Evidence of God vs Evidence for no god

[Codpiece]

God being...well God could just as easily provide that eternal joy without the suffering.

Again, I pointed out one needs to consider the whole of Christianity. If it is all true then indeed humanity began in a state of perfection, moral wholeness, potential immortality and happiness in a place where every need was met and genuine safety and security existed. According to the Bible the first people chose knowledge of good and evil over moral innocence and perfection. They were promised that this choice would oead to death, but chose it anyway.

Isee parallels between that story and my own life, where I know better but choose a certain path anyway. When I do that I have no right to complain that I end up miserable.

 

[m52nickerson]

Again, I pointed out one needs to consider the whole of Christianity. If it is all true then indeed humanity began in a state of perfection, moral wholeness, potential immortality and happiness in a place where every need was met and genuine safety and security existed. According to the Bible the first people chose knowledge of good and evil over moral innocence and perfection. They were promised that this choice would oead to death, but chose it anyway.

Isee parallels between that story and my own life, where I know better but choose a certain path anyway. When I do that I have no right to complain that I end up miserable.

I was raised in the Catholic church, so what you are explaining to me is not new to me.

Why did people have to even be given he choice between knowledge and perfection? Better yet I'll make his statement. God set the rules and the first one was, remain ignorant or face punishment. I'm sorry but in know way shape form does that sound like a good and just God. You can't escape the fact that all powerful being does not have to allow evil and suffering to exist for any reason. Certainly not free will, as even if you believe that evil must be allowed for free will to exist God could change that rule as well. If not he is not all powerful then is he.

 

[Thurisaz]

God being...well God could just as easily provide that eternal joy without the suffering.

You have a false premise there.

We're not here to be happy.

 

[dontsnitch]

Again, I pointed out one needs to consider the whole of Christianity. If it is all true then indeed humanity began in a state of perfection, moral wholeness, potential immortality and happiness in a place where every need was met and genuine safety and security existed. According to the Bible the first people chose knowledge of good and evil over moral innocence and perfection. They were promised that this choice would oead to death, but chose it anyway.

Isee parallels between that story and my own life, where I know better but choose a certain path anyway. When I do that I have no right to complain that I end up miserable.

You made some good posts in this thread and kept it civil. I like your style.

 

[m52nickerson]

You have a false premise there.

We're not here to be happy.

I'm not saying we are here to be happy. I'm saying that an loving, all powerful God could have us happy here and everywhere else. Since he didn't choose that, since he allows, or even makes us exist on this mortal plane and suffer means is something less then the loving, good, all powerful God as presented to be.

 

[Thurisaz]

I'm not saying we are here to be happy. I'm saying that an loving, all powerful God could have us happy here and everywhere else.

You're wrong. And I'm not talking only about grammar here.

 

[Codpiece]

You made some good posts in this thread and kept it civil. I like your style.

Wow, that means a lot to me - I really respect your posts and have learned a lot from you. Thanks a lot for your comment.

 

[InvestigatorIL]

Wow, that means a lot to me - I really respect your posts and have learned a lot from you. Thanks a lot for your comment.

Oh geez... we got a lovefest over here. Ha. snitch is good even though he is mostly wrong lol

 

[m52nickerson]

You're wrong. And I'm not talking only about grammar here.

Just saying I'm wrong is not valid argument. It sounds like you are suggesting that God can't make us happy here. If that is the case, why even call him God?

 

[Thurisaz]

Just saying I'm wrong is not valid argument.

I already gave the reason in the previous message.

It sounds like you are suggesting that God can't make us happy here.

He could, but then there would be no point in us being here in the first place.

If that is the case, why even call him God?

Because He is, of course. That was probably the stupidest question in the history of War Room.

 

[m52nickerson]

I already gave the reason in the previous message.


He could, but then there would be no point in us being here in the first place.


Because He is, of course. That was probably the stupidest question in the history of War Room.

Oh, so God put us here to suffer. Does that really sound like something a benevolent God would do? No not at all.

Why would we call a being of limited power God?

 

[Thurisaz]

Oh, so God put us here to suffer.

False dichotomy. You're not even in the right ballpark. We're here to learn, to understand and to choose. In short, we're here to show ourselves and others who we are in our hearts. That choice is also of paramount importance, as it is the main prerequisite for the existence of love and goodness.

Why would we call a being of limited power God?

Again, because He is one. His being God is in no way dependent upon your opinion on the subject. You're seeing limits that are not real, by expecting oxymorons. One should be careful about laying judgment on things one does not understand well. Such actions have a tendency to come back and bite you one the ass. I know from experience.

 

[m52nickerson]

False dichotomy. You're not even in the right ballpark. We're here to learn, to understand and to choose. In short, we're here to show ourselves and others who we are in our hearts. That choice is also of paramount importance, as it is the main prerequisite for the existence of love and goodness.

Okay, thing is while we are here there is also evil and suffering. We could do all those things without the bad, God could make that so couldn't he?

Again, because He is one. His being God is in no way dependent upon your opinion on the subject. You're seeing limits that are not real, by expecting oxymorons. One should be careful about laying judgment on things one does not understand well. Such actions have a tendency to come back and bite you one the ass. I know from experience.

The argument that people can't understand is not a valid one. People do understand basic good and evil. They understand that if a being is all-powerful he is not limited by anything, including paradoxes.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

There is no evidence either way. If anything though, the universe's existence and the infinity indicate something incomprehensible to the mind, suggesting something like a God or creator.

No sense in trying to find out, we will never know.

 

[Fawlty]

There is no evidence either way. If anything though, the universe's existence and the infinity indicate something incomprehensible to the mind, suggesting something like a God or creator.

No sense in trying to find out, we will never know.

No.

No, no, no. No no. This is where everybody gets it wrong. It suggests nothing of the sort. You're making the god of the gaps argument mixed with the fallacy of creation. You never have ground to say "we don't know = a god." And you can't show any evidence of anything being created, ever. You can't even properly define creation.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

No.

No, no, no. No no. This is where everybody gets it wrong. It suggests nothing of the sort. You're making the god of the gaps argument mixed with the fallacy of creation. You never have ground to say "we don't know = a god." And you can't show any evidence of anything being created, ever. You can't even properly define creation.

You`re wrong about the possibilities. The concept of infinity isn`t compatible with thought. Every life form down to the first life exists in an environment which is observed and measured. So the incompatibility of everything we know and measure, and the infinity can certainly we explained by something "God like". I'm not talking about any God as defined by any religion, just something like that.

I'm not religious and I don't believe in God, but if you open your mind about the universe, multiverse, infinity, what ever then you will be humbled.

 

[Fawlty]

You`re wrong about the possibilities. The concept of infinity isn`t compatible with thought. Every life form down to the first life exists in an environment which is observed and measured. So the incompatibility of everything we know and measure, and the infinity can certainly we explained by something "God like". I'm not talking about any God as defined by any religion, just something like that.

I'm not religious and I don't believe in God, but if you open your mind about the universe, multiverse, infinity, what ever then you will be humbled.

I'm not wrong about the possibilities- I didn't even list the possibilities. I made no claim about the possibilities there. If the concept of infinity is incompatible with thought, then how have people thought up god to explain what they perceive as an infinity?

The universe is humbling regardless of whether I believe in a cosmic parent. Personally I'm far more awed by the lack of one. You're ignoring my point, which is that you can't just plop in an explanation in the place of ignorance without any evidence. And you're just doubling down on "we don't know = a god."

 

[Deleted member 457759]

I'm not wrong about the possibilities- I didn't even list the possibilities. I made no claim about the possibilities there. If the concept of infinity is incompatible with thought, then how have people thought up god to explain what they perceive as an infinity?

You just answered your own question. The fact that people have thought up of God/Gods supports my argument not yours.

The universe is humbling regardless of whether I believe in a cosmic parent. Personally I'm far more awed by the lack of one. You're ignoring my point, which is that you can't just plop in an explanation in the place of ignorance without any evidence. And you're just doubling down on "we don't know = a god."

I'm not necessarily arguing that there is a God, just the possibility of one. I'm not ignoring your point, I don't believe you have one at all lol. We disagree on what the evidence is. I'm a scientific guy, I'm well aware that people have used god to explain things they don't understand for thousands of years. However when I get to that ceiling of the infinity I have to be open minded. It's simply to incompatible with thought.

 

[Fawlty]

You just answered your own question. The fact that people have thought up of God/Gods supports my argument not yours.

I'm not necessarily arguing that there is a God, just the possibility of one. I'm not ignoring your point, I don't believe you have one at all lol. We disagree on what the evidence is. I'm a scientific guy, I'm well aware that people have used god to explain things they don't understand for thousands of years. However when I get to that ceiling of the infinity I have to be open minded. It's simply to incompatible with thought.

You have no grounds to assume infinity, and you certainly have no grounds to assume creation. Meanwhile, my argument is supported by the fact that people have always placed god where the ignorance lies, and they have always been forced to retreat.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

You have no grounds to assume infinity, and you certainly have no grounds to assume creation. Meanwhile, my argument is supported by the fact that people have always placed god where the ignorance lies, and they have always been forced to retreat.

I have every ground to assume infinity. Take an astronomy course. Ask yourself these questions. What is outside of the Universe and everything the big bang created? Hint: we will never every know. But lets just say for the sake of argument that it was a larger universe filled with little universes. Well, what's outside of that? If there is an end to the universe (you say that there is no grounds to assume infinity) then what's outside of that? And that? And then that?

It's not compatible with human thought because it can't, and never ever will be measured. This is different from people assuming God is the Sun because they don't understand nuclear physics. The sun and what it is can be measured. The Universe , and what is outside of that, if there is an outside of that, can't be.