An argument for the existence of God

[chaz wyman]

NO you pick up your foot, if you picked up the splinter you would have to know where it is.

NO! You wouldn't need to know where the splinter is to pick it up. That's the beauty of it being a splinter, it hurts.

That tumbleweed is still rolling...
Have you wondered why?

Not really. Theists are an assorted bunch, I gave the opportunity to argue for or against my evidence. I certainly wouldn't expect a fundamentalist to post a reply.

I think your problem is that you do not have an argument.

[attofishpi]

I think your problem is that you do not have an argument.

Your problem is you lack the basic skills of comprehension. I am arguing that God exists and have provided ample evidence to support such a claim.

[chaz wyman]

I think your problem is that you do not have an argument.

Your problem is you lack the basic skills of comprehension. I am arguing that God exists and have provided ample evidence to support such a claim.

Then show us how your (ahem!) "evidence" is evidence that God exists.

[attofishpi]

Then show us how your (ahem!) "evidence" is evidence that God exists.

Mmm...i see your point.

[chaz wyman]

Then show us how your (ahem!) "evidence" is evidence that God exists.

Mmm...i see your point.

Does this not give you cause for concern; that your belief does not submit to scrutiny like this?
Does it not make you question upon what your belief is based?

In every instance, I hope, that when I have become aware that I was labouring under the burden of a belief I have tried to understand the ground of that belief.
In fact it has been the occasion of some joy when finding that there was little to support the belief I have been able to release myself from its burden.

An unfounded belief, poisons everything you think by colouring everything that comes after it.

[attofishpi]

Does this not give you cause for concern; that your belief does not submit to scrutiny like this?
Does it not make you question upon what your belief is based?

No, because the "evidence" that i have provided to you is not what my 'belief' is based upon. I do not believe God exists, as i have stated to you countless times. I know God exists..a knowledge attained from over a decade of personal experience. In this thread i have attempted to provide a rational explanation as to how such an entity could exist.
I often wonder now whether if someone was to provide the same images to me as i have presented prior to KNOWING, whether i would be further convinced in my BELIEF, which is why i was interested in a theist's perspective.
When i became fully aware that such an entity existed and that it was panetheistic, i began looking for evidence in the reality around us in an attempt to convince others such as yourself.
My statement in relation to 'I see your point' is simply to show agreement that the imagery i have provided does not prove God's existence any more than it negates the possibility that ALIENS built the planet!

In every instance, I hope, that when I have become aware that I was labouring under the burden of a belief I have tried to understand the ground of that belief.
In fact it has been the occasion of some joy when finding that there was little to support the belief I have been able to release myself from its burden.

An unfounded belief, poisons everything you think by colouring everything that comes after it.

And there you have it. I am not labouring under a burden of belief, but a burden of knowing. The images i have provided must surely raise some questions about the true nature of reality, even from the most fervent of atheists.

[chaz wyman]

Does this not give you cause for concern; that your belief does not submit to scrutiny like this?
Does it not make you question upon what your belief is based?

No, because the "evidence" that i have provided to you is not what my 'belief' is based upon. I do not believe God exists

You can say this as much as you like - does not make it the truth.
And that delusion is the reason why people think you are 'touched'

In every instance, I hope, that when I have become aware that I was labouring under the burden of a belief I have tried to understand the ground of that belief.
In fact it has been the occasion of some joy when finding that there was little to support the belief I have been able to release myself from its burden.

An unfounded belief, poisons everything you think by colouring everything that comes after it.

And there you have it. I am not labouring under a burden of belief, but a burden of knowing. The images i have provided must surely raise some questions about the true nature of reality, even from the most fervent of atheists.

Fuck no. They are interesting in terms of your personal psychology. nothing more.
Go and seek help!

[attofishpi]

Does this not give you cause for concern; that your belief does not submit to scrutiny like this?
Does it not make you question upon what your belief is based?

No, because the "evidence" that i have provided to you is not what my 'belief' is based upon. I do not believe God exists

You can say this as much as you like - does not make it the truth.
And that delusion is the reason why people think you are 'touched'

In every instance, I hope, that when I have become aware that I was labouring under the burden of a belief I have tried to understand the ground of that belief.
In fact it has been the occasion of some joy when finding that there was little to support the belief I have been able to release myself from its burden.

An unfounded belief, poisons everything you think by colouring everything that comes after it.

And there you have it. I am not labouring under a burden of belief, but a burden of knowing. The images i have provided must surely raise some questions about the true nature of reality, even from the most fervent of atheists.

Fuck no. They are interesting in terms of your personal psychology. nothing more.
Go and seek help!

You rile me back to the forum to reassert my case, which i have done, then attempt to score points off of me again by suggesting i am psychotic!

Surely that makes you little more than a first grade idiot.

[Felasco]

In every instance, I hope, that when I have become aware that I was labouring under the burden of a belief I have tried to understand the ground of that belief. In fact it has been the occasion of some joy when finding that there was little to support the belief I have been able to release myself from its burden.

Let's take this and run with it, joy is a good goal.

The current belief burden you are carrying is the notion that the source of your views on religion is reason. Every piece of evidence you are providing in many hundreds of posts argues against the accuracy of this belief.

It's beyond question that you are very emotionally attached to a particular conclusion, which causes you to immediately reject any analysis or evidence which does not support your preferred conclusion. I doubt there is a single reader of this forum who doesn't see this. The process you are engaged in is exactly the same as the passionate religious believer who clings desperately to their own preferred conclusion.

The solution is simple. Not easy, but simple.

Be loyal to your own chosen method, reason.

Not convert to anybody else's method, convert to your own chosen method.

Which raises a question central to any philosophy forum. What is reason?

Reason has no stake in the game. Reason doesn't care what conclusion the inquiry may lead to. Reason has no need to be emotional, because reason is not attached to any particular outcome. Reason welcomes challenges. Reason is not interested in victory or defeat, because reason is about the topic, not the investigator's ego.

If you were to convert to reason, in regards to your analysis of religion, you would experience a burden lifted. All this relentless negativity would no longer be needed. You could relax, kick back, smile, as you'd no longer be carrying the burden of a pointless holy war which convinces no one of anything.

And then, perhaps for the first time, you could begin to experience the joy of actually exploring religion, the largest cultural process in human history. It's a fascinating subject, when one is actually interested in it, and not just for or against it.

Not converting to religion, but trying to actually understand it. You'll never develop any further understanding of religion until you cure yourself of the fantasy that you already understand it.

What's great about religion is that nobody fully understands it. That's what makes it such a rich subject for inquiry, there's no end to the journey.

The main challenge for many philosophers is that journey will necessarily take us beyond our head. There's no way to really explore this topic in a purely intellectual manner. Any analysis limited to abstractions will inevitably be shallow and incomplete.

One thing that we know for sure is that you are very sincerely interested in the subject of religion. Half your posts on this forum are on that topic, and have been for years. Given that level of interest, why not take a break from the endlessly repetitive rant war, which must be a bore even to you at this point, and try to actually learn something from all the energy you are investing?

I think in the end you'll find reason and learning much more joyful than mere emotional ranting.

[attofishpi]

In every instance, I hope, that when I have become aware that I was labouring under the burden of a belief I have tried to understand the ground of that belief. In fact it has been the occasion of some joy when finding that there was little to support the belief I have been able to release myself from its burden.

Let's take this and run with it, joy is a good goal.

The current belief burden you are carrying is the notion that the source of your views on religion is reason. Every piece of evidence you are providing in many hundreds of posts argues against the accuracy of this belief.

It's beyond question that you are very emotionally attached to a particular conclusion, which causes you to immediately reject any analysis or evidence which does not support your preferred conclusion. I doubt there is a single reader of this forum who doesn't see this. The process you are engaged in is exactly the same as the passionate religious believer who clings desperately to their own preferred conclusion.

The solution is simple. Not easy, but simple.

Be loyal to your own chosen method, reason.

Not convert to anybody else's method, convert to your own chosen method.

Which raises a question central to any philosophy forum. What is reason?

Reason has no stake in the game. Reason doesn't care what conclusion the inquiry may lead to. Reason has no need to be emotional, because reason is not attached to any particular outcome. Reason welcomes challenges. Reason is not interested in victory or defeat, because reason is about the topic, not the investigator's ego.

If you were to convert to reason, in regards to your analysis of religion, you would experience a burden lifted. All this relentless negativity would no longer be needed. You could relax, kick back, smile, as you'd no longer be carrying the burden of a pointless holy war which convinces no one of anything.

And then, perhaps for the first time, you could begin to experience the joy of actually exploring religion, the largest cultural process in human history. It's a fascinating subject, when one is actually interested in it, and not just for or against it.

Not converting to religion, but trying to actually understand it. You'll never develop any further understanding of religion until you cure yourself of the fantasy that you already understand it.

What's great about religion is that nobody fully understands it. That's what makes it such a rich subject for inquiry, there's no end to the journey.

The main challenge for many philosophers is that journey will necessarily take us beyond our head. There's no way to really explore this topic in a purely intellectual manner. Any analysis limited to abstractions will inevitably be shallow and incomplete.

One thing that we know for sure is that you are very sincerely interested in the subject of religion. Half your posts on this forum are on that topic, and have been for years. Given that level of interest, why not take a break from the endlessly repetitive rant war, which must be a bore even to you at this point, and try to actually learn something from all the energy you are investing?

I think in the end you'll find reason and learning much more joyful than mere emotional ranting.

If you wish to discuss RELIGION with chaz...please take it up in a suitable thread - in the RELIGION area.

As i stated at the beginning of this thread...THIS THREAD HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION.

[chaz wyman]

To Felasco and Attophifish (whaever your name is)

I am so glad you have found each other.

Now I can leave you to get a room on your own, and leave me alone.

[Felasco]

and leave me alone.

Yes, you want to be left alone, so you can continue in peace to relentlessly insult half the human race. And this is called reason.

[chaz wyman]

and leave me alone.

Yes, you want to be left alone, so you can continue in peace to relentlessly insult half the human race. And this is called reason.

You can insult me of you like - it obviously give you a sense of power, however misconceived.

But this is not much of an argument. Arguments seem to be sadly lacking in your posts. So yes - leave me alone, until you have something to say for yourself.

[attofishpi]

Fuck! Your paintings are interesting in terms of your personal psychology...its amazing that you were able to percieve the fingerprints left by what could only be deemed a higher entity...and they were right below our noses.

UK to scale - (including the Aisle of Man)


South America to scale - a rather large Bra is ill. Chile a thin backbone. Natal (dict of or relating to childbirth) the nipple


SINAI - the location where man was instructed commandments to abide by from an ALL knowing entity..God - an AI in a binary universe?
Sin AI.

Oh G thanks chaz.

[chaz wyman]

Oh G thanks chaz.

You forgot the man in the moon