Searching for GOD...

[Sebastian Toe]

I might have bin.

..more like a has-bin.

[Sebastian Toe]

You appear to have succumbed to the Devil's tactic of convincing people that he does not exist.

I've asked this before but you seem unable or unwilling to respond,
How does the Devil manifest his tactics?
What exactly is it that he does?

[wigginhall]

He's behind you!

[Roses]

He's behind you!

OH NO HE'S NOT!

[Alan Burns]

I've asked this before but you seem unable or unwilling to respond,
How does the Devil manifest his tactics?
What exactly is it that he does?

I consider our thoughts to be of a spiritual nature, because they defy any physical definition or description.  We have no means of detecting the sources which influences our thoughts, but I am very much aware that temptation to do what we know to be wrong is a reality.  The Christian bible is quite clear of the source of such temptation.  I do not know the mechanism for how we become tempted, but I have faith in the divinely inspired word of the Christian bible.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Theistic arguments are clear.

He's done it again!

[torridon]

I consider our thoughts to be of a spiritual nature, because they defy any physical definition or description.  We have no means of detecting the sources which influences our thoughts, but I am very much aware that temptation to do what we know to be wrong is a reality.  The Christian bible is quite clear of the source of such temptation.  I do not know the mechanism for how we become tempted, but I have faith in the divinely inspired word of the Christian bible.

Stuff and nonsense.  Just because thoughts are hard to define and measure does not mean they 'defy' physical definition. Clearly thoughts are physical, otherwise how could we be building mind control technologies.  The origins or triggers for thoughts are often fairly obvious too - I am writing this post now in response to one from you.  No magic required for that, just cause and effect.

[Enki]

What makes you say it is non sensical?

Simple. If I don't believe in a god, how can I be said to be running away from said god?

Theistic arguments are clear.

That would depend on which variety of god that they were talking about and whether it could be described successfully. Unfortunately you have such a huge degree of obfuscation and disagreement where god is concerned.(e.g. AB's'we can't aspire to know the mind of God') that lack of clarity seems to be the order of the day.

Non theistic arguments are incomplete and I would have thought by dint of that nonsensical.

An interesting conjecture on your part...that if something is incomplete it must therefore be nonsensical. It isn't a view that I share, and certainly not one that I was making.

Your post is also full of the positively asserted.

Such as? As far as I can tell I am simply stating that the idea that running away from God is, for me. a nonsensical idea. If you wish to suggest that my lack of belief is an assertion, I would disagree with you on two counts. 1) It's a personal position. Others may take an entirely different position. I am not attempting any 'confident statement of fact or belief' at all. 2) It's not even positive, it's negative.

I look forward on your post entitled How and why I can completely disregard theism in the face of knowing I cannot be completely certain that it isn't the deal.

Why on earth should I do that? I don't completely disregard theism. I simply have no particular belief in it in any of the forms that I know about. Why should I actually believe in any particular god that you care to name simply because there remains a possibility that this god(or any other that you don't care to name) actually exists, especially as I can't find any evidence that it exists except in the minds of people?

What's lacking or ignored is this....there are theisms which propose we are alienated from God and that is why he seems hidden, non existent, angry uncle in the attic or as Wigginhall said monstrous

You can stick with your idea that we are alienated from God, if you want or if it comforts you in some way. It means nothing to me though as I don't have any sense of alienation whatsoever. I can't see why I would or should? As far as I can tell I have always been completely at ease with myself and religion of any kind has always only played a cultural part in my life.
.

[Stranger]

I consider our thoughts to be of a spiritual nature, because they defy any physical definition or description. 

So you assert, but all your attempts to justify this have been self-contradictory, fallacy ridden nonsense that offers no actual definition or description at all.

[Sebastian Toe]

I consider our thoughts to be of a spiritual nature, because they defy any physical definition or description.  We have no means of detecting the sources which influences our thoughts, but I am very much aware that temptation to do what we know to be wrong is a reality.  The Christian bible is quite clear of the source of such temptation.  I do not know the mechanism for how we become tempted, but I have faith in the divinely inspired word of the Christian bible.

...short version:
"its magic innit"?

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

You appear to have succumbed to the Devil's tactic of convincing people that he does not exist.

But you appear to have succumbed to Eutychia, the Greek goddess of happiness, who convinces people that she doesn't exist. How else though would you explain raindrops on roses
and whiskers on kittens?   
 

The evidence of evil is all around us, yet secular thinking leads to a conclusion that there is no such thing as evil.

No it isn’t. Things that are undesirable or considered immoral happen a lot, just as things that are desirable or considered moral happen a lot too. Deciding that there must be something with agency causing either is the thinking of a six-year-old who says “that branch hit me”.

[Alan Burns]

Stuff and nonsense.  Just because thoughts are hard to define and measure does not mean they 'defy' physical definition. Clearly thoughts are physical, otherwise how could we be building mind control technologies.  The origins or triggers for thoughts are often fairly obvious too - I am writing this post now in response to one from you.  No magic required for that, just cause and effect.

And can you honestly believe that your entire post was predefined by a series of inevitable, uncontrollable physical reactions?  Where are you in all this?  And what defines or determines your belief?  What is belief in physical terms?  Can a series of predetermined physically controlled reactions produce the concept of belief?  Can you not see the obvious that we comprise far more than physically controlled material reactions can ever define?

[Alan Burns]

No it isn’t. Things that are undesirable or considered immoral happen a lot, just as things that are desirable or considered moral happen a lot too. Deciding that there must be something with agency causing either is the thinking of a six-year-old who says “that branch hit me”.

Are you effectively saying that there is nothing we can do to combat evil, because what we consider to be evil is just an inevitable consequence of the way things happen?

[Stranger]

And can you honestly believe that your entire post was defined by a series of inevitable, uncontrollable physical reactions?  Where are you in all this?  And what defines or determines your belief?  What is belief in physical terms?  Can a series of predetermine physically controlled reactions produce the concept of belief?  Can you not see the obvious that we comprise far more than physically controlled material reactions can ever define?

Oh, come on, Alan! Do we really have to go through all this again? Why the idiotic and dishonest pretence that you haven't had answers to all these questions countless times before? Even if you disagree with the answers given, what do you think this mindless, bot-like repetition will achieve?

[Gordon]

And can you honestly believe that your entire post was defined by a series of inevitable, uncontrollable physical reactions?  Where are you in all this?  And what defines or determines your belief?  What is belief in physical terms?  Can a series of predetermine physically controlled reactions produce the concept of belief?  Can you not see the obvious that we comprise far more than physically controlled material reactions can ever define?

I suspect you are in thrall, Alan, to that great god 'Incredulity'.

[Alan Burns]

Oh, come on, Alan! Do we really have to go through all this again? Why the idiotic and dishonest pretence that you haven't had answers to all these questions countless times before? Even if you disagree with the answers given, what do you think this mindless, bot-like repetition will achieve?

Witness to the truth of our God given freedom which nature can never provide.

[Sebastian Toe]

Witness to the truth of our God given freedom which nature can never provide.

It's magic, innit!?

[Stranger]

Witness to the truth of our God given freedom which nature can never provide.

You really think the dishonest pretence that your questions haven't been answered (many, many, many times) and mindless repetition of baseless assertions and fallacies in the face of logic and reasoning is going to achieve that, do you?

[torridon]

And can you honestly believe that your entire post was predefined by a series of inevitable, uncontrollable physical reactions?  Where are you in all this?  And what defines or determines your belief?  What is belief in physical terms?  Can a series of predetermined physically controlled reactions produce the concept of belief?  Can you not see the obvious that we comprise far more than physically controlled material reactions can ever define?

Really, I've lost count of the number of times people have taken time out to explain this and here you are coming back as if it was the first time you'd come across it.  All life operates on principals of deep logic, it observes cause and effect, life at the cellular level could not happen without the principal of adequate determinism and everything that happens in minds of higher creatures like us is built on these underlying foundations.  Your incredulity is no more an argument than that of early peoples on hearing that the Earth was spherical and not flat.  It might not be intuitive on first hearing, but it does make sense. Things happen for a reason, this should not be controversial, actions have consequences, this should not be surprising, we, like all life forms, are products of the environment that gave birth to us and nurtured us, do you really think you can 'control' what parents you had or what sort of upbringing you had ? Of course we cannot, and similarly we cannot 'control' where we find Paris on a map or like something we don't like or find something tragic to be hilarious.   Where are 'we' in all that ? We are in the middle of all those information flows, formed by them and contributing accordingly.  Like a hurricane crossing the Atlantic, we are phenomena of sufficient overall stability and duration to merit a name, but nonetheless subject to constant change as air flows interact.  We aren't magic beings, products of some capricious god playing dice, really we aren't, we are living breathing products of Nature and all our doings are consistent with that.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Simple. If I don't believe in a god, how can I be said to be running away from said god?

That would depend on which variety of god that they were talking about and whether it could be described successfully. Unfortunately you have such a huge degree of obfuscation and disagreement where god is concerned.(e.g. AB's'we can't aspire to know the mind of God') that lack of clarity seems to be the order of the day.

An interesting conjecture on your part...that if something is incomplete it must therefore be nonsensical. It isn't a view that I share, and certainly not one that I was making.

Such as? As far as I can tell I am simply stating that the idea that running away from God is, for me. a nonsensical idea. If you wish to suggest that my lack of belief is an assertion, I would disagree with you on two counts. 1) It's a personal position. Others may take an entirely different position. I am not attempting any 'confident statement of fact or belief' at all. 2) It's not even positive, it's negative.

Why on earth should I do that? I don't completely disregard theism. I simply have no particular belief in it in any of the forms that I know about. Why should I actually believe in any particular god that you care to name simply because there remains a possibility that this god(or any other that you don't care to name) actually exists, especially as I can't find any evidence that it exists except in the minds of people?

You can stick with your idea that we are alienated from God, if you want or if it comforts you in some way. It means nothing to me though as I don't have any sense of alienation whatsoever. I can't see why I would or should? As far as I can tell I have always been completely at ease with myself and religion of any kind has always only played a cultural part in my life.
.

People dont believe in God for various reasons....what are yours?

Yes there are many points which spring from an overall theism.

We either make a decision to ignore these a priori having dismissed God or we do visit them.

For instance Judaism states that we have gone wrong but with a bit of effort and observence we can make it up.

Christianity states that we need salvation.

How do we feel about each of these alternatives.Which is more challenging and which more comforting?.......and how are they so?

[Roses]

People dont believe in God for various reasons....what are yours?

Yes there are many points which spring from an overall theism.

We either make a decision to ignore these a priori having dismissed God or we do visit them.

For instance Judaism states that we have gone wrong but with a bit of effort and observence we can make it up.

Christianity states that we need salvation.

How do we feel about each of these alternatives.Which is more challenging and which more comforting?.......and how are they so?

Just because a religion states something doesn't mean it is correct.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Are you effectively saying that....

BEEP! Another fail. I wasn't "effectively" saying anything - I was saying what I actually said. When you attach your (frankly mediaeval) notion of "evil" to rational argument it's like trying to talk to a six-year-old who says, "can you honestly say that the Tooth Fairy doesn't leave 50p under my pillow. But there's so much evidence!" over and over and over again.

Your problem isn't just that you cannot break out of the self-imposed box of utter wrongness you've made for yourself, it's that you're terrified even of trying.

[Gordon]

People dont believe in God for various reasons....what are yours?

Speaking for myself it is a combination of two things: 1) that 'God' is a meaningless statement, and 2) I've yet to see an arguments i favour of 'God' that isn't either fallacious in one way or another, or is incoherent.

For instance Judaism states that we have gone wrong but with a bit of effort and observence we can make it up.

Christianity states that we need salvation.

How do we feel about each of these alternatives.Which is more challenging and which more comforting?.......and how are they so?

That there are different cultural traditions and superstitions, some of them conflicting, among the various religious beliefs doesn't overcome the absence of a convincing argument for divine agency that isn't fallacious or incoherent.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Just because a religion states something doesn't mean it is correct.

But thats what we are trying to get to the bottom off.

You are notorious for assertion and then leaving it at that.

What we dont know is how the idea which you placed in bold affects you but merely going on the fact that you put it in bold hints that it makes an impact.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Speaking for myself it is a combination of two things: 1) that 'God' is a meaningless statement, and 2) I've yet to see an arguments i favour of 'God' that isn't either fallacious in one way or another, or is incoherent.

That there are different cultural traditions and superstitions, some of them conflicting, among the various religious beliefs doesn't overcome the absence of a convincing argument for divine agency that isn't fallacious or incoherent.

Lets shift this out of your usual paint roller and tippex approach to things Gordon and get particular.
Christianity states that we  need salvationn.
How do YOU feel about that?