God and existence

With a chip that big on your shoulder, i wonder that you don't have balance problems as you walk around in the world.

Having a chip on the shoulder, is that not akin to being vain??? Not quite sure here...

No, it means someone who is resentful, and who is looking for a fight.

The only thing I'm looking for is a definition atm... As for fights? I'm a pacifist. This might have more to do with the fact that my fighting skills are absolutely abominable, then with any beliefs on my side.

Therefore I can only assume you make this remark because I have 'enraged' you in some manner?

Indeed they are not identical, but understanding the difference seems beyond a lot of people here. Whilst we are defining things, I have always understood that an atheist is someone who is without god, just as asymmetrical is something without symmetry, or amorphous something without form just as Set says. But the popular definition of atheist is someone who states "there is no god". But to be able to say this assumes perfect knowledge. As omniscience is generally held to be characteristic of God, one could not state with certainty "there is no god" without being one...something of a logical problem.

Naj wrote:



Once again, you misunderstand. My remark had nothing to do with you. Snood posted an "emoticon" with rolling eyes, which was an expression of his contempt for my expressed point of view. I respond to the fanatically religious, when i encounter them here, with scorn and ridicule. That offends Snood, who thinks that one's religious views ought never to be criticized. He gets angry when i refer to someone's preferred "god" as an imaginary friend. He takes every opportunity he finds to lash out at me about it. Therefore, my remark was not addressed to you, it was addressed to Snood. Yes, he would very much like to pick a fight over this issue.

However, i reserve my scorn of the religious for those who attempt to push their beliefs onto othes, and not simply in a doctrinal discussion. There are also those here who attempt to insist that abortion is wrong, that homosexuality is wrong, and that a theory of evolution is wrong, and that they know that because their "god" condemns these things, and they know this because they can quote scriptural authority for it. I ridicule such people, and that offends Snood. He ignores that when people simply ask questions about religion, i give him as honest an answer as i am able, if i have one. If i have none, then i don't participate.

Here are two recent examples in which someone simply asked a question about religion, and to which i responded without offering any judgment as to the "validity" of the religious belief in question:

Judaism vs Christianity

History of Voo Doo practices

Because Snood ignores the distinction between criticizing those who are hypocritical, or who attempt to push their religion on others, and those who simply ask questions, and because he jumps on me whenever he can on the subject of religion, i say he has a chip on his shoulder, and that he is looking for a fight.

An excellent observation Steve, and an hilarious thought--i'd never looked at it that way.

Steve,

such atheists as claim there is no good, are believers as well of course. They believe in said statement. Knowledge regarding the (non)existence of god is beyond human realms for now. It is about as hard to prove there is no god as it is to prove there is no black swan. Disproving the excistence of something does indeed imply knowing all other beings that can be reasanbly compared to that something and then proving that all said beings are not (completely) equal to said something.

Setanta, it might be betteer henceforth to assume I misread/misinterpret your posts in general, it would save you from wasting the time of typing your first sentence.

See the quote

YES :-)
When the music stops, i return to the silent spiritual state.

That is, the ever-present UnKnowable Self... misery in mind is dead.

Raise infinity to the power of infinity...the only answer is God.

God = the good One, if you dont mind.

infinity = the immensity
.
.

i think you mean 'then yes' cause the universe DOES exist

God= supremely perfect being;

i think that the only things in the world which actually mean anything are certain qualities such as JUSTICE and GOODNESS and God is the culmination of all these qualities. and these qualities permeate not just the spirtual level but also the physical level.

How can god be the culmanation of kindness and goodness when he killed all those innocent babies with the world flood?

HE KILLED NO ONE. EVIL IS INEVITABLE IN THE WORLD OF GENERATION AND CORRUPTION.

JUSTICE WILL BE DONE.

raheel, You do not need to shout. Your logic is all screwed up, btw. God created the world flood, not satan or the devil, although many describe god as the devil. He created this world, and everything that is possible to happen. He knew before hand what was to happen. Otherwise your god is not omnipotent as all of you claim; can't have it both ways - it's just not logical.

If you ask me, omnipotence is bull. No doubt you've all heard the argument along the lines of "can God make a rock that he himself cannot lift?".

And meL999,

try geting into the habit of speaking as you would to another person face to face.

cicerone, omnipotent is not equal to omniscient, and even with omniscient it's not logical, at least not to me, that this implies knowing the future. Why?
As for applying the principle of logic on the bible... That is a completely hopeless job. You'd have more luck trying to haul water from the sea in a leaky bucket, because this at least might allow you to bring dregs... There is no reason and little rhyme to be found in the bible, but then again, the bible isn't really about logic, right?

Naj.

naj, Most of us that have learned to be somewhat critical of teachings that are contradictory have no problem citing where those contradictions are - as often as is necessary to get the point across to those folks that seem to deny them.

But your analogy about the leaky bucket has much merit. Alas, I am stubborn.