Arguments for the Existence of God

[ScottA]

Internet is a simulation and all of it exists in our reality. It exists as a state of matter that transmits that state to our brain.

When you are talking about being taken outside... what are the circumstances? You realize that there are hundreds of alien abduction stories and there are viable psychological explanstion for these when it comes to how our brains handle narcosis.

My father was also claiming to "fly outside" during his surgery and vlaimed to be given some information... but none of it came true or was true... not surprisingly. If there was some super human information passed down, I'd think it would be in a form of something we could actually use... and not the revelation type of cryptic stuff which unfolds no history and moves nothing at all.

You are not in a position to be critical or set the terms of inquiry.

Under your terms, this is my answer: If you have a change of heart and attitude perhaps we can go further with the discussion, otherwise I am not going to waste my time.

 

[Belk]

Subscribing for the lulz

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You are not in a position to be critical or set the terms of inquiry.

Under your terms, this is my answer: If you have a change of heart and attitude perhaps we can go further with the discussion, otherwise I am not going to waste my time.

You've wasted enough people's time already with your inane ramblings.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

You are not in a position to be critical or set the terms of inquiry.

Lol. I'm pretty sure everyone has the ability to be critical. Especially concerning things which lack good evidence.

 

[ScottA]

Perhaps not crazy... but not very uselful. If there's no way to demonstarte outside, and there's no way to veryfy whether you messages are true or not... how useful are these?

Comic books are fun just like any fantasy fiction. Perhaps it can relate some moral reality through a metaphor.... but as something tha actually impacts history. I think what we actually know seems to have a far greater impact.

What you don't realize, is you have it upside down and backwards. Life in this world has one use (only), and you disregard it.

 

[devolved]

What you don't realize, is you have it upside down and backwards. Life in this world has one use (only), and you disregard it.

You realize as to why I can't simply take your word for whatever extraordinary experience that you've had? It seems is like you are saying "Hey, accept the possibility and then we'll talk further"...

And if you follow my discussions here, I'm not the one to utterly reject the possibility of supernatural and merely bash you for crazy ideas. That's not the point.

If there is more to it, then I'd gladly like to listen and learn, but the answers you provide seem to stem from an pressupositional assumptions, rather than follow some form of rational framework. You have to remember that I didn't experience what you claim that you did... and that there are plentiful of stories about extra-ordinary experience, with some of them proven to be hoaxes.

You understand as to why we as humans generally don't believe certain extraordinary claims without certain evidence, right? Do you believe Mohammed, Joseph Smith, etc? All of them had a claim on some extra-ordinary experience of receiving "messages from outside".... but these messages and claims are in conflict with each other.

SO... which standard do I use to tell which one of you guys are correct if the messages are so selective, and I'm not the one of the lucky chosen ones?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

What you don't realize, is you have it upside down and backwards.

No. What you don't realize, is that you have it upside down and backwards.

 

[ScottA]

Really... So you were taken into some supernatural realm by god, and you had a chance to look around? What does that mean that you were taken "outside"

I was taken out of the world.

It is? Which fallacy, and how did I commit it? You can't just dismiss an argument by saying "that's a fallacy". You have to show what and where.

And no, you haven't demonstrated a single thing. You've just been arguing by assertion so far, without backing up your claims.

The fallacy, is that the kingdom or realm of God can be demonstrated within the world. I have used inside and outside for the sake of example, because it is easier to image that the world is like a cosmic fishbowl in the hands of God - but it was only for example. In reality, the kingdom of God is within...and you cannot enter into another person, but must enter into God, but cannot do so because of your own lack of belief.

How is that in the least bit relevant to this argument?

Because it (as I said) is an example of a complete and vast universe that is completely contrived as a tool for a greater reality. It is as if those who do not believe there is a God, were in internet space and denying that someone made everything they know. Good luck with that.

 

[ScottA]

You've wasted enough people's time already with your inane ramblings.

Now...let's not get all emotional and misspell words, and forget that you are a guest in the house of another. Your character is showing.

 

[Dave Ellis]

I was taken out of the world.

Really? How so?

The fallacy, is that the kingdom or realm of God can be demonstrated within the world. I have used inside and outside for the sake of example, because it is easier to image that the world is like a cosmic fishbowl in the hands of God - but it was only for example. In reality, the kingdom of God is within...and you cannot enter into another person, but must enter into God, but cannot do so because of your own lack of belief.

That's not a fallacy... Do you know what fallacies are?

And again, you're just arguing from bald assertion. What reason do I have to take any of your claims seriously?

Because it (as I said) is an example of a complete and vast universe that is completely contrived as a tool for a greater reality. It is as if those who do not believe there is a God, were in internet space and denying that someone made everything they know. Good luck with that.

Which is completely meaningless unless you can back up your claims.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Now...let's not get all emotional and misspell words, and forget that you are a guest in the house of another. Your character is showing.

What did he misspell?

 

[devolved]

What you don't realize, is you have it upside down and backwards. Life in this world has one use (only), and you disregard it.

The point being is that as humans we have certain way that we progress through knowledge and understanding... and that way generally doesn't start with being pulled into some external reality where the secrets of the universe are explained.

We generally get a wide variety of information, and we weigh the evidence to form a mental model as to what this world is really like.

But, all you have is a claim of experience. My dad had an "out of body experience" when he went through surgery, and he flew through tunnels to a bring light with a voice that told him that I will play in the NBA . Of course I didn't, quite the opposite... I went and got an education and didn't really make the sports into a career. Was it a "conditional prophecy". Was it an imagined experience?

But let's say that I did make it into the NBA. Would that be an evidence of an all-knowing deity?

Can you see my point? Without some collective experience of reality, it's very difficult to convince people... and God if it exists should know it quite well and at least provide better evidence than that. I'm sure God would be perfectly capable to be more convincing to people like me who are very much open to the idea that God exists, but simply don't see evidence that it's true.

 

[ScottA]

Lol. I'm pretty sure everyone has the ability to be critical. Especially concerning things which lack good evidence.

And that is your fatal mistake.

What "good evidence" would a dog give to a flea?

 

[devolved]

And that is your fatal mistake.

What "good evidence" would a dog give to a flea?

Who are you in this analogy... a dog or a flea? If you are a flea, then it seems like you got the evidence you need by being "pulled out", right? So, your claim and the question seems to not make sense and carry inherent inconsistencies.

On one hand, there is evidence that YOU get. On the other hand, there isn't evidence that everyone else can have . Do you see the problem?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Now...let's not get all emotional and misspell words, and forget that you are a guest in the house of another. Your character is showing.

I didn't misspell any words.

 

[ScottA]

there are plentiful of stories about extra-ordinary experience, with some of them proven to be hoaxes.

You understand as to why we as humans generally don't believe certain extraordinary claims without certain evidence, right? Do you believe Mohammed, Joseph Smith, etc? All of them had a claim on some extra-ordinary experience of receiving "messages from outside".... but these messages and claims are in conflict with each other.

It's not a contest. It is a screening process.

SO... which standard do I use to tell which one of you guys are correct if the messages are so selective, and I'm not the one of the lucky chosen ones?

There is only one ribbon of truth that has withstood the test of time. If it is in you to discover it - you will discover it.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

What did he misspell?

My guess is that he doesn't know that "inane" is a word...

 

[ToddNotTodd]

And that is your fatal mistake.

What "good evidence" would a dog give to a flea?

What's that got to do with your inability to give evidence for your beliefs?

 

[ScottA]

Really? How so?

Although it is no secret, that is privileged information...and we're not there yet.

That's not a fallacy... Do you know what fallacies are?

And again, you're just arguing from bald assertion. What reason do I have to take any of your claims seriously?

Which is completely meaningless unless you can back up your claims.

My "claims" are my witness as a link in the chain that you are hung up in. You are under no obligation to take it serious...but that won't make it go away. Have it your way.

 

[devolved]

It's not a contest. It is a screening process.

What standards do you use to "screen" between various claims like yours and others? There are still people believing all sorts of demonstrably wrong things that seems to slip through the test of time you are talking about.

There is only one ribbon of truth that has withstood the test of time. If it is in you to discover it - you will discover it.

Ok, I though this is a thread about evidence for God's existence, and I actually thought that you have some form of a claim... but this conversation devolved into "There is evidence, and if you find it.... you'll find it"

Great, thank you for your participation.