Tiberius
Well-Known Member
You mean the Nazca lines? We know how they were made. Are Peru's Nazca Lines A Message To The Gods Or Something Else?
-
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!
If God existed, would there be any atheists?
- Thread starter Trailblazer
- Start date
You mean the Nazca lines? We know how they were made. Are Peru's Nazca Lines A Message To The Gods Or Something Else?
Tiberius
Well-Known Member
So God gives us the ability to use reason and logic and develop the scientific method, all tools which have let us learn incredible things about the universe. We've used these tools to develop almost instantaneous communication anywhere in the world, medical treatments for deadly diseases. We've unlocked the secrets of the subatomic world and we've sent spacecraft out beyond our own solar system. And then God refuses to show himself to these tools that he gave us that have proven themselves reliable? REALLY? Seems to me that if that's the case, then either he doesn't want to be found or he doesn't exist at all!
Just out of curiosity, what do you consider good evidence?
So messengers of a deity are evidence for that deity? Does that apply to ANY deity, or just to yours?
I have nothing against tenacity or patience, but ...Thanks for sharing that.
I'd be the first person to wonder why God is obligated to prove he exists to everyone.... to some sincere souls like you maybe -- but not to everyone. It really boils down to sincerity and effort, and God well knows who is sincere and makes an effort. God will guide those people if they seek Him out... It might not happen overnight, but God admires tenacity and patience.
“Whoso maketh efforts for Us,” he shall enjoy the blessings conferred by the words: “In Our Ways shall We assuredly guide him.”” Gleanings, pp. 266-267
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
But what?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Why would God show himself to these tools that he gave us that have proven themselves reliable?
You completely lost me.
God does want to be found but He plays hard to get.
I mean God is hard for some people to find and more easily found by others.
The Messengers of God, and one in particular.
There is only one deity and all the Messengers are evidence for that deity. The Messengers and the religions they establish all proceed from that one deity. That is called Progressive Revelation.
“These principles and laws, these firmly-established and mighty systems, have proceeded from one Source, and are the rays of one Light. That they differ one from another is to be attributed to the varying requirements of the ages in which they were promulgated.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 287-288
Thief
Rogue Theologian
HOW was not the question
did you read the article you referred to?
the real question is ….WHY?
did the natives do such work
were they not?....looking up
rational experiences
Veteran Member
When you write basic precepts as a thinker.
O God the planet did exist in natural cosmology as a stone body sitting in space...and space owned the cooling of burning gas mass.
O God the planet released its STONE gases into space......straight away no string theory. As we live in those gases, the gases are the gases that belong to the Planet and God….and males in science said God is Stone, God is planet Earth and his science was a philosophy about the physical mass of stone.
Seeing he built his machines out of that stone.
However his mind thinks Sun machine...UFO metal first....and that condition is not first....our planet is.
So if an a theist said to me today God does not exist, I would ask him why he said God was our planet as a scientist then....if he wants to pretend today that God does not exist.
Then that a theist owns theories that in the formula and theme, he pretends that our planet does not exist....factually.
I would quantify that argument to be a human aware Destroyer mentality actually.
Why the argument owns human arguing on behalf of self purpose.
1. God the planet does exist.
2. God the planet says a male scientist told him how to do science.
3. Reason rationally scientist.....historically science is not rational, it was irrational.
4. Humans today claim science mentality of a theist who does not believe in the presence of God.....ask a simple question. Is it because God historically by science is gone/destroyed and converted...as first science mentality?
5. Which then brings human awareness about a shared conscious reality that some humans in science actually factually claim God does not exist.
6. The spiritual God, the presence of a spiritual being says the scientist does not exist. I am arguing about science that says God the power is a spirit that they can own in a machine as that spirit and force change it.
7. Science has its own reasons to argue against God theists.
8. Father of God is who I know spiritually, the male human his own self who is recorded in AI speaking, updated speaking when he dies as a world O community that shares male information in AI machine human caused encodings of a speaking voice that also produces cloud images.
9. Human brain is affected by an ethereal quality of a communication that produces very large feed back imagery.
10. I simply state the effect is Father of God, our Father historically the scientist.
The question is eternal being real? Yes, but we only own that state when the human being is deceased as consciousness...we were physically separated from them by the pyramid irradiation of our Nature bodies, that put radiation into our bodies that caused the separation.
Historically we were just manifesting spiritual beings from out of the eternal...actually, and owned presence of nearly physical by how much water mass existed at the ground state.
Can a not seen spirit poke you in your side with a felt finger, but not see them?
Yes, had lots of spiritual experiences that says...when the eternal human self dies as an eternal human....they own a real just eternal self.
And eternal in the spirit form was never in creation, then the contradiction says, but the human spirit was formed first in the eternal and came into the heavenly gases....so we own a contradiction of information. For a human is not actually a real eternal being today...because we die.
Information and memory therefore affects our beliefs and choices today.
O God the planet did exist in natural cosmology as a stone body sitting in space...and space owned the cooling of burning gas mass.
O God the planet released its STONE gases into space......straight away no string theory. As we live in those gases, the gases are the gases that belong to the Planet and God….and males in science said God is Stone, God is planet Earth and his science was a philosophy about the physical mass of stone.
Seeing he built his machines out of that stone.
However his mind thinks Sun machine...UFO metal first....and that condition is not first....our planet is.
So if an a theist said to me today God does not exist, I would ask him why he said God was our planet as a scientist then....if he wants to pretend today that God does not exist.
Then that a theist owns theories that in the formula and theme, he pretends that our planet does not exist....factually.
I would quantify that argument to be a human aware Destroyer mentality actually.
Why the argument owns human arguing on behalf of self purpose.
1. God the planet does exist.
2. God the planet says a male scientist told him how to do science.
3. Reason rationally scientist.....historically science is not rational, it was irrational.
4. Humans today claim science mentality of a theist who does not believe in the presence of God.....ask a simple question. Is it because God historically by science is gone/destroyed and converted...as first science mentality?
5. Which then brings human awareness about a shared conscious reality that some humans in science actually factually claim God does not exist.
6. The spiritual God, the presence of a spiritual being says the scientist does not exist. I am arguing about science that says God the power is a spirit that they can own in a machine as that spirit and force change it.
7. Science has its own reasons to argue against God theists.
8. Father of God is who I know spiritually, the male human his own self who is recorded in AI speaking, updated speaking when he dies as a world O community that shares male information in AI machine human caused encodings of a speaking voice that also produces cloud images.
9. Human brain is affected by an ethereal quality of a communication that produces very large feed back imagery.
10. I simply state the effect is Father of God, our Father historically the scientist.
The question is eternal being real? Yes, but we only own that state when the human being is deceased as consciousness...we were physically separated from them by the pyramid irradiation of our Nature bodies, that put radiation into our bodies that caused the separation.
Historically we were just manifesting spiritual beings from out of the eternal...actually, and owned presence of nearly physical by how much water mass existed at the ground state.
Can a not seen spirit poke you in your side with a felt finger, but not see them?
Yes, had lots of spiritual experiences that says...when the eternal human self dies as an eternal human....they own a real just eternal self.
And eternal in the spirit form was never in creation, then the contradiction says, but the human spirit was formed first in the eternal and came into the heavenly gases....so we own a contradiction of information. For a human is not actually a real eternal being today...because we die.
Information and memory therefore affects our beliefs and choices today.
Tiberius
Well-Known Member
Why would God show himself to these tools that he gave us that have proven themselves reliable?
You completely lost me.
How are you lost?
God gave us the tools of reason and logic.
Using those tools, we have been able to discover things about the world and universe in a way that we can confirm. Thus, we can conclude that those tools are reliable ways to learn about the truth of how the universe works.
Yet God has remained undetectable by these reliable tools he has given us.
God does want to be found but He plays hard to get.
I mean God is hard for some people to find and more easily found by others.
Sure.
God plays hard to get.
Of course.
The Messengers of God, and one in particular.
There is only one deity and all the Messengers are evidence for that deity. The Messengers and the religions they establish all proceed from that one deity. That is called Progressive Revelation.
“These principles and laws, these firmly-established and mighty systems, have proceeded from one Source, and are the rays of one Light. That they differ one from another is to be attributed to the varying requirements of the ages in which they were promulgated.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 287-288
So you're basically picking and choosing which ones you want to count as evidence based on your preconceived notions. Cherry picking is a logical fallacy.
Tiberius
Well-Known Member
No. Stop it.
HOW was indeed the question you asked.
You said:
and humans can scratch shallow ditches in the dirt
and from high above the ground work is a picture of some sort
hard to say how they knew what they were doing
and from high above the ground work is a picture of some sort
hard to say how they knew what they were doing
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
God cannot be detected by physical instruments because God is immaterial.
But God can be detected by the tools of reason and logic.
God makes it hard because God wants to separate the wheat from the chaff.
I did not cherry pick. All of the Messengers of God are evidence for God, I just believe Baha'u'llah is the best evidence since He is more verifiable; e.g. His life and what He did on His mission is verifiable history, and it can be verified that He wrote His own scriptures since we have the originals that were stamped with His official seal..
Tiberius
Well-Known Member
Because he's not physical? So physical instruments can only detect things that are physical? Fine, go and get me a cup of photons then. How about a bowl of heat? We can detect lots of things that are immaterial.
All the arguments I've seen so far are filled with logical fallacies, so I question the accuracy of this statement.
Cool story, but why did God make it possible for there to be chaff at all?
Yes, you are cherry picking because you don't consider messengers for Gods other than the one you believe in to be evidence for those Gods.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Even if we can detect things that are immaterial God is not one of them. Let me put it this way: If an omnipotent God does not want to be detected , He won't be detectable..
The other thing is that God does not exist in THIS material world, God is in the spiritual world, which is out of our reach until we get there.
Yet you cannot explain why anything I have said is a logical fallacy.
God gave everyone free will thus the ability to choose.
God did not create the chaff, humans became chaff by virtue of their own free will decisions.
I just told you I consider ALL Messengers of God to be evidence for God.
There are no other Gods other than the one I believe in, there is only one God who sends a Messenger in every age.
Tiberius
Well-Known Member
That sounds very circular. I can claim that I have an invisible dragon perched on my shoulder and come up with excuses like that to explain why the dragon is undetectable. Still gonna need more than being able to explain away a lack of evidence to show that God is there.
And yet he has interacted with it and that interaction also leaves no traces.
Yeah, I pointed out how you were cherry picking and you disregarded that, claiming that they all count towards YOUR God, and not any others.
Doesn't matter. God still created a system where Humans could mess it up.
Except you don't believe that.
You think all messengers for God are evidence for YOUR God.
Te truth is that if Messenger for God A is evidence for God A, then Messenger for God B is evidence for God B and Messenger for God C is evidence for God C.
Cool story, shame you can't support those claims.
The ability for evidence to be investigated and refuted if the evidence does not meet its claims. I.e. to be able to demonstrate the claim is false.
The claim "god exists" cannot be falsified, it is a claim, there is no evidence
Logical : reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.
Making sense to you does not make something logical, it just makes it your opinion.
Actually evidence is paramount, without it, what you have is opinion
Lets play with you what if. Suppose the man didn't commit murder and there were no evidence, yet people spoke and accused, said i i believe he committed murder despite the lack of evidence.
Does that mean the man committed murder?
Last edited:
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Don't tell me that you are about to play a semantics game to broaden the meaning of the word "know", just so that you can include faith based beliefs as "knowledge"....
It certainly smells like it.
Knowledge is verifiable.
"You don't know it, if you can't show it."
Belief isn't knowledge simply because you believe it.
That's just your religious belief. Other believers of competing religions believe other things.
I was talking about reasonable expectations based on evidence. Not about "prophecy" or other such faith-based claims about future events.
Now, you are just preaching.
Empires, nations, governments, political ideologies,... rise and fall all the time.
To predict it will happen, is like predicting rain will follow sunshine.
Also, some of the major changes in the balance of power and the shifts in political ideology we see today, aren't exactly heading in a nice direction like you seem to believe... protectionism, racism, nationalism and extreme right wing ideologies are on the rise. This is not a good thing.
This is misleading.
First, because I didn't say that I consider it likely that religion would disappear. In fact, I explicitly called it unlikely. I merely said that that was MORE LIKELY then ALL HUMANS becoming followers of ONE religion.
Secondly, the numbers you show are also misleading. The growth rates posted here are not freewill conversions to those religions. The high growth rate of Islam for example, is by far mostly due to high birth rates among muslim families, who raise their kids to be muslim.
Third, branding a communist country where religion is surpressed as "atheist" is equally dishonest since those to are forced numbers.
And last but not least: I don't need to defend claims I didn't make and frankly the actual growth rate of each of these is of little consequence or importance to me. As it is not relevant to the point, nore is it an indication of which belief is correct.
Your data doesn't in any way show that all humans in the future will follow just one religion.
In fact, your data shows a trend to the opposite: even more division.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
No, it is NOT AT ALL "illogical" to apply the same standard of evidence to claims.
What is illogical, is to believe claims to which the standard of evidence does not apply....
If no standard of evidence applies to a claim, then by definition you can never be rationally justified in believing said claim, because rational justification consists of supporting evidence...
That makes no sense at all to me.
Why do you think that? What is so special about the behaviour of any of the people who claimed ot have received a message from god that you think can only be "explained" by the magical interference of an undetectable being?
(I use quotes around "explained", because the undetectable isn't capable of explaining anything in reality....)
There are literally millions of example of humans being wrong and delusional about all kinds of things - including believing that they receive messages from gods / angels / demons / aliens / CIA mind controlling devices.
There is ZERO evidence of ANY supernatural message ever reaching a real human. Ever.
So yes, there is MUCH evidence in support of the assumption that they were delusional, lying or honestly mistaken.
There is ZERO evidence that the "message" actually came about through magic.
If evidence isn't independently verifiable, then it isn't evidence.
Verifiable evidence is not a "kind" of evidence. It's what evidence is.
An eyewitness testimony by itself, is NOT evidence. That's a CLAIM, in need of evidence.
Such testimony can become evidence, when it is corroborated with other independent lines of evidence.
But there HAS to be a verifiable factor here. Without that verifiable factor, it's just claims - not evidence.
This is not just the case for "me" or "other atheists". This is the case for everyone. It's what evidence is all about.
No. To everyone.
We've been over that allready. I never said otherwise.
There's a difference between something actually existing and knowing that it exists. And believing that it exists, for that matter.
If a thing exists that can't be detected in any way, if it has no detectable manifestation whatsoever, then it is indistinguishable from a thing that does not exist.
Things that don't exist have no detectable manifestation either.
So a thing that exists without detectable manifestation, looks exactly like a thing that doesn't exist.
If you think there is a way to detect the undetectable, go right ahead and make your case.
I won't be holding my breath though.
Read that sentence again.
What you really said there is: "if you don't accept the claims as being evidence of themselves, you are dead in the water".
You are saying that one should "just believe" the claims and that somehow is a rational thing to do.
No. Claims aren't evidence. Claims require evidence.
[qutoe]
That you do not believe in something which by definition can never be shown to be real, which isn't testable or verifiable in any manner, which isn't falsifiable... is not my "fault".[/quote]
Why would I believe something which can never be shown to be real, accurate, correct,.. which isn't testable or verifiable in any manner?
Wouldn't it be irrational to believe such things?
So far, it looks as if your "standards of evidence" amount to not having any standards of evidence whatsoever, and instead "just believe" the claims, no questions asked.
And that will be a rational position, if god is never defined in testable ways.
You and me both, use this standard for every other aspect of our lives.
Otherwise, you'ld just believe me if I told you that last night, Jennifer Anniston crawled out of the TV screen during an episode of friends, made love to me and then returned to the TV to finish the scene.
Or you'ld just believe me if I told you that the ghost that never lies just told me that an undetectable dragon is about to eat your undetectable soul, dooming you for eternity, unless you immediatly wrap yourself in tin foil - I bet you won't be wrapping yourself in tin foil.
You don't believe these claims, because in every other area of your life, you DO apply a standard of evidence to claims being presented to you.
You just engage in special pleading for your god / religion. This religion, is exempt from your standard of evidence.
I don't see the need for such an exception.
Then why are we then even talking about this?
In that case, it doesn't matter anyway.
You have just spend this entire post claiming the opposite... that they aren't supportable and demonstrable.......................................
I know New York and Manhattan exist, and very likely a Peter Parker lives there. But that doesn't warrant belief in Spiderman.
Those are claims.
One exists and the other does not.
And how could you know which does and which doesn't, if not through evidence?
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
So far, it seems like the more gullible one is, the easier it is to "find" god.
The Messengers of God, and one in particular.
No. Those are the claims that are in need for evidence.
The claims aren't evidence of themselves. That's called circular reasoning.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
I already did.
You engage in special pleading and circular reasoning.
[qutoe]
God gave everyone free will thus the ability to choose.[/quote]
Having knowledge about what exists and what doesn't, has nothing to do with free will and everything with detectability, testability and verifiability.
syo
Well-Known Member
Yesssssss!!! All the way! The Gods want us to be free and they don't press themselves on us.