Why does God >insert your grievance here<....?

[Fat is a type of crazy]

4 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

I would be so bold as to make this statement.  We could not exist or survive in this world or any other without love.  Love is the inherent basis of existence.  To understand that statement does requires some thinking about it.  Probably a whole lot of thinking.  And it's true to say it requires more thinking than most would want to devote to it.  Not a problem.  Everyone has their own thing in this world.  Not everyone has a great interest in understanding that statement.  But, no workie, no rewardie. 

 

Also, it's not just humans who experience the emotion of love.  Ever have a pet? 

 

Wouldn't that be 'evidence' that love is a universal thing?

Hard topic but it could be universally a feeling amongst some individuals at certain times. Dogs maybe do feel something similar. Cats are different. Insects may feel some driving force to survive and do their thing that maybe could be defined in some obscure way as a love or love of life.

ThaiBeachLovers seems to feel similar to romantic songs that it's more than a feeling - there is some thing universal in the air rather than a shared separate experience or feeling. 

 

[Tippaporn]

26 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Hard topic but it could be universally a feeling amongst some individuals at certain times. Dogs maybe do feel something similar. Cats are different. Insects may feel some driving force to survive and do their thing that maybe could be defined in some obscure way as a love or love of life.

ThaiBeachLovers seems to feel similar to romantic songs that it's more than a feeling - there is some thing universal in the air rather than a shared separate experience or feeling.

 

Good post, Fat is a type of crazy. 

 

Yes, it's a difficult topic.  As is the God concept.  The first impressions that come to mind on both subjects can be guaranteed to not be the best.  Both require a lot of thought and searching for true answers.  Again, not many who are willing to devote the time and effort required to find those real answers.  Most just spout off what comes off the top of their heads.

 

I will maintain, though, that without love nothing would exist.  I'm decades upon decades into this and though that doesn't guarantee that I know jack about jack it is an indication that I've spent the time and effort.  And that is my sincere conclusion which I would not state if I didn't think it was correct.

 

BTW, I have 10 cats presently.  Cats are different than dogs.  They do not trust nearly as readily as dogs do, which many people find frustrating and off putting.  But if you're into cats, as I am, then you would know that they are extremely loving creatures.  One of my cats is a nuzzler.  If I put my face near hers she will continually rub her snout against my cheeks whilst purring loudly.  Now that's love! 

 

In fact, my avatar is of a cat asleep on top a gate with a sign reading, "Beware of the dog."  I identify with the cat.  The sign gives warning of danger.  Yet the danger is not immediate as the dog is not present.  So the warning is meaningless and the cat understands that.  However, if the dog were to appear the cat would quickly vanish.  What my avatar represents is the cat reacts to immediate danger but not to imagined danger.  People too often, much too often, react to imagined dangers.  So my avatar itself is a statement which rails against the poor and unhealthy idea of reacting to imagined dangers.

[Skeptic7]

On 1/7/2024 at 1:38 PM, Sunmaster said:

Agreed. 
That's why I have to scratch my head every time an atheist comes up with this question. Only atheist ask these questions!
If you don't believe, what's the point in asking?

And that was the reason I started this thread. For these poor confused souls to have a place to vent their frustration. A bit like handing them pen and paper to write a letter to Santa Claus. 55

C'mon Sun I know you are better than this. You're post above is absolute disingenuous garbage. I schooled you on this years ago and over and over in that other thread. Those are rhetorical questions aimed at the believers...in gods, mysticism, consciousness-absent-a-brain and other such nonsense...to try to invoke a bit of critical thinking and dislodge them from their (your) folly. It didn't take obviously. I do think you're a talented artist tho. Guess god grace you with such ability❓🤣 (to be clear...that was sarcasm. I am not serious about that. Not admitting there is any god-thingy and remain a lifelong atheist)

[Tippaporn]

18 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

I schooled you on this years ago and over and over in that other thread.

 

“You’re a legend in your own mind.”

— Harry Callahan

 

Talk about sticking one's foot in one's mouth.  Well done, Skeptic7.  Well done. 

 

       

 

Edited January 9 by Tippaporn

[Sunmaster]

29 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

C'mon Sun I know you are better than this. You're post above is absolute disingenuous garbage. I schooled you on this years ago and over and over in that other thread. Those are rhetorical questions aimed at the believers...in gods, mysticism, consciousness-absent-a-brain and other such nonsense...to try to invoke a bit of critical thinking and dislodge them from their (your) folly. It didn't take obviously. I do think you're a talented artist tho. Guess god grace you with such ability❓🤣 (to be clear...that was sarcasm. I am not serious about that. Not admitting there is any god-thingy and remain a lifelong atheist)

Thanks for the compliment. Appreciate it.

We had some hard sparring in the past, but it was fun and helped me to understand many things. One of them was that intellectual understanding of the subjective world was not enough, and because of that I took up the practice of meditation. It's been 3 (or 4?) years now. Best decision ever.

Hope you're well and continue to question everything...and I mean  e v e r y t h i n g.

[Tippaporn]

Well, it appears Skeptic7 was here and then left.  Without commenting on my post.  Which is exactly what happened to him on the God thread.  Just as no one there could prove the existence of God in physical terms neither could he prove the tenets upon which his atheism is founded upon in real terms.  So he stomped and stomped hurling insults all the while and finally took his ball and bat and retreated to wherever he resides now. 

 

I mean, if the truth of what really happened be told . . .

 

Edited January 9 by Tippaporn

[Mike Teavee]

2 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Well, it appears Skeptic7 was here and then left.  Without commenting on my post.  Which is exactly what happened to him on the God thread.  Just as no one there could prove the existence of God in physical terms neither could he prove the tenets upon which his atheism is founded upon in real terms.  So he stomped and stomped hurling insults all the while and finally took his ball and bat and retreated to wherever he resides now. 

 

I mean, if the truth of what really happened be told . . .

 

 

In fairness & playing Devil's Advocate (If the Devil didn't exist would he have an advocate ), it's impossible to prove that something doesn't exist so the onus is really on proving that it does.

 

This doesn't reflect my views on whether God exists or not... I don't believe he/she/they exist in the Abrahamic religion sense, but do think that there is something out there that we don't (& may never) understand, is that "God"? Dunno...  

 

 

 

[Skeptic7]

2 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Well, it appears Skeptic7 was here and then left.  Without commenting on my post.  Which is exactly what happened to him on the God thread.  Just as no one there could prove the existence of God in physical terms neither could he prove the tenets upon which his atheism is founded upon in real terms.  So he stomped and stomped hurling insults all the while and finally took his ball and bat and retreated to wherever he resides now. 

 

I mean, if the truth of what really happened be told . . .

 

You, as always, tell untruths and spin BS. I was on that thread from the beginning and for years. It was a fun for a while and sure, I hurled out a few insults...mostly deserved. But finally it got old. No one on the other side had any game...including you. No validity nor evidence for all their "woo".

 

I didn't grab my ball and go home. No need, I won. So left the ball and that old tired game as it became redundant, boring and continued getting even more ridiculous. There's no reasoning with the unreasonable. There's no rationality with the irrational. So I'll take my leave of this thread now and bid you adieu. While Sunmaster is a talented artist, you are a expert 🐂💩 artist❗Keep up the crappy work. Seeya. 

[Tippaporn]

7 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

In fairness & playing Devil's Advocate (If the Devil didn't exist would he have an advocate ), it's impossible to prove that something doesn't exist so the onus is really on proving that it does.

 

This doesn't reflect my views on whether God exists or not... I don't believe he/she/they exist in the Abrahamic religion sense, but do think that there is something out there that we don't (& may never) understand, is that "God"? Dunno... 

 

The onus can't be placed on the person making the claim if the claim involves something which cannot be proven with physical evidence that can be placed in one's hand, metaphorically speaking.  As I explained with a few examples here:

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Your definition of love must be some universal thing. Could be strong feelings and that's it. You could go one further and say humans in love feel good, sometimes, and act a certain way that tends to be consistent with a positive outcomes for the community and therefore is held in high regard ...  as compared to negative feelings that have bad outcomes or something. 

Well done, you pretty much defined how people that believe in God feel.

[thaibeachlovers]

30 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

but do think that there is something out there that we don't (& may never) understand, is that "God"? Dunno...  

Why wouldn't it be God?

[thaibeachlovers]

34 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

 

In fairness & playing Devil's Advocate (If the Devil didn't exist would he have an advocate ), it's impossible to prove that something doesn't exist so the onus is really on proving that it does.

 

This doesn't reflect my views on whether God exists or not... I don't believe he/she/they exist in the Abrahamic religion sense, but do think that there is something out there that we don't (& may never) understand, is that "God"? Dunno...  

 

 

 

If we classify the Devil as being evil, it is easily apparent that the devil is in the heart of many humans, given by the evil they do.

That's proof enough for me.

No one is born evil- they become evil.

[Tippaporn]

35 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

You, as always, tell untruths and spin BS. I was on that thread from the beginning and for years. It was a fun for a while and sure, I hurled out a few insults...mostly deserved. But finally it got old. No one on the other side had any game...including you. No validity nor evidence for all their "woo".

 

I didn't grab my ball and go home. No need, I won. So left the ball and that old tired game as it became redundant, boring and continued getting even more ridiculous. There's no reasoning with the unreasonable. There's no rationality with the irrational. So I'll take my leave of this thread now and bid you adieu. While Sunmaster is a talented artist, you are a expert 🐂💩 artist❗Keep up the crappy work. Seeya. 

 

True, I did arrive later and I don't doubt your word that you behaved civilly and congenially when you first came on board.  However, by the time I arrived you had become quite vicious.

 

To be fair you did not win.  Since the existence of a God can not be proven nor disproven in physical terms then the debate was fated to be a draw.    But as with so many other beliefs the real truth isn't important; only the truth of your belief.  That's all that matters, right? 

 

I do, though, miss your special terms of endearment for me. 

 

Edited January 9 by Tippaporn

[Tippaporn]

I thought you left? 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

 

True, I did arrive later and I don't doubt your word that you behaved civilly and congenially when you first came on board.  However, by the time I arrived you had become quite vicious.

 

To be fair you did not win.  Since the existence of a God can not be proven nor disproven in physical terms then the debate was fated to be a draw.    But as with so many other beliefs the real truth isn't important; only the truth of your belief.  That's all that matters, right? 

 

I do, though, miss your special terms of endearment for me. 

 

I thought I'd check it out and looked up to page 20 or so. You must have been later.

Thread started 15,4,19

MauGR1 page 1

Skeptic 16,4,19 page 7

Myself 17,4,19 page 13

Sunmaster 18,4,19 page 15

 

It was interesting in seeing who was posting then. Lots that are still posting but gave up on the God thread long ago, and heaps that have left the forum for good.

 

 

From an early post by skeptic

"More ridiculous nonsense".

 

 

Edited January 9 by thaibeachlovers

[Mike Teavee]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Why wouldn't it be God?

Dunno... 

[thaibeachlovers]

10 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

Dunno... 

Then you de facto have to accept that God can exist.

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Then you de facto have to accept that God can exist.

 

Nah, fence sitters are called agnostics. One does not need to accept that something exists just because they are unconvinced.

[pomchop]

How about a good ole "i don't know" when it comes to all the long winded arguments about god what it is etc.

 

There is really nothing wrong with just using those three words ...as far as i can tell NOBODY KNOWS for sure .  Believe whatever you want and try and justify it with lots of arguments but in the end i do not know for sure and neither does anyone else.

[ozimoron]

Just now, pomchop said:

How about a good ole "i don't know" when it comes to all the long winded arguments about god what it is etc.

 

There is really nothing wrong with just using those three words ...as far as i can tell NOBODY KNOWS for sure .  Believe whatever you want and try and justify it with lots of arguments but in the end i do not know for sure and neither does anyone else.

 

I don't know if xirfartium exists either but it doesn't mean I have to accept that it might until proven otherwise.

[Tippaporn]

Perhaps my analogy needs a bit of a modification to make it even more clear as to the true, underlying dynamics at play which Sunmaster's thread highlights.

 

Have you ever gone out to eat and you're undecided as to the fare of food you want to eat?  Let's say you're on foot in Bangkok and there are a plethora of restaurants offering all manner of different cuisines.  Lots of them have menus posted outside.  You may stop to take a look at a particular restaurant's menu and decide it's not the food you like.  Off you go until you find a restaurant which does offer the food you like.  In you go and satisfy your gastronomical inclinations.

 

Imagine now that you're walking by a restaurant and from it's name you know it offers a cuisine you don't like.  But rather than simply walking past you decide to enter.  You walk in despite the fact that you have no intention of ordering anything.  in fact, the only reason you enter is because it bothers you to no end that others would want to eat this type of cuisine.  And so you don't take a seat but go round from table to table to let each patron know how disgusting you think their food is.  Furthermore, you tell them they're stupid for eating the type of food they're eating.  You harass them further by telling them what type of food you eat and then shame them by saying that your food is good and their food is bad.

 

When the patrons protest your treatment and attempt to explain to you what makes their food delicious, so that you might understand and perhaps even reconsider your judgement of it, you tell them their reasons are a bunch of BS and a load of sh!te and their reasons are proof that they're all ignorant.  So then one of the patrons asks you why you came into the restaurant if you don't like the fare?  You retort that it's because of the fact that the restaurant has a shingle hanging above their establishment, proclaiming to any who are interested in their fare, which invites and justifies you to come in and abuse the patrons.  It is, after all, their fault for having the shingle and that they should expect you and people like you to abuse them.

 

BTW, the name of that restaurant is "Do you believe in God and why."  Our hypothetical belligerent protagonist we'll call @ozimoron.  There are others. 

[Tippaporn]

Uhm, BTW, the analogies I've offered have many more applications than just the God thread. 

[sipi]

11 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Why are you, presumably, clean shaven?  Ask a silly question and get a silly answer. 

 

Since a lot of folks here share the sentiment that it's perfectly fine to troll, trash, and ridicule people for holding ideas that they deem are pure fantasy then shouldn't it also be perfectly fine to troll, trash, and ridicule people who act silly?  Fair is fair, right? 

 

A serious answer, though, would be that God is an idea and because it appears to be human nature to personify everything then God was given a human image.  And since that was done a couple of thousand years ago when razors weren't in prolific use they pasted a beard on him to make his image match their own.

 

God was seen as cruel and powerful when man believed that these were desirable characteristics, needed particularly in his battle for physical survival. He projected these upon his idea of a god because he envied them and feared them. You have cast your idea of god, therefore, in your own image.

 

Show me a photo of god without a beard.

[Tippaporn]

4 minutes ago, sipi said:

Show me a photo of god without a beard.

 

You obviously missed my post.  Should I add your name to the protagonist list?

 

 

[sipi]

7 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

You obviously missed my post.  Should I add your name to the protagonist list?

 

 

Up to you.

[Tippaporn]

2 minutes ago, sipi said:

Up to you.

 

Just takin' a troll down the thread, are ya?  Okay. 

[sipi]

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Just takin' a troll down the thread, are ya?  Okay. 

What's so troll about asking for a photo of god without a beard?

At least I left her sandals alone.

[sipi]

8 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Just takin' a troll down the thread, are ya?  Okay. 

You spelt "stroll" wrong.

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, sipi said:

What's so troll about asking for a photo of god without a beard?

At least I left her sandals alone.

 

Her? Of course God is female.

[Sunmaster]

44 minutes ago, sipi said:

Show me a photo of god without a beard.

There you go.