One person’s distortion is another person’s clarity. Refusing to change one’s mind in the face of evidence is not a strength, nor is declaring the intent to do so.
I have yet to see any clarity in your ‘view’ of ‘God’.
actually - I take that back - there was a brief bit of clarity (post 557) - but somehow, I don’t think its the ‘clarity’ you expected, or maybe it is - not sure anymore with you.
I think you must have a new definition, yet again.
It was the evidence that gave me belief in God. I am a practical man, and Causality convinced me of God, I do not agree with things coming into being without a cause. Morality convinced me of God, I just can’t, for the life of me, believe that morals came from a hot magic hole in space. Purpose lead me to believe in God, because I see no purpose in Natural theory. DNA totally convinced me of God, because I think something that complex , must come from something MORE complex. Speaking of Complex, increasing complexity convinced me of God, I see evolution and believe in it, and the way it increases in complexity is a stunning proof of God to me. I believe in God because the strong evidence of the Anthropic principles explain him to me. If proteins, DNA, positions of planets, temperture of the Sun, if any of these things were slightly off and not exactly as they are, we would not exist.
I believe in God because Biblical Archaeology has simply stunned me with its continuing facts. The Nag Hammadi Library, the Ain Dara Temple, Peters house, Hezekiahs tunnel, Simon the Cyrenians bones, Caiaphas bones, The writings of historians and our history. I believe in God because I have seen the works of great minds who believe in God, Like Blaise Pascal, John Ray, Isaac Newton, FrancisBacon: I believe in him and admire others who believe in him, like Martin Luther King, Tyler Perry, Abraham Lincoln, Jimmy Carter, Mel Gibson, Denzel Washington, Martin Sheen, Mark Waklberg.
I believe in God because I really admired and trusted my Mother, in my view, she was the wisest woman I had ever known, and she believed in God with all her heart, but never tried to sway my belief. I liked her principles and her way of thinking and living, and know those came from God’s influence in her life.
I believe in God because of science, and I believe even science began as a search for the divine. I like science because it explains many things, like how the Astrialian Koloa Bear just could not have created itself.
I believe in God because of Women; my observation of them and their ways; in my view, only a God could have made these lovely creatures.
None of whom believe in the god you claim to believe in. Yet another in a series of lists that pretty much don’t support the premise put forth. At this point, I’m not sure you could be trusted to list the days of the week accurately.
You said this before, but never answered - What did God come from?
If God (which must be complex in order to create DNA which is complex) - then it must have come from something ‘more complex’ - what is this , ‘super God’ ? If thats the case, where did ‘super God’ come from?
I think God came from himself; I think he created parts of himself, and I think he is a being that really is the fiber of existence himself. Which is why I view God’s anger and wrath far different than other believers do; God has to be careful, or he could crack the fiber of existence. I think he is the origin of himself, but his existence is like a circle, no beginning, no ending, just a continuim.
Why can’t DNA be explained the same way? Why must it ‘be created’ ?
‘It just came to be’
A great man once wrote about the water who was amazed that the hole it was in was just the right size to fit it. Ponder on that, grasshopper.
Why not be created? Why must it not be created? You begin to sound like " Whats the difference?" Well in the Anthropic Principle difference is greater than chance. The percise difference was planned and prepared and designed, but you cannot get percision with chance. In example; Chimps and humans are 95-96% the same in DNA. Human DNA has 3 billion letters ( base pairs). So what is a 2% difference out of 3 billion? Well its 60 million differences. What this means Simster is that a chimp or ape like creature would have to go through 60 million changes to their DNA to get to where its a human being. The DNA would have to evolve 60 million times, and make 60 million improvements. Now thats based on if, not the exactness of reality. There is no " If it just came to be." Life is percise.
No, in your case - its called ‘special pleading’
You’ve stated that "for something as complex as DNA to happen, something ‘more complex’ must have created it’ - if that were logically true - than your ‘creator’ must also have a ‘creator’.
Since your ‘creator’ can just ‘come to be’ - then your logic falls apart, and there is no longer a ‘reason’ for there to be a ‘creator for the complex to happen’.
You also don’t quite seem to grok the timetable for how evolution works - nor is there a requirement for ‘60 million’ improvements - nor does evolution always require a change to ‘make something more complex’ nor does it have to classify as ‘an improvement’.
I’d also like to see a cite for your numbers, etc - … based on your previous citations, I know how that will go.
I am indeed making an argument against Mickiel’s point and not yours. So i did not shift the goal posts…i actually backed your statement.
You mean your god created himself? So something can come from nothing?
You are just posting wrath without content.
The Hebrew Bible was assembled by the Jewish people. Nothing I have posted contradicts that point.
The phrase “Christian bible,” however, does not mean what you want to pretend that it means. The phrase refers to the collection of both Jewish and Christian texts that are presented as a single book. The phrase “Christian bible” does not mean that Christians own it. The phrase “Christian bible” does not mean that Christians wrote the whole thing. The phrase “Christian bible” is used simply to distinguish it from the Hebrew bible. The “Christian bible” certainly includes the Hebrew bible, but the phrase is used to indicate that it is the book that Christians use while the Hebrew bible, (or Tanakh), excludes the last 27 books that Christians include. (Note that at no point have I claimed that Christians wrote the whole bible. I simply pointed out that Christians are the ones who assembled the version that you are using, combining both the Tanakh and the New Testament into a single publication.
Being upset over a phrase because you place your own misinterpretation on what it means is counterproductive. You are welcome to get as mad as you wish, but it will not change the meaning of the phrase. You have quoted passages from a written work in an attempt to prove your beliefs.
If you claim that the only description of that book is “bible,” then any time you quote the New Testament you are open to being challenged because your text is not in “the bible.” Certainly, no Jewish scholar would accept a claim that statements by Paul or Luke are “in the bible.”
You are getting really worked up over a rather silly point–a point that only comes up because you put a meaning on a phrase that no one else would use in the same way.
I mean our God created parts of himself.
I am neither upset or mad, but hey, I don’t expect you to believe that either.
I am cool man. Cool with all of this.
The Bible does not say where God came from and how the Creator came to be.
There is a verse that says “no God was formed before Him”
**Isaiah 43:10 ** “YOU are my witnesses,” is the utterance of Jehovah, “even my servant whom I have chosen, in order that YOU may know and have faith in me, and that YOU may understand that I am the same One. Before me there was no God formed, and after me there continued to be none.
King James 21st Century version:
Ye are My witnesses,” saith the Lord, “and My servant whom I have chosen, that ye may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after Me
What formed means in the original Hebrew i still have to look up.
But i am not bothered about not knowing (yet) how the Creator came to be.
There are many things we don’t know but perceive to be here or be in effect.
That’s why mankind keeps asking questions and keeps researching stuff. No shame in not knowing everything, otherwise we can close all schools and laboratories.
I believe we will keep learning about God and his works for ever as he is dynamic. Isaiah 40:26
Doesn’t the universe keep expanding as well? It has no walls i’ve heard.
(Future of an expanding universe - Wikipedia)
If you want to think and equate things according to human standards and current scientific knowledge…
…you might have a very hard time understanding or explaining things that are (still) way out of your league.
What is time? Where did time begin? Did it have a begin? If so what was there before time began? Does time only exist for certain lifeforms or in certain places? Is there a dimension outside of time? Will time end?
These are not questions i expect anyone to answer. But they’re a nice example of what i mean.
Humility is a virtue. You were not around forever so maybe just maybe, you missed something and maybe it’s you that needs to catch up.
Yeah.
It would be nice if you would not make silly accusations while refraining from imposing odd definitions of terms that are not connected to reality, but whatever.
Hey man, we can only be conscious of , those things we are conscious of. Your not conscious of what I said about there being no such thing as the Christian bible. You think there is. And you think my disagreement of that is silly. I don’t think being Atheist is silly, I think its destiny. I think the bible was destined to be written, and destined to have the superior influence that it has. It is in no manner inferior, and no inferior forces can stop its message. There is absolutely nothing an Atheist can do about the biblical message, and its nothing Theist can do about Atheist and their message; in my view, both were preordained by God to exist, and stay as they are.
Two sides of the same coin. Two different fruits growing in the same tree.
Actually…Psalm 14:1 And Psalm 37:10 say something different.
As for atheists being around forever… Isaiah 11:9 gives a different view.
Just quoting.
So who created him? Who created the other parts? What evidence do you have of any of this?