There is no doubt a god, the question is what is it?

[Nay_Sayer]

Like Atheists redefining the word Worship to show they don't worship themselves.

We don't worship ourselves.

Stop. Lying. About. Us.

That's his shtick thou, Habitual and continual lying.

[The Grand Nudger]

Not a problem, for his god, if it leads to more sheep to be fleeced.

[Mystic]

Worship at the end is nothing but what we value the most.

If it's ourselves we value the most, then we are our own god, and if we have many things we value on par with each other like prestige, wealth, out of the love of the self, they are all gods and idols.

The question is, why do people then not call themselves, "Self-Worshipers" if they disbelieve in a Creator? Or "Human worshipers + sex worshippers + wealth worshipers" etc....

Because it intrinsic it is a petty thing to worship all these things.But why when the word worship simply what we value most?

It's because we know intrinsically, we ought to value without limit. If we worship things other than the Source of all Value and the Absolute being, we feel ashamed. We naturally feel ashamed.

That is why Atheists never would say yes they believe in gods, but just not a supernatural one. 

It's so shameful, to worship other than God, that no one wants to say it. We want to do away with the words worship and gods as if they never had meaning among society.

Ok, I'll shamelessly say it then. According to your explicit/implicit definitions of the terms "worship" and "gods", I worship gods other than the god that you profess to worship.

Now what?

The fact that Atheism movement didn't take this into account, and used a circular definition with respect to religion and gods....speaks volumes of the ignorance they plunge themselves and try to dictate to the world.

It's like they never even opened up the Bible to see what is in it,  just criticize all it teaches, without understanding what it says.   

Had they sincerity in this question with religion, they would of said, something on the lines of "we don't have proof of a person Creator but by all ways religions defined idolatry, we cannot be under that definition of worshiping things lesser then a supreme being by that definition, and if religion is what pertains to that which we worship, then we cannot be but with a religion that is decided by us".

But the fact is you want to take on this "we disbelieve in all religions" which really translates to "I believe in my own self-made religion". You see it's not attractive when the truth of these words are seen for what they are.

You complain of Christians who say "no religion, all we need is Jesus and relationship with him", yet the very fact you can't see how religion is defined in non-circular manner,  no human has no religion. The question only is are they going to submit to God or make up their religion by their desires out of ignorance?

How you decide you ought to live, whether, it is well thought of or chaotic day to day intuition and changes as you go, will become your religion....because you value yourself the most and the other things as far as it relates to valuing yourself, and religion is nothing but the path one believes and follows with respect to to what one values the most....

You cannot do away with religion in any sense.

And when it is presented like that people will think.... so should we all make our own religion as we go?

You see it put's you on equal intellectual grounds. But that it too absurd for you to simply see yourself as the rest of people, all with love valuing something the most, seeking purpose and meaning, and have beliefs and a creed which is but your answer to the fundamental questions of what makes us human.

Presenting yourself as the unique way out of false religions to no religions, is convenient but either not very well thought of (in reality it's blindly followed) or it's dishonest.

[The Grand Nudger]

LOL, Mystic, atheists don't dictate to the world...and couldn't if they tried.  If there's something wrong, with the world....as you see it...it isn't the fault of hur durr atheists dictating.  

The notion that atheists have never opened a bible..that they don't know what's in it, fails similarly by brute force of demographics.  If someones fucking up the message...again, it isn't hur durr atheists.   Look to your left and right the next time you're prostrate before your god.  

The only way that you, you..not us, can convince yourself....not us...of your beliefs..,,not ours...is to imagine that everyone who doesn't agree with you and yours is a bad....bad, man™.  Are you that miserable, is your faith that thin?

[Mystic]

^out of all things you could of responded to.

[The Grand Nudger]

I could respond to the rest, bullet point style......I guess, but it would be pointlessly mean..because Id be responding to crazy that takes itself seriously?

[GrandizerII]

Ok, I'll shamelessly say it then. According to your explicit/implicit definitions of the terms "worship" and "gods", I worship gods other than the god that you profess to worship.

Now what?

The fact that Atheism movement didn't take this into account, and used a circular definition with respect to religion and gods....speaks volumes of the ignorance they plunge themselves and try to dictate to the world.

It's like they never even opened up the Bible to see what is in it,  just criticize all it teaches, without understanding what it says.   

Had they sincerity in this question with religion, they would of said, something on the lines of "we don't have proof of a person Creator but by all ways religions defined idolatry, we cannot be under that definition of worshiping things lesser then a supreme being by that definition, and if religion is what pertains to that which we worship, then we cannot be but with a religion that is decided by us".

But the fact is you want to take on this "we disbelieve in all religions" which really translates to "I believe in my own self-made religion". You see it's not attractive when the truth of these words are seen for what they are.

You complain of Christians who say "no religion, all we need is Jesus and relationship with him", yet the very fact you can't see how religion is defined in non-circular manner,  no human has no religion. The question only is are they going to submit to God or make up their religion by their desires out of ignorance?

How you decide you ought to live, whether, it is well thought of or chaotic day to day intuition and changes as you go, will become your religion....because you value yourself the most and the other things as far as it relates to valuing yourself, and religion is nothing but the path one believes and follows with respect to to what one values the most....

You cannot do away with religion in any sense.

And when it is presented like that people will think.... so should we all make our own religion as we go?

You see it put's you on equal intellectual grounds. But that it too absurd for you to simply see yourself as the rest of people, all with love valuing something the most, seeking purpose and meaning, and have beliefs and a creed which is but your answer to the fundamental questions of what makes us human.

Presenting yourself as the unique way out of false religions to no religions, is convenient but either not very well thought of (in reality it's blindly followed) or it's dishonest.

Again, according to your overall argument and the provided definitions of the relevant terms, I follow a religion. Also, according to you, I cannot be an atheist given those definitions. I'm ok with that. For me, it's more about the concepts being discussed than it is about semantics. So what's the next thing you want me to accept? That you and I are on equal intellectual grounds? What if I don't agree because your beliefs are not grounded in logic and evidence while [I believe] mine are?

[Amarok]

Again I don't care how religion defines these terms I reject them as foreign

[Mystic]

The fact that Atheism movement didn't take this into account, and used a circular definition with respect to religion and gods....speaks volumes of the ignorance they plunge themselves and try to dictate to the world.

It's like they never even opened up the Bible to see what is in it,  just criticize all it teaches, without understanding what it says.   

Had they sincerity in this question with religion, they would of said, something on the lines of "we don't have proof of a person Creator but by all ways religions defined idolatry, we cannot be under that definition of worshiping things lesser then a supreme being by that definition, and if religion is what pertains to that which we worship, then we cannot be but with a religion that is decided by us".

But the fact is you want to take on this "we disbelieve in all religions" which really translates to "I believe in my own self-made religion". You see it's not attractive when the truth of these words are seen for what they are.

You complain of Christians who say "no religion, all we need is Jesus and relationship with him", yet the very fact you can't see how religion is defined in non-circular manner,  no human has no religion. The question only is are they going to submit to God or make up their religion by their desires out of ignorance?

How you decide you ought to live, whether, it is well thought of or chaotic day to day intuition and changes as you go, will become your religion....because you value yourself the most and the other things as far as it relates to valuing yourself, and religion is nothing but the path one believes and follows with respect to to what one values the most....

You cannot do away with religion in any sense.

And when it is presented like that people will think.... so should we all make our own religion as we go?

You see it put's you on equal intellectual grounds. But that it too absurd for you to simply see yourself as the rest of people, all with love valuing something the most, seeking purpose and meaning, and have beliefs and a creed which is but your answer to the fundamental questions of what makes us human.

Presenting yourself as the unique way out of false religions to no religions, is convenient but either not very well thought of (in reality it's blindly followed) or it's dishonest.

Again, according to your overall argument and the provided definitions of the relevant terms, I follow a religion. Also, according to you, I cannot be an atheist given those definitions. I'm ok with that. For me, it's more about the concepts being discussed than it is about semantics. So what's the next thing you want me to accept? That you and I are on equal intellectual grounds? What if I don't agree because your beliefs are not grounded in logic and evidence while [I believe] mine are?

Your claim is that you are on reason and logic, like every other religion claims.

I post threads to show proofs of my claims and you guys get upset if I show the strength of conviction in them.

If people are silent, you say, they have no proofs or they would present them.

And if they are presented, they are dismissed even if they should not be.

How about this? Go the backward approach like the thread I showed. Go "If God is real, and we are connected to him by his name, how can we unveil his name and recognize his religion?".... You will say there is all sorts of interpretations of each religion. So I will show you a way to distinguish false claims from right ones. 

Let us open a thread about going backward approach and actually applying it, I made a thread about it in theory, we can go this backward approach... work like Science assume a hypothesis just for the sake of gathering evidence, and then try to disprove it.

You can't begin to truly know a religion unless you know who truly understands it and represents it and believes in it all together as it's meant to. Otherwise, like Atheists always point out, you get into a mess....

So let's find out who represents Islam out of all those claiming to represent it and all leaders claiming to teach it.

It will be fun, and you have nothing to lose, but gaining a way to distinguish falsehood from a truth in a certain paradigm. 

You may not find the truth unless you enter many doors at once,  perhaps, God is not truly knowable without recognize his leader and guide, and that is not knowable unless we recognize who we truly are.

If you want my help in this journey let me know. I know I haven't been doing a good job and been lousy, but I am trying my best, is all I can say.

[GrandizerII]

Your claim is that you are on reason and logic, like every other religion claims.

Note I also said "evidence". Does every other religion make the claim it is based on evidence? Evidence matters as well.

I post threads to show proofs of my claims and you guys get upset if I show the strength of conviction in them.

What threads exactly? I've seen your threads in which you make some arguments for God, but nothing compelling.

If people are silent, you say, they have no proofs or they would present them.

I'm not sure I remember ever saying that.

And if they are presented, they are dismissed even if they should not be.

They're dismissed probably because they're not compelling at all. When I personally look at your arguments, I don't see logically sound arguments (or even logically valid arguments, for that matter). I see instead desperation. You, MK, come off as really desperate.

How about this? Go the backward approach like the thread I showed. Go "If God is real, and we are connected to him by his name, how can we unveil his name and recognize his religion?".... You will say there is all sorts of interpretations of each religion. So I will show you a way to distinguish false claims from right ones.

No, forget your backward approach. I'd have to accept first the premise that God exists. 

Let us open a thread about going backward approach and actually applying it, I made a thread about it in theory, we can go this backward approach... work like Science assume a hypothesis just for the sake of gathering evidence, and then try to disprove it.

I really doubt you see God as a falsifiable hypothesis, MK. So no.

You can't begin to truly know a religion unless you know who truly understands it and represents it and believes in it all together as it's meant to. Otherwise, like Atheists always point out, you get into a mess....

A mess of what? Also, do you really think you're the first theist to tell me I can't truly begin to understand some religion unless I go through them first? Don't flatter yourself too much, you're not that special.

So let's find out who represents Islam out of all those claiming to represent it and all leaders claiming to teach it.

Let me guess: MK, the one and only?

It will be fun, and you have nothing to lose, but gaining a way to distinguish falsehood from a truth in a certain paradigm.

Somehow I'm suspecting it's not going to be fun, and I'm going to be wasting a lot of my precious time going through a lot of nonsense with you. So I pass.
 

You may not find the truth unless you enter many doors at once,  perhaps, God is not truly knowable without recognize his leader and guide, and that is not knowable unless we recognize who we truly are.

Right ... this is starting to get disturbing.

If you want my help in this journey let me know. I know I haven't been doing a good job and been lousy, but I am trying my best, is all I can say.

No thanks. I'm not so gullible as to fall for your nonsense. Been there before, never again.