Do I beleive in GOD? (page 17)

70wksfyrs

Laika,

You are not late to the thread. Thanks for coming. I have just had 8 pages of posts. Nice to meet another newbie that still beleives in God and Christianity.

Take care

70wks..

cofty

70wks - thanks for your concern but I thrive on being challenged. Maybe one day we will hear an original argument from theism. We live in hope.

Redefining the word god to mean some vague philosophical concept or equating god with maths or science or love or whatever is nothing more than theism giving up the argument.

70wksfyrs

Finkelstein, you said

I do however understand why people (humans) both past and present do or have, its part of are sociological and psychological make up.

The most interesting point thus far on this thread for me. The bible teaches similar in Matt5:3.

snare, you said

i didn't give up god after watchtower, i then examine the bible. I didn't give up god following rejection of the bibiel, i looked at the Quaran ans read it and some hadiths, went to mosque a number of times. I examined buddhism, hinduism and at about this point realised that all these beliefs had common threads. Very human contructs and all required faith, whereas the science I was consuming all day in class didn't require faith, but simply eyes and ears and hands.... The evidence was real, you could see, hear and touch it.

First of all snare, not waffle at all in fact, very interesting and backs up Finkelstein point. Wonderful revelation to me thanks guys whoopeeee!!!!!

My question now is,

If it is part of our make up, why? HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

cofty, here we go back to your gap filling point. I am going to fill in the gaps HEHEHEHEHE!!!!!!!!

70wksfyrs

cofty,

I have changed my mind. I think there is a need for a creator again. Sorry

In my opinion Jehovah needed to use complex polarising separating techniques, in order for the right balance of enatiomers to form in living things. There is also a need for a creator for me, becuase I want to pray to him, even if he ignores me.

70wksfyrs

In my opinoin, science will never fully explain anything, especially the non-existence of God. There are always discoveries to be made at an individual level. I am satisfied with my scientific knowledge and my belief that God exists.

However if he keeps ignoring me when I pray to him, and cannot show me satisfying reasons why my family is suffering and others the world over are suffering, then my relationship with him is going to deteriote rapidly.

70wksfyrs

bohm,

you said

I find this re-definition of words to be tiresome, counter-productive and really remind me of humpty-dumpty (It mean what i say it means).

If you are finding this thread, topic and comments tiresome, why are you here?

70wks.....

Monsieur

Redefining the word god to mean some vague philosophical concept or equating god with maths or science or love or whatever is nothing more than theism giving up the argument.

Cofty,

Why is it impossible to redefine the word ‘god’? Who wrote THAT rule in stone? Does it say, “When debating the existence of God, you MUST use THIS ONE definition of God, otherwise your arguments are null and void”.

Of course not, this is absurd by the very nature of the subject, God, an entity whom you described as ‘imaginary’. I understood what you meant by ‘imaginary’ , as in the mythical bearded old man sitting upon a throne dispensing punishment and pain, not existing. I agree that this is an absurd cartoon created many years ago to instill fear and suppression.

Thankfully, man has acquired knowledge and comprehension of seemingly ‘impossible’ things in nature and science, like knowing how to put himself in outer space for instance. Thus the ‘myth’ of God, a man (yet conveniently a spirit, unseen or intangible) becomes more and more an impossibility.

But what if ‘God’ is a symbol? Something designed to help represent what is VERY real, like love and math and science. As the saying goes, a picture paints a thousand words, Cofty. The ‘picture’ of God is designed to do the same. But out of a thousand ‘words’, you are peculiarly focused on one.

No I'm saying that resorting to esoteric philosophy to salvage a failed notion of a god is pointless

Your statement here would indicate that you understand that God is a ‘notion’, an interpretation, an opinion even. You cannot argue against an interpretation or an opinion, but you can argue on behalf of fact. The Bible factually states (it’s in there) that God is perfect, intelligent, discernible, irrefutable. What is it describing really? I say it again, it is describing what can be proven irrefutably to be all these things, and that is mathematics and science.

70wksfyrs

Tammy,

Some of my page 2 and page 3 of this thread is missing on my screen. Can you repost any comments you made on these pages please. I will also pm simon to see if he can fix it.

Take care tammy

70wks....

70wksfyrs

Hey guys,

I think this is the end of the thread now. Well done for getting involved it was fun. I probably wont be checking it much now, but feel free to send me a pm if you have a question.

See you around the board

70wks....

tec

Did you manage to be able to look at page 2 and 3 again? You responded to both of my posts, but if you want me to repost them I can.

Peace,

tammy

Do I beleive in GOD?

Share this