Why do you believe God exists? - page 18.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: Astargath on November 05, 2018, 12:59:16 PM

Quote from: BADecker on November 05, 2018, 10:14:39 AM

You are unusually slow today. Because we operate according to universal physics, and our minds think according to the way physics dictates, there is no way to absolutely describe what outside-the-universe really means.

So, the way we describe it is to simply say that it includes whatever is not part of this universe.

If it were to be described in any more detail than that, it would have to be part of the universe, just so it could operate with universe physics enough that we could recognize it with our universe physics way of thinking.

Now, it is true that there are probably others that could use better words than I do. So, if you are that interested, seek them out.

Cool

None of that proves ''outside the universe'' is possible, we don't know of anything that's not in the universe, there is no point in assuming it's possible, it's scientifically not proven and even if you think it's logical that something must be outside the universe, you still have no idea what it is, so it could be anything anyways, pointless discussion.

Just because none of that proves "outside the universe," doesn't mean there is no proof. I mean, there are lots of things that talk about lots of things, and yet are no proof for their existence. What of it?

The fact of everything that exists in the universe is the proof for outside-the-universe. How is it proof? We understand countless things in the universe being made by other things. We have no example of even one thing in the universe that was not made by something else, or example of even one thing that made itself. Before the universe existed, it didn't exist. After the universe started existing, it existed. Therefore something outside the universe made or caused it. That's all we see, and we see it in such quantities that it is scientifically acceptable to say that something outside the universe made the universe. Even your beloved big bang theory essentially states it.

Cool

Astargath

hero member

Activity: 1624

Merit: 645

Quote from: BADecker on November 05, 2018, 10:14:39 AM

Quote from: Astargath on November 05, 2018, 07:51:25 AM

Quote from: BADecker on November 05, 2018, 04:10:07 AM

Quote from: Astargath on November 04, 2018, 05:39:29 PM

Show us an example of something that has existed forever

There is a real definition of "outside of the universe." The definition lies in as many ways as you can say it. No there isn't. As far as science knows and observes, this is the only universe but there are a lot of hypothesis about multi verses. The term ''universe'' by definition means everything, saying ''outside the universe'' makes little to no sense.

I actually am a little surprised at you. Science attempts to extrapolate backwards millions of years, and then talk about it like it is reality. Science attempts to suggest that big bang is something that existed, but is unlike anything that we have today, even though it had the "seeds" of what the universe would become within it. But you don't even want to wrap your mind around the idea of outside-the-universe? How totally unscientific of you. Sounds like you are moving back to the limited scientific thinking from the 1800s. Wink

Define ''the idea of outside-the-universe'' then.

Universe: all existing matter and space considered as a whole; the cosmos.

That's the only thing we can observe or prove.

You are unusually slow today. Because we operate according to universal physics, and our minds think according to the way physics dictates, there is no way to absolutely describe what outside-the-universe really means.

So, the way we describe it is to simply say that it includes whatever is not part of this universe.

If it were to be described in any more detail than that, it would have to be part of the universe, just so it could operate with universe physics enough that we could recognize it with our universe physics way of thinking.

Now, it is true that there are probably others that could use better words than I do. So, if you are that interested, seek them out.

Cool

None of that proves ''outside the universe'' is possible, we don't know of anything that's not in the universe, there is no point in assuming it's possible, it's scientifically not proven and even if you think it's logical that something must be outside the universe, you still have no idea what it is, so it could be anything anyways, pointless discussion.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: Astargath on November 05, 2018, 07:51:25 AM

Quote from: BADecker on November 05, 2018, 04:10:07 AM

Quote from: Astargath on November 04, 2018, 05:39:29 PM

Show us an example of something that has existed forever

There is a real definition of "outside of the universe." The definition lies in as many ways as you can say it. No there isn't. As far as science knows and observes, this is the only universe but there are a lot of hypothesis about multi verses. The term ''universe'' by definition means everything, saying ''outside the universe'' makes little to no sense.

I actually am a little surprised at you. Science attempts to extrapolate backwards millions of years, and then talk about it like it is reality. Science attempts to suggest that big bang is something that existed, but is unlike anything that we have today, even though it had the "seeds" of what the universe would become within it. But you don't even want to wrap your mind around the idea of outside-the-universe? How totally unscientific of you. Sounds like you are moving back to the limited scientific thinking from the 1800s. Wink

Define ''the idea of outside-the-universe'' then.

Universe: all existing matter and space considered as a whole; the cosmos.

That's the only thing we can observe or prove.

You are unusually slow today. Because we operate according to universal physics, and our minds think according to the way physics dictates, there is no way to absolutely describe what outside-the-universe really means.

So, the way we describe it is to simply say that it includes whatever is not part of this universe.

If it were to be described in any more detail than that, it would have to be part of the universe, just so it could operate with universe physics enough that we could recognize it with our universe physics way of thinking.

Now, it is true that there are probably others that could use better words than I do. So, if you are that interested, seek them out.

Cool

Astargath

hero member

Activity: 1624

Merit: 645

Quote from: BADecker on November 05, 2018, 04:10:07 AM

Quote from: Astargath on November 04, 2018, 05:39:29 PM

Show us an example of something that has existed forever

There is a real definition of "outside of the universe." The definition lies in as many ways as you can say it. No there isn't. As far as science knows and observes, this is the only universe but there are a lot of hypothesis about multi verses. The term ''universe'' by definition means everything, saying ''outside the universe'' makes little to no sense.

I actually am a little surprised at you. Science attempts to extrapolate backwards millions of years, and then talk about it like it is reality. Science attempts to suggest that big bang is something that existed, but is unlike anything that we have today, even though it had the "seeds" of what the universe would become within it. But you don't even want to wrap your mind around the idea of outside-the-universe? How totally unscientific of you. Sounds like you are moving back to the limited scientific thinking from the 1800s. Wink

Define ''the idea of outside-the-universe'' then.

Universe: all existing matter and space considered as a whole; the cosmos.

That's the only thing we can observe or prove.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: Astargath on November 04, 2018, 05:39:29 PM

Show us an example of something that has existed forever

There is a real definition of "outside of the universe." The definition lies in as many ways as you can say it. No there isn't. As far as science knows and observes, this is the only universe but there are a lot of hypothesis about multi verses. The term ''universe'' by definition means everything, saying ''outside the universe'' makes little to no sense.

I actually am a little surprised at you. Science attempts to extrapolate backwards millions of years, and then talk about it like it is reality. Science attempts to suggest that big bang is something that existed, but is unlike anything that we have today, even though it had the "seeds" of what the universe would become within it. But you don't even want to wrap your mind around the idea of outside-the-universe? How totally unscientific of you. Sounds like you are moving back to the limited scientific thinking from the 1800s. Wink

OgNasty

donator

Activity: 4760

Merit: 4323

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: Parodium on December 02, 2017, 05:27:41 PM

I'd like to know.... What is it that compels you to believe in God? How can you argue for his existence?

I would say I was compelled to believe in God because I was raised in a house that held religion in high esteem. Since then I have seen a lot of good done in my local community by various churches, leading me to believe that whether or not God "exists" in a physical sense, God's impact is definitely felt and used to do a lot of good, at least in the communities where I have lived.

Astargath

hero member

Activity: 1624

Merit: 645

Quote from: BADecker on November 03, 2018, 03:23:51 PM

Quote from: Astargath on November 03, 2018, 10:38:58 AM

Quote from: BADecker on November 02, 2018, 02:32:33 PM

Quote from: guybrushthreepwood on November 02, 2018, 07:29:58 AM

Quote from: SinarG on November 01, 2018, 11:58:41 AM

There are 5 proofs of the existence of God. It is written by Aquinas. I give it below:

1. Proof through motion means that everything moving has ever been triggered by something else, which in turn was triggered by the third. It is God that is the root cause of the whole movement.

2. Proof through the generating cause - this proof is similar to the first. Since nothing can produce itself, then there is something that is the root cause of everything - it is God.

3. Proof through necessity — every thing has the possibility of both its potential and real being. If we assume that all things are in potency, then nothing would arise. There must be something that contributed to the transfer of things from the potential to the current state. This is something - God.

Those are all "proofs" that god can't exist. I'll never understand why religious people don't ask the same questions about god. If all these things need an originator then so does god. He can't exist -- or be the original creator if we go by this logic. God would be, by definition, far more complex than us or the universe and therefor he also needs a creator. He can't just exist due to your own proofs. The truth is it's these flawed proofs that allow the religious to shut off their brain and just accept the easiest or simplest option to them -- which is, don't worry about it because god made everything. I'm sure there will always be unanswered questions about the origin of the universe but god or religions will never be able to answer them.

The point that somebody thinks that God needs a maker, is proof that God exists. Why? Here's why.

Everything we see in the universe was made by other things. Just the idea that something could make itself is absurd.

The one thing we don't see at all is a thing that made the universe. We don't see this thing because it can't be in the universe. If it were, it would be the universe making itself, which never happens that we have any example of.

This means that something outside the universe made it. It also means that the outside thing doesn't follow the laws of the universe, because if it did, it would be part of the universe.

The point is, God can't have a maker. If He did, He would be just like anything else in the universe. But the Maker of the universe can't be in the universe, because nothing that is part of something makes itself.

God, being outside the universe, not only doesn't need something to make Him, but can't have something whereby He was made. If He did, He would be part of the universe, and we know that nothing makes itself out of nothing. Something else always makes it.

Proof that God doesn't need and can't have a maker.

Cool

'' Just the idea that something could make itself is absurd.'' Who says so?

Show us an example of something making itself from nothing.

Quote from: Astargath on November 03, 2018, 10:38:58 AM

''If it were, it would be the universe making itself, which never happens that we have any example of.'' How are we going to have an example of this?

Why do you ask for an example of something you know never happens?

Quote from: Astargath on November 03, 2018, 10:38:58 AM

''This means that something outside the universe made it. It also means that the outside thing doesn't follow the laws of the universe, because if it did, it would be part of the universe.'' There is no real definition of ''outside the universe'' since it isn't know if such thing is possible

There is a real definition of "outside of the universe." The definition lies in as many ways as you can say it.

Cool

Show us an example of something that has existed forever

There is a real definition of "outside of the universe." The definition lies in as many ways as you can say it. No there isn't. As far as science knows and observes, this is the only universe but there are a lot of hypothesis about multi verses. The term ''universe'' by definition means everything, saying ''outside the universe'' makes little to no sense.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: Astargath on November 03, 2018, 10:38:58 AM

Quote from: BADecker on November 02, 2018, 02:32:33 PM

Quote from: guybrushthreepwood on November 02, 2018, 07:29:58 AM

Quote from: SinarG on November 01, 2018, 11:58:41 AM

There are 5 proofs of the existence of God. It is written by Aquinas. I give it below:

1. Proof through motion means that everything moving has ever been triggered by something else, which in turn was triggered by the third. It is God that is the root cause of the whole movement.

2. Proof through the generating cause - this proof is similar to the first. Since nothing can produce itself, then there is something that is the root cause of everything - it is God.

3. Proof through necessity — every thing has the possibility of both its potential and real being. If we assume that all things are in potency, then nothing would arise. There must be something that contributed to the transfer of things from the potential to the current state. This is something - God.

Those are all "proofs" that god can't exist. I'll never understand why religious people don't ask the same questions about god. If all these things need an originator then so does god. He can't exist -- or be the original creator if we go by this logic. God would be, by definition, far more complex than us or the universe and therefor he also needs a creator. He can't just exist due to your own proofs. The truth is it's these flawed proofs that allow the religious to shut off their brain and just accept the easiest or simplest option to them -- which is, don't worry about it because god made everything. I'm sure there will always be unanswered questions about the origin of the universe but god or religions will never be able to answer them.

The point that somebody thinks that God needs a maker, is proof that God exists. Why? Here's why.

Everything we see in the universe was made by other things. Just the idea that something could make itself is absurd.

The one thing we don't see at all is a thing that made the universe. We don't see this thing because it can't be in the universe. If it were, it would be the universe making itself, which never happens that we have any example of.

This means that something outside the universe made it. It also means that the outside thing doesn't follow the laws of the universe, because if it did, it would be part of the universe.

The point is, God can't have a maker. If He did, He would be just like anything else in the universe. But the Maker of the universe can't be in the universe, because nothing that is part of something makes itself.

God, being outside the universe, not only doesn't need something to make Him, but can't have something whereby He was made. If He did, He would be part of the universe, and we know that nothing makes itself out of nothing. Something else always makes it.

Proof that God doesn't need and can't have a maker.

Cool

'' Just the idea that something could make itself is absurd.'' Who says so?

Show us an example of something making itself from nothing.

Quote from: Astargath on November 03, 2018, 10:38:58 AM

''If it were, it would be the universe making itself, which never happens that we have any example of.'' How are we going to have an example of this?

Why do you ask for an example of something you know never happens?

Quote from: Astargath on November 03, 2018, 10:38:58 AM

''This means that something outside the universe made it. It also means that the outside thing doesn't follow the laws of the universe, because if it did, it would be part of the universe.'' There is no real definition of ''outside the universe'' since it isn't know if such thing is possible

There is a real definition of "outside of the universe." The definition lies in as many ways as you can say it.

Cool

Astargath

hero member

Activity: 1624

Merit: 645

Quote from: BADecker on November 02, 2018, 02:32:33 PM

Quote from: guybrushthreepwood on November 02, 2018, 07:29:58 AM

Quote from: SinarG on November 01, 2018, 11:58:41 AM

There are 5 proofs of the existence of God. It is written by Aquinas. I give it below:

1. Proof through motion means that everything moving has ever been triggered by something else, which in turn was triggered by the third. It is God that is the root cause of the whole movement.

2. Proof through the generating cause - this proof is similar to the first. Since nothing can produce itself, then there is something that is the root cause of everything - it is God.

3. Proof through necessity — every thing has the possibility of both its potential and real being. If we assume that all things are in potency, then nothing would arise. There must be something that contributed to the transfer of things from the potential to the current state. This is something - God.

Those are all "proofs" that god can't exist. I'll never understand why religious people don't ask the same questions about god. If all these things need an originator then so does god. He can't exist -- or be the original creator if we go by this logic. God would be, by definition, far more complex than us or the universe and therefor he also needs a creator. He can't just exist due to your own proofs. The truth is it's these flawed proofs that allow the religious to shut off their brain and just accept the easiest or simplest option to them -- which is, don't worry about it because god made everything. I'm sure there will always be unanswered questions about the origin of the universe but god or religions will never be able to answer them.

The point that somebody thinks that God needs a maker, is proof that God exists. Why? Here's why.

Everything we see in the universe was made by other things. Just the idea that something could make itself is absurd.

The one thing we don't see at all is a thing that made the universe. We don't see this thing because it can't be in the universe. If it were, it would be the universe making itself, which never happens that we have any example of.

This means that something outside the universe made it. It also means that the outside thing doesn't follow the laws of the universe, because if it did, it would be part of the universe.

The point is, God can't have a maker. If He did, He would be just like anything else in the universe. But the Maker of the universe can't be in the universe, because nothing that is part of something makes itself.

God, being outside the universe, not only doesn't need something to make Him, but can't have something whereby He was made. If He did, He would be part of the universe, and we know that nothing makes itself out of nothing. Something else always makes it.

Proof that God doesn't need and can't have a maker.

Cool

'' Just the idea that something could make itself is absurd.'' Who says so?

''If it were, it would be the universe making itself, which never happens that we have any example of.'' How are we going to have an example of this?

''This means that something outside the universe made it. It also means that the outside thing doesn't follow the laws of the universe, because if it did, it would be part of the universe.'' There is no real definition of ''outside the universe'' since it isn't know if such thing is possible

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: guybrushthreepwood on November 02, 2018, 07:29:58 AM

Quote from: SinarG on November 01, 2018, 11:58:41 AM

There are 5 proofs of the existence of God. It is written by Aquinas. I give it below:

1. Proof through motion means that everything moving has ever been triggered by something else, which in turn was triggered by the third. It is God that is the root cause of the whole movement.

2. Proof through the generating cause - this proof is similar to the first. Since nothing can produce itself, then there is something that is the root cause of everything - it is God.

3. Proof through necessity — every thing has the possibility of both its potential and real being. If we assume that all things are in potency, then nothing would arise. There must be something that contributed to the transfer of things from the potential to the current state. This is something - God.

Those are all "proofs" that god can't exist. I'll never understand why religious people don't ask the same questions about god. If all these things need an originator then so does god. He can't exist -- or be the original creator if we go by this logic. God would be, by definition, far more complex than us or the universe and therefor he also needs a creator. He can't just exist due to your own proofs. The truth is it's these flawed proofs that allow the religious to shut off their brain and just accept the easiest or simplest option to them -- which is, don't worry about it because god made everything. I'm sure there will always be unanswered questions about the origin of the universe but god or religions will never be able to answer them.

The point that somebody thinks that God needs a maker, is proof that God exists. Why? Here's why.

Everything we see in the universe was made by other things. Just the idea that something could make itself is absurd.

The one thing we don't see at all is a thing that made the universe. We don't see this thing because it can't be in the universe. If it were, it would be the universe making itself, which never happens that we have any example of.

This means that something outside the universe made it. It also means that the outside thing doesn't follow the laws of the universe, because if it did, it would be part of the universe.

The point is, God can't have a maker. If He did, He would be just like anything else in the universe. But the Maker of the universe can't be in the universe, because nothing that is part of something makes itself.

God, being outside the universe, not only doesn't need something to make Him, but can't have something whereby He was made. If He did, He would be part of the universe, and we know that nothing makes itself out of nothing. Something else always makes it.

Proof that God doesn't need and can't have a maker.

Cool

guybrushthreepwood

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1195

Quote from: SinarG on November 01, 2018, 11:58:41 AM

There are 5 proofs of the existence of God. It is written by Aquinas. I give it below:

1. Proof through motion means that everything moving has ever been triggered by something else, which in turn was triggered by the third. It is God that is the root cause of the whole movement.

2. Proof through the generating cause - this proof is similar to the first. Since nothing can produce itself, then there is something that is the root cause of everything - it is God.

3. Proof through necessity — every thing has the possibility of both its potential and real being. If we assume that all things are in potency, then nothing would arise. There must be something that contributed to the transfer of things from the potential to the current state. This is something - God.

Those are all "proofs" that god can't exist. I'll never understand why religious people don't ask the same questions about god. If all these things need an originator then so does god. He can't exist -- or be the original creator if we go by this logic. God would be, by definition, far more complex than us or the universe and therefor he also needs a creator. He can't just exist due to your own proofs. The truth is it's these flawed proofs that allow the religious to shut off their brain and just accept the easiest or simplest option to them -- which is, don't worry about it because god made everything. I'm sure there will always be unanswered questions about the origin of the universe but god or religions will never be able to answer them.

Moloch

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 722

Quote from: coins4commies on November 01, 2018, 08:43:50 PM

All of that is wrong because when applied to God, prove the existence of an even higher being, the creator of God, which would be proof that not even god is God.

Also known as The Problem of the Creator of God

Quote

The problem of the creator of God is the controversy regarding the hypothetical cause responsible for the existence of God, presuming God exists. A common challenge to theistic propositions of a creator deity as a necessary first-cause explanation for the universe is the question: "Who created God?". It contests the proposition that the universe cannot exist without a creator by asserting that the creator of the universe must have the same restrictions. This, in turn, may lead to a problem of infinite regress wherein each newly presumed creator of a creator is itself presumed to have its own creator.

coins4commies

full member

Activity: 952

Merit: 175

@cryptocommies

All of that is wrong because when applied to God, prove the existence of an even higher being, the creator of God, which would be proof that not even god is God.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: tentros on November 01, 2018, 03:19:45 PM

Quote from: SinarG on November 01, 2018, 11:58:41 AM

There are 5 proofs of the existence of God. It is written by Aquinas. I give it below:

1. Proof through motion means that everything moving has ever been triggered by something else, which in turn was triggered by the third. It is God that is the root cause of the whole movement.

2. Proof through the generating cause - this proof is similar to the first. Since nothing can produce itself, then there is something that is the root cause of everything - it is God.

3. Proof through necessity — every thing has the possibility of both its potential and real being. If we assume that all things are in potency, then nothing would arise. There must be something that contributed to the transfer of things from the potential to the current state. This is something - God.

4. Proof of the degrees of being - people talk about the various degrees of perfection of an object only through comparisons with the most perfect. This means that there is the most beautiful, the most noble, the best - that is God.

5. Proof through target cause. In the world of rational and unreasonable creatures, the expediency of activity is observed, which means that there is a rational being who sets a goal for everything that exists in the world - this being we call God

There are some perfect proofs http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm, they are so god damn good, that i cant even stop laughing.

Good point. If you can't falsify the proofs, make a joke out of them.

Cool

tentros

jr. member

Activity: 112

Merit: 4

Look ARROUND!

Quote from: SinarG on November 01, 2018, 11:58:41 AM

There are 5 proofs of the existence of God. It is written by Aquinas. I give it below:

1. Proof through motion means that everything moving has ever been triggered by something else, which in turn was triggered by the third. It is God that is the root cause of the whole movement.

2. Proof through the generating cause - this proof is similar to the first. Since nothing can produce itself, then there is something that is the root cause of everything - it is God.

3. Proof through necessity — every thing has the possibility of both its potential and real being. If we assume that all things are in potency, then nothing would arise. There must be something that contributed to the transfer of things from the potential to the current state. This is something - God.

4. Proof of the degrees of being - people talk about the various degrees of perfection of an object only through comparisons with the most perfect. This means that there is the most beautiful, the most noble, the best - that is God.

5. Proof through target cause. In the world of rational and unreasonable creatures, the expediency of activity is observed, which means that there is a rational being who sets a goal for everything that exists in the world - this being we call God

There are some perfect proofs http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm, they are so god damn good, that i cant even stop laughing.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: SinarG on November 01, 2018, 11:58:41 AM

There are 5 proofs of the existence of God. It is written by Aquinas. I give it below:

1. Proof through motion means that everything moving has ever been triggered by something else, which in turn was triggered by the third. It is God that is the root cause of the whole movement.

2. Proof through the generating cause - this proof is similar to the first. Since nothing can produce itself, then there is something that is the root cause of everything - it is God.

3. Proof through necessity — every thing has the possibility of both its potential and real being. If we assume that all things are in potency, then nothing would arise. There must be something that contributed to the transfer of things from the potential to the current state. This is something - God.

4. Proof of the degrees of being - people talk about the various degrees of perfection of an object only through comparisons with the most perfect. This means that there is the most beautiful, the most noble, the best - that is God.

5. Proof through target cause. In the world of rational and unreasonable creatures, the expediency of activity is observed, which means that there is a rational being who sets a goal for everything that exists in the world - this being we call God

Since God told him to do it, it is absolutely sane... because obeying god is the most sane thing that can be done.

Cool

Moloch

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 722

Quote from: SinarG on November 01, 2018, 11:58:41 AM

There are 5 proofs of the existence of God. It is written by Aquinas. I give it below:

1. Proof through motion means that everything moving has ever been triggered by something else, which in turn was triggered by the third. It is God that is the root cause of the whole movement.

These are absolutely not proofs... proofs are applicable to mathematics... these are all debunked logical fallacies

This first one is debunked by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_the_creator_of_God

If you can't have something that moves without a creator, then who created God? God moves, right? Then who created the creator of the creator of God, ad infinitum?

SinarG

jr. member

Activity: 126

Merit: 5

There are 5 proofs of the existence of God. It is written by Aquinas. I give it below:

1. Proof through motion means that everything moving has ever been triggered by something else, which in turn was triggered by the third. It is God that is the root cause of the whole movement.

2. Proof through the generating cause - this proof is similar to the first. Since nothing can produce itself, then there is something that is the root cause of everything - it is God.

3. Proof through necessity — every thing has the possibility of both its potential and real being. If we assume that all things are in potency, then nothing would arise. There must be something that contributed to the transfer of things from the potential to the current state. This is something - God.

4. Proof of the degrees of being - people talk about the various degrees of perfection of an object only through comparisons with the most perfect. This means that there is the most beautiful, the most noble, the best - that is God.

5. Proof through target cause. In the world of rational and unreasonable creatures, the expediency of activity is observed, which means that there is a rational being who sets a goal for everything that exists in the world - this being we call God

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3990

Merit: 1385

Quote from: Moloch on November 01, 2018, 09:10:33 AM

Quote from: BADecker on November 01, 2018, 08:48:12 AM

But Satan thought he was better than God and tried to conquer God. So, God destroyed him, and is in the process of destroying his works.

From what I remember from reading the bible, Satan was the good guy

God murders, or orders the Israelites to murder, millions of people in the bible...

Satan only murders Job's family, and only because God told him to do it

Satan is known as the questioner/accuser of God... Satan didn't try to "conquer" God... Satan accused God of abusing his authority like a dictator... Satan managed to convince 33% of all the angels that God was a dick... God saw that he was losing his control, so before it reached 50%, he banned everyone from heaven... just like a fascist dictator would do

God is a fascist dictator... no wonder republicans like God and Trump so much... sorry, not sorry

God made everything and owns it all. When people are against God like Satan was, they should be glad He even gives them the opportunity to be on His side, so that they will not be destroyed like Satan was. But when they won't change, okay. They are with Satan, and get the same results as Satan.

Or don't you own any property? Or do you let your neighbors into you living quarters and do anything with your stuff that they want? And do you let everybody mess up all your plans? You are at the library right now, using one of their computers, because people wrecked yours, because you don't care about your property?

Since God made people, and gave them freedom to act according to His instructions, which is to their best benefit... yet they frustrate Him to no end by turning against Him Who holds them alive, to destroy themselves (even though they may not clearly understand that is what they are doing)... why shouldn't He finally let them go on to their own destruction?

God isn't destroying people. They are destroying themselves, just like their buddy, Satan, did, by opposing their Creator.

Cool

Moloch

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 722

Quote from: BADecker on November 01, 2018, 08:48:12 AM

But Satan thought he was better than God and tried to conquer God. So, God destroyed him, and is in the process of destroying his works.

From what I remember from reading the bible, Satan was the good guy

God murders, or orders the Israelites to murder, millions of people in the bible...

Satan only murders Job's family, and only because God told him to do it

Satan is known as the questioner/accuser of God... Satan didn't try to "conquer" God... Satan accused God of abusing his authority like a dictator... Satan managed to convince 33% of all the angels that God was a dick... God saw that he was losing his control, so before it reached 50%, he banned everyone from heaven... just like a fascist dictator would do

God is a fascist dictator... no wonder republicans like God and Trump so much... sorry, not sorry

Topic: Why do you believe God exists? - page 18. (Read 7963 times)