Okay, Wings of Azrael, let's kick things off with a few simple questions so I know where you stand on theological matters.

1) Is there any scientific proof of God, as you interpret the term?

2) Where is God? If he exists outside materiel being, what is the nature of his realm?

3) Where does your intimate knowledge of God derive from? Epiphany? Or were the particulars of faith taught to you?

4) How would you describe God? Gimme just a few quick adjectives.

ALEX CHIU KNOW BIG SECRET GOD! HE KNOW OF KNOWLEDGE! HE TEACH YOU! NOW!

ALEX CHIU KNOW BIG SECRET! (http://www.alexchiu.com/philosophy/godandevil.htm)

quote:Originally posted by Kikey_Kikeowitz:

ALEX CHIU KNOW BIG SECRET GOD! HE KNOW OF KNOWLEDGE! HE TEACH YOU! NOW!



He also know secret of immoratality, click here to see! He teach you and help you become immortal too!

ALEX CHIU MAKE YOU IMMORTAL!!! NO LIE! (http://www.alexchiu.com/affiliates/clickthru.cgi?id=Dragon)

1) Is there any scientific proof of God, as you interpret the term?

Scientific proof of God? I see our existence and nature as proof of God. All the things of His creation are everywhere. That is enough for me. That's like me asking you if there is scientific evidence of no God? You can prove nothing of God based on science. He is unfathomable and beyond human comprehension.

2) Where is God? If he exists outside materiel being, what is the nature of his realm?

God is omnipresent. You could say He is everywhere but his technical home is the 7th heaven.

3) Where does your intimate knowledge of God derive from? Epiphany? Or were the particulars of faith taught to you?

Personal experiences as well as personal religious studies and meditation and prayer. Discussions with Rabbis, Priests, Imams and Mullahs helped with the proper ways of faith. Correct ways to pray, and the times, restrictions as fortold by God in religious documents, etc. I had faith in God before I converted to Islam. Islam just strengthened it to a point I didn't think was possible.

4) How would you describe God? Gimme just a few quick adjectives.

The Beneficient, The Merciful. The Possessor Of Power. The All-Knowing, The All-Seeing, The All-Hearing, All-Powerful. Lord Of The Universe, The Lord Of All. The Creator, The Sustainer. The Most High. He is Allah, besides whom there is no God.

give me scientific proof of why the universe BOTHERS to exist, or possible WHY is came into existance. The big bang is just how baby boy.

Doofnoil2.

The big bang theory is just what it says on the tin. Theory not proven fact. Before the big bang theory there was the steady state universe theory before that, you get the idea.

The big bang model makes many predictions. Any sound theory does.

That is, if the theory is correct, here is what we would expect to find as a result of it.

It was predicted that if the big bang theory was true, that all galaxies would appear to be moving away from a central point.

They are.

It was also predicted that there would be background radio waves from the bang, the "echo" of it so to speak.

Those waves that were predicted to exist have been found.

This is how a scientific theory develops. The more predictions it makes and the more accurate they are, the greater the chance of the theory being accurate is.

1) Our existence and nature are proof only of themselves. They do not tell us one thing about the force or forces that brought us about. Perhaps it was God. Perhaps it was random chance. I don't know, and more importantly, I don't claim to know in the absence of proof.

As for proof that God DOESN'T exist, surely you must be aware that it's quite impossible to prove a negative. This is why intellectual discourse places the "burden of proof" on the affirmative side of the debate. To use an example Dark Magneto once employed against me, can you prove that the universe wasn't created by the Almighty Bunny God?

2) If God is everywhere, how could he dwell in one particular place simultaneously?

3) Your search for spiritual truth, while certainly admirable in many respects, has yet to employ empirical logic at any level. Don't you think these rabbis, priests, imams, and mullahs might have a motive for their proselytizing? And did any of them give you any proof?

As for you, doofnoil, stop playing the semantics. Read my response to 1), as I've neither the time nor the patience to retype it.

quote:Originally posted by Armed&Angry:

As for proof that God DOESN'T exist, surely you must be aware that it's quite impossible to prove a negative.

2) If God is everywhere, how could he dwell in one particular place simultaneously?

As for you, doofnoil, stop playing the semantics. Read my response to 1), as I've neither the time nor the patience to retype it.

I think you need to reread my post, I didn't ask you to DISPROVE God's existance. I merely posed a question of my own.

1) here read this http://www.graveyardofthegods.net/articles/cantprovenegative.html

2) easy, If god is everywhere, then for it to be in one place, God also must be everything. Is god here, sure, is god there sure, yet again semantics.

3) get over yourself

[This message has been edited by Doofnoil2 (edited 09-07-2003).]

1) Don't even try that shit, the connotation of your question was clear, and if you meant something else you should phrase it better. I'm not a goddamn mind reader. As for that article, it really just proves my point here, doesn't it? I suppose the idea that you can't prove a negative depends on your definition. By my definition I'm right, and the article even states explicitly that my position is correct. So what the hell is your point?

2) If God is everything, i.e. by definition possessed of all traits at all times, how is that in any way different from nonexistence?

3) Get over myself? I'm just arguing, dipshit. You're the one who decided to come into this thread, point out an extremely minor foible of logic that actually has nothing to do with the veracity of my argument, and tout yourself as the fount of all knowledge. Maybe you should get over yourself?

3A:

1) Our existence and nature are proof only of themselves. They do not tell us one thing about the force or forces that brought us about. Perhaps it was God. Perhaps it was random chance. I don't know, and more importantly, I don't claim to know in the absence of proof. As for proof that God DOESN'T exist, surely you must be aware that it's quite impossible to prove a negative. This is why intellectual discourse places the "burden of proof" on the affirmative side of the debate. To use an example Dark Magneto once employed against me, can you prove that the universe wasn't created by the Almighty Bunny God?

Everything was created by Allah. Here is the only proof I need...

Unto Allah belongs the soverignty of the heavens and the earth, and all that they contain; and He has power over all things. Holy Quran 5:120

Surely We have revealed the Reminder, and surely We are its Guardian. Holy Quran 15:9

Surely it is a bounteous Quran, In a book that is protected, Which none touches save the purified ones. A revelation from the Lord Of The Worlds. Holy Quran 56:77-80

Nay, it is a glorious Quran, In a guarded tablet. Holy Quran 85:21-22

3A:

2) If God is everywhere, how could he dwell in one particular place simultaneously?

And certainly We created man, and We know what his mind suggests to him -- and We are nearer to him than his life-vein. Holy Quran 50:16

And Allah's is the East and the West, so whither you turn thither is Allah's purpose. Surely Allah is Ample-giving, Knowing. Holy Quran 2:115

They seek to hide from men and the can not hide from Allah, and He is with them when they counsel by night matters which please Him not. And Allah ever encompasses what they do. Holy Quran 4:108

Seest thou not that Allah knows whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth? There is no secret counsel between three but He is the fourth of them, nor between five but He is the sixth of them, nor between less than that nor more but He is with them wheresoever they are; then He will inform them of what they did on the day of Resurrection. Surely Allah is Knower of all things. Holy Quran 58:7

SAHIH BUKHARI, BOOK 54: Beginning of Creation--Volume 4, Book 54, Number 429:

Narrated Malik bin Sasaa:

The Prophet said, "While I was at the House in a state midway between sleep and wakefulness, (an angel recognized me) as the man lying between two men. A golden tray full of wisdom and belief was brought to me and my body was cut open from the throat to the lower part of the abdomen and then my abdomen was washed with Zam-zam water and (my heart was) filled with wisdom and belief. Al-Buraq, a white animal, smaller than a mule and bigger than a donkey was brought to me and I set out with Gabriel. When I reached the nearest heaven. Gabriel said to the heaven gate-keeper, 'Open the gate.' The gatekeeper asked, 'Who is it?' He said, 'Gabriel.' The gate-keeper,' Who is accompanying you?' Gabriel said, 'Muhammad.' The gate-keeper said, 'Has he been called?' Gabriel said, 'Yes.' Then it was said, 'He is welcomed. What a wonderful visit his is!' Then I met Adam and greeted him and he said, 'You are welcomed O son and a Prophet.' Then we ascended to the second heaven. It was asked, 'Who is it?' Gabriel said, 'Gabriel.' It was said, 'Who is with you?' He said, 'Muhammad' It was asked, 'Has he been sent for?' He said, 'Yes.' It was said, 'He is welcomed. What a wonderful visit his is!" Then I met Jesus and Yahya (John) who said, 'You are welcomed, O brother and a Prophet.' Then we ascended to the third heaven. It was asked, 'Who is it?' Gabriel said, 'Gabriel.' It was asked, 'Who is with you? Gabriel said, 'Muhammad.' It was asked, 'Has he been sent for?' 'Yes,' said Gabriel. 'He is welcomed. What a wonderful visit his is!' (The Prophet added). There I met Joseph and greeted him, and he replied, 'You are welcomed, O brother and a Prophet!' Then we ascended to the 4th heaven and again the same questions and answers were exchanged as in the previous heavens. There I met Idris and greeted him. He said, 'You are welcomed O brother and Prophet.' Then we ascended to the 5th heaven and again the same questions and answers were exchanged as in previous heavens. there I met and greeted Aaron who said, 'You are welcomed O brother and a Prophet". Then we ascended to the 6th heaven and again the same questions and answers were exchanged as in the previous heavens. There I met and greeted Moses who said, 'You are welcomed O brother and. a Prophet.' When I proceeded on, he started weeping and on being asked why he was weeping, he said, 'O Lord! Followers of this youth who was sent after me will enter Paradise in greater number than my followers.' Then we ascended to the seventh heaven and again the same questions and answers were exchanged as in the previous heavens. There I met and greeted Abraham who said, 'You are welcomed o son and a Prophet.' Then I was shown Al-Bait-al-Ma'mur (i.e. Allah's House). I asked Gabriel about it and he said, This is Al Bait-ul-Ma'mur where 70,000 angels perform prayers daily and when they leave they never return to it (but always a fresh batch comes into it daily).' Then I was shown Sidrat-ul-Muntaha (i.e. a tree in the seventh heaven) and I saw its Nabk fruits which resembled the clay jugs of Hajr (i.e. a town in Arabia), and its leaves were like the ears of elephants, and four rivers originated at its root, two of them were apparent and two were hidden. I asked Gabriel about those rivers and he said, 'The two hidden rivers are in Paradise, and the apparent ones are the Nile and the Euphrates.' Then fifty prayers were enjoined on me. I descended till I met Moses who asked me, 'What have you done?' I said, 'Fifty prayers have been enjoined on me.' He said, 'I know the people better than you, because I had the hardest experience to bring Bani Israel to obedience. Your followers cannot put up with such obligation. So, return to your Lord and request Him (to reduce the number of prayers.' I returned and requested Allah (for reduction) and He made it forty. I returned and (met Moses) and had a similar discussion, and then returned again to Allah for reduction and He made it thirty, then twenty, then ten, and then I came to Moses who repeated the same advice. Ultimately Allah reduced it to five. When I came to Moses again, he said, 'What have you done?' I said, 'Allah has made it five only.' He repeated the same advice but I said that I surrendered (to Allah's Final Order)'" Allah's Apostle was addressed by Allah, "I have decreed My Obligation and have reduced the burden on My slaves, and I shall reward a single good deed as if it were ten good deeds."

3A:

3) Your search for spiritual truth, while certainly admirable in many respects, has yet to employ empirical logic at any level. Don't you think these rabbis, priests, imams, and mullahs might have a motive for their proselytizing? And did any of them give you any proof?

What would be their gain in me, one person, joining their church, synagouge or mosque? They were all most helpful with anything I asked. Proof? All the proof I need to is to look outside and see the sun and the trees and everything else. In those things are signs for those who reflect.

In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of the night and day, and the ships that run in the sea with that which profits men, and the water that Allah sends down from the sky, then gives life therewith to the earth after its death and spreads it in all (kinds of) animals, and the changing of the winds and the clouds made subservient between heaven and earth, there are surely signs for a people who understand. Holy Quran 2:164



[This message has been edited by Wings Of Azrael (edited 09-07-2003).]

Look, WOA, you're gonna have to give me something other than "Allah is all the proof I need." How do you know Allah did it? Maybe Zeus did. Maybe Baal did. Maybe nobody did. Similarly, when arguing with atheists, you can't expect quoting the Quran to be terribly effective, can you?

Firstly, you can not convince someone who has no shred of faith or belief in anything. You can only share the knowledge you have been given. I seek the bounties and blessings of my God, therefore I do all the good I can. Telling other people of what I know, is the good I am talking about. It is their choice whether to remain in unbelief or not. Some people are destined not to believe. Not believing helps them in their attainment of the bounties of this life. This life is nothing short of a trial to show who is of faith and steadfast. Others don't believe because they are just too blind to see the signs, or perchance think that they have extraordinary vision and see through the signs and try to explain them away. Well they are the ones who will be explained away on the day of Judgement. Whosoever rejecteth the signs, rejecteth Allah. And whoever rejects God, God will reject him.

obviously you didn't read that article and definitions aren't subject to interpretation, they the DEFINE, just accept that YOUR definition is wrong and move on.

I'm not trying to be high an mighty here, nor do I "tout my self as the fount of knowledge". I'm just providing proof of my argument which is what you're asking for, and is most certainly needed for empirical logic.

And your question of how being in possession of all trait at all times is different from nonexistance, it is impossible for something(God) to be in possession of something else(all traits at all times) without first being in existance. To merely argue that something(A)is in possession of something(B) else(which is what you have argued) automatically proves that something(A) exists.

and WOA gave concrete proof from the islamic faith which clearly defines Allah, what other type proof do you need to argue with athiests?



Also how can the inability to prove something's existance translate into proof of nonexistance? If there were no recorded data for the existance of apples and you said to me "prove the existance of apples" how could I? And if I couldn't prove their existance would that mean that they don't exist or merely that neither of us have the technical skills to prove our respective theorys. This conersation is "fruitless" so to speak.

Zeus was a pagan deity and Baal was an idol. They are not worthy of worship. The one true God is. And with the revelation of the Holy Quran, truth came.

And say: The Truth has come and falsehood vanished. Surely falsehood is ever bound to vanish. Holy Quran 17:81

"Converts tend to be extremists and hurl quotations at you", book of faithless.

WOA: You simply cannot convince someone who doesn't believe in God by quoting His holy book. I don't accept the validity of the Quran, so how do you expect me to simply change my mind about it? Again, I ask you to prove to me that God does exist. As for the worship of Zeus and Baal, they're adherents were just as fervent as you are over Allah. Surely they'd call you ridiculous and your God unworthy. How do you know that you're correct?

Doofnoil: "Secondly, a person who rejects an assertion does not need to provide any justification for it." That's a direct quote from your precious article. Okay, so you're victorious in a minor matter of procedure, yet your own article states what I've been stating all along - that the onus of proof rests with the believer. Given this, what the hell do you think you've proved? And, actually, what the hell is your position anyway? You've somewhat contradicted yourself; clear it up for me.

Perhaps you could share with me your definition of "concrete proof," as quoting surahs from the Quran hardly seems "concrete." For all we know, Mohammed wrote it all himself and then ran out and declared it a revelation. If you can't prove a divine entity's existence, let alone the divine origin of a "holy" book, how can you possibly expect the text of such a book to be valid in an argument based on empirical logic?

As your own article stated the unbeliever does not have to provide any proof that God doesn't exist. The burden of proof rests with the believer. Add to this the entirely ridiculous "apple analology" you offer. If there was no technical data to prove the existence of apples, and nobody had ever even SEEN an apple, isn't it entirely possible that in this little dreamworld you've constructed, apples DON'T exist? How do you know that they DO exist, if nobody's ever seen one?

quote:Originally posted by Faithless:

"Converts tend to be extremists and hurl quotations at you", book of faithless.

Bah. I'm as far from extremist as they come.

I don't care what you believe, do whatever you want, I say. Makes no difference to me, just leave me alone and let me believe in what I want to believe.

What this whole argument sounds like is this...it seems as if there are lost souls out there desperately seeking God and searching for some kind of scientific evidence to convince themselves to believe. And only when they see this scientific proof do they think that they will believe. And the answer is no. Religion is not science. And just because you may see proof of something, that in and of itself doesn't give you faith in it, even though you will try to convince yourself so. You have to faith in God from the beginning, and then you will see more than you could ever imagine.

I'm getting tired of this goddamn broken record. Are you, in the above statement, admitting that there is absolutely no empirical evidence to support the existence of God, in any way, shape or form? Because if you can just admit that, we could wrap this up.

P.S. I'm still not sure why you have such condescension towards the pursuit of fact.

Oh, hell.

I'll admit it for him.

quote:What should be posted by Wings of Azrael:

No, there is no scientific evidence proving the exitence of the commonly defined "God."

The Prophet(pbuh) says that He does, but A&A(pbuh) says he doesn't. Kikey(pbuh) doesn't give a shit either way, and the members of Totse(pbut) just want to let this topic die.

There. Maybe now, we can just agree to disagree.

I'd prefer to actually stick to some sort of logic in the goddamn argument, but... you're the future president.

quote:Originally posted by Wings Of Azrael:

What this whole argument sounds like is this...it seems as if there are lost souls out there desperately seeking God and searching for some kind of scientific evidence to convince themselves to believe.

And then there are some who are rather disgruntled by Christians and Muslims (mainly) who judge them (these some) based on their (the believers') brand of religion. And it gets downright ugly at times. So these some want to know why any given individual would choose to believe any given book or books to the extent that they (the believers) make others unhappy. To us some, making others unhappy is counterproductive to any idea of Heaven on Earth - if one believes in that possibility to begin with.

[This message has been edited by Amaterasu (edited 09-07-2003).]

You've already made up your mind on this subject through your OBVIOUS attempts to prove god's non existance in lieu of supporting facts that it does. You have access to recorded history in books on the matter. I suggest you read them. Read something, anything. Check out St. Aquina if you want a catholics definition, though i doubt you will.

"The word “god” hasn’t even been defined and the nature of belief in that god has not been described; these must take place before any substantial discussion about the nature of God can begin" from my precious article

"The person rejecting the assertion needs to provide nothing at all" standard athiest practice, also from my precious article.

Clearly, it’s possible to prove a negative statement. The real problem here is clearly the nature of the positive statement being refuted. When a person asserts that God exists, he does not specify the nature of God – that is, is God small, large, blue, red? And where is he? Of course it is not possible to prove that God does not exist, if “God” is a thing that has no definition, no characteristics, and no location. In fact, you can prove just about any kind of negative you can think of – except for (surprise!) the non-existence of mystical beings. When you get right down to it, the statement “you cannot prove a negative” is really just a different way of saying “You can’t prove me wrong because I don’t even know what I’m talking about.” also from my precious article

****Logical statements have to abide by certain rules and restrictions*** you should really look into this one to brush up on your "empirical logic".

to wit "In order for a statement to be logical, it must be falsifiable, which means that it has to be presented in such a way that it could be proven incorrect. A statement is not logical if it cannot be tested to make sure it is true. The existence of God is not a logical question at all, and is therefore nonsensical" also from my precious article.

as you can see this conversaion is retarded and comes down to a baby(you) pissing an moaning when people try to play by your extremely flawed "empirical logic" which really makes no damn sense. somebody shut this topic down, beccause us people who believe in a god have to run away for fear of this man's "empirical logic"

Get off of you precious computer, step out side and get some sun.

What is god? how can he be all around? wouldnt that mean that he is apart of every living organism in the universe? since he supposedly created the universe too...

Personally i think when people say 'god' created this, that and the other, etc..., i just think fuck it, its chance, that could of happened or it couldnt, i believe in nothing, that everything is by chance, that there is no fate, no 'god', no nothing, only chance, you believers just want something to believe in, a higher 'power', something you believe to be greater and more powerful than yourself, why do this? why believe that something is greater than yourself without proof? isnt this kind of getting yourself down in a certain way?

or it could be that they _need_ to believe that we arnt all alone on this planet, circling around in space oblivious to what is ahead of us and that we are just cells and atoms held together by the big daddy of forces--gravity, and nothing else. their 'god' could be something or someone--always there for them when they are in shit (please god...), someone to talk to when they are lonely (funny how he never talks back...ignorant bastard http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif)), and when people claim that they heard a voice or seen a vision, they are deemed insane by the majority, or were under the influence at the time of the event, maybe some people dont want to _know_ he exists, maybe they want an element of doubt while they continue to exist? fuck knows.

eh?

And along with "what is God? Isn't he...," we can ask, "Is God 'he?'" <shrug> Maybe God is a S/He. Who knows?

quote:Originally posted by Armed&Angry:

I'd prefer to actually stick to some sort of logic in the goddamn argument, but... you're the future president.

He's a moslem. Why kind of logic could you possibly expect?

*laughs really fucking loudly at kikey* Let's just end it with this...the believer(that would be me) will never be able to convince a hardcore unbeliever of God because the unbeliever will always doubt any sign unless God Himself were to come and visit you. And then you would probably find someway to explain that away too. The unbeliever (that would be whomever) will never be able to prove the believer otherwise of God based on the fact of 'if it can't be heard, seen, smelled, touched, or tasted...then it must not exist'. God is omnipresent and omnipotent. He is a spirit and His works are seen everytime you open your eyes regardless of whether or not you believe. To each his own destination as I am through with this discussion. And, btw....GOD is not a she. Blasphemer.

God is also not a he.

God is an all. Or, perhaps he is a none.

Or maybe he's everything and nothing simultaneously.

very good reply kikey, "The dance of Brahman"

quote:Originally posted by Armed&Angry:

I'd prefer to actually stick to some sort of logic...

Logic?

Fundamentalists have no use for such frivolties.

Apparently...

Look, doofnoil, that little "response" of yours on page 1 was truly a gem. You start off by declaring that I'm hell-bent on not believing in God; this couldn't be further from the truth. Until about a year ago, I was a dedicated and practicing Lutheran Christian. I decided to challenge my beliefs by simultaneously continuing my studies of the scriptures, while also searching for competent agnostic and atheist literature to play Devil's Advocate (literally, WOA would say). The simple fact is that the unbelievers won - they supported their arguments extremely well, while the validity of the Bible is essentially based on my pastor's claim that the Bible is valid. I did not set out to destroy the idea of God in my own mind. The proponents of theism did this themselves. Hence, your attempts to paint me as some pre-teen anarchist rebelling against anything and everything seems, well, more than a little desperate.

You then go on to state that the term "God" doesn't even have a definition. How, pray tell, does this support your argument? Are you actually asking me to believe in something that has no discernable meaning?

And I'm still not sure why you're still quibbling over the particulars of that article. As you'll note in my earlier post - if you'd read it - I grudgingly conceded to you the fact that it is possible to prove a negative. Yet you ignore the much weightier fact, stated within the article itself, that you believers possess the burden of proof in its entirety. Please drop the straw man argument and admit this simple fact, which you yourself pointed out.

From here you bring things down further, declaring this whole discussion to be "retarded," and demand that it be closed. Looking for a way out, doofnoil?

And here's what really threw me: "Get off of you precious computer, step out side and get some sun."

What does this have to do with the existence or nonexistence of God? I go outside and enjoy the sun between ten and twenty times a day, usually to indulge in a tasty Lucky Strike filtered. But what is your point here? Are you suggesting that my atheism is merely due to cabin fever? I'm afraid it's simply not the case.

So let's try this again. Can you offer any proof whatsoever for the existence of God, as your own infernal article says you must? If not, just say so. It was a hard thing for me to say, too, doofnoil, but I did eventually get it out.

Now bumpify!

Ive given up trying to prove my God, I am content to know. Armed, good luck on your search bro, remember faith is spiritual. The spirit is illogical and yet "it is". My personal experience "proves" to me an all benevolent God. (Im still stuggling with the omnipotent and omniscient bit). And they say a man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument.

Your last sentence carried much truth. That is why I never feel I am at the losing end of a discussion on religion. If it were not for God, I would not be alive today.

quote:Originally posted by Brazilian Waxman:

And they say a man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument.

Because the man with "experience" is blinded by his unthinking interpretation of it. Isn't it possible, just possible, that maybe your feelings of spiritual ecstacy are in fact a firing of neurons and release of chemicals acting as a defense mechanism?

seriously guys......

you all have different opinions.....

these opinions are of your own minds which you hold in high regard......

i do it myself..

just understand this....mind is an interpreter...you are all dependant on your minds and your minds interpretation of things......your interpretations are not necessarily right and true...for they are dependant on knowledge you have gathered about things during your life....they are dependant on your charachter and what you think you need to get peace of MIND....and most of all they are egotistical......

KNOW THAT the truth need not be interpreted..... after all it is just the truth....therefore just look without your minds....

all this arguing is good at solving boredom...but dont think that it is ever going to get you anywhere.....

Shut the hell up.

Your pronouncements are not based on fact. You decry virtually all beliefs, both theism and atheism and any conceivable alternative, as inferior to your beliefs. You totally deny any idea of objective reality, and you seem to think that any sentence is made sensical by the addition of "truth" as the subject noun. Just shut the hell up, you're moron posing as a wiseman.

Armed, you'll have to level with the fact that you're dealing with people that probably haven't had an extensive look at the finer intracacies of human psychology and probably don't know of things like confirmation bias (http://skepdic.com/confirmbias.html), self-indoctrination, pareidolia (http://skepdic.com/pareidol.html), retroactive shoehorning (http://www.skepdic.com/shoehorning.html), shotgunning (http://www.skepdic.com/shotgun.html), communal reinforcement (http://www.skepdic.com/comreinf.html), subjective validation (http://www.skepdic.com/forer.html) (aka. "The Barnum effect"), selective thinking (http://www.skepdic.com/selectiv.html), glossolalia (http://skepdic.com/glossol.html), etc.

You're right. I'm gonna go get hammered and holler this stuff at sorority girls.

quote:Originally posted by Kikey_Kikeowitz:

God is also not a he.

God is an all. Or, perhaps he is a none.

Or maybe he's everything and nothing simultaneously.

Everything is true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true, false and meaningless in some sense... <grin>

Hail Eris. All Hail Discordia.

[This message has been edited by Amaterasu (edited 09-09-2003).]

OK, granted! Im not learned in the literature of psychology and sociology, or any other field of study that relates to what is known as human spirituality, but guess what. I DONT CARE!! For once, I FEEL secure, and I can contend with my struggle. Maybe youre right. Maybe I am delusional, my heart tells me Im not. But on the off-chance that you are right, I wouldnt change a thing. My life is all the better for my "delusion".