Wanted: Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not.

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: cooperton

I will attempt to look up deja vu as related to Gamma waves, since no references were cited.

So you know Out6of9Balance's thoughts?

And you conclude something about another also?

Are not individuals free to think and write for themselves?

They were able to detect it during deja vu experiences during epileptic attacks:
source

Perhaps why epilepsy used to be considered a sacred disease.

a reply to: cooperton

Everything that I've read so far has deja vu categorized as a malfunction.

My most profound experience of deja vu was related to an illness which resulted in sleep disruption, then aggravated by massive steroid prescription.

I imagined a conversation with an individual in which he showed me a poem which he had written. We discussed it. I misinterpreted the central imagery in the poem, and later in the conversation realized the true import of what I had misinterpreted.

Three years later I was shown the poem by the same individual. Massive deja vu. I stated that my interpretation was the same as from when he showed it too me before. He denied having shown me before. It was written at the same time three years earlier when I was suffering delusions.

So malfunction seems key, even if the malfunction was in the past.

Hallucinations show a non-epilepsy related increase in Gamma Waves activity.

a reply to: pthena

Cool story, but I don't think Its a malfunction if it was able to accurately depict a future event. it has been categorized as a malfunction, but I think such a label is a great disservice to how profound deja vu phenomenon is. Especially since it transcends typical spacetime limitations

a reply to: cooperton

if it was able to accurately depict a future event

No precognition involved.

The poem had been written.
The poet must have been thinking about it.

The delusion was that I was conversing with him in an amiable atmosphere. As I recall, we had never had any actual amiable conversations at around that time period.

The deja vu was me remembering a conversation that never occurred in real time.

MONO




[ Dear everyone here including my opponents, I thought I was already banned here in ATS, because I found myself no longer auto logged in on opening my link to ATS this morning, so I logged in again, and am now glad that I can still continue here with my thread. ]

.


This morning I will just repost my OP from my thread in a Singaporean web forum of condo owners/tenants - so far none has replied to my OP there.

Here is my OP in that forum, see quote below - you guys can interact with me also on that OP.

Title: The generic concept of God, i.e. God outside faith brands.


OP: 1. The generic concept of God, i.e. God outside faith brands.

[ Please bear with me for a topic that might not appeal to some members here, but this board is described thus:

Forum: Coffeeshop Talk - Anything under the sun.

So I guess the topic, "The generic concept of God, i.e. God outside faith brands," is all right here. ]



Here is my generic concept of God:

"God in concept is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning."

What do you guys here say about that?
.

forums.condosingapore.com...

.

MONO*

posted by Tzar on Aug, 26 2020 @ 02:07 AM


originally posted by: cooperton


Stop being obtuse. Obviously he meant the question rhetorically to express irony.



There's nothing obvious about that. Except for the part where they have nothing useful to say.

Also, "Pachomius the great" appears to have abandoned the discussion which leaves us more or less where this exercise began. Good game everybody.

edit on 25-8-2020 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)

.



*Thanks Tzar for the kind words.

.

a reply to: Pachomius

Nobody cares.

What you going to do?

MONO





What is the thing you derailing posters are into all the time, namely, saying that I am not linking to you?

Are you guys first and foremost linked to the OP at all?


Okay, read the OP again, and see if you talk about it, at all.

I will itemize the OP in a list so you choose just one item per post, and give your comments, and no more complaining that I am not linking to you - when you are into derailing - in order to increase your number of posts here in ATS, even though useless posts.


For your orientation, read the OP now.

1. Title of thread: Wanted: Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not.

Author of thread: Pachomius

posted on Jun, 25 2020 @ 01:12 PM

OP of thread:

2. On the assumption that mankind sincerely seeks knowledge,

3. I submit that it is possible for any person to come to resolve the issue God exists or not, with honest intelligent productive thinking,

4. i.e., thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas. Now, honest intelligent productive thinking on the said issue

5. [it] must start with working together to concur on the concept of God.

6. What do you dear colleagues here say?

.

a reply to: Pachomius

Chirp chirp chirp........

a reply to: Pachomius

It seems that very many people already hold to your same concept of God.

See Wikipedia: God

In monotheistic thought, God is conceived of as the supreme being, creator deity, and principal object of faith. God is usually conceived as being omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), omnipresent (all-present) and as having an eternal and necessary existence.

On the necessary existence: It is necessary that God exist or there would be no nose or baby or roses.

a reply to: Pachomius

You are so welcome, and it's a relief to see we didn't scare you off. Did you happen to bring some actual facts back with you?

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: Pachomius

It seems that very many people already hold to your same concept of God.

See Wikipedia: God

In monotheistic thought, God is conceived of as the supreme being, creator deity, and principal object of faith. God is usually conceived as being omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), omnipresent (all-present) and as having an eternal and necessary existence.

On the necessary existence: It is necessary that God exist or there would be no nose or baby or roses.

This is usually the part where I point out how the planet we call home thrived for over 4 billion years without any theology or any concept of a creator. If by necessary you mean essential to the existence of the universe, that's a gross exaggeration to put it mildly.

a reply to: TzarChasm

This is usually the part where I point out how the planet we call home thrived for over 4 billion years without any theology or any concept of a creator. If by necessary you mean essential to the existence of the universe, that's a gross exaggeration to put it mildly.

Correct. The concept as necessary is not necessary. Reality is necessary for the real to exist. They exist together and rely upon each other to exist.

In order to dispel the notion that necessary existence implies such non-confirmable attributes as eternal, omnipotent, omniscient; I may have to use a simple notation such as (*) to indicate essential without the baggage associated with the word God.

a reply to: TzarChasm

You reason so because you were told it took the universe or I don't know what cause or source necessary 13 billion years to get you here where you are now.

That's what it's all about.

What got you here and what got the universe here? Now you will tell me the universe is a too ridiculous thing to have been created by a perfect omnipotent good God and so the circular reasoning continuous.

Humans reason in order to solve and create things but God doesn't need to be solved or created.

God is not human. God is unlike your understanding of what you want Him to be. You can't control God.

Does God Exist?—Some Scientists Answer

Physics professor Ulrich J. Becker, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, stated when commenting on the existence of God: “How can I exist without a creator? I am not aware of any compelling answer ever given.”

Did this contradict his scientific views? The professor’s thought-provoking answer was, “If you discovered how one wheel in the ‘clock’ turns—you may speculate how the rest move, but you are not entitled to call this scientific and better leave alone the question of who wound up the spring.”

Contrary to the opinion of some, many respected men of science do not rule out the idea of there being a God—a Great Mastermind behind the creation of the universe and man.

Consider some more examples on this point. When mathematics professor John E. Fornaess, of Princeton University, was asked for his thoughts on the existence of God, he replied: “I believe that there is a God and that God brings structure to the universe on all levels from elementary particles to living beings to superclusters of galaxies.”

Physics professor Henry Margenau, of Yale University, said that he was convinced that the laws of nature were created by God. He then noted that in the book The Mystery of Life’s Origin, three scientists explain that a Creator is a plausible explanation for life’s origin. Supporting this view, astronomer Fred Hoyle has stated that believing the first cell originated by chance is like believing that a tornado ripping through a junkyard full of Boeing 747 airplane parts dismembered and in disarray could produce a 747.

To these answers can be added the words of the Bible writer Paul: “[God’s] invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship.”—Romans 1:20.

Unlocking The Mystery of Life Trailer (playlist with context)

Yes, God really does exist! But what is his reason for allowing the world’s present sorry state? What is his purpose for the earth? Can we know exactly who the true God is?

What Is God’s Purpose? (Awake!—1999)
Identifying the Only True God

We created God and now that He's here what are we going to do?

Tell Him the truth, honor Him, submit yourself.

Tell Him He's beautiful over and over again.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

If you are a Christian then you can take this prayer by Reinhold Niebuhr as is.

God, give me grace to accept with serenity
the things that cannot be changed,
Courage to change the things
which should be changed,
and the Wisdom to distinguish
the one from the other.

Living one day at a time,
Enjoying one moment at a time,
Accepting hardship as a pathway to peace,
Taking, as Jesus did,
This sinful world as it is,
Not as I would have it,
Trusting that You will make all things right,
If I surrender to Your will,
So that I may be reasonably happy in this life,
And supremely happy with You forever in the next.

-------------
Personally, I would remove some lines.

Trusting that You will make all things right,
If I surrender to Your will,
And supremely happy with You forever in the next.

but that's me.

MONO




Thanks everyone for your statements that you are linked to the OP.


Now, you must also explain in concise clean comprehensible words why and how you are linked to an item in my OP - and no quoting from internet materials, just present your self personal thought up explanation, like what is a necessary being, from your honest intelligent productive thinking.

Those who claim to have accepted God exists, you first have to state at the top of your post, your concept of God, and please just the generic* concept - and no bringing in like with Neutron quotes from faith branded religion, his Bible.


Those of you who are atheists, please concentrate on what is an argument, what is evidence, what is circular logic, what is your generic* concept of God, okay?

Otherwise you really don't have any solid inkling at all what you are denying to exist, except calling God ridiculous names like orbiting teapot in space, Santa, tooth fairy, flying spaghetti monster, etc. etc. etc. - and feeling so smart with yourselves.


To detailers, you are increasing your post load in this ATS forum, so you can congratulate yourselves, for I seem to understand that there is some kind of some award of some sort for reaching some big quantity of posts contributed to the ATS forum.

*Generic concept of God = God in concept is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.
.

a reply to: Pachomius

Although God is The Creator we should not fall for their delusion God doesn't exist.

This delusion is based on circular logic.

Sincerely

MONO




To everyone, I have a bonus for you all, for your loyalty in sticking here with me though you be into derailing.


There are atheists who are with extreme semantic trickery on what is an atheist, like with American atheists i.e. members of the so-called American Atheists society of sorts, they propound their concept of what is an atheist, with simply declaring that they just lack any belief in any gods - they can also just be even more extreme with their semantic contortionist maneuverings, they could also just insist that they just lack a brain.


So, please be guided accordingly, with doing honest intelligent productive thinking, even though you are into shallow employment of your brain tissues, or writing without knowing what you are saying if anything at all - that is not indicative of honest intelligent productive thinking.


Okay, here is the bonus, see quote below.

forums.delphiforums.com...

From: mdejess 2:16 PM 082820fri0218h
To: All in particular AletheiaAtha, FirstCowboy, Slackersx, and everyone
____________________


First, let us not dwell wastefully on what are militant atheists, let us just - if you don't accept the existence of God and I accept the existence of God, let us first present what is our respective each one's concept of God.

Here is my concept of God: God (in concept) is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

Now, let everyone in particular AletheiaAtha, FirstCowboy, Slackersx, please present your concept of God.

For the orientation of readers:
From: mdejess
Aug-25 9:57 PM

To: All
Dear everyone, what kind of atheists am I inviting to discuss God exists or not?
I call them militant atheists and I describe them as follows (see also quote below), "Militant atheists are those who publicly convey that there is no God."

So if anyone here does not fit that description, no matter you call yourself anything, I am not inviting you to discuss the issue God exists or not.

Dear everyone here, my insight into what I call militant atheists is that they are scared to death to engage themselves in honest intelligent productive thinking and writing, they are into nothing but evasions all the time from the issue God exists or not, for example, they will never present what is their information, (mind you, information, not any conviction about God existing or not existing), because they know that once they bring in the information of what is God, it is inevitable that if they do honest intelligent productive thinking, they will land into the conclusion, God exists.


Anyway, I sincerely invite militant atheists to present their best argument against God existing.

Yes, they will evade this invitation with insisting that they are not making any claim, but I am making the claim God exists, so I must be the one to argue for my claim.

So?

So, dear militant* atheists, at least you owe it to your own intellectual integrity to explain why and how you ascribe to yourselves the designation, atheist?

*Militant atheists are those who publicly convey that there is no God and therefore what? What? They will tell you, enjoy life, as though folks knowing God exists them folks cannot enjoy life - only atheists enjoy life.
.