(December 9, 2009 at 7:15 am)tackattack Wrote:(December 9, 2009 at 6:07 am)theVOID Wrote:(December 9, 2009 at 4:04 am)tackattack Wrote:(December 8, 2009 at 8:57 am)theVOID Wrote: So why don't you answer this question: Can you explain what you believe and why you believe it?
God to me is a force that created and set into motion the known universe.
Got any evidence to back up that claim?
No evidence I can produce will ever suffice your level of belief nor am I here to.
Quote: I don't feel he acts on our behalf or intercedes
That is directly contradictory to the Christian belief in which God sends himself to earth as his own son, born of a virgin on earth, to directly intervene in human affairs. How can you call yourself a christian and still hold that God does not interfere?
I consider the man Jesus real with more insight into the ways of the creator than anyone. He taught through parrable and led by example. The story of creation, the floods, probably most miracles and maybe his ressurection was less historical fact and more parrable as believed in the torah.
Quote:but is omniviscent and omnipotent.
Prove it
-unprovable by definition
Quote: God is unknowable
So you admit you actually have no idea what you are talking about...
Quote: therefore it doesn't follow that it's sentient.
If it's non-sentient it isn't intelligent at all, so why call it god?
the human need to quantify and classify
Quote: If I had to visualize God it would be a huge ball of energy sitting outside the universe with photons shooting out from it.
Oh, i think we have a testable hypothesis emerging here! So if god sits outside the universe and shoots photons into the universe then there should be a measurable excess of light in the universe that would be unaccounted for in observations. As far as i am aware there is no such light in the universe, therefore your claim is disproved until you can provide evidence to the contrary.
And of course finding the light alone is not comprehensive proof of anything, but it does give your idea falsifiability which is a good thing because it means it can actually be tested.
-I'm not equiped to attempt observations of things outside our universe, much less our known universe.
Quote:I believe this because I can not explain what created the universe with science.
This is known as the god of the gaps argument, for example "I can't explain something, therefore god did it". As you can see from that statement you have simply assumed the answer you want is the correct one without taking any steps to verify it as true.
Reason away all the gaps with science and I'll consent.
Quote: Even though historical documents are steeped in contradictions, mytos and warped perspectives they convey a similar hope and parables that make sense to me.
People don't organise their lives around contradictory historical documents.
-People have been doing it for centuries.
Quote: I believe science is wonderful and opens our eyes to a myriad of possibilities
Then why don't you start using it? Where is the evidence to support your claim that god is a big ball of energy outside the universe shooting in photons? At the moment you are not doing science, so your claiming to support it is irrelevant in argument when you can't demonstrate actually using it.
Quote: There will always be unexplainable things that need explaining.
That does not mean you just pick your favorite answer
Quote: Frankly I don't have the energy to debunk all of them and I have a great repsect for those who do. I feel it's easier to prove what's real to me than disprove what other's feel is real.
It's impossible to disprove most of the supernatural claims people make because they are not testable, you obviously don't get how this works.
Quote: While I enjoy looking at things from an increasing perspective, it gets tedious at times and I invariably come beck to what's real to me. I don't believe in fate. I do believe in karma. Every action, thought and belief of one affects the others around them, then other's around them and so on. I see a balance on a moralistic scale, on a scientific scale and on a physical scale that leads me to believe that the randomeness of the human condition is not a singularity. I'd like to hope that perfection is love. I'd like to hope that a God is that love and he shares it with us like photons from the sun. I'd like not to sit under an umbrella with my shades.
Whether you like it or not the truth of the universe has nothing to do with man kind or what any one of us wants, it is something entirely external to our very existence. To me it sounds like you have picked a completely conceptual ideal that appeals to you and stuck with it regardless of whether of not it's true.
Which is why I'm here. Thank you for the critique on my belief. I'm here to ask questions though and don't really intend to defend myself too much. I simply stated my belief because I was asked and I believe I already have you answer (thank you by the way) so anyone else's opinion on teh question?
Yeah, ball of energy that isn't intelligent shooting out photons is pretty clear, albeit unreasonable to hold as a belief.
Do you want to rephrase the question again to make it more clear?
.