ADVERTISEMENT

POLL: Is there a God ??

Is there a God ??

  • Yes

    Votes: 216 76.9%
  • No

    Votes: 65 23.1%

  • Total voters
    281
  • This poll will close: .
The Bible is both testaments, though. If differing conclusions can be made in the old, I don't have much faith in the new either.
That would be a mistake. Don't overthink it. The Jewish folks don't have both. They are generally pretty smart folks. I don't see them running from the old testament (Torah). They tend to believe it to be divinely inspired by God. That part is several thousand years older than the New.
 
So to sum up. Gravity THEORY is just that. There is no LAW and science does not have an answer nor does it profess to know the answer. Maybe some day. But now it is just theory. Are you so fragile in your 'belief" that you cannot acknowledge something so simple.

Trans men? You mean women (with mental issues) pretending to be men? That answer alone says much about you. You profess to live by science...while the simplest PROVEN genetic fact is XX and XY. We all can agree that a woman can have a baby even if she tries to dress like a dude. Her XX and not her pants suit defines her sex.

Please spare us the typical....there was a human in India with XXYXXYYXX chromosomes and a dong and a vagina that both worked.....we all understand that there are freak mutations. We had a football player with 11 fingers. No sane person would say finger totals are fluid.
I can acknowledge that it's a theory (that's based on years of research), that's kind of the whole point of science. I beg you to research the scientific method.

Professing to know the answer to something when you can't fully back up that hypothesis seems a bit reckless to me. Seems like you're the type of person who just likes to be told what to think and the more confident someone is, the more likely you are to believe. Just a theory though.

If you're so triggered about trans people, I'd suggest moving over to the political thread where you and your fellow boomers can have a circle jerk over your shared ignorance of a seemingly easy concept to grasp.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DrH. Lecter
So to sum up. Gravity THEORY is just that. There is no LAW and science does not have an answer nor does it profess to know the answer. Maybe some day. But now it is just theory. Are you so fragile in your 'belief" that you cannot acknowledge something so simple.

What in the wide, wide world of sports is a goin on here?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_law_of_universal_gravitation

https://physics.weber.edu/amiri/phy...&Gravity/reviewofgravity/ReviewofGravity.html

https://www.britannica.com/science/Newtons-law-of-gravitation

https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/circles/Lesson-3/Newton-s-Law-of-Universal-Gravitation
 
I can acknowledge that it's a theory (that's based on years of research), that's kind of the whole point of science. I beg you to research the scientific method.

Professing to know the answer to something when you can't fully back up that hypothesis seems a bit reckless to me. Seems like you're the type of person who just likes to be told what to think and the more confident someone is, the more likely you are to believe. Just a theory though.

If you're so triggered about trans people, I'd suggest moving over to the political thread where you and your fellow boomers can have a circle jerk over your shared ignorance of a seemingly easy concept to grasp.

Actually your pompous attitude and arrogance notwithstanding....you wasted a lot of words to bury the lead....."yes it is just a theory."

As for the rest of your post, you know nothing about me. I know your ilk. Angry leftist soyboy with a manbun, likely barista, who has contributed nothing to society or the economy. I am a contributor. You are a taker. You are welcome for my paying your student loans. I payed my own.

As for men having babies....why do you hate science?
 
Actually your pompous attitude and arrogance notwithstanding....you wasted a lot of words to bury the lead....."yes it is just a theory."

As for the rest of your post, you know nothing about me. I know your ilk. Angry leftist soyboy with a manbun, likely barista, who has contributed nothing to society or the economy. I am a contributor. You are a taker. You are welcome for my paying your student loans. I payed my own.

As for men having babies....why do you hate science?
Yep..need that thermal insulation on your boots...Are you sure you PAID your student loans? If so, ask for a refund. you definitely didn't get your money's worth.
 
Yep..need that thermal insulation on your boots...Are you sure you PAID your student loans? If so, ask for a refund. you definitely didn't get your money's worth.
In all honesty, my parents wrote a check. We didnt need loans. I make no apology for being "blessed."
 
  • Like
Reactions: roguemocha
Actually your pompous attitude and arrogance notwithstanding....you wasted a lot of words to bury the lead....."yes it is just a theory."

As for the rest of your post, you know nothing about me. I know your ilk. Angry leftist soyboy with a manbun, likely barista, who has contributed nothing to society or the economy. I am a contributor. You are a taker. You are welcome for my paying your student loans. I payed my own.

As for men having babies....why do you hate science?
Please keep the rambles about leftists in the political thread. This thread is about questioning/debating the existence of god(s).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catemus
Actually your pompous attitude and arrogance notwithstanding....you wasted a lot of words to bury the lead....."yes it is just a theory."

As for the rest of your post, you know nothing about me. I know your ilk. Angry leftist soyboy with a manbun, likely barista, who has contributed nothing to society or the economy. I am a contributor. You are a taker. You are welcome for my paying your student loans. I payed my own.

As for men having babies....why do you hate science?
Were you student loans for elementary school cause you can’t even spell at a first grade level. It’s paid sir, not payed.
 
Were you student loans for elementary school cause you can’t even spell at a first grade level. It’s paid sir, not payed.
Thank you officer. I will slow down so as not to offend the troll.

FYI, (I don't normally do this but) it's BEcause sir, not cause. 😉
 
Last edited:
Actually your pompous attitude and arrogance notwithstanding....you wasted a lot of words to bury the lead....."yes it is just a theory."

As for the rest of your post, you know nothing about me. I know your ilk. Angry leftist soyboy with a manbun, likely barista, who has contributed nothing to society or the economy. I am a contributor. You are a taker. You are welcome for my paying your student loans. I payed my own.

As for men having babies....why do you hate science?


How old are you and what do you do for a living?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catemus
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one's foes will be members of one's own household”
(Matthew 10:34-36).
This thread proves that point. Thanks for the scriptural context.
 
I agree with British astrophysicist Brian Cox about the frequency of intelligent species occurring in the universe. He thinks that there are two or three per galaxy.

So the Milky Way might have another civilization but Andromeda, which is a much bigger galaxy might have more.

Regarding death, I, too, think that oblivion awaits us when our consciousness subsides. As Edgar Allen Poe said, we experience little slivers of death every time we go to sleep. Also, when we’re anesthetized we experience oblivion. Death, to me, is like being anesthetized but never being brought back to consciousness.

Regarding consciousness, I think it happens in all creatures in varying degrees of sophistication based upon the complexity of the being’s stimulus processing capability. We, of course, have the most complex stimulus processing capability in the known universe. So complex, in fact, that it can be self-stimulating, as with reason and thinking.

I also think that each of us has been conscious multiple times and will be multiple times going forth in time. Not always as humans, of course, and certainly not as reincarnations of past human lives. Rather, I think that we have been, and will be again, all of the creatures that have been and will be in the future, from a blade of grass to the grazing animal that ate the grass.

I don’t think that memories of those experiences are magically retained and passed on to the subsequent creatures that we become. I think it’s a crapshoot as to which being we will be.

Interesting thoughtful post.

What is your source or foundation for your belief in multiple consciousnesses?
 
Verifiable science isn't adequate but a giant, invisible man in the sky is? Make it make sense. We can literally map out how things evolved throughout time, try going to a museum.

It is interesting that in a time when scientists, not theists, are admitting to the incredible flaws in the evolution theory that people confidently make such exact comments.

I don’t know anyone who believes in a giant invisible man in the sky, but I have read a lot of snarkiness that has been posted over the past pages about belief in a God.

I know atheists hate the word faith, but it is inevitable when discussing the beginning of life in the absence of a designer (a designer that also requires faith). At some point the world was a perfect mix to create a primordial soup that took a non-living mixture and create the simplest of living things out of randomness and chaos in an environment that leads to degradation rather than order. A life that is “simple” only in relation to the complexity of other life, but had to be complex in relation to its environ. And, it not only existed, but sustained. And, not only sustained, but repeated. And, not only repeated, but evolved.

You cannot deny the faith needed for that belief, if you hold it or one like it, but it takes faith.

So, for a people of faith to make fun of a people of faith is just kind of ridiculous.

Everyone, enjoy the sincere posts in this thread and ignore the others.

Peace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: roguemocha
Interesting thoughtful post.

What is your source or foundation for your belief in multiple consciousnesses?
Yes … interesting post to consider.
My naive and uninformed question would be something like … IF consciousness is a brain function, and the brain is composed of atoms, where do these molecules go and/or how do they/we “be conscious” when a person is no longer alive and we are reduced to dust … not to mention cremains in an urn or even scattered about … ??? Just a simple thought …
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: WildcatfaninOhio
It is interesting that in a time when scientists, not theists, are admitting to the incredible flaws in the evolution theory that people confidently make such exact comments.

I don’t know anyone who believes in a giant invisible man in the sky, but I have read a lot of snarkiness that has been posted over the past pages about belief in a God.

I know atheists hate the word faith, but it is inevitable when discussing the beginning of life in the absence of a designer (a designer that also requires faith). At some point the world was a perfect mix to create a primordial soup that took a non-living mixture and create the simplest of living things out of randomness and chaos in an environment that leads to degradation rather than order. A life that is “simple” only in relation to the complexity of other life, but had to be complex in relation to its environ. And, it not only existed, but sustained. And, not only sustained, but repeated. And, not only repeated, but evolved.

You cannot deny the faith needed for that belief, if you hold it or one like it, but it takes faith.

So, for a people of faith to make fun of a people of faith is just kind of ridiculous.

Everyone, enjoy the sincere posts in this thread and ignore the others.

Peace.
I'm interested to see the support behind your first sentence, I haven't seen a sweeping change in belief among the scientific community about evolution. Here's an interesting link I found from Cal-Berkeley concerning misconceptions about evolution if you'd so indulge:


Also, based on Christian beliefs heaven is theoretically above us, God is theoretically supposed to be in heaven, and you also can't see God (convenient). All of this joins together to become giant, invisible sky man. You may not call him the same thing but the basic principles are still there.
 
I think doubt is a normal intermediate stage in faith to knowing. For me, it never happened, as I went from unbeliever to Believer in an instant, and all my attempts to challenge it were quickly thwarted.

The atheists' goal is to attack the doubting believer's uncertainty before it can turn into knowledge.

“I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well” (Psalm 139:14, emphasis added).

I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him until that day” (2 Timothy 1:12, emphasis added).

I know that my redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand on the earth” (Job 19:25, emphasis added).

I know the greatness of the Lord—that our Lord is greater than any other god” (Psalm 135:5, emphasis added).

We know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose” (Romans 8:28, emphasis added).

For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work among you will complete it by the day of Christ Jesus” (Philippians 1:6, emphasis added).

For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future” (Jeremiah 29:11, emphasis added).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caveman Catfan
Yes … interesting post to consider.
My naive and uninformed question would be something like … IF consciousness is a brain function, and the brain is composed of atoms, where do these molecules go and/or how do they/we “be conscious” when a person is no longer alive and we are reduced to dust … not to mention cremains in an urn or even scattered about … ??? Just a simple thought …
Do you think consciousness and self awareness is just a combination of atomic connections?
 
I'm interested to see the support behind your first sentence, I haven't seen a sweeping change in belief among the scientific community about evolution. Here's an interesting link I found from Cal-Berkeley concerning misconceptions about evolution if you'd so indulge:


Also, based on Christian beliefs heaven is theoretically above us, God is theoretically supposed to be in heaven, and you also can't see God (convenient). All of this joins together to become giant, invisible sky man. You may not call him the same thing but the basic principles are still there.
I will look at your link. I believe it was Stephen Meyer, in an interview, who said he recently attended an international conference of scientists and reported the international community is far more objective about evolutionary theory than is the North American community and there is a realization of its flaws. It’s a scientific perspective, not a theist perspective. Kind of like physicists knowing that gravity is still a mystery and a problem when the general public thinks it’s resolved.

There may be Christians who believe heaven is literally physically above us. I do not know those people. I also do not know any Christian who believes God is confined to His created heaven or to His created earth.

God is spirit. Just as I cannot see your spirit, I cannot see Him. I realize that is a problem for many.

So, I appreciate your attempt to defend your snark, but just do not follow, nor do I accept your claim to basic principles.
 
Do you think consciousness and self awareness is just a combination of atomic connections?
Yes, I guess so. Neurons, currents, impulses, etc … flowing through the brain … is my very uninformed view of how the brain allows us to be conscious. All of that would be composed of atoms or other molecular matter. That is what seems to be the case to me …

If consciousness is not composed of matter, or the result of matter, what can it be ?? Could it be something (or nothingness) that can only be recognized by the brain … perhaps ?? Can you be conscious without a living brain ?? What does it mean to lose consciousness … where does it go ??
All fascinating stuff … but certainly above my pay grade !! 😎

Here is but one (very short) of MANY, MANY youtubes on consciousness … fascinating stuff to think about !!
 
Last edited:
Walk into any children's hospital, and you know there is no God.....

Oh, silly. That’s just part of God’s plan. Or at least that’s what I’m told if some kind of tragedy befalls an innocent person.

On the flip side, if the medical treatments work, God did it.

Dude really is infallible.

Bad stuff = his plan, mysterious ways
Good stuff = he did it
 
Oh, silly. That’s just part of God’s plan. Or at least that’s what I’m told if some kind of tragedy befalls an innocent person.

On the flip side, if the medical treatments work, God did it.

Dude really is infallible.

Bad stuff = his plan, mysterious ways
Good stuff = he did it
If you believe God is good and, not only good, but the creator of all things good, then giving God credit for good things seems appropriate. When an otherwise unexplainable miracle happens, it would also seem appropriate for those who believe to give credit to God.

I do not know any source, however, that denies evil, or in the least bad things, happening in the world. Even so, when my father died from a horrific illness recently that I would not wish upon anyone, I asked God how good may come from such ugliness. And, he showed me.

I don’t think being an atheist means you have to pretend believers don’t realize there is ugliness in the world. Go thru most children’s hospitals and you will see great faith at work.
 
Interesting thoughtful post.

What is your source or foundation for your belief in multiple consciousnesses?
I don’t believe in anything. Rather, I base my thoughts and conclusions upon a lifelong observation of nature (including humans in an overall natural world), adopting a reductionist world view and studying physics and the other sciences for over seven decades.

To be clear regarding this subject, let me restate that I don’t think there is any link whatsoever between the “multiple consciousnesses (this term is inadequate but is the best one that I can come up with)” that we experience over what appears to be endless time.

Saying that places a demand upon me to define consciousness, something that has bedeviled people ever since we evolved consciousness. So, in the context of my statement above, I have to think that it is the state of awareness of one’s (with the one being any living creature) environment via sensory input and the processing of that data to a determination of one’s status within that environment and the extent to which one has influence upon that environment.

Again, to me, consciousness occurs in every creature to a degree of sophistication that is determined by the amount of sensory input and the processing power that it has for that input in order to react to its environment. The scale of sophistication ranges from the first cell that could be called life to Einstein, who had the most incredible processing capability of anyone or any thing that has ever lived.
 
Last edited:
Yes … interesting post to consider.
My naive and uninformed question would be something like … IF consciousness is a brain function, and the brain is composed of atoms, where do these molecules go and/or how do they/we “be conscious” when a person is no longer alive and we are reduced to dust … not to mention cremains in an urn or even scattered about … ??? Just a simple thought …
As a reductionist thinker, I say that there are many processes that the brain performs, many of which we are not even “conscious,” such as breathing, heart beating, etc. Consciousness seems magical until we realize that it, too, is just another process of the brain.

The sophistication of human consciousness is so advanced that it stands far removed from any other species that is alive or has ever lived on earth. No other species employs symbolism, for example. To us its second nature.

The mistake we make, IMO, is to think of consciousness as a thing, something ethereal that exists independent of our living body; that it can survive the breakdown of our bodies into the molecules and atoms that were assembled and led to the organism in which it originated.

When we acknowledge that it isn’t an it at all, but a process of a genuine it, the brain, then we can better understand that we experience consciousness because we’re alive and that that process will end along with all the other more mundane processes of our bodies upon our deaths.
 
To paraphrase Catemus: God is a misconstrued interpretation/unintended by-product of the most advanced brain in our known universe.
 
I know, as do most believers. Most...as there are still doubters despite their faith.

So, idiot it is, and if that is the path I am on, it is a damn good one.


I get it. The fault is on me. What I clumsily failed to convey was that anyone that says they have absolute and demonstrable proof for or against the existence a divine creator, is an idiot, because it is, by definition unprovable.

The primary difference that I see, between the two sides of the argument is that the atheists overwhelmingly/ignorantly believe that "proof" IS on their side. Which is ironic when you consider that all of the "known" evidence, so far, points to a spontaneous explosion of complex life forms, rather than a "soup of life" that finally led to a simple single-celled lifeform that evolved.

If this were a civil trial, the "preponderance of all known evidence" points more strongly towards an external intervention than it does to "life soup". Is that irrefutable proof? Nope. It's just common sense, based on what we know so far.
 
Last edited:
To paraphrase Catemus: God is a misconstrued interpretation/unintended by-product of the most advanced brain in our known universe.
I haven’t said what I think God is, but to accommodate you I’ll state that I think that God is a general concept of the human brain, devised to provide: A quick and easy explanation for the unknown; a maintenance of the social hierarchy that humans inherited during our evolution as intelligent social primates; a comfort to turn to when we experience trauma in our individual and community lives; and, most prominently, a justification for the actions we take regarding interactions between groups of humans and the use of resources in our environment.

We make war upon other groups in the “name of God,” whether defensively or, especially, offensively for a myriad of reasons; and we use the resources of our environment with an unchecked consumption because of the dominion over the world and all of its other species of life that was given to us by this being that resides only within our brains as a communal thought.
 
To paraphrase Catemus: God is a misconstrued interpretation/unintended by-product of the most advanced brain in our known universe.
An old idea that can make existence all about you and your perception. It contends that we and our consciousness are temporary and just a transcient manifestation of parts of the whole that will simply be reconfigured. If true, there is no universal reality, nor much value in anything, except that which your short consciousness determines. If true, life and every perception, thought, emotion, concept is meaningless. In fact, human “sophistication” is nothing but an unintended joke.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT