Evidence That the Absence of a God is Not Possible

[Sargonski]

Acknowledgement of that which has been stated as a conscious organism, experiencing the reality that is in question, and navigation between sides of the coin (the metaphor), and the many variables that exist within that space itself, seem to have you in doubt of the understanding I adhere to and acknowledge as a conscious organism you doubt I myself acknowledge, to which you declare a logical fallacy held.

How is it you find such difficulty acknowledging a coin (God metaphor) to have two sides and many attributes (characteristics) existing within that space between? I experience as I am and when I leave or lay my soul to rest, the same will be experienced as I have experienced by those who are also of that substance, able. You seem to acknowledge consciousness as the determining factor. I acknowledge consciousness as opportunity to know as I know at all.

I have no idea what you claim I have difficulty acknowledging a twin God .. with many attributes .. when I was me who brought up the concept ? What I don't understand is why you are making things up and attributing these to me .. pure undadulted strawman fallacy.

I also acknowledte that the "I AM" moment .. some refer to this as the soul - can not happen until ~ 22 weeks into a pregnancy ..

BUT - what does any of this have to do with your failure to provide a rational definition of God .. such that you have absolutely no idea who or what your God is or might be .. never mind knowing the God of Jesus and conduct required of this God ?

As you put it -- how is it you have difficulty acknowledging the fact that your foundation is based on fallacy and deception .. with a big does of misdirection ? Like a leaf floating in the wind .. who knows where it is going to land .. no rhyme or reason .. but to deflect away from the "Bad thought".

Do you have any understanding of destructive cult mind control Brother Balth ?

 

[Balthazzar]

I have no idea what you claim I have difficulty acknowledging a twin God .. with many attributes .. when I was me who brought up the concept ? What I don't understand is why you are making things up and attributing these to me .. pure undadulted strawman fallacy.

I also acknowledte that the "I AM" moment .. some refer to this as the soul - can not happen until ~ 22 weeks into a pregnancy ..

BUT - what does any of this have to do with your failure to provide a rational definition of God .. such that you have absolutely no idea who or what your God is or might be .. never mind knowing the God of Jesus and conduct required of this God ?

As you put it -- how is it you have difficulty acknowledging the fact that your foundation is based on fallacy and deception .. with a big does of misdirection ? Like a leaf floating in the wind .. who knows where it is going to land .. no rhyme or reason .. but to deflect away from the "Bad thought".

Do you have any understanding of destructive cult mind control Brother Balth ?

That would be, Brother "Balt"

Each part works as a complete name and in conjunction together, from the first element to the last of it. I'm not a Czar, but I'm sure we all come from somewhere. The name itself meaning:

"Baal protects the king"

For me to make sense of my surroundings, what we know as the universe, and our place in it on earth, I am required to utilize terms able to connect the concept and that conceptualized from past to present in an effort to articulate the experience that has been life for humans. The term God is an adequate term to utilize for that aim, that direction moving backward and forward while remaining present with the processing. My foundation is also based on what we have learned about the cosmos, about the mind, and about life on earth and how we over the ages have learned to connect the dots with similar intent. The fields of science, religion, literature, art, music, and ongoing exploration of the unknown, drives us towards a more and more coherent understanding than in times past. God and universe - God is Universe, and all things formed from that which it consists of, is what I also term as the "All", to which nothing existing does not belong, and that which does not yet exist, it too will belong to this substance as itself once it has formed.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

How have the experiments aimed at replicating the production of fully-formed RNA or DNA by miraculous intervention by a creator-god been going?

There is absolutely no scientific evidence that God created life. Nor can there ever be, since science can only explore those things which are measurable, and we cannot measure God.

 

[McBell]

How have the experiments aimed at replicating the production of fully-formed RNA or DNA by miraculous intervention by a creator-god been going?

then comes the issue of which one of the proposed creator gods is responsible....

 

[IndigoChild5559]

"fully formed RNA"

Sir, "fully formed RNA" is not considered life.

I'm not sure why this is so difficult for you. You are a highly intelligent and educated person, and this is far from rocket science.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There is absolutely no scientific evidence that God created life. Nor can there ever be, since science can only explore those things which are measurable, and we cannot measure God.

Since anything that affects the physical world is potentially measurable, at least indirectly if nothing else, this sounds like quite an admission.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Since anything that affects the physical world is potentially measurable,

That's quite an assumption.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That's quite an assumption.

No, it follows necessarily.

If a thing has physical effects, those physical effects are themselves the measurable evidence.

 

[Sargonski]

That would be, Brother "Balt"

Each part works as a complete name and in conjunction together, from the first element to the last of it. I'm not a Czar, but I'm sure we all come from somewhere. The name itself meaning:

"Baal protects the king"

For me to make sense of my surroundings, what we know as the universe, and our place in it on earth, I am required to utilize terms able to connect the concept and that conceptualized from past to present in an effort to articulate the experience that has been life for humans. The term God is an adequate term to utilize for that aim, that direction moving backward and forward while remaining present with the processing. My foundation is also based on what we have learned about the cosmos, about the mind, and about life on earth and how we over the ages have learned to connect the dots with similar intent. The fields of science, religion, literature, art, music, and ongoing exploration of the unknown, drives us towards a more and more coherent understanding than in times past. God and universe - God is Universe, and all things formed from that which it consists of, is what I also term as the "All", to which nothing existing does not belong, and that which does not yet exist, it too will belong to this substance as itself once it has formed.

Completely avoiding the discussion of God's definition .. the false foundational cracks pointed out quite clear .. Pillars of Nothing a good analogy .. you give a completely new definition .. no longer the God of Everything .. and infinite length but one with beginning and end in a circular metaphysical time warp ... har har har .. don't laugh .. Brother Balt ... I am serious ... and .. lucky for you .. one who .. with scientific acumen .. even then .. read "mystycism and the New Physics" .. and "Dancing with the Wu Li Masters" prior to reaching one and twenty .. when I heard a wise man say .. give crowns and pounds and guineas .. but not your heart away...

Now .. Later .. having returned to University .. end up taking 400 level quantum Chemistry class . go thorugh all the founding fathers .. doing the shrodinger wave equations .. particle in a box problem .. wild stuff and to be sure "MY definition of God" factors in these things .. and it is here where you can really prove Everything is God of nothing .. but ! .. none of thi means anything without the "I AM" moment now does it. ..or as the Monty Python version "I drink therefor I am" .. and in this evidence is the proof that the soul is infinite ... which settles your queries on science and religion... philosophy and art .. the Holy Grail at your service har har har.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

No, it follows necessarily.

If a thing has physical effects, those physical effects are themselves the measurable evidence.

We aren't talking about measuring effects. We are talking about the sometimes inability to measure their CAUSES.

 

[Balthazzar]

Completely avoiding the discussion of God's definition .. the false foundational cracks pointed out quite clear .. Pillars of Nothing a good analogy .. you give a completely new definition .. no longer the God of Everything .. and infinite length but one with beginning and end in a circular metaphysical time warp ... har har har .. don't laugh .. Brother Balt ... I am serious ... and .. lucky for you .. one who .. with scientific acumen .. even then .. read "mystycism and the New Physics" .. and "Dancing with the Wu Li Masters" prior to reaching one and twenty .. when I heard a wise man say .. give crowns and pounds and guineas .. but not your heart away...

Now .. Later .. having returned to University .. end up taking 400 level quantum Chemistry class . go thorugh all the founding fathers .. doing the shrodinger wave equations .. particle in a box problem .. wild stuff and to be sure "MY definition of God" factors in these things .. and it is here where you can really prove Everything is God of nothing .. but ! .. none of thi means anything without the "I AM" moment now does it. ..or as the Monty Python version "I drink therefor I am" .. and in this evidence is the proof that the soul is infinite ... which settles your queries on science and religion... philosophy and art .. the Holy Grail at your service har har har.

Have a nice day

 

[BrightShadow]

What is north of the north pole?

Aha!
Everyone cheer!
A deflector is here!
with all his gear,
totally insincere!

So, what happened before the Big Bang? Why the deflection?

It is nice to slice an "event" in a couple of pieces and then analyze one piece to promote your position - isn't it?
In a grown up world - a sane person wouldn't make an argument in that fashion! Non-believers are all on the same boat heading into "nowhere".

What you have is - minor realities expanding into or coming out of fantasyland!

Fallacy of composition - in its finest form!
A Tire is made of rubber, vehicle has tires; therefore vehicle is made of rubber!

The only person you are fooling with such argument- is yourself.
By the way - you are an atheist of the 3rd kind! (that is not a compliment!)

I am not here
for any puppeteer
from out of this sphere
who is here to smear.

 

[BrightShadow]

Honest answer is we don't know.

Then you should start thinking about that rather than waiting for scientists to spoon feed you.
Where did your so-called "first matter" or energy come from?
If your answer is - it was always there - then all you need to do is wonder if it was just some ordinary "matter" or "energy" (with no intelligence connection) or was it initiated by something smart.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

We aren't talking about measuring effects. We are talking about the sometimes inability to measure their CAUSES.

Measuring the effect of a thing is how we measure the thing that caused the effect.

For example, do you think a mercury thermometer actually measures temperature? It's measuring the volume of liquid, not the temperature directly. It's just that we've figured out the correlation between temperature and volume, so we can mark the volume increments on the thermometer with the corresponding temperature.

This is how empirical evidence works. We're often measuring a thing indirectly by measuring its effects.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Aha!
Everyone cheer!
A deflector is here!
with all his gear,
totally insincere!

So, what happened before the Big Bang? Why the deflection?

No deflection. An analogy, which clearly went over your head.
The big bang happened at T = 0.

"before" the big bang is like "north" of north.
There is no north of north. Just like there is no before the start of time.

Whatever happened at T = 0 that triggered the big bang, it happened AT T = 0. Not "before" that.
And to answer what it was that happened there... my answer is that I don't know.

It is nice to slice an "event" in a couple of pieces and then analyze one piece to promote your position - isn't it?

Not sure what you are talking about.

In a grown up world - a sane person wouldn't make an argument in that fashion! Non-believers are all on the same boat heading into "nowhere".

If you say so.
Meanwhile, it still make no sense to talk about "before" time itself even exists.

What you have is - minor realities expanding into or coming out of fantasyland!

Do I?
I don't remember making any such claim.

Fallacy of composition - in its finest form!
A Tire is made of rubber, vehicle has tires; therefore vehicle is made of rubber!

I don't remember making any kind of argument either. So not sure what you are talking about here either.
You seem triggered. Why?

The only person you are fooling with such argument- is yourself.

What argument?

By the way - you are an atheist of the 3rd kind! (that is not a compliment!)

Ok. No idea what that means, but ok. I guess.

I am not here
for any puppeteer
from out of this sphere
who is here to smear.

Uhu, uhu.

So, do you have something productive to say aside from all these ad homs and strawmen, or...?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Then you should start thinking about that rather than waiting for scientists to spoon feed you.

Why?

What makes you think an unqualified lay person is going to succeed where the brightest experts in physics are failing?

Where did your so-called "first matter" or energy come from?
If your answer is - it was always there - then all you need to do is wonder if it was just some ordinary "matter" or "energy" (with no intelligence connection) or was it initiated by something smart.

Why would it have to be something "smart"?

Smells like a seriously false dichotomy. One that only exists to sneak in you a priori religious bias.

 

[F1fan]

Then you should start thinking about that rather than waiting for scientists to spoon feed you.

Sorry, but experts in the sciences are the authority for any knowledge. The irony of your sarcasm is that you as a religious person holding beliefs that are contrary to facts and reasoning are accusing the educated for being "spoon fed". Scientists follow facts and data, and show their work. Your religious leaders have no facts, just a dogma that you have adopted without due scrutiny as a rational human.

Where did your so-called "first matter" or energy come from?

You haven't learned anything. There is no reason to believe matter hasn't always existed. And you assuming anything was crwated or caused from nothing only begs the question where the First Cause came from. You can't escape the dilemma you create. Matter has always existed, or infimite regression of causes.

If your answer is - it was always there - then all you need to do is wonder if it was just some ordinary "matter" or "energy" (with no intelligence connection) or was it initiated by something smart.

What "something smart"? It's obviously not believers as they can't learn that their First Cause belief has no basis in fact, or plausibility. It comes straight from trying to make the Genesis account have merit, which it doesn't.

And still no explanation for why your God created cancers. This is your assertion, that a God created life and all around us. If you are going to keep promoting this, or implying it, the facts of nature all have to be explained, and that includes the cancers that kill our children and loved ones. One of my oldest friends died of Leukemia at 40. He beat it twice but it got him the third time it came back. He was a good bike racer and an excellent artist. Explain the purpose behind God killing my friend in such a painful way.

 

[Sargonski]

Have a nice day

How was it you were offended when great thanks and pledges of gratitude are in order. I I answered all your questions .. provided you with the metaphysical solution to Everything that you were looking for . the "Holy Grail" ... scientific proof that the soul is infinite and that there is life after death !? Did you never read "Dancing with the Wu Li Masters ? you should I guarantee you will enjoy.

 

[Balthazzar]

How was it you were offended when great thanks and pledges of gratitude are in order. I I answered all your questions .. provided you with the metaphysical solution to Everything that you were looking for . the "Holy Grail" ... scientific proof that the soul is infinite and that there is life after death !? Did you never read "Dancing with the Wu Li Masters ? you should I guarantee you will enjoy.

It's the circular nature of the discourse that negates the stance of something abundantly evident in life. Do I wish to know God? I already know God. I likewise understand the minute nature of my knowing. For stability purposes, the grounding of electrical current and activity, I prefer to keep my awareness in a place that affords me this stability. The dance itself between pleasure and pain, light and dark, benefit and detriment, life and death, heat and cold, etc. requires a line to be drawn able to accommodate my personal need. If not, a person could very well find themselves in the clouds of oblivion, too far reaching on one side of the spectrum, necessitated in life to hep equalize and balance the sum total whole.

 

[Sargonski]

It's the circular nature of the discourse that negates the stance of something abundantly evident in life. Do I wish to know God? I already know God. I likewise understand the minute nature of my knowing. For stability purposes, the grounding of electrical current and activity, I prefer to keep my awareness in a place that affords me this stability. The dance itself between pleasure and pain, light and dark, benefit and detriment, life and death, heat and cold, etc. requires a line to be drawn able to accommodate my personal need. If not, a person could very well find themselves in the clouds of oblivion, too far reaching on one side of the spectrum, necessitated in life to hep equalize and balance the sum total whole.

"Nothing is abundantly evident in life but, - I know God and understand the minute nature of my knowing"

Can you make sense out of this contradictory spaghetti on the wall response ? Nothing is evident in life you claim but somehow God is evident and you know and can explain (because you understand) how this God is evident in life.

OK -- if you can explain this evidence for God -- Fire away .. the crowd is all ears .. and is something I have been asking for 10 times .. in 10 posts .. please define your God .. with valid definition .. since you know and understand so well .. and explain why the soul is infinite ... the one and only thing that is abundantly evident that we know for sure.

"Stability - Grounding" .. as discussed - difficult to achieve without solid foundation = one not builty on fallacy and deception .. hearken not to the wolves in sheeps clothing .. why look to the dark when you have a true Prophet of Light on which to hear. The forked tongue of the snake charmers is not the p;ath to stability grounded in solid foundation Brother Balt hearken instead to the life giving words of the Prophet -- and it will become abundantly evident that the Soul is infinate .. and only then will you understand the nature of knowing .