INDISPUTABLE Rational Proof That God Exists (Or Existed)

[godnotgod]

Divine love is that destructive force that will love only what is divine.

If you want Something Divine to love you.....you must be divine.

Otherwise the sword...and divine judgment.

You are making divine love conditional and discriminating, when it is unconditional and non-discriminating. Otherwise it would not be divine love.

Our true nature is already divine; it's just that some have not yet realized it.

 

[Thief]

You are making divine love conditional and discriminating, when it is unconditional and non-discriminating. Otherwise it would not be divine love.

Our true nature is already divine; it's just that some have not yet realized it.

The peace of heaven is guarded.
Judgment awaits.

 

[godnotgod]

The peace of heaven is guarded.
Judgment awaits.

Again, you don't actually KNOW that to be true; it is only your BELIEF, based on.....what?

Do you give credence to the words of the Carpenter when he said that the kingdom of God is within you? If so, then you must experience an inner peace that is guarded.

Othewise, you're just making things up....AGAIN!

 

[Thief]

Again, you don't actually KNOW that to be true; it is only your BELIEF, based on.....what?

Do you give credence to the words of the Carpenter when he said that the kingdom of God is within you? If so, then you must experience an inner peace that is guarded.

Othewise, you're just making things up....AGAIN!

Not at all.
Peace is shared.
Sure...you must at peace within yourself.
But if your sense of peace is greatly different......the next guy might wander off.

If the angels leave you wherever you fell......too bad for you.

(so I believe)

 

[godnotgod]

Not at all.
Peace is shared.
Sure...you must at peace within yourself.
But if your sense of peace is greatly different......the next guy might wander off.

If the angels leave you wherever you fell......too bad for you.

(so I believe)

If you are truly at peace, there is nothing that can harm you.

What falls is not you; it is only the body.

Why do you persist in your attachment to dust?

 

[Thief]

If you are truly at peace, there is nothing that can harm you.

What falls is not you; it is only the body.

Why do you persist in your attachment to dust?

I just posted in another thread responding to this very item.
(responding to your previous post)

Around and around we go.

And I shall persist in flesh as long as God wants me to.
(not my will)

 

[godnotgod]

I just posted in another thread responding to this very item.
(responding to your previous post)

Around and around we go.

And I shall persist in flesh as long as God wants me to.
(not my will)

Ah, the ultimate denial that you are God pretending not to be God, and tenaciously clinging to the flesh that becomes the dust of the grave.

Yoo hoo! Is it dark in there, Thief? Heh heh heh

Good luck old chap....good luck with that.

While your at it, watch out for those who would pry your dust from your cold dead mind, ha ha ha....:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:

 

[Thief]

Ah, the ultimate denial that you are God pretending not to be God, and tenaciously clinging to the flesh that becomes the dust of the grave.

Yoo hoo! Is it dark in there, Thief? Heh heh heh

Good luck old chap....good luck with that.

While your at it, watch out for those who would pry your dust from your cold dead mind, ha ha ha....:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:

Actually.....it IS dark down there!

Eternal darkness is physically real.
No form of light follows anyone into the grave.

You cannot escape your flesh as you are breathing.
What makes you think you will do so when you're dead?

However, I think the spirit CAN escape the flesh....but it must be allowed.

I did not put myself into this parcel of meat.
I come and go with it.....not without it.
I can hope for resurrection in that hour of my last breath.
I happen to believe life after death is immediate.

I don't plan on laying in the ground.

 

[godnotgod]

Actually.....it IS dark down there!

Eternal darkness is physically real.
No form of light follows anyone into the grave.

You cannot escape your flesh as you are breathing.
What makes you think you will do so when you're dead?

However, I think the spirit CAN escape the flesh....but it must be allowed.

I did not put myself into this parcel of meat.
I come and go with it.....not without it.
I can hope for resurrection in that hour of my last breath.
I happen to believe life after death is immediate.

I don't plan on laying in the ground.

Not to worry. I will bring you flowers and a blankee from time to time, and light a candle to make you feel comfy. :candle: :foryou:

I never think 'escape', nor 'not-escape'. There is nothing to escape from. The more you struggle, the more entangled in nothing you will become. Relax and float; otherwise you will drown.

(BTW, when God said: 'Let there be light', it was dark by default. So God dwelt within the Void, and light came out of the darkness. Black holes swallow light)

 

[Thief]

Not to worry. I will bring you flowers and a blankee from time to time, and light a candle to make you feel comfy. :candle: :foryou:

I never think 'escape', nor 'not-escape'. There is nothing to escape from. The more you struggle, the more entangled in nothing you will become. Relax and float; otherwise you will drown.

(BTW, when God said: 'Let there be light', it was dark by default. So God dwelt within the Void, and light came out of the darkness. Black holes swallow light)

Graves swallow the light we could be.

I'm not going there.
Keep your blanket.

As for floating?......not me.
The moment I shed this mortal coil......C squared!

 

[godnotgod]

Graves swallow the light we could be.

I'm not going there.
Keep your blanket.

As for floating?......not me.
The moment I shed this mortal coil......C squared!

They don't allow seducers of nuns or thieves into Paradise, unless you discard the baggage of your old earthly self first.

We come empty handed; we leave empty handed. And that means everything, including the self.

Come clean, Thief!:slap:

 

[Thief]

They don't allow seducers of nuns or thieves into Paradise, unless you discard the baggage of your old earthly self first.

We come empty handed; we leave empty handed. And that means everything, including the self.

Come clean, Thief!:slap:

It's more like......we came into this life naked and into the arms of someone who cared.

I would like to think leaving this world.....Someone might care.

Of course....If I show up empty ( as you suggest).....why would they even bother?

 

[1robin]

They don't allow seducers of nuns or thieves into Paradise, unless you discard the baggage of your old earthly self first.

We come empty handed; we leave empty handed. And that means everything, including the self.

Come clean, Thief!:slap:

I am butting in so excuse me. To say they do not allow seducers of nuns into heaven is the equivalent of saying they do not allow anyone who has sinned into heaven. In my faith my past, present, and future sins were paid for by Christ. He claimed he came to forgive all sins (not only non nun seducers). I don't even know what that means but all who are saved are allowed in heaven because their sins were paid for on the cross. Either that is the case or every single one of us is doomed.

 

[1robin]

Some of the ancient Greeks accepted common descent, but my main interest is that millions of conservative Christians living today reject common descent.

You have so many posts and I have so little time this will be hit and miss. Sorry. You missed the point here. My point was that long before Christians were trying to make Genesis line up with Darwin they included interpretations that allow for at least some common descent and especially a very old universe. They did not do so because they were trying to jive with modern science because there was no modern science. So despite what you think (and I imagine your wrong in many cases) the bible has always had interpretations that allowed for common descent and an old universe. Your confusing iron fisted Catholic dogma with scripture, and the imprint it left on Protestantism with what that bible actually says.

Regarding the story of Adam and Eve, the issue is not just what the Bible says, but also what it means since the story can be interpreted literally, or as an allegory, or myth, just like the stories of the flood, the Ten Plagues, and the Exodus. Millions of American Christians interpret the story literally, and reject common descent. It is only to those Christians that my arguments about common descent pertain to

. Whether allegory or literal we are al guilty of sins and stand condemned. The standard is perfection. I have as of yet not met anyone who met it. It is quite clear in present time that man can become totally depraved on a societal level so the flood stories lesson is valid. There is a growing amount of evidence for the exodus so I think a literal interpretation is reasonable. I agree some common descent has occurred, I am skeptical it is a explanation in totality for genetic reality. For example all the major body plans appeared in a geological instant of a few ten million years without any predecessors known. The theory has merit and holes. I really wish you would read that book I suggested you would be far wiser for having done so.

You sometimes questioned common descent from an entirely scientific perspective. My position is that you do not know enough about biology to make such a claim based upon your own personal knowledge, and that also goes for most creationists who reject common descent.

The holes I mention in some kind of totality theory called common descent are 95% from scholars in those areas. I did not invent them. For example the burgess shale that proved what I stated above was found by one of the most prominent Paleontologist named Walcott. He found 60,000 fossils that proved all major body types exploded on the geological scene. He sent them to the Smithsonian. That is where I got that. However it gets even more interesting. The president of the Smithsonian believed in gradual evolution. Made one announcement and promptly buried all 60,000 of the most important fossils ever found in backrooms and closets. They were only rediscovered by a student many years later. So much for scientific integrity. That story gets even weirder and Steven Gould gets involved and makes the treachery even worse. I can tell you the whole thing sometime if you want.

Another point I did not make up is that the original tree model for evolution that was very consistent with common descent was eradicated by the bush of evolution which was supplanted by the forest model of evolution by evolutionists, not by me.

I wonder how many more days, weeks, or months you will want to discuss common descent since so far you have wasted a lot of your time discussing it, and have not accomplished useful for the purpose of helping to convert skeptics to Christians, or helping to strengthen the faith of Christians. For a busy person, you frequently waste a lot of your time.

If that was my intent I would have wasted a lot of time as I have never seen anyone on any side ever convert in this forum. One of my purposes is to dispel the myths the media feeds about how omniscient science is for the new Christian that may be troubled by an issue. I was initially confused by many things and found professional debates resolved most of my questions. I am hoping to do the same in an informal setting and judging by your over optimism about your "victories" I am undeterred in that quest.

 

[SkepticThinker]

. Whether allegory or literal we are al guilty of sins and stand condemned. The standard is perfection. I have as of yet not met anyone who met it. It is quite clear in present time that man can become totally depraved on a societal level so the flood stories lesson is valid. There is a growing amount of evidence for the exodus so I think a literal interpretation is reasonable. I agree some common descent has occurred, I am skeptical it is a explanation in totality for genetic reality. For example all the major body plans appeared in a geological instant of a few ten million years without any predecessors known. The theory has merit and holes. I really wish you would read that book I suggested you would be far wiser for having done so.

This is not accurate, and has been pointed out to you several times.

 

[godnotgod]

It's more like......we came into this life naked and into the arms of someone who cared.

I would like to think leaving this world.....Someone might care.

Of course....If I show up empty ( as you suggest).....why would they even bother?

Love is not the accumulated baggage of your temporal, earthly identity. Because you are empty, you can be filled. If you bring your baggage with you to the afterlife, it will only be in the way.

 

[godnotgod]

I am butting in so excuse me. To say they do not allow seducers of nuns into heaven is the equivalent of saying they do not allow anyone who has sinned into heaven. In my faith my past, present, and future sins were paid for by Christ. He claimed he came to forgive all sins (not only non nun seducers). I don't even know what that means but all who are saved are allowed in heaven because their sins were paid for on the cross. Either that is the case or every single one of us is doomed.

If sins have been paid for, then they have been expunged. You no longer carry them with you. You are no longer a sinner; no longer are you attached to your former identity. So why bring that baggage with you when entering the afterlife? Of what use is it? The idea is that you are to begin an entirely new life, one that you have no previous experience of.

So no. You would not enter into the afterlife as the sinner that you now are.

Thief has repeatedly said that the peace of heaven is guarded. So why would God allow a seducer of nuns, or any other sinner, in those states of existence, into the sanctity of heaven? To contaminate the future with the past?

 

[metis]

If sins have been paid for, then they have been expunged. You no longer carry them with you. You are no longer a sinner; no longer are you attached to your former identity. So why bring that baggage with you when entering the afterlife? Of what use is it? The idea is that you are to begin an entirely new life, one that you have no previous experience of.

So no. You would not enter into the afterlife as the sinner that you now are.

Thief has repeatedly said that the peace of heaven is guarded. So why would God allow a seducer of nuns, or any other sinner, in those states of existence, into the sanctity of heaven? To contaminate the future with the past?

The belief enunciated by some (not you) is countered by the Christian scriptures themselves as Paul tells his audience to help and bring backsliders back into the fold (refutes the "once saved, always saved" theology), and also that he was unwilling even to judge himself. Over and over again the gospels and epistles pass on information as to what constitutes moral conduct and that belief is not enough, as the Parable of the Sheep and Goats (Matthew 25) clearly states, which is at least somewhat echoed in the Sermon on the Mount.

James says that belief without good works is not real faith at all, and Paul states that faith without good works is like "cymbals clashing".

 

[Nakosis]

Energy/matter and the fluctuations between them maybe an eternal process. Just maybe difficult for us to fathom because we get conditioned to see everything as having a beginning and an end.

Really, beginning is some arbitrary point in time that we'll claim as the start of something. There's actually always something before that. There's always something after the "end".

 

[metis]

Energy/matter and the fluctuations between them maybe an eternal process. Just maybe difficult for us to fathom because we get conditioned to see everything as having a beginning and an end.

Really, beginning is some arbitrary point in time that we'll claim as the start of something. There's actually always something before that. There's always something after the "end".

Good points, imo. Let me just add that we see things having a "beginning" and an "end" only because we draw rather arbitrary lines of separation, whereas the reality appears to actually be a continuous chain of causes and effects.