27
   

Critical thinking on the existence of God

 
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2015 08:32 am
@Leadfoot,
Adios. I'm willing to listen anytime you come up with real evidence for your invisible guy in the sky.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  0  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2015 08:36 am
@manden,
manden wrote:

The true God is the real creator of the universe - MORE OF HIM IS NOT
RECOGNIZABLE !
We must try to recognize at the universe that he really exists .
TILL NOW the mankind could not do it !
That is the reason for the catastrophal state of this mankind since many thousand years .


Evidence or http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/airwank%201.gif
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2015 09:52 am
@FBM,
FBM wrote:

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

There is a better way of making the question undressed of all its childish fantasy...the question being, do you believe in REASON ? (not reasoning, not agency) Well I do...therefore I have a sort of "God" for referrent...it just is not a person. I believe strongly in Universal Unity. That satisfies my criteria for a "God" talk.


I'd be interested in learning more about this, if you're of a mind to unpack it a bit. A metaphorical god is quite different from the literal god that the theists are arguing for, though.


I understand and largely speaking agree with your pov but REASON is not a metaphor...its just not a person nor an agent...think of it more like a bedrock.
manden
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2015 09:56 am
@FBM,
Try to recognize at the universe that the real creator of the universe really exists ! It is possible , but for this ill mankind incredibly difficult .
And everbody must recognize it himself .
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2015 11:02 am
@manden,
Your English really sucks. Most of the time, there's no way to be sure exactly what you mean. That's OK, though, i suspect it would be drivel even in proper English.
0 Replies
 
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2015 11:24 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:
Oh by the way I have undoubetably found God beyond any shread of doubt...Its something very apalling and abstract...it looks like a stone...its alone and dead.
That brings back the memory of when I felt almost exactly the same. Can't remember the thread where I wrote about it but it was a moment when I wasn't in doubt about his existence but was appaled at his character and wished he and I were both dead.

He was very understanding when I figured out where I went wrong.
0 Replies
 
Tuna
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2015 06:33 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:
By definition all that exists is natural...you see its not only possible... IT IS !

You could say that all things are of nature, so if God or tooth fairies exist, they're natural. It's possible that there are naturalists who define "nature" in this way. It's a definition that gives rise to trivially true statements, though.

More often, "natural" is a property of causes, not things.
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2015 06:39 pm
@manden,
manden wrote:

Try to recognize at the universe that the real creator of the universe really exists ! It is possible , but for this ill mankind incredibly difficult .
And everbody must recognize it himself .


Not only is this not evidence, it's not intelligible.
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Dec, 2015 06:43 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

I understand and largely speaking agree with your pov but REASON is not a metaphor...its just not a person nor an agent...think of it more like a bedrock.


I'm not sure that I've used reason as a metaphor, but maybe I have. Anyway, using something as a metaphor doesn't change its identity or the standard use of the word. Like your use of the word "bedrock" as a metaphor for reason.

Reification is common in language, but if I were to speak carefully, I'd say rather that reason is a verb describing an activity.
manden
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Dec, 2015 04:39 am
@FBM,
There is this possibility ! If you can't grasp it , you must search for the truth
about the real creator of the universe with all your power and 100% honest
(especially to yourself) for years , for the rest of your life .
in "HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO RECOGNIZE THE REAL CREATOR . . . "
you find perhaps a little help .
FBM
 
  2  
Reply Mon 7 Dec, 2015 04:46 am
@manden,
Rolling Eyes I used to believe. Fervently. Then I studied up and found plenty of reason to doubt. If you can't provide credible evidence for your god, then there's no point in trying to sell it to a skeptic.

I've noticed that the number of exclamation points!!!! and ALL CAPS seems to be inversely proportional to the amount of credible evidence the poster has at his disposal. Just sayin'. Wink
manden
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Dec, 2015 06:00 am
@FBM,
I can say you , who the true God is :
the real creator of the universe ( more of him is not recognizable) .

That is the reason , why I say , with a religion it is incredibly difficult to recognize the real creator . Normally impossible .
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Dec, 2015 06:06 am
@manden,
More claim, but still no evidence. This is getting redundant. Can you do better? Like, cough up some credible evidence that your invisible, undetectable creator even exists in the first place? That would be helpful. Emotive rhetoric and exclamation points, not so much.
manden
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Dec, 2015 07:10 am
@FBM,
Evidence as you want , is not possible .
You must recognize personally . Everybody for himself .
From the real creator we can only recognize that he has created the universe
with unimaginable logic and power .
unimaginable logic means : the causes for the universe are unimaginable
higher than our causes .
That you must try to recognize .
Behind the unimaginable logic and power is the real creator , of course !
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Dec, 2015 07:25 am
@manden,
Give it up man. He wants to be spoon fed by others, not do the work himself.
manden
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Dec, 2015 09:36 am
@Leadfoot,
Everybody , who is really interested , gets his chance .
More I cannot do .
The mankind needs the truth much more than very much .
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Dec, 2015 09:41 am
@manden,
Quote:
Everybody , who is really interested , gets his chance .
I'm inclined to agree with that.

I could be wrong, but I'm not convinced that there is any real interest there.
manden
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Dec, 2015 09:58 am
@Leadfoot,
You are probably right . That was and is in Germany the same .
But I have no other possibility - I must try it .
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Dec, 2015 09:59 am
@Tuna,
You are quite right it is a trivial statement...the point being regarding nature how could it not be ? Any other definition is not only false but foolish !
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Dec, 2015 10:05 am
@FBM,
Not my definition of Reason...I work with what is mine not with vulgar coinage... Reasoning is action which unfolds from Reason in "agents"...REASON itself is the bedrock of such action. REASON is not even a law but the timeless order of Reality as a whole..I emphasise timeless. Its done.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 07:30:45