Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Son of GOD EXISTS

For anyone who might want to have a side conversation...you're welcome here!
Re: Son of GOD EXISTS
Post by cthia   » Sat Aug 04, 2018 4:27 pm

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 10465
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:10 pm

Exidor wrote:
cthia wrote:As I've once shared and it still holds true, you non believers keep asking us for proof.


If someone makes a statement intended as fact (be it "God exists", "Son of God exists", or anything else) it seems to me that it is only reasonable to request proof.

cthia wrote:Yet the onus of responsibility to produce that proof falls on your head, not ours.


If you make the claim, the responsibility to prove the claim is yours, not that of those that do not accept the statement as fact. That you accept the statement as fact does not mean others have to disprove the claim.

cthia wrote:Since you have so much riding on your intransigence and resistance.


Somebody certainly has alot riding on their "intransigence and resistance", I'll agree. :)

[setting aside the popcorn] My viewpoint is my own, and I'm going to share it as food for thought, not with the intent to get anyone to "shut up".

I believe my job as a Reverend is that of spiritual guidance, not to convert people. To help others regardless of their denomination (or lack thereof).

When I became a Reverend, there were a couple of things I had to accept - the first being there was absolutely no way on earth (or off) for me to prove to anyone the existance of God. Can't be done, no matter what I believe. But...

... I realized I don't have to. If God wants her/his (however one believes) existance proven, it's on those mighty shoulders to do so, not mine.

An individual's relationship with their Creator is exactly that - between themself and (their) God. I am quite certain the way I relate with God is different that the way you do, or the way Dilandu does. Being different is not, however, the same thing as being wrong.

Christians are called on to witness unto others, not to proselytize; to live their lives in such a way as to bring glory onto the lord, not to sow strife because others don't believe as you do. To share, not to impose.

To me, what you're doing with your "you must prove God does not exist" viewpoint is attempting to to impose your belief on others, not sharing - not witnessing for God/Jesus. And the more vehemently you rail against those that do simply not their head and agree - the more you tend to either drive people away or cause them to simply ignore you. This glorifies no one - and (to my point of view) does not please God.

Now, I'll step back from the pulpit. Feel free to disregard any of my words - I do not expect nor demand any reply. I simply felt moved to share a different point of view. :)


Finally, a respectful post practicing the art of real discourse that I can joyfully engage.

If someone makes a statement intended as fact (be it "God exists", "Son of God exists", or anything else) it seems to me that it is only reasonable to request proof.


Totally agree. I shared the fact that I am trying to deliver that proof in the form of science, something they can understand and trust.



If you make the claim, the responsibility to prove the claim is yours, not that of those that do not accept the statement as fact. That you accept the statement as fact does not mean others have to disprove the claim.
I wouldn't go so far as accepting it as a responsibility of my own. Responsibility to what, or whom? I accept it as truth. Know it as truth, by faith. If I am wrong, I have nothing to lose but a great big pie in the sky. If they are wrong they lose quite a bit. That's a very big bet to make without at least trying to hedge it by having an open mind.

OTOH, the responsibility to prove the most important belief system of mankind false is a responsibility that non believers have to themselves. We are responsible to ourselves for ourselves. I cannot drag someone to heaven with me. Or drag them out of hell.



[setting aside the popcorn] My viewpoint is my own, and I'm going to share it as food for thought, not with the intent to get anyone to "shut up".

I believe my job as a Reverend is that of spiritual guidance, not to convert people. To help others regardless of their denomination (or lack thereof).

When I became a Reverend, there were a couple of things I had to accept - the first being there was absolutely no way on earth (or off) for me to prove to anyone the existance of God. Can't be done, no matter what I believe. But...

... I realized I don't have to. If God wants her/his (however one believes) existance proven, it's on those mighty shoulders to do so, not mine.

An individual's relationship with their Creator is exactly that - between themself and (their) God. I am quite certain the way I relate with God is different that the way you do, or the way Dilandu does. Being different is not, however, the same thing as being wrong.

Christians are called on to witness unto others, not to proselytize; to live their lives in such a way as to bring glory onto the lord, not to sow strife because others don't believe as you do. To share, not to impose.

To me, what you're doing with your "'you must prove God does not exist" viewpoint is attempting to to impose your belief on others, not sharing - not witnessing for God/Jesus. And the more vehemently you rail against those that do simply not their head and agree - the more you tend to either drive people away or cause them to simply ignore you. This glorifies no one - and (to my point of view) does not please God.

Now, I'll step back from the pulpit. Feel free to disregard any of my words - I do not expect nor demand any reply. I simply felt moved to share a different point of view.


Not "must prove." I already know. More like, interested in proving. And in case of typo, that is prove God does exist.

At any rate, tried all of that, done that, been there in the original GOD EXISTS thread. People are simply afraid of a discussion of religion. Whereas I agree that one can drive others away, it is also true that we have a responsible to witness. I don't browbeat, but I also don't suffer fools or entertain disrespect born out of ignorance and a complete lack of couth, either. Besides, at the end of the day that sees the Lord returning, playing footsies with them is not going to help them. Nor is straddling the fence. Not accusing you of this, because I don't know you, but I dislike and disagree with Reverends portraying Christianity as something one can "Take it or leave it." Being a Reverend is a calling. I simply don't think the Lord would call someone who is lukewarm or afraid to step on toes. You have to step on a lot of toes to get many people in church. It does not imply browbeating or disrespect. If you are not stepping on any toes, may be because there are no toes in church to step on.

Surely you recognize this forum as an opportunity for you to witness which I believe comes with the territory and responsibility of being a Reverend??? You have whacked me for my inadequacies, which I agree are many. Now how's about a little correcting of us all. Or are you going to leave your admonition of me for the non believers to. . .misconstrue? As you and I both know they shall. I attempt to broach the subject of God and I have not shied away from putting my belief out there. At least I have tried, my many inadequacies and all.

I invite a few words from you on the subject.

Have you read any of the original thread? I tried it your way, which is also my way. I've completely give up on it. I was not raised to he confrontational. I wasn't raised to be walked over either.

And finally, I have never ever tried to force religion on anyone else. I was simply looking for a pleasant discourse on the existence of God.

I contemplated the title quite a bit before settling on what I did, as I explained in the original thread. The title got many a goat. However, one title I considered was . . .

Does God Exist?

IMO, that was disrespecting God himself, and my own belief system to question that which my faith has answered. Faces with a choice of offense to God or man was a no brainer to me.

I'd really like a discourse on the mathematical beauty of God existing. I won't hold my breath on that one!

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Son of GOD EXISTS
Post by Imaginos1892   » Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:11 pm

Imaginos1892
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:24 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

cthia wrote:The Austrian mathematician Gödel left behind a theory in 1978 that God must exist. The theory was proven in 2013 by a formal system of proofs.

For any mathematical proof to be valid, ALL of the postulates and axioms it is based upon must be true. Did these two computer scientists rigorously verify ALL of them? Because several of them look pretty suspect to me. Or, since they were only doing an exercise to demonstrate how far computer hardware has come in the last 40 years, did they just input Godel’s framework without checking anything for veracity? Since their primary interest was in the mathematics, not the existence or non-existence of a god.

I can believe they proved the math. That is a pretty straightforward matter once the terms and conditions have been established.

HOWEVER: Any mathematical proof is only valid within the abstract realm of mathematics. In order to claim that it has any relevance to the real world, you have to also prove that every aspect of your mathematical model has the necessary correlations to reality.

Otherwise, as The E said, it’s just a lot of meaningless mathematical wankery. Of some academic interest to mathematicians, but useless to most everybody else.

cthia wrote:Yatta yatta yatta. And the cow jumped over the moon.

Oh, my, what a cogent and persuasive argument. Whatever shall we do?

cthia wrote:"Suffering fools, Batman."

"The proof is simply too much for you Robin, boy blunder."

And this is why it is so painful to argue with fundies. When we call them on their bullshit, and demand proper evidence for their outlandish claims, they resort to infantile name-calling. Hoping, I suppose, that we will find it so tiresome we simply give up in disgust.
———————————
When someone does a foolish thing, you should say it is a foolish thing. They may still continue to do it, but at least the truth is where it needs to be.
Top
Re: Son of GOD EXISTS
Post by Imaginos1892   » Sat Aug 04, 2018 6:05 pm

Imaginos1892
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:24 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

cthia wrote:You non believers swear by statistics and science. Yet the majority of mankind believe in some kind of higher power.

Yet you nonbelievers choose to ignore that bit of statistics??? Statistics which is a branch of your science that you hold so dear above all else. I suppose you simply don't really trust your science after all. Or respect it either.

Statistics is actually a branch of mathematics, which is not the same thing. I suspect you know that, and are just trying to be a pain.

And we don’t distrust statistics, or 'ignore that bit', or even disagree with your assertion. We simply know that it is irrelevant. The uninformed opinions of a bunch of ignorant fools have no bearing on whether your god does or does not exist. No matter how many fools there are. FACTS DO NOT DEPEND ON OPINIONS. Unfortunately, for far too many people, opinions do not depend on facts, either. That is the problem.

cthia wrote:'Course, I don't blame you. Man has never invented an instrument to work on the metaphysical.

If your hypothetical ‘metaphysical realm’ can produce real, observable effects in the real universe, those effects can be measured and analyzed scientifically.

If it can’t, it makes no difference to us whether it exists or not. It is unable to affect us in any way.
———————————
Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it. Those who do remember history are doomed to watch everybody else repeat it.
Top
Re: Son of GOD EXISTS
Post by Annachie   » Sun Aug 05, 2018 2:24 am

Annachie
Admiral

Posts: 2436
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

Dilandu wrote:
cthia wrote:About not believing in the statistics leg of science that most of mankind believe in God.


Which God exactly? There are many of them, you know.
Some estimate are as high as 320,000,000 gods.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: Son of GOD EXISTS
Post by dscott8   » Sun Aug 05, 2018 7:44 am

dscott8
Captain of the List

Posts: 734
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 6:17 am

Time and again, humanity returns to this debate, which will never be resolved because the opposing sides disagree about what constitutes "evidence".
Top
Re: Son of GOD EXISTS
Post by The E   » Mon Aug 06, 2018 8:52 am

The E
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Bielefeld, Germany

cthia wrote:Finally, a respectful post practicing the art of real discourse that I can joyfully engage.


Interesting. Thank you for confirming that you are not interested in discussing things with people who fundamentally disagree with you.

Man, I can just smell the rational discourse and logic....

Totally agree. I shared the fact that I am trying to deliver that proof in the form of science, something they can understand and trust.


Except we seem to have a better understanding of Science than you. Seriously, if it takes me only a few seconds to understand the limits and restrictions of the sort of proof you intend to provide, I don't want to know what deeper fallacies someone who is actually good at math and logic can find.

And when it comes to trust: Trust has to be earned. So far, I have seen enough of you to understand that you cannot be trusted to deliver factual, accurate information; Everything you do will always be tainted by the fact that you consider noone to be your intellectual equal.

If I am wrong, I have nothing to lose but a great big pie in the sky. If they are wrong they lose quite a bit. That's a very big bet to make without at least trying to hedge it by having an open mind.


What happens if you find evidence of god, but it turns out that it's actually Allah? Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Humanity has revered gods in many shapes and forms; the assumption that out of all of them, christianity is the one that got it all correct is rather small.

OTOH, the responsibility to prove the most important belief system of mankind false is a responsibility that non believers have to themselves. We are responsible to ourselves for ourselves. I cannot drag someone to heaven with me. Or drag them out of hell.


You go prove your belief system, then. Right now, all you're doing is proving ours.

I have a lot of respect for the quiet, personal faith and confidence in their faith that Exidor has. Living your best life and helping others to live theirs is always going to be a more effective tool to proselytize than any number of mathematical proofs.

Not "must prove." I already know. More like, interested in proving. And in case of typo, that is prove God does exist.


And yet, you definitely feel the urge to toil away on your basement cray that you definitely have, to get angry and dismissive at random people on the internet for disagreeing with you, to dig up "evidence" for your beliefs and to defend that evidence vigorously. This is all the behaviour of a person with something to prove (I could also list your constant need to remind us of how rich you are or how smart and successful your family is here).

At any rate, tried all of that, done that, been there in the original GOD EXISTS thread. People are simply afraid of a discussion of religion.


Demonstrably not true.

In fact, remember that whole thing where you were absolutely convinced that asking god for proof of his existence was to invite disaster upon oneself?

Whereas I agree that one can drive others away, it is also true that we have a responsible to witness. I don't browbeat,


LOL

but I also don't suffer fools or entertain disrespect born out of ignorance and a complete lack of couth, either. Besides, at the end of the day that sees the Lord returning, playing footsies with them is not going to help them. Nor is straddling the fence. Not accusing you of this, because I don't know you, but I dislike and disagree with Reverends portraying Christianity as something one can "Take it or leave it." Being a Reverend is a calling. I simply don't think the Lord would call someone who is lukewarm or afraid to step on toes. You have to step on a lot of toes to get many people in church. It does not imply browbeating or disrespect. If you are not stepping on any toes, may be because there are no toes in church to step on.


Ah, yes, that good old-time religion, with the fire and the swords and the crusades and DEUS VULT, that's exactly your jam, right?

Surely you recognize this forum as an opportunity for you to witness which I believe comes with the territory and responsibility of being a Reverend???


His words are more compelling to me as an argument for taking up the faith than yours are. At the very least, he's being honest about his inability to use the methods of science to confirm what he knows in his heart to be true and thus lets his heart do the talking instead of trying to do something that is flat out impossible.

You have whacked me for my inadequacies, which I agree are many. Now how's about a little correcting of us all. Or are you going to leave your admonition of me for the non believers to. . .misconstrue? As you and I both know they shall. I attempt to broach the subject of God and I have not shied away from putting my belief out there. At least I have tried, my many inadequacies and all.


While I am reasonably sure that this post will, in your mind, constitute proof of your little prophecy here, know that it isn't.

Have you read any of the original thread? I tried it your way, which is also my way. I've completely give up on it. I was not raised to he confrontational. I wasn't raised to be walked over either.

And finally, I have never ever tried to force religion on anyone else. I was simply looking for a pleasant discourse on the existence of God.


Then go to a safe space filled with fellow believers where you will not be challenged by anyone. Or talk to your family, which never seems to disagree with you. Don't go on the open internet and expect people to just let you be when you want to be ~edgy~.
Top
Re: Son of GOD EXISTS
Post by gcomeau   » Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:56 am

gcomeau
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm

dscott8 wrote:Time and again, humanity returns to this debate, which will never be resolved because the opposing sides disagree about what constitutes "evidence".


I would say rather only one side seems to understand the concept of how evidence even works...
Top
Re: Son of GOD EXISTS
Post by Exidor   » Tue Aug 07, 2018 2:09 pm

Exidor
Lieutenant (Junior Grade)

Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 5:32 pm

Dilandu wrote:So:

God is supposed to be omnipotent. So, could the omnipotent god create a stone that he - omnipotent god - could not lift?


Oh, I've seen the answer to this one: "Yes - then he'll lift it anyway."

>chuckles<
Top
Re: Son of GOD EXISTS
Post by Exidor   » Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:20 pm

Exidor
Lieutenant (Junior Grade)

Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 5:32 pm

cthia wrote:Totally agree. I shared the fact that I am trying to deliver that proof in the form of science, something they can understand and trust.


And that is issue by itstelf - how do you intend to prove the existance of an immaterial being by using material methods?

Further quotes will be following your user ID in actual quotes, as I'm having issues with some of the coding here...

(cthia) "I accept it as truth."

And that, IMO, is as far as the truely honest believer should go - that we accept as true the existence of God, regardless that we can offer not physical proof for same.

(cthia) "If I am wrong, I have nothing to lose but a great big pie in the sky. If they are wrong they lose quite a bit."

"They" however, are not your responsibility. We all follow our own paths to God; each person's path is unique to that person. We all are the sum of our experiences, and what lead you or I to God will not necessarily lead others to God.

(cthia) "OTOH, the responsibility to prove the most important belief system of mankind false is a responsibility that non believers have to themselves."

"Most Important" is a subjective assessment, to my mind.

But that aside, the appearance is that you are not asking that of them - rather, you appear to be asking them to prove it to you.

And is it truely the case, that they must do so? Taking another belief system into consideration, is it my responsibility to prove to myself that (for example) Shiva, Brahma & Vishnu do not exist simply because I don't believe they do?

(cthia) "We are responsible to ourselves for ourselves. I cannot drag someone to heaven with me. Or drag them out of hell."

And yet, you have given the appearance of trying to do just that.

(cthia) "People are simply afraid of a discussion of religion."

Hesitant for the most part, I'll agree. But looking at what happens too often - I can't blame them for being hesitant. I've been witness to the flamewars of the past in several on-line forums. There again, I've also been witness to quite a few civil discussion on the topic as well. But simply because you want discourse on religion does not mean others must.

(cthia) "Whereas I agree that one can drive others away, it is also true that we have a responsible to witness."

Ah, there's another point where people disagree - what it means to witness. :) For some, it's corner others and "thump the Bible".

I simply try to live my life in such a way as to please my Creator, IAW my understanding of His commandments and call.

(cthia) "I don't browbeat,"

Browbeat: To bully in an intimidating, bossy, or supercilious way.

I think you really need to step back and take an objective look at how your posts have appeared - because to me, supercilious does seem an apt description.

(cthia) "Besides, at the end of the day that sees the Lord returning, playing footsies with them is not going to help them."

And again, you appear to be taking responsibility for their salvation, when it is only your own that you are in responsible for.

(cthia) "Nor is straddling the fence."

Indeed, something I have been accused of. Mostly by those that dislike that I'm not a "fire and brimstone" kinda Reverend, but that's alright - it's only words.

(cthia) "I dislike and disagree with Reverends portraying Christianity as something one can "Take it or leave it."

So, would it be your preference that Reverends go about every day getting in the face of others, telling them they are damned if they don't follow the Bible (whatever version), screaming that only they are the path to God?

Jesus is quoted by John as saying, "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him"...

Seems to say that man must first be drawn to religion by God, not dragged there by man. >shrug< Your mileage may vary, but that seems to require a minister to be inviting, not off-putting. There is, to me, a difference between inviting someone to God, and conscripting them.

(cthia) "You have to step on a lot of toes to get many people in church."

I tend to apologize when stepping on toes (mostly because I have two left feet).

(cthia) "If you are not stepping on any toes, may be because there are no toes in church to step on."

Or, perhaps, that God called upon me to do just as I am doing. No, I'm no Joel Osteen, with a television flock and a mega buck church building... but I am everything to the little flock that I am responsible for and to.

(cthia) "Surely you recognize this forum as an opportunity for you to witness which I believe comes with the territory and responsibility of being a Reverend?"

IMO, simply interacting with others is my opportunity to witness - regardless of when I'm using my title.

(cthia) "You have whacked me for my inadequacies,"

If you feel whacked... 'twas not my intent. As I stated, I was only sharing a different point of view on the matter (as indicated by qualifiers such as "I believe" & "To me"), though I did recognize I was drifting towards a seminary mode towards the end.

(cthia) "Now how's about a little correcting of us all."

Now, how do you expect me to "correct" anyone at all when I've stated from the beginning that I cannot prove to anyone the validity of my own beliefs?

(cthia) "Or are you going to leave your admonition of me for the non believers to. . .misconstrue?"

That you consider the sharing of my point of view on the matter as an admonishment... seems to indicate you are granting me authority in your demonimation over you that I have not demonstrated or claimed, simply with the use of the ecclesiastical address "Reverend".

I am a simple Minister - to my little flock I teach, lead services and provide spiritual guidance. Should you desire correction, it is your minister you need seek counsel of. Should you feel admonished... I would still say to seek counsel of your minister. I am not he.

(cthia) "As you and I both know they shall."

Some will, some won't, and it's entirely possible that a few or so skipped over everything past "Reverend" in the expectation of a fire and brimstone sermon. Since God has not given me the power to force a particular mindset on anyone, I think I can be forgiven for not controlling the thoughts of others.

(cthia) "I attempt to broach the subject of God and I have not shied away from putting my belief out there."

Noted. And if that's what you felt God truely called upon you to do - Bravo!

(cthia) "I invite a few words from you on the subject."

I offer only the wise words of one of my own teachers: "You cannot force a person to believe in God."

(cthia) "Have you read any of the original thread?"

I glanced at the first few posts, thinking it may have been a discussion of religion as presented in David's Honor Harrington series (I admit to liking how he presents The Church of Humanity Unchained, among others) or perhaps another series (I've not started his Safehold series), but when that wasn't the case, I marked it as read and went on to other topics.

(cthia) "And finally, I have never ever tried to force religion on anyone else."

You might want to consider the point of view that requiring another to disprove your own religious belief with the expectation / belief that she/he cannot is de facto an attempt to force religion on another.

(cthia) "I was simply looking for a pleasant discourse on the existence of God."

And the forum of a Science Fiction writer was, in your point of view, an ideal place to find it?

(cthia) "Does God Exist? IMO, that was disrespecting God himself, and my own belief system to question that which my faith has answered"

>ponders< The question "Does God Exist? is not (IMO) disrespectful of God, but does require one to present material evidence to explain an immaterial presense. We interact with our Creator more on an experiential basis than material. A better question might have been, "How do you experience God?" though even that might not attract the kind of conversation you say you wished to have.

(cthia) "Faces with a choice of offense to God or man was a no brainer to me."

Hmmm.. I'm not following how it was a "better choice" to offend the very same individuals you say you wish to engage in civil discourse, but then again, I'm not the one taking the position that presenting a title intended to start a conversation as being offensive to my Creator.

(cthia) "I'd really like a discourse on the mathematical beauty of God existing. I won't hold my breath on that one!"

Nor would I (because I have a fondness for O2).

While I enjoy the beauty of Fibonacci Spiral Art and fractal geometric illustrations, I don't consider Mathematics as anything other than a scientific tool we humans use to try to understand our universe.
Top
Re: Son of GOD EXISTS
Post by Annachie   » Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:00 pm

Annachie
Admiral

Posts: 2436
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

"No, I'm no Joel Osteen, with a television flock and a mega buck church building"

For obvious reasons, as you seem to actually be religious and not a con man.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top

Return to Free-Range Topics...