Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What? No. You haven't discovered anything at all. You've merely asked a question, guessed at an answer, and called it a "discovery."
Don't pick on the term I used. Are you able to say something about the process?
To shape the property of a personal god, the term "discovery" is not that bad.
I promised to shed some light over my theist philosophy, so here goes.
Rather than saying directly "God exists", it tries to prove it the opposite way: "It's impossible for God to not exist".
----------
For me the brain represents the material link between the body and soul. DNA is also material, and materia in itself doesn't have the intelligence to create life and the perfect balance and symbiosis in the ecosystems.
Soul is more important than materia for the existence as a whole. If there was not even one soul ever, not even time or the void alone that the universe floats in would have existed because there would have been nothing and no one to detect their existence, and thus they would have existed for nothing.
The existence and continuity of souls is thus a necessity for existence of everything else. It gives universe a reason and a meaning.
I do appreciate science as it tries to feed our hunger for knowledge, which is definitely a noble goal. But Big Bang theory and the evolution theory are still just that theories, because they don't have all the supportive evidence to make them 100% (of the) fact yet.
The Big Bang theory only starts from the point where the materia already existed, and does not much comment on where the energy came from to create the materia into the void for the Big Bang to happen later on. On top of it, no astronomer is able to explain where the center point of the great explosion located.
For the evolution theory to work, there must be a mechanism in living cells which adds more DNA to the DNA chain. But no one has been able to prove that yet, and mutation only changes or swaps DNA, it doesn't add it. Scientiests are also unable to explain the birth of a nucleus in a cell.
Scientists do admit that there must be an organizer which keeps all the materia in proper order and the nature on this planet in balance, but doesn't straight out name the organizer as a designer or soul, or in other words, God. That's because science refrains to comment on beliefs or religion to stay as neutral as possible, and only examines the observable, material world.
Refraining from commenting the subject doesn't mean, however, that science denies the existence of souls, or God. That's what people choose to do, not science itself.
Besides, I would rather believe that there is a God and then find out there isn't, than not believe in God and then find out there is.
Don't pick on the term I used. Are you able to say something about the process?
To shape the property of a personal god, the term "discovery" is not that bad.
there would have been no universal creation and life if there has been no God, there must be something or someone that creates and supports the life, because just think what would be if there was no normal place for living in the cosmos but just some dark space, how the souls would stray in the dark cosmos without having any normal life
Blessings
For me the brain represents the material link between the body and soul.
If there was not even one soul ever, not even time or the void alone that the universe floats in would have existed because there would have been nothing and no one to detect their existence, and thus they would have existed for nothing.
Besides, I would rather believe that there is a God and then find out there isn't, than not believe in God and then find out there is.
there would have been no universal creation and life if there has been no God
Why not pick on the term? The most generous term I can think of for what you are describing is "speculating."
To "guess" an answer and derive a property of a divine being from that is... well, "bad" is a very weak term to describe it.
Beyond that, I fear that your "guess" is based on a faulty after-the-fact logical mistake.
- could the god make every human being have happy life forever? Yes, of course, it's god - god could do everything.
- but not every human being have happy life forever... we can see this.
- thus there must be a good reason for god not to make every human have happy life forever. God should not happy human forever life make!
OK. Then let me ask you: Why should "bad" people (like Hitler) in this world also enjoy a forever happy life? If a god make them have that, is that god not fair?
This is not guess or speculation. It is reasoning. Reason on what kind of god do you like to see? (don't forget the existence of a god is assumed at the very beginning). No. a god can NOT do everything. A god has properties. Once some properties are set, then the god can not violate those properties.
After the fact reasoning again.
- there are bad people... we can see this.
- so god must have a good reason to create bad people who are not deserve life happy forever
And now ask yourself, is it fair to create these people? Is it fair to the people that these bad people do bad thing to? Would it be fair not to create bad people? Perhaps it would be graceful to grant happy life forever to everyone, even bad people?
With enough "guessing", you can find that this god has any attribute that you want to show he has. You can even "guess" that a god can do everything.
There´s something profoundly funny about a believer asking a non-believer to define his god for him.Before you asked me the question, you have just introduced another property to this god: this god created ALL people on the earth, good and bad.
Are you sure you want that god to have this property? Don't forget every property assigned WILL have serious consequences.
Now this god has two properties already: 1) make ALL people have eternal happy life. 2) create (and continue to create) people, good and bad.
Do you like to change something about this god? Or you want to ditch them and start it all over? If you like to keep them, then I will consider your questions.
We can do this as long as you wish... assigning properties, making conclusions from them, debating the validity of these conclusions... but in every single case, in every single property that you "discover", there will be the (completely valid) objection "and maybe this is completely wrong, because this god does simply not exist".Before you asked me the question, you have just introduced another property to this god: this god created ALL people on the earth, good and bad.
Are you sure you want that god to have this property? Don't forget every property assigned WILL have serious consequences.
Now this god has two properties already: 1) make ALL people have eternal happy life. 2) create (and continue to create) people, good and bad.
Do you like to change something about this god? Or you want to ditch them and start it all over? If you like to keep them, then I will consider your questions.
There´s something profoundly funny about a believer asking a non-believer to define his god for him.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?