What's your definition of "God"?

[Atom]

Originally Posted by Zap

I think I may have seen the same thing. It was truly mind blowing.
Even more so, when you realize that (as difficult as it is to grasp his concepts the first time you hear them) he created the concepts from a basic understanding he had about how everything fits together.
We understand it, sometimes with difficulty, while he just understood it and was able to relay that information to the rest of us without having it fed to him first. Amazing!

It was the one where Einstein was shown as a cartoon character on a rocket traveling at the speed of light etc.. and he returned to earth to see his twin brother appear older. Had some billiard balls in there somewhere too .. it was aired several years ago. I told myself, you're going to watch this over and over till it sinks in! lol

[mabel01]

God is my shelter..

[bytech]

Welcome to SHAM Atom. I know self acclaimed 'atheists' that swallow 'Ask and It's Given'. Just as I don't judge all religious people on extremists, I ask that others do not judge me on confused 'but ' atheists.

Atheism is NOT a belief. It's the _absence_ of belief. An absence of belief in light of no reason for believing.

Anyone claiming I am insecure in 'not knowing' is a fool. I'm the first to say I don't know, but understand that not all unknowns are equal. It's the religious that are generally uncomfortable with 'not knowing', so often assigning a reason, and purpose to everything... so sure that Jesus wants this or that, that god hates fags or Islam, that Mary was a virgin, that this universe was made so we could let our egos expand it. The religious certainty is quite sickening, a disease really.

[Atom]

Originally Posted by bytech

Welcome to SHAM Atom. I know self acclaimed 'atheists' that swallow 'Ask and It's Given'. Just as I don't judge all religious people on extremists, I ask that others do not judge me on confused 'but ' atheists.

Atheism is NOT a belief. It's the _absence_ of belief. An absence of belief in light of no reason for believing.

Anyone claiming I am insecure in 'not knowing' is a fool. I'm the first to say I don't know, but understand that not all unknowns are equal. It's the religious that are generally uncomfortable with 'not knowing', so often assigning a reason, and purpose to everything... so sure that Jesus wants this or that, that god hates fags or Islam, that Mary was a virgin, that this universe was made so we could let our egos expand it. The religious certainty is quite sickening, a disease really.

I'll try to not judge.

I enjoy reading your posts.


Something happened to me one time that I can't explain. All I know is that it changed me completely in an instant. I'll never forget it.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by bytech

Atheism is NOT a belief. It's the _absence_ of belief. An absence of belief in light of no reason for believing.

You're confusing atheism with agnosticism. Atheists belief and have faith in the belief that God doesn't exist. And insofar as they believe this without any proof, and make the statement that God does not exist without the slightest proof of the same, we have to classify this as blind faith.

[bytech]

Originally Posted by John Scott

You're confusing atheism with agnosticism. Atheists belief and have faith in the belief that God doesn't exist. And insofar as they believe this without any proof, and make the statement that God does not exist without the slightest proof of the same, we have to classify this as blind faith.

Nope, not confusing agnosticism with atheism. Not believing in something there is no proof for is as much a belief as bald is a hair colour. Any claim without proof can be dismissed without proof, and no belief is expressed anywhere in doing so.

Originally Posted by Dulce

Yeah I agree with John Scott when he said that believing in God doesn't mean that you are mentally weak. Saying that you believe in God actually takes up a lot of courage and strength.

Having faith in god without proof takes as much "courage" as having faith in another's claim - without proof - that your spouse is cheating on you. Can you imagine the kind of life you'd have if you were to have blind faith in all other areas? This 'faith thing' only 'works' in religion... only that it doesn't.

The blind faith proposition is an absurd one and there is nothing admirable about it. If a god exists and prefers that kind of blind servitude and superstition over a life without, there is nothing I can admire about him.

[bytech]

Originally Posted by John Scott

You're confusing atheism with agnosticism. Atheists belief and have faith in the belief that God doesn't exist. And insofar as they believe this without any proof, and make the statement that God does not exist without the slightest proof of the same, we have to classify this as blind faith.

John, by your theory, we'd all have to be tooth-fairy agnostics, or guilty of blind faith. The same goes for every other god ever invented by mankind. Your theory only seems to work if you leave it in the sandbox of your own beliefs.

[bytech]

My answer to the thread question:
God is the sound people make when they're too tired to think anymore.

[shahbaz419]

God is God ~ We folks can't reach upto his caliber .. Those who believe that God does't exist are really silly people ~~ they are putting their legs in Hell themselves~~

[krahmaan]

I'll give the def. a go...



Giver Of Destiny.

Giver Of Death.

Giver, Giver, Giver...

Of ALL THAT EXIST.

[shahbaz419]

Originally Posted by krahmaan

I'll give the def. a go...



Giver Of Destiny.

Giver Of Death.

Giver, Giver, Giver...

Of ALL THAT EXIST.

Please use capital letter for God!! HuH!!

[upsonians]

We can't define GOD.AS its something out of our knowledge.

[TheFriend]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God

God is the hope.........

[John Scott]

Not believing in something there is no proof for is as much a belief as bald is a hair colour.

Not believing is agnosticism. Perhaps English is not your native language? When you go beyond not believing into stating as as fact that God doesn't exist, you are stating a belief.

Any claim without proof can be dismissed without proof, and no belief is expressed anywhere in doing so.

LOL!!! You just walked into a philosophy 101 (junior high school level) trap. Let's now apply your principle to your own statement. You stated that God does not exist. Do you have proof that He doesn't exist? No. So, by your own statement -

Any claim without proof can be dismissed without proof, and no belief is expressed anywhere in doing so.

we must dismiss your belief and believe the opposite. Which is, that God exists. LOL!!! Funny how that works, eh?

Now if you had actually thought it through, you would know that statements without proof may very well be true. We have no proof for most of history. We have no proof that humans evolved. What we do have is a lot of things pointing in that direction. Unless you have had a DNA analysis done, you do not have proof that your parents are indeed your parents. What you do have is a lot of indications that they are.

Proof is, as anybody who has studied philosophy in the slightest can tell you, few and far between. We believe most of what we believe because it makes the most sense.

This 'faith thing' only 'works' in religion... only that it doesn't.

You have blind faith in your belief that God doesn't exist. Not an ounce of proof, but you believe nonetheless.

The blind faith proposition is an absurd one and there is nothing admirable about it.

I agree 110%. It's idiotic, if you ask me.

[bytech]

Originally Posted by John Scott

Not believing is agnosticism. Perhaps English is not your native language? When you go beyond not believing into stating as as fact that God doesn't exist, you are stating a belief.

Only works in a black and white universe. I can say I hate the colour red, and you still know nearly nothing about what I believe. The agnostic says "not enough info to make a decision on", the atheist says "darn unlikely, i'll live my life assuming the non-existence until new evidence comes in".

LOL!!! You just walked into a philosophy 101 (junior high school level) trap. Let's now apply your principle to your own statement. You stated that God does not exist.

Where did I say "God does not exist"? I know not of such thing, and make no claims toward it. Proof for god does not exists, just like none exists for Allah and Thor. How do you know which god to believe in? I'm a non-believer, for no grounds for believing exist. You read my posts the way you read the bible: take that which is nice and good from your perspective, dismiss the rest.

We have no proof that humans evolved.

Absolute rubbish. A total show stopper, John.
To dismiss mountains on evidence based on 'lack of 100% certainty', that's just bad science.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by bytech

Only works in a black and white universe. I can say I hate the colour red, and you still know nearly nothing about what I believe. The agnostic says "not enough info to make a decision on", the atheist says "darn unlikely, i'll live my life assuming the non-existence until new evidence comes in".

No, most agonostics believe one way or the other - they just know we do not have proof either way.

Originally Posted by bytech

Where did I say "God does not exist"?

You might want to look up the definition of atheist.

And weren't you just saying that the very fact that we don't have proof that God exists, is of itself proof that God doesn't exist? You should pick a theory and stick to it.

I'm a non-believer, for no grounds for believing exist.

Non belief is one thing, but a minute ago you were stating that you God doesn't exist. Are you having trouble choosing between agnosticism and atheism?

Originally Posted by bytech

Absolute rubbish. A total show stopper, John.

If you had an education, you'd know it to be true. I'm sorry you feel so uncomfortable with uncertainty that you have to manufacture it. Most evolutionists I know, and I am one, do not have a problem with believing it based on the number of indicators we have, which is a lot.

To dismiss mountains on evidence based on 'lack of 100% certainty', that's just bad science.

No, we do not dismiss. Science is accepting a theory based on plausibility and indicators. There is a mountain of indicators that we evolved. May I ask where you're from? I find it hard to believe that you had a Western, science based education.

[swiftmed]

someone who doesnt exist

[TheFriend]

Originally Posted by swiftmed

someone who doesnt exist

Who knows?

[John Scott]

Tooth-fairy agnostics

Yes, does that make you uncomfortable? Does it make you uncomfortable that you do not have proof either way? So you randomly choose a story and call it fact without any proof?

Take a philosophy class. Or, cheaper, look up the definition of fact.

Agnosticism works. If you believe it doesn't, prove me wrong. You want to believe that God doesn't exist, go for it. You want to believe that the tooth fairy doesn't exist, go for it. You want to believe that the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist, go for it.

But if you want to call those beliefs facts, you'll have to provide proof. Where's the proof that the flying paste guy doesn't exist? If you ain't got any, then you lose the right to call it fact.

It's not a matter of whether or not God exists; it's a matter of standards for for truth. Before we became civilized, people could call anything they wanted "facts".

In this day and age, we have "education", "reason", "logic", and if you want to say state something as fact, you have to have proof to back it up. Is that a problem for you? Are you anti-proof? Should people just take your word for it because you're a nice guy?

[chicgeek]

Should this go into the "pawleeticks and srius stuffs" forum?