Does God exist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I certainly hope God exists; I suspect that all of us do. Most of us probably firmly believe that he does. But no belief, however firmly held, is a fact. We’ll never know for sure until we die.
**Welcome junior member!

Do you exist?

Then so does God, cause ya can’t have one without the other!👍 **

Read John Chaoter 6; 40-60 and you’ll get another AWESOME SURPRISE!

God bless you and welcome home!
 
Amid our previous squabbles I was tempted to invite you via PM to peruse my website because your qualifications appeared good, and your orneriness level was definitely upscale. I did not follow through on that because you neglected to reply to any of the questions I posed in #124. Perhaps that was because the thread was closed. Whatever the reason, I am anticipating a follow through so that I can get a better sense of how you think.
Hi greylorn,
I found your web site and am reading it with great interest. It will take me some time to digest your entire thesis. I think we may have the same objectives and have similiar approaches, winding roads that will sometimes cross while other times diverge. I will have a lot of questions and maybe some suggestions, so please have some patience.

I have a very busy weekend so don’t expect a reply until next week at the earliest. In the meantime you can continue to be annoying, yet dul on some other threads.
YPPOP
 
Wrong experiment. That is for Physics class, not for Theology.😃
The belief that theology is separate from physics has relegated religious beliefs to the backwaters of human progress for the last couple of centuries.

Besides, the proposed experiment is actually a theological issue having nothing to do with physics, per se. It addresses either the willingness of God to suspend or interfere with physical law, or His ability to do so— or both.

Two strangers were drinking side-by-side in a Vegas high-rise bar and getting along fine when one said, “Let me show you something interesting.”

He then went to the nearest window, opened it, and stepped out. Instead of falling he remained suspended in mid-air, grinning, until he reached out for the sill and pulled himself back into the room.

His drinking companion, amazed, asked how he did that.

“Nothing to do, actually. You see, because of the unusual structure of this building there is a constant updraft of air at that window. Anyone can do it. Great way to impress women. Give it a try yourself.”

The trusting fellow swallowed another shot of bourbon, went over to the window, and stepped out. Punctuated by a loud “thunk,” his scream of terror was audible throughout his 20-floor fall. .

The bartender came over to his now lone companion who was enjoying a good laugh, and said, “Hey… Did anyone ever tell you, Superman, that you’re a mean drunk?”
 
Hi greylorn,
I found your web site and am reading it with great interest. It will take me some time to digest your entire thesis. I think we may have the same objectives and have similiar approaches, winding roads that will sometimes cross while other times diverge. I will have a lot of questions and maybe some suggestions, so please have some patience.

I have a very busy weekend so don’t expect a reply until next week at the earliest. In the meantime you can continue to be annoying, yet dul on some other threads.
YPPOP
YP
Good work! I trust that you’ll explain (via PM of course) how you found it, since sometimes in the wee hours I cannot find it myself.

I love questions and learn from suggestions. I’m wondering if it would be appropriate to post queries and replies on this thread. The entire site is relevant to the question, “Does God Exist?” so that is not an issue. I like the idea of arguing in public but am not ready to go public with the theory quite yet, so we’d need to avoid using phrases and jargon specific to the site concepts. Ultimately our moderator will decide what is appropriate.

Having pretty much killed an otherwise potentially useful lifetime developing the ideas, naturally I’ll be really annoyed if you cannot read and understand them and return a cogent analysis by the weekend.
 
The belief that theology is separate from physics has relegated religious beliefs to the backwaters of human progress for the last couple of centuries.

Besides, the proposed experiment is actually a theological issue having nothing to do with physics, per se. It addresses either the willingness of God to suspend or interfere with physical law, or His ability to do so— or both.
I disagree with your initial premise.

Your site was pretty easy to find. 😉
 
YP
Having pretty much killed an otherwise potentially useful lifetime developing the ideas, naturally I’ll be really annoyed if you cannot read and understand them and return a cogent analysis by the weekend.
Hi,
Not this weekend, I will be in three diffent cities. Plus I am not that quick; I am a slow ponderer.
Yppop
 
I disagree with your initial premise.
You must be the only Catholic in the world, except maybe the Pope, who would disagree with that. :rolleyes: I’m open to discussion, having once believed exactly as you do, but the topic is inappropriate to this thread. I should not have posted that remark. .

I do not feel that you will like the website you found, and so cannot recommend bothering to peruse it.
 
I certainly hope God exists; I suspect that all of us do. Most of us probably firmly believe that he does. But no belief, however firmly held, is a fact. We’ll never know for sure until we die.
You certainly believe in your birthday and that your birthday is true, no doubt about it. If we reflect of our birthdays, then we shall realize that the year of our birthday is an evidence that God became man and truly lived with men more than 2,000 years ago.

Others may not accept Him as God. But their non-acceptance of Him would not change the fact of his existence as man about 2,000 years ago. That event more than 2,000 years ago is the proof that truly, God exists.
 
You must be the only Catholic in the world, except maybe the Pope, who would disagree with that. :rolleyes: I’m open to discussion, having once believed exactly as you do, but the topic is inappropriate to this thread. I should not have posted that remark. .

I do not feel that you will like the website you found, and so cannot recommend bothering to peruse it.
I consider that a compliment. 😉
 
🤷 Since the initial premise is faulty the rest of the content expounding on the initial premise wasn’t worth reading.
its kind ocreepy, with the secret websites and all, very cult like.

if the ideas are worthy they should be able to survive in the public marketplace of the forums.

in this case i think secret = cult or heretic, otherwise why keep them a secret?

his come on sounds a little to much like* “psst…hey kid…want some candy?”*
 
Even atheists know that God exists.
Becoming an Atheist is an act of will, it’s a denial of a belief in God.
Yeah they argue it is simply a lack of belief, and that is the technical definition of atheism, but in practice that is not the case.
Even the rare that says he never believed in God since he was born is simply a liar.
An innate belief in a deity is part of the human condition, not an antiquated superstition.
Whatever the case human beings are naturally theists.
Atheism is a symptom of pride and an act of the will.
Christian is a symptom of pride and an act of will. If Christians were humble, they would at least claim to be agnostic.
If they were humble they would at least claim to be agnostic.
 
Even atheists know that God exists.
Even Christians know that Zeus exists.
Becoming an Atheist is an act of will, it’s a denial of a belief in God.
Becoming a Christian is an act of will. It’s a denial of a belief in Zeus.
Yeah they argue it is simply a lack of belief, and that is the technical definition of atheism, but in practice that is not the case.
Yeah, they argue it is simply a lack of Paganism, and that is the technical definition of Christian, but in practice that is not the case
Even the rare that says he never believed in God since he was born is simply a liar.
Even the rare that says he never believed in Zeus since he was born is simply a liar.
An innate belief in a deity is part of the human condition, not an antiquated superstition.
An innate belief in Zeus is part of the human condition, not an antiquated superstition.
Whatever the case human beings are naturally theists.
Whatever the case, human beings are naturally Pagans.
Atheism is a symptom of pride and an act of the will. If they were humble they would at least claim to be agnostic.
Christian is a symptom of pride and an act of will. If Christians were humble, they would at least claim to be agnostic.

Of course I’m neither Pagan nor Christian. I’ve simply come to the conclusion that a magical being is a magical being, regardless of culture, that the Yahwehs and the Christs are the same as the Jupiters and the Hercules.

But a person who is a bigot for one religion over another probably doesn’t appreciate his or her own bias and so I thought to simply illustrate that point.
 
Hi there,
Even Christians know that Zeus exists.

Becoming a Christian is an act of will. It’s a denial of a belief in Zeus.
One might be tempted to think of this as a reversible claim, but upon reflection, I don’t think that’s the case. Pagan gods, ancient or modern (take the Flying Spaghetti Monster, for example) are conceived as corporeal beings, composed of parts. Yahweh, on the other hand, is in many ways comparable to the God that philosophers, like Aristotle, came to believe in.*

This thread is a bit long, so I’ll re-post some of my earlier comments.
  1. Every dependent thing has a cause.
  2. The series of dependent causes either proceeds to infinity, or has a self-existent first cause.
  3. The series cannot proceed to infinity.
  4. Therefore, there exists a self-existent first cause.
Through experience, we all know what (1) is saying. Even assuming that some events are random (i.e. quantum fluctuations), they still have a cause in some sense. Quantum fluctuations are dependent on the energy contained within the quantum vacuum, so they’re caused in that sense.

The series of dependent causes is not temporal in nature, but ontological. At any finite period of time, the human body is dependent on its systems, its systems on organs, its organs on cells, and so forth. However, it would take infinite time for an infinite series to cause anything. Therefore, the ontological series of dependent causes must be finite. The first cause cannot be dependent, since that would result in its not being first, which is a contradiction. Hence, the first cause is self-existent (i.e. it exists by a necessity of its own nature).

The first cause is also eternal, one, and simple. It must be eternal, since it cannot depend on any state of affairs to come into, or go out of, existence. It must be one because the uniformity of nature entails that every existing thing participates in the singular attribute of intelligibility. Finally, it must be simple, since every composite thing is dependent on the ordering of its parts. And, since the first cause is not dependent, it must be simple.

Zeus, and other pagan gods, are incompatible with these descriptions. I believe that since we so commonly and intuitively use the notion of causation, that within every person is an innate knowledge of God. One may or may not be conscious of this knowledge, though.

What are your thoughts?

*I’m not suggesting Aristotle was a proto-Christian. I do, however, think a number of his views are consistent with Christian theism.
 
Christian is a symptom of pride and an act of will. If Christians were humble, they would at least claim to be agnostic.
I have come across plenty of Christians who are Agnostic.
Being Agnostic in no way undermines hope and faith. That a man would put hope in Jesus, is evidence only of his value towards his own existence and his desire to improve the dignity of his being and humanity.

If an atheist chooses not to have faith because of an arrogant pride of will, because they think they are better then everybody else, because they choose to face the path of life and death with no hope in a higher power, and thus see some kind of glory in such unbelief, then so be it. You have bought into the belief that your life is ultimately and objectively irrelevant. This belief must serve you well; otherwise i cannot think of any good reason to believe it, with out absolute evidence.
 
🤷 Since the initial premise is faulty the rest of the content expounding on the initial premise wasn’t worth reading.
Now and then I go out for a night of country dancing. Some dances are so easy to do that I can lead anyone through them. Often I’ll find a shy lady who doesn’t know how to dance and invite her onto the floor, then use a basic dance such as the Arizona two-step (when the D.J. obliges) to teach her some basics, build some confidence. Over the years, a few of these ladies have become fine and practiced dancers. They represent perhaps 1% of those whom I’ve introduced to dance. The remaining 99% were out on the dance floor periphery for something else.

Now and then the band or D.J. will play some serious dance music, Fast country waltz, rarely, and occasionally a good flying two-step. The only ladies I’ll invite to the dance floor for a serious two-step are those whom I’ve previously observed and evaluated. No point trying a complex and difficult dance with an overweight lady who hasn’t seen a dance floor since her high school prom and doesn’t know that dance teachers exist.

You’ll note that I did not invite you to my website. That is because you are unqualified to evaluate any of the ideas I propose. (I’ve watched you dance.) Likewise, WarpPetey, who invents the absurd notion that I keep it out of sight for nefarious reasons. All my ideas are public. I’ve written a book, published an open website which does not require a sign-in or subscription. Not publishing the website is quite different from keeping it secret. Not asking an incompetent lady to dance is not an attempt to pretend that I do not dance.

But inviting a lady to dance on a public floor when she is unqualified to follow a lead or the music will only embarrass her.
 
You’ll note that I did not invite you to my website. That is because you are unqualified to evaluate any of the ideas I propose. (I’ve watched you dance.) Likewise, WarpPetey, who invents the absurd notion that I keep it out of sight for nefarious reasons. All my ideas are public. I’ve written a book, published an open website which does not require a sign-in or subscription.

But inviting a lady to dance on a public floor when she is unqualified to follow a lead or the music will only embarrass her.
really, as you dont know us, our backgrounds or educations, i find it difficult to believe that you have seen us ‘dance’ and evaluated our abilities.

i suspect that you try to limit your ideas to people who know just enough to be accepting of your ideas, yet not knowledgeable enough to refute them.

i too, have watched you ‘dance’, and i suspect you of heresy, that you are attempting to prosyletize here on the forums

i may be entirely wrong, if so you can simply publish your website publicly.

if there are no nefarious purposes then simply bring it all out into the light.

p.s. thats a horrible way to treat women
 
really, as you dont know us, our backgrounds or educations, i find it difficult to believe that you have seen us ‘dance’ and evaluated our abilities.

i suspect that you try to limit your ideas to people who know just enough to be accepting of your ideas, yet not knowledgeable enough to refute them.

i too, have watched you ‘dance’, and i suspect you of heresy, that you are attempting to prosyletize here on the forums

i may be entirely wrong, if so you can simply publish your website publicly.

if there are no nefarious purposes then simply bring it all out into the light.

p.s. thats a horrible way to treat women
Knowing anyone’s education level is not relevant. I’ve worked with Ph.d’s who weren’t smart enough to change a tire. I’ve trusted my life to guys I’d met in a tavern 500 miles from home who probably did not graduate high school… I’m still alive.

There are simple clues to evaluation. They begin with grammatical inferences. Does the person with whom one is communicating have enough intelligence to capitalize the personal pronoun? Or, is the person with whom one is communicating neglecting to capitalize the personal pronoun because he, she, or it is too lazy to do so? Or, is the person neglecting to capitalize because he has psychological problems?

Given any one of the above possibilities, plus the unwarranted inference that I mistreat women or anyone else, I’m putting WarpedPetey on my dipstick list. (Don’t take that personally. I was changing oil this afternoon, and the analogy just came up.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top