Does God exist?

[InfiniteNow]

Oh for goodness sakes, I have other things to do then my days reading every post.

 

To all of you, I would like to say, only your definition of God doesn't exist. My definition of God does exist. God is the substance of universe, and we know of it by studying it.

 

And you've been asked to prove it.

 

Nature is nature.

The universe is the universe.

 

Calling it god offers no value, obfuscates things, and is unecessary.

 

 

Either prove that this is all "god," or show how it's necessary. During your time here at Hypography, you've repeatedly failed at both.

 

Simply repeating an invalid assertion offers it no additional validity.

[Thunderbird]

I disagree with you here. Actually, I think I have a very broad perspective in this matter, as I have in my lifetime the experience of transitioning from devout fundamentalist christian to athiest. I understand the importance of religion. Without it, we would probably still be barbarians. But we have to move on...

 

I agree. They are worth knowing because it tells us something about ourselves.

 

No disagreement here. No doubt Hitler and Osama Bin Ladin are products of this tendency. All I'm saying is that if we can can ever succeed in excreting all the bullshit we've inherited from the past, (not saying that at one point it wasn't usefull to get us where we are today), we will be a lot better off and avoid all kinds of problems going forward.

 

I have to disagree with the assumption that this rout of being inside the fundamentalist mind set then becoming of a non believer atheist gives one a perspective of religion, quite the contrary. To me they are two extremes of an identical world view.

 

Defining ones own personal identity though exclusionary paradigms.

 

The fundamentalist are defined by motives of exclusion and self interest. A black and white view point of good and evil. They and they alone know the truth and will be rewarded for it. When one comes down off this self deluded, self righteous pinnacle they tend to hold a grudge against all religious idealisms as all black, in the truth is they are still in the mind set of the dark side of self interest.

 

On the other hand, If one's intention is inclusionary, to define our place in the world though educating one‘s self with the intention of understanding. by studying others paradigm without the lens of black and white judgment, but to seek an understanding of what it means to be human.

This is a true religion of helping people in need with genuine compassion, not in the fundimentist view of a final reward, but rather an immediate response to suffering. This acceptance coming from the realization that others are not separate from ones self, but part of an inseparable whole. The truth that what one suffers another feels as well , what one accomplishes others also benefit. This reality of connectedness was not invented by religion, it invented religion. Just as any power of nature however we need to learn to use it for the benefits of the whole and not for a selected few.

[Overdog]

I have to disagree with the assumption that this rout of being inside the fundamentalist mind set then becoming of a non believer atheist gives one a perspective of religion, quite the contrary. To me they are two extremes of an identical world view.

 

Hmmm...I really don't see the world view of religious fundamentalists as being an extreme form of atheism, or vice versus, if I understand you correctly.

 

To me the question "Does God exist" is one I cannot answer. But I need some evidence now before I will believe that he does. That was not always the case.

[modest]

Defining ones own personal identity though exclusionary paradigms.

 

The fundamentalist are defined by motives of exclusion and self interest. A black and white view point of good and evil. They and they alone know the truth and will be rewarded for it. When one comes down off this self deluded, self righteous pinnacle they tend to hold a grudge against all religious idealisms as all black, in the truth is they are still in the mind set of the dark side of self interest.

 

Are you going to paint all atheists with this brush? Seems a bit of an exclusionary paradigm to me.

 

On the other hand, If one's intention is inclusionary, to define our place in the world though educating one‘s self with the intention of understanding. by studying others paradigm without the lens of black and white judgment, but to seek an understanding of what it means to be human.

 

And atheists cannot do this why? Why would a personal belief in no god prohibit the world view you advocate here? Fact is, it does not. If you asses objectivly I believe you will come to that conclusion. And, Overdog has a point... what you say here: "by studying others paradigm without the lens of black and white judgment" he is better able to do having lived that life.

 

This is a true religion of helping people in need with genuine compassion, not in the fundimentist view of a final reward, but rather an immediate response to suffering.

 

You are completely confusing one's religion or atheistic beliefs with thier philosophy on humanity, compassion, learning, and understanding.

 

Atheism is an opinion, not a philosophy. Sometimes religious beliefs are an opinion as well. You can't lump them all in one pile and put a label on them like your doing.

 

~modest

[Thunderbird]

Hmmm...I really don't see the world view of religious fundamentalists as being an extreme form of atheism, or vice versus, if I understand you correctly.

Paradigms that originate from an opposing Paradigms. Defining personal identity though what they deem as negative then incorrectly deducing the opposite is positive

To me the question "Does God exist" is one I cannot answer. But I need some evidence now before I will believe that he does. That was not always the case.

This is a prime example of the merchant mentality that I am addressing. life is to be lead as a journey though mystery and discovery, anything else, such as inane absolutes, and definitions are trivial details. Life is an adventure only when we do not know how the story is going to unfold and that we are given plenty of choices of how we can participate. Its not the paradigms built between poles of good and evil that reflect life to its fullest possible potential.

I believe mystery and knowledge are the true complimentary opposites in the equation of discovery of life’s potentials, and what it means to be human.

[Thunderbird]

Are you going to paint all atheists with this brush? Seems a bit of an exclusionary paradigm to me.

No, I was just making the point of inclusion and exclusion. I noticed you excluded the fundamentally religious veiws in the above accusation. :)

 

 

And atheists cannot do this why? Why would a personal belief in no god prohibit the world view you advocate here? Fact is, it does not. If you asses objectivly I believe you will come to that conclusion. And, Overdog has a point... what you say here: "by studying others paradigm without the lens of black and white judgment" he is better able to do having lived that life.

If your an atheist with no ax to grind against others beliefs,... great, however you are not considering the currently thread in the context of the statements made about painting all religious beliefs as stupid superstition. Hello ! Maybe you should reread the thread and get a little perspective.

[modest]

No, I was just making the point of inclusion and exclusion. I noticed you excluded the fundamentally religious veiws in the above accusation. :)

 

 

 

If your an atheist with no ax to grind against others beliefs,... great, however you are not considering the currently thread in the context of the statements made about painting all religious beliefs as stupid superstition. Hello ! Maybe you should reread the thread and get a little perspective.

 

Wow! That's very brave of you Tbird. You edit your quote of my post so it doesn't mention religion then comment on how I didn't include religion when I made a point of it. How do you even think you can get away with that?

 

Furthermore - please comment on the content of what I said which is most agreeable.

 

And to be clear: I know a couple fundamental Jesus freaks who are a model of understanding, compassion, and tolerance.

 

~modest

 

EDIT:

 

Retrospectively, Thunderbird has done nothing wrong in his method of quoting me above. There is of course nothing wrong with cropping quotes, and I indeed did not address religion in the part he quotes, as he says.

[Thunderbird]

Wow! That's very brave of you Tbird. You edit your quote of my post so it doesn't mention religion then comment on how I didn't include religion when I made a point of it. How do you even think you can get away with that?

 

Furthermore - please comment on the content of what I said which is most agreeable.

 

 

 

~modest

As far as the accusation of unfair editing of context... your going to have to point it out specifically. I think you are trying to muddy the waters, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt by allowing you to post the said offence. go ahead.....

 

And to be clear: I know a couple fundamental Jesus freaks who are a model of understanding, compassion, and tolerance.

You are being anything but clear.

 

That was what Jesus taught.. He was not a fundamentalist however. Just to clear the mud out of that pool of thought.

[modest]

You are completely confusing one's religion or atheistic beliefs with thier philosophy on humanity, compassion, learning, and understanding.

 

Atheism is an opinion, not a philosophy. Sometimes religious beliefs are an opinion as well. You can't lump them all in one pile and put a label on them like your doing.

 

I noticed you excluded the fundamentally religious veiws in the above accusation. :naughty:

 

And to be clear: I know a couple fundamental Jesus freaks who are a model of understanding, compassion, and tolerance.

You are being anything but clear.

 

A theistic or atheistic person can have the philosophy you outline above. You are confusing a personal belief in god with a person's attitude toward compassion, understanding, tolerance and the things you mention. You accuse atheistic and theistic people of not being able to have such a philosophy. This unfairly groups people together based on one opinion they have.

 

As an example: I know a couple Jesus-freaks who are very compassionate and understanding people. They don't hold others views and opinions as below their own. It is possible - as I said before - to disagree with someone and yet understand, be tolerant of, and learn from their point of view.

 

Once again, please comment on the content of what I'm saying, I think it is most agreeable.

 

~modest

[Thunderbird]

Yea I'll coment on the post above look where you placed this my quote....

 

Originally Posted by Thunderbird

I noticed you excluded the fundamentally religious veiws in the above accusation

Then you placed quotes above it that were not the quote I used.

I will not agree with any statement of you are making when you're obvious intent is to misrepresent my own.

Ether develop some integrity or Go **** yourself, your choice *******.

[REASON]

Ether develop some integrity or Go **** yourself, your choice *******.

 

I take it this is your idea of integrity. Pathetic!

 

Is your goal to screw up every thread you post in?

 

You won't be missed around here.

[modest]

Yea I'll coment on the post above look where you placed this my quote....

 

Then you placed quotes above it that were not the quote I used.

I will not agree with any statement of you are making when you're obvious intent is to misrepresent my own.

Ether develop some integrity or Go **** yourself, your choice *******.

 

You cropped my post to leave out what I said which explicitly included religious beliefs then claimed I didn't include religious beliefs. Truth is, I don't think either an affirmative belief in God nor an atheistic view can prevent a person from having the philosophy you outline.

 

I think that's a valid point. Again, can you comment on the content of what I'm saying?

 

~ modest

[Thunderbird]

I take it this is your idea of integrity. .

 

Yea actually it is........ BTW go **** yourself.:naughty:

[Pyrotex]

Okay guys, settle down.

 

As a Moderator, I am breaking up this tussle, okay?

 

Modest, this may have started back in post # 434, where it appears that you interpreted a statement of fundementalist motive for a slur on atheists. In the heat of the argument, mis-reading posts becomes very easy.

 

Tbird, next time, if someone misquotes you, give them a neg-rep or call a Moderator. Don't wait until you're angry enough to call names. Oh, and you might want to read over your posts and edit them for clarity and non-ambiguity before you hit that "Post" button. On rare occassions, you're prone to pulling the trigger before you aim. Word to the wise, and all that. :naughty:

 

Okay. Both of you go take a cold shower. When you return, try not to tear each other to ribbons. It scares the nubies.

[Thunderbird]

okedokly :naughty:

[modest]

:naughty:

[Reaper]

Either prove that this is all "god," or show how it's necessary. During your time here at Hypography, you've repeatedly failed at both.

 

 

 

 

No iNow, you just simply don't get it. Since you cannot disprove the existence of pixie fairies, they therefore must exist and/or a very credible idea nonetheless.

 

 

Simply repeating an invalid assertion offers it no additional validity.

 

Oh my! You clearly aren't well versed in the philosophy of truthiness, are you :naughty:.