- This topic is empty.
- Posts
OK, just a matter of time before Stu starts manifesting his hate toward any belief in God.
Waiting…..
Let's imagine that video again, this time set to the Benny Hill theme tune and replacing the cute baby picture with a photo of one of god's guinea worms being pulled from someone's skin.
Stuart
Here is a perfect demonstration of your bias forming your conclusions. Your conclusions really have very little to do with science and logic from what I have observed.
You use your imagination to twist things to make them look bad, instead of seeing things as they are.Scripture says that only the pure will see the Kingdom. The lack of purity is filth. When a lens is filthy it is hard to see. When water is pure it is transparent and you can see clearly and for a good distance.
If you look at something good and see bad, maybe the bad is in your eye/soul and not at the thing you are looking at. In scientific terms that is a possibility and if you deny that and say I don't see it that way then, that could be seen as supporting what I am saying.
As it is written:
Titus 1:15
To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted.Did you actually make a point in that post t8?
I think you were probably writing more interesting stuff when you were an atheist.
Don't you think?
Stuart
Ha ha. You proved the point.
To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure.
If you can't see the point, then what does that say regarding the above? I don't expect you to know the answer by the way.
You are an interesting case because you are proof of bias at work.
You aptly demonstrate that bias, not science forms the belief and I think you are not to different to most atheists.
I was the same once. I hated the idea of God and was anti-God. In fact I argued with believers as you do, and I used evolution, and other ideas to back up my arguments. But in hindsight, I can see that I never gave any competing theories or ideas a chance because I was extremely biased against any belief in God, therefore I was never going to find God in that state.
Then in an honest moment I prayed and offered the unknown and unbelievable God to demonstrate to me that he was real. Deep down I think I really believed that God didn't exist, but God worked with the one microbe of faith I had at that time.
I got my proof and it is no theory to me any more because it is real. I tasted reality and it was good and every thing came into balance once I was on the path of truth.
I wouldn't give up my faith in God for anything material because what I have is worth more than all teh physical riches in the world.
But of course there is always the possibility that you will never know any better because you appear to be a slave to your bias and it controls you and tells you what you are and what you are not allowed to consider.
But you will know the truth when you die, but then your life will be reviewed and there will be nothing you can change. Once your life is lived it is recorded. You can't rewind and erase the tape.
We can neither prove nor disprove gods, as you yourself have correctly stated in the past.
What kind of bias are you applying to choose specifically the Judeo-christian god over all the others?
I am entirely unbiased in my atheism. All gods are the product of human delusion. No bias there at all.
Stuart
Quote You are an interesting case because you are proof of bias at work.
You aptly demonstrate that bias, not science forms the belief and I think you are not to different to most atheists.
I was the same once. I hated the idea of God and was anti-God. In fact I argued with believers as you do, and I used evolution, and other ideas to back up my arguments. But in hindsight, I can see that I never gave any competing theories or ideas a chance because I was extremely biased against any belief in God, therefore I was never going to find God in that state.
As an atheist, you were completely unbiased, in other words.Quote Then in an honest moment I prayed and offered the unknown and unbelievable God to demonstrate to me that he was real. Deep down I think I really believed that God didn't exist, but God worked with the one microbe of faith I had at that time.
So you developed a biased, unsupported faith in the unbelievable. Interesting.Quote I got my proof and it is no theory to me any more because it is real. I tasted reality and it was good and every thing came into balance once I was on the path of truth.
Proof is only possible in mathematics, but since 2=7 and 3.1415926=3 and for trinitarians 3=1, with god any old thing is allowed as proof.Quote I wouldn't give up my faith in God for anything material because what I have is worth more than all teh physical riches in the world.
I appreciate the riches I have, and while they are all material in some sense, the dearest have no monetary value.Quote But of course there is always the possibility that you will never know any better because you appear to be a slave to your bias and it controls you and tells you what you are and what you are not allowed to consider.
You protesteth too much. Indeed what have you lost as a consequence of the hasty purchases, borne of momentary dissatisfaction, made during your religious shopping trip? The one that didn’t show any biases… oh wait, no it did in fact.Quote But you will know the truth when you die, but then your life will be reviewed and there will be nothing you can change. Once your life is lived it is recorded. You can't rewind and erase the tape.
Your view of life and death, with its celestial round the clock surveillance mentality, is too brutal to have any credibility in such a beautiful universe.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ April 28 2009,23:08) Quote But you will know the truth when you die, but then your life will be reviewed and there will be nothing you can change. Once your life is lived it is recorded. You can't rewind and erase the tape.
Your view of life and death, with its celestial round the clock surveillance mentality, is too brutal to have any credibility in such a beautiful universe.Stuart
That is wrong Stu. I will prove it.When we look at the stars we see them as they were many billions of years ago. We look at light to see the past. Therefore light has recorded the events of the universe after the stars lit up and we can play that light in sequence to create a movie of the universes progression. Are you part of the universe? Is there light reflecting out into space that has you recorded therein? If the physical universe records it, then how much more does a creator know?
Obviously we are blinded by small things in the universe by reason of the bright and big things competing with the light of smaller things. That said, it is not like we cannot overcome that barrier. So it may be possible one day to observe exoplanets as they were in the past. Do we live on a planet and if so, could someone observe you from elsewhere in the future?
Quote That is wrong Stu. I will prove it. When we look at the stars we see them as they were many billions of years ago. We look at light to see the past. Therefore light has recorded the events of the universe after the stars lit up and we can play that light in sequence to create a movie of the universes progression. Are you part of the universe? Is there light reflecting out into space that has you recorded therein? If the physical universe records it, then how much more does a creator know?
That is called begging the question, which is a well-known logical fallacy. You stand proudly I see, in the tradition of Augustine and Anselm in using circular logic to “prove”, well, nothing at all actually.Quote Obviously we are blinded by small things in the universe by reason of the bright and big things competing with the light of smaller things. That said, it is not like we cannot overcome that barrier. So it may be possible one day to observe exoplanets as they were in the past. Do we live on a planet and if so, could someone observe you from elsewhere in the future?
“Do we live on a planet…”?I live on earth, t8. I cannot speak for you.
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ May 05 2009,16:57) Ha ha. So you have been and are being recorded. 
Recorded by the brutal celestial dictator you worship? The one that sits in front of a bank of billions of security cameras obsessively waiting to record evidence that demonstrates how unfit you are as an object created by 'him'?Nice.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ May 06 2009,03:29) Quote (t8 @ May 05 2009,16:57) Ha ha. So you have been and are being recorded.
Recorded by the brutal celestial dictator you worship? The one that sits in front of a bank of billions of security cameras obsessively waiting to record evidence that demonstrates how unfit you are as an object created by 'him'?Nice.
Stuart
Or how fit.You seem to go to the negative by default.
Quote (t8 @ May 06 2009,14:33) Quote (Stu @ May 06 2009,03:29) Quote (t8 @ May 05 2009,16:57) Ha ha. So you have been and are being recorded.
Recorded by the brutal celestial dictator you worship? The one that sits in front of a bank of billions of security cameras obsessively waiting to record evidence that demonstrates how unfit you are as an object created by 'him'?Nice.
Stuart
Or how fit.You seem to go to the negative by default.
I love the christian, and hold out hope for him. It is the delusion under which he suffers that I am negative about.Paul frowns at you missing the chance to deride humans for being human.
Stuart
I am not the one taking a purposeful risk of losing my soul Stu. You need hope, but your belief denies you the right to have it.
Quote (t8 @ May 07 2009,16:08) I am not the one taking a purposeful risk of losing my soul Stu. You need hope, but your belief denies you the right to have it.
What is a soul? How do you know for sure you still have yours?Stuart
It is probably impossible to prove to you that I have or am a soul, since the proof you require is physical and the soul is not physical. The soul is the ghost in the machine so to speak. It is the real person or the inner person.
When my body is dead, my life will still exist. My body is merely a vehicle that ties me to the physical realm. Think of the body as an earth suit. We tend to think it enables us to see, but it is actually a filter that only allows us to see in part. We cannot for example see ultraviolet or infrared with our naked eyes, and the spiritual realm is completely hidden from our senses even more so.
When you die, you (your soul) leaves your body and it is a common theme in NDE that the dead person is often shocked when they see their body lying dead. I know one person and I met another who both had death experiences and they both explained to me what it was like to leave the body and return.
I probably cannot prove that I have a soul with my 5 senses which are part of my physical body. But I could say that my body is in a constant state of renewal and yet I am still me. My body is composed of different cells than the body I had when I was 5 years old, and I am still me. I guess you could rebut this with the argument that we are 16 trillion brain cells that become less as they die off, but there is now evidence that brain cells are replaced too. Although I don't think they all are.
Try to think of your soul as you who experiences things in the body and has deeper experiences when sleeping. When you sleep your body is resting and in a less active state. In that state you often experience memories and sometimes you have amazing experiences that cannot be put into words because there are no words to describe some things that you experience.
Death is separation from your body. The second death is destruction of the soul, the real you.
Your soul is you and it is the part that God can redeem. Your body will perish.
You list one experience you say is an effect of having a soul, and that is a so-called out-of-body near-death experence. Other than that, which is a product of the workings of a stressed brain that is also capable of decieving you with the vividness of a dream, the soul appears to be like Spinoza's god: a concept of state of mind, not a thing of any kind. You say it leaves the body and I say there is no such thing. We are both asserting things about which we can know nothing. I don't think that is a just basis for making religious claims for what will happen to a person on his death: the concept of soul is just a handle with which the power-seeking religionist attempts to hold on to people for their own political ends.
I have a soul in the sense of Spinoza's god. It is nothing more than a metaphor for self.
Stuart
Yes it is self.
What you believe that self to be is your choice.
I know that my body is a vehicle for myself.
You are obviously not aware of that, and not being aware doesn't negate something, just as not being aware of the fifth dimension negates that.
However, it does stand to reason that there is a lot more to what you would know and experience. My experience is obviously different to yours. But I believe and by reason of that, I can be open to things that you cannot be open to by reason of your belief structure which limits such things.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
