Did God Destroy The Tower Of Babel, Sodom, Make Floods etc?

a reply to: Dr1Akula

So yes I am not agnostic to the christian god, I am an atheist because I am 100% absolutely sure he doesn't exist and never ever did.

Congradulations, may I ask when you achieved full knowledge
of the universe? Which BTW makes you God. Denying your
own existence.

RIGHT HERE ON ATS!

Claiming God doesn't exist even the Christian God is lame.
But show me the proof any way?

originally posted by: Dr1Akula
a reply to: randyvs



Sagan emphasized that his belief in god was dependent on whether it was defined in a theistic or a pantheistic way,

On your second quote he suggested that accepting the pantheist definition of god should make everyone a believer of god.

he frequently and firmly rejected the atheist label as he believed it was being unhelpful and vain.



“If we are to discuss the idea of God and be restricted to rational arguments, then it is probably useful to know what we are talking about when we say God. This turns out not to be easy.'' Carl Sagan



If we assume that god is essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe, then I agree, yes such a god exists, actually that's polytheism and or pantheism...



Polytheists also believed that the some laws and aspects of nature and human behavior were gods, and I'm also agnostic to that idea of god.

Sagan says he is agnostic to the possibility of some form or some idea of god, but I don't understand how does that prove your point.



What does that have to do with the biblical disasters caused by the specific god Yahweh?

What does the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe, have to do with the great flood, the tower of Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah and Yahweh's zeal and selfishness needing to rule over and be worshiped by his creation?



The problem is the definition of god which is something subjective to people, and when we try to generalize we get confused.

If we are talking about the Judeo-muslim-christian god described in the bible then yes I am 100% sure he doesn't exist, and thanks to science, we have overwhelming evidence that the creation story in genesis never happened, ignorance is to believe otherwise.

The idea of the christian god was first thought by primitive naive dessert people who believed an imaginary being in the sky was the answer to their existence, by not knowing any better. and then their leaders wrote down some stories about god (bible) to draw attention, help their morality, control them better and give them something to hope for.

The only evidence of gods existence is the bible, BUT anecdotal evidence, faulty reasoning and spurious claims prove there never was a case.

Trying to pick and chose or adding symbolic meaning to the bible, is a desperate attempt for justification imo, and it also leads to heresy away from the orthodox original beliefs.



So yes I am not agnostic to the christian god, I am an atheist because I am 100% absolutely sure he doesn't exist and never ever did.

So do you believe there could be other intelligent life in the universe perhaps higher than our own?

Also could this intelligent life have manipulated earth humans?

Could intelligent life be godlike?

a reply to: LittleByLittle

Lets assume that the probability field that is measured in the double slit experiment is connected to consciousness/awareness.

Why should we assume this? There is no reason for that to be the case and there is no evidence that it is.

Lets assume that the probability field "that can become achieve Synchronicity" is "the bible idea of god works in mysterious way".

Why? They are not the same thing at all. Jung, who invented the term, defined synchronicity as 'an acausal connecting principle.' If something was uncaused, it cannot have been God's — or anybody else's — work. It just happened.

Humanity as a specie is as a whole unfortunately not very wise.

The singular of 'species' is 'species', just like the singular of 'politics' is 'politics'.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: LittleByLittle

Lets assume that the probability field that is measured in the double slit experiment is connected to consciousness/awareness.

Why should we assume this? There is no reason for that to be the case and there is no evidence that it is.

Lets assume that the probability field "that can become achieve Synchronicity" is "the bible idea of god works in mysterious way".

Why? They are not the same thing at all. Jung, who invented the term, defined synchronicity as 'an acausal connecting principle.' If something was uncaused, it cannot have been God's — or anybody else's — work. It just happened.

Humanity as a specie is as a whole unfortunately not very wise.

The singular of 'species' is 'species', just like the singular of 'politics' is 'politics'.

Why because of quantum physics and superpostion thats why.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Why because of quantum physics and superpostion thats why.

Physics was the subject I studied at university. Quantum theory does not privilege consciousness; that is a fallacy invented by ignorant laymen of a mystical persuasion to give pseudoscientific credence to things they wanted to believe in, like telekinesis and out-of-body experiences.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Why because of quantum physics and superpostion thats why.

Physics was the subject I studied at university. Quantum theory does not privilege consciousness; that is a fallacy invented by ignorant laymen of a mystical persuasion to give pseudoscientific credence to things they wanted to believe in, like telekinesis and out-of-body experiences.

Sure it does, all things are based on the rules of the universe, wether known or unknown. I studied physics at a university too big whoopteydoo.

if you've ever read the book of enoch's references to the 200 watchers who descended to the earth at a mount and took (abducted?) human females and created offspring with them (nephilim), notice the name of the place they were sent to as punishment, Dudael. I prove that the language variants that started at babel, hid the actual identity of the references in the story and related information. here's the thread i wrote on the subject

Enoch's Dudael
www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Why because of quantum physics and superpostion thats why.

Physics was the subject I studied at university. Quantum theory does not privilege consciousness; that is a fallacy invented by ignorant laymen of a mystical persuasion to give pseudoscientific credence to things they wanted to believe in, like telekinesis and out-of-body experiences.

If you want to believe that awareness and synchronicity (and therefor the probability field) is not connected then do so. Some of us have experienced otherwise and have played around with synchronicity/probability fields with for instance the Reiki tool. Just because you are taught the earth is flat do not make it so even if the majority say it is flat.

originally posted by: Dr1Akula
a reply to: randyvs



The idea of the christian god was first thought by primitive naive dessert people who believed an imaginary being in the sky was the answer to their existence, by not knowing any better. and then their leaders wrote down some stories about god (bible) to draw attention, help their morality, control them better and give them something to hope for.
The only evidence of gods existence is the bible, BUT anecdotal evidence, faulty reasoning and spurious claims prove there never was a case.

The bible is hardly a book that demonstrates God being the conclusion of any philosophical reasoning. Like the conclusion of the Greek thinkers. And not anecdotal so much as personal contact.

As far as "primitive dessert people"......the whole world had an idea of God, gods ect sky and otherwise. Why single out just one culture? Sounds like an agenda to be always harping on what comes out of the middle east in isolation to the rest of the world. And I mean that only very generally in addressing the idea of god and gods.

Besides what do we make of the very advanced civilizations....Babylon, Egypt, Greek, Roman, China, Inca, Maya that were educated, scientific, philosophers......and were neck deep in gods and great public works, that stand to this day, dedicated to them?

This primitive desert people line is getting old and worn out. Its become a pejorative....like "hillbilly". It ignorant in itself.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

I studied physics at a university too big whoopteydoo.

No, you didn't, or you wouldn't give credence to such rot.

a reply to: LittleByLittle

If you want to believe that awareness and synchronicity (and therefor the probability field) is not connected then do so. Some of us have experienced otherwise and have played around with synchronicity/probability fields with for instance the Reiki tool. Just because you are taught the earth is flat do not make it so even if the majority say it is flat.

Another physics student, I suppose.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

I studied physics at a university too big whoopteydoo.

No, you didn't, or you wouldn't give credence to such rot.

To be fair he didn't say he passed any exams or anything.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

I studied physics at a university too big whoopteydoo.

No, you didn't, or you wouldn't give credence to such rot.

To be fair he didn't say he passed any exams or anything.

Maybe you two went to a closed minded university or something and never discussed superposition with your professors LOLz. Wait you said you studied, what did you learn in your classes about quantum mechanics? Did you both finish? Have you both finished learning, meaning you know it all now and have absolute knowledge? If your such a great physicist you must have a job which specializes in physics research. Please do illuminate us as to the absolute nature of superposition and reality. Care to list your credentials?

Perhaps you know more then these PHD's,:

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: LittleByLittle

If you want to believe that awareness and synchronicity (and therefor the probability field) is not connected then do so. Some of us have experienced otherwise and have played around with synchronicity/probability fields with for instance the Reiki tool. Just because you are taught the earth is flat do not make it so even if the majority say it is flat.

Another physics student, I suppose.

Not on University level. I am just very interested in quantum physics and spend a lot of time listening to the ones who discuss quantum physics/holographic universe theory.

I do have other degrees in science but really 6 years of university do not really mean you know the field you are studying, since it only the start of understanding that you should build on in your career.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Dr1Akula

So yes I am not agnostic to the christian god, I am an atheist because I am 100% absolutely sure he doesn't exist and never ever did.

Congradulations, may I ask when you achieved full knowledge
of the universe? Which BTW makes you God. Denying your
own existence.

RIGHT HERE ON ATS!

Claiming God doesn't exist even the Christian God is lame.

You don't need to achieve full knowledge of the universe, to be 100% sure Santa, the pink unicorn or Mr Boogeyman doesn't exist.

Read my previous post again and you will understand why I draw that conclusion.
You are an atheist to all other gods but yours, while I, include yours into my atheism...

You misunderstood the Sagan quotes...
We can't speak about any form of god in general like the the god who is the sum of laws of the universe.
Who said such ''god'' couldn't exist, but again, that's pantheism and it has nothing to do with your religion.

Accepting the possibility of some form of god (extraterrestrial beings, the power behind nature, the law of gravity) etc
is far far far away from the impossibility of Yahweh's creation, the talking snake, the great flood, and so on...

But show me the proof any way?

Why would I need proof that the spaghetti monster in the sky isn't real
Since those suggesting god exists in the first place haven't show us any proof at all,
the idea of the christian god was first thought by primitive naive dessert people who believed an imaginary being in the sky was the answer to their existence.... The only evidence of gods existence is the bible, nothing but anecdotal evidence, faulty reasoning and spurious claims.
We have overwhelming scientific evidence that the creation story in genesis among many other stories in the bible never happened.
Since the book is presented as god-breathed and it's wrong in so many ways....think about it
Would an omnipotent and omniscient creator be wrong?

Therefore I have all the proof I need that the idea of this god was invented by primitive people to serve their purposes and such a being never existed...

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Dr1Akula
a reply to: randyvs



The idea of the christian god was first thought by primitive naive dessert people who believed an imaginary being in the sky was the answer to their existence, by not knowing any better. and then their leaders wrote down some stories about god (bible) to draw attention, help their morality, control them better and give them something to hope for.
The only evidence of gods existence is the bible, BUT anecdotal evidence, faulty reasoning and spurious claims prove there never was a case.

The bible is hardly a book that demonstrates God being the conclusion of any philosophical reasoning. Like the conclusion of the Greek thinkers. And not anecdotal so much as personal contact.

As far as "primitive dessert people"......the whole world had an idea of God, gods ect sky and otherwise. Why single out just one culture? Sounds like an agenda to be always harping on what comes out of the middle east in isolation to the rest of the world. And I mean that only very generally in addressing the idea of god and gods.

Besides what do we make of the very advanced civilizations....Babylon, Egypt, Greek, Roman, China, Inca, Maya that were educated, scientific, philosophers......and were neck deep in gods and great public works, that stand to this day, dedicated to them?

This primitive desert people line is getting old and worn out. Its become a pejorative....like "hillbilly". It ignorant in itself.

My use of ''primitive desert people'' was to describe the origins of a specific religion, and I'm spot on cause that's the truth...
I'm not hatred towards middle east and I follow no agenda at all...

Polytheism is a totally different subject, with tremendous philosophical and cosmological value that reached beyond superstitious for those who could think, but unfortunately not for the peasants.
Religion was always used as a tool of mass manipulation and control, even by the most advanced civilizations in history.

Again I'm not distinguishing the people of the past but there was an obvious difference in ideology, culture, education and social level that lead to the creation of each civilization's religion that separates the two (polytheism and monotheism), and an obvious geopolitical survival reason as to why the specific monotheistic religion was created.

monotheism was not for everyone, only for their people
(They desperately had the need of a god watching over them through their tough times, and that's why their god favor's only them and not the gentiles and helps them to win against them by destroying their enemies)

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord
So do you believe there could be other intelligent life in the universe perhaps higher than our own?

Of course I do.

Also could this intelligent life have manipulated earth humans?

That's a little stretched, but not impossible

Could intelligent life be godlike?

It depends what do you mean by ''godlike''....

a reply to: Dr1Akula

You misunderstood the Sagan quotes...

Ha ha I didn't misunderstand anything. Because the God of the Bible
is encompassing to pantheism in my view. Believe in Pantheism all you
like. You believe in the God of the Bible. There is no difference.
So show me the evidence the creation story in the Bible never happened
stud. Show me something or cease with your biased rants.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Dr1Akula

You misunderstood the Sagan quotes...

Ha ha I didn't misunderstand anything. Because the God of the Bible
is encompassing to pantheism in my view. Believe in Pantheism all you
like. You believe in the God of the Bible. There is no difference.

You can have any views and beliefs you like but you can't use things you make up, as an argument
that's plain ignorance...

Pantheism is the belief that the universe (or nature as the totality of everything) is identical with divinity, or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent God. Pantheists thus do not believe in a distinct personal or anthropomorphic god.

Do you see now your misunderstanding?
Pantheism doesn't sum up all the superstitious deities of the world.
Also your religion relies to faith and prayer which have no place in pantheism since there is no need to have faith in the law of gravity for ex. and it would be stupid to pray to it.

If you still believe there is no difference then I am sorry to say but you are deluded my friend

So show me the evidence the creation story in the Bible never happened stud. Show me something or cease with your biased rants.

wow, look who's talking about bias, anyway no need to be offended we are just a having a conversation and I have no hard feelings at all...

As for the evidence you asked for:
Big bang, evolution, fossils everywhere, dinosaurs, the age of earth, the age of the universe.

The bible is full of serious errors. The world was not created in 6 days. If you say - to god a day is like 1000 years. Well if god is omnipotent and he's writing a book for people to read and understand - don't you think that God knows how long a day is? Even if a day is 1000 years that takes the age of the universe up to what? 12,000 years? Where did the other 15 billion years go? The bible also has creating in the wrong order. The stars came before the Earth(god has it backwards). We are seeing stars and galactic clusters out there that are 10 billion light years away. That means that what we are seeing came from stars 10 billion years ago. That's how long the light takes to get here.

Creation of Day and Night "Day" 1
Creation of Heaven "Day" 2
Creation of the Earth, the Seas, and the Plants "Day" 3
Creation of the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars "Day" 4
Creation of Fishes and Birds [Beginning of Sexual Reproduction] "Day" 5
Creation of Land Animals (Cattle, Insects, Reptiles, Man) "Day" 6

So we have day and night before the sun was created
plants are older than the sun, and so is the Earth and seas
Also why are those two referred as something separate aren't the seas part of the planet Earth? This shows that those who wrote genesis (or god himself, since it's god-breathed) didn't even knew the earth was a planet, for them the earth meant the ground and nothing more, which is normal for a flat Earth society, but not for the creator
and it took him five days to create earthy things, while it took him just one day to make the moon the sun and the ~1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars and their planets-worlds in the vast complex universe. Yet the creation doesn't even speak about a vast universe as we know it, it just calls it sky and ''Heavens'' as they imagined it above their flat Earth.

Wouldn't an omniscient and omnipotent perfect god who created everything, know any better than this?
It's like me claiming to have build the empire state building, while I have no idea how it was build, presenting faulty plans of the building.

If that's not proof that the creation story is wrong and naive people (and not an omniscient god) wrote the story with their extremely limited understanding of cosmology, then what is?

a reply to: Dr1Akula

You know what I LMAO about people like you?
You actually believe you know something.
Where as others only know they believe something.