-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
God Debate
- Thread starter pandamonk
- Start date
Bennettresearch
Politically Incorrect
Hi Pandamonk,
Before I say anything, I have to check you "definitions" that you are laying out here. Who said, and can you back up, the concept of an unchanging God? These are the paradoxical statements that pervade your arguments. You are defining God and asking me to defend the concept. Can't do that. You have not defined God.
So I'll take up the challenge and state that, at this point, the simple definition would be that God is the life force of the Universe. How does this tie in with the material? God is supposed to have created everything, Therefore, where did God come from? This is where we lose our ability to comprehend such a thing as why there is anything in existance at all? This is why God cannot be defined in a finite sense because we lack the ability to make such a definition. Science, or logic cannot explain why there is a spiritual nature to mankind. Putting all inadequate or silly representations of it aside, it does exist. Some people connect with it and some don't. Yes, through spirituality, even a former atheist like myself can decide that there is definitely SOMETHING that is driving our very existence. And so, even if I can't quantify God for an empiricist, I have come to know that SOMETHING exists outside of our 4 dimensional existence.
To conclude, to restrict your search for answers to the purely material existence and the empirical observation of science, or to investigate it logically, is to deny the very thing that brings about a belief in God in the first place. That is why I said that I hope you find your own spirituality and upon examining this within yourself, there is something more to our existence than what we can see, touch or feel.
Before I say anything, I have to check you "definitions" that you are laying out here. Who said, and can you back up, the concept of an unchanging God? These are the paradoxical statements that pervade your arguments. You are defining God and asking me to defend the concept. Can't do that. You have not defined God.
So I'll take up the challenge and state that, at this point, the simple definition would be that God is the life force of the Universe. How does this tie in with the material? God is supposed to have created everything, Therefore, where did God come from? This is where we lose our ability to comprehend such a thing as why there is anything in existance at all? This is why God cannot be defined in a finite sense because we lack the ability to make such a definition. Science, or logic cannot explain why there is a spiritual nature to mankind. Putting all inadequate or silly representations of it aside, it does exist. Some people connect with it and some don't. Yes, through spirituality, even a former atheist like myself can decide that there is definitely SOMETHING that is driving our very existence. And so, even if I can't quantify God for an empiricist, I have come to know that SOMETHING exists outside of our 4 dimensional existence.
To conclude, to restrict your search for answers to the purely material existence and the empirical observation of science, or to investigate it logically, is to deny the very thing that brings about a belief in God in the first place. That is why I said that I hope you find your own spirituality and upon examining this within yourself, there is something more to our existence than what we can see, touch or feel.
pandamonk
Active Member
It is not up to me to define God, as it is not me who believes in a god. To have a debate about God we need to be clear on what the believer believes God is. I have, though, given the widely accepted view of God throughout this debate. And the unchanging god came from the good old bible itselfBennettresearch said:
What you said does not even make sense, "You are defining God and asking me to defend the concept. Can't do that. You have not defined God." I'm defining God and asking you to defend the concept, yet i have not defined God? Hmm, ok, can't see how that works?!
And how do you know this if you don't even know what God is? Who says there is a spiritual nature to mankind? Not the atheist scientist, this is why they don't try to explain it, lol. It is the religious people of this world that believe there is a spiritual nature to mankind. Now you may say that there are religious scientist, but why would they try to explain why there is a spiritual nature to mankind, they already "know" that God is the answer, lol. Why are you sure that it does exist, when you don't even know what it is? You think God is the creator of the universe, and is external. Why not say that the universe is eternal and cut out the middle man? Why do we need him? If he is the only thing that does not need a creator then why not accept that the universe does not need a creator. It's much more of a possibility than an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, immutable, transcendent, etc, etc etc, being who controls everything and yet is impossible.Bennettresearch said:
Why are you so sure that i need to find something that i believe does not exist? Why are you so sure it does exist? Have you not heard of imagination, maybe it is that which makes you think there is something spiritual about this life? Personally i do not see anything spiritual or supernatural about this world, and why should i?Bennettresearch said:
Bennettresearch
Politically Incorrect
OK Pandamonk,
Nice denial and challenge, but you are relying upon archaic representations of God and the motive behind such statements are to persuade any challengers that when they say what the word of God is, it stands that way forever. As far as God himself, to deny that this God would be changing and maybe even evolving is to deny what we observe in the universe. That is perpetual change, the universe is not static and presuppose that God is static is a misconception. Even the Bible cannot define God. And as to your challenge about why I would know that SOMETHING exists, it is through personal experience. I cannot present it as proof, and wouldn't even try. THerefore, I stand by my statement that God cannot be defined in a macro sense. My hope that you would discover spirituality is only to say that if you had any of this kind of experience and analyzed it, it would give you better perspective. It is easy to doubt everything. I grew up around people like that and it was a pain in the #%&. They presented no real substantial alternate view, only denial. Of course they felt they knew all about morals and things and blah blah blah. I think that you are wasting your time arguing in this forum and should maybe persue a more productive line of study. You cannot prove there is not a God so you will always stalemate.
Nice denial and challenge, but you are relying upon archaic representations of God and the motive behind such statements are to persuade any challengers that when they say what the word of God is, it stands that way forever. As far as God himself, to deny that this God would be changing and maybe even evolving is to deny what we observe in the universe. That is perpetual change, the universe is not static and presuppose that God is static is a misconception. Even the Bible cannot define God. And as to your challenge about why I would know that SOMETHING exists, it is through personal experience. I cannot present it as proof, and wouldn't even try. THerefore, I stand by my statement that God cannot be defined in a macro sense. My hope that you would discover spirituality is only to say that if you had any of this kind of experience and analyzed it, it would give you better perspective. It is easy to doubt everything. I grew up around people like that and it was a pain in the #%&. They presented no real substantial alternate view, only denial. Of course they felt they knew all about morals and things and blah blah blah. I think that you are wasting your time arguing in this forum and should maybe persue a more productive line of study. You cannot prove there is not a God so you will always stalemate.
Mike182
Flaming Queer
ok, for arguments sake, assume god does in fact existpandamonk said:
have you ever seen "the life of brian" - monty python
someone pointed this out in a different thread, that at one point in the film, brian's shoe falls off, and the crowd chasing him inturprit this differently, soem take off their left shoe, some bow down and worship the shoe, otehr ignore it and chase him some more - but they are all focused upon brian
this is the same with scripture, we argue over its meanings adn significance, but we are all focused on god in our own way - thus we are all focused on and following the one God, yet in different ways - the simple fact is, people worship God how they choose to, and we all choose different ways, thus conflict is inevitable
but you are quite correct, this does nto in fact prove god's existence, is proof of god what you are looking for? faith must come before proof, or else (in my oppinion) that faith is meaningless
The god i follow is "that that which nothing greater can be concieved" - god is so great that we can only grasp some ideas of how great he is, so a God that you can 'prove' is not the God that i follow
C_P
pandamonk
Active Member
Did you actually read all of my last post, or only the one which said "God's word is settled in heaven; it will not change." If you look you will see that the rest say along the lines of "There is absolutely no change with God". Well the time that the idea of God was made up, they did not observe the universe, in the sense that we do. They knew nothing of evolution, and all you are trying to do is bring the idea of God up-to-date. God, if he exists, he is unchanging, no matter what. The bible does define God. Where do think my definitions came from? You do know that humans have great imaginations, don't you? Maybe your "personal experience" was of your imagination, like "outer body experiences", read here. Why was it "a pain in the #%&"? Because they did not blindly follow your beliefs, because you, or others, said so? Who needs an alternative? Why should everyone always have a belief in a deity? What is wrong with atheism? Is it just unattractive? They may well have known about morals! Why do religious people, especially Christians, believe that they are the only ones that a good, moral people? Well, let me tell you, it is not moral to just blindly follow rules like a robot. What would happen if those rules were shown to be wrong, or your God was proven not to exist? Would you turn your back on those morals? I know/have talked to many who would. Atheists don't have a rule giver and yet, many of them are just as moral as any Christian, if not more. I will only stalemate, because the people i am arguing with do not think about what i'm saying, and only have one thought in mind. They will not see that what they have said makes absolutely no sense, and they will not accept defeat. And like you, they will ignore the question and give a politician style answer. Or just completely ignore the argument/post!:banghead3Bennettresearch said:
pandamonk
Active Member
I can conceive of something greater! A God which is so great that we can grasp all ideas of how he is, and therefore avoid all the wars/fights/arguments etc. Is that not greater? Then does that not show that the "god" you pointed out is not greater "than which nothing greater can be conceived" and therefore is not God?:jam: No i have not seen "the life of brian", and i think it is a good point. The only thing is, that Brian was not a god. If such a thing happened with a god, he would make sure everyone understood, to avoid conflict, and if there was conflict he would show the right way, in a way that everyone would understand, and believe:shout. Seeing as he has not done this, your "the life of brian" point does not hold much.corrupt_preist said:
Mike182
Flaming Queer
then this is not Godpandamonk said:
as my god is so great he is above human understanding, to suggest our minds are greater than his in that we can concieve everything about him, also suggests that we are superior to him, how can we be superior than the ultimate souce of power and wisdom?
no, brian was an allegory for jesus, who did things which were interprited differently by people. we all see the things he did in different ways because we are not all the same, we don't all have the same maturity and experiences, so we get different ideas about his actions
and this is obviously true, because otherwise there would not be such a split between churches on certain issues
but the overwritting fact that shines through is that all christians are focused on God and on Christ!
C_P
Kowalski
Active Member
Exactly how do you know things which you clearly state humans cannot know ?How do you see God if not through your human eyes ? How do you know god always was ?. what do you mean god will allow peolple to see from less than human eyes ? what does that mean excatly ?. I put it to you, you know nothing other that what you've read in the Bible and heard in Church. I put it to you that you really have no idea about what you are proposing and that what you've said is nothing other than hearsay and your personal view, which by all the empirical evidence is plainly nonsensical.fromthe heart said:God,Jesus and the Holy Ghost are this and so much more...some are able to believe some as you are not...If you try to see God through human eyes then you don't understand just how powerful my God really is...to second guess Him would IMPO make YOU the ignorant one...God reveals things to we mere mortal humans as we grow in Him and are able to understand the workings of our creator.God had a plan when He created our world,He made nothing by mistake,humans can't see the BIG picture God sees when we see life in general. NO ONE created God...He always was and that in itself says we can not even comprehend His greatness...believing is by choice,faith is by choice...some are so intimidated by Him that they feel it necessary to come up with something to explain away everything God has done....one day all will be enlightened...and amazed...God will then let us see from less human eyes and it will all make sense to us as well. Say what you will about gods and goddesses that aren't the great I AM. There IS only one creator and despite the big bang THEORY...there will always be only one great I AM. Question as you will but He IS and always will be. Peace to you my friend.
Cheers
K
pandamonk
Active Member
This is not what i said! You have twisted my words to mean what you want them to mean. I said i can conceive of a being greater, ie. one that we can understand, this does not take away from the greatness of the being, and does not suggest that we are superior to it. It suggests that the being is so great that it has allowed us to conceive of it. A god which does not allow its followers the mind capacity obviously has something to hide. You must remember that God made us(for arguments sake anyway)so it was his choice not to allow us to fully comprehend him, even though he knew there would be terrible conflict. My argument is that i could think of a being greater than a god we can't fully comprehend, and that is, a being so great we can conceive it in total. This is greater than not being able to conceive of it because it avoids conflict which will inevitably happen with an inconceivable god. It does not take away from the infinite powers, knowledge, etc of the being it just avoids the inevitable conflict.corrupt_priest said:
Why did Jesus not explain himself clearly enough that everyone would interpret him as he wished? He was the son of God after all. How could Jesus allow such a terrible inevitable conflict between his followers? Did he not love them? Also, wouldn't God step in and resolve the conflict when it happened? He, supposedly, loves us infinitely, so how can he sit back and allow us to kill each other/ hate each other, etc?corrupt_priest said:
Mike182
Flaming Queer
so what you are saying is that god has infinite power and wisdom, but we can understand this power and wisdompandamonk said:
if this is what you are saying, it is a contradiction - because the human mind simply cannot concieve a quantity that is infinite - therefor it is also impossible to concieve a being with infinit quantities of power and wisdom, therefor any being with power and wisdom we can understand, does not have infinite power and wisdom, and therefor is not God
well, communication could be one reason
the human method of verbal communication is very problematic and flawwed. you could say/write and mean one thing, i could inturprit it to mean another. the same is true with actions aswell. meanings change through time and culture, they do not stay the same, thus inturpritations change aswell
and interfear with our free will, one of the greatest gift he gave us? i don't think so. this comes under the problem of evil in the christian faith, and should probably be put in a different thread
but i think you've missed a crutial point though, i have just had a fairly fundamental disagreement with aqualung about priestly authority over baptism, but i still love her as a person, and respect her faith! i don't hate her or want to kill her because she believes differently to me .......... C_P
pandamonk
Active Member
NO:banghead3Aghh, stop trying to play with my words. I'm not saying we understand God in every way. I'm saying, i can think of a greater God than the one you mention, it would be one which is infinite and yet we can understand, and i know the human mind cannot conceive a quality that is infinite, but who's fault is that? God's! So if he had made our minds capable of conceiving a quality that is infinite, without making us infinite, it would be better because there would be no conflict between us, and because that would have been better than what is it now, the being/God i can conceive of would be greater than the one you mentioned!understand? Don't read between the lines, read what is actually said. It seems to me that many Christians have this disability.corrupt_priest said:
Yes i agree, but seeing as Jesus is the son of God, he would, or at least God would, have the power and knowledge to make it mean the same forever.corrupt_priest said:
He does not need to interfere with our free will to help us understand, he just needs to tell us. ie. come down from the heavens and announce it to the world, spell out what it means in the clouds, whisper it in everyones ear, i don't know, it would be up to him how he did it. I know you don't have a problem with other peoples faith and i also don't hate anyone because of their faith, but many people do. Take the catholics and protestants, in ireland especially, that is two christian religions who conflict. Conflict with other religions, ie. muslim extremists. There so so much hatred and conflict over what God is or what religion is right, and there is such a easy solution for God, but why does he not do it? My belief is that he is not there to do it, he doesn't exist.corrupt_priest said:and interfear with our free will, one of the greatest gift he gave us? i don't think so. this comes under the problem of evil in the christian faith, and should probably be put in a different thread
Aqualung
Tasty
Hmmm... I thought I was doing a pretty good job of trying to answer them. If you thought my answers insuficient, why didn't you continue with those points? Remeber, we were going to go point by point to make sure we covered it all. Are we not doing that anymore?pandamonk said:If you actually look around, i have posted many arguments which are yet to be answered. Why not have a look then you can have a go?
pandamonk
Active Member
Yeh we should. I was directing it at gtrsgrls though, because of their post. Wee should go through each, point by point, but not try and cram everything in at once like before, lol.Aqualung said:Hmmm... I thought I was doing a pretty good job of trying to answer them. If you thought my answers insuficient, why didn't you continue with those points? Remeber, we were going to go point by point to make sure we covered it all. Are we not doing that anymore?