Originally posted by karoly aczel"Smacks?"
Lets get this str8-
1.I do not consider myself above anyone.
2.My intention is not to "knock" anyone "out of their acceptance."-(I mainly just like sharing views without jumping to any conclusions too much)
Like I said, I'm not in the business of ganging up.
Your post smacks of serious paranioa.
I guess part of your aversion to jumping to conclusions is your inability to comprehend what you read. Try again.
I think that what really hacks off those who don't believe in God (especially when that disbelief comes from "scientific intellect"😉 is that the existence of a God that is so totally beyond us in presence, knowledge, ability can't be disproven by scientific method.
** Note, I mean the scientific method as it USED to be practiced whereby empirical, hard proof was required to disprove the existence of something-- not the new way they do it these days: "I'm smarter than you and I say you're just wrong" **
And why are the so-called atheists even posting on this thread anyway? Maybe it's because their spirit knows what their heart and mind don't want to confess- that God DOES exist, and we DO need him.
Originally posted by telecomladyjActually, a lot of the people here who posted aren't atheist.
And why are the so-called atheists even posting on this thread anyway? Maybe it's because their spirit knows what their heart and mind don't want to confess- that God DOES exist, and we DO need him.
They just don't ascribe to your notion of god
Originally posted by telecomladyjI'm glad to say scientists don't try to disprove God.
I think that what really hacks off those who don't believe in God (especially when that disbelief comes from "scientific intellect"😉 is that the existence of a God that is so totally beyond us in presence, knowledge, ability can't be disproven by scientific method.
** Note, I mean the scientific method as it USED to be practiced whereby empirical, ha ...[text shortened]... t their heart and mind don't want to confess- that God DOES exist, and we DO need him.
While reading what you say, you assure us there IS a God but give no proof. What makes your method better than the non-existent scientist you speak of who claim 'they are smarter'?
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitOh the folks I mention, while hypothetical in this thread, are not non-existent, they are very real. I've talked to plenty of them. I also know scientists who believe that although you can't prove God's existence to another person, he is nonetheless real.
I'm glad to say scientists don't try to disprove God.
While reading what you say, you assure us there IS a God but give no proof. What makes your method better than the non-existent scientist you speak of who claim 'they are smarter'?
P-
Not sure what you mean by "my method". I don't claim to be able to prove God, I just have a problem with people who state that there is no God as if it were fact- when it has not been proven to be fact.
I assert that some things are true whether you choose to believe them or not. This has happened many times in the history of science, not the least case is the existence of air, and then also the existence of particles in the air even though we can't see them. Air didn't begin to exist ONLY when someone was able to prove it, did it? No- it was always there.
Originally posted by telecomladyjSo you choose to believe, and they choose not to believe.
Oh the folks I mention, while hypothetical in this thread, are not non-existent, they are very real. I've talked to plenty of them. I also know scientists who believe that although you can't prove God's existence to another person, he is nonetheless real.
Not sure what you mean by "my method". I don't claim to be able to prove God, I just have a prob ...[text shortened]... begin to exist ONLY when someone was able to prove it, did it? No- it was always there.
Do you tell them "There IS a God"?
If so, why does it bother you when they tell you there is NOT a God?
That's my point.
Originally posted by PhlabibitI don't foist my belief on anyone, if that's what you mean. Unless simply stating my belief is considered "foisting". But I saw a lot of abusive and arrogant things get hurled at the originator of this post, and my point was why are they even on this thread if they disagree? I don't go to a forum or thread where people are blasting God and start getting in their faces. So why did that happen here?
So you choose to believe, and they choose not to believe.
Do you tell them "There IS a God"?
If so, why does it bother you when they tell you there is NOT a God?
That's my point.
In his original post, freak didn't say anything against those who don't agree with the Bible, he was just enjoying a nice passage of the book we like (if y'all don't like it- fine but we do), thinking so naively that maybe other Christians might be able to come to this thread and be edified by the word of God rather than abused.
Whatever happened to agreeing to disagree, and plain old common courtesy? Most of the insults were needless and ugly. It's not disagreement that I'm against, I just don't understand the need to be nasty about it. Whether or not you have any faith of any sort-- behavior like that illustrates low character.
such a cool conversation haz ensued...
from a snippet of isaiah???
what if...
think carefully and logically with yer tiny, inefficient lil human brain...
what if...
'we' are ALL wrong in our descriptions of "God"???
i include myself in this question...
now,
from isaiah, we have "God" speaking to 'us'...
all mankind...
ladies, too...
and He say, "I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like me. "
at least, that's how itz translated by a regular goon like me or you...
i'll bet real currency ole isaiah wuz quakin when he heard THAT Voice...
ifn it were me, and it weren't, pickin up a pencil and jottin down notes would be kinda problematic during a revelation of that magnitude...
heck,
when i won tha lotto last year i peed myself bigtime...
but,
i digress...
how in tha devil are mortals supposed to effectively describe a Being which haz no beginning or end???
short answer...
you CAIN'T...
i quit trying about ten minnites ago, myself...
so,
i said all that just to say this...
what if...
what if we iz ALL wrong about this "God" guy???
what if tha "ding!!! you win!!!" answer still eludes???
if you (the global 'you' ) is very dang sure of what, who, or where, Spirit iz, i humbly submit...
yer fulla poop...
sincerely,
rookie
Originally posted by rookie54Lol!
such a cool conversation haz ensued...
from a snippet of isaiah???
what if...
think carefully and logically with yer tiny, inefficient lil human brain...
what if...
'we' are ALL wrong in our descriptions of "God"???
i include myself in this question...
now,
from isaiah, we have "God" speaking to 'us'...
all mankind...
ladies, too...
and He ...[text shortened]... re, Spirit iz, i humbly submit...
yer fulla poop...
sincerely,
rookie
Hey Rookie, nice post!
Sounds like you're in the right ballpark- the search for God is a process of elimination which starts with the understanding that we all could be very wrong.
I just start with the notion that God is everything, and more, and It doesn't really care what opinions we have of It.
So if I say.."God is dead", for example, or " Jesus is a bhoddisattva, nothing more" , I really don't think it will change anything- especially the destination of my soul.
If Jesus comes to me and tells me to knock it off , I'll let the forum know😀
Originally posted by karoly aczelI will submit to a thought experiment along the lines of this protocol.
Lol!
Hey Rookie, nice post!
Sounds like you're in the right ballpark- the search for God is a process of elimination which starts with the understanding that we all could be very wrong.
I just start with the notion that God is everything, and more, and It doesn't really care what opinions we have of It.
So if I say.."God is dead", for exam ...[text shortened]... my soul.
If Jesus comes to me and tells me to knock it off , I'll let the forum know😀
Me: Maybe you're wrong about God.
Me: I shall consider that.
Me: Let met know what you conclude
Me: After having considered it, I conclude that I am wrong.
Me: Now you're talking.
Me: Who is talking, me or you?
Me: You, of course! Duh.
Me: By 'you,' do you mean 'me-you,' or 'you-me?'
Me: Can we just get back to the subject?
Me: Oh, right. I am wrong.
Me: Now that you are wrong, you are right.
Me: I am?
Me: Well, now you are.
Me: What about you?
Me: Me?
Me: Yeah... I think so.
Me: I'm not so sure. What do you think?
Me: Who in hell are you?
I'll be! It works! Thanks for the insights, EVERYONE!
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYes thats basically my contention,ie. we are all schizophrenic.
I will submit to a thought experiment along the lines of this protocol.Me: Maybe you're wrong about God.
Me: I shall consider that.
Me: Let met know what you conclude
Me: After having considered it, I conclude that I am wrong.
Me: Now you're talking.
Me: Who is talking, me or you?
Me: You, of course! Duh.
Me: By 'you,' do you mean 'me-yo ...[text shortened]... ho in hell are you?
I'll be! It works! Thanks for the insights, EVERYONE!