Question for Atheists...

[Bird123]

Being open to possibilities in no way relates to whether they are likely. Most anything is possible from an intellectually honest position. But whether they are true or likley true depends on evidence. Your many religious claims lack evidence. So while they might be possible they are not supported by evidence, so rejected as true. That's on you. If you want critical thinkers to be convinced your claims are true, offer valid evidence.

You still have beliefs. What you need is evidence, and you have none.

How does this demonstrate humility? These fall into the "no ****" category.

Now this is arrogance. How do you know a God exists? You offer no evidence, and you seem to expect me to just take your word for it as if you are beyond error, like a God yourself. Is it possible you could be mistaken? If you aren't oven to the possibility that you are mistaken, I suggest you read your first sentence at the top.

Your arrogance seems to follow you everywhere you go.

And look at the poor results in religion. Just pick one, is it true and others are not? Or are all of them true despite constradictions? It's intellectual catastrophe. Critical thinkers don't ignore the problems like believers do.

That is whjat critical thinkers do. And none find any God, or gods, or supernatural. Only those who who think they have the answer will conclude a God exists, and then work to self-validate their prejudgment without any care for truth.

Yet none of them, including you, can show how you know this is true. Are you special, a God yourself, perhaps? Have extra-sensory perception? Show us facts and the explanation how you know a God exists. If you refuse, we remain unconvinced.

I never stated this. Can you defend your false accusation of me?

I have asked you how you know God exists, and thus far you don't provide any evidence, nor why I should just take your word for it as if you claimed to have eaten a ham sandwich for lunch.

I believed that a God existed as a child, but unlike other children I set about testing the claims. I discovered that what I was told wasn't true. So as I observed other believers I discovered believers were tyically idealists, but failed to live up to their ideals. That smacks of followers who don't understand the nuance of what they adopted as "truth". I was 10-11 and I didn't have intellectual chops like I do at my age, but I had a raw curiosity and intuitive intellect that sought truth beyond the the peer pressure religious ideology I was exposed to.

But look at you, you gobbled up all the God speak hook, line, and sinker without thinking if it's possible none of it is true.

Stories don't convince thinkers, evidence does.

Trauma does strange things to the mental stability of folks.

I've had my experiences with intuition. One day many years ago I was riding my bike on a tyically busy boulevard quite fast, over 20 mph, and as I approached an intersection with a green light I had a very strong sense to slow dowmn, which I did for some reason. Within seconds a car blew through the red light, and would have likley hit me. I can't explain it, perhaps time is more fluid that our awareness tells us. It didn't suggest any angels, or gods protecting me, or anything. But I wondered about it. When I met a family that had a three year old girl that had been diagnoses with Leukemia, and after almost two years of treatment died, I realized there is no rhyme or reason to life and justice.

Is it possible you haven't worked hard enough? Remember what you said about possibilities.

God isn't known to exist. And you seem to render God useless if it did. But I do agree that some humans are capable of learning wisdom. Those who consider themselves wise quickly show themselves a fool.

Well that is a long story with numerous stages. I shared a bit above, that as a child I realized the folly of belief in any gods. That opened the door to seek truth. What I learned is that truth isn't what our minds want as some ideal, but what is practical.

You still don't get it. I placed truth in your lap. I'm not trying to convince you of anything. Do nothing if that is your choice. I'm happy!!

You seem to allow pain or hurt to alter your thinking. Pain and hurt have their purpose as well. Solve the problem is the answer.

How do I know it was God? Everyone already knows God whether they realize this or not. Names are never needed because everyone knows everyone.

OK, you say I am not open. I know it was God, however if I run into anyone with more Intellect and capabilities, I will be open enough to reconsider. I am an ant and I have seen no one even in the ball park with God's capabilities.

Brains win in the end. This hungry student is marching toward the Intelligence. There is so very much to learn and Discover before I am no longer an ant. Sound arrogant?? Perhaps, that is what you want to see in order to justify your position to allow knowledge to come to you rather than Go to it. Reject or accept all those beliefs. It will do you no good. Further, if you really wanted evidence, you would be looking for it.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[lewisnotmiller]

How are you defining "physical" in order to differentiate the "non-physical" from it?

For me, the physical is defined descriptively: anything that happens in reality is physical.

What's the difference between "physical evidence" and just "evidence"?

Initial evidence for neutrinos (to move away from the religious) was more about the fact that physical evidence suggested there was an undiscovered agent impacting.

This was later proven, but at one point in time there was a strong assumption that we wouldn't be able to prove it, due to limitations with our equipment and senses.

So...there was physical evidence to some extent, but it was indirect and the agent largely unverifiable.

That would be an example, I think. Not that the agent was non-physical, but that the evidence was largely inference.

 

[Bird123]

Have you considered the possibility that your direction has already been investigated and nothing was found? Since you refuse to provide evidence, it is *possible* that you found a new path that was not previously discovered, but without such evidence to re-evaluate the previous failure of that path, why go that direction yet again when previous attempts found nothing?

The arrogance is in your belief that you know and nobody else does.

And you assume your interpretation consists of facts. But you refuse to provide evidence supporting your claims that they are facts.

And how do you know religion itself is not a mistake?

Yes, indeed. True discovery is difficult. And that is one of the reasons we are skeptical about your claims. We *know* how hard it is to separate truth from fiction, especially when there is an ego driven desire to hold certain beliefs to be true. That is precisely why we want to see your evidence (not just your claims) and more specificity as to which direction to investigate. At this point, you are pointing in directions many of us have already looked and found nothing.

And how do you *know* that God exists? Provide the evidence. because many of us have searched and found nothing.

If a God actually exists, I would want to know. But, in order to know, I must first have evidence. You have provided none. You have only made claims that many of us have previously considered and found nothing. So why should we believe you?

So her intuition is God? Sorry, not eve3n close to the type of evide3nce required to show there is a God.

Dreams are like that. No God required.

Yes, discovery takes work. We know this. And it is why we doubt your claims.

When I have some time.

In this time-based causal universe God's actions can be seen. When you understand God's actions, you start to understand what God is doing with this world and people. If you want to leave God out of it, study what is around you. God hides nothing. God places knowledge all around. It waits to be Discovered. Put the pieces together and see where it leads.

Ebb and Flow of knowledge. If I were to build a car, there are some things every car must have: An engine, a way to steer, a way to stop, a place to sit. You get the idea. Look for purpose. Put the pieces together. See where it leads.

You assume me arrogant. How in the world could I ever know how many people had a visit from God? Since you assume no one, you think it could not possibly be. Is this a flaw in critical thinking, assuming??

Put the pieces together. When you walk through one door, it leads to more doors that can be opened. God will always be a belief until you get a visit. Evidence of a Spiritual Being can only be Direct evidence. On the other hand, in a time-based causal universe actions can be seen.

God isn't just giving knowledge out. It must be Discovered. This is an action of God. Perhaps, it is no more than a test of intelligence. On the other hand, the more one learns: the faster one learns moving forward.

I'm just pointing again in case you forgot where I was pointing.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[F1fan]

You still don't get it. I placed truth in your lap.

You aren't understanding that what you post are not facts, they are ideas you believe are true, yet can't provide any evidence they are true. We have no obligation to blindly accept what you claim, no matter how impressed you are with your beliefs.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. Do nothing if that is your choice. I'm happy!!

Then why do you keep repeating the same claims, and telling me that I'm not getting it?

You seem to allow pain or hurt to alter your thinking. Pain and hurt have their purpose as well. Solve the problem is the answer.

I suspect you are projecting your own feelings. For some reason you want critical thinkers to stop thinking and adopt your dogma, and as we expalin to you, this isn't how we function as thinkers. We seek truth (actual truth) not dogma to believe in.

How do I know it was God? Everyone already knows God whether they realize this or not. Names are never needed because everyone knows everyone.

This isn't a valid answer. At best you adopted the idea of God from others and pretend it's knowledge, and then go on assuming God exists without any critical thought.

OK, you say I am not open. I know it was God, however if I run into anyone with more Intellect and capabilities, I will be open enough to reconsider. I am an ant and I have seen no one even in the ball park with God's capabilities.

I challenged you to show us you are open minded to the possibility you could be mistaken in your religious belief, and you are not open to that possibility. So you should be very careful of accusing others of being closed minded when you are that very thing. Don't you agree?

Brains win in the end. This hungry student is marching toward the Intelligence. There is so very much to learn and Discover before I am no longer an ant. Sound arrogant?? Perhaps, that is what you want to see in order to justify your position to allow knowledge to come to you rather than Go to it. Reject or accept all those beliefs. It will do you no good. Further, if you really wanted evidence, you would be looking for it.

No, here you sound incoherent. You must know that your manner is arrogant because the few times I bring it up you write basic truisms like the sky is blue, or little absurd sentences like these. You avoid the context of my challnge, and that is your arogance of assuming a God exists, that you claim is real, and that you have truth that thinkers are unconvinced are valid. You think we are wrong yet can't explain how we are wrong. It's as if you think you are infallible and a God yourself that can't be questioned.

You obviously have not Discovered a dark side of your mind that is guiding you to false statements and accusations.

 

[F1fan]

In this time-based causal universe God's actions can be seen.

Demonstrate that a God exists, then demonstrate that it perfoms actions that we humans can distinguish from nature. If you can't, then this is not a true statement. We default to the logical norm which is all claims are considered untrue until they are demonstrated true.

 

[Polymath257]

In this time-based causal universe God's actions can be seen.

That is your claim. You have presented no evidence of this that *shows* a God is involved.

When you understand God's actions, you start to understand what God is doing with this world and people. If you want to leave God out of it, study what is around you. God hides nothing. God places knowledge all around. It waits to be Discovered. Put the pieces together and see where it leads.

Oh, I *do* study what is around us. And I have found the 'God hypothesis' to be irrelevant to understanding what happens around us.

Ebb and Flow of knowledge. If I were to build a car, there are some things every car must have: An engine, a way to steer, a way to stop, a place to sit. You get the idea. Look for purpose. Put the pieces together. See where it leads.

First ask if there is a purpose or not. Do *not* assume a purpose when there may not be one. otherwise, you set yourself up for confirmation bias.

You assume me arrogant. How in the world could I ever know how many people had a visit from God? Since you assume no one, you think it could not possibly be. Is this a flaw in critical thinking, assuming??

I do not *assume* there is no one. I have *concluded* there is no one. Do you see the difference? if there is no evidence of God, there is no reason to think anyone has been visited by such an entity. And, without evidence, it is better to not assume there is a God.

Put the pieces together. When you walk through one door, it leads to more doors that can be opened. God will always be a belief until you get a visit. Evidence of a Spiritual Being can only be Direct evidence. On the other hand, in a time-based causal universe actions can be seen.

And, if you get such a 'visit', do you assume that your experience is valid? or do you consider that it might be an experience induced by stress or some other factor that causes the brain to process incorrectly? And, even more importantly, how do you distinguish between the two possibilities?

God isn't just giving knowledge out. It must be Discovered. This is an action of God. Perhaps, it is no more than a test of intelligence. On the other hand, the more one learns: the faster one learns moving forward.

Again, these are you claims. Why should anyone think you are in a position to know these things? Especially when most of us have conducted our own investigations and reached the opposite conclusions? Sure, we may be incorrect, but so can you.

I'm just pointing again in case you forgot where I was pointing.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

You are not pointing. You are flourishing your arms around vaguely. That you think you are giving specific directions is part of what we see as arrogance.

 

[Bird123]

You aren't understanding that what you post are not facts, they are ideas you believe are true, yet can't provide any evidence they are true. We have no obligation to blindly accept what you claim, no matter how impressed you are with your beliefs.

Then why do you keep repeating the same claims, and telling me that I'm not getting it?

I suspect you are projecting your own feelings. For some reason you want critical thinkers to stop thinking and adopt your dogma, and as we expalin to you, this isn't how we function as thinkers. We seek truth (actual truth) not dogma to believe in.

This isn't a valid answer. At best you adopted the idea of God from others and pretend it's knowledge, and then go on assuming God exists without any critical thought.

I challenged you to show us you are open minded to the possibility you could be mistaken in your religious belief, and you are not open to that possibility. So you should be very careful of accusing others of being closed minded when you are that very thing. Don't you agree?

No, here you sound incoherent. You must know that your manner is arrogant because the few times I bring it up you write basic truisms like the sky is blue, or little absurd sentences like these. You avoid the context of my challnge, and that is your arogance of assuming a God exists, that you claim is real, and that you have truth that thinkers are unconvinced are valid. You think we are wrong yet can't explain how we are wrong. It's as if you think you are infallible and a God yourself that can't be questioned.

You obviously have not Discovered a dark side of your mind that is guiding you to false statements and accusations.

I can not be who you project me to be. Simply because you say it and want it to be true, doesn't make what you think true.

What I have told you about God are facts.

What you or anyone chooses to seek has never been up to me. I make no demands.

Truth is not what you seek. You seek to confirm that your belief that God does not exist is real.

My answers are valid. On the other hand you can assume they are not valid if you choose but that does not make it so.

Do you really think I want critical thinkers to stop thinking? Advanced thinking and Higher IQ does nothing but help see what I am saying and pointing to.

Sure lots of people use feelings when dealing with God. You must realize God has an intellectual half. This is the connection one must strive for. Everything about God, this world, and people add up perfectly. What are you missing here?

Am I wrong about my religious beliefs? I have no religious beliefs. It's about what is. Isn't that what critical thinking is all about? Widen your view. There is so much more to see.

I sound incoherent to you because you lack understanding. Your view is so narrow that you can not see beyond your box of beliefs. I even said take your journey without God in mind. It will lead to God anyway. Why? It's the only way it will add up perfectly.

Do not discount an interaction with God. God is High Level Intellect working on multiple levels with multiple views. Do you know what you would get at your current understanding. You would just be confused by the experience.

Have you given God a reason to visit? Further, God will never intimidate or coerce your free choices. If a visit would alter those choices, I would not count on one happening. Remember, what is happening isn't about God or believing in God. God doesn't belong to any religion. Why would you assume I would?

I am placing truth in the world. What others do with truth is up to them. You can want me to be a religion or act like a religion, however that is not going to happen.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Subduction Zone]

My answers are valid. On the other hand you can assume they are not valid if you choose but that does not make it so.

Sorry, one does not just get to declare "My answers are valid." One must be ready to defend them and you never appear to be able to do that.

Your actions tell us that your answers are not valid

 

[Bird123]

That is your claim. You have presented no evidence of this that *shows* a God is involved.

Oh, I *do* study what is around us. And I have found the 'God hypothesis' to be irrelevant to understanding what happens around us.

First ask if there is a purpose or not. Do *not* assume a purpose when there may not be one. otherwise, you set yourself up for confirmation bias.

I do not *assume* there is no one. I have *concluded* there is no one. Do you see the difference? if there is no evidence of God, there is no reason to think anyone has been visited by such an entity. And, without evidence, it is better to not assume there is a God.

And, if you get such a 'visit', do you assume that your experience is valid? or do you consider that it might be an experience induced by stress or some other factor that causes the brain to process incorrectly? And, even more importantly, how do you distinguish between the two possibilities?

Again, these are you claims. Why should anyone think you are in a position to know these things? Especially when most of us have conducted our own investigations and reached the opposite conclusions? Sure, we may be incorrect, but so can you.


You are not pointing. You are flourishing your arms around vaguely. That you think you are giving specific directions is part of what we see as arrogance.

The answer is easy. Do nothing!! I have pointed to what works. I have been there. You can try to convince me I'm wrong, but how can that be? What I said Works!!!

It's OK, if you choose to do nothing. You don't need to come up with excuses. There is no punishment. It's ok, you aren't ready.

Be who you must. It's a part of the plan!! Given enough time, all the kiddies are going to make it, anyway.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Bird123]

That is your claim. You have presented no evidence of this that *shows* a God is involved.

Oh, I *do* study what is around us. And I have found the 'God hypothesis' to be irrelevant to understanding what happens around us.

First ask if there is a purpose or not. Do *not* assume a purpose when there may not be one. otherwise, you set yourself up for confirmation bias.

I do not *assume* there is no one. I have *concluded* there is no one. Do you see the difference? if there is no evidence of God, there is no reason to think anyone has been visited by such an entity. And, without evidence, it is better to not assume there is a God.

And, if you get such a 'visit', do you assume that your experience is valid? or do you consider that it might be an experience induced by stress or some other factor that causes the brain to process incorrectly? And, even more importantly, how do you distinguish between the two possibilities?

Again, these are you claims. Why should anyone think you are in a position to know these things? Especially when most of us have conducted our own investigations and reached the opposite conclusions? Sure, we may be incorrect, but so can you.


You are not pointing. You are flourishing your arms around vaguely. That you think you are giving specific directions is part of what we see as arrogance.

I am telling you what works. I have been there.
If you get a visit, you will have no doubts. Why not? You do not have the capabilities of the experience. On the other hand, without a certain amount of understanding and an open view, most would just be confused by the experience. Choosing to see only what one wants to see leaves the view way too narrow to see anything but oneself.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Bird123]

Sorry, one does not just get to declare "My answers are valid." One must be ready to defend them and you never appear to be able to do that.

Your actions tell us that your answers are not valid

Are my answers really telling you my answers are not valid? Lack of Understanding will often lead to wrong conclusions. Look again. There is knowledge and wisdom behind my words. One must look beyond what one wants to be the truth. Truth will not always be an agreeable thing.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Polymath257]

I can not be who you project me to be. Simply because you say it and want it to be true, doesn't make what you think true.

What I have told you about God are facts.

No, they are your claims. You have given no evidence to show they are facts.

What you or anyone chooses to seek has never been up to me. I make no demands.

Truth is not what you seek. You seek to confirm that your belief that God does not exist is real.

And I would say that you seek to confirm your belief that there is a God.

My answers are valid. On the other hand you can assume they are not valid if you choose but that does not make it so.

And I would say the same about my answers.

Do you really think I want critical thinkers to stop thinking? Advanced thinking and Higher IQ does nothing but help see what I am saying and pointing to.

And I would disagree. Those that think critically come to very different conclusions (from you and from each other, I might add).

Sure lots of people use feelings when dealing with God. You must realize God has an intellectual half. This is the connection one must strive for. Everything about God, this world, and people add up perfectly. What are you missing here?

Evidence.

Am I wrong about my religious beliefs? I have no religious beliefs. It's about what is. Isn't that what critical thinking is all about? Widen your view. There is so much more to see.

I could say the same about you. From my perspective, you are tied to a false belief in a deity. You need to open your mind to other possibilities.

I sound incoherent to you because you lack understanding. Your view is so narrow that you can not see beyond your box of beliefs. I even said take your journey without God in mind. It will lead to God anyway. Why? It's the only way it will add up perfectly.

And I have taken a journey and not found this to be true. I have been thinking and asking questions for the last 50 years or so. At one time I believed as you do now. But I realized that I was just playing games with myself. That is why I doubt your claims.

Do not discount an interaction with God. God is High Level Intellect working on multiple levels with multiple views. Do you know what you would get at your current understanding. You would just be confused by the experience.

I don't discount the possibility. But I don't find the current evidence to be convincing, or even all that relevant. So, you make claims that what you are 'facts', but I don't see it that way. What I see is you starting with a position and being subject to confirmation bias while refusing to consider alternative possibilities.

Have you given God a reason to visit? Further, God will never intimidate or coerce your free choices. If a visit would alter those choices, I would not count on one happening. Remember, what is happening isn't about God or believing in God. God doesn't belong to any religion. Why would you assume I would?

A belief in a God *is* a religious belief. So, yes, you have religious beliefs since you think a God exists.

I am placing truth in the world. What others do with truth is up to them. You can want me to be a religion or act like a religion, however that is not going to happen.

Again, this is why some see you as arroagant: you claim to have 'truth', but provide no evidence. You only give vague hand-waving positions and say others have to search. But when we do search, we don't find what you claim.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

Understood. Many disagree.

 

[Polymath257]

I am telling you what works. I have been there.

So you claim. But you might consider that I have also 'been there' and realized that it was all illusions and falsehoods.

If you get a visit, you will have no doubts. Why not? You do not have the capabilities of the experience. On the other hand, without a certain amount of understanding and an open view, most would just be confused by the experience. Choosing to see only what one wants to see leaves the view way too narrow to see anything but oneself.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

You are assuming I have never had the types of experiences you claim. I have. And I realized that they were illusory and false.

 

[Polymath257]

Are my answers really telling you my answers are not valid? Lack of Understanding will often lead to wrong conclusions. Look again. There is knowledge and wisdom behind my words. One must look beyond what one wants to be the truth. Truth will not always be an agreeable thing.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

Again, this is why you come across as arrogant. You think you have the truth and that others are just missing something obvious. But many of us have traveled the same or a similar path, had similar experiences, and realized they were false.

Please consider the possibility that you might be wrong. Think outside the box you have made for yourself. Or, don't. Your choice. There is no reason you *need* to actually search for the truth by being skeptical of claims without evidence.

 

[Polymath257]

The answer is easy. Do nothing!! I have pointed to what works. I have been there. You can try to convince me I'm wrong, but how can that be? What I said Works!!!

Maybe it works *for you*. But others of us have been on a journey of discovery for longer than you and have reached different conclusions that 'work' better.

Keep searching. You might eventually realize a different path works better.

It's OK, if you choose to do nothing. You don't need to come up with excuses. There is no punishment. It's ok, you aren't ready.

Be who you must. It's a part of the plan!! Given enough time, all the kiddies are going to make it, anyway.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

maybe you need to stop thinking everything is clear and be a bit more skeptical. Those that really search often find very few things to be 'perfectly clear'. That you find so many things to be so suggests you aren't really searching for truth, but merely trying to confirm your chosen beliefs.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are my answers really telling you my answers are not valid? Lack of Understanding will often lead to wrong conclusions. Look again. There is knowledge and wisdom behind my words. One must look beyond what one wants to be the truth. Truth will not always be an agreeable thing.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

Yes. An inability to support one's claims tells others that the odds are that you are wrong. And yes, your obvious lack of understanding is probably why you cannot support your claims. If you would only apply your own rather ignorant spiel to yourself you might realize that you have only made yourself look silly.?


If you really believe that you are right then please try to explain why you are right. Don't just post inane nonsense.

 

[F1fan]

I can not be who you project me to be. Simply because you say it and want it to be true, doesn't make what you think true.

I am writing my assessments given what you claim. You hold religious views that you deny are relgious, for some reason. Denying that your belief in God isn't religious is another level of curiosity of your position.

What I have told you about God are facts.

There are no gods known to exist. That you claim a God exists is a typical religious position, and none who claim this have ever been able to demonstrate a God actually exists outside of human imagination. You are not different. You don't even try to argue for your idea of God existing, you just claim it does.

What you or anyone chooses to seek has never been up to me. I make no demands.

You are emphatic that we critical thinkers accept your "discovery" and other beliefs. I wonder if your way of thinking lacks the self-awareness of doing this. Me and others have indicated this, yet you ignore what we say.

Truth is not what you seek. You seek to confirm that your belief that God does not exist is real.

This is ironic. My approach on these boards is to understand what is factually true, or at least likely true, and critical thinkers make conclusions based on factual evidence. You are often vague in your claims, but what you do post is cookies cutter religious belief, that you seek truth, but then reveal you believe that God exists despite not showing any evidence. Why would any thinker assume, or believe, or pretend to know, that a God exists when there is no evidence or explanation offered?

My answers are valid. On the other hand you can assume they are not valid if you choose but that does not make it so.

False. Your answers and beliefs are valid to YOU, and other believers. They aren't valid to critical thinkers who require evidence and critical analysis of the evidence to form valid conclusions. In logic and debate claims made by folks are considered UNTRUE by default, and the claimant has a burden of proof to demonstrate what they claim is true in reality, and that comes with evidence and a cherent explanation. You offer none of this.

Do you really think I want critical thinkers to stop thinking? Advanced thinking and Higher IQ does nothing but help see what I am saying and pointing to.

You want us to accept your claims at face value, and you are too lazy defend what you claim. You then make false accusations about me because you assume you are correct, and therefore I must be wrong by contrast. But you don't show how your beliefs are true.

Sure lots of people use feelings when dealing with God. You must realize God has an intellectual half. This is the connection one must strive for. Everything about God, this world, and people add up perfectly. What are you missing here?

OK, prove a God exists, and that it has parts, half of which is intellectual. My prediction is that you have no evidence for this claim. Yet you expect me to take your word for it. Why?

Am I wrong about my religious beliefs? I have no religious beliefs. It's about what is. Isn't that what critical thinking is all about? Widen your view. There is so much more to see.

Who told you a God exists, and why did you believe them? What makes you think God is a real thing outside of you imagine?

I sound incoherent to you because you lack understanding. Your view is so narrow that you can not see beyond your box of beliefs. I even said take your journey without God in mind. It will lead to God anyway. Why? It's the only way it will add up perfectly.

OK, take your time and present evidence that all these statements are true. That means providing evidence and a coherent explanation. You insist I (and others) aren't understanding, but you aren't doing a good job at explaining. These are your beliefs, yet you are terrible at being comprehensible, and then blame me. Is it possible you just believe in some religious ideas and don't know why? Could it be you that doesn't understand reasoning and evidence and how to come to valid conclusions? Don't be closed minded, is it possible the problem is you and your thinking?

Do not discount an interaction with God. God is High Level Intellect working on multiple levels with multiple views. Do you know what you would get at your current understanding. You would just be confused by the experience.

What is it that a mortal interacts with that you consider a God? How does a mortal know that they are interacting a real God and not imagining it? Use facts.

Have you given God a reason to visit?

As an open minded person God (if any siuch beings exists) has an open invitation to make contact. Thus far in my life, not even a whisper. Now you might be tempted to accuse me of not listening (how would you know, you wouldn't, but you seem eager to accuse non-believers of things that you can't know are true), but that would suggest God is so weak that he can't get the attention of a mortal. So don't blame mortals for not hearing a God that by all accounts is absent, or non-existent.

Further, God will never intimidate or coerce your free choices. If a visit would alter those choices, I would not count on one happening. Remember, what is happening isn't about God or believing in God. God doesn't belong to any religion. Why would you assume I would?

More details about God that you didn't explain is true in reality, so I throw this out until you provide more than your belief and claims. Can you do it? I don't believe you can, so that's on you.

I am placing truth in the world. What others do with truth is up to them. You can want me to be a religion or act like a religion, however that is not going to happen.

More of your arrogance. Why do you think you are so special, especially when you can't provide any evidence that you are correct? Why be critical of thinkers who follow the rules of analysis so they don't end up believing in false ideas?

 

[idea]

what God is doing with this world and people.

I used to believe evil was necessary to refine. I've since witnessed/experienced things that absolutely do not refine.

"It's just the laws of nature." Is a less painful mindset for me now.

 

[Audie]

I used to believe evil was necessary to refine. I've since witnessed/experienced things that absolutely do not refine.

"It's just the laws of nature." Is a less painful mindset for me now.

"Refine evil'.

What an odd concept.

Whatever do you mean by it?

 

[Audie]

I am writing my assessments given what you claim. You hold religious views that you deny are relgious, for some reason. Denying that your belief in God isn't religious is another level of curiosity of your position.

There are no gods known to exist. That you claim a God exists is a typical religious position, and none who claim this have ever been able to demonstrate a God actually exists outside of human imagination. You are not different. You don't even try to argue for your idea of God existing, you just claim it does.

You are emphatic that we critical thinkers accept your "discovery" and other beliefs. I wonder if your way of thinking lacks the self-awareness of doing this. Me and others have indicated this, yet you ignore what we say.

This is ironic. My approach on these boards is to understand what is factually true, or at least likely true, and critical thinkers make conclusions based on factual evidence. You are often vague in your claims, but what you do post is cookies cutter religious belief, that you seek truth, but then reveal you believe that God exists despite not showing any evidence. Why would any thinker assume, or believe, or pretend to know, that a God exists when there is no evidence or explanation offered?

False. Your answers and beliefs are valid to YOU, and other believers. They aren't valid to critical thinkers who require evidence and critical analysis of the evidence to form valid conclusions. In logic and debate claims made by folks are considered UNTRUE by default, and the claimant has a burden of proof to demonstrate what they claim is true in reality, and that comes with evidence and a cherent explanation. You offer none of this.

You want us to accept your claims at face value, and you are too lazy defend what you claim. You then make false accusations about me because you assume you are correct, and therefore I must be wrong by contrast. But you don't show how your beliefs are true.

OK, prove a God exists, and that it has parts, half of which is intellectual. My prediction is that you have no evidence for this claim. Yet you expect me to take your word for it. Why?

Who told you a God exists, and why did you believe them? What makes you think God is a real thing outside of you imagine?

OK, take your time and present evidence that all these statements are true. That means providing evidence and a coherent explanation. You insist I (and others) aren't understanding, but you aren't doing a good job at explaining. These are your beliefs, yet you are terrible at being comprehensible, and then blame me. Is it possible you just believe in some religious ideas and don't know why? Could it be you that doesn't understand reasoning and evidence and how to come to valid conclusions? Don't be closed minded, is it possible the problem is you and your thinking?

What is it that a mortal interacts with that you consider a God? How does a mortal know that they are interacting a real God and not imagining it? Use facts.

As an open minded person God (if any siuch beings exists) has an open invitation to make contact. Thus far in my life, not even a whisper. Now you might be tempted to accuse me of not listening (how would you know, you wouldn't, but you seem eager to accuse non-believers of things that you can't know are true), but that would suggest God is so weak that he can't get the attention of a mortal. So don't blame mortals for not hearing a God that by all accounts is absent, or non-existent.

More details about God that you didn't explain is true in reality, so I throw this out until you provide more than your belief and claims. Can you do it? I don't believe you can, so that's on you.

More of your arrogance. Why do you think you are so special, especially when you can't provide any evidence that you are correct? Why be critical of thinkers who follow the rules of analysis so they don't end up believing in false ideas?

Where there's actual wisdom rather than
arrogant ignorance, someone ought be
able to detect some of it.

In this case the contest of wits is
too unbalanced to be interesting