentiate mate .. that is the name of this game.

Have you not acknowledged the expressed other hand associated with the Hands of human origins? I thought I had made this clear enough. Apparently not. I can't decide whether you're being disingenuous or if you're just not comprehending the concept of one being two, and two becoming more, yet all existing within that "nucleus" that enables life. The throne region, specifically according to the literature I've read about angels. In other words, the "universe" and all its planetary bodies.

 

[firedragon]

It describes a God that identifies as male

That's one of the most absurd things I have ever heard in my life.

Based on what linguistic evidence are you claiming this? With what scholarship?

Please do explain.