Lack of belief in gods.

[Thumper]

you have not rebutted any of my beliefs....

Do you want them rebutted? Is there anything that could rebut you beliefs?

...Someone had to be first in mind and heart.....that would be God

Why should I believe that? Am I to just take your word for it without any proof other than "I say so"?

 

[Thief]

Do you want them rebutted? Is there anything that could rebut you beliefs?

Why should I believe that? Am I to just take your word for it without any proof other than "I say so"?

please proof read.....all of this thread.....

science.....
nothing moves unless moved

Spirit first

 

[Thumper]

please proof read.....all of this thread.....science.....nothing moves unless moved Spirit first

Not an answer to any of my questions. But I didn't really expect any.

 

[Thief]

Not an answer to any of my questions. But I didn't really expect any.

all the answer you need is already posted

 

[Vaderecta]

please proof read.....all of this thread.....

science.....
nothing moves unless moved

Spirit first

You seem to have a belief that there are two things. One is Substance and the other is Spirit. Than you imply Substance can not move without Spirit but Spirit can move by itself and whenever. Substance needs a cause and mover and Spirit can do whatever it wants. Nothing moves unless moved. But Spirit moves. Therefore something must have moved it or it could not be moved?

 

[Thief]

You seem to have a belief that there are two things. One is Substance and the other is Spirit. Than you imply Substance can not move without Spirit but Spirit can move by itself and whenever. Substance needs a cause and mover and Spirit can do whatever it wants. Nothing moves unless moved. But Spirit moves. Therefore something must have moved it or it could not be moved?

indeed....
in regression ALL motion had a beginning

science can take you to the singularity....the beginning
but cannot explain the Initiation
science cannot affirm God....but...
cannot explain the Spark that ignited the big bang

at the beginning you have a choice to make
substance first?....or Spirit?

and substance (according to science) doesn't have what it takes to 'self' start

 

[Vaderecta]

indeed....
in regression ALL motion had a beginning

science can take you to the singularity....the beginning
but cannot explain the Initiation
science cannot affirm God....but...
cannot explain the Spark that ignited the big bang

at the beginning you have a choice to make
substance first?....or Spirit?

and substance (according to science) doesn't have what it takes to 'self' start

You rely on science to substantiate a belief in substance but entirely fail to provide a scientific belief for the idea of a concept that exists outside of science and that being spirit.

The big bang didn't cause itself therefore something that needed no cause must have therefore caused it and thus where science breaks down I invoke the god of the gaps is a tired argument and unconvincing. (If the big bang ever happened I still think its just an illogical argument with no merit.)

 

[Thief]

You rely on science to substantiate a belief in substance but entirely fail to provide a scientific belief for the idea of a concept that exists outside of science and that being spirit.

The big bang didn't cause itself therefore something that needed no cause must have therefore caused it and thus where science breaks down I invoke the god of the gaps is tired argument and unconvincing. (If the big bang ever happened I still think its just an illogical argument with no merit.)

all of motion regresses to a beginning

all substance requires a 'push'

 

[Vaderecta]

all of motion regresses to a beginning

all substance requires a 'push'

But Spirit has always existed and needs no push. Spirits have no beginning and no end. Spirits cause AND are the foundation of all existence. What are spirits? Science doesn't know but they are the cause of everything. Science doesn't know but many people think they know. You appear to be one of those people. A god of gaps explanation makes sense to you and you want to convince others that where ever science breaks down they should look to religion or the supernatural or maybe even you. I can't be the first person to tell you this is an entirely unconvincing argument and by definition has no evidence.

 

[Thief]

But Spirit has always existed and needs no push. Spirits have no beginning and no end. Spirits cause AND are the foundation of all existence. What are spirits? Science doesn't know but they are the cause of everything. Science doesn't know but many people think they know. You appear to be one of those people. A god of gaps explanation makes sense to you and you want to convince others that where ever science breaks down they should look to religion or the supernatural or maybe even you. I can't be the first person to tell you this is an entirely unconvincing argument and by definition has no evidence.

there will never be a photo, a fingerprint, an equation or a repeatable experiment

no evidence for your satisfaction
nothing in your petri dish

science can take you to the beginning

at that 'point'.....Spirit first
substance cannot 'self' motivate

 

[Vaderecta]

there will never be a photo, a fingerprint, an equation or a repeatable experiment

no evidence for your satisfaction
nothing in your petri dish

science can take you to the beginning

at that 'point'.....Spirit first
substance cannot 'self' motivate

In programming there is the concept of DRY. (Don't Repeat Yourself). If you find yourself repeating yourself than you need to rework your code base.

Your post is you repeating yourself but you haven't shown any ability to process what I posted. While it is popular to keep repeating your core idea over and over to get others to accept your view I don't think it helps your viewpoint.

No one cares what I believe unless they already agree with me and repeating my belief is not likely to change that. I could appeal to emotion to try and influence them but ultimately at the end of the day I don't really care if you believe in Chi, Allah, Jesus or no god. You are going to believe whatever makes sense to you.

Your response is science can't explain this but You can. And your explanation is one that lies outside of science and is of Spirit and Spirit causes Substance. Your post states nothing will provide evidence except your word that Spirit comes first.

 

[Thief]

In programming there is the concept of DRY. (Don't Repeat Yourself). If you find yourself repeating yourself than you need to rework your code base.

Your post is you repeating yourself but you haven't shown any ability to process what I posted. While it is popular to keep repeating your core idea over and over to get others to accept your view I don't think it helps your viewpoint.

No one cares what I believe unless they already agree with me and repeating my belief is not likely to change that. I could appeal to emotion to try and influence them but ultimately at the end of the day I don't really care if you believe in Chi, Allah, Jesus or no god. You are going to believe whatever makes sense to you.

Your response is science can't explain this but You can. And your explanation is one that lies outside of science and is of Spirit and Spirit causes Substance. Your post states nothing will provide evidence except your word that Spirit comes first.

yeah....I tend to be redundant
in the face of denial

so.....have you made the choice?
Spirit first?....or substance?

consequence pending

 

[Cephus]

there will never be a photo, a fingerprint, an equation or a repeatable experiment

no evidence for your satisfaction
nothing in your petri dish

science can take you to the beginning

at that 'point'.....Spirit first
substance cannot 'self' motivate

If there are none of those things, what idiot would believe in something for which there is absolutely no credible, objective reason to think that it's real?

 

[Thief]

If there are none of those things, what idiot would believe in something for which there is absolutely no credible, objective reason to think that it's real?

note previous post.....

make a choice

 

[Cephus]

note previous post.....

make a choice

Well, you clearly just answered my question.

 

[Thief]

Well, you clearly just answered my question.

so...you actually made a decision?!!!!!!

let's hear it

 

[leibowde84]

So when you see the rocks on the deserted island beach spelling 'HELP', no evidence of anyone ever being there, you rationally conclude the material action of waves did it accidentally? No reason to suspect intelligent agency?

"Help" is a word created by human beings with a specific meaning. So, when a word is spelled out with rocks, yes there was a human being that spelled out the word with rocks. What on earth does that have to do with this conversation though?! The rocks were part of the material world, the human was part of the material world, and the word was created by members of the material world. Everything in your scenario is part of the material world, so you are basically proving his argument with this analogy.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

"Help" is a word created by human beings with a specific meaning. So, when a word is spelled out with rocks, yes there was a human being that spelled out the word with rocks. What on earth does that have to do with this conversation though?! The rocks were part of the material world, the human was part of the material world, and the word was created by members of the material world. Everything in your scenario is part of the material world, so you are basically proving his argument with this analogy.

So you deduce intelligent design even when the only direct evidence is for a natural cause.- which we don't even have for the universe.

It's not impossible that the waves could spell help, it's just that there is a better explanation if we allow even the merest possibility of ID being involved, it easily becomes the better explanation.

All you need is a potential motive + the possibility of ID V the very long odds of the natural mechanism achieving the same result.

 

[Curious George]

So you deduce intelligent design even when the only direct evidence is for a natural cause.- which we don't even have for the universe.

It's not impossible that the waves could spell help, it's just that there is a better explanation if we allow even the merest possibility of ID being involved, it easily becomes the better explanation.

All you need is a potential motive + the possibility of ID V the very long odds of the natural mechanism achieving the same result.

Except the real analogy here is that when there is a cluster of rocks by a deserted island that doesn't seem to spell anything discernable, does one deduce that the rocks were shaped that way by an alien lifeform stranded on the island seeking help.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

you have not rebutted any of my beliefs....
you are simply placing adjectives that you like in your complaints

substance will not move of it's own volition.
the primary singularity moved.....
something moved it

Spirit first.

Someone had to be first in mind and heart.....
that would be God

"you have not rebutted any of my beliefs...."

That is the part you just cannot grasp. It was never my aim to rebuke your beliefs. I mean, why on Earth would I care what you believe?