Why don't Theist's admit that there's no evidence for God?

[Sleeppy]

I never said they don't possess information, and I deny your accusation that I "know" I'm arguing a lie.

Nothing alone can process information. It takes everything in tandem.

I brought up silicon specifically because it's basically a wonder material, being a primary component in computers.

So, back to the original question? What qualifies God, the Source, as knowing? It exists, and it functions. We are functioning in direct and unique ways, as well. Because we exist, we are information, we know information, and we act according the information- the knowledge that is us. God, the Source, with infinite information and knowledge gave everything, the entire Universe, its possibility. This is basic science and understanding of what God means.

 

[Riverwolf]

So, back to the original question? What qualifies God, the Source, as knowing? It exists, and it functions. We are functioning in direct and unique ways, as well. Because we exist, we are information, we know information, and we act according the information- the knowledge that is us. God, the Source, with infinite information and knowledge gave everything, the entire Universe, its possibility. This is basic science and understanding of what God means.

Hardly.

Rather, Gods. Many Gods working in tandem with each other, not a single one of them having total dominion over absolutely everything, but can collectively cover everything. Remember: I'm a polytheist.

'Sides, that's not basic science. Basic science is pretty much nothing more than applied curiosity. It's not about containing knowledge, but obtaining it.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

'Sides, that's not basic science. Basic science is pretty much nothing more than applied curiosity. It's not about containing knowledge, but obtaining it.

And here are paths diverge. Basic science is the regurgitation of the work others do (e.g., the bulk of my posts here). Real science is the application of curiosity in a systematic approach to obtain knowledge. That's why so many scientists never get much beyond the basics. One day I hope I will, but who knows.

 

[Riverwolf]

And here are paths diverge. Basic science is the regurgitation of the work others do (e.g., the bulk of my posts here). Real science is the application of curiosity in a systematic approach to obtain knowledge. That's why so many scientists never get much beyond the basics. One day I hope I will, but who knows.

Well... by "basic", I mean the core desire that drives scientists; that is, the "reason" they do it.

 

[Sleeppy]

Hardly.

Rather, Gods. Many Gods working in tandem with each other, not a single one of them having total dominion over absolutely everything, but can collectively cover everything. Remember: I'm a polytheist.

'Sides, that's not basic science. Basic science is pretty much nothing more than applied curiosity. It's not about containing knowledge, but obtaining it.

God, the Source, created many gods. None of them created themselves. None of them decided their being. Their beings, which originated at the Source, decided them. And interaction with other gods decided them further.

It's not about containing knowledge but obtaining it? That's not possible, friend.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

It's not about containing knowledge but obtaining it? That's not possible, friend.

How do you know?

 

[Sleeppy]

How do you know?

Because I contain the knowledge to know it.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Because I contain the knowledge to know it.

Knowledge you didn't obtain. How, then, do you possess it?

 

[McBell]

Knowledge you didn't obtain. How, then, do you possess it?

Thus far, very poorly...

 

[Sleeppy]

Knowledge you didn't obtain. How, then, do you possess it?

You don't realize I was refuting the very thing you are? Hence, 'not possible.' You can't obtain knowledge and not contain it. Pay attention to the conversation, if you're going to quote from it.

 

[Sleeppy]

Thus far, very poorly...

It helps if you're paying attention.

 

[McBell]

It helps if you're paying attention.

Nice try, but no dice.

 

[Sleeppy]

Nice try, but no dice.

Well, it would be better you didn't. You lack the confidence for good reason. Evidenced by your uneducated remark. Educate yourself. Read some of what you missed and who said what. And why.

Then come back and say something educated.

 

[BruceDLimber]

>Why don't theists admit that there's no evidence for God?

What are you talking about???!!!!!

I'm a theist, and I've been saying for years that:

The existence and non-existence of God are both equally unproveable in any objectcive fashion!

So you protest too much, methinks!


Bruce

 

[idea]

As an agnostic theist I always notice other theist's attempting to prove God in one way or another. These arguments are never sufficient or conclusive enough to prove God. I recognize that my position is irrational and that there is no evidence for God. If you already have faith in God, what is the need to attempt to prove him?

Malachi 3:10...prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts,

 

[Philomath]

Malachi 3:10...prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts,

Are you offering this Bible verse as proof?

 

[Enai de a lukal]

As an agnostic theist I always notice other theist's attempting to prove God in one way or another. These arguments are never sufficient or conclusive enough to prove God. I recognize that my position is irrational and that there is no evidence for God. If you already have faith in God, what is the need to attempt to prove him?

Those in glass houses, my friend... As someone whose own position is admittedly irrational and intellectually irresponsible, its not clear what grounds you have to criticize anyone elses position on the matter.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

I'm a theist, and I've been saying for years that:

The existence and non-existence of God are both equally unproveable in any objectcive fashion!

Except that this is mistaken, or at best highly misleading.

 

[Riverwolf]

God, the Source, created many gods. None of them created themselves. None of them decided their being. Their beings, which originated at the Source, decided them. And interaction with other gods decided them further.

This "original" is nothing more than a Yawning Gap, according to our songs. It's not a sentient being. Our songs don't say how Muspelheim(Fireland) and Niflheim(Iceland - the realm, not the country) first formed, if they were ever nonexistent to begin with.

My own meditations have taught me that if there was an original being who is somewhat sentient, that original being is none other than Hel; the Ice Queen; Death.

It's not about containing knowledge but obtaining it? That's not possible, friend.

Scientists do it all the time. It's their job.

They, themselves, aren't necessarily the storehouse of the obtained knowledge. Books, disks, documents, etc. are.

 

[Philomath]

Those in glass houses, my friend... As someone whose own position is admittedly irrational and intellectually irresponsible, its not clear what grounds you have to criticize anyone elses position on the matter.

I have the same grounds that you do to question anyone else's position.