Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Lilly

Why I Think God Exists

637 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Will Do
4 minutes ago, Podo said:

It is a fallacy to assert that the existence of constants requires a conscious writer. There are reasons for them, of course, but there is no evidence whatsoever to support their intelligent creation

 

I understand your position about this and appreciate it. Because it demonstrates the value of free will, and what's at the heart of being human.

If there are constants, then there is stability. When the physical world and the universe is observed, all indications show that some things are at the edge of, or in chaos. But when further researched and studied, what becomes revealed is that all is in perfect balance. 

 

(12:9.3) Mathematics, material science, is indispensable to the intelligent discussion of the material aspects of the universe, but such knowledge is not necessarily a part of the higher realization of truth or of the personal appreciation of spiritual realities. Not only in the realms of life but even in the world of physical energy, the sum of two or more things is very often something more than, or something different from, the predictable additive consequences of such unions. The entire science of mathematics, the whole domain of philosophy, the highest physics or chemistry, could not predict or know that the union of two gaseous hydrogen atoms with one gaseous oxygen atom would result in a new and qualitatively superadditive substance—liquid water. The understanding knowledge of this one physiochemical phenomenon should have prevented the development of materialistic philosophy and mechanistic cosmology.

 

http://www.urantia.org/urantia-book/read-urantia-book-online

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Podo
3 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

I understand your position about this and appreciate it. Because it demonstrates the value of free will, and what's at the heart of being human.

If there are constants, then there is stability. When the physical world and the universe is observed, all indications show that some things are at the edge of, or in chaos. But when further researched and studied, what becomes revealed is that all is in perfect balance. 

 

(12:9.3) Mathematics, material science, is indispensable to the intelligent discussion of the material aspects of the universe, but such knowledge is not necessarily a part of the higher realization of truth or of the personal appreciation of spiritual realities. Not only in the realms of life but even in the world of physical energy, the sum of two or more things is very often something more than, or something different from, the predictable additive consequences of such unions. The entire science of mathematics, the whole domain of philosophy, the highest physics or chemistry, could not predict or know that the union of two gaseous hydrogen atoms with one gaseous oxygen atom would result in a new and qualitatively superadditive substance—liquid water. The understanding knowledge of this one physiochemical phenomenon should have prevented the development of materialistic philosophy and mechanistic cosmology.

 

http://www.urantia.org/urantia-book/read-urantia-book-online

 

Links to a holy book aren't proof of anything beyond a creative human author.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
Just now, Podo said:

Links to a holy book aren't proof of anything beyond a creative human author.

 

I'm participating in this forum to introduce the Urantia Book to all who may find it useful for the purpose of stimulating creative speculation.

For the record, the Urantia Book is most definitely not holy, but it is wholly and full of other worldly information.

It's a very mysterious and unexplained thing. Until it's evaluated on the merits of what it says.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Podo
33 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

I'm participating in this forum to introduce the Urantia Book to all who may find it useful for the purpose of stimulating creative speculation.

For the record, the Urantia Book is most definitely not holy, but it is wholly and full of other worldly information.

It's a very mysterious and unexplained thing. Until it's evaluated on the merits of what it says.

 

So you're peddling cult documents? Neat. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
1 hour ago, Podo said:

So you're peddling cult documents? Neat. 

 

Have I been rude to you?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Claire.
2 hours ago, Podo said:

Links to a holy book aren't proof of anything beyond a creative human author.

The books authors have apparently been traced to a Seventh Day Adventist splinter group.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose
2 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

I'm participating in this forum to introduce the Urantia Book to all who may find it useful for the purpose of stimulating creative speculation.

For the record, the Urantia Book is most definitely not holy, but it is wholly and full of other worldly information.

It's a very mysterious and unexplained thing. Until it's evaluated on the merits of what it says.

 

Everyone seems to have their favorite book, don't they? 

Why this one?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
D.O'N
2 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

Everyone seems to have their favorite book, don't they? 

Why this one?

 

My favourite book is about having favourite books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose

Probably the toughest thing to swallow about the UB is that it supports eugenics. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Podo
58 minutes ago, Claire. said:

The books authors have apparently been traced to a Seventh Day Adventist splinter group.

Oh boy, that's super fringy. Thanks for the info. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Astra.
On 04/07/2017 at 0:46 AM, Will Due said:

 

That's a very good question:

(101:4.2) Mankind should understand that we who participate in the revelation of truth are very rigorously limited by the instructions of our superiors. We are not at liberty to anticipate the scientific discoveries of a thousand years. Revelators must act in accordance with the instructions which form a part of the revelation mandate. We see no way of overcoming this difficulty, either now or at any future time. We full well know that, while the historic facts and religious truths of this series of revelatory presentations will stand on the records of the ages to come, within a few short years many of our statements regarding the physical sciences will stand in need of revision in consequence of additional scientific developments and new discoveries. These new developments we even now foresee, but we are forbidden to include such humanly undiscovered facts in the revelatory records. Let it be made clear that revelations are not necessarily inspired. The cosmology of these revelations is not inspired. It is limited by our permission for the co-ordination and sorting of present-day knowledge. While divine or spiritual insight is a gift, human wisdom must evolve.

 

You know, I do find some of your postings to be rather preachy and sermonising. Quite frankly, nothing annoys me more than that. In fact you remind me of another poster here, who comes across as thinking they have (close to all the answers) whilst pushing their religious idea's and / or other notions down the throats of others. Stubbly would certainly have a good idea of who I am referring to.

Also, please stop with the referencing of this Urantia book of yours. If anything, it' seems like your touting it. People are entitled to read any book / or research whatever they choose to on this enquiring subject, and are also quite capable of thinking for themselves.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
33 minutes ago, Astra. said:

You know, I do find some of your postings to be rather preachy and sermonising. Quite frankly, nothing annoys me more than that. In fact you remind me of another poster here, who comes across as thinking they have (close to all the answers) whilst pushing their religious idea's and / or other notions down the throats of others. Stubbly would certainly have a good idea of who I am referring to.

Also, please stop with the referencing of this Urantia book of yours. If anything, it' seems like your touting it. People are entitled to read any book / or research whatever they choose to on this enquiring subject, and are also quite capable of thinking for themselves.

 

Pardon me. I wasn't thinking. 

 

Edited by Will Due

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Podo
5 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

Have I been rude to you?

 

Not directly, but your posts come across, in all of your threads, as single-minded and incredibly arrogant. You're pushing your eugenics-supporting literature to a fanatical level, and I'm no fan of that. 

Edited by Podo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 02/07/2017 at 5:38 AM, Lilly said:

Ok, I'm not saying there's a 'personal God' or a God indicative of any particular religion. What I'm offering as a hypothesis is that *something* eternal has to exist. In philosophy this is called the Cosmological Argument. Here's the basic framework of this hypothesis:

Something exists (pretty obviously our universe)

Nothing can’t bring forth something

Therefore, something must have always existed in order to cause the universe to come into existence

The universe didn’t always exist (we know the universe came into being at the Big Bang)

Therefore, something outside of the universe must have always existed

 

So, what has always existed? What is eternal? IMO, this has to be God. Opinions?

it may have been answered in the many replies already posted, but isnt modern scientific theory that, not only can "something"  come forth from "nothing",  but indeed nothing is so inherently unstable  in its physical properties that it is inevitable that something will come from it, in a relatively short time?.

We also tend to think with human perspectives.  To us the known universe seem old, but is it really?  it seems big, but is it really, or are both views subjective and dependent on our relative position in time and space?. 

Even if we accept  "your"  theory of "something"  being always existent, why (and indeed how)  could it be anything resembling a god?  Would it not be simply a natural  matter /energy form? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 02/07/2017 at 6:19 AM, spartan max2 said:

Thinking about something forever existing is just impossible to wrap our little brains around lol.

Either the universe or some kind of God has had to forever exsist.

Just like the concept of never ending Is impossible to understand. The universe either goes on forever or it ends. But what does ending even me. If there is a stopping point then there would have to be an invisible wall, walls means somethings on the other side lol

I think some things our brains just can't understand 

Why do you think these concpet are impossible to understand?  We create/construct the concepts of infinity or eternity and  so our minds are more than capable of comprehending them.

the more interesting question is, which was it  An unending eternal existence OR a (perhaps repeated ) pattern of non existence /transiting into existence and maybe back into non existence.  For example black holes may be "machines" of nature which break down matter and energy and draw it through themselves, spitting out the raw materials into another part of the universe.  Thus our part of the universe may have come from,  and will eventually transit back through, one (or many)  black holes  The big bang might be the explosive outpouring of energy from the reverse side of a black hole.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 02/07/2017 at 6:57 AM, Lilly said:

To be quite frank, I simply don't think it's possible for anyone to prove the existence of God. IMO, the best we can do is to hold a personal opinion that's at least thoughtful.

That would dependon how one defined god.  It has long been my opinion that any entity,   which is truly a physical god, is capable of proof, just like any other real physical entity. Only unreal/non physical things are potentially beyond the ability to prove to exist   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 02/07/2017 at 9:01 AM, Lilly said:

Uh...because the existence of God is an 'unexplained mystery' and because this is a discussion forum about 'unexplained mysteries'. Nothing nefarious I assure you.

I dont just like this response,  I love it. :) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 02/07/2017 at 9:53 AM, Kismit said:

I don't see what makes Lilly's belief provocative. Could you explain.

As I see it it fits very clisely wirh my own belief.

My self, I don't believe people have purpose, but I believe that God is the spark that makes all things exsist. Is this also a provocative thought?

I just don't understand how you where, provoked by someone's genuine and thoughtful post.

 Lots of people are not only provoked but even sometimes angered by the idea that any intelligent rational human could form a belief in ANY form of god, and what is more dare to express that belief.   

As an evolutionist i see no need for a god anywhere in the formation of the natural universe  although as one who knows  (a) god  it is clear  (to me)  that god forms have evolved within this universe.

I think some people  are upset by the idea of others  that there HAS to be a creator god because  the y think something must have created the universe   This does see to beg the same question often asked, then who created that god.  If a GOD can come into existence spontaneously   or exist eternally then it is much more likely and possible that a non living physical universe can do the same, and then, that life intelligence and gods can evolve from within tha t universe. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 02/07/2017 at 4:32 PM, eugeneonegin said:

Lilly's hypothesis is a fallacy.

She says the universe exists, it can't come out of nothing (why not? Spontaneous existence is dismissed?) so something must have created it.

But she proposes the creator came out of nothing, even though she maintains nothing can come out of nothing.

Or did the creator get created because the creator couldn't have come out of nothing?

This type of argument can go on an on.....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

Intelligence even the intelligence of god is, by nature, an evolved and evolving property which is dependent on interaction with other things around it  to provide the feedback required to learn grow experiment and improve. Thus before any god there must have been a universe which provided the learning environment in which that god evolved self awareness, intelligence and slowly its godlike powers.  After that anything is  possible but in the chicken and egg question the natural universe came first and any   gods which might exist  evolved within the universe, becoming gods as their knowledge, power and technology evolved . . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 02/07/2017 at 6:28 PM, eugeneonegin said:

Intelligent design and science doesn't mix!

Intelligent Design is a religious concept. Based on no evidence, while science is evidence based.

There are lots of reasons why people have a vague belief in a god, or a more concrete belief in a specific god.

Some are: Evolutionary. Those groups who worshipped had a common cause and worked together better than other groups and were more likely to survive.

Nurture: most people are born into a family, and grow up believing, at first, their parents are all-wise and all-powerful, and as adults carry this belief into the wider world.

Evolutionary again: we have an innate need to order the world, the better to survive, and we also try to understand the "bigger questions", such as why are we here?.

BTW, gorillas have been observed carrying out what has been claimed to be proto-religious rituals!

 

 

it is scientifically possible (in theory) that the very small part of the universe we know about was constructed and managed by a powerful alien entity or race which we would think of a s gods. it i s possible life in our galaxy or even universe   was seeded onto planets and our evolution managed by a powerful and ancient race of beings   However, originally, that being or race would be a naturally evolved entity, coming out of an earlier natural universe.  Personally i tend to the view that we are purely the result of natural forces as is our universe, but with our present technology and limited space/time perspective, we dont have the knowldge to answer this question factually or absolutely   

Ps before long artificial intelligences will also develop spirituality and religions  It is an essential artefact of a certain level of self aware intelligence. 

As to the gorillas i am open to being convinced, but it is still a very debatable pov.

I think that,  if left to natural evolution, most primates are still a 100000 years or so away from  the necessary level of self aware consciousness required But interaction with humans and any teaching/training by humans could reduce that timeframe significantly, and probably will  . 

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/03/chimpanzee-spirituality/475731/

 

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 02/07/2017 at 10:18 PM, ChaosRose said:

To be scientific, an hypothesis must at least be falsifiable. In order to be falsifiable, it has to be testable.

Are you sure?  Can't it be just theoretically testable?  ie if we had adequate technology and knowledge it would be testable  There are MANY scientific hypotheses which currently are not testable, using current technology, but have been expressed as ideas for discussion and debate with the potential to be tested as technologies evolve   Here is one, sort of on the edge of current science.  "That water exists in liquid form on mars"  .  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 02/07/2017 at 10:44 PM, simplybill said:

We may eventually find the answers to the origins of the material world, though we'll still have the questions about the origins of the non-material things such as emotion, intelligence, longing, grief, conscience, morality, decision-making...the hundreds of non-material components of our humanness. 

Some will argue that chemical activity in our brains may be the answer, but I'm not convinced that chemicals can force me to consider a glorious sunrise to be "beautiful", or to consider murder to be "evil". 

Those are LEARNED or socialised responses  As such the y are also  constructed products of our self aware intelligence   just as grief anger hatred and  etc are.

Thought and memories are observable biochemical activities within our brains, a pattern of connected electrochemical discharges and relays.  However,  because we are conscious of them, and learn to understand them via language of the mind,   we gain control of them from infancy,   developing increasingly  sophisticated  language of the mind (thought) and speech.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 03/07/2017 at 2:22 AM, Matt221 said:

I belive in Atheisum ...... it's non Prophet organisation.... see what I done there

Are you sure it is not an element   on the periodic  table ? :) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
5 hours ago, Podo said:

Not directly, but your posts come across, in all of your threads, as single-minded and incredibly arrogant. You're pushing your eugenics-supporting literature to a fanatical level, and I'm no fan of that. 

 

Show me how the Urantia Book supports eugenics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 03/07/2017 at 8:20 AM, eugeneonegin said:

I think this is a tautology.

So,the only people who can understand God exists are people who understand God exists.

The people who do not believe God exists are not in a position to believe he exists, as they have the wrong mind-set.If they had faith he exists, they would understand he exists. Because they lack such faith, they do not realise he exists.

You can say exactly the same thing by substituting the Flying Spaghetti Monster or the Flying Teapot for God.

 

if you have never had a personal experience with a dog, how can you be TRULY sure that dogs exist ?

The only true surety and knowldge we can have, and hold, about ANYTHING, is that gained via personal experience  We can all believe and have faith in things we have no personal experience with; eg by accepting the evidences and stories of others or of books videos etc.   but we can only really know that which we have experienced to be real and true. This also true for any gods.   So yes in fact the only people who can truly know gods exist are people who know gods exist because they have experience with them This is true for people and dogs as well.  Also true for aliens, ghosts, big foot  and any other entity. 

You can only know the flying spaghetti monster has an independent physical existence, once you have encountered him in person.  (gender  of said monster arbitrarily attributed)  Only then will you be able to describe the feel, taste, smell and temperature of his  supreme holiness. And if people dont believe those spots on your nice white shirt truly are a result of your encounter,  why, that is their problem .YOU know what you encountered. 

Edited by Mr Walker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.