How to show an atheist the possibility of God

[Michael]

FYI, the *function* of those plasma filaments are exactly the same as the *function* of neutrons, namely they act as *conductors* of electrical current. It's not just a *visual* similarity, it's a *functional* one as well, but go ahead and handwave away.

 

[Davian]

I assume you prefer your evidence to be "objective". Meaning the evidence presented must be absolutely objective and not a product of someone's subjective mind, correct?

That would be better than unevidenced assertions.

Well when this absolute objective evidence is presented to you, you still have to use your subjective mind to comprehend that absolute objective evidence, correct? Well our minds can't comprehend absolutes, which is why even if absolutely objective evidence is presented, you still have to "believe" it's absolute objective evidence because you can't be absolutely certain of this absolute objective evidence. If you could be absolutely certain of absolute objective evidence then what's stopping you from knowing absolutely everything there is to know? The answer is that your subjective mind is what's stopping you from knowing absolutely everything there is to know.

I am not looking for absolutes. I am only looking for a high degree of accuracy.

I believe only God can know absolutely everything there is to know.

And how do you know this?

With all that said, you can either choose to believe what I believe

No, I cannot. Belief is not a choice; I need convincing arguments or evidence; I cannot choose to believe like I would choose what to have for breakfast.

or you can continue not believing what I believe and in reality I have no say in the matter, but I continue to respond because I'm powered by love.

You don't eat food?

Actually, whether you believe it or not your powered by the same thing, you just need to recognize where love comes from and I've done my best to show you,

This was your best? All you did was repeatedly assert that you were right.

but if you still can't see it, then I'm leaving it to God to deal with you. Remember God is merciful, but He's also the ultimate judge.

For what will I be judged?

 

[Chriliman]

The "Christian" God both communicates with, and has an effect on humans. The universe definitely has a tangible effect on humans, and a living universe that operates on EM fields, much like the intelligent structures of our brains, just might help to explain that communication process, perhaps even in purely empirical terms. I don't see why not. As long as you don't mistake the little sliver of the universe that is visible to us from Earth, I really don't see why not.

I will say, we need to be careful what "boxes" we put God in. God never claims in the Bible that His mind is the universe. God also never claims in the Bible that He is absolute consciousness. These are ideas that God has allowed us to think, but we should not confuse these ideas with the one True God who is beyond all of our "ideas". I believe the only "box" God wants to be in is our hearts and He's made this possible through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

Hebrews 4:12
"For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart."

 

[Davian]

You didn't "think" about anything. You basically handwaved it away without any consideration at all, pretty much just like I figured.



That's not true. Pickup any book in any bookstore related to someone's experiences of God. I recommend Autobiography of a Yogi if the New Testament doesn't float your boat.



Er, ok.



It's certainly there. It's certainly shaped like the intelligent and aware structures that form inside of intelligent beings on Earth. It's electromagnetic in nature just like humans.



Do you actually think that astronomers can show that dark energy exists or that it has some effect on photons in empirical lab tests or something? The *cause/effect relationship is often assumed* in "science'. Often the *effect* is all there is to work with in "science'. In this case I'm offering you a tangible way for the process to take place, and a tangible way to 'test' it in controlled experimentation.

You're basically applying a *non scientific* standard to the topic of God. Why?

FYI, the *function* of those plasma filaments are exactly the same as the *function* of neutrons, namely they act as *conductors* of electrical current. It's not just a *visual* similarity, it's a *functional* one as well, but go ahead and handwave away.

Keep it in your own threads, Michael.

 

[Michael]

Different goalposts.

It seems to me that you're the one moving the goalposts.

His post implied that modern cosmology was limited to atheism and scientists. What I implied back, and say to you: if you cannot convince your fellow Christians of the veracity of your personal cosmology claims, why take it to the unbelievers? Sort it out among yourselves.

Why would his cosmology beliefs *necessarily* be the very same as mine simply because we are both "Christians"? I fail to understand why you even think that's necessary to begin with.

You sentence is semantically broken. Do those that do not collect stamps have a consensus on everything that they believe/lack belief in?

I think we're talking past each other. I see no logic in you *assuming* that "Christians" must agree on everything, from cosmology beliefs, to points of 'spiritual dogma' simply by virtue of sharing the same "Christian' label, anymore than I would expect all atheists to think alike in terms of cosmology.

 

[Michael]

I will say, we need to be careful what "boxes" we put God in. God never claims in the Bible that His mind is the universe. God also never claims in the Bible that He is absolute consciousness. These are ideas that God has allowed us to think, but we should not confuse these ideas with the one True God who is beyond all of our "ideas". I believe the only "box" God wants to be in is our hearts and He's made this possible through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

Hebrews 4:12
"For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart."

I hear you on the point about not trying to put God into boxes, and I certainly don't profess to understand the totality of God. I'm simply looking for one logical, possible, and empirical explanation for *some* of the experiences and things which we attribute to "God". My faith in God isn't limited to, nor dependent upon the scientific validity of Panentheism, it's based on my faith in the teachings of Christ, and the experiences they've led to in my life.

 

[Chriliman]

That would be better than unevidenced assertions.

I am not looking for absolutes. I am only looking for a high degree of accuracy.

And how do you know this?

No, I cannot. Belief is not a choice; I need convincing arguments or evidence; I cannot choose to believe like I would choose what to have for breakfast.

You don't eat food?

This was your best? All you did was repeatedly assert that you were right.

For what will I be judged?

I'm going to leave you with this scripture because I think the fact that God has put this in the Bible is actually a great blessing in disguise to those who do not believe because it clearly states that you are being deceived by the god of this world, which is the devil. The fact that you can't recognize that you're being deceived clearly shows that you are blinded, just remember this as you continue through life's trials because you may reach a point where all hope is lost and I pray you'll know where to turn.

2 Corinthians 4:4
"In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God."

I believe you will eventually see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

 

[Chriliman]

I hear you on the point about not trying to put God into boxes, and I certainly don't profess to understand the totality of God. I'm simply looking for one logical, possible, and empirical explanation for *some* of the experiences and things which we attribute to "God". My faith in God isn't limited to, nor dependent upon the scientific validity of Panentheism, it's based on my faith in the teachings of Christ, and the experiences they've led to in my life.

Awesome! Keep doing what you're doing then! God bless!

 

[Davian]

I'm going to leave you with this scripture because I think the fact that God has put this in the Bible

This is not a "fact".

is actually a great blessing in disguise to those who do not believe because it clearly states that you are being deceived by the god of this world, which is the devil. The fact that you can't recognize that you're being deceived clearly shows that you are blinded, just remember this as you continue through life's trials because you may reach a point where all hope is lost and I pray you'll know where to turn.

I know of this. Religionists often prey on the down-and-out.

2 Corinthians 4:4
"In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God."

Of course the writers of the bible will claim that the unbelievers cannot see what is supposedly there. I would not think them stupid.

I believe you will eventually see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

Not if all I see are unevidenced assertions like this.

 

[Michael]

Of course the writers of the bible will claim that the unbelievers cannot see what is supposedly there. I would not think them stupid.

Same deal with Lambda-CDM proponents and their "dark" deities by the way.

Not if all I see are unevidenced assertions like this.

Ultimately you're going to have to come to terms with the fact that some claims/assertions, *even in "science"*, are based on assertions that lack evidence. The photon/dark energy connection is simply *assumed*. Your standards of 'evidence' are therefore not "scientific" standards of evidence.

 

[Loudmouth]

I assume you prefer your evidence to be "objective". Meaning the evidence presented must be absolutely objective and not a product of someone's subjective mind, correct?

If I said that a specific rock weighed 5 kg, do you think you could objectively test that rock to see if it comes close to matching my claim?

Well when this absolute objective evidence is presented to you, you still have to use your subjective mind to comprehend that absolute objective evidence, correct? Well our minds can't comprehend absolutes, which is why even if absolutely objective evidence is presented, you still have to "believe" it's absolute objective evidence because you can't be absolutely certain of this absolute objective evidence. If you could be absolutely certain of absolute objective evidence then what's stopping you from knowing absolutely everything there is to know? The answer is that your subjective mind is what's stopping you from knowing absolutely everything there is to know.

You seem to be looking for an excuse to ignore the evidence.

I believe only God can know absolutely everything there is to know.

You could believe the Moon is made of green cheese. Wouldn't make it true.

With all that said, you can either choose to believe what I believe or you can continue not believing what I believe and in reality I have no say in the matter, but I continue to respond because I'm powered by love.

I would think that you are powered by ATP just like the rest of us. Anyway, if you can't present evidence for your beliefs, what compelling reason is there for believing them?

Actually, whether you believe it or not your powered by the same thing, you just need to recognize where love comes from and I've done my best to show you, but if you still can't see it, then I'm leaving it to God to deal with you. Remember God is merciful, but He's also the ultimate judge.

Again, those are assertions with no evidence to back them.

 

[Davian]

<snip rant>

Off topic.

 

[Chriliman]

If I said that a specific rock weighed 5 kg, do you think you could objectively test that rock to see if it comes close to matching my claim?

Yes, which only shows that the truth that the rock weighs 5kg is an objective truth and if the truth is objective then it cannot change and if it cannot change then it must be absolute. So the fact that the rock weighs 5kg even after it has been tested by many different people shows that we must believe the absolute objective truth about the rock is that it weighs 5kg. But, this still requires belief because it was our subjective minds that defined kg as weight and it was our subjective minds that tested the rock, so through our subjective minds we determined a degree of objective truth about the rock, but we cannot determine absolute objectivity about the rock, simply because we are subjective beings.

I would think that you are powered by ATP just like the rest of us. Anyway, if you can't present evidence for your beliefs, what compelling reason is there for believing them?

The fact that I'm conscious without needing evidence to prove that I'm conscious is more than enough for me to hold my beliefs about how I came to be conscious. You on the other hand are very uncertain on how it could be possible that you are conscious, simply because you withhold belief until evidence is presented.

Again, those are assertions with no evidence to back them.

Again, stop claiming my beliefs are assertions. Look up the definition of both words and you will see they are not the same.

 

[Chriliman]

Chriliman - "I'm going to leave you with this scripture because I think the fact that God has put this in the Bible"

This is not a "fact".

Good catch, it's not a "fact" to you because you don't believe it, it is a "fact" to me because I believe it. I think you're beginning to understand the power of belief.

I know of this. Religionists often prey on the down-and-out.

I'm not sure why you think helping someone in need could be thought of as "preying" on them...seems like an evil thought to me.

Of course the writers of the bible will claim that the unbelievers cannot see what is supposedly there. I would not think them stupid.

If you don't think their stupid, do you think they are smart? If they are smart, why don't you respect what they say?

Not if all I see are unevidenced assertions like this.

Again, not assertions, but rather beliefs.

 

[Chriliman]

Life is a beautiful struggle. Be thankful for the real struggles in life because it's real struggles that reveal the true beauty. It's the real struggles that make us stronger and it's the true beauty that keeps us striving for more.

I hope both believers and unbelievers can relate to this

 

[Davian]

Chriliman - "I'm going to leave you with this scripture because I think the fact that God has put this in the Bible"

Good catch, it's not a "fact" to you because you don't believe it, it is a "fact" to me because I believe it.

No, it is not a fact as you cannot demonstrate that it comports with reality.

I think you're beginning to understand the power of belief.

Or the power of circular reasoning.

I'm not sure why you think helping someone in need could be thought of as "preying" on them...seems like an evil thought to me.

Why then pick on the down-and-out? Why go after people when they are at their weakest and most vulnerable? When they will grasp at straw?

If you don't think their stupid, do you think they are smart? If they are smart, why don't you respect what they say?

The inability of religionists such as yourself to demonstrate that what they claim is an accurate description or reality.

Again, not assertions, but rather beliefs.

When you assert your beliefs as truth without substantiation, they become assertions. It is you that makes them so.

 

[Gene2memE]

If you can't demonstrate the validity of a fact, it is just an assertion or belief. Facts require validation.

 

[HitchSlap]

Again, stop claiming my beliefs are assertions. Look up the definition of both words and you will see they are not the same.

But that's all they are. I'm sorry you're unable to accept this, as it has prevented us from moving forward with this discussion.

 

[Chriliman]

No, it is not a fact as you cannot demonstrate that it comports with reality.

I've used reason to demonstrate my beliefs. Do you not value a reason for a belief?

Or the power of circular reasoning.

We has humans can reason for eternity, but until we actually believe that our reason has gotten us somewhere, we'll never get anywhere.

Why then pick on the down-and-out? Why go after people when they are at their weakest and most vulnerable? When they will grasp at straw?

I most likely wont be there when people are down-and-out. What I hope is that they will turn to Jesus Christ, when they are really down-and-out, when they realize they can't do it on there own.

When you assert your beliefs as truth without substantiation, they become assertions. It is you that makes them so.

You run into this problem when you try to assert the truth that you are conscious. Yet even without direct evidence of your consciousness, I still believe that you are conscious.

Do you believe that I'm conscious? If you say yes, then I'm NOT going to say that you have asserted your belief as truth, I am, instead, going to say thank you for believing me when I say it is true that I'm conscious.

If you say no, you don't believe I'm conscious, then I'm going to believe you're delusional and try to stay away from you because there is no telling what you might try to do to me if you believe I'm a being without consciousness.

So, in fact it is not me who is asserting my beliefs, I'm simply claiming I have beliefs and attempting to use reason to explain why I believe them. It is in fact you who continues to claim that I'm asserting my beliefs as truth, when in fact I'm saying it requires "belief" in absolute truth in order to make the most sense about this life we all find ourselves in.

However, I don't expect you to understand, since you choose neither to believe in or not-believe in absolute truth, which now that I've typed that out, I'm not even sure that it's possible to neither believe or not-believe in something, but I guess you may have proven it's possible.

I guess the only way to neither believe or not-believe in something is if you never knew about the "something" to be believed in. I think it's safe to say that you have heard the term absolute truth, so I guess we're back to the question that you're so good at avoiding: Do you believe in absolute truth or not? Please try to answer this question with the terms "believe" and "absolute truth" in the answer.

If you have no evidence for absolute truth then simply say you don't believe in an absolute truth because there is no evidence that supports it. I would accept this answer, but in my conversation tree I show how this answer leads to irrational thinking that YOUR conscious mind is the only thing that has ever existed.

Just honestly answer the question.

 

[Chriliman]

But that's all they are. I'm sorry you're unable to accept this, as it has prevented us from moving forward with this discussion.

This is an assertion:

"Since you can't provide direct evidence of your consciousness, it is not true that you are conscious, therefore I don't believe you are conscious"

Assertion - a confident and forceful statement of fact or belief.

This is a belief:

"Since you can't provide direct evidence of your consciousness, I must believe it's true that you're conscious because I am also conscious even without evidence to prove I'm conscious."

Belief - an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists

Can you see the difference?