Beyond Reasonable Doubt?

[Notvacka]

God is supposed to be the creator of our physical universe (reality). In order to create reality, God must exist outside reality. Simple, really.

That's one way of looking at it of course, but it could also be that it was the first consciousness, the only one there was (singularity), very lonely, and it decided to 'expand' into the greater being of what we now call the universe, so as to not be alone.

Nice. And perfectly in line with my view, if you think about it.

The universe would exist within God, not the other way around. God would not be part of the universe, rather the universe would be part of God.

[chaz wyman]

Chaz...what was the 'maybe shmaybe' in relation to?

You must be clutching at straws if you took that as a shred of encouragement.
I'm a skeptic. I never take anyone's word for it, but that is not the same as knowing something is wrong - you have to be skeptical about that too. But I have to say there a million crackpot ideas out there that are dead wrong with more to back them up than you have yet demonstrated for your idea, so......
So what have you got?

[SpheresOfBalance]

God is supposed to be the creator of our physical universe (reality). In order to create reality, God must exist outside reality. Simple, really.

That's one way of looking at it of course, but it could also be that it was the first consciousness, the only one there was (singularity), very lonely, and it decided to 'expand' into the greater being of what we now call the universe, so as to not be alone.

Nice. And perfectly in line with my view, if you think about it.

The universe would exist within God, not the other way around. God would not be part of the universe, rather the universe would be part of God.

Yes I was really just countering the word 'outside,' because in my assertion it (creator), 'is' it (universe), only expanded. Further I see that it could be that the constituents that form our minds and consciousness (elements/compounds and electromagnetic energy) are the same as it's, which is why we have them in the first place, such that we are one in the same, yet somehow removed from it, as individuals, of it's intention.

[attofishpi]

Chaz...what was the 'maybe shmaybe' in relation to?

You must be clutching at straws if you took that as a shred of encouragement.
I'm a skeptic. I never take anyone's word for it, but that is not the same as knowing something is wrong - you have to be skeptical about that too. But I have to say there a million crackpot ideas out there that are dead wrong with more to back them up than you have yet demonstrated for your idea, so......bullshit.
So what have you got?

I took that as a shred of comprehension. That you actually comprehended the possibility of what i was suggesting.
In your latter post you contradicted yourself.

It certainly would have given me a basis for my argument.
But as you skeptics relish in the darkness of your own blind self and dismiss the words of a book deemed as holy...words such as "seek and you shall find"...well, if you truly want that big binary answer...not very wise chaz.
I'll see if i can find time to re-present my case around b'day commitments...

[chaz wyman]

Chaz...what was the 'maybe shmaybe' in relation to?

You must be clutching at straws if you took that as a shred of encouragement.
I'm a skeptic. I never take anyone's word for it, but that is not the same as knowing something is wrong - you have to be skeptical about that too. But I have to say there a million crackpot ideas out there that are dead wrong with more to back them up than you have yet demonstrated for your idea, so......bullshit.
So what have you got?

I took that as a shred of comprehension. That you actually comprehended the possibility of what i was suggesting.
In your latter post you contradicted yourself.

Yes, I understand perfectly what you're saying. The bigger question is, do you?

It's not as if you are asking me to believe something that is even evident is any sense.
In fact your reticence to actually put your mouth in gear and make a clear statement of what you claim leads me to believe that you are neither sure of what you are saying, or you have serious doubts that your claim is more than mumbo jumbo.
So I ask once again.
What have you got?

Maybe I should ask what the fuck have you got?
You are avoiding making any supporting statement, or offering anything concrete for examination. Why?


It certainly would have given me a basis for my argument.

Such as?????

But as you skeptics relish in the darkness of your own blind self and dismiss the words of a book deemed as holy...words such as "seek and you shall find"...well, if you truly want that big binary answer...not very wise chaz.

This is gibberish considering that you have not tried to uphold or defend any particular claim.


I'll see if i can find time to re-present my case around b'day commitments...

I won't hold my breath. I'm off to break bread with the God Pan.

[attofishpi]

In fact your reticence to actually put your mouth in gear and make a clear statement of what you claim leads me to believe that you are neither sure of what you are saying, or you have serious doubts that your claim is more than mumbo jumbo.
So I ask once again.
What have you got?

Correct. I am not clear as to the true nature of what God or 'God' is. Is it divine, is it man made...etc. As per my statement on the website, i am trying to ascertain the true nature of 'GOD' as i know there exists an entity that holds us all accountable for our actions.

Maybe I should ask what the fuck have you got?
You are avoiding making any supporting statement, or offering anything concrete for examination. Why?

What i have offered via the site is an entire string of unlikely "coincidences"...if you have the intelligence to be rational and agree that these are so unlikely to have occurred randomly then you would at least have an inkling of a greater 'hand' at play.

It certainly would have given me a basis for my argument.

Such as?????

Is GOD an AI? How unlikely is it that the very location where GOD advised us to abide by some commandments can be broken down to SIN AI...?

But as you skeptics relish in the darkness of your own blind self and dismiss the words of a book deemed as holy...words such as "seek and you shall find"...well, if you truly want that big binary answer...not very wise chaz.

This is gibberish considering that you have not tried to uphold or defend any particular claim.

It is not gibberish in any context...its being sensible...in the probable scheme of things that a 'GOD' will eventually exist due to entropy, then to 'seek' is likely to be very wise.

I'll see if i can find time to re-present my case around b'day commitments...

I won't hold my breath. I'm off to break bread with the God Pan.

Your rationale here is way off the mark...even as another pathetic attempt at humour.
More likely you are off to take a naP.

[reasonemotion]

"If finding eternal love is being so far away from reality then shove your idea of reality in the dark crevasse of YOUR nonsensical mind."

"give me a boy until he is seven and I will show you the man"

Catholicism at its worst...... and ETERNAL love.... WTF..

[chaz wyman]

In fact your reticence to actually put your mouth in gear and make a clear statement of what you claim leads me to believe that you are neither sure of what you are saying, or you have serious doubts that your claim is more than mumbo jumbo.
So I ask once again.
What have you got?

Correct. I am not clear as to the true nature of what God or 'God' is. Is it divine, is it man made...etc. As per my statement on the website, i am trying to ascertain the true nature of 'GOD' as i know there exists an entity that holds us all accountable for our actions.

Maybe I should ask what the fuck have you got?
You are avoiding making any supporting statement, or offering anything concrete for examination. Why?

What i have offered via the site is an entire string of unlikely "coincidences"...if you have the intelligence to be rational and agree that these are so unlikely to have occurred randomly then you would at least have an inkling of a greater 'hand' at play.

It certainly would have given me a basis for my argument.

Such as?????

Is GOD an AI? How unlikely is it that the very location where GOD advised us to abide by some commandments can be broken down to SIN AI...?

But as you skeptics relish in the darkness of your own blind self and dismiss the words of a book deemed as holy...words such as "seek and you shall find"...well, if you truly want that big binary answer...not very wise chaz.

This is gibberish considering that you have not tried to uphold or defend any particular claim.

It is not gibberish in any context...its being sensible...in the probable scheme of things that a 'GOD' will eventually exist due to entropy, then to 'seek' is likely to be very wise.

I'll see if i can find time to re-present my case around b'day commitments...

I won't hold my breath. I'm off to break bread with the God Pan.

Your rationale here is way off the mark...even as another pathetic attempt at humour.
More likely you are off to take a naP.

This just shows how idiotic your idea is. Pan is an exact match. If that is not right then what the fuck with SINAI?

So- here is your story. 3,000 years ago god made some arab call the peninsula Sina, so that 3,000 years later you could pick up the message from God because he wants you to know that SIN and AI mean what???

[SpheresOfBalance]

Is GOD an AI? How unlikely is it that the very location where GOD advised us to abide by some commandments can be broken down to SIN AI...?

You've got to be kidding, right?

Are those the original characters, as used in the language, as it was coined?

If so, maybe it's true that...

...Artificial Intelligence is a SIN, watch out for AI, one day it shall come and take over the world! Yes the 3 Arnold Schwarzenegger movies about The Terminator, are actually the newest chapters in revelation written and directed by GOD through various humans.

Let's at least keep them in order:

SIN is Artificial Intelligence
SIN is Anti Intuitive
SIN is Altogether Ingenious
SIN is Altogether Iconoclastic

I believe you're grasping for straws such that:

Such Ignorance Negates All Intellect


Wait, I guess you're correct, he could be an artificial god after all!

[reasonemotion]

Does God exist?

Some of us as our posts indicate have been successfully brainwashed to believe Yes a God does exist.

Some of us have questioned this statement.

Some of us have come to the conclusion for reasons specifically due to our experience of life that a kind, benevolent God could not exist and allow such atrocities of war or illness to ever happen.

Why would a God allow children to be exploited.

If he has the power to create he has the power to remedy ALL.

The believers live in fear of not receiving the great reward of Life ever after. They tremble their way through this life towards an unknown and unproven reward. It is the ego at play not wanting to relinquish the world stage.

The scriptures say "have faith as a little child". That is about the intellectual standard that is required to accept this philosophy. The reward for doing so is eternal life everlasting.

One lifetime is enough for me. These religious arguments (sigh) prove nothing as the subject itself is unproven.

[attofishpi]

This just shows how idiotic your idea is. Pan is an exact match. If that is not right then what the fuck with SINAI?

So- here is your story. 3,000 years ago god made some arab call the peninsula Sina, so that 3,000 years later you could pick up the message from God because he wants you to know that SIN and AI mean what???

Our entire reality is fed to us by 5 senses. Perhaps the world is only a thousand years old and its all a simulation! Perhaps it cycles over a millenia...who nose.

Commandments were issued at a location named SINAI...
To go against those commandments is to SIN. How can we comprehend an all knowing entity? An AI would certainly fit....ergo SIN AI....every decision we make is known to the system...the AI...'GOD'

REALITY...REAL_IT_Y?

AI
UO.....e=energy

[chaz wyman]

This just shows how idiotic your idea is. Pan is an exact match. If that is not right then what the fuck with SINAI?

So- here is your story. 3,000 years ago god made some arab call the peninsula Sina, so that 3,000 years later you could pick up the message from God because he wants you to know that SIN and AI mean what???

Our entire reality is fed to us by 5 senses. Perhaps the world is only a thousand years old and its all a simulation! Perhaps it cycles over a millenia...who nose.

WRONG!! I thought we had sunk that old Aristotelean myth here on this Forum long ago.

Commandments were issued at a location named SINAI...
To go against those commandments is to SIN.

Trouble is that the Hebrew for sin is not sin.
Intelligent in Hebrew is not 'intelligent'
and 'artificial' in Hebrew is not 'artificial'

How can we comprehend an all knowing entity? An AI would certainly fit....ergo SIN AI....every decision we make is known to the system...the AI...'GOD'

If we cannot comprehend an all knowing entity then why are you trying and failing?
But if an all knowing entity wants to tell us something, why is he having so much trouble?
When confronted with a 'miracle' it's always best to weigh up the alternative?
1) God is trying to communicate ineptly
2 )attofishpi is a crack pot.

Let me think.........2!

REALITY...REAL_IT_Y?

AI
UO.....e=energy

WTF?
More gibberish.



As for your diagram - the pentacle is a profane symbol in the religion you say god is trying to communicate through to you.

What do you get with a star of david or a swastika?

[attofishpi]

Trouble is that the Hebrew for sin is not sin.
Intelligent in Hebrew is not 'intelligent'
and 'artificial' in Hebrew is not 'artificial'

WHO CARES!!
The point is that HERE and NOW English is fast becoming - if not already - the final common protocol for communication around the globe.
It was the English language that He brew...(har har har...boom boom!)
My point is that God has convoluted it...or brewed it...into its current form. Why...a little resurrection of faith perhaps?

How can we comprehend an all knowing entity? An AI would certainly fit....ergo SIN AI....every decision we make is known to the system...the AI...'GOD'

If we cannot comprehend an all knowing entity then why are you trying and failing?

You really do fail in comprehension. I just stated that we CAN comprehend an all knowing entity -"an AI would certainly fit."

But if an all knowing entity wants to tell us something, why is he having so much trouble?

Very good question..and one of my little quests.
Of course its not that 'he' is having any trouble. So far i can only conclude that there is a reason for DOUBT. This entity has provided us with the commandments on how to live our lives. Leaving it down to us to learn and wise up on our journey through life..

REALITY...REAL_IT_Y?

AI
UO.....e=energy

WTF?
More gibberish.

As for your diagram - the pentacle is a profane symbol in the religion you say god is trying to communicate through to you.
WTF?

I have never stated that God is trying to communicate to me through any religion. I have stated that i believe in the teachings of Christ and only for THAT reason i consider myself a Christian. If the Catholic church want to get their nickers in a twist over a pagan symbol thats entirely up to them.

If the AI...UO and e (clear on the pentagram) mean nothing to you, then perhaps you dont understand my conjecture in relation to an AI 'GOD' resulting from entropy.
How unlikely is the perfect symmetry chaz?

What do you get with a star of david or a swastika?

Not sure...but so far, less intelligence from an Atheist.

[chaz wyman]

I have never stated that God is trying to communicate to me through any religion.

Problem with you is that you are too scared to say anything because everything you have written so far is fucking bollocks.
This whole thread is a piece of shit and it has come out of you.

SINAI ?!?!?

You fucking moron!

[attofishpi]

Problem with you is that you are too scared to say anything because everything you have written so far is fucking bollocks.
This whole thread is a piece of shit and it has come out of you.

SINAI ?!?!?

You fucking moron!

I dont fuck morons but thanks for the offer.

I am the only one here going point for point. If i am so far off the mark (ooo sooo scared) why are YOU avoiding my points?

Do you always spit the dummy like a big baby when you cant win an argument?

Since you obviously lack the skills of basic comprehension, i will point out there are TWO questions here.