Believers Have to Prove the Existence of God

Jump to Last Post 51-100 of 115 discussions (883 posts)

0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Show me an atheists that really wants an honest answer and I'll show you my beanstock that climbs to the stars.
reply report
77
calynbanaposted 11 years ago
Why?
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Are you serious.....why ? Do dod od oddooo do do!
reply report
1. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Brave.......
  So very, very brave........................
  
  Scroll up - you can read - right?
  reply report
2. 77
  calynbanaposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Is this towards my comment? I am a little lost.
  reply report
  70
  unitifyposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Click on chronological, top right.
  reply report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you unifity! I didn't know we could put in chronological order!
  reply report
  70
  unitifyposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You are most kindly welcome.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yes you are.
  
  The thing "unitify," was making an argument that because it loves me and I cannot prove it - this means there is a god.
  
  I said that I did not believe it and asked that it prove this love.
  
  So far - no proof and it is pretending that is not what it meant. Pretty sure the horse comment was the same as you - not having bothered to read the rest of the exchange.
  reply report
  77
  calynbanaposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No I read your exchange Mark, I thought it was quite amusing. Actually this whole thread is quite funny.I was confused about horsebacks comment.
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Mark Knowles,....... I aint skeert ! Wanna come beat me up tough guy ?
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Firstly , If you're addressing me I'm never angered , if you knew me at all , you would know that . However I do find myself shaking my head at the utter stupidity of some of the political correctness of these posts . As in this one . Why I even bother adressing it is another story . But anger ...No. a mild disgust at the immaturity of my fellow humans , yes !

'Mark Knowles it all ", The reason I use an avatar is irrelevent to this or any response I make to forum posts , and especially to the common sense responses I provide , some of my writing however is intensly personal , or might be to family and friends , get over yourself ! You're not that important , if my name and address were enough to settle the anger or guilt you might feel at posting or resonding to me , let me know by email . I'll gladly remedy that !
reply report
1. 64
  heatblast92posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The political correctness is what's keeping all of us still writing on Hubpages, let alone alive right now... and I think you're confusing your offended sensitivities with Mark's, or rather, his lack thereof.
  reply report
2. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  LAWL!
  
  http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/103349
  
  And I quote:
  
  Just pointing out the hypocrisy - that is all.
  reply report
47
monkeymindsposted 11 years ago
Nah! Proof is for math, philosophy, and religion. Existence is purely a matter of science. Reality could not care less about a human's beliefs.
reply report
56
Taurus2posted 11 years ago
Do they need so? Hah!
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Mark Kwols it all , what diff does that really make ?!
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Its not hyocracy if its not intended to simply offen Christians as most of your posts !
reply report
61
dianetrotterposted 11 years ago
i will add mark and a horseback to my prayer list. Can't we ALL get along!
reply report
1. 57
  knowledgeismightposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Best joke <3 ;-)
  I know we should but as long as we are discussing what should be a private thing and if discuss we tend to 'aggressive' kind of conversation which leads to both parties using harsher words as they should. And, because it the www it's obvious that most people can't discuss using a good climate. You can't hear irony, emphasis / intonation therefore you'll interpret mostly every sentence the wrong way.
  reply report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  not me. Look at my post. I like to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. I stopped posting on Huffington Post because people were way, way to emotional and insensitive. I guess I have to choose thread wisely. I wonder what is behind all of the sarcasm and hostility. I assume there is a lot of history and hurt. Could be wrong.
  reply report
  57
  knowledgeismightposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Didn't say anything like that.
  
  According to hurt: Probably but who have not experienced hurt or bad moments in any way?
  There's no one. By the way, no offend just mentioning: hurt (etc.) could also be an excuse for believing in god. There's always another point of view.
  
  Telling atheists or those who don't believe things your way what they could have experienced so far had led them to their belief could also be said to the other person. It's always like this:
  <->
  Know what I mean?
  reply report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  sure jelly bean?
  
  i couldn't resist that. My students rap so much that they try to rhyme everything. It never makes sense.
  
  Back to the subject, I just believe everyone has free will to believe what they choose. When I am comforting/encouraging someone, I go by my experience.
  
  I have many hurting students. Yesterday, they went 'to the line' (Freedom Writers) and all had hurt and pain. Some share spiritual perspectives. I listened because I don't want to proselytize.
  reply report
0
Giselle Maineposted 11 years ago
Nope I don't agree with the OP. One thing on which virtually all Christians and atheists agree upon is that neither side can successful prove or dis-prove the existence of God. So neither side is able to come up with any proof of their viewpoint. To put the 'onus' on one side or another is silly when neither side is successfully able to prove or disprove God's existence!!
reply report
1. 61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Hi Giselle, You are so right. Christians believe by faith. Faith is the substance of things hoped for for which evidence is unseen. Hebrews 11:1 (I believe).
  reply report
2. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  But that rather implies that the existence/non existence of a thing hold exactly the same possibilities.
  So - when a believer postulates the existence of something that is (a) invisible, (b) untestable, (c) logically impossible, and then goes on to makes claims about what this invisible god-thingy wants you and me to do behavior-wise - the onus is on them to prove it. This would be why this religion causes so many fights.
  
  Logically - if "a" god is possible - there is an infinite number of possible gods. So - your god is - at best - infinitely improbable.
  
  In any case - what you are calling "god" is actually a small Arcurian Megaturd that fell through a freak worm hole from dimension 677,9999.000000009 - and you have mistaken it for a psychotic super being that needs worshiping by people incapable of rational thought. The Megaturd will - upon your death - inflict numerous punishments on you until the end of time. You will be begging for mercy within .003 milliseconds, but the agony will endure. Unless you carry a small dried turd around with you and pray to it every day at sundown.
  
  Prove me wrong!
  reply report
  0
  Giselle Maineposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Even the situation that you are postulating, I would not demand proof from you. You are not answerable to me; nor I to you. If you want to believe in the Arcurian Megaturd, why would I have problem with that? If I personally find it ridiculous, I can simply choose not to believe it.
  
  I think it is a 'leap of faith' to believe in the existence, or the non-existence, of God. There is no proof in either direction. Ultimately it is up to each person to decide what he/she believes. Debate is healthy and encouraged, but asking for proof is not going to work. It would be ideal if people could be tolerant of other people's choices and ideas, even if they don't agree with them. And I mean this goes both ways - atheist to Christian, Christian to atheist.
  
  Ultimately, by the law of the land, I haven't committed any crime by being Christian, just as atheists haven't committed any crime by being atheist. Far be it for one group to demand proof from the other on their point of view.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I personally find your beliefs to be ridiculous and wish you would keep them to yourself. Of course you find not believing the nonsense you believe to be a "leap of faith," despite how ridiculous your beliefs are.
  
  Yet - how easily you dismiss the Arcurian Megaturd.................
  
  So - I guess you have hit the nail on the head. Without proof - your beliefs can be easily dismissed as "ridiculous," no matter how much you feebly attempt to compare a belief in something with a lack of belief in something as exactly the same "leap of faith."
  
  So your "leap of faith," in dismissing the Arcurian Megaturd is exactly the same as the "leap of faith," you undertook to become a Christian. Equally valid.
  reply report
  0
  Giselle Maineposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No, I did NOT dismiss YOUR beliefs in the Arcurian Megaturd, I only dismissed MY belief in it (actually I didn't even SAY I thought it was ridiculous, I said, "IF I think it is ridiculous....". I said it was your choice, I wouldn't demand proof either way of it. If I don't agree, I will simply choose not to believe it. I won't demand proof. Unlike me, you are asking to demand proof of other people's beliefs. Ridiculous. I don't have ANY problem with you beleiving in the A.M. I think it is ridiculous for ME to believe it. If you don't want to believe in Christianity - that's fine. But don't expect you have the right to demand proof of it from those who do, any more than I have the right to demand proof of your A.M.
  
  Sorry but your arguments are not well-thought out enough for me.
  
  And unlike you, I am quite happy for other people to have beliefs I don't believe in.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Of course my arguments are not well thought out enough for you. They actually make sense. You dismiss my belief as "ridiculous," and then say you did not dismiss my belief. This is the strong cognitive dissonance that believers such as yourself always demonstrate. I mean - I am assuming you find it ridiculous - unless you have converted and now believe? If not - you have found my belief ridiculous and chosen not to believe?
  
  So - are you carrying a small turd in your pocket? I am trying to get enough people together to make it mandatory for children to carry a small turd to public school every day. Will you help me - or are you planning on eternal damnation?
  reply report
  0
  Giselle Maineposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You responded to what you expected me to write without bothering to read what I actually wrote.
  reply report
  0
  Giselle Maineposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I think it's actually quite funny that you seem bothered by the fact that I believe in Christianity while I am not in the least bit bothered by what religion other people are (whether atheist, Muslim, Hindu, etc.)! Oh well whatever, this is obviously something we will never agree on. What I believe to be the truth (Christianity) is something that I have put a lot of thought into. If you arrive at a different conclusion about your beliefs so be it - not everyone will agree with everyone else's beliefs.
  
  If you think I am being irrational, whatever, so be it. It doesn't bother me in the slightest if you think negatively of my beliefs in Christian (and my being happy to be one, for that matter).
  reply report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I agree with you Giselle. For some reason the thought of belief in Christ and His Word drives people nuts.
  reply report
  0
  Giselle Maineposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks Diane, I too cannot fathom why some people have so many issues with the religion of others. Everyone is responsible for their own religious beliefs. I am not answerable to other people for my beliefs, nor should others be answerable to me. Just as I can't prove the existence of God, neither atheists disprove it - that's fine. What I think is silly is when people are expecting others to justify their religious stance (whether it be atheist, Christian, Muslim, etc) - last I checked, it's not a crime to believe in a religion, no matter what the reasons are.
  
  So I don't feel any 'burden of proof' upon myself. If an atheist has a problem with my religion and with my thought processes, the problem is at their end (by expecting people to justify themselves to them), not at my end. If they choose to be unhappy about that (and continue to have the arrogance of expecting other people to be answerable to them about their religious beliefs), then so be it. Like I said, I don't feel any burden of proof at all.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Not really. More the actions and behavior of those who believe such stuff. If you want to believe in a non existent god - that is your business. It is a shame you cannot keep such beliefs to yourselves and feel the need to spread it.
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No, its when you invoke Christ as some sort of reality to be used as a tool for driving societies that drives people nuts.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I genuinely don't care what you believe. If you kept it to yourselves - it wouldn't even be an issue - would it? The only reason I responded to you was because - according to you - believing in a particular majikal super being out of an infinite number of possible super beings takes exactly the same leap of faith as using reason to reject it. I understand you need to bring every one down to your level - I guess I object to be told I am incapable of making a rational judgment.
  
  Bet you get your brakes checked regularly though - don't you? It is the rational thing to do.
  
  Have you prayed to your turd today? Are you saved or damned?
  reply report
  0
  Giselle Maineposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Freedom of speech and religion means that I am quite within my rights to talk about my religious beliefs if I choose to (just as atheists are welcome to spread their beliefs, Muslims too, Hindus too, etc etc). I will occasionally answer my cellphone with a religious greeting. If this type of behavior offends you, so be it. I will not be silenced.
  
  It is not a crime for me to talk about Christianity, nor do I have a problem when others talk about their religious viewpoints, even if I don't agree with the viewpoint itself. If my willingness to talk about my religion and to spread religious greetings and/or information bothers someone, then the problem is at their end, not mine. I haven't broken any laws, and I refuse to be silenced.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I understand you need to keep spouting off about your religious beliefs. Nor do you care whom you offend - I get it.
  
  Odd you complain when people tell you how obnoxious that is and how ridiculous your beliefs are.
  
  You can't have it both ways. This freedom of speech works both ways you know.
  reply report
  0
  Giselle Maineposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I have made it completely clear that I am all for everyone else spouting off their beliefs too. I am completely for freedom of speech and of religion. You are the one who appears to be against that type of freedom! Otherwise why would you care whether or not I keep it to myself?
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Because of the conflicts it causes. (See:History)
  
  I am not against any type of freedom - I am just trying to explain to you why people call you on your irrational beliefs. You say something ridiculous, and people will tell you how ridiculous it is.
  
  If you kept your religion where it belongs - we would not have all these arguments and fights. Make sense? Can you fathom it?
  report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No - I responded to what you actually wrote. I do think it is wonderful that you are not like all the other Christians though. Christianity is pretty intolerant of any and all other religions and practices. But - Good for you rejecting all that stuff in the bible. Well done.
  reply report
  0
  Giselle Maineposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  We are both 2 humans with different viewpoints on religion. We each came to our own viewpoints with careful thought and reflection. We each believe ours to be the truth, and yes, they are mutually exclusive viewpoints. We each believe the other is irrational in their beliefs (since neither of us can prove nor disprove the existence of God). I am not a worse or better person than you for believing differently to you (and vice versa). The main issue I have is that I don't believe that one side should be asking for proof of postion from the other side, when NEITHER side can prove their position. I agree with you that there have been a lot of issues in history that have stemmed from religious viewpoints. But ultimately, that is simply not a good reason for everyone to be atheist. I believe in Christianity because I believe it to be the TRUTH (as simple as that), not because I think 'society needs it', or because I want to be annoying, or whatever. If I believe something to be the truth, then that is why believe it - not because of any potential effects one way or another about conflict.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Odd - you are the one making a positive statement. Therefore the onus is on you to prove it. I simply don't believe your claim of an invisible super being. How is this not rational?
  
  I understand you do not care about the conflict your beliefs cause - I get that. This is one of the many reasons I reject your belief.
  reply report
  0
  Giselle Maineposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I would rather not have conflict to begin with. But, for example, if I believed 1 plus 1 equalled 2, and someone else believed differently and wanted to start a fight with me about it, I would not suddenly reject the laws of mathematics just to avoid an argument. So, while I would prefer not to have conflict, I will not compromise my beliefs on that basis. Neither would many people, I imagine - regardless of their religious viewpoint. I mean, if there was a proposal that everyone in the world become, for example, Hindu, to avoid religious conflicts, I don't think that the atheists, Christians or Muslims would be willing to compromise their beliefs for that. Everyone is always going to have irreconcible differences in viewpoint about ANYTHING (not just religion). I have my beliefs, you have yours.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No - you have your beliefs. I don't hold a belief - I just reject yours. I understand you will not compromise your desire to spread your religion - regardless of the conflicts - I get it. See: History.
  
  This is one of the many reasons I reject your religion.
  reply report
  86
  HeadlyvonNogginposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Come on Mark, you know better than that. Unless you know everything about everything, which of course nobody does, then you hold beliefs in something. You've formed your beliefs around those things that cannot be known based on your own leanings. Everybody stands on a foundation based at least partially on beliefs where there is no certainty.
  report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No - in this case I am simply rejecting this belief as nonsense.
  report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  It seems like the life work of some people is to get other people to stop believing what they choose to believe!
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The issue here is not so much who believes what, but instead, how those beliefs become some sort of reality that we are supposed to accept.
  
  The Arcurian Megaturd is not being invoked with concepts such as abortion, birth control and a host of other issues Christianity wishes to impose on us.
  
  If Christians merely kept their beliefs behind closed doors where they belong, both Jesus and the Arcurian Megaturd will find the respect they deserve.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Never ceases to amaze me how many Christians have their head in the sand and pretend that their irrational beliefs have no impact on the rest of society. Then they can claim to be "shocked," that anyone has an opinion on what they choose to believe.
  
  Have you prayed to your turd today?
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, as I watched it swing to and fro and then release itself into the glistening and spinning waters of purity of essence.
  reply report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Great comments Giselle!
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I agree. Beliefs should be dismissed as ridiculous when they have no basis in reality.
  
  Are you carrying your turd this morning?
  reply report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Bowel movement? I must have missed something. It is a natural body function. If you have surgery, you can't leave the hospital until you have had one. The body is wonderfully made to include a flushing process.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yes - you missed something. Don't worry - it will only result in eternal torment.
  
  How 'bout those wisdom teeth and appendixes. They suck ass.
  reply report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I had my wisdom teeth removed when I was abou 25. i got an infection and had to have holes drilled in my cheeks to drain. But for the grace of God, I would have died. I went to a different surgeon for the corrective surgery.
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  So, why didn't you just pray to God to remove your wisdom teeth Himself?
  reply report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Then there would be no jobs for dental surgeons. I'm blessed to have a job and many, many kids to mentor. Mark, you obviously give a lot of thought to God. I'm keeping you on my prayer list. The real miracle is the moment you become a believer. If you keep questioning, that means you are seeking. Seek and you will find.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Not a chance. Sorry. I can use my brain. I have given your beliefs a good deal of thought - yes. It is contradictory nonsense. You don't even understand why the first woman - Lilith was removed from the mythology. Always shocked when women - and especially black women, embrace this religion. Makes me fear for the future of humanity.
  
  I have sought - it is irrational, nonsense, written to cow ignorant peasants and divide the masses and keep them pliant. But - you keep on praying if it makes you feel good.
  
  What a shame you gave up looking when you found this placebo. Still - it is very, very easy - isn't it? All the answers to all your fears - all with one majik word. No more looking, no more seeking. All you have to do is argue with anyone who does not believe. Support Chick Fil A and you are good with Jesus.
  
  Interesting that you think god gave us the pain and suffering of wisdom teeth in order to employ dental surgeons. How many did he murder with a burst appendix to keep ambulance drivers and coffin makers employed? Cancer? Just keeping the pharmaceutical conglomerates in business.
  
  Is that why so many have poor eyesight? Not bad design - just keeping the eye glass manufacturers pounding plastic out to destroy the environment?
  
  Got to say - that is one of the funniest justifications for an irrational belief I have heard for months. \
  reply report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Hi Mark, I had to look Lilith up because I never heard of it/her. I browsed quite a bit and read about a demonic creature in Jewish mythology and one account was that she was Adams first wife ... before Eve.
  
  There is so much information out there that there is no way that I will every know it. I won't worry about it because all I need to know is Jesus is God from Genesis to Revelations. I am blessed to be a Black woman who teaches students of all races and attend church with all races of people.
  
  I lived through the segregated and hate filled south and saw people of many ethnicities fighting for racial equality ... some til death. It was difficult for me to get jobs (I wrote an article on my White Heroine) but when I did get jobs I put 100% in to the disappoinment of some people. When I was an auditor I was underestimated which surprised auditees when they saw my reports and supporting schedules.
  
  God said I can't love Him if I don't love my neighborhood. I live daily aware of that. Yes, there are still racist and evil people of all ethnicities. I have hope within me that cannot be killed by ridicule because I know what I know because I know.
  
  And .... I'm still praying for you dude!
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Like I said - pray all you want as long as it makes you feel better. Clearly you missed my point. Why was Lilith replaced by a female that was subservient?
  report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  How sad. To ignore all the information in the world in order to focus on one mythical book.
  
  That would most certainly be the perfect picture of a closed mind.
  report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Trouble, do you feel that you have pored over all of the vast resources available? I doubt that anyone can say that they have read that exhaustively. Then once you have read all of that, what does it do for you?
  report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Of course not.
  
  To be intellectual honest and knowledgeable in order to understand the world around me.
  
  It would be ignorant and dishonest to not want something like that.
  report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yup - that s some pretty bad design - agreed.
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Then, why was the body made with an appendix?
  
  "The human appendix is a vestigial structure. A vestigial structure is a structure that has lost all or most of its original function through the process of evolution. The vermiform appendage is the shrunken remainder of the cecum that was found in a remote ancestor of humans."
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermiform_appendix
  reply report
  68
  Ceegenposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  That's a load of baloney. Go ahead and use wikipedia at college and see how far that gets you.
  
  The appendix is vital to staving off infection and building the immune system of fetuses:
  http://soundmedicine.iu.edu/segment/219 … -a-Purpose
  
  It also seems to have a function later in life for the culture of beneficial bacteria that aid in digestion within the GI tract:
  http://www.webmd.com/digestive-disorder … ve-purpose
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  From the link...
  
  "Although the study stops short of providing direct proof of this proposed purpose for the appendix..."
  
  reply report
  68
  Ceegenposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Because they don't want to be labeled as evolution deniers. Anyone who is an evolution denier is automatically a creationist!
  
  People lose jobs over stuff like that, and I don't expect a whole lot of media coverage. But the same "evidence" that proves black holes exist, is the same format of evidence that proves the appendix is not a vestigial structure.
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Not really. There most certainly are very strong candidates for black holes however no direct evidence for them is in our hands, so to speak. We wouldn't be here if it was.
  
  Nonetheless, black holes are solutions from General Relativity for objects that should actually exist, and when astrophysicists observe our universe, they find a lot of objects that meet the exact requirements of those solutions.
  
  Scientists are now making an effort to link over 50 radio telescopes across the globe in order to get an actual picture of a black hole, the one that is supposed to be at the core of our galaxy.
  
  http://www.space.com/14278-black-hole-p … scope.html
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  LOL
  
  Is all science a cunning conspiracy to destroy your irrational beliefs?
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Knowles , I'd like to be a fly on that turd in heaven on your day ! Just to watch the look on your face for a while !...... Here's the gyst , We can't all be idealistic intellectual mega- beings that can see through all things spiritual . The rest of us humble human beings have to rely on that ,that lies beneath those like you , simple and pure faith. Get some , you might actually enjoy it . Of coarse just like your president , you might have to cling to your" bible and your gun"! Oh I'm sorry .........well maybe your anti-christian forum posts and your ultra -liberal firebombs. By the way if you were to read my profile BEFORE you opine , you might see that I don't hide behind anything ! PROOF , you kind of anti's wouldn't believe even ...proof !
reply report
1. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  That is very Christian of you. Hoping to be there when I get punished by the Invisible Super Being for not believing.
  
  See - if you hadn't posted this:
  
  http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/103349
  
  And I quote:
  
  I wouldn't have said anything. See how that works?
  reply report
2. 0
  Motown2Chitownposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Eek! Ed, I'd like to think there are neither flies nor turds in Heaven...LOL
  reply report
65
isenhower33posted 11 years ago
Lets just say if i'm a believer an i'm wrong, what happens? But now what if you're wrong? I dont believe because of what could happen if i dont. I just want to see what the guy that doesnt believe will say. I love all people no matter what belief though
reply report
1. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  But - the FSM burns believers for believing without evidence.
  
  You will burn!
  reply report
2. 58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You've wasted your life believing in a lie.
  
  Then, there are a great many believers who don't believe in the same god who are also wrong. At the very least, non-believers are being honest and not choosing one belief over another to follow of the many religions out there. Your god will appreciate our honesty.
  
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
You keep pointing out the avatar thing Knowles , and in the mean time you miss the whole point... ! For all we know you aren't mark knowles it all , which doesn't even matter ........ Great .....you're too intelligent to believe . Yet, you don't offend the muslim or, or the native American, the buddist or the darkest Austrailian aborigianal , You make no negative claims to the Jewish ? Come on knowles grow up ......want some more P.C. cool aid !..... Jees' you seem intelligent , why not be wise !
reply report
1. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah - I keep pointing pout the avatar thing because of your attack on anyone who hides behind an avatar and fake user name as being a coward. I miss the whole point? How so? What was the point in that case?
  http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/103349
  
  The Muslim? I make fun of them at every opportunity. Not very many here though.
  Why would I offend the Native American? I respect their belief system.
  Buddhist - married to one who thinks much the same way as I do about your religion. Guess you don't know much about Buddhism huh?
  Never met an Australian aboriginal. Do they believe the nonsense you guys believe?
  Jews? Ridiculous belief system, based on absolutely no evidence at all. Guess you missed this thread where I prove there was no Exodus? http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/103854
  
  Grow up? I usually come into contact with Christianists such as yourself. I am non-denominational anti-religionist.
  
  Cool? PC? Wise? What are you talking about? At least make an attempt at proper English.
  reply report
59
Jeramiposted 11 years ago
How can we prove that which can't be defined ???
reply report
60
CineReviewerposted 11 years ago
Believers believe in the existence of God not through reasons of proof but by mere faith. For them, it's enough to believe there is one.

And why should they prove the existence of God? In the first place,they can't prove it because there really is no God.

And if it's enough for believers to believe that there is a God without any kind of concrete proof, why should they need to prove God's existence? For whom? Or for what?

Non-believers - the real ones - do not really need proofs. They're non-believers so they will remain so because there is no proof.

Those who claim to not believe God but challenge the believers to present concrete proofs of God's existence are not really non-believers. They're actually believers who are in doubt. The believers who are in doubt will never get their proofs, anyway because there really is none.
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Perhaps its all because only the extremely intellectually inclined people are so far above the rest of us that they just dont need religion , Only proof of everything including our reliance on faith alone as "enough". If you have to ask for proof ....you will never get anyway.
reply report
1. 60
  CineReviewerposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I don't think that those who don't need religion are necessarily "extremely intellectual".
  
  What I consider to be "extremely intellectual" are those who let those who believe there is a God practice their faith because that is their right. For one to be really intellectual one has to have the good sense to respect that right.
  
  One's practice of religion is a right. So, it's not an option if we would like to respect those who want to practice a certain religion. It's a must that we respect to respect their religion - it's our responsibility as a human being to another being.
  reply report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I love this Cine!!!
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  That is noble, unfortunately those religions don't offer or show respect to anyone, hence they don't deserve respect by anyone.
  reply report
34
ChristopherNguyenposted 11 years ago
What it does for him is get him more followers just like any other religions. Spreading the word and thinking that its right, but it could be wrong. I personally like jainismus point of view, because it's rational and there's proof. Religion's point of view is so vague that every knowledge a person should know is written in a book while science progress. I am still shock that people don't know about personal time, or virtual particles. We can look out in the stars to know our past, because it takes time for light to travel back. When I look at the stars from the reflections of our past I can tell you this, there's no god.
reply report
1. 61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Wow Christopher!
  reply report
60
CineReviewerposted 11 years ago
And I personally believer there is no God. But I won't really treat those who believe there is one, antagonistically. I don't think it's proper. Let's debate and convince each other with our own beliefs - that's alright. But, to be disrespectful towards another - that's not the right way to convince or to explain the whole truth about religion.

We should know better.
reply report
1. 64
  heatblast92posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  More often than not, it's really the other way around. Kinda reminds me of the time the tag 'God is not great' was trending in Twitter, around the time Christopher Hitchens passed away, and it incited a lot of hate, name-calling and threats of death from the supposedly religious.
  reply report
  60
  CineReviewerposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I said "But, to be disrespectful towards another - that's not the right way to convince or to explain..."
  
  So, I was referring to both sides. Some religious and some who do not believe in God have been disrespectful. I've read the comments, Sir.
  reply report
63
Momma Miaposted 11 years ago
Just the topic, length and depth here implies the desire for a greater understanding:) Best way to gain it is through true debate. Most of my dear friends are/were atheist and after decades of this type discussions, they disclosed to me how very much they wanted to believe in God. Some times intelligence seems to get in their way or just a real need to debate.
My best friend died in my arms and I was told that he indeed believed , because he felt God through me. Not the way I had imagined anyone would gain Gods love an mercy... but hey as a christian . I will take that as the hugest compliment I have ever been given:)
wishing all well
Mia
reply report
1. 61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Great thoughts momma mia. I have been thinking the same thing. Non-believers passionately try to get believers to see non-believer side. We were already there. We must be able to talk about the hope that lies within us at all times ... with a kind word.
  reply report
  61
  Praetorposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  If only your philosophy were the rule, instead of the exception. This is an argument that has been around long before Christianity, and one that will be around long after Christianity has faded away.
  
  The problem that I, and most of the non-believers that I know personally, have with believers (specifically Christians) is their unfounded assertion that they're "right" and that everyone else is "wrong"; yet when pressed for some evidence that would seem to allow for this kind of arrogance, they can offer nothing but the restated assertions of their faith.
  
  Anyone claiming that theirs is the only "correct" religion is as ridiculous as me claiming to be the world's greatest cook, and then using "because I said so" as my only means of validating that claim.
  reply report
  77
  calynbanaposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I think that any one holding any belief system would believe that their belief system was right. Or else they wouldn't hold that particular belief system. If they were to believe other beliefs were equally right then again they would not maintain their own belief system. It wouldn't be logical to believe in something that one does not think is the right belief for whatever reason.
  
  Now that being said it is entirely possible and I would say entirely necessary to respect other belief systems, questioning every set of beliefs (including your own) constantly as we learn new information. This is the only way to ensure that we are not set up with blind faith and are well informed about choices. It also validates our own feelings of being right.
  
  Also you have stated your belief that anyone holding the belief that their beliefs are correct is arrogant and it is ridiculous to believe. Are you not asserting this to be a right belief? Should I then conclude that your belief is arrogant and ridiculous? Or should I give it a thorough chance of research and then come to the conclusions the belief, and the believer deserves?
  reply report
  61
  Praetorposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The problem is that believers don't question their beliefs, they simply accept it on faith. They adhere to a foundation of archaic dogma that, is itself, simply a collection of pre-existing mythologies. They're not open to new thinking or new ideology.
  
  You're correct in that, I do feel that my beliefs are right, the only difference is, unlike religion however, I am willing to accept that, at some point, there may be a something that comes along (i.e. the expanding realm of quantum physics) that changes everything we know to be true. That's where the difference exists: religion is unwilling to grow, science seeks to.
  
  Science is fluid- it evolves, there was a time when the best scientific knowledge reflected a geocentric model of the Universe, then Galileo came along with the heliocentric model; science adapted to reflect this new wisdom, the church persecuted him as a heretic. To this day, religion still advocates "creationism" and a 6,000 - 7,000 year old Earth, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
  
  If religion were benign then there wouldn't be an issue, but it's not; religion imposes itself on others, attempting to control education, social and public policy, and dictate medical research. Religion is trying to force itself on a society that's outgrown it, attempting to maintain some sort of relevance.
  reply report
  77
  calynbanaposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You all painting all believers with the same brush. I am a believer and do not believe that the Earth is 6000 years old. I think it is billions of years old. I believe in evolution, in the Big Bang. I also believe in the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.
  
  Religion the way you speak of it is a problem, it should always be looked at with a critical eye. It should be examined and when new information comes along that proves a person absolutely wrong I think the only intellectually honest thing to do is to try and understand the new facts and apply them to your world view.
  
  I am a believer but I have doubts, I am still not sure about everything I have read in the Bible or in scientific theories. The point is to question always, to seek the truth and to adapt.
  
  Atheists and agnostics often fall into the same trap of the religious people you describe. Closing their minds to information.
  reply report
  61
  Praetorposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, I am. Christians have had 2,000 years to get their house in order, and yet you still have the majority of them that claim to despise the radical fundamentalist element, yet they do nothing to stop it.
  
  See, that's the problem: believers try to mold the facts to fit their beliefs instead of reevaluating their beliefs based on the facts.
  
  Let's not forget that it was a thirst for knowledge that created religion in the first place. We crawled out of our caves and wanted to know where rain came from, what the moon was, or how fire was made; and since no one knew, we created "Gods", mythic, supernatural "catchalls" to explain the explainable.
  
  Over the centuries, knowledge has steadily replaced faith in almost every aspect of human existence, and it's lead to advancements in medicine, communications, exploration, and technology that have enlightened humanity. In the 2,000 years since it's creation, what has religion given humanity aside from some artwork?
  reply report
  77
  calynbanaposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I think I didn't explain myself well. When I said apply the new facts to their worldview I was trying to say that yes people should definitely reevaluate their views and beliefs. Your worldview should be shaped and molded according to the new information you acquire.
  
  If there was some in irrefutable proof disproving some aspect of beliefs found that I understood and trusted then I would be forced to change my beliefs and views. I think this should be the same for everybody.
  
  I think the question of what religion has given us is a very hard one to answer, it is a very emotional question and it is hard for a person to answer in a way that satisfies another. Personally I do not like religion. However I do have faith in God. One does not need to be religious or ascribe to a religion in order to follow Jesus or God. I would be categorized as a Christian for sure, but I do not participate in any religious behavior really. At least not the way religion is now understood.
  
  I would like if you explained your thoughts regarding knowledge replacing religion a little further.
  reply report
  61
  Praetorposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  There was a time when it was common to sacrifice animals (and sometimes people) for a better harvest; then, as we developed agriculture, we learned that the sacrifices had nothing to do with crops or the harvest. There was a time when people worshiped fire, now we know that it's just a chemical reaction. Lightning and thunder have been worshiped by dozens of religions, we know now that it's just an electric discharge in the atmosphere.
  
  There are literally hundreds of examples of this throughout history.
  reply report
  60
  CineReviewerposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I agree with your calynbana.
  
  We should always look at the world, critically. To use the information - whether of the past or of the present - to help understand things and the world.
  
  However, we should also understand that not everyone is the same. We have different perspectives, different attitudes and different knowledge. Some people think critically, some don't and many simply do not care - they just accept the things that they learned.
  
  And those who think more critically should understand these differences in knowledge in order to apply the right technique in informing the rest of the world. Those who think critically should avoid arrogance because those who are less knowledgeable won't listen to them - no matter how right their points are. Those who think critically should convince and explain the right way - diplomatically, that is. And they must also learn to listen to the opinion of those who are less knowledgeable so they would know best how to explain things to them.
  
  And in the end of it all, it should not be forgotten that the reason why we want to find out as much as we can about this world, why we want to inform those who are less informed, those who are less knowledgeable so that we may grow in numbers who think more critically. The more critical people there are, the more there will be to analyze the world and change it to a better world. We just can't end in debate.
  reply report
2. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Interesting - good point. Intelligence does tend to lead to non-belief in bronze age superstitions. I have had a lot of friends die in my arms as well - they always convert to reason at the point of death, because they say they can see reason in my eyes. They immediately stop worrying and relax, secure in the knowledge they will not be judged by their irrational beliefs after they die.
  
  As an atheist - I take that as a great compliment. Since I Came to Reason, I have converted many, many people from Fear to Reason. They are always grateful.
  reply report
  63
  Momma Miaposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Hmmm I would Like to add that I never try to convert but just live my life with God in it. Some call that being a witness. I call it living in Christ and Christ living in me However it is always wonderful to feel the compliment of helping others, no matter what one believes or does not believe:) Intelligence also aids in knowing what to believe and one that is highly intelligent in their knowing...... rarely feels a need to banter loudly
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yet here you are bantering loudly.
  reply report
  63
  Momma Miaposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Ahh I suppose that is with in the perception:) I thought I was bantering softly and lady like So since this is mild, you should actually see my loud banter LOL Some would run , yet I know that you wouldn't
  Hope you have a spectacular day Mark
  always
  wishingUwell
  Mia
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Ah - well - now you know. I wouldn't run - no. I like a bit of banter myself. Otherwise I wouldn't be here.
  
  Lovely day so far - except for not liking dealing with domain registrars all day long.
  reply report
  61
  Praetorposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Ahh, you have my sympathies sir. I would almost prefer a trip to the DMV... almost.
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Actually, intelligence will show you what NOT to believe and will usually crush faith, which is what is actually required to believe.
  reply report
59
Jeramiposted 11 years ago
Mark Knowles wrote:
That is a lot of "IF"s Jerami. There is no proof because he does not exist. Weird you don't understand that.
====================
ME
Well ... Lets try this one step at a time, What kind of proof would it take to prove to you that there is some kind of higher power. Forget for the time being, any and all descriptions that you have heard concerning what this entity is.
=================

Me some more
I believe that you do not have any reason what-so-ever to doubt the existence of beings living on a higher plane of existence than ours. You can honestly say that you have no reason to believe it and you can just as honestly say that you have no reason to despute it.
Your arguement seems to be confined to how religion has been representing such an entity.
reply report
59
Jeramiposted 11 years ago
Again Lets keep this as simple as posible. Don't attach unstated implications to my simple question.
I am NOT attaching any titles such as "GOD" to any of this.
Do you believe than Homosapiens are the most inteligent species in the universe?
That nothing exists that we are not aware of? And that there is no such thing as space time continiums. But if there is such a thing, there is only one and WE ARE in it.
Is Quantium physics not real science?
reply report
1. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  That is not what you said Jerami. You said this:
  
  Now you are changing it to a completely different question.
  
  I have no idea whether homo sapiens are the most intelligent species in the Universe - no. I highly doubt it given the apparent intelligence displayed by many of them.
  
  I feel certain there are many things that exist that we are not yet aware of.
  
  The Space/Time continuum is somewhat difficult to explain and I suspect the word you are looking for is spacetime. As far as we know - there is only one, and there does not appear to be a "higher plane of existence" where majika beings live - no.
  
  Quantum physics is theoretical physics and we are now beginning to explore that.
  
  Your point?
  reply report
  59
  Jeramiposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I feel certain there are many things that exist that we are not yet aware of.
  
  The Space/Time continuum is somewhat difficult to explain and I suspect the word you are looking for is spacetime. As far as we know - there is only one, and there does not appear to be a "higher plane of existence" where majika beings live - no.
  ======================
  
  There are Many, many, many etc. ... things which exist that we can not imagine, let alone provide any proof for. Understand that I am not emplying or denying the existence of what you call magical beings! But if I was , I am sure we could debate what defines a magical being. What one society would consider to be magical might be considered as normal in another.
  The point that I was origionally attempting to make is that you haven't been providing an arguement against there being an entity which religion calls GOD, Though you have been doing quite well argueing "Religions" many different perseptions of what such an entity would be.
  
  I might say that I have been walking on the beach. You then ask for proof of that. I take my shoes off and pour out a hand full of sand. This may not be proof enough for you while it is quite sufficient for me. And then someone else says that I am wrong because they have just came from the beach then proceeds to pour black sand from their shoes. (My sand was white) He states that he knows that the sand on the beach is black therefore I must be lieing.
  You then proclame that sinse we can not agree upon the color of the sand ???? there is no sand and there is no beach.
  reply report
  61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I like this!
  reply report
  59
  Jeramiposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you diane
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 11 years ago
Ohhhh , yeaaa ! , I love this thread too . But all it tells me is that humanity is the only species here on earth that has to justify its meager existance , and it's infantile squabbling about anything and everything . God! .....oh soo sooory . God has no say here! ......that is................ among the P.C. seudo -intellectuals of the hub page forums . Where all things christian , and christian alone are called to the front of the class. Where morons rule all supreme !
reply report
1. 61
  dianetrotterposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  One basic difference between Christianity and some non-believers is the spirt of gentleness v.s. meanness. Is it humane to insult people who don't believe what you believe? Many of the problems experienced in this world result from self elevation and the annihilation of those whom the selfish choose to bully. What happened to kindness and self control?
  reply report
78
Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years ago
Is it so restricting to be good? Is it so restricting to believe in God who demands goodness? If so, do not despair. Only God is good.

You, a soul, have a body and mind.
You can tune in (to yourself) to find what you want to do.

You are allowed to earn clean money and spend it in clean ways.
What joy there is in that...
What joy.
reply report
1. 58
  A Troubled Manposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  No, but it is restricting to believe in a God who demands worship and praise and will send you to Hell if you don't, despite being good.
  
  A "good God" would never send anyone to Hell simply because they were good.
  reply report
  78
  Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  And, ATM, what is your proof that God sends "anyone to hell simply because they were good?"
  And what is your proof that God "demands worship and praise?"
  (These are very peculiar comments... coming from you!)
  reply report
  44
  Ericdierkerposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  ATM work with this please. I am not required to love God. I am lucky as I already went to Hell and God let me back into heaven. (metaphorically)
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, sure.
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Is that supposed to be a joke? Have you not read the Bible? Have you not been in these forums long enough to read post after post after post from believers who say those things to us?
  reply report
44
Ericdierkerposted 10 years ago
I just love this one. Something metaphysical must be proven empirically? I am using Merriam/Webster construct here.
Here is the fun result. You must prove my love by things???
Or even better you must prove that I am not upset.
Here is a fun one: I hate the color pink, now prove it!!!
I am cold: Now prove it. I like chocolate: now prove it.
This is how silly this proposal is.

My wife did not believe that I still love her. So I wrote it down and now she believes I do.

Here is another "johnny is afraid of the dark" prove it.

And of course here: If you know and love God, prove it. How funny is that?? That is just hilarious.
reply report
1. 58
  A Troubled Manposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  What is silly are your comparisons. There is nothing metaphysical about any of those things, they can all be demonstrated easily.
  
  Yes, your comparisons are hilarious. Agreed.
  reply report
  44
  Ericdierkerposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Alrighty smarty pants ATM. Show me the steps to prove anger. Be careful for as soon as you do I will use them to prove God. Show me the logic in proving love and I will take that to prove Jesus is in my heart.
  Go ahead, hit me with your best shot.
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Is that a joke? We can observe your anger or your love and observe the results of changes in your brain activity and your biochemical makeup. This is not new stuff, it's been around for a while.
  
  How you can prove God by watching your brain activity is baffling but should prove to be interesting?
  reply report
  44
  Ericdierkerposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  You simply have an incorrect interpretation of what love is. God and love are synonymous.
  The rest the stuff is hyperbole and for man's little brain. 2k years ago they could not explain that now we can. It is not mystical or fantastical. God is simply nothing but love. No funny robes or long beards or a ranch style house called heaven. God is purely that energy that we can calculate as love by watching neurons and biochemical changes in us. Is pure energy matter??? I think not. Is pure energy real, I think so and my people call it God. Sort of like the God particle. God is just a name so we can talk about it and have a reference point. We need that.
  But you have just agreed that we can empericize Love, or love or luv and that it is different than animal lust of reproduction drive. It is real and you can call it love, I often do, but it is really just plain old God.
  reply report
  58
  A Troubled Manposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Not according to any scriptures. Good men would never demand someone worship and praise them, or else.
  
  Man's "little brain" has acquired much knowledge and understanding of the world around him. If you consider knowledge and understanding "hyperbole" then you should be living in a cave, with no computer or internet connection. Do you live in a cave or do you use all that mans knowledge and understanding have provided for you?
  
  True, it is science.
  
  Not according to scriptures.
  
  Your baseless assertion of what energy is does not preclude how we understand it.
  
  Matter and energy are equivalent, but in different forms.
  
  Your "people" have no understanding of energy.
  
  Yes, just like when we talk about unicorns and leprechauns, they have a name, too, despite the fact they are imaginary entities, much like your God.
  
  So, is that your proof for God?
  reply report
  78
  Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  What is your proof of NO God? If there was no God, there would be NOTHING.
  But there is something...everywhere you look, hear, feel, taste, touch and intuit!
  BTW: Evolution is proof of God.
  I am proof of God.
  And ATM is Proof of God!
  LOL!
  reply report
  0
  Deepes Mindposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Good luck getting this one to fly
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  However, Kathryn, a "NO GOD" is true! If God "Is" then that is the nothingness of the infinite.
  
  The average human mind can only conceive of a "god" as represented in some-thing that is see-able, or hear-able, or touch-able, or taste-able, or smell-able. The finite is all we can really comprehend.
  
  We cannot comprehend that nothingness, yet the reality is precisely in the No-thingness.
  
  Complicated? Yes, it is, until you go inwards and contemplate it.
  reply report
  44
  Ericdierkerposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Such anger is truly proof of the lack of God in some of my brothers.
  reply report
  78
  Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Even the anger is Proof of God!
  reply report
  60
  prog47posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence. you're just making an assetion out of the top of your head. what if I said that anger is proof of no god? why would your claim be any more valid than mine ?
  reply report
53
MarioBalloposted 10 years ago
Ok, So i can't prove anything as far as the existence of gods. I am supposed to be roman catholic, but i don't live up to that ascribed status. I mean, there are like dozens of religions that claim that their god, or gods, are the one and only force and anything else is obsolete and idolized characters. I don't really want to say I consider myself atheist as i find them a bit to full of themselves and neither do i want to say i am a religious person because i am not. All i want i say is that- i won't place anyone or anything above me, no kings or monarchs, no gods or angels, no one, i am not a slave or anything like that, i simply won't bow down to anyone. I will die before i bow down to anyone. Just like i wont place any being above myself. Someone i have to be so thankful for everything in have done myself, give then praise for all the sacrifices and struggles i when through and then blame myself when i fail to do so( well it would be my fault after all) and be like " oh its what you want it and i will accept that" Fuck that.... You wanna be given credit for what i do, and place the full blame on me when i fail, that sounds more like the capitalist system of america that fucks its people up when it fails.... just saying mes amis
reply report
1. 60
  janesixposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I don't think you have to worsjip God to believe He exists. I don't. I fear and respect him(sometimes) but worship? No.
  reply report
  53
  MarioBalloposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, I respect my family and their dedicated religious way of living, i just hate it when they push the boundaries and try to force me into their ideology and way of life.
  reply report
2. 44
  Ericdierkerposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  If someone is bowing down to worship a being, then they may have issues. Probably a better way to think of it is bowing down to worship being.
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Beautiful use of the English Language!
  reply report
  53
  MarioBalloposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Not sure what you meant but i got the message. No i won't spend every second of my day mentioning the name of god in vain
  reply report
78
Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years ago
God has everything, but our love.
He wants our attention, love, and sincere regard... We just need to pay attention to Him.
"The harvest is abundant, but the laborers are few."
reply report
1. 60
  janesixposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  love has to be deserved. and real to make any sense. I sometimes love God, sometimes not. It's not unconditional for some reason
  reply report
  78
  Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Tell Him about it. He is omnipotent. Always listening.
  He loves us.
  How could he not?
  At heart we are bubbles in His ocean.
  reply report
  60
  janesixposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you:) I forget this sometimes
  reply report
  78
  Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Even if you all agree with each other that "god exists" and you shake hands, and hug each other, and say your hallelujahs, as many times as you like, and you gel with each other because you agree...............this still does not mean that god exists in reality. Only in your minds.
  
  You can refer to that god as though it/he/she exists, and enjoy your life like that, if it makes you feel better belonging "to the club." But it does not translate into a required acceptance by everyone else.
  
  You have read of my understandings, as a person of atheist understanding. I don't expect you to take on board everything that I say and accept it. You don't have to. In the same way I don't have to take on board everything you say and believe. When the majority of christian-thinking people accept this "level playing field," without judgment, then we will all be a lot happier.
  
  If a million people all "believe" the same thing, it still does not make it fact. If a million atheists all agree that there is no such thing as "god," that does not prove the non-existence of god. Can you not see there is no point in arguing about a god that no one can prove one way or the other? Surely it's better to get on with life and learn to live with our differences. In the end what does it matter?
  reply report
  78
  Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Who am I to argue with you?
  reply report
  60
  janesixposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Why do YOU keep arguing about God? Why do you even care?
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Oh! I would not want you to run away with the idea that all your presumptions about god, and your standing with god, and your religion placing you at an advantage over others, are taken without challenge.
  I have found that people with a very fundamental belief in christianity can be the least tolerant of other views. And I am not accusing yourself of being one of these, of course, but as a person with atheist views and also being of homosexual orientation, I am subject to vilification from christians who claim to know all about love. So, I feel justified in presenting my views at any time there seems to be a need.
  Sorry if my questions and doubts about the validity of your views cause you some kind of discomfort. I would not wish you to change them on my account.
  reply report
  60
  janesixposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I am sorry you have been villified for your homosexual orientation. So have i. I actually thought that didn't happen in this day and age, until i worked at a country club and told people i was bisexual.
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you.
  
  You asked why would I care. I care about people being able to have a faith, if that fits their life, without being told they must change that faith. I care about the people who suffer enormously throughout the world, much more than I have ever experienced, simply because they have a different religious belief, or a different sexual orientation from the majority in their society.
  
  I am seeking a "level playing field," and an increase in awareness for the needs of our neighbour and an acceptance of difference as being Fine! Great! Accepted! Loved!
  reply report
  59
  Jeramiposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  JonnyCL ... I agree completely. ... If everyone just knew that the most beneficial thing we "ALL" could do for ourselves is to care more about our immediate environment and everyone in it than we do for ourselves .
  But when we think only in the moment and of "our own" immediate gratification, we are hurting ourselves and our species as a whole.
  Whether we are talking about sexual orientation, good looks or lack there of, intelligence or lack there of, any kind of addiction , whatever the case may be ... When we start judging anyone, about anything, we should tell ourselves, (from a theist point of view) "Except for the grace of God, that could be me"
  
  What a pitiful this world would be if everyone was like me.
  reply report
  44
  Ericdierkerposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Villification and or prosecution of homosexuals is abhorrent. Christians who do it with a Bible in their hand are wrong and hateful. I will carry that Bible in my hand and Love them with all that I have to love my children. And then OOOPs they are gay! Well guess what I am old and dang near unsexual. I hope them Bible thumpers don't come crucify me for being impotent.
  reply report
  60
  janesixposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I agree. Anyone who does it is abhorrent. Not just Christians.
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Eric, your reply is about as potent as they get! ++
  reply report
78
Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years ago
Mother Theresa did what she did, to help the downtrodden, with joy. It gave her joy. Think of that!
reply report
1. 95
  wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Recently released letters from Mother Theresa to the Vatican put a different face on it. From the time she hit India she was in despair, very depressed and feeling that God had deserted her. She no longer knew God and told the vatican that.
  
  So I don't know if it gave her joy or not, in her depression and despair. It doesn't seem she had any joy in her life for years and years. She may have done what she did because it needed doing. A wonderful, wonderful woman - sad to think she was in such a state of depression for so long.
  reply report
  78
  Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  - Thank You Wilderness for sharing these insights....she must have found somthing satisfying in the
  doing
  of what she did. Perhaps in the
  effort
  of facing square on
  the problems
  facing so many.
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  It reminds me of a story, how true I don't know, about a woman who worked in a Salvation Army Hostel for years. She did the cleaning and general "looking after" the people, the down-and-outs, that would come in every evening for somewhere to kip.
  
  One man came in, virtually every time drunk, filthy, spewing up and generally making a mess of the place. This woman would clean up after him, without complaint, just doing her duty for him.
  
  Someone asked her why she bothered with him. "Do you really think you are going to get him converted by doing what you do?"
  
  "No," she said, "but maybe whatever I can do for him is the closest he will get to heaven while he's on this earth."
  reply report
  78
  Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thank You, Jonny.
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Maybe she did, maybe not. We all do unpleasant things sometimes, simply because we know it's the right thing to do.
  
  To me, it just increases the awe I feel for Mother Theresa. It's one thing to dedicate your life to helping others, at the behest of God or church. It's another to do so when it causes tremendous pain and neither has asked or told you to do so.
  
  I can't imagine what drove her to do what she did, but she left a gigantic mark on this tired ball of dirt.
  reply report
2. 60
  prog47posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  actually there is a considerable amount of evidence that mother teresa was not at all as good as they make her out to be. you should read the missionary position by hitchens.
  
  also from Wikipedia: She has also been criticised for her view on suffering. She felt that suffering would bring people closer to Jesus. Sanal Edamaruku, President of Rationalist International, criticised the failure to give painkillers, writing that in her Homes for the Dying, one could "hear the screams of people having maggots tweezered from their open wounds without pain relief. On principle, strong painkillers were not administered even in severe cases. According to Mother Teresa's philosophy, it is 'the most beautiful gift for a person that he can participate in the sufferings of Christ'
  reply report
  78
  Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I don't do painkillers either.
  reply report
  64
  Hmtrio2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  The "sufferings of Christ" has to do with the spiritual only, not the natural. There are two kinds of suffering: the natural and the spiritual. Spiritual sufferings represents the sufferings of Christ. This kind of suffering occurs as a result of presenting the gospel to the world of unbelievers. The natural suffering that occurs in the world(sickness and diseases) is the type of suffering that is healed by the anointing of Christ within the individual.
  reply report
61
JPB0756posted 10 years ago
Kathryn, well-said. Thanks!
reply report
75
jacharlessposted 8 years ago
Inquiry:
Why do so many folks insist upon -and blatantly attempt- division/separation of what is defined as spirit and Creator from physics or physical/tangible/visible?

Air, water, land, blood, space, comets, stardust is energy.
A soul is defined as the Essence of Creator, who is Light.
Light is the most abundant form of (known) energy in the universe.
Therefore a spirit/soul is physical and applies to the (human) designed laws of physics.
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 8 years ago
Okay everybody , HERE is your proof .........Faith !
reply report
1. 77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Yupperz!
  reply report
60
integraterposted 8 years ago
When you have nothing to do in life you argue if God exists or not , creates an illusion you are doing something intellectual
reply report
1. 0
  ahorsebackposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  And yet the MOST "intellectual " cannot or will not accept the simple existence of faith as being All that's Needed " ! Perhaps a little more education for them !
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  @ahorseback, how much of that "simple faith" is a convenient cop-out so that you can avoid facing reality?
  I hope you have seen me say before, in other Hubs and discussions, that I respect a person's private faith and belief; I am not trying to deny that personal choice or leaning towards faith. You have said that "all it takes" is faith. Implicit within your talk is the presumption that others need to take on the faith which you have. It's all part of evangelism. Some would say in response to this that they are not trying to evangelize.... just stating their opinion. Yet I see a personal dishonesty in saying this. Really, in the depths of the mind there is the intent to evangelize.
  
  I remain happy in my willingness to be open for further investigation and research into everything that this world has to offer. This world. Not an unseen, unproven, unlikely world beyond our physical ken.
  
  But this is just my choice. Do you respect and allow my choice without qualification? Such is a reasonable request if you expect me to accept and respect your "faith" without qualification.
  reply report
2. 0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I have no need to argue..... in my mind there is no place for a fictitious god. Life has much more of interest and intellectual importance.
  However, if some one else wishes to argue their belief in a fictitious god, that is their free choice..... which I give respect to without accepting it for my self.
  reply report
  60
  integraterposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Yup. My comment was directed at both Believers and Atheists.
  Existence or non-existence of god is a matter of belief. If a believer believes in God that is his belief and if an Atheist does not believe in existence of god it is his belief. An atheist will use logic to justify his belief while a believer will use his personal experience to justify his belief . It is a no-win situation and hence a futile discussion with no conclusion in sight. No model of scientific inquiry can be used to prove existence or non-existence of god. Just too many variables to pin down. So there really is no point in having this discussion. Hence my comment and it was for both Believers and Atheists.
  reply report
78
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
… everything that exists is proof, for those who require proof.
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 8 years ago
Jonnycomelately , no I certainly have no problem with the intellectual questioning of all things ,especially those things unseen , However , I only have a problem with the title of this thread . No one has to prove a thing ! Once long ,long ago I was hitchhiking to work and it was a minister who picked me up for the ride . Of course , I asked the same question then, at his inquiries to my faith , ---- " Where's the proof "?

What he said has always stuck in my mind , and mind you I am NOT a practicing Christian , merely one of faith . He said " This Christianity is the only faith in the world that doesn't require a physical idol for believing , That Faith was all that one needs" . Pretty simple huh ? Kind of hard to argue that one-- for me at least . Now I know that you are the intellectual kind and that's all fine and good , however many in this world , which is neither here nor there , are Not ! So , If faith is good enough for those that I've known , it's good enough for me .

Each of us , especially the non- believer has to acquire his own vessel as I see it , each of us has his own demons to slay , no pun intended , But it is no one's responsibility to "prove" that God exists to anyone . That's my only issue- the proving . .
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 8 years ago
By the way , faith being a cop -out ? , Maybe for you . Faith is good enough for most though , it may be only our over anxious and inquiring minds that must suffer more than the humble believer , I do understand my friend .
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 8 years ago
is this thread screwed up or does everyone comment to the middle of the thread , Just asking ?
reply report
1. 78
  Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Prolly the formler and the lattler!
  (Kings's English)
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Larfin wiv a lolly in me mouf.
  reply report
78
Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years ago
!
reply report
77
colorfuloneposted 8 years ago
"Truth is stranger than fiction but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't.” ~ Mark Twain
reply report
1. 0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I love this.... did not know the full quote. Thank you.
  reply report
75
Oztinatoposted 8 years ago
Perhaps you need to examine Kurt Godel's God Theorem which mathamatically proves the existence of God (in the same way that any theoremcan "prove" anything).
Usually at this point all kinds of negative comments appear by atheists who claim to be scientific thinkers! Of course such negativity only exists in such minds for this one special formula that deals with the spiritual.
reply report
1. 60
  Kiss andTalesposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Also this theory of nature creating everthing does not pass the test of truth. Example living nature can only produce living things. Nothing dead can not make something live. Or a dead cell can not make a living cell.
  So life had to have a start from a living source that is greater then all things to give life to it.
  Like your appliances need a currant of power to mechanically run. Unplug the charge you just have a object with no function and power to perform.
  We need a similar source of power that is connected to our cells and DNA. Then we are living souls. Once we lose this special current then we are reliant on the one who gave it from the very beginning at birth ,to return it too us at his designated time.
  
  1 Cor 15:21 the resurrection of the dead
  
  So it is written there is going to be a resurrection of the righteous and unrighteous. John 5:29.
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  "Nothing dead can not make something live."
  
  How do you know this? Can you prove your statement? Can you even provide any but negative evidence ("I've never seen it happen in my extremely limited experience and environment so it is impossible under any and all circumstances.").
  reply report
  60
  Kiss andTalesposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Wilderness can a dead cell produce a living cell
  Medically no. If your cells are dying like ganegreen
  Then please tell me why amputation. And science has plenty of proof.you certainly will not grow another leg will you from dead cells.
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Organic molecules are being manufactured all the time in the green leaves of plants. Organic from the inorganic. Water - hydrogen and oxygen - combine with carbon to make carbohydrate which feeds the metabolism which creates and feeds living cells.
  Life from non-life. Scientific research proved this.
  Please explain how your beliefs explain anything but your beliefs.
  reply report
  60
  Kiss andTalesposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Johny you are simply saying something dead can
  Feed something living true. We as humans eat meat that is dead and prepared. What I am saying you can not take dead human cells and create living human cells not possible. That is why I mention ganegreen. You can not take dead animals and create living animals from its dead cells life. If that was the case death would not be a issue.
  No matter what you said you involved a living source. Simple you can not take a dead animal and feed it to a dead animal and a life exist. No way !
  reply report
  60
  Kiss andTalesposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Example organ transplant can a human organ just completely die with the rest of the body to be useful. No you can not use anything dead from a dead. Body to a living body and still the chances are slim if the cells are still alive they have to keep
  Them as though they are still in a living environment. You can not take dead cells from a heart and make a new heart
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  By the way, K&T, back to the original heading of this thread, I don't personally accept that a "Believer has to prove the existence of God." It's a personal choice as to whether anyone believes in God's existence. I have no problem with that, and support a person's right, always.
  
  What I do not accept, is the insistence on the part of some believers, that non-believers must be converted, evangelized to the point of believing. I do not accept the absolute statements about having to be "saved from sin," or "be born again," or the idea of punishment in horrific conditions for eternity. If you want to accept these things then, again, it's your choice. But please leave me to make my choices as well.
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  K & T, you said, " Example living nature can only produce living things. Nothing dead can not make something live. Or a dead cell can not make a living cell.
  So life had to have a start from a living source that is greater then all things to give life to it."
  
  You are assuming, I think, that living matter can only come from living matter...right? Well, I have tried to explain to you that living (organic) matter can and does come from inorganic (that is not living) matter. Science has been able to fathom these processes (called photosynthesis) out. This is the objective of science: to work out how and why things happen, then to formulate laws around those happenings, so we can use such laws in gaining further understanding. We can also employ the laws in applied science, i.e., technology. We will never know everything there is to know about our Universe, but the journey and adventure in trying to find out is part of the human existence.
  
  If you only accept the idea, the belief, that your God somehow made this universe and all that is in it, then how do you imagine that could happen? Did it all happen in a sort of Harry Potter Magic experiment? Like WHOOOSHHHH !!! Suddenly the Lord said Let there be Light and there was Light...and you could suddenly see for miles and miles!
  
  Is it so very difficult to allow the possibility your God actually used a process of chemical and physical evolution to build this world?
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  "You can not take dead animals and create living animals from its dead cells life. If that was the case death would not be a issue."
  
  And yet exactly that has already been done in the laboratory. A dead bacteria, missing some of it's DNA, was brought to life through the addition of off-the-shelf chemicals (quite dead) to reform that DNA and the animal lived.
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Did it result in degeneration, and nothing evolved?
  What are you assuming here?
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I assumed nothing; just reported what I've seen reported elsewhere. That man took a dead cell, with incomplete DNA, and rebuilt the DNA from bottles of chemicals with the result that the cell "came to life". There was no report of degeneration (a bacteria that showed degeneration would probably be dead) or of mutations. Not sure what either has to do with anything, though.
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  If the cell came to life (I would love to read that report) and the animal lived, how long did that animal live? There had to have been degeneration.
  
  Selection of the best mutations will only slow down degeneration.
  I'm interested in human-animal Chimeras (though I do not agree with the practice).
  reply report
  60
  Kiss andTalesposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Wilderness people say alot of things but they dont tell it all or they frabricate. You are welcome to share your proof .
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science … g-god.html
  
  This isn't the one I referred to, but is another case entirely. Google is full of this one; pick your article yourself.
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  There certainly was: a good chunk of the DNA was removed. Beyond that "degeneration", though, I am not aware of any. As I understand it, the bacteria lived long enough to reproduce - is more necessary to be "alive"?
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Even allowing for beneficial mutations (genomes) they are overwhelmingly injurious. They have to reproduce because of degeneration to survive. However, bad mutations will always outnumber the beneficial cells by about 1 million to 1. Selection is extremely difficult at best even when a beneficial mutation does arise. From what I have read they will destroy their genetic information systematically...so then the more mutations there are, the less the information is available because of the process.
  
  They will wear out eventually. Everything is deteriorating.
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Colorfulone, could you please supply some links to verify what you are saying? It sounds stranger than fiction, but not to say it's inaccurate.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  LOL - it seems we are talking about totally different things. I'm speaking of a form of abiogenesis (creation of life) while you're talking about evolution of existing life - two completely separate, different, topics. Or am I wrong (again!)?
  report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  LOL - we might get on the same page yet, without me reading that report. Was that 'dead cell' eukaryotic or prokaryotic?
  
  Abiogenesis (chemical evolution)’is baffling for evolutionists because the origin of life is a mystery by design that opens a door for creationists to fill in the gaps. The 'General Theory of Evolution' ~ evolutionist Kerkut, ‘the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form’.
  
  Perhaps the bacteria was dormant and was coaxed back to life since it did have DNA?
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  "Abiogenesis (chemical evolution)’is baffling for evolutionists because the origin of life is a mystery by design that opens a door for creationists to fill in the gaps."
  
  An interesting statement. You are saying that evolutionists are baffled by abiogenesis, not because the details are not yet clear but because it was via Intelligent Design; a "goddunnit" answer that answers nothing. So why are not creationists just as baffled? They know only "goddunnit" without knowing how, when, where, why or anything else. Is it because they don't care? That "goddunnit" is sufficient for the creationist? Perhaps if they cared enough to question the details they would be just as baffled!
  
  Kind of hard to be alive without any DNA in the body, isn't it? Or is it more convenient, and supporting the idea that man cannot create life, to redefine "life" to include partial cells that cannot reproduce or grow?
  report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Kind of hard to be alive without any DNA in the body, isn't it?
  
  Exactly! But, you said that a part of the DNA was missing. I would love to read the report or know the names of the scientists at least.
  
  Having a personal relationship with Jesus (submission) changes every aspect including the mind and ones views on science and its history. Its amazing how Jesus opens blind eyes gradually to simply see in part, a part that was hidden.
  
  I agree we need many more brilliant minded creationists involved in research. The more Darwinian 'sacred cow' assumptions proven to be demonstrably false science-fiction the better.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, that was the report I read some time ago. The one in the link, though, had the entire DNA string removed and another constructed and put in.
  
  Yes, that "personal relationship" does change some aspects of the mind - notably the satisfaction with the explanation for everything that consists of a simple "goddunnit" with no further questioning or understanding required.
  
  Outside of a handful of "Piltdown Man" frauds, I'm unaware of any "sacred cows" that have ever been shown to be false. While our understanding continues to grow, it isn't from "brilliant creationists" with that "goddunnit" answer to everything.
  report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Those that chose to omit the god-factor from the beginning of institutional science created tensions with creationists in academia because of their assumptions taught in secular schools and colleges. I think they are mostly hostile environments for discussion with believers about the existence of a living God.
  
  What people are taught in a secular academic environment will likely be their conclusions, unless there is an individual's God-factor. It is lovely to remove the hostile-factor for discussion to create a welcoming environment for evolutionists and creationists.
  
  We do alright.
  report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Please pardon me interjecting here, (I doubt you are going to value my opinion, Susie) --
  
  There seems to be the assumption that creationism should get to have the last word. But if you are willing to recognise and admit the rôle of science in coming to understand DNA, then you will see that creation/god theory cannot take a dominant rôle.
  
  Before the advent of scientific study during this past 200 or 300 years, philosophy came out of religious beliefs and concepts. It was necessary to expand thinking processes away from beliefs in order to have progress in understanding. Yet it is probably more common for scientists to stand in awe than religionists.
  
  It just depends on being willing to open the mind to infinite possibility. I suppose that also includes the infinity of god-ship.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Academia is most certainly a hostile environment for discussing the god-factor, at least outside of the realm of mythology or religion. That should be expected as science does not deal with beliefs and imagination.
  
  As far as being lovely to remove the hostile factor - few are actively hostile to consideration of the god-factor. In the proper environment, which does not include knowledge or factual information. Only when religious beliefs are the topic is it appropriate, and when imagined gods are presented as factual some hostility or derision should be the expected response. In the environment of science and fact creationism is not welcome - not until at least some kind of evidence is produced, whereupon it would be welcome.
  report
  59
  f_hruzposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Can we start from the fact, our reality is based on natural events and not on some theological interpretation of what ever religious doctrine one may like the best or be most comfortable with?
  
  Religious types like to start by thinking some god created everything before even getting a handle on understanding how our concepts of reality are simply limited by natural forces which no make-belief gods can possibly transcend in a rational world confined by nature and the intellectual capacity she imposes.
  
  Can we focus more on the question of how all life forms acquire the ability to interact intelligently within their given environment to exist in better harmony with nature to their own greatest advantage through a continuously adaptive process, and why this can only be an inherently natural quality not provided by some wishful human idea based on religious concepts?
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I once had a strong theist tell me, after asking for and getting several observed examples of evolution in action, that she would only believe in evolution when a cat gave birth to a dog on every street corner, every day.
  
  No, we probably can't focus on the "how" when the "what" is already assumed to be false based on ancient writings contradicting reality.
  report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Such a distorted view of theTheory of Evolution shows lack of willingness to learn, a closed mind. " 'Tis easier for a camel...."
  Even the expression "believe in" is misplaced in relation to the Theory. Agreement/disagreement can be adjusted or qualified by further research. Such research seeks to advance knowledge, not superstition.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, when she demanded something evolution says cannot happen in order to believe the theory it kind of shut the conversation down. Superstition does rule for many a person - witness the pogrom against house cats in the middle ages that contributed to the spread of plague - and not much has changed.
  report
  75
  jacharlessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Precisely. So, why should the proselytes of what is dubbed science be treated any different.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  They should not. Everything said should be thoroughly checked and tested for truth. Is that what you refer to?
  report
  75
  jacharlessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Truth is merely an abstract designed within the human psyche to postulate for or against a belief, or anti belief. Truth and Fact, even by definition, are vague and naive. People who " seek truth" can only find themselves in a finite deluge of self indulgence; a seemingly prolific humming, a tickle in the ear, generously nourished by a billion strands of data within the mind. God truths, evolution truths, scientific facts, ancient alien abductions and more. None of it is true or -for lack of a better term- factual by universal standards. In honesty every human fact or truth is false. But why? Because we use our or another fragments of thought to conjure -and that is truly the fitting term- what we want to be truth and fact.
  report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Profound! I can't even say "profoundly true, " now..... But that's ok, by Me.
  report
  75
  jacharlessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Oh man, it has been forever. How are you?
  report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Very well thanks. Keeping up the humour, which is the way my mind works when things get too heavy.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Is this your "proof" that nothing dead can produce life? That you have never seen a dead cell produce life? As proof of anything at all it is a failure - that you haven't seen it, or that no one has observed it, is not proof that it cannot, or does not, happen.
  reply report
  60
  Kiss andTalesposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Wilderness where is your proof I gave you the example of ganegreen you give me nothing but critism. which does not prove your point.
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Where is my proof of what? YOU made a claim, not I - it is up to you to support it, not to my to prove it wrong.
  
  You gave an example of gangrene not coming back to life - was that supposed to prove that no lifeless object ever, anywhere, under any circumstances can ever come to life? I'm not attempting to "prove" anything at all, except perhaps that you need to be able to support YOUR statements with something besides your personal experience/opinion.
  
  You made the statement that life can never be created by nature, then used the statement to say that it shows that ID has to have happened. If your statement (that life cannot come into being from the forces of nature) is true, then ID has to be true, but so far all you've offered in support of the statement was that gangrene produces dead flesh. Hardly sufficient for such a sweeping claim that life can never, under any circumstances, come into being from natural laws or actions.
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  A thought I have just had (it being 6.20am here) is that even Gangrene in fact is life happening.
  The breakdown of tissues, the death of one form of organism (those muscles, bones, etc.), leads to other forms of life arising, i.e., bacteria.
  So, I think I can see where K&T is coming from here, might be mistaken, in other words, life comes from life. Ok, up to a point.
  The origin of life is energy. A continuum. As such, we cannot confine life, or any aspect of this world, to one form or another. I feel we need to have a sense of awe when contemplating the infinite possibilities.
  reply report
75
jacharlessposted 8 years ago
And, Wilderness, please don't think me snide, in any way. But this variable argument has gone on for ages, with no resolution. The only probable and actual end is this: a force, entity, creature, what have you, outside of the human idea must validate human ideology, regardless of perspective. Until such an event occurs, we cannot and should not accept anything spawned of man to be true and factual. Interim, it is all speculation and entertainment. Albeit engaging entertainment.
reply report
60
AnnaDanishekposted 8 years ago
If you make believers prove their beliefs, where will it end? Everyone believes an infinite number of things. We don't ask proof of most beliefs. Which is why we call them beliefs!
reply report
1. 95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  There is never a need to prove a belief...until it is presented as fact. At that point proof is most definitely in order.
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Who makes up the rules? That sounds like rules and laws, kind of religious sounding.
  
  "Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
  
  The reality of God in a believer's life does not have rules to stick to. There are many, many events that happen that are improbable but they do happen. No one would ever believe them if they weren't truly real.
  
  Just because someone else doesn't believe realities, doesn't mean they aren't real. Man-made rules have to be plausible to be believable, like fiction.
  
  No, unbelievers don't make-up the rules for believers to live-up-to for expressing their personal beliefs. Think about it.
  
  Creationism is most certainly welcome in the environment of science and fact. I guess it depends on who makes-up the rules for creationist? Man...pft. Evolution is Religion!
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  "Who makes up the rules?" Well, if you are telling me your wild tales of gods and creation are true, then I do. (Actually, it doesn't matter WHAT you tell me, I will make the rules determining whether it is believable or not.)
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  You make the rules as to whether something is believable for you. That is okey! But, you do not make the rules on inevitability for anyone else unless they are under your control. If someone is under your control and follows your rules, then that's their thing.
  
  I haven't told any wild tales. You are on your own there...
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Of course! How could it ever be otherwise? People running around with mind-altering drugs to force belief?
  
  Wild tales? Of course you tell them - you're just as full of "wild" tales as I am, as just as willing to post them in the forums. Of course, who gets to apply the "wild" label is determined by who is listening and who is talking...
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Wild-er-ness! I like a wild kind of guy.
  
  I was reading a little about Theistic evolution, or evolutionary creationism. That's some middle ground stuff there. Would that make us radicals? joking
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Well, it might make you a radical if you call yourself Christian but don't accept the biblical story of creation as it is written.
  
  Of course, even the Pope is following that path, along with the vast majority of other Christians. It is the way of religion; maintain the old beliefs as long as possible after they are proven wrong, then "interpret" or otherwise manage to change the sacred writings to agree with reality. Or, in some cases, just ignore the whole thing and pretend it never happened - that's always a popular one.
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  A physicist got me interested in catastrophic events and I have found that enlightening. NASA has some very good information but you have to find it. Only catastrophes can explain some events that were documented but not explainable thousands of years ago. Such as the huge comet that hit earth and probably caused a tsunami (the Flood in Noah's days) about 6,000 years ago. I believe that everyone who is interested in truth would find catastrophic events terrific reading material.
  
  Noah's Flood Was Really a Tsunami Caused by a Comet: A Retranslation of Genesis 7:11
  * http://www.newscientificevidenceforgod. … aused.html
  
  Hebrew words like English words can have multiple meanings. The job of a translator is to select the best word to convey the meaning for each word being translated. The better a translator understands what is being said, the better the translation.
  
  Personally, I have no respect for Jesuit pope Francis. But, its not because he does believe evolution is real.
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Somehow I don't see a wooden boat, laden with 2 of every creature on earth, surviving a 5 mile high tsunami. Do you?
  
  Nor do I see a comet capable of creating such a tsunami as leaving any life at all alive - the dinosaur killer 65 million years ago didn't leave a whole lot and Noah's would have to be much larger.
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  "Somehow I don't see a wooden boat, laden with 2 of every creature on earth, surviving a 5 mile high tsunami. Do you?"
  
  There is evidence of an ancient shoreline in the Black Sea, and that there was a flood in that region. Scientists say it was once fresh water, that was forever changed and it would have had to be a catastrophic event like a very large comet hitting the earth. There isn't any evidence of the Arch that has been found, but there is of villages and humans. Decay happens.
  
  I think that if there were animals on the boat, that it was limited to only those in that region.
  
  People were extremely superstitious thousands of years ago and believed that comets were God's doing. People still believe that natural disasters are "an act of God", insurance companies use that wording today. I'm not inclined to believe that natural disasters are an act of God. People give Him far too much blame.
  
  Dating back to 65 million years ago seems impossible for me to believe. But, I can believe that evidence dating back to 50 to 60 thousand years ago is highly possible.
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  There is evidence that the Salt Lake in Utah was much larger, too. And a catastrophe drained much of it. But, like the Black Sea, it isn't evidence of a world wide flood that covered all the earth.
  
  Yes, you may "interpret" the words to indicate that it was only those in the area, or at least a very small minority of them. It absolutely helps to make such calls and change the meaning of scripture. Neither, however, is what is indicated or meant.
  
  It seems impossible because you don't know how to date things. You don't know how an airplane flies, either, or how a single hard push can get to the moon, but you "believe" in those things don't you? But do you believe a wooden boat loaded with animals survived a 5 mile high tsunami? You never said.
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you for mentioning Salt Lake, that would be interesting to read about for me at a later date.
  
  I didn't say that the Black Sea is evidence of a world wide flood that covered all the earth. Once again:
  
  Hebrew words like English words can have multiple meanings. The job of a translator is to select the best word to convey the meaning for each word being translated. The better a translator understands what is being said, the better the translation.
  
  Some people tend to read the Bible literally. That's ok, I have no problem with that. I study the Scriptures in the languages it was written to gain a better understand of the English translations.
  
  "It seems impossible because you don't know how to date things."
  
  Wow, you can be judgmental! No, it is because..."The earliest records we have of human history go back only about 5,000 years."—*World Book Encyclopedia, 1966 edition, Vol. 6, p. 12. --- Also, because of decay evidence is destroyed after so many years.
  
  The Black Sea has a low oxygen content which slows down decay.
  
  "You don't know how an airplane flies, either, or how a single hard push can get to the moon, but you "believe" in those things don't you?
  
  What? I love to read how things work, and I'm sure you have read about how they work as well. I don't always respond to silly questions, so be warned.
  
  "But do you believe a wooden boat loaded with animals survived a 5 mile high tsunami?"
  
  What are you envisioning with asking that hypothetical question?
  The Caucasus Mountains' highest peak is 18,510 ft.
  There are 5280 ft. in a mile.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Don't mean to be judgemental: I don't understand the details of dating things from a million or billion years ago either. I just mean that because I don't understand it doesn't mean that no one else does either. As far as the plane or moon rocket: do you understand the air flow dynamics that picks up tons and tons of airplane into the air? Or how we know where to aim a rocket to go into a precise orbit around the moon or other planet? Unless you can correctly calculate such an orbit I'd say that you don't understand how it's done, but accept that it IS done. Just as things are dated to millions of years whether you understand how it's done or not.
  
  When you use your personal ignorance of dating to decide that it can't be done, well, it doesn't make much sense. Almost as if you're saying you know everything there is to know, so if you don't know how to date far back in the planet's history then it can't be done. NO ONE can do it if you can't. I don't think you DO mean that, but that's the way it comes across.
  report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I am not a physicist, or a scientist and don't claim to be, so I don't understand your questioning to be anything other then to prove a point that doesn't matter, expect for you to argue with yourself about what I know or don't know.
  
  I don't believe things can be dated back millions and millions of years. If you do, I don't have a problem with that and I'm not going to debt or argue to prove some point that doesn't matter, or judge you for it in anyway...that's your thing. Live and let live!
  
  The Wright brothers were sons of a minister, I thought that was interesting since they seemed to have some divine knowledge in solving aeronautical problems. As for the designers of Saturn V, I don't remember much about any of them, except for physicist von Braun, who had said something like the farther we go into space the better we know God. But, I would dare say that the designers or at least some of them had divine knowledge to go to the moon. He believed in using science to know God, and I don't have a problem with that either.
  report
  60
  Kiss andTalesposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  We must come to grisp the bible says the end will be just as the days of Noah people were eating , drinking. getting married and they took no note until the flood waters came. Which tells us people
  will not change believing if they had they would have been on the Ark. The same negative words people spoke then of not believing in God or his words have repeated the same attitude in our time.
  You can not force people to believe in a lifesaving message .but you can do your part in helping them get the message rather they believe it or not. So really the message is not of human origin which has been reserved through out many genetations even ours. So if this message can not be wiped out by unbelievers from centuries then humans are not in control .there is a higher and greater authority that keeps it circulated until all is fulfilled.
  report
  60
  Kiss andTalesposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  True ColorF. We know it is not impossible for water to climb at enormous hights. We not to long
  Just experience Dallas Texas water disaster.
  What about katrina and the damage it caused.
  So now people are questioning the flood account.
  Just think about where did all the water that make
  Lakes. Oceans , streams, pounds come from, as you look at a world map you can see land seperating from main parts of land like a puzzle piece it is detached.
  Also fossil of small crawling animals way up high as in mountains.tells us nust like a cup of ice poor water in and things rise to the top like the ice. So did these animals that were found in fossel state.
  God did not need to save every animal but he saved what he felt was vital. So the Ark shaped like a box was good enough .
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Separation of land masses are all over the map. I like reading about it. But, if an article starts out with "evidence of 300 million years ago" I skip to more solid articles. The earth is groaning and erupting all over the place right now and leaving its devastation. It may only be a matter of time before another catastrophic event hits the US. Katrina was one hellish hurricane. There was a meteor that hit Russia in 2013, thankfully it had diminished in size greatly before crashing. Interesting times!
  report
  60
  Kiss andTalesposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  What I notice about certain people they will never admit anything is right in the bible.they will discredit it all .nothing you or anyone can say can change their view but they work hard to change yours. Why? Because there is a treasure in it .You !
  If satan can mislead Angels to follow lead them .how easy it would be to mislead humans
  What its all about .You have the prospect as a human life to live forever on paradise.
  satan goal is to take it away from you with doubt and lies. He took Adams and Eves now he trying to take ours
  Do not believe the doubter they have no proof of their claims just their beliefs
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  We know from Scriptures that the thief (satan) come to steal, kill and destroy...those are the goals. And, that the devil comes to steal the Word of God from the hearers.
  
  I see the tactics. Satan is the greatest at causing deceptions, doubts and discouragements, at causing diversions, and at getting us to focus on defeats and delays and more... People are destroyed for lack of knowledge.
  
  The importance of knowing the Word is abundantly clear to me. After all, that's how we defeat satan.
  reply report
  60
  Kiss andTalesposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Wonderfully said and explain !.colorforlone I need say anything else . thank you.
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Wilderness, how can you argue with such in-depth knowledge and wisdom?!
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Never argue with the statement itself; confine yourself to questioning how the speaker determined it to be true. Most (most) people can recognize when their reasoning process doesn't make sense, although there are some that declare "divine knowledge" or other such nonsense.
  reply report
  80
  lovetherainposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Just because you haven't personally experienced something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Nor does making up non-existent connections mean something DOES exist. There are a great many things I haven't experienced, and there are a great many things that others declare they HAVE experienced, but solely because they declare that connection that isn't there.
  
  For example, many have declared that a god has spoken to them; that they have experienced that god. Not a single person, however, has ever bothered to explain just how that "voice", or "experience" can be distinguished from their own mind's workings. The process whereby they have made that determination, then, is grossly insufficient to make the claim.
  reply report
  77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  That is so true. It seems the more I do experience, the more I feel like I have only scratched the surface of experiences ready to be realized personally. We are like specs of dust on this big beautiful planet.
  reply report
  60
  paradigmsearchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Indeed.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  For sure. And the whole planet isn't even that speck of dust in the universe.
  report
  60
  paradigmsearchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  I believe in God. I know He exists because He has been seriously screwing with me lately. I wish He'd get bored and go find someone else.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  All gods have feet of clay. The same as their subjects.
  report
  60
  paradigmsearchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Maybe if I left Him some cookies on the kitchen counter He'd take them and go away.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Possibly, but do make sure there is a glass of milk alongside them.
  report
  60
  paradigmsearchposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  But if He doesn't go for it, I'll be out the milk. How about water? Come to think of it, I don't have any cookies. I do have a couple rolls, so it will have to be those.
  
  [Edit]
  
  Found a can of V8 in the fridge. So that's it, two rolls and a can of V8. What God wouldn't be happy with that? After all, it's the thought that counts.
  
  Maybe He'll not only stop screwing with me, but He'll even start being nice to me. If my offerings have disappeared when I get up tomorrow, I'll report as such here.
  report
2. 0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  If a Believer presents a belief as fact in order to control my life then I also need proof. However, if there is respect and tolerence from the believer for my position, then I offer the same in return.
  reply report
3. 60
  Kiss andTalesposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Words well spoken .thank you.
  reply report
60
AnnaDanishekposted 8 years ago
And is seems desperately that We want people we DON"T know to believe what's in our minds. It is easier for me to believe in him
reply report
52
dizzydeanposted 8 years ago
Well, no matter how extraordinary the claims of Christians, it is ATHEISTS who claim the Romans were incompetent executioners. Lets see someone claim that a society for whom execution was literally an artform would be anything but horrifyingly competent at it, and then prove THAT. There are fundamentalist Catholics in the Philippines who re-enact the Crucifixion, no, no just the Passion, the CRUCIFIXION. They practice a watered-down form of what Jesus experienced, and it is still the most dangerous religious ritual this side of human sacrifice. If a roman soldier assigned to guard any prisoner for any particular punishment,, allowed such a prisoner to escape, it was simply their life for that of the one in chains.
reply report
60
Kiss andTalesposted 8 years ago
Wilderness I believe in these as well.
But must ask you as example a lamp.
Does your lamp work on the table not pluged in?
I would say no in general. It is plug into a source of power that keeps it glowing.
Do we forget that just because its light help us to see where we are going. If the source of its power is disconnected then no light would illuminate.
The point here is that our bodies are in the same position there is a surge of power that keeps our bodies functioning just like an Alternator keeps the battery going without draining the battery. If the alternator dies so does the battery and the car can not function.
Our heavenly Father is our Alternator. Even thought the car can function on its battery a short time before its drained.
We have been living off of our batteries since Adam and Eves betrayal.
The body is drained of life from different problems sickness and world issues as crime
Hunger.
But the point is an Alternator provided by our heavenly Father will be given to us it has been paid for so we can continue to live without interruptions.
Humans will live life to the fullest potential in body and mind.
The point is we all have tasted God out of the picture. Its not good.
But we soon will be reconnecting to the heavenly Father who will keep us living throughout eternity.
This is our human hope.
reply report
1. 95
  wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  OK, I understand and can even make the "battery" that makes the lamp glow. I see it, I use it and I understand it.
  
  Now show me the "alternator" for my body. Show me that it made the universe. Show me that without it I die. Don't just tell me there is one, an "alternator" that you really know nothing about outside of imagined attributes you give it - show it to me.
  
  Then I will believe your claim, too. And, perhaps, I will also have the hope to connect to it, just as you have. Until then there is absolutely no reason to believe that there is a secret, hidden power source making me live. All the claims are nothing compared to just a single observation - unfortunately, an observation that not a single person has ever accomplished.
  reply report
77
colorfuloneposted 8 years ago
A conspiracy (plans made in secret, behind closed doors) only benefits those who have ulterior motives. A theory is simply an explanation of a secret conspiracy, like the dumbing down of citizens through the rewriting of history (events) I was talking about in this post.

* http://hubpages.com/forum/post/2810549

We have been lied to about George Washington being the first president of the USA. We have been lied to that Obama is the first black president.
On and on, and on and on...

Pretty easy to form a conspiracy theory about the people who run things when we know what the truth is.
reply report
1. 0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  To re-phrase that: "....when we know what we want the truth to be."
  
  Is that not so?
  reply report
0
snapcracklepopposted 8 years ago
You, yourself are proof that God exists. Scientists are in awe of the human body and it's intricate, complex, components. The beautiful and many complex varieties of life forms on earth, underground, in the many waters upon our earth, and the many life forms that take to the air is proof that God is real and that He exist....(Romans 1:20). Everything is interconnected and interdependent. Everything that God created was done with the utmost deliberation, wisdom, and power from/of God.

It is truly a blessing and a loving kindness on His part that He, God, does not literally reveal Himself to us.....We could not bear the supremely brilliance of His presence and we would probably instantly evaporate! I say this because the Bible says that no man can see God literally with their naked eyes and live. It makes so much sense, especially when you think about the star our sun whom God created. The sun would probably be likened to a firefly in contrast to the Almighty Creator, Jehovah. No one can look directly at the sun even with the proper sunglass ware without having some grave significant damage done to their eyes. How much more so the Creator of the universe who created the sun and all things!? (Revelation 4:11)(Exodus 33:20).

We cannot see the wind, or electricity (except during an electrical storm or under laboratory settings), or even germs, or bacteria, viruses and the like, yet we do not say that those things don't exists. We know they exists because of the good or bad effects they have on humans and other life forms. Truly if you could see those germs heading your way, you'd run out of Lysol disinfectant spray because of constantly spraying......THE SAME PRINCIPLE applies to the very powerful, loving, living God....We cannot see Him with our literal eyes but we can see, experience and feel the effects of His existence by the things He created. Yes, God definitely exists, but it will take a measure of faith based on accurate knowledge from God's Word, on one's heart and mind....God doesn't waste His holy spirit on those who truly do not want to believe He exists, but He does open the heart and mind of those who want to believe He exist who are conscious of their spiritual need to eventually come to believe and know that he exists (Matthew 5:3).
reply report
1. 78
  Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Quite eloquent and well said.
  
  The film 'War of the Worlds' (1953) came to mind, the last piece of dialogue went thusly:
  
  "When everything man could do to stop the invaders failed, it was the simplest things that God in his wisdom placed upon the Earth that saved humanity.
  
  Speaking of the Martians succumbing to bacteria in the earth's atmosphere
  for which we have long been immune.
  
  Every person has to come by the truth on their own, but if one critically evaluates, just opening your eyes will tell you a great deal.
  
  It stretches the limits of credulity to accept so many unrelated coincidences favorable to life without acknowleging some sort of pattern. That is not very scientific.
  reply report
  0
  snapcracklepopposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you Credence2
  reply report
2. 0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  So you believe, and with all the other things you have written here. As is your right and freedom to see it this way. Greatly respected. I am not asking you to drop or change your opinion.
  
  Do you also open your "heart" to my way of seeing things my way? Without requiring that I drop or change my points of view?
  
  This world is big enough for each of us to believe as we wish, provided there is no coercion, because that can be the start of derision and wars.
  
  I only mock religion when confronted by someone who says, "Jonnycomelately," you have got to change, because you are threatened with punishment and everlasting torment in hell if you don't."
  
  So, I hope you enjoy many more years in the bosom of your religion. And may the gods help you to survive in the hell, fire and brimstone of HubPages. Welcome!
  reply report
  0
  snapcracklepopposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  jonnycomelately, I do understand your viewpoint as well as seeing things your way and any who believe that "concrete" evidence is needed to prove that God exists or is real....I am also not in the business of forcing others to change their beliefs or way of thinking. That is their call and personal choice. Even the Creator, God doesn't force people to change. Everyone has been given a free will and choice by God.....I don't waste my time debating or arguing about a certain secular or scriptural issue, I simply state and reason on what I know and believe as truth, others can take it or leave it (no sarcasm unintended)
  
  Also, jonnycomelately, I don't believe in the non scriptural falsehood of hell and fire and brimstone for the wicked or unrighteous person.....However, if a person wants to question my beliefs and why I believe as such, I am open for the opportunity to share my knowledge.
  reply report
  0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you. My latter sentence was, of course, simply being humerous. I don't accept any of the hell fire, etc.
  reply report
  0
  snapcracklepopposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Lol! absolutely no problem jonnycomelately. I took it as a humorous term of "endearment" anyway.
  reply report
61
Damian10posted 8 years ago
Interesting discussion here. I believe that our faith is about as personal as it ever gets. Many years ago, 1967 to be exact, my Dad was very sick with Hogkins Lymphoma. The doctors and the hospital gave up on him. He went down to 80 lbs, got weak, became bedridden and was near death. The only thing that was left for our family was prayer. Over a two year difficult period without medicine he began to get better. Eventually he even returned to work. My parents were determined to pay it forward and they did so. There was no real medical explanation on his recovery. My Dad lived another 15 years and finished raising us. He died in 1982 of an unrelated cancer. I was and am completely blessed with incredible parents. God was right there with us. We lived it so how could I ever doubt Him.

Sometimes I believe we just have to look around us. There is also incredible history and archaeology. The Tel Dan inscription which clearly denotes the reality of King David and the House of David. The Pilate Stone highlighting the existence of the said procurator. Even writings of non Christians such as Tacitus. These and so many other findings as well as the incredible prophesy of the Bible certainly lead us to believe there is someone bigger and greater than all of us. He came first as a suffering servant and He will return as a great warrior. God will win out in the end. I will choose to worship, believe and love that poor, Jewish carpenter who gave His life for a wretch like me.
reply report
1. 77
  colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  Amen. When we have lived it and God is revealed to us, there is no doubt. Its spiritual. Thank you for sharing, you are truly blessed.
  reply report
61
Damian10posted 8 years ago
Thank you Color. I truly am in every sense. Blessings to you.
reply report
1. 0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 8 years agoin reply to this
  So, just because Colorfulone agrees with it, that makes it right..... mmm. Each to their own.
  reply report
61
Damian10posted 8 years ago
Hi Jonny:

Not sure that makes it right. I can only attest to what took place. I was just a toddler at the time but I know that my father was not supposed to make it. They did not have chemo at that time. It had not been invented yet. There was no logical explanation for him surviving.

You are right that people have to believe what they believe. Some people believe in a lot of coincidence. I am just not one of those people. Right down to the very planet we live in. Right proximity to the sun, plants with giving off oxygen and taking in carbon dioxide, water, food and other natural resources, even the whole gravity thing. No other planet even seems to be inhabitable. I guess just a whole, whole lot of coincidence. Blessings to you anyway.
reply report
62
PhoenixVposted 7 years ago
Reality plus emergence equals syntax plus semantics, therefore God is existing.
reply report
1. 0
  jonnycomelatelyposted 7 years agoin reply to this
  With heightened semantics, the English language is interesting.
  
  "-ing," the present participle. The Here and Now. Not "then." Not "will be." Only "Now."
  
  Thus, no need to envisage "God" in the future, or blame a "God" of the past. This moment is the only connection.
  
  "Being" as in "Human Being."
  
  Is it all in the head, or are we bathed in it?
  reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Previous 1 23 Next

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Believers Have to Prove the Existence of God

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Believers Have to Prove the Existence of God

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies