|
Author
|
Topic: Where did God come from?
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
|
Message 7 of 178 (72449)
12-12-2003 1:03 AM
|
Reply to: Message 4 by Asgara
12-11-2003 11:43 PM
|
|
Asgara writes:
quote:
You are asking for someone to prove a negative.
That isn't necessarily a problem. Proving negatives can be done, but it requires a well-defined object that behaves in well-defined ways. For example, it is proven that there is no way to square the circle (construct a square with the same area as a given circle) using only a straightedge and compass. But, that's because we know what squares and circles are and what straightedges and compasses are capable of doing. Since they have constraints, it is possible to determine what the limits of their actions are and thus whether or not something is possible given those limits. Methinks we will never be able to agree on the definition of "god," so proving the non-existence of it will be exceedingly difficult. And, of course, certain definitions of "god" inherently make themselves indisputable. A god that can "do anything" can't be tested since every single outcome is consistent with "anything." ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 4 by Asgara, posted 12-11-2003 11:43 PM | | Asgara has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 8 by Asgara, posted 12-12-2003 1:41 AM | | Rrhain has not replied |
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
Re: Here we go...
Born2Preach writes:
quote:
Well, for starters the Titans were so big that they would've left fossils even from that long ago,
Not at all. The Titans aren't dead. Most are in Tartarus. And no, they're not that big. Prometheus the Titan was chained to the Caucasus and Heracles freed him, so Titans aren't that big.
quote:
and they probably ate so much you'd think they would've made everything else extinct,
Why? Dinosaurs and whales are gigantic creatures and yet, there are still animals around.
quote:
but if they were there first all they could eat were Cyclops
No, the Cyclops were locked in Tartarus, too, and Zeus freed them to help him overthrow Cronos. They gave Zeus the thunderbolt, Poseidon the trident, and Hades the helmet. Later, when Zeus killed Asclepius, Apollo (Asclepius' father) retaliated by killing the Cyclops that gave Zeus the thunderbolt (Arges, Brontes, and Steropes).
quote:
On to making a point.
But you haven't answered the question: Maybe you could disprove the existence of Thor, Bast, Astarte, the Titans, or Wakan Tanka. ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
Re: Continuations
Born2Preach responds to sidelined:
quote:
There's a (physical) feelings that you get when you come out of a church service and you believe what it said, or when you just got done having a long prayer.
You get that feeling during plenty of mind-control/meditative techniques. What makes the preacher different from a terrorist/yoga?
quote:
Christianity and Islam were "founded"(well, 'founded' more or less) about 500 years apart in completely different places, and yet they both have Abraham as a universal father, believe in one supreme God, and believe in the existence of Jesus, even if their ideas of His identity were different.
(*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? Are you seriously trying to claim that Islam had no connection to Christianity at all? That it was a completely independent creation that just happened to come up with the same symbols as the Christians with whom they had been trading for the past 1,000 years?
quote:
We're the only species with a religion.
That we know of. We don't really have very good communications with the other animals. It seems Koko the gorilla has some concept of god...or at least an afterlife. Look at her comments regarding the death of her kitten.
quote:
We are designed intelligently.
No, we weren't. If we were, our retinas wouldn't be inside out thus requiring a blind spot. We wouldn't have a tail-extensor muscle with no tail...and that muscle wouldn't emerge and re-attach to the exact same bone.
quote:
Big Bang theory completely agrees with theological belief.
Which one are you referring to? There are plenty of theological beliefs out there. Not all of them are compatible.
quote:
The laws of the natural world kind of make you wonder.
No, they don't. You're merely pushing the question back one level. If the universe is so complex that it needed a god, then that god is even more complex and thus needs an uber-god to create it. And then that uber-god must be yet more complex and require a super-uber-god. And that super-uber god.... If god can exist without a creator, why can't the universe? ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
Re: Here we go again!
Born2Preach responds to me:
quote:
quote:
Not at all. The Titans aren't dead. Most are in Tartarus.
Well,you said most so where are the other ones
Didn't you read my post? Prometheus was chained to the Caucasus. Another example is his brother, Epimetheus. He was given a wife, Pandora. You've heard of her, haven't you? Another example is Enceladus who was defeated by Athena (or Zeus, depending upon the version you read) and buried under Mt. Etna. Not all the Titans are in Tartarus.
quote:
Furthurmore, where is this Tartarus and how do you get there?
Dunno. Where is this "heaven" of yours and how do you get there?
quote:
quote:
Why? Dinosaurs and whales are gigantic creatures and yet, there are still animals around.
If the Titans weren't so big why were they so high and mighty when there's a perfectly good T-rex that could eat them?
Um, when did "smaller" equate to "weaker"? It never occurred to you that the Titans weren't afraid of the dinosaurs because they were more powerful than the dinosaurs?
quote:
If you are asserting this was at the dawn of time you must explain how they were created without endless years of evolution and what proof you have besides the religion's scripture that says this took place(everyone seems to ask for 'more proof' from Christian arguements on this forum, so I think it's only fair that I ask this of you.)
Congratulations! You just figured it out! Has it not occurred to you by now that all of the answers being given to you are simply outcroppings of the religious dogma and are not based upon any physical evidence? Has it not occurred to you by now that the people who believed this stuff had their reasons, they were just as sincere as you, and believed with all their heart? If you cling to your religion, why do you deny the ability of others to do the same? In other words, if you don't like the answers given by the followers of other religions, what makes you think your answers are any different?
quote:
Sheesh, this Tartarus must be pretty dang big, and it has a friggin' lock!
So? Your response is argument by incredulity? Because you aren't clever enough to visualize it, that means it can't be?
quote:
You're telling me they invented locks before they invented the wheel?
(*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? You do remember that Helios drove a chariot, yes? You do remember that chariots have wheels, yes? What makes you think the wheel hadn't been invented?
quote:
That's not even counting the fact that they had tridents, helmets, and the technology to control a bolt of lightning and give it to somebody!
What's wrong with tridents and helmets and what makes you think lighting is handled via "technology" and not the godhood?
quote:
And where did Apollo kill those Cyclops? We've gotta go there, we've got some fossils to find!
What makes you think there were any fossils left behind? Fossilization is a rare occurrence. And it requires that the bodies be left undisturbed. What makes you think they were? ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
|
|
Message 39 of 178 (73672)
12-17-2003 5:30 AM
|
Reply to: Message 30 by grace2u
12-16-2003 8:44 PM
|
|
grace2u writes:
quote:
Given the observed existance of absolute truths such as reason, morality, concepts of justice ,etc
But they are not absolute. They are arbitrary. Therefore, the rest of your argument falls apart.
quote:
You will argue no doubt that there is no such thing as a set of absolute moral truths. I would say in doing this, you are denying an obvious reality
If it were obvious, then all cultures would have the same reasoning, morality, concepts of justice, etc. Instead, the obvious reality is that different cultures have different reasonings, different moralities, different concepts of justice. Take something simple: The death penalty. We can't even figure out in this country whether it is reasoned, moral, or just, let alone the rest of the world. Therefore, the idea that there are absolutes of reason, morals, and justice is disproven by examination.
quote:
I'm assuming you are an atheist now-apologies if I'm wrong
See, that's part of the problem. You continually assume that if someone doesn't agree to your particular theology, then that means they don't believe in god at all. Just because I don't believe in your god doesn't mean I don't believe in any god.
quote:
Give me reason to believe otherwise.
Already done: Why is there no universal consensus on whether or not the death penalty is reasoned, moral, or just? Even among cultures that claim the same theology? The rest of your post was nothing but circular reasoning. Reality doesn't work that way. ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 30 by grace2u, posted 12-16-2003 8:44 PM | | grace2u has not replied |
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
WILLOWTREE writes:
quote:
The crux of the issue whether anyone wants to accept it or not is the fact that desire for God can only originate from Him.
Logical error: Circular reasoning. You only believe in god because god makes you believe and god makes you believe because you believe? That makes no sense.
quote:
Source of Information: the Bible
Logical error: Circular reasoning. The Bible is true because it says it's true and it says it's true because it's true. Reality doesn't work that way. ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
|
|
Message 41 of 178 (73676)
12-17-2003 5:43 AM
|
Reply to: Message 33 by grace2u
12-16-2003 9:27 PM
|
|
Re: Here we go again!
grace2u responds to Rand Al'Thor:
quote:
The vast majority of the world agrees that God exists.
Irrelevant. They can't agree on which god they mean. Therefore, there is no absolute belief in god. It is arbitrary.
quote:
The wonders of revealed theology.
Same problem: There is no agreement on this. Therefore, there is no absolute revelation. It is arbitrary.
quote:
Millions of changed lives from Christ.
Same problem: There are millions of changed lives through any other religion you care to name...including BOBO and the Invisible Pink Unicorn. Do not confuse your ignorance with a universal lack of knowledge. In other words, just because you don't know any doesn't mean they don't exist. How arrogant and rude of you to denigrate the revealed wonders and changed lives of other people simply because you don't like their religion.
quote:
rapid growth of Christianity amongst persecution and large differences in jewish culture.
Actually, Christianity is a faltering religion, growing smaller and smaller every year. Islam, on the other hand, is on the increase.
quote:
Teachings of Christianty are solid and speak to the very core of ones being.
So why does the overwhelming majority of the world thinks it's a load of hogwash? Why is it growing smaller and smaller?
quote:
Why is it that most atheists can not speak honestly and concede the same for Christianity?
They do. As soon as you can provide actual evidence of a Christian god, then it will be accepted. Your personal vision doesn't count because nobody else can manage to replicate it. Great...you had a vision. But so did many other people who disagree with your opinion about god. Why should we believe you over them?
quote:
This denial of reality is absurd and irrational at best.
Indeed. That's why we keep trying to get you to discard it. This denial of the reality of Christianity's place in the world is absurd and irrational and you would do well to discard it. You can keep your religion, but your idea that Christianity is the only thing out there that can explain everything simply isn't borne out. Most of the world thinks you're fooling yourself. Why should we believe you over them? ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 33 by grace2u, posted 12-16-2003 9:27 PM | | grace2u has not replied |
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
|
|
Message 45 of 178 (73886)
12-17-2003 8:33 PM
|
Reply to: Message 43 by grace2u
12-17-2003 6:08 PM
|
|
grace2u writes:
quote:
Some of these laws are unchanging however.
Name one. Not even the simple question of whether or not it is morally acceptable to kill another person is unchanging. Even in your scenario, such treatment has been considered right and appropriate in the past. If it were universal, everybody would agree with it and it would never happen. But it does, so obviously it isn't universal. Keep spinning, grace. ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 43 by grace2u, posted 12-17-2003 6:08 PM | | grace2u has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 51 by grace2u, posted 12-18-2003 12:57 PM | | Rrhain has replied |
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
WILLOWTREE responds to me:
quote:
quote:
Logical error: Circular reasoning. You only believe in god because god makes you believe and god makes you believe because you believe? That makes no sense.
You are almost correct, if you omit the last "....because you believe" in your reply quote then I agree with this statement.
So why are you arguing a point you don't believe with? You were the one that said that you have to believe before god reveals himself to you but god is the one that makes you believe. That's circular.
quote:
This then (if true) does not make what I said a circular argument.
Incorrect. To remove that end leaves an ungrammatical statement. When somebody says X happens because of Y, one cannot remove the Y.
quote:
IF the Bible teaches that ANY degree of urge for God can only initially originate from God (which is my claim)
Then god deliberately makes atheists. Just how merciful and good is an entity that creates things deliberately to destroy them?
quote:
The street becomes two-way when response is activated.
But it never becomes two-way until god makes it happen. You don't believe until god makes you believe and god doesn't make you believe until you believe. Circular.
quote:
Your error is refusal to accept this doctrine because of a subconscious absolute that believes God MUST extend this urge to everyone.
I didn't say that. I'm merely pointing out that by your definition, belief is either circular in justification (and thus, is not justified) or results in an evil god. ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
|
|
Message 60 of 178 (74301)
12-19-2003 2:47 PM
|
Reply to: Message 51 by grace2u
12-18-2003 12:57 PM
|
|
Re: Not much time so I'll respond to the simple ones first
grace2u responds to me:
quote:
quote:
Even in your scenario, such treatment has been considered right and appropriate in the past. If it were universal, everybody would agree with it and it would never happen. But it does, so obviously it isn't universal
If I understand you correctly, you are saying then that the horrible example I gave is not wrong.
Incorrect. Try reading what I said: It isn't universally wrong. There are cultures that do not think such treatment is evil. You are arguing that there is a universal standard. You have yet to come up with an example that is universally held to be evil. Whether or not I think it is wrong is irrelevant.
quote:
The example of torture and rape is never right.
Says who? You? Why do you get to be the arbiter of universal morality? When the vast majority of people in the world think your religion is a load of hooey, why does your opinion trump all of theirs?
quote:
Is it not a more reasonable answer to concede that there are moral absolutes?
No. We cannot find anything that is universal across all cultures. Ergo, by simple examination, there are no moral absolutes.
quote:
I mean no disrespect by this
Yes, you do. You mean to denigrate everybody else's opinions about god and morality, to assert that you have the lock on such things, and to make sure that there is no dissent from your vision. The fact that there are functional societies that directly contradict your claim is of no concern. You know you are right and damn everybody else. The mere existence of atheists proves you wrong.
quote:
The existance of the old and new testaments are legitamate evidences to be used in this discussion
Incorrect. It is circular reasoning. You are claiming that there is absolute morality because the Bible says so and then saying that the Bible says so because there is absolute morality. Your breaking down the text of the Bible into the two Testaments doesn't change the fact that you are using the existence of the Bible to justify the Bible.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 51 by grace2u, posted 12-18-2003 12:57 PM | | grace2u has not replied |
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
WILLOWTREE responds to me:
quote:
You are not acknowledging the first part of my argument.
Incorrect. I'm getting it all: You cannot see god until god gives you the "urge." But god won't give you the "urge" until you believe. Circular argument.
quote:
Atheism is a penalty from God for continually resisting Him.
Arrogance. Who the hell are you to tell other people that they have received the "urge" and have consciously and willfully chosen to ignore it?
quote:
"I never had the urge or desire for God " The Bible says you did
Arrogance. ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
|
|
Message 63 of 178 (74320)
12-19-2003 3:45 PM
|
Reply to: Message 62 by grace2u
12-19-2003 3:23 PM
|
|
Re: Not much time so I'll respond to the simple ones first
grace2u writes:
quote:
I am amazed that atheism uses concepts of reason, logic and even moral arguments at times
Why? Why are you amazed? See, this is the point that you need to grasp: The mere existence of atheists proves your claim false. Atheism is just as reasoned, logical, and moral as your religion. Therefore, one does not need god to come up with reason, logic, or morality.
quote:
Do you not realize that in doing this you are borrowing from a theistic interpretation of the world?
Incorrect. You're assuming that reason, logic, and morality come from god. Instead, they are completely non-theistic. The reason that atheists can use them is because they don't depend upon god. The mere existence of atheists proves your claim false.
quote:
You are assuming an absolute standard of goodness
Incorrect. One need only recognize the accepted standard. The rules of Monopoly are completely man-made and arbitrary. But if you break the rules, you're still cheating. Nobody claims that Monopoly is some god-given game, but we all agree that the rules are the rules. You are confusing "arbitrary" for "existence" by indicating that if something is not universal, then it must not exist.
quote:
the existance of "concpets of morality" within man demonstrate that a moral God must exist.
But the mere existence of atheists proves this wrong. They have no god and still have concepts of morality.
quote:
I maintain that if one argument for the existance of God is proved reliable(morality in this case), then this God does in fact exist.
But since the exact opposite is the case, morality is not reliable in the slightest, then what does that say for the existence of your god? ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 62 by grace2u, posted 12-19-2003 3:23 PM | | grace2u has not replied |
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
WILLOWTREE responds to me:
quote:
you've chosen to intentionally mis-quote me.
Hmmm...did you or did you not say this?
A person cannot believe unless God FIRST implants the desire/urge to want Him And then did you or did you not say this?
What God wants is for a person who has the freedom to do otherwise to choose to trust Him by faith. So you've hit the circular argument: You cannot see god until he gives you the "urge," but god won't give you the "urge" until you believe. You won't get faith until you choose faith, but you won't choose faith until you get faith. And then there's this. Did you or did you not say:
IF the Bible teaches that ANY degree of urge for God can only initially originate from God (which is my claim) it is a linear continuim, a one way street. And did you or did you not follow it up with:
In theological reality He does but the length of this extension to any given person is not equal. So you're saying that god is the one to give out the "urge" and yet he will not give it out to everyone...thus they will never seek god. You can't get god until god decides to get you but god won't decide to get you until you get god. And then the claim that started it all. Did you or did you not say this:
A person cannot manufacture the desire for God contrary to what anyone might claim. And then did you or did you not continue with:
Am I saying absence of urge for God means He doesn't want you ? Yes I am IF you truly have no urge So what are we to conclude? A person cannot come up with the "urge" on his own and god doesn't want to deal with people who don't have the "urge." You can avoid this all you want, but the fact still remains that you're making a circular argument. ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
WILLOWTREE responds to me:
quote:
The continuance of selective quoting to prove your point is nonsense.
Indeed. If you can show any instance of me quoting you out of context, please do so. All the comments of yours I pulled are from this thread, so it should be easy for you to find them.
quote:
This is what I wrote: God - urge/desire - person - trust/faith - promise recieved/or conflict. How is this circular ?
Because god won't start until you have the faith. Did you or did you not say the following:
What God wants is for a person who has the freedom to do otherwise to choose to trust Him by faith. And did you not say the following:
Am I saying absence of urge for God means He doesn't want you ? Yes I am IF you truly have no urge So there you have it: God won't talk to you in the first place unless you have faith. But according to your other statement, god is the source of faith. So you've got a circular argument...you need to have faith for god to deal with you but only god gives faith. Absolutely, perfectly circular. ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
Rrhain
Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: 05-03-2003
|
WILLOWTREE responds to me:
quote:
Tell me, BY THIS EQUATION, how is it circular ?
Because by your own admission, god doesn't even start until you have faith. But since god makes faith, you've made your argument circular. ------------------ Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
™ Version 4.2