(December 26, 2009 at 9:57 pm)theVOID Wrote:

(December 26, 2009 at 9:01 pm)Dotard Wrote: I have a pic of me creating the universe.


What more proof do you need?

You mean that someone else had created a camera prior to your creation of matter? Then sir, i'm arfaid you aren't all that godly

Perhaps he created the camera before the universe and set it to self timer?

(December 29, 2009 at 11:14 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: Aw did Pippy get his feelings hurt? We mock everything here, even each other, why do you think you are special? Besides CP already agreed with my addendum to his memo. I do have one serious question though.

Do you really believe that you choose to see god? If so, can you choose to NOT see god?

I vividly remember seeing god everywhere and in everything and it was overwhelming to the point I could not ignore it, then I continued to think about it and read up about how nature works; as knowledge grew, god shrank with no effort on my part. In fact, I exerted great effort to redefine god so it still had a place in my life. I say "it" not to poke fun, but to be inclusive. You see, god was a man(according to biblical teaching), then mother nature, then everything, and then me. I ran around those identities of god in no particular order, trying desperatly to fit it into my life, but eventually, like a slippery bar of soap, god slipped out of my grasp.

Rhizo

In relation to this whole debate about seeing god in things, I've noticed that you've brought up mother nature.
Now I commonly refer to 'mother nature' as 'Gaia' (I've watched "Final Fantasy - The Spirits Within" far too many times) and yet don't consider it a 'God' even though that the Greeks had a deity called Gaia who was basically an "earth goddess".
I want to know where we draw the line and what is actually considered "a god" (has this been brought up on another thread?) because I believe in many things (none of them actually religious - I don't have a faith) and think that the current understanding of the term "God" is quite vague .

Thanx


Definition for "God" (according to the Macquarie Dictionary - reprinted 1991)

Quote:n1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.
2. the Supreme Being considered with reference to a particular attribute: the god of justice
3. (l.c) a deity, esp a male deity presiding over some portion of worldly affairs.
4 (cap. or l.c) a supreme being according to some particular conception: the god of pantheism
5. (l.c) and image of a deity; and idol.
6. (l.c) and deified person or object.
7. (l.c, pl.)the highest gallery in a theatre

Lilith, Rhiz was talking about how religion evolved from worship of nature to a pantheon of Gods that ruled over a specific aspect of nature, then a God that ruled everything, to what we have no...a wishy washy God that has been defined out of the realm of scientific inquiry because science has demolished all other types. Essentially, as we learn more about the world, the need to attribute what we don't know about it becomes less and less.

It is obvious to the casual non biased observer that as knowledge about the world and the universe we live in increases our ideas about the biblical creator god specifically decreases.

Lilith,

I didn't bring up, "mother nature" although I know many people who recede from mainstream religion to an amorphous, "I worship the universe." or some other meaningless pap, including me for a while. My post was explaining how our perception is not under our control and I ran down my many interpretations of nature. What E said is pretty close to what my thoughts are about how religion evolved.

I am an atheist because I am no longer convinced in the things I was brought up to believe and I remain unconvinced by arguments I have seen on these forums and elsewhere.

Rhizo

The Christian version of the famous axiom stated by Rene Descartes "I think therefore I am".

"I think God exists therefore he does". Now beat that you bunch of heathens lol I believe it, I receive it, therefore it is true!! Halellujah !! Lmfao

No atheist argument stands a chance against that!

(January 14, 2010 at 10:58 am)chatpilot Wrote: It is obvious to the casual non biased observer...

There is no such thing, CP. No matter how unbiased you think you are, you are not. In fact, it is impossible to be unbiased with respect to any fact. Once you interpret the fact as meaning something, you have already applied your bias. Even ignoring a fact applies your bias.

touche my good friend rjh4! So let me rephrase that statement. It is obvious to one that has not had his mind and his judgments clouded by religious dogma and beliefs that.............etc. etc. etc. feel free to fill in the rest.

(January 14, 2010 at 3:13 pm)chatpilot Wrote: The Christian version of the famous axiom stated by Rene Descartes "I think therefore I am".

"I think God exists therefore he does". Now beat that you bunch of heathens lol I believe it, I receive it, therefore it is true!! Halellujah !! Lmfao

No atheist argument stands a chance against that!

A Christian friend used that argument, that some say because man can concieve of the idea of God, therefore God exists. I told him "I could concieve of a lot of things that did not exist. What's your point?"

I know Ledo but that is the only thing I can think of to help these poor deluded people (Christians) out. I don't think that there exist any logical and coherent object to support the existence of god, especially the Christian version of god.