what do non/anti-religion Deists and Theists believe ?

[jenny1972]

Again, your god is the rigger of games.  You use your god concept, at least in part, to explain something you do not understand - biology.  That's -just- what you've shared with us, and I would find it to be miraculous if that's the only gap in your own understanding that you've filled with a god (or a "not god", rather - "an intelligence", depending on which of your contradictory comments I'm supposed to take as truthful).  

Yet, you feel that it is appropriate to criticize others for doing so.  To call their concepts corrupt for what yours is plainly and demonstrably guilty of as well.  Pot, meet kettle.

there are biologists who believe in God and scientists also so whats your reasoning as to why they believe in God if your theory of God belief is 'you only believe in God if you dont understand biology' yet having careers in biology many people do believe in God so your theory of why people believe belief through default mysteries =it must be God doesnt exist its not the reason for belief you just think it is .

[The Grand Nudger]

-and none of that changes the fact that you've used "god" to cover your ignorance, precisely what you criticized other religions for, precisely why you consider them to be corrupt. I haven't offered any theory as to why people believe in god, I've only pointed out that you are guilty of what you condemn in others. If that was actually important to you, as your criticisms would imply, you'd be concerned. You aren't...so obviously it isn't.

[jenny1972]

-and none of that changes the fact that you've used "god" to cover your ignorance, precisely what you criticized other religions for, precisely why you consider them to be corrupt.  I haven't offered any theory as to why people believe in god, I've only pointed out that you are guilty of what you condemn in others.  If that was actually important to you, as your criticisms would imply, you'd be concerned.  You aren't...so obviously it isn't.

yes you have offered several theories as to why people believe here again saying that i believe in God to use god to cover up ignorance you have more theories than you know what to do with and your convinced your right - your using your disbelief to cover up your arrogant belief that you know why people believe in God . you shouldnt be so confident in your intellectual abilities because your theories are all wrong but of course your too arrogant to concede that that are anything less than facts and think that because they are theories that you have invented and so they must be true , which is nothing less than absolute arrogance you should tell the truth and stop promoting your opinions as facts its dishonest .

[The Grand Nudger]

Thats not a theory,  again you have a problem with words.  That's a statement of fact backed up by your own comments and interaction.  Whatever the reason is that you believe, that's what you've leveraged your belief in service of, here, in our presence, on the boards, on record. You've also stated, here, on the boards, on record, that this is (at least one of the reasons) why you see religion as corrupt. I'm suggesting that you shine that light inward.

Here again I see you drifting towards a statement that begs the question you refuse to answer. My intellectual abilities aren't relevant in a discussion regarding those comments you've made, and I've made no claim to any phenomenal ability in the first place. It doesn't -take- any special ability to see that your comments are at odds with each other. The dripping irony in being called dishonest, by you, in this manner...is delicious to me.

[jenny1972]

Thats not a theory,  again you have a problem with words.  That's a statement of fact backed up by your own comments and interaction.  Whatever the reason is that you believe, that's what you've leveraged your belief in service of, here, in our presence, on the boards, on record.  You've also stated, here, on the boards, on record, that this is (at least one of the reasons) why you see religion as corrupt.  I'm suggesting that you shine that light inward.

Here again I see you drifting towards a statement that begs the question you refuse to answer.  My intellectual abilities aren't relevant in a discussion regarding those comments you've made, and I've made no claim to any phenomenal ability in the first place.  It doesn't -take- any special ability to see that your comments are at odds with each other.  The dripping irony in being called dishonest, by you, in this manner...is delicious to me.

your extremely vague about what your asking you never asked any question you alluded to a demonstration and then i said i couldnt demonstrate sooo that shoulve answered the question if that was the question (?) but didnt go into detail about what kind of demonstration your comments are as vague as the bible lol i think your doing it to annoy me you just like giving me a hard time  . so me trying to figure out what the hell your talking about my comments are at odds with eachother i disagree ! i see the bible as corrupt because it was handled by people thats the only reason i believe the bible or any other religious text is corrupt .

[The Grand Nudger]

No, I'm not.  I asked you a question, explicitly, three times consecutively.   Look, you don't have to answer it, we all decide our own level of involvement, but this play-acting shit is tedious.

On the rest of your post. -You- claimed that god was demonstrable, detectable. I merely asked you to back up those claims you chose to make. After a bit of waffling, you retracted that claim..and that's that for me. I'm not -giving- you a hard time, you're creating it for yourself. Try to take a little personal responsibility for the things that fall from your lips, eh? Are you now retracting the statement you made earlier in this thread, wherein you claimed that religion was corrupt, that all the other god concepts fall short of perfection, and happened to be so and fall because men were trying to explain what they did not understand, with god? You don't notice a little bit of that in your own comments regarding intelligent design? That never occurred to you - even after I layed it out explicitly.....the first time I posted it? You're confused.......somehow?

[jenny1972]

No, I'm not.  I asked you a question, explicitly, three times consecutively.   Look, you don't have to answer it, we all decide our own level of involvement, but this play-acting shit is tedious.

On the rest of your post.  -You- claimed that god was demonstrable, detectable.  I merely asked you to back up those claims you chose to make.  After a bit of waffling, you retracted that claim..and that's that for me.  I'm not -giving- you a hard time, you're creating it for yourself.  Try to take a little personal responsibility for the things that fall from your lips, eh?  Are you now retracting the statement you made earlier in this thread, wherein you claimed that religion was corrupt, that all the other god concepts fall short of perfection, and happened to be so and fall because men were trying to explain what they did not understand, with god?  You don't notice a little bit of that in your own comments regarding intelligent design?  That never occurred to you - even after I layed it out explicitly.....the first time I posted it?  You're confused.......somehow?

i said many many comments ago that only God can demonstrate and God does demonstrate to people individually i cannot demonstrate it since i am not God i said that a long time ago and more than once maybe you didnt read those comments or only read a few of my comments that would explain but i did say only God can demonstrate and does no person can.

[The Grand Nudger]

I read that comment, we discussed it.  Are you the only person who posts on your account?  How many people am I having a conversation with right now? I think it's silly to use the term demonstrable in such a manner, that was my peace on the issue then and now. I see no need now to pursue it any further, no more so than I saw a need to pursue it further then. I'm not stuck on that, never was. I wouldn't exactly call that an explanation......but you seem to have special uses for words, and you're perfectly free to compose your statements in such a manner as to say nothing while taking up alot of space.

.....?

[drfuzzy]

No, I'm not.  I asked you a question, explicitly, three times consecutively.   Look, you don't have to answer it, we all decide our own level of involvement, but this play-acting shit is tedious.

On the rest of your post.  -You- claimed that god was demonstrable, detectable.  I merely asked you to back up those claims you chose to make.  After a bit of waffling, you retracted that claim..and that's that for me.  I'm not -giving- you a hard time, you're creating it for yourself.  Try to take a little personal responsibility for the things that fall from your lips, eh?  Are you now retracting the statement you made earlier in this thread, wherein you claimed that religion was corrupt, that all the other god concepts fall short of perfection, and happened to be so and fall because men were trying to explain what they did not understand, with god?  You don't notice a little bit of that in your own comments regarding intelligent design?  That never occurred to you - even after I layed it out explicitly.....the first time I posted it?  You're confused.......somehow?

i said many many  comments ago that only God can demonstrate and God does demonstrate to people individually  i cannot demonstrate it since i am not God i said that a long time ago and more than once maybe you didnt read those comments or only read a few of my comments that would explain but i did say only God can demonstrate and does no person can.

We've been here before, haven't we, Jenny girl?  I wasn't the only one to tell you here that your assertions that god speaks to you individually will be challenged, and people will demand proof, again and again, every time you make that assertion. Without proof, we simply aren't going to believe you.  Now maybe Rhythm and others will do the same thing as I did - agree to disagree, you seem pleasant and harmless.  But every time you make your claim, just expect to be asked for proof.  And when you say "it can't be proved", expect us to believe that you are mildly delusional.

[jenny1972]

i said many many  comments ago that only God can demonstrate and God does demonstrate to people individually  i cannot demonstrate it since i am not God i said that a long time ago and more than once maybe you didnt read those comments or only read a few of my comments that would explain but i did say only God can demonstrate and does no person can.

We've been here before, haven't we, Jenny girl?  I wasn't the only one to tell you here that your assertions that god speaks to you individually will be challenged, and people will demand proof, again and again, every time you make that assertion. Without proof, we simply aren't going to believe you.  Now maybe Rhythm and others will do the same thing as I did - agree to disagree, you seem pleasant and harmless.  But every time you make your claim, just expect to be asked for proof.  And when you say "it can't be proved", expect us to believe that you are mildly delusional.

i agree some things are pointless to even begin talking about but its going to happen sometimes i dont mind talking about it but if you have an atheist and a theist together the topic will inevetably come up , but no i dont expect anyone to believe me and am not trying to convince anyone since there isnt any proof that i can give or is my job to give and its not my job to convince anyone of anything thats Gods job no mine or anyone elses , and i absolutely believe nothing short of having a spiritual experience/science will convince anyone so discussing it at all is a waste of time a completely useless argument to even start but i was genuinely just curious about what deists believe and theists who just believe in God already think about different things.