Is there a God?

[Squible]

RickD,

One word...

Trippy!

And I mean that sincerely..

[Squible]

And to be fair, Kenny I find you respectful and kind.

I must say these are qualities that make you grow on people despite our differences.

[Kurieuo]

And to be fair, Kenny I find you respectful and kind.

I must say these are qualities that make you grow on people despite our differences.

I wonder if Kenny would say the same about us lot.

[Audie]

Now you raised altruism, I agree that It may be true that certain animals which belong to groups and that behave altruistically will have some survival advantage. However, moral beliefs are not required in order to produce such behavior. It seems evident that there are many species of animals that are naturally inclined to help others of their species, and do not have moral beliefs.

Of course they dont have moral beliefs. My idea is just that people have the same characteristics. We are intelligent enough to be able to talk analyze, give names to what we do.

You also denied your position was a "faith" based position by saying "As one can see it in various stages, its a reasonable thing to think, no faith needed.".
Interesting. It's reasonable to think that, yet you do not have absolute evidence for your own position, to then say it is not a "faith" based position. Not one doubt huh? No leap at all in trusting that position? Interesting.. that..

My training is science, and law. Neither does absolutes. This is getting into equivocation on the word faith.

Ironically, I think its also reasonable to conclude that God exists as one sees it in various stages.

Conclude?

And I am honest enough to admit there's a level of uncertainty with any position. Then again the Christian definition of faith doesn't have the same meaning as used before. The Greek being pistis meaning trust or reliability, in that we can trust God.

Not everyone can admit that.

As for the reality of moral existence it seems that you do not understand the ontological, I tried explaining it with illustrations but without success.

I dont have t rouble with simple basic concepts. i wanted a defintion of this term, "moral existence> which I cannot find anywhere.

I see you are still looking at the tap.  As such I see all of your examples are put in terms of the tap being the cause/source. You see the perfect explanation you accepted in an earlier exchange where morality exists because it gives an advantage is no different to saying that the water exists because it gives the tap an advantage by keeping the hole clear, sounds perfect but the reality is the water doesn't come from the tap now does it?

Your analogy is just inapt, and I dont do perfect. Organisms have many behaviours and responses. Amoeba move away from light. I dont see the problem in this.

I also notice you went off to argue against design, by uncharitably using the worst case you could in order to prove your point. It's easy to attack a straw man Audie and jump up an down claiming victory. How about you get the best case scenarios from academia and attack them instead.

Oh heavens, no attack no s trawman and no jumping. People are attuned to looking for design. Faces in clouds. No argue against design, either. Design is everywhere.
The search for intelligent design is fine, maybe even nobel. Its been prematurely announced how many times! That is where to look for someone claiming victory.
I doubt anyone will ever find anything, but, hey, I wont get all biblical and refuse to accept something that doesnt fit my -ology.

How are you not being dogmatic when you continue to attack philosophy in the way you are? By claiming philosopher's don't go outside their field. Audie

Oh bosh, honestly. No attack, no dogmatic, no such claim. I said to the extent that
some do that, they go astray, like those who refer only to the bible. Neither, imo, will lead anyone to any ultimate truths. Both camps separately, let alone combined, seem to lead many to think they can to that.



I

believe given what I know and understand from a cumulative set of arguments that it is more plausible that God exists then its negation. Then again I also I have my personal experience to draw from as well like my prayer life and the day I came to know Christ. And the day I came to know Christ and the following two weeks was an intense alteration of how I saw reality as if my eyes were opened from a deep sleep or that I was blind to this new reality. It has stayed that way ever since. You can put up all the intellectual barriers you want but ultimately I believe it is a spiritual, moral and relational issue.

You speak of know, understand, and reality in ways that I cant correlate with what you said earlier of uncertainty. Prease exprain.

Regarding the barriers you speak of, I did have a mormon say more or less the same to me when I said the BoM is jsut ridiculous, how can anyone believe it.

You may be right, but you can see how I look at it, perhaps. Probably the same comments are to be made for any religion.

Anyway, I have better things to do. I feel like I am wasting my time sharing this. Since, I think you will come back mocking it by tearing it apart with glib rhetorical devices, rather then actually thinking on it.

Be nice now. Im not like that.

as for the below, been there, done that.

It also seems you are not prepared to at least think upon the tap illustration given the response you gave.

[/quote]

[Audie]

Kurieuo wrote:
I feel for you. People here are not your enemy, nor you Audie.
Really, I never understand those self-professing Atheists who believe in nothing coming here to dog Christians.
What's the point? It doesn't follow, unless you religiously believe in no god -- or should I say the god of self?

K,

Could you clear this up for us? It seems to come across as an attack against Audie or Ken. And knowing you, it wasn't meant that way.

Thanks

Point out in what ways this was attacking?

Not sure, but Audie took it that way.

I see. Well... I did not intend it that way.

I did say some harsher comments out of frustration that were removed within a minute of posting. Perhaps she caught them?
I'm not sure discussions like this can be had without there being some heat.

I do not see that "people here" are their enemy, and by that I mean us Christians.
If we asked just about any Christian here, I'm sure they'd want the very best for Kenny and Min.
It's just our beliefs grain so against each other -- this fact often gets buried.

And "I feel" for them, because what I believe I see as seriously true -- not just a debate for a "who's right" and "who's wrong" which clouds the truth of the matter in smoke.
The veil is so thick on many who are not Christian and that pains and frustrates me. Especially when the grace is so amazing. And most of us were blind once too.
I just want to help them see, but I know I can't. And they just think me crazy or deluded. I'll tolerate that back if they can tolerate that I think they're blinded.

Finally, I just don't get why Atheists come to the board and start defending their beliefs and attacking ours.
Logically, as I see it, an Atheist shouldn't care either way about God's existence. And yet, they frequent forums like these.
God doesn't exist, just be done with it and move on. Obviously, there is some inner need they're trying to meet by being here.

Hence my question, "What's the point?" In other words, why are they here?
I really like Audie being here mind you, and I did enjoy my own exchanges with Kenny where I took a more laid back approach, but I'm nonetheless perplexed.
Unless they so "religiously" believe in their non-belief that they can't stand the thought of something other. But, then we're told over and over that it's not really a belief.

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.
For example, it is interesting that Kenny roots "morality" in humanity.
In what "he" identifies as the prime value -- to live peacefully with one another. "God of self".
If God does not exist, then given our evolutionary supremacy we really are the gods of the world.
So...

Hope that clarifies my meaning.

As for my earlier comments in that same post, I think I'm entitled to call a discussion as I see it.
I can't help the way I feel on that there. I just really don't think a lot of what Squible offered was countered.
Just lots of smoke and mirrors. But, such is the blindness that I see in them, just like the delusion they perhaps see in me.

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.

This is a rather different statement than saying what is. Which do you mean, a declarative statement of how things are, or just your opinion?

But either way, it is a failure to comprehend how someone could really just not think the way you do. I remember years ago the first time I heard someone say, "I dont think anyone is really an atheist, in their heart". I was so surprised, I could show you right where I was standing. Till then, I thought that nobody in their heart could really believe in god! You may still not a-gotten that little epiph.

I never have thought of an adequate way to illustrate this, but try this..
"Everyone believes in something, has some god"

or

"Everyone has some sport, cheers for some team"

Not really.

As for this...

self-professing Atheists who believe in nothing

Seriously? Is this what you really think?

Tell me it isnt true.

[Kenny]

Squible
You are reducing yourself into absurdity.
Ken
How so? Please explain.

Squible
How do you know that everybody agreeing does make something true?
Ken
I am not suggesting popularity equal the truth, I think this gets back to the subjective vs objective argument; I believe perfection is subjective; judging from your responses I suspect you see It as objective. The way I see it, I might see (for example) a perfect person as big on justice and small on forgiveness; where as you might see it visa versa. That’s just one issue, there are a million more that various people will debate what makes someone perfect; that’s why I see perfection as subjective; when it comes to people we all have different standards of what perfect would be

squible
How do you know your skepticism leads you to truth?
Ken
I don’t believe skepticism leads to truth, I just see it as a tool I use to help me get there. I have some Christian friends who are as much of a skeptic as I am and they still believe in God! It's just a tool; it all depends upon how you use it.

Squible
A huh...
Which is?
Ken
Too many to list; a few that comes to mind is someone who shares my moral ideas and is better at applying it than I am, someone who remains right when I go wrong, someone who has the right answers when I do not, someone who is what I try to be; etc. I could go on all day.

Squible
And to be fair, Kenny I find you respectful and kind.
I must say these are qualities that make you grow on people despite our differences.
Ken
Thank-you! I appreciate the compliment.

Ken

[Kurieuo]

I don't really want to respond Audie, but since you ask of me I'll do my best to respond kindly.

I see. Well... I did not intend it that way.

I did say some harsher comments out of frustration that were removed within a minute of posting. Perhaps she caught them?
I'm not sure discussions like this can be had without there being some heat.

I do not see that "people here" are their enemy, and by that I mean us Christians.
If we asked just about any Christian here, I'm sure they'd want the very best for Kenny and Min.
It's just our beliefs grain so against each other -- this fact often gets buried.

And "I feel" for them, because what I believe I see as seriously true -- not just a debate for a "who's right" and "who's wrong" which clouds the truth of the matter in smoke.
The veil is so thick on many who are not Christian and that pains and frustrates me. Especially when the grace is so amazing. And most of us were blind once too.
I just want to help them see, but I know I can't. And they just think me crazy or deluded. I'll tolerate that back if they can tolerate that I think they're blinded.

Finally, I just don't get why Atheists come to the board and start defending their beliefs and attacking ours.
Logically, as I see it, an Atheist shouldn't care either way about God's existence. And yet, they frequent forums like these.
God doesn't exist, just be done with it and move on. Obviously, there is some inner need they're trying to meet by being here.

Hence my question, "What's the point?" In other words, why are they here?
I really like Audie being here mind you, and I did enjoy my own exchanges with Kenny where I took a more laid back approach, but I'm nonetheless perplexed.
Unless they so "religiously" believe in their non-belief that they can't stand the thought of something other. But, then we're told over and over that it's not really a belief.

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.
For example, it is interesting that Kenny roots "morality" in humanity.
In what "he" identifies as the prime value -- to live peacefully with one another. "God of self".
If God does not exist, then given our evolutionary supremacy we really are the gods of the world.
So...

Hope that clarifies my meaning.

As for my earlier comments in that same post, I think I'm entitled to call a discussion as I see it.
I can't help the way I feel on that there. I just really don't think a lot of what Squible offered was countered.
Just lots of smoke and mirrors. But, such is the blindness that I see in them, just like the delusion they perhaps see in me.

...

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.

This is a rather different statement than saying what is. Which do you mean, a declarative statement of how things are, or just your opinion?

Just my opinion.

But either way, it is a failure to comprehend how someone could really just not think the way you do. I remember years ago the first time I heard someone say, "I dont think anyone is really an atheist, in their heart". I was so surprised, I could show you right where I was standing. Till then, I thought that nobody in their heart could really believe in god! You may still not a-gotten that little epiph.

Not really, it's kind of in-built into Scripture (cf. Romans 1:18+; Romans 2:14-15).
So it also kind of goes with my Christian beliefs. But, I believe it applies equally to all.
We ALL want to bury God. None of us truly seek after God. (Romans 3:11)

Told you, I'm Christian.
You may not like that, but unlike "Atheism" it kind of carries with it some other baggage.
Hope you can still accept me as a person. I definitely otherwise deeply respect you as a person.

I never have thought of an adequate way to illustrate this, but try this..
"Everyone believes in something, has some god"

or

"Everyone has some sport, cheers for some team"

Not really.

As for this...

self-professing Atheists who believe in nothing

Seriously? Is this what you really think?

Tell me it isnt true.

The fuller sentence, "I never understand those self-professing Atheists who believe in nothing coming here to dog Christians."

Again, I never had you specifically in mind.
I've debated a lot of Atheists in my 12 or something years here, not to mention elsewhere.
You might be different, but trust me I know what I'm talking about. There are many Atheists who behave in this manner.

This board was overrun with them once upon a time. Probably 5 Atheist for every Christian, and not your fun-loving kind
Jac and I started the board afresh, with new rules. Some of which you've read.
And this board has been a much safer and funner environment for Christians ever since.
But, to deny my very own experiences would be to deny myself. That I can't really do.

As for yourself, I don't think you just come here to dog Christians.
Again, not all Atheists are this way. I don't see you in this light and am sorry if I implied as much.
We've had some wonderful exchanges. You just make our lives a bit more uncomfortable, but in a good challenging way!

I don't believe Atheists believe in nothing. That's my opinion. They carry other beliefs too.
Consciously they deny God, while on subconscious levels they embrace God in many ways.

Scripture supports this.
That scientific study I posted elsewhere also seems to support this.
My Christian beliefs support this.

Again, I'm sorry if that offends you.
I suppose if you do want to continue talking with me, then it's something you're going to have to accept about what I believe.
But, I'm sure praying that you can look beyond that in me.

[Audie]

I don't really want to respond Audie, but since you ask of me I'll do my best to respond kindly.

I see. Well... I did not intend it that way.

I did say some harsher comments out of frustration that were removed within a minute of posting. Perhaps she caught them?
I'm not sure discussions like this can be had without there being some heat.

I do not see that "people here" are their enemy, and by that I mean us Christians.
If we asked just about any Christian here, I'm sure they'd want the very best for Kenny and Min.
It's just our beliefs grain so against each other -- this fact often gets buried.

And "I feel" for them, because what I believe I see as seriously true -- not just a debate for a "who's right" and "who's wrong" which clouds the truth of the matter in smoke.
The veil is so thick on many who are not Christian and that pains and frustrates me. Especially when the grace is so amazing. And most of us were blind once too.
I just want to help them see, but I know I can't. And they just think me crazy or deluded. I'll tolerate that back if they can tolerate that I think they're blinded.

Finally, I just don't get why Atheists come to the board and start defending their beliefs and attacking ours.
Logically, as I see it, an Atheist shouldn't care either way about God's existence. And yet, they frequent forums like these.
God doesn't exist, just be done with it and move on. Obviously, there is some inner need they're trying to meet by being here.

Hence my question, "What's the point?" In other words, why are they here?
I really like Audie being here mind you, and I did enjoy my own exchanges with Kenny where I took a more laid back approach, but I'm nonetheless perplexed.
Unless they so "religiously" believe in their non-belief that they can't stand the thought of something other. But, then we're told over and over that it's not really a belief.

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.
For example, it is interesting that Kenny roots "morality" in humanity.
In what "he" identifies as the prime value -- to live peacefully with one another. "God of self".
If God does not exist, then given our evolutionary supremacy we really are the gods of the world.
So...

Hope that clarifies my meaning.

As for my earlier comments in that same post, I think I'm entitled to call a discussion as I see it.
I can't help the way I feel on that there. I just really don't think a lot of what Squible offered was countered.
Just lots of smoke and mirrors. But, such is the blindness that I see in them, just like the delusion they perhaps see in me.

...

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.

This is a rather different statement than saying what is. Which do you mean, a declarative statement of how things are, or just your opinion?

Just my opinion.

But either way, it is a failure to comprehend how someone could really just not think the way you do. I remember years ago the first time I heard someone say, "I dont think anyone is really an atheist, in their heart". I was so surprised, I could show you right where I was standing. Till then, I thought that nobody in their heart could really believe in god! You may still not a-gotten that little epiph.

Not really, it's kind of in-built into Scripture (cf. Romans 1:18+; Romans 2:14-15).
So it also kind of goes with my Christian beliefs. But, I believe it applies equally to all.
We ALL want to bury God. None of us truly seek after God. (Romans 3:11)

Told you, I'm Christian.
You may not like that, but unlike "Atheism" it kind of carries with it some other baggage.
Hope you can still accept me as a person. I definitely otherwise deeply respect you as a person.

I never have thought of an adequate way to illustrate this, but try this..
"Everyone believes in something, has some god"

or

"Everyone has some sport, cheers for some team"

Not really.

As for this...

self-professing Atheists who believe in nothing

Seriously? Is this what you really think?

Tell me it isnt true.

The fuller sentence, "I never understand those self-professing Atheists who believe in nothing coming here to dog Christians."

Again, I never had you specifically in mind.
I've debated a lot of Atheists in my 12 or something years here, not to mention elsewhere.
You might be different, but trust me I know what I'm talking about. There are many Atheists who behave in this manner.

This board was overrun with them once upon a time. Probably 5 Atheist for every Christian, and not your fun-loving kind
Jac and I started the board afresh, with new rules. Some of which you've read.
And this board has been a much safer and funner environment for Christians ever since.
But, to deny my very own experiences would be to deny myself. That I can't really do.

As for yourself, I don't think you just come here to dog Christians.
Again, not all Atheists are this way. I don't see you in this light and am sorry if I implied as much.
We've had some wonderful exchanges. You just make our lives a bit more uncomfortable, but in a good challenging way!

I don't believe Atheists believe in nothing. That's my opinion. They carry other beliefs too.
Consciously they deny God, while on subconscious levels they embrace God in many ways.

Scripture supports this.
That scientific study I posted elsewhere also seems to support this.
My Christian beliefs support this.

Again, I'm sorry if that offends you.
I suppose if you do want to continue talking with me, then it's something you're going to have to accept about what I believe.
But, I'm sure praying that you can look beyond that in me.

No worries, mate.

[Kurieuo]

Cool, well now everything's all good I'll be off like a Jewish foreskin.

[RickD]

Cool, well now everything's all good I'll be off like a Jewish foreskin.

Oy Vey!

[Squible]

Cool, well now everything's all good I'll be off like a Jewish foreskin.

Eeeeeew! That's just off!

[Kurieuo]

Cool, well now everything's all good I'll be off like a Jewish foreskin.

Eeeeeew! That's just off!

Yeah, well, it's called circumcision for a reason. So I'd expect it off.
I'm just using an old Aussie saying.

[Squible]

Now you raised altruism, I agree that It may be true that certain animals which belong to groups and that behave altruistically will have some survival advantage. However, moral beliefs are not required in order to produce such behavior. It seems evident that there are many species of animals that are naturally inclined to help others of their species, and do not have moral beliefs.

Of course they dont have moral beliefs. My idea is just that people have the same characteristics. We are intelligent enough to be able to talk analyze, give names to what we do.

Philosophers have been doing this for centuries. However, I don't see how this follows. There is an oughtness to morality that precedes behavior and as such overrides behavior.
It doesn't explain why we ought to do what's right, and why there is this objectiveness with morality. There is this perceived objectivity to this right/wrong, in what we ought to do.

For example we ought not lie to others.

You also denied your position was a "faith" based position by saying "As one can see it in various stages, its a reasonable thing to think, no faith needed.".
Interesting. It's reasonable to think that, yet you do not have absolute evidence for your own position, to then say it is not a "faith" based position. Not one doubt huh? No leap at all in trusting that position? Interesting.. that..

My training is science, and law. Neither does absolutes. This is getting into equivocation on the word faith.

There is no equivocation on there word faith here in this case. To hold to all that exists is the natural world without all the evidence is still a leap of faith.

Ironically, I think its also reasonable to conclude that God exists as one sees it in various stages.

Conclude?

Natural Theology

As for the reality of moral existence it seems that you do not understand the ontological, I tried explaining it with illustrations but without success.

I dont have t rouble with simple basic concepts. i wanted a defintion of this term, "moral existence> which I cannot find anywhere.

I have thought on it further and it can also be put as the "reality of objective moral values".
Evolution as far as I am concerned does not explain why this exists at all.

I see you are still looking at the tap. As such I see all of your examples are put in terms of the tap being the cause/source. You see the perfect explanation you accepted in an earlier exchange where morality exists because it gives an advantage is no different to saying that the water exists because it gives the tap an advantage by keeping the hole clear, sounds perfect but the reality is the water doesn't come from the tap now does it?

Your analogy is just inapt, and I dont do perfect. Organisms have many behaviours and responses. Amoeba move away from light. I dont see the problem in this.

inapt? Easy. I see the illustration as quite fitting, mind you the tap is a fitting.

As I said previously, the way I see it morality is prior to behavior, since it has an oughtness about it where we can override our behavior. The amoeba example is simply describing behavior.

You explanation offers no explanation for the reality of objective moral values. Perhaps the source is not the tap but rather what's behind the wall

I also notice you went off to argue against design, by uncharitably using the worst case you could in order to prove your point. It's easy to attack a straw man Audie and jump up an down claiming victory. How about you get the best case scenarios from academia and attack them instead.

Oh heavens, no attack no s trawman and no jumping. People are attuned to looking for design. Faces in clouds. No argue against design, either. Design is everywhere.
The search for intelligent design is fine, maybe even nobel. Its been prematurely announced how many times! That is where to look for someone claiming victory.
I doubt anyone will ever find anything, but, hey, I wont get all biblical and refuse to accept something that doesnt fit my -ology.

Fair enough.

I believe given what I know and understand from a cumulative set of arguments that it is more plausible that God exists then its negation. Then again I also I have my personal experience to draw from as well like my prayer life and the day I came to know Christ. And the day I came to know Christ and the following two weeks was an intense alteration of how I saw reality as if my eyes were opened from a deep sleep or that I was blind to this new reality. It has stayed that way ever since. You can put up all the intellectual barriers you want but ultimately I believe it is a spiritual, moral and relational issue.

You speak of know, understand, and reality in ways that I cant correlate with what you said earlier of uncertainty. Prease exprain.

Regarding the barriers you speak of, I did have a mormon say more or less the same to me when I said the BoM is jsut ridiculous, how can anyone believe it.

You may be right, but you can see how I look at it, perhaps. Probably the same comments are to be made for any religion.

Having some uncertainty doesn't mean one doesn't make a decision. Ultimately I have good reasons for what I believe from experience , what I see in the natural world and through rational thought.
However, the case for God is a cumulative one. I believe that if something is more likely than not then one is justified in holding to the belief and even more so from a cumulative case.

Haven't you made a decision that all that exists is the natural world without all the evidence?

Interesting as an actual Christian, who has mormans come to my front door I can assure you they believe in something completely different to what a Christian does. Mind you Jesus did warn of this.

To them as far as I understand it their god lives within the universe and did not bring physical existence into being. This means to a Christian they are worshiping an idol, since God is the ground of all being and is responsible for bringing all of physical reality into existence and sustaining it moment by moment. I charitably took some mormans to task on this recently, they were stumped and haven't come back since.

Perhaps I am too far gone in my apostasy.

[Squible]

Kenny,

I will say I am not against skepticism, since I too believe it is important.

It seems you hold to some form of materialistic skepticism (ie: empiricism). It also seems you believe objective physical laws exist and then deny objective moral values.

If you do believe that the physical laws exist, then that should tell you that there is more to reality then just the physical.

I must say I have found your position somewhat contradictory at times and quite boggling.

Anyway lets leave it at this point for now.

Cheers.

[Kenny]

Kenny,

I will say I am not against skepticism, since I too believe it is important.

It seems you hold to some form of materialistic skepticism (ie: empiricism). It also seems you believe objective physical laws exist and then deny objective moral values.

If you do believe that the physical laws exist, then that should tell you that there is more to reality then just the physical.

I must say I have found your position somewhat contradictory at times and quite boggling.

Anyway lets leave it at this point for now.

Cheers.

I guess this is one of those issues we can agree to disagree on. If everybody thought the same, we wouldn't be having these type of discussion forums and the world would be a little less interesting huh?
It's been nice conversating with you my friend!

Peace
Ken