God is not an element both in religious fanaticism and atheism alike

by exWTslave 80 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  DJS

  Kalos,

  I've not a clue as to what you are asking me. Who supports my research? It isn't my research, and it is collected by various entities, some of which are supported by Xtians. I could be a smart ass and do my Dana Carvey impersonation that "SATAN" provides my data but I will refrain.

  If you have objections with the data or the manner in which it was collected and evaluated, I suggest you present those objections. If you cannot I suggest you present equally valid empirical data which appears to counter. If you cannot I suggest you admit you are wrong. If you cannot I suggest you remain silent, exhibiting some of that Xtian humility I see in such rare display on this site.

  Those are your only grown up options. To entrench yourself in emotions and make believe beliefs is not an appropriate response. I've shown you a tip of the iceberg of the data which completely refutes the dumbass theists' repetitive mantra statements on this site that atheists are baby killing whores. If you wish to rely on your god(s), by all means do so. But bringing your thoughts or views out in public on this site opens them up to the bright light of rational analysis.

  If you or anyone like you doesn't like that I and those like me refer to you at times as dumbasses, then please, please stop acting like dumbasses. Starting OPs and responding to OPs is in and of itself a somewhat narcissistic endeavor. The more rational one's responses are, and the more those responses are supported by the very best data possible, the less narcissistic and egoistic they become. Just the facts, ma'am. It is what it is. Select the decade of choice.

  When someone's opinion is all that is offered, especially when that opinion is stated as facts unsupported by data or when those opinions are based on nothing more than the first confirmationallly biased article they could find on the 'net, then it is narcissism at its very worst. And it deserves flames and condemnation. I suggest those feeling/perceiver/believers amongst us learn from the more rational. Frame an opinon as an opinion. Provide facts and data, emprirical if possible, to support definitive statements or Professor DJS will red-line your paper and return it to you. Or call you a dumbass. I mean the term in the most loving manner possible.

  I'm trying to help you and I can; but you have to let me.
• 

  Hairtrigger

  EXWTSlave, Pinku, Kalos, or whatever else you choose to call yourself. If you were an honest man you wouldn't try to support your half baked ideas

  when commenting as Kalos while OPing as exWTSlave and vice versa. A con man needs a lot of savvy!
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Science has an answer that fits all the known facts.

  Religious nuts are not allowed to be told though.

  They are kept in the dark for comedy purposes.

  That works for me, I can use the laughs.

  Let me play devil's advocate for one second. I work at a large company and have never met the president. I see the president's car in the lot and his signature is on the memos that come out and I see his picture on the wall in the entranceway to the building. But I don't like the way this company is run because I strongly believe that employees are treated unfairly and dismissed if they try to organize a union. So I decide the president doesn't exist?

  That is about the size of your opening post. It just doesn't add up in the real world. Atheists don't just ignore the evidence because of inhumanities going on. God has no car in the parking lot, nor his picture on the wall or his signature on any documents. Even Jesus left us no written documents, let alone his father or Thor or Zeus or Jupiter or Mythros or Isis. Atheists do not use use inhumanities to prove that God doesn't exist, we just use inhumanities to prove that an all-knowing, omnibenevolent god must not be there.
• 

  cofty

  Kalos - Your illustrations are rubbish.

  It is valid question that cannot be blithely dismissed. You can't solve the problem of origins, by positing the acme of complex beings, that just happened to exist eternally.

  That is the ultimate in intellectual dishonesty.
• 

  Kalos

  cofty

  Just saying "rubbish" does not answer the question I posed to you:

  How would you feel about that traveler?

  How would you answer to that student?
• 

  Kalos

  OnTheWayOut

  Viewed objectively, you really did the role of God’s advocate. You see God’s signature on everything. Take just only one example: We see the food-factories (fruit-bearing trees) God has put in place for our enjoyment. Has man so far succeeded in duplicating them fully with all its miracles including photosynthesis?

  For the reasonable minds, trees are God’s feeding arrangement—physical and spiritual. We know that many complain asking: ‘Why can’t God appear and tell us what to do?’ But the truth is that we need only to open our eyes to see what we need to know! Take again the case of the life-support system, the fruit-bearing trees. They are living examples of three core-attributes or principles (which are also at the root of all of God’s qualities):

  1) Trees have been producing their seeds in whose memory all their future generations remain protected so that tree-seed-tree cycle goes on eternally—hence highlight the principle of TRUTH, which literally means that which does not change, hence remains forever.

  2) Fruit-bearing trees clothe their seeds with nutritious flesh (not for them to eat) for the nourishment of others, and thus do good for the sake of good—hence highlight the quality of BENEFICENCE.

  3) And they present the fruits to us in attractive colors and shape—hence highlight the quality of BEAUTY!

  Thus life of a fruit-bearing tree is the simplest, most elevated message, clearly conveyed earlier and better than all the religious founders have preached. Intellectuals and philosophers have always discerned these principles from the trees. For example, Socrates told his friend to use the famous “Test of Three”: ‘Before you talk to me about something, let's take a moment to test whether what you're going to say is Truthful, Beneficial and Pleasant [or Beautiful].’

  Now there is another miracle possible--try putting this signature (these three principles) on your life, and you will likely be adored like a god by people.
• 

  bohm

  Kalos-- already addressed the prime mover argument
• 

  Kalos

  bohm

  You may understand everything what Einstein said and wrote. But that does not prove Einstein did not exist.

  You may understand the principles of motion, but that does not prove the Prime Mover (who formulated those principles) does not exist.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Kalos, if trees are just one example that God exists, it still leaves the question that you are ignoring.

  Everything good must have been designed by a creator, so who created the creator? Turtles all the way down!!!!!!

  Stop and actually ponder that. Your god is wonderful and clearly beneficial to mankind. He could not have just come to be in existence or always been there. You are so sure that matter/energy didn't do that and your god is clearly more advanced/complicated than matter/energy. He must have had a creator, who in turn must have had that super-creator, and yadda yadda yadda.

  Turtles all the way down!!!!!
• 

  prologos

  OTWO, :" who created the creator?" The question arises because we are used to think in our human mode, always MOVING THROUGH TIME.

  but not everything moves through time. take light waves/radiation : it does not move through time, it arrives the moment it left. The same if you are really overcome by strong gravity.

  If, like light, the hypothetical creator does not move through time, and there always was time,* why do you have to think of his beginning? his cause?

  *a recent article on bbc, "someting from nothing" reiterates that there were virtual fluctuations befor the appearance of the universe, fluctuations= time, time^2.

  the idea, time before us, light and other entities not moving through time. time etrnal.