Who knows?

[F1fan]

It is you dealing in beliefs. I do not want people living on beliefs. I point to where one can Discover the truth. Your logic and advanced thinking will be crucial in the journey to Discover the truth.

False. Your use of the word "truth" is synonymous with belief. You just have a biased set of assumptions that distort your framework. As I have noted numerous times, I use facts. You don't.

You say I want to believe in God but you have not read what I said. My journey was to Discover the truth regardless of whether God existed or not. Put the pieces together. See how things do add up perfectly and it will lead to God. If you are very good at this, you might get a visit from God. If you do, believing will not exist anymore. You will know.

This is not factual. You are working hard to reinforce your assumptions and beliefs and pretending they are true (truth). Notice you have no interest in fact nor reasoning. You just have a set of concepts you insist are true, but offer no facts or test in reality.

Decide what you seek. Life isn't about Discovering God. You are going to see God between physical lives anyway. You already know God.

More religious nonsense, and it borders on a rule violation of proselytizing. You are not presenting evidence and an argument, you are making untrue assertions. If you are unable to discern real from fantasy that is your problem.

Why your quest to fight so hard to discount others who know there is more than this physical world? Granted much of their beliefs are wrong, however they do not shut their eyes to what does exist.

More vague implications of religious superiority. No facts, no reasoning.

You want logic?? If God exists, then God can be found!! How many are really looking??? You?? I find very very few people religious or otherwise that actually want to find God.

IF God exists? Now you aren't sure? Notice the 9-11 hijackers found God. How could they possible have committed suicide and murdered 3000 people if they only acted on religious belief. They were more certain than you are about God. Would you kill yourself for God if God told you to?

Me? I have always been one who had to know about all kinds of things. God was just one of them. The more I discover; the more possibilities for new knowledge exists all around waiting to be Discovered. It stares us all in the face.

What a shame that you can't explain how you came to believe that you know God exists. You must be avoiding that for some reason. Maybe you have doubts and don't wnat to even think about it.

Is there any possibility that you could be mistaken in your beliefs that God exists?

 

[Muffled]

Well, if that's true, what I've said can hardly be considered honest. Is that the entirety of your point?

I believe the point is not to think about what I said but think about what you have said. Are you sure that you are being totally objective? I can understand lacking perspective. That happened to me. My cousin showed me a picture and asked me what it was. I saw a fox. She said it was a picture of Jesus. I had to change my visual perspective in order to see Jesus. Here is where it gets tricky. She espoused a theory that I did not know Jesus because of my lack of discernment. She was probably half right but not because of the picture. What I find is that some people see the fox and never see Jesus because seeing fox becomes the only truth for them and they are unwilling to change their perspective.

 

[Muffled]

I don't lie, you can believe whatever you want.

I believe I am glad to hear that. That means you are not able to falsify my testimony.

 

[ChristineM]

I believe I am glad to hear that. That means you are not able to falsify my testimony.

Such testimony cannot be falsified and hence would not be valid in either science or the law.

 

[Muffled]

Math is an application invented by mankind. A tool that can be used.

I suppose its possible to see God in that same context as an invented tool made and used by people applicable with religious functions.

I believe that is called a jump to a conclusion or a non-sequitur.

I believe the mind can invent things and that is called imagination but the mind can also receive things. I believe the concept of numbers is a natural reaction to what a person sees ie fingers and toes, night and day.

 

[Muffled]

Such testimony cannot be falsified and hence would not be valid in either science or the law.

I believe that makes science and law useless if it can't be validated.

 

[ChristineM]

I believe that makes science and law useless if it can't be validated.

You are welcome to your belief.

If the only way to falsify your testimony is by lying then i would say the same thing. It's useless.

 

[Muffled]

You are welcome to your belief.

If the only way to falsify your testimony is by lying then i would say the same thing. It's useless.

So then the conclusion is that math is useless because it is true and God is useless because He is true. I believe that serves as a fantasy. I find math and God useful.

 

[ChristineM]

So then the conclusion is that math is useless because it is true and God is useless because He is true. I believe that serves as a fantasy. I find math and God useful.

There is no falsifiable evidence a god (any god) exists or existed.

Maths works, you used it (or it's results) to post that comment

 

[vulcanlogician]

Are you sure that you are being totally objective?

That's a good question. I personally answer "no."

I don't think it's possible for any of us to be fully objective about all possible things. But at the same time, we can make efforts to be objective. And those efforts can help take our biases out of the equation.

Appealing to logic is one way to attempt this. When we want to make a point, we clearly state our conclusions and clearly state the things we think must support our conclusions. Is it an error-free process? No. But it's way more objective than puffing your chest up and saying whatever the hell you feel like saying.

If you think agnostic atheists aren't being honest with themselves, show me why it is so.

I think agnosticism is perfectly honest. I've never seen God throw a lightning bolt or send down the walls of a city. If I'm being honest, I've only witnessed things that nature can explain. That's why I think naturalism is the most honest/truthful way to see the world. What lie am I telling myself that omits God from that picture?

 

[Bird123]

False. Your use of the word "truth" is synonymous with belief. You just have a biased set of assumptions that distort your framework. As I have noted numerous times, I use facts. You don't.


This is not factual. You are working hard to reinforce your assumptions and beliefs and pretending they are true (truth). Notice you have no interest in fact nor reasoning. You just have a set of concepts you insist are true, but offer no facts or test in reality.


More religious nonsense, and it borders on a rule violation of proselytizing. You are not presenting evidence and an argument, you are making untrue assertions. If you are unable to discern real from fantasy that is your problem.


More vague implications of religious superiority. No facts, no reasoning.


IF God exists? Now you aren't sure? Notice the 9-11 hijackers found God. How could they possible have committed suicide and murdered 3000 people if they only acted on religious belief. They were more certain than you are about God. Would you kill yourself for God if God told you to?


What a shame that you can't explain how you came to believe that you know God exists. You must be avoiding that for some reason. Maybe you have doubts and don't wnat to even think about it.

Is there any possibility that you could be mistaken in your beliefs that God exists?

You might want truth to be synonymous with belief, but how could that ever be right when beliefs are not always true? Where is your logic now?

It is not I who makes assumptions. It is you assuming God does not exist.

Just like the water in the desert. I am giving you facts. On the other hand, from your point of view, I understand how you see them as beliefs.

Your bias views are not open to all possibilities. Since burden of proof rests on the one who seeks and you do not seek for yourself, everything I say will be a belief to you simply because that is what you want to believe.

You are right. I am not presenting the evidence you want to hear. On the other hand, I am pointing to where you have the capability to discover the evidence you are asking for. Since I will not serve it up to you, you have a choice to make. What are you really seeking? I point to the water in the desert just like I point to where you can discover God for yourself. It has always been in your hands, not mine.

I can point to lots of true things. The sky is blue. The Earth is round. The oceans are deep. Now if you are one of these people who thinks the world is flat and there are those today that do, then you would once again claim I'm giving you my beliefs until you are willing to take the effort to discover what the truth really is.

Cold water does freeze faster than hot water. This is not my belief.

What I said: If God exists, I was talking logic from your point of view ,not mine.

Can you really place all religious people in the same box as 911 terrorists? With the diversity of people can you really say you know more about the possibility that God exists than all the religious people of the world? They know we are Spiritual beings in our true natures. Can you even tell you are a spiritual being?

Maybe religion or religious people have hurt you in the past. Would not one become bias, narrow that view, then crawl in a box on one's beliefs blind to all the possibilities that could ever exist? Where is that scientist in you?

To question is the start on the journey to Discovery. Do you question anything or do you already know?

There is purpose to everything. Question: What is your purpose? Why are you here? Do you seek? What is the purpose of the universe? Why does the universe exist? Why is it we can't find life elsewhere in the universe? The answers are staring you in the face.

Don't you see? Anyone who searches for truth always has a million questions? By finding the answers one discovers the Intelligence behind it all especially when it all adds up perfectly.

How do I know God exists? I bumped into God.

Yes, the sky is blue, the Earth is round, the oceans are deep, and if you are in that desert with me and I point to where you can find water, you are capable of walking on the flat Earth in the other direction. I will be happy for you because that is where you really want to be. I make no demands to anyone. Control is one of the petty things mankind holds so dear. Just like God, I want you to be free.

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

 

[F1fan]

You might want truth to be synonymous with belief, but how could that ever be right when beliefs are not always true? Where is your logic now?

Your views are beliefs, you just don't want to ackowledge this fact.

It is not I who makes assumptions. It is you assuming God does not exist.

I don't have to assume things not known to exist don't exist, including any of the many thousands of gods.

Just like the water in the desert. I am giving you facts. On the other hand, from your point of view, I understand how you see them as beliefs.

You are posting your beliefs, no facts that your beliefs are true. That is your problem.

Your bias views are not open to all possibilities. Since burden of proof rests on the one who seeks and you do not seek for yourself, everything I say will be a belief to you simply because that is what you want to believe.

This is the third time you have gotten this wrong.

You are right. I am not presenting the evidence you want to hear. On the other hand, I am pointing to where you have the capability to discover the evidence you are asking for. Since I will not serve it up to you, you have a choice to make. What are you really seeking? I point to the water in the desert just like I point to where you can discover God for yourself. It has always been in your hands, not mine.

In other words you have no evidence to demonstrate your beliefs are true. All your posts are fraud.

I can point to lots of true things. The sky is blue. The Earth is round. The oceans are deep. Now if you are one of these people who thinks the world is flat and there are those today that do, then you would once again claim I'm giving you my beliefs until you are willing to take the effort to discover what the truth really is.

Cold water does freeze faster than hot water. This is not my belief.

What I said: If God exists, I was talking logic from your point of view ,not mine.

Can you really place all religious people in the same box as 911 terrorists? With the diversity of people can you really say you know more about the possibility that God exists than all the religious people of the world? They know we are Spiritual beings in our true natures. Can you even tell you are a spiritual being?

Maybe religion or religious people have hurt you in the past. Would not one become bias, narrow that view, then crawl in a box on one's beliefs blind to all the possibilities that could ever exist? Where is that scientist in you?

To question is the start on the journey to Discovery. Do you question anything or do you already know?

There is purpose to everything. Question: What is your purpose? Why are you here? Do you seek? What is the purpose of the universe? Why does the universe exist? Why is it we can't find life elsewhere in the universe? The answers are staring you in the face.

Don't you see? Anyone who searches for truth always has a million questions? By finding the answers one discovers the Intelligence behind it all especially when it all adds up perfectly.

How do I know God exists? I bumped into God.

Yes, the sky is blue, the Earth is round, the oceans are deep, and if you are in that desert with me and I point to where you can find water, you are capable of walking on the flat Earth in the other direction. I will be happy for you because that is where you really want to be. I make no demands to anyone. Control is one of the petty things mankind holds so dear. Just like God, I want you to be free.

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

Wow, all these words and not a single fact that explains how your beliefs are true. Just incoherent ramblings.

 

[Heyo]

I believe that makes science and law useless if it can't be validated.

Black and white fallacy. Only because science and law can't answer your question, doesn't make them useless for other tasks.
You just have to find the right tool for the job. For fixed believes that can't be changed by argument or evidence try psycho-pathology.

 

[SDavis]

So you are relying on an objective process as a defense that your fantastic beliefs could be real?

If your feelings and religious beliefs were truthful, you would just show us. Instead you are falling back on science, and that's because it uses facts and data, not emotions. Science is reliable, beliefs are not.[/QUOTE

If they can't do it _ I can't either - neither can you
Does science disprove the existence of God? - The Science Behind It.

But I can believe as do some scientist

 

[F1fan]

If they can't do it _ I can't either - neither can you
Does science disprove the existence of God? - The Science Behind It.

Disprove what God? There are no Gods that are known to exist, nor any evidence of any of the many thousands of gods in human lore. So what is left is believers assuming their vrsion of God exists without vidence or reason, and then forcing others to disprove their assumption incorrect. We can explain how assumptions like this are unwarranted. No one can disprove the existence of things that aren't known as existing. The science have disproved many religious beliefs, with God being among the most vague.

But I can believe as do some scientist

How many believers understand why they believe in religious concepts? And I meant do they understand the indoctrination, the cultural norms, the biological need to belong, the social pressure to adot cultural ideas like religion (which is why religion is geographic), etc.?

 

[SDavis]

Disprove what God? There are no Gods that are known to exist, nor any evidence of any of the many thousands of gods in human lore. So what is left is believers assuming their vrsion of God exists without vidence or reason, and then forcing others to disprove their assumption incorrect. We can explain how assumptions like this are unwarranted. No one can disprove the existence of things that aren't known as existing. The science have disproved many religious beliefs, with God being among the most vague.


How many believers understand why they believe in religious concepts? And I meant do they understand the indoctrination, the cultural norms, the biological need to belong, the social pressure to adot cultural ideas like religion (which is why religion is geographic), etc.?

That's for you and those who believe like you.
As it is written in the Book of Revelation just keep believing and doing what you're doing.

 

[F1fan]

That's for you and those who believe like you.

Those who believe like me? I believe OJ Killed his ex-wife and Ron Goldman, and that is because there is substantial evidence to make that judgment. I don't believe in fantastic claims like religious concepts and that's because there's a fatal lack of evidence for any of them.

So feel free to expand on what you mean, as if my reasoning is faulty somehow.

As it is written in the Book of Revelation just keep believing and doing what you're doing.

That's one reason it is not a very good book.

Let's note how little your response dealt with what I wrote.

 

[Muffled]

There is no falsifiable evidence a god (any god) exists or existed.

Maths works, you used it (or it's results) to post that comment

I believe God uses me to post comments.

 

[ChristineM]

I believe God uses me to post comments.

You are free to believe whatever you want. Belief is not falsifiable evidence

 

[Muffled]

That's a good question. I personally answer "no."

I don't think it's possible for any of us to be fully objective about all possible things. But at the same time, we can make efforts to be objective. And those efforts can help take our biases out of the equation.

Appealing to logic is one way to attempt this. When we want to make a point, we clearly state our conclusions and clearly state the things we think must support our conclusions. Is it an error-free process? No. But it's way more objective than puffing your chest up and saying whatever the hell you feel like saying.

If you think agnostic atheists aren't being honest with themselves, show me why it is so.

I think agnosticism is perfectly honest. I've never seen God throw a lightning bolt or send down the walls of a city. If I'm being honest, I've only witnessed things that nature can explain. That's why I think naturalism is the most honest/truthful way to see the world. What lie am I telling myself that omits God from that picture?

I believe logic sometimes does not work. For instance it isn't logical that a man can put clay on his eyes, wash it off and receive his sight. I feel pretty confident a blind person today would not find success in doing that. However it is logical for a person to receive their sight if an all powerful God is doing it.