Posts by braincleaned

I am 54 and although I'm a layman, my life has been spent studying these things. But we cannot be elitist, not even the scientists can. There is a measure of common sense, and needed humility.

No one here is claiming to 'know' these ideas that are more theoretical than not. To claim that the Big Bang is not a subject of dispute and philosophical debate anymore is proof that you are not a serious reader snare&racket! Even the idea of it being a singularity is debated. The jury is still out on the origins of the Big Bang — and I'm not talking about the religious.

I have this double advantage of having argued for Creationism for years, until my quest led me here, laughing at my biased discourse of past, while defending Evolution today. Am I now convinced that it all stops here, that no further information will ever rock my boat again? Nope. I am, and will continue to be open to changing my view if need be.

88

Changing the Goalposts

by braincleaned in

creationists are not consistant with their otherwise apparant logic:.

nothing comes from nothing check .

everything has a beginning check .

braincleaned

Thank you for your kind response, Tec.

//But believing that God to be the God and Father of Christ... that is from the truth I heard from Christ, as stated above. I loved Him for these, and followed Him. Now, I hear Him... His voice, speaking. So I can hear the truth FROM Him. So I can KNOW Him, and not just 'guess' or hope that He exists. I know He exists, and I put faith IN Him.//

As you know, there is no way I can dispute your experience, nor do I wish to question it.
I do believe that you have felt these experiences, and that they have a profound influence on your life.

I'm not sure I even want to argue any further, as I wish to respect your feelings.

Maybe I can refer to my own journey to explain my conversion to atheism.
In doing so, I am honoring your own journey — while sharing mine.

At first, my issue was not the existence of God, but his character. I swam in my cognitive dissonance for decades, grasping at anything that would confirm my bias for Him. But the evidence grew thin.
I studied in depth — ironically rationalizing the Biblical statement that God is Love. I went to concordances to understand Hebrew and Greek semantics… oh I really worked hard. But the more I read my Bible, the more YHWH became a monster to me. Later, even the Son, Jesus, condoned and even lauded the Mosaic Law, which is a horrid mountain of about 600 laws, more cruel one than the other. It was no surprise that Jesus warned in Mathew 10: 34-39 that he did not come to bring peace, but a sword. Also that anyone who loves their father or mother more than Him was not worthy of Him; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than Him is not worthy of Him… not the most concern for family unity. Not to mention the Church that followed his War cry literally, through crusades and Inquisition…

Still, I found Jesus relatively harmless compared to the Father, YHWH.
Jehovah boasts jealousy, vengeance, genocide, and leglistated slavery, and other niceties.
He never used his almighty power with love — as illustrated for example in the Flood story. He is said to have the power to do anything he wanted — yet, he destroyed whole families; women (pregnant and not) and children, to the horrors of slow drowning, while if he was love, he could have just made them drop dead painlessly and/or disintegrate (I won't even try to talk about the logic fallacies this whole tale)!
There is this sick idea of vengeance He has — as if torturing his "enemies" could serve them a lesson. There is no lesson to be learned if dead or in Hell!

Did I really think the God who dislikes abortion was consistent when He ordered his armies to kill "by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open???" (Hosea 13:16)
Nooo...

I haven't even scratched the surface here… but I gather you will understand my point.

I concluded that Jesus is a smooth talker, and that some people are easily swooned by him. Of course, I say this because I also believe this is a delusion derived from our brains in need of bliss at all cost, and confirmation bias.
This is why so many of us have a hard time with the God idea. That humanity is conned (often by self) into believing the particular god of their culture, or preferred folklore. It seems so convenient…

This is also why I encourage to learn other religions. Other have the same experience than you but with other gods. My personal quest is truth. Not MY Truth, but THE Truth...

I will conclude with a quote from my favorite writer, Bertrand Russell:
"There can’t be a practical reason for believing what isn’t true. That’s quite... at least, I rule it out as impossible.
Either the thing is true, or it isn’t. If it is true, you should believe it, and if it isn’t, you shouldn’t. And if you can’t find out whether it’s true or whether it isn’t, you should suspend judgment.
But you can’t... it seems to me a fundamental dishonesty and a fundamental treachery to intellectual integrity to hold a belief because you think it’s useful, and not because you think it’s true."

Peace. :)

62

Discussion w/ Wife: I Welcome Your Suggestions

by breakfast of champions in

so these last few wts have definitely eroded my wife's faith in the org.

she is definitely seeing the bs, and i even overheard her talking openly about it to a family member.

good for her!.

braincleaned

About Rand cam stock:

The official US Securities and Exchange Commission have the rundown here:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/922330/000106299302000371/form10k.txt

62

What kind of scandal would cause most JW to leave the "truth"?

by Iamallcool in

jw
friends

braincleaned

Nada.

88

Changing the Goalposts

by braincleaned in

creationists are not consistant with their otherwise apparant logic:.

nothing comes from nothing check .

everything has a beginning check .

braincleaned

//The current scientific theory... or hypothesis, I am not sure how "sure" it is... if I understand correctly (from Laurence Krauss), is that the universe did or could have come from "Nothing" (the meaning of the word has been changed though, lol, so that "Nothing" is actually something//

I'm not sure I agree with Krauss, although I'm a fan of his. I find his 'nothing' to be 'something' a bit of an intellectual gymnastic.
Of course, I'm not a scientists — but I'm a thinker.
Krauss is a theoretical physicist ("which uses mathematical models and abstractions of physical objects and systems to rationalize, explain and predict natural phenomena"). Nobody has to accept this as a basis for reality.

For example, William Lane Craig bases his argument on the impossibility of an actual infinite (weird I know — he is shooting himself in the foot about the infinity of God), and rewords Kalam's syllogism like this:

1 An actual infinite cannot exist.
2 An infinite temporal regress of events is an actual infinite.
3 Therefore, an infinite temporal regress of events cannot exist.

However, Victor Stenger has proven that quantum mechanics refutes the first premise of the argument (that 'everything that begins to exist has a cause'). He points out that such naturally occurring quantum events violate this premise, such as the Casimir effect and radioactive decay.

I am just a comic book writer — a layman. But I have often read that nobody can explain infinity. This is a big surprise for me, as a simple circle is ample proof of infinity: Where does it start? When does it stop? Even a child would get the point. Any circle is a powerful and obvious example of infinity.

So we are both agreeing on one thing. Whether God or Nature — the cycle of life and energy can be eternal.

My problem is when one points to the source of life as being God. Which god?

You think it is YHWH/Jesus…? okay then. But can you give me an argument, different and MORE persuasive than any other religion? Are your arguments against any other god any more persuasive that the argument against yours?

I am an atheist in that I see no evidence for a god of our human folklore. But I am an agnostic as to the possibility of a god-like intelligence out there. Actually, I even side with Einstein and his Spinoza God; Nature. We'll see what quantum physics teach us in the future.

However, like you are an atheist (so to speak) against Zeus, Thor, Allah, Brahma, etc… and as you dismiss their existence as human invention and myth — I — like the other religions out there, dismiss YOUR idea of god. Your arguments are no better. Or at the least, I have read no better argument.

Just for your information, I do know all the arguments for the christian god, as I was a Christian Minister for over 30 years. It's my deep study of the Bible that turned me into a non-believer. I studied other religions too, and still do. The closest I have gotten to logic and reason, is the scientific method and its peer-reviewed research. It does not explain everything — but it's better than believing the folkloric gods of our respective cultures and wishes.

Peace! :)

88

Changing the Goalposts

by braincleaned in

creationists are not consistant with their otherwise apparant logic:.

nothing comes from nothing check .

everything has a beginning check .

braincleaned

//

(though the statement... God created the universe from "Nothing"... the new definition, is not much different than what that physicist is saying (other than the God part), in that that the universe came from "Nothing". Because "Nothing" isn't nothing)

//

I do not believe the Universe comes from nothing. I beleive the Big Bang to be part of an infinit cycle. Something you should understand well, since you believe God is infinite too. My main problem with that, is which "god" are we talking about here? I don't dispute the idea of an intellegent creative force, but I do dispute the existance of the folkloric Abrahamic God.

88

Changing the Goalposts

by braincleaned in

creationists are not consistant with their otherwise apparant logic:.

nothing comes from nothing check .

everything has a beginning check .

braincleaned

Tec,

"What came FROM God had a beginning. But God, Himself, always WAS."

You obviously have not even taken the time to see these videos.
Your argument is totally in your head, as there no observable example of ANYTHING coming into existence "ex-Nihilo" or from nothing.

What you and your fellow believers argue is that God has always existed (with of course, no evidence) AND that he made the Universe come to be from nothing other than his own existance. And to argue this, you are are using 'creatio ex materia' examples to defend 'create ex-Nihilo' claims.

You go even further, and I must admit I need to think about this — you say "Since God is not nothing (the absence of anything/everything)... this is untrue. Everything came from HIM. From HIS energy, that brought forth LIGHT/LIFE."

This is yet a new spin for me; because this is NOT what the Bible not other creation stories claim at all. I need to dig deeper in this claim of yours and where you get the idea that God had the elements to make the Universe.

88

Changing the Goalposts

by braincleaned in

creationists are not consistant with their otherwise apparant logic:.

nothing comes from nothing check .

everything has a beginning check .

braincleaned

Everything has a beginning — Check √

You say, "No. God does not have a beginning."

Exaclty my point — you are changing the goalpost — with absoluetly NO evidence!
Duh...