Do I beleive in GOD?

by 70wksfyrs 173 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • tec
    tec

    Or, prologos... WE "left" that 'fourth dimension' (spiritual realm), to be confined to this three dimensional (physical) realm.

    (just an example/metaphor... to help get a sense of something... like the spiritual to the physical)

    Peace,

    tammy

  • Finkelstein
    Finkelstein

    If there was a beginning to the universe as science has now recognized and revealed then a god like(Creator) could never possibly exist.

    God therefore may only exist in the human imagination of emotive theory.

  • tec
    tec

    If there was a beginning to the universe as science has now recognized and revealed then a god like(Creator) could never possibly exist.

    That doesn't make any sense. Even the genesis accounts states... there IS a beginning to the universe. So the beginning of the universe was recognized and revealed long before science recognized and revealed it. Science is discovering the how and process of it... but a "beginning" was always known, even when science theorized that the universe was eternal.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    So we can do a mental exercise to add God to the mix, or not. Both models may stand up to scrutiny for a while. Why not add aether back in to explain some of our gaps of understanding?

    When it comes to scientific inquiry though, it has been more helpful to look for a Higgs Boson than for aether.

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    Hey seventy, my first post, on page 2, was meant to be my answer to the thread question:

    I don't find myself believing in God often.

    For the best answer ever to the question, 'are you an atheist' I have to refer to one of my favourite YouTube videos again, with Derria 'answering' the question:

    http://youtu.be/hcl00tc-WHc

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    bohm, the meaning of the holocaust resides exactly within the spaces of personal perspective. That is where it derives its meaning. I can never understand why some people insist it must have a certain meaning and no other. We argue against the views of deniers on the grounds that their perspective is immoral and crass and contrary to the evidence, not on the grounds that we have discovered the one unalterable truth of the situation. How could you define such a perspective anyway? Would it exist if there were no humans left to hold the perspective? The universe does not hold within itself the secrets of its essence and its history in a language we can understand, or any sort of language. It does not owe us an explanation, and it has none to give us even if we insist. We construct meaning, we ourselves. That is all. In fact the position of those who hold that there is only one legitimate perspective on harrowing aspects of history such as the holocaust are in the most precarious position of all. For what if a history of denial becomes the dominant discourse? The idea that the truth can be pinned down will be pinned on a terrifying solid.

  • Monsieur
    Monsieur

    Yes, I believe God exists.

    And there is plenty of proof of it. Not too long ago i logically argued the existence of God in the form of 'love'.

    Well, God also exists in a most crucial form- math and science.

    Here is the simple proof -

    God is suppose to be perfect, infalliable, irrefutable, eternally trustworthy.

    Math and science is perfect, infalliable, irrefutable, eternally trustworthy.

    So much so that man can 'trust' his own life onto math/science/God when going into space, miles under the ocean, etc. etc.

  • cofty
    cofty

    Monsieur you can't just arbitrarily define an imaginary god and then pretend you have offered evidence.

  • Monsieur
    Monsieur

    Monsieur you can't just arbitrarily define an imaginary god and then pretend you have offered evidence.

    Cofty-

    PRECISELY because god is imaginary i CAN arbitrarily define him Cofty.

    The difference is that I can define 'him' with REAL evidence, not mythical or fantastical abstracts.

  • prologos
    prologos

    We are talking about BELIEF in God, not testable evidence.

    I just wanted to walk you all through the thought jgnat introduced of a 2 dimension, flatland universe.

    If you take one spatial dimension away from the expanding curved membrane that had a beginning and it is expanding, moving through TIME, as our clocks tell us,

    it could follow that time is a primordial dimension but not an aetherlike substance.

    If you remove one dimension of your choice also away from God in this model, he equations that give you infinity now, would drop that bothersome entity, the lazy 8.*

    God as a creator might then become a more realistic option for those who can not see him/her having stomac aches per bible stories.

    The Hicks Boson aka God Particle if found again& again, would only confirm to some that work was done at the smallest, below Planck level and

    the creator has left the workshop and closed the door, leaving us with lots of goodies to work with.

    Finkelstein, why would the BEGINNING of the universe proove that God NEVER existed?

    God =Universe? just because our clocks read 13.6 billion years traveled through time does not mean there was no time before the start button was pressed. In one model of the beginning, the pre - big bang vaccuum seethed with energy, virtual particles, that again would take time, work, even if the balance was zero for a while.

    just trying to stimulate brain activity without contradicting evidence.

    No disrespect to the 8 wt dukes or NY residents intended.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit