My doubts (God complicates things)

[teachccd]

It’s evolution from a spiritual, infinite, religious point of view. For the universe is infinite, and Being is in itself. We don’t need a creator for nature is our creator; We are now its controller.

Nature is our creator. So, we now control our creator. If this were to continue then wouldn’t we eventually become the creator and then have to explain how we created ourselves?

 

[teachccd]

Study this phrase: “Being is in itself”

If 'being is in itself", then our existence is only relative to the length of our existence. In other words, when I die the world ends, period…teachccd

 

[godfree12]

If 'being is in itself", then our existence is only relative to the length of our existence.

You’re logic is flawed. I am saying One’s existence is irrelevant to its origins. Does it really matter why one was created? No, They are here in this world, in this state of existence. Therefore, it is there natural responsibility, just like any other living organism, to make the most of their being. In other words to overcome challenges(like the monkeys with their termite tools) and to progress the comprehension of intelligence as far as possible(in the case of humanity).

when I die the world ends, period…teachccd

I think we can all say that is not true.

This is a typical argument i have come across and it is selfish. For if one thinks merely of their individual existence tehy ignore the thousands, millions of beings that over time conceived you (ancestors etc.). One most certainly has a responsibility to the future of humanity and therefore cannot think their life is insignificant and “the world ends” when I end. Selfish to ancestors and selfish to future generations.

 

[quaestio]

godfree12:

If a human being is made by nature alone, as you say, one’s purpose in life is to preserve oneself, even at the expense of others. In short, utter selfishness.

Do you agree with that?

Note that I am asking this independently. It is not directly related to your post above about selfishness.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

You’re logic is flawed. I am saying One’s existence is irrelevant to its origins. Does it really matter why one was created?

man makes nothing without purpose, there is no object one makes that serves no purpose, why would G-d then make a universe with no purpose?

so it would seem that the reason why one is created is of the utmost importance, as a creation you have a purpose, nothing else would seem to matter in comparison

No, They are here in this world, in this state of existence. Therefore, it is there natural responsibility, just like any other living organism, to make the most of their being.

how does being in this state of existence give some one the responsibility to make the most of their being?

how does any other living organism have this responsibility?

In other words to overcome challenges(like the monkeys with their termite tools) and to progress the comprehension of intelligence as far as possible(in the case of humanity).

do you have some evidence that these are the goals of monkeys or humanity?

I think we can all say that is not true.

it would seem to not be true.

This is a typical argument i have come across and it is selfish. For if one thinks merely of their individual existence tehy ignore the thousands, millions of beings that over time conceived you (ancestors etc.). One most certainly has a responsibility to the future of humanity and therefore cannot think their life is insignificant and “the world ends” when I end. Selfish to ancestors and selfish to future generations.

this doesnt agree with the beginning of the post where you talk about ones existence being irrelevant to its origins

 

[Sarpedon]

If God does not exist, then nothing has purpose. If nothing has purpose, nothing has to be a certain way.

Consider the intellect. Everything we know comes through our senses, and is processed by our mind. All of our perception is based on data transmitted by the senses and that data is interpreted by the brain.

Now, consider this “brain” and the “senses”. Let’s presume, for the sake of the argument, that these two faculties are wholly material things. They are machines made of parts (nerve cells). In fact, they are made of billions of billions of parts, as huge numbers of neurons make up the brain and senses.

Let’s consider what we have. We have an enourmous machine composed of billions of parts. If any of those parts are missing or non-existent in the first place, the result can be unpredictable (a simple facet of mechanics in general- missing or damaged parts can affect the result in many different ways).

So, we have an enourmous machine composed of billions of living cells. Now, we presume that those cells interpret the incoming data into an accurate image of the subject. We can’t know this for sure, because we can’t step outside of our senses to check.

So in the end, we are left with the proposition that, due to undirected, purposeless forces, the body of man assembled billions of parts into a machine that can know all reality and comprehend the question of whether a transcend being exists or not. This is just amazingly fortunate. We don’t know for sure whether those billions of parts assembled in that way. We’ll just assume we have the necessary parts to answer the God question and live our life according to that conviction.

This is the irrationality of atheism. If atheism is true, there is no reason to expect our mind to have developed in the way where we could know that truth, and there is no way to check whether it has developed in that manner. If atheism is true, then we almost certainly would not be able to know it. There is no reason our minds B]must accurately think about a non-existent entity, so why would we assume that our minds for some odd, undirected reason aquired that capability?

Of course, if you believe that God arranged the billions of parts in a way where we can know reality, this problem is overcome.

Below is a quote from Darwin which expresses a particular take on this issue: why would we trust our convictions any more than we trust the convictions of a monkey?

With me, the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would anyone trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind…?

Letter to William Graham, Down, 3 July 1881. In The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin Including an Autobiographical Chapter, ed. Francis Darwin (London: John Murray, Albermarle Street, 1887), Volume 1, pp. 315-316.

 

[Sarpedon]

Here’s another quote, from C.S. Lewis:

It is only through trusting our own minds that we have come to know Nature herself. If Nature, when fully known, seems to teach us (that is, if the sciences teach us) that our own minds are chance arrangements of atoms, then the sciences themselves would be chance arrangements of atoms and we should have no reason for believing them.”

 

[godfree12]

This is a typical argument i have come across and it is selfish. For if one thinks merely of their individual existence tehy ignore the thousands, millions of beings that over time conceived you (ancestors etc.). One most certainly has a responsibility to the future of humanity and therefore cannot think their life is insignificant and “the world ends” when I end. Selfish to ancestors and selfish to future generations.

I’m not sure how you arrived at that conclusion. Existence is irrelevant in the case that being alive is irrelevant to how it came to be an individual being in the universe. I think the question, “Why am I here?” sums up the irrelevancy. It does not matter why “you” came to be here, on this planet at this time. It matters that you have an innate purpose to your present state of existence. You have a responsibility to join yourself productively to that greater purpose: the progression of your human race. Regardless of the human race’s origins. And here I arrive at the flaw of God(in the religious sense).

That flaw lies in the ignorance religion institutes. They(Islam, Christianity, Ancient Greeks, Roman etc.) assume that what they know is Absolute. That what is written in their Koran, Iliad, and Bible is God(s) over Man. When scientific advances were made regarding astronomy, sexism, and psychiatry, which did not follow the “word” of God, Allah, Zeus, and Pluto, then that advance is deemed heretic. The advance is, in reality, a challenge to the controlling power’s complacency, and the controllers know it. I believe the middle ages are testimony to this. The complacency breeds a selfishness in the controlling power that poisons the original “righteous” attempts of the Bible, Koran, and Iliad.

What humanity must realize is that the Bible was originally a challenge of the controllers’ complacency. The Koran was originally a threat to stability, and the Iliad a challenge to the assumption that present rulers knew everything. But they evolved the former state of existence into something much more magnificent.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

I’m not sure how you arrived at that conclusion. Existence is irrelevant in the case that being alive is irrelevant to how it came to be an individual being in the universe. I think the question, “Why am I here?” sums up the irrelevancy. It does not matter why “you” came to be here, on this planet at this time. It matters that you have an innate purpose to your present state of existence. You have a responsibility to join yourself productively to that greater purpose: the progression of your human race. Regardless of the human race’s origins. And here I arrive at the flaw of God(in the religious sense).

from what does this innate purpose emanate? thats the point, we have purpose because we are creation, nothing is created without a purpose

you agree, but you claim an innate purpose with no cause, with no sufficient reason for being.

so what are you claiming causes this innate purpose?

we claim the source of that purpose is G-d, which then would have everything to do with how and why we are here.

you seem to be making a similar claim, but just trying to cut out G-d by claiming purpose is innate and somehow separate from the creator

it looks like an attempt to not have an explanation as to where we come from.

That flaw lies in the ignorance religion institutes. They(Islam, Christianity, Ancient Greeks, Roman etc.) assume that what they know is Absolute.

stick to Christianity for simplicity sake.

what ignorance are you talking about, and what do you mean by absolute.

That what is written in their Koran, Iliad, and Bible is God(s) over Man. When scientific advances were made regarding astronomy, sexism, and psychiatry, which did not follow the “word” of God, Allah, Zeus, and Pluto, then that advance is deemed heretic. The advance is, in reality, a challenge to the controlling power’s complacency, and the controllers know it

.

are you wearing aluminum foil on your head right now?
what are you talking about? who are the controllers?

I believe the middle ages are testimony to this. The complacency breeds a selfishness in the controlling power that poisons the original “righteous” attempts of the Bible, Koran, and Iliad.

I believe the middle ages are testimony to this. The complacency breeds a selfishness in the controlling power that poisons the original “righteous” attempts of the Bible, Koran, and Iliad.

what does the illiad have to do with this?

What humanity must realize is that the Bible was originally a challenge of the controllers’ complacency. The Koran was originally a threat to stability, and the Iliad a challenge to the assumption that present rulers knew everything. But they evolved the former state of existence into something much more magnificent.

do you have any evidence or logical arguments for any of these assertions at all?

because all this sounds even more out there than MOQ and those guys are pretty far out.

so i will need some evidence or logical argument, or citations that serious thinkers deal with this issue, otherwise it will be pretty hard to take seriously.

 

[godfree12]

from what does this innate purpose emanate? thats the point, we have purpose because we are creation, nothing is created without a purpose

Nothing is created without a purpose? That is a bold statement. What is the purpose of the millions of the stars we can’t see because they’re beyond our means of observation? What is the purpose of greek gods? What is the purpose of hip hop music? What is the purpose of anything in the world besides Christianity? Money? Power? What is the purpose of atheism? What purpose did the dinosaurs exhibit?

The innate purpose is in our existence. Why do we need a creator? We’re here just as those stars are out there somewhere. It is because it is. I AM THAT I AM.

what does the illiad have to do with this?

The Iliad was used as a bible of sorts. Aeschylus derived many epic plays (The Orestia) from its plot in order to inspire the Greeks in their battles against Persian invaders. What purpose did The Orestia serve? What purpose does Satan serve? What purpose does the Pope serve? Catholicism I do not think is mentioned in the Bible. So there should not really be a “church” of Christ in my opinion.

 

[notsmart]

“I believe the middle ages are testimony to this”

The middle ages were not as dark as you may think.

What was this testimony you speak of?

 

[Eucharisted]

Hey everyone,

I have always struggled with the idea of God, but this is what has always thrown me off the most and I was hoping that someone could help with it. (forgive me if someone or many people have already posted with this same problem).

Simply put, it seems to me that all the arguments for the creation of the universe could also be applied to the creation of God. Namely that if the universe has all of these traits or whatever it must have been created. That sort of thing. To me, it solves nothing.

Basically, it just adds the question: how’d god come into being?
to which people generally say that he’s always existed and had no creator. I see no reason why the same could not be said about the universe–that is, cut out the middle man, so to speak. (yes, i know that scientists know that the universe had a “beginning” but that was basically just the start of time. For all we know, the matter had always been there.

Thanks!

P.S. I really am hoping to be convinced.

God is Existence and existence is self-existent and eternal. What could possibly have created or given birth to Existence?

 

[teachccd]

I think we can all say that is not true.

This is a typical argument i have come across and it is selfish. For if one thinks merely of their individual existence tehy ignore the thousands, millions of beings that over time conceived you (ancestors etc.). One most certainly has a responsibility to the future of humanity and therefore cannot think their life is insignificant and “the world ends” when I end. Selfish to ancestors and selfish to future generations.

The denial of our Creator is the epitome and ultimate of selfish. Don’t you dare talk to me about being selfish when you believe that your right to know that God does not exist comes merely from your own human reasoning that originates from cosmic dust and arranged itself to the point where you have the capability to deny the very Creator who designed the order of this universe.

DO NOT talk to me about what selfishness is. Atheism is selfishness at its core.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Nothing is created without a purpose? That is a bold statement.

 

[Dameedna]

Here’s another quote, from C.S. Lewis:

This is a circular argument. If he is right, then there is nor reason…to acknowlege his argument This is why circular reasoning is bad…it comes back around to BITE you …on the butt

 

[teachccd]

godfree12;4516837:

then please name something that exists for no purpose.

how do you know there are millions of stars beyond our observational limits? if we dont know they are there than we simply dont know they are there

those are concepts, not creations. but those concepts served sa spirituality in the pre christain era

to entertain

be specific, what things?

to buy things, and to impose ones will on the surrounding environment

atheism is a concept, not a creation.

they were part of the process of evolution that lead to us

do you have actual evidence or arguments to support this? you havent offered any yet

because nothing comes from nothing, we could not exist without a creator. nothing could because 0+0=0

that is not evidence, that is just the repetition of your previous statements. it is a direct denial of causality with no supporting evidence

that does’t make it Holy Scripture.

he refused to serve his purpose, thats why he is satan.

to lead the faithful

Catholic is the greek word for universal

check matthew 16:18, that is where Christ founded the Catholic church.

but none of this is evidence of the correctness of your assertion, it seems more like an attack on religion

please offer some evidence, not hyperbole

Very well said. I could only hope that godfree12 would address each point that you made. You really hit the nail on the head concerning the reality of satan. Very well said…teachccd

 

[Sarpedon]

This is a circular argument. If he is right, then there is nor reason…to acknowlege his argument This is why circular reasoning is bad…it comes back around to BITE you …on the butt

Exactly. That’s his point. Logically, it can’t verify itself. The only way to break the circle is if you start with faith that the human mind and its functions can know truth.

Now, there are two possibilities to justify this faith. One is faith that God designed the mind that way, presumably so that we can know Him. The other option is faith that matter just happened to arrange itself into that way with no obligation.

I think the theistic justification for this faith is the most reasonable. I find the atheistic explanation just far too unlikely, given all the different shades of mental abilities that would be possible .

 

[godfree12]

DO NOT talk to me about what selfishness is. Atheism is selfishness at its core.

I am really pressing some people’s buttons, wow! Religion is selfish from its standpoint that it(Islam, Catholicism, Lutheran, Anglican, Calvinist, etc.) assumes it knows best. But, most atheism is selfish - I agree with you on that. That is why we need something much more spiritual than what selfish atheists, and absolute religions call reality.

warpspeedpetey:

those are concepts, not creations.

If concepts are not created than they must by innate in nature. I think you have just proved my point…

warpspeedpetey:

Quote:

What is the purpose of atheism?

atheism is a concept, not a creation.

Atheism must then arise from humanity’s innate nature of evolution. For if this so-called God’s word did not put them into being it must be in the innate existence and evolution of humanity that the ability to not believe in God, or Allah is found.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

I am really pressing some people’s buttons, wow!

sorry, but it seems more like watching a bus load of clowns crash into a into a van full of hippies, you cant help but stare.

Religion is selfish from its standpoint that it(Islam, Catholicism, Lutheran, Anglican, Calvinist, etc.) assumes it knows best.

Catholicism, does know best. we can trace our lineage to Christ, who fulfilled dozens of convergent prophecies, written by different people, in different places, in different languages, in different cultures, spread over millennium, then those prophecies were fulfilled in the person of Christ.

no other faith can make that claim, that is why were are the one true faith.

But, most atheism is selfish - I agree with you on that.

ok

That is why we need something much more spiritual than what selfish atheists, and absolute religions call reality.

it sounds amazingly like an introduction to MOQ, please say it aint so joe.

or it sounds like you think we need a new religion, who should be the high priest of it, you?

If concepts are not created

concepts are created, but they are not existent, as a physical creation is.

than they must by innate in nature

.

why must concepts be innate in nature? if so than every concept ever to exist would be known by every man.

I think you have just proved my point…

keep thinking

Atheism must then arise from humanity’s innate nature of evolution.

if atheism is innate than why do we find indigenous tribes have their own religions separate from anything the rest of the world when they are first contacted?

and evolution is a theory describing the minute changes biological systems under go in response to their environment, thereby changing over the course of time.

how is that innate to human nature?

For if this so-called God’s word did not put them into being it must be in the innate existence and evolution of humanity that the ability to not believe in God, or Allah is found.

again this idea is betrayed by indigenous religions, there is no record of any indigenous peoples had any concept of atheism, but rather they all had some religion.

it seems that you simply dont like religion, so you are looking for a way around it, you call atheism selfih and then call for a new spirituality

this is the classic search for G-d

and here He is, He has been waiting on you. You will continue to run for a number of years, but He will still be here.

someday, you will do great things for Him. even if you dont think so now.

 

[crowonsnow]

God is Existence and existence is self-existent and eternal. What could possibly have created or given birth to Existence?

Given birth to existence? That sounds like what presuppers like to claim, that “existence exists.” It’s the same as saying “is” exists. That doesn’t even begin to make for a decent or convincing argument.

The universe is certainly real. It certainly “is.” It’s not necessary to get into senseless semantics by saying existence “is” and therefore the universe can exist. Without the universe existing there can be no talk of anything else, unless an alleged anything else can be shown to possess “is.”

A god doesn’t have any “is” until it shows up. Until then, the universe is all that “is.”