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

a reply to: Pachomius

I found this interesting.


t.me...

a reply to: Pachomius
Well its obvious that the only conclusion is that god exists. But has used his all omnipotent powers to make it so he or she or it, does not exist. There by creating a conundrum throughout all the universe of a whole lot of people and possibly aliens as well wondering if god exists or does not exist.

Yup! Its the only logical answer to your question. One of those questions which will never by answered. Kind of like the age old question of! How many licks it takes to get to the bottom of a tootsi pop? The world may never know.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: Pachomius

There are here two items:
1. To decide whether man can prove God exists or not.
2. To formulate a mutually concurred on method to resolve i.e. prove God exists or God does not exist.

First, work on num 1.

1. No

2. The scientific method

No response? Not surprised.

Wanted Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3483)
=============================================================================================

Dear readers and in particular my fellow posters here, it seems that regrettably you dear follow posters appear to be always into obfuscations, I refer to all kinds and manners of God-deniers starting with atheists.

I am telling you again, that - and without offense, please present your concepts of existence, God, proof, so that we can together work out mutually agreed on concepts, and from whence then to work out again together for the definitive statement of conclusion, namely, that God exists or does not exist.

Otherwise, and again without any intention to offend, just read, don't write here.

Pachomius posted on Mar, 12 2021 @ 02:04 PM

Wanted Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3479)
=============================================================================================

I have just entered these words below into google, bing, and yahoo:

Free my God from atheists' obfuscations and theists' stupidities

And here are their numbers of hits:

Google: About 1,350,000 results (0.56 seconds) (divided into nine pages)

Bing: 650 (divided into seven pages of 10 hits per page)

Yahoo:12,300 results (get it at the bottom right side for each page around that number 12,300 or less...)


I am different, I am neither into obfuscations and nor into stupidities, because I have definitions for existence, God, and proof, while - let you all read them atheists' and theists' writings, them atheists and them theists don't have definitions of existence, God, and proof.

For your benefit, dear readers, here again are my definitions of existence, God, and proof:

Existence in concept is anything at all that we experience directly with our senses and consciousness, and/or indirectly by our honest intelligent productive thinking on what it is from what we know with our senses and consciousness.

God in concept is the permanent self-existent cause of man and the universe and everything transient, i.e. with a beginning and an ending.

Proof is the process by which we humans ascertain the existence of something directly by our conscious experience of the object of concern, and/or indirectly by reasoning from the data of our conscious experience.




Further, affiant sayeth naught.
.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: Pachomius

There are here two items:
1. To decide whether man can prove God exists or not.
2. To formulate a mutually concurred on method to resolve i.e. prove God exists or God does not exist.

First, work on num 1.

1. No

2. The scientific method

.

a reply to: Pachomius

I answered your questions, maybe reply to my answers.

Yes, yes yes...Yes!!! That what you wanted to hear?

That ends intelligent discussion that took 175 pages took get across. Later, everyone will be arguing about his name being El or Al.

Yahway, crap, I mean yeESs.

a reply to: Specimen88

To some people you have to be a educated religious scholar to understand the texts. But the texts actually state the opposite. If these educated scholars were right the bible would not be saying that even the moste elect will be fooled.

No where in the bible does the text tell you to listen to men or their teachings.

Wanted: Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3487)
=============================================================================================


Dear Tzar and Specimen and Spy, I can't be adequate with my appreciation for your visits, thanks so much - you were present and articulate in past times, but I guess you got exhausted with - as in a church sermon, the same preacher is always the one talking - notwithstanding that the congregation has fallen asleep.

Forgive me, but I will talk again, here is a message I just delivered in another net forum, where I face what I might call most abominable colleagues who would rather commit suicide than share something that is of what I consider to be honest intelligent productive thinking.

These abominable critters got me banned transiently several times, for me getting overly zealous against them, and calling them uncivil but still very diplomatic language, like go and get yourselves puffed up into extinction.

Here is the message I am referring to, modesty aside from my part, please write something like that, with honest intelligent productive thinking on the issue God exists or not, though in another orientation but still in re God exists or not:

The more I think about existence, the more I come to realize that from the study of existence, it is irrefutably that the mind of homo sapiens must come to the existence of God.

So, let us dear readers just start with my definition of existence:

• Existence in concept is anything at all that we experience directly with our senses and consciousness, and/or indirectly by our honest intelligent productive thinking on what it is from what we know with our senses and consciousness.

That kind of a definition, as it is not challenged by my colleague posters here who belong to the what I might call all kinds and manners of God-deniers school of opinions, then it stands as the standard for judging something to be an example of existence.

And that means everything whether predominantly of the object world that is outside and independent of our mind, or even of the concept world that are ideas, thoughts, fictions, intentions, decisions, even such an invalid concept insofar as concept no matter how invalid, namely, infinite causal regress, etc. etc. etc. in our mind - it has existence inside our mind.

Of course all these things inside our mind remain in existence inside our mind until our mind dies or goes into non-existence with the death of the human with a brain, i.e. when a human is dead, definitely so - because his corpse is already in decay, thus more than just brain-dead.

Do you follow me, dear readers?

Now, let us think on this thought which is irrefutably the fact and the truth, namely:

• There has always been existence everywhere and all the time, even when there were no time and no space yet, that means that existence cannot ever go into non-existence.

That thought in our mind, namely, that there has always been existence, when we go forth from our mind with that thought for a road-map of sorts, we come to all kinds of objects, starting with the nose on our face, or if you prefer the brain inside your skull, and the sun and the moon in the sky, and on and on and on . . .

How to now transit from our experience of things that are outside our mind and independent of our mind, to the existence of God?

What about that we just concentrate on ourselves and take notice that we have a beginning at birth and an ending at death, that means that we are transient entities.

Transient entities irrefutably implicates at least one permanent entity that is self-existent.

There! The fact and the truth is staring at our face: God exists in concept as the permanent self-existent cause of man and the universe and everything transient, i.e. with a beginning and an ending.

This whole concise exposition is what I call my argument for God's existence, scil., the argument from existence.

.

PS: Yes! I am a pompous narcissistic (read from right to left) elohssa - hehehehehe softly.

.

a reply to: Pachomius

When you talk about the existance of God, how far into the beginning of time would you have to go to satisfy peoples understanding of who God is or what God is..?

How do you speak to people so that they understand where you are going with your point..?

People would have to have some form for qualifications to grasp youre content right..? You would need a level of understanding from people,... if not you are speaking to death ears.... Minds with no qualifications to understand youre point of view... This is mostly what is the deal on these forums.

Moste people on ATS or other forums are not qualified to grasp infinite time or the begining of finite time. They have no qualifications to grasp the concept of God. But they love to speak their mind. And according to them you are only speaking youre mind. Unless you bring God to the table you actually have nothing for these people. They wont listen to reason.

Wanted Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3488)
=============================================================================================

Dear Spy, you ask me: "When you talk about the existance of God, how far into the beginning of time would you have to go to satisfy peoples understanding of who God is or what God is..?"

Please bear with me, I am at this very moment into getting you and me to concur on what is existence, what is God, and what is proof.

Let you not bother for the time being with peoples, okay?

Let you and me work as to concur on what is existence, what is God, and what is proof.

Here again are my definitions of the three terms: existence, God, proof:

Existence in concept is anything at all that we experience directly with our senses and consciousness, and/or indirectly by our honest intelligent productive thinking on what it is from what we know with our senses and consciousness.

God in concept is the permanent self-existent cause of man and the universe and everything transient, i.e. with a beginning and an ending.

Proof is the process by which we humans ascertain the existence of something directly by our conscious experience of the object of concern, and/or indirectly by reasoning from the data of our conscious experience.

Get busy and come forth with your definitions of the three terms: existence, God, proof.
.

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: Pachomius

When you talk about the existance of God, how far into the beginning of time would you have to go to satisfy peoples understanding of who God is or what God is..?

How do you speak to people so that they understand where you are going with your point..?

People would have to have some form for qualifications to grasp youre content right..? You would need a level of understanding from people,... if not you are speaking to death ears.... Minds with no qualifications to understand youre point of view... This is mostly what is the deal on these forums.

Moste people on ATS or other forums are not qualified to grasp infinite time or the begining of finite time. They have no qualifications to grasp the concept of God. But they love to speak their mind. And according to them you are only speaking youre mind. Unless you bring God to the table you actually have nothing for these people. They wont listen to reason.

a reply to: Pachomius

Dear Tzar and Specimen and Spy, I can't be adequate with my appreciation for your visits, thanks so much - you were present and articulate in past times, but I guess you got exhausted with - as in a church sermon, the same preacher is always the one talking - notwithstanding that the congregation has fallen asleep.

Forgive me, but I will talk again, here is a message I just delivered in another net forum, where I face what I might call most abominable colleagues who would rather commit suicide than share something that is of what I consider to be honest intelligent productive thinking.

PS: Yes! I am a pompous narcissistic (read from right to left) elohssa - hehehehehe softly.

Um, thanks for your honesty...? But you still did not address my response to your questions.

Can god be proven or disproven to exist as its own distinct autonomous entity outside of human psychology? The simple answer is no.

Is there a method which is unanimously agreed upon as the most viable/dependable research toolkit for proving or disproving god? The scientific method.

Your move.

a reply to: Pachomius

I think my argument is pretty solid on who this GOD fellow is. He is a charter that exists somewhere but they dont know were, in some peoples heads.

The rest of the people who don't believe in GOD well they have to go to work. And the daily grind and world keeps them to busy to be wasting time so frivolously as to sit around all day wondering about magical people in the sky,

So to answer your question seriously? I think it was people that created the idea of GOD. Not God that created the idea of people. So yes. There is as strong a possibility that people created god. And not the other way around.

So what is the premise of your question and thread? Have you not had your answer? I mean if were going by a literal sense, it would be like asking who created a character in a book? Well then your answer would be, the creator was the catholic church some thousand or so years ago.

And also they were the publisher of said book. They called there book? The book. A bit pompous I know. To think they were the only and most important book in the world. But they termed it in Greek. And in the greek language the word for book is Βιβλίm a romanized and latter popularized translation being Bible.

Which is a word in greek that means book.

I mean they almost catch up the the harry potter series on a best sold list now a day. But back then it was the best story the world had ever heard. And in fact. It was pretty much the only book most people on the continent had. The reasons to why? They were to poor to afford other books, and the churches were giving them out for free. Other books you had to buy and only the rich and affluent owned them back then.

And then the printing press came along. It was on the best seller list for along time. But now a days, the hary potter books outsell the bible by a giant margin.

Now if you were to ask, Is there an entity out there which created the whole of the world and universe? Well who knows. Maybe! Maybe not! I mean we could all be living in a cosmic computer playing a cosmic game. But as to who invented the idea of a GOD? It was some mud hut dwelers in the middle east a few thousands of years ago. And? Well it was the old holy roman empire and the church some thousands of years ago, did a revision on a religion which worshiped a singular god. So they revised to older tales to the ones you hear now.

Some many thousands of years earlier. And now us. Here many thousands of years latter? Well. We think its a cool story bro! But it would be like asking who created spider man, it was Stan Lee and Marvel comics. And if you were to ask who created GOD that many people have in there heads. Well it was a revved up publication of an older tale and religion which were all older tales and religions.

It is printed by many publishers today. Under the title bible of which GOD is a character. And the publishing rights and logo and image. Is owned by the roman catholic church. If you ask in a literal sense who is god? Well read the above. Now if your asking if GOD exists? Well yes, in peoples heads.

Outside of that though? Well. Who knows as life and existence is quite subjective.

Wanted Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3492)
============================================================================================

Dear all fellow posters here in ATS forum, first we must be grateful to ATS for its non-partisan policy and also most lenient discipline, that is me speaking non-partisan-ly, because I have been in very fanatical bigotical web forums where everyone including all their admins, moderators, and what have you, are into nothing but suffocation of free honest intelligent productive thinking, in the service of their most blind die-hard devotion to their 'cause' - not to let even one step through their door-frame or stay on inside, as soon as they just sense that you are into the issue God exists or not, in the affirmative position.

--------------------


Today I will try a different approach.

Answer this question: Do you know you have a nose on your face, yes or no?

First answer that question, then you can make comments on the following text from yours truly:

Mankind can and does prove God exists, but atheists and all kinds and manners of God-deniers, they are into evasions all the time, from the issue, so that they don't have to engage in honest intelligent productive thinking, with the rest of rational mankind, to attend to the issue at all.

Like the proverbial ostrich with its head under the beach sand.

Here is my very own argument on existence:

In existence there are transient beings like for example, you and me, we have a beginning at birth and an ending at death.

This fact and truth irrefutably implicates the reality of a permanent self-existent cause - of man and the universe and everything transient, i.e. with a beginning and an ending.

There! Do you now see God staring at your face like a flash of lightning?

(From the Conversation)

originally posted by: Pachomius
Wanted Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3492)
============================================================================================

Dear all fellow posters here in ATS forum, first we must be grateful to ATS for its non-partisan policy and also most lenient discipline, that is me speaking non-partisan-ly, because I have been in very fanatical bigotical web forums where everyone including all their admins, moderators, and what have you, are into nothing but suffocation of free honest intelligent productive thinking, in the service of their most blind die-hard devotion to their 'cause' - not to let even one step through their door-frame or stay on inside, as soon as they just sense that you are into the issue God exists or not, in the affirmative position.

--------------------


Today I will try a different approach.

Answer this question: Do you know you have a nose on your face, yes or no?

First answer that question, then you can make comments on the following text from yours truly:

Mankind can and does prove God exists, but atheists and all kinds and manners of God-deniers, they are into evasions all the time, from the issue, so that they don't have to engage in honest intelligent productive thinking, with the rest of rational mankind, to attend to the issue at all.

Like the proverbial ostrich with its head under the beach sand.

Here is my very own argument on existence:

In existence there are transient beings like for example, you and me, we have a beginning at birth and an ending at death.

This fact and truth irrefutably implicates the reality of a permanent self-existent cause - of man and the universe and everything transient, i.e. with a beginning and an ending.

There! Do you now see God staring at your face like a flash of lightning?

(From the Conversation)

Firstly, you're welcome. Free speech is the bread and butter of independent thought.

Secondly, to answer your question, I know that I have a nose on my face. And I have a question for you in return.

Do you believe that there is a discipline or strategy of investigation which is more dependable and viable than the scientific method for proving the existence of cosmic power interacting with our world? Besides using strictly inductive or ontological reasoning?

Wanted Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3494)
============================================================================

Dear Tzar, you ask me:

Do you believe that there is a discipline or strategy of investigation which is more dependable and viable than the scientific method for proving the existence of cosmic power interacting with our world? Besides using strictly inductive or ontological reasoning?

Please bear with me, Tzar, for I have my own method and argument to the existence of God, I call it argument from existence, here as follows below:*

1. There is the distinction between the object world and the concept world, the object world is outside and independent of our mind, while the concept world is inside our mind.

2. We do honest intelligent productive thinking in our mind which is the concept world, and we come to the idea that God in concept is the permanent self-existent cause of man and the universe and everything transient, i.e. with a beginning and an ending.

3. Then armed with this concept of God, we go forth into the object world to seek God's presence in it.

4. And here is my conclusion from my expedition in the object world to seek God's presence i.e. existence in it.




I exist therefore God exists.

First we define God as in concept the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

Then we concur that man has a beginning.

Therefore man is the evidence for the existence of God: As man exists therefore God exists.

Objection: Should man become extinct, God will no longer exist?

Answer: Should man become extinct, then there would be no more atheists, so no need for any proof for God's existence addressed to atheists, for atheists would also be extinct - good riddance.

*Taken with changes from my writings elsewhere in the internet, perhaps you guys here might have read something similar or even identical from my previous posting in ATS forum.

From Tzar posted on Mar, 17 2021 @ 11:11 AM

Firstly, you're welcome. Free speech is the bread and butter of independent thought.

Secondly, to answer your question, I know that I have a nose on my face. And I have a question for you in return.

Do you believe that there is a discipline or strategy of investigation which is more dependable and viable than the scientific method for proving the existence of cosmic power interacting with our world? Besides using strictly inductive or ontological reasoning?

.

a reply to: Pachomius
Dude your question was answered on the first page. Yes god exist to many. Just like Harry Potter is the greatest wizard that exists to many. Those that have not read the book? Well of course both would not exist. As they got better things to do.

Wanted Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3496)
============================================================================================

Dear galado, you say:
"But [God] has used his all omnipotent powers to make it so he or she or it, does not exist. There by creating a conundrum throughout all the universe of a whole lot of people and possibly aliens as well wondering if god exists or does not exist."

Sorry to have to tell you this: Stop writing fictions, unless you just want to go into nonsense posting, and thus abuse the purpose of ATS forum.

Dear readers, let you not bother to read fictions here, because you would not want to encourage people with a fiction for an intellect, wasting the bandwidth of ATS.

Now dear readers, allow me to share with you my argument from existence on the existence of God, in very concise clear and simple words:

"You and I we exist as transient beings, i.e. we have a beginning and an ending, therefore God exists corresponding to the concept, scil. the permanent self-existent cause of man and the universe and everything transient, i.e. with a beginning and an ending."

Happy honest intelligent productive thinking!

posted by galado on Mar, 12 2021 @ 04:29 PM

a reply to: Pachomius
Well its obvious that the only conclusion is that god exists. But has used his all omnipotent powers to make it so he or she or it, does not exist. There by creating a conundrum throughout all the universe of a whole lot of people and possibly aliens as well wondering if god exists or does not exist.

Yup! Its the only logical answer to your question. One of those questions which will never by answered. Kind of like the age old question of! How many licks it takes to get to the bottom of a tootsi pop? The world may never know.

Wanted Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3497)
=============================================================================================


Addressing Oh ye atheists and all kinds and manners of God-deniers, let you and me work together in a non-partisan approach to resolve the existence or non-existence of God, okay?

That means that we will or we can arrive at the conclusion that God exists, or God does not exist, do you get me?

So, when we get to the conclusion that God does not exist, then Christians will no longer take to converting fellow humans to be Christians, and atheists and all manners and kinds of God-deniers, they will get to be accepted by erstwhile Christians to for example get voted to be say president of America.

Are you keen on us working together in a non-partisan approach to resolve God exists or not?

Wanted Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3498)
============================================================================================

So, I am still waiting for you anyone here to reply to my invitation to him:

Are you keen on us two working together in a non-partisan approach to resolve God exists or not?

Yes, what about you anyone else?

Or are you all scared stiff to answer my in effect challenge to you all, namely again:

Are you keen on us two working together in a non-partisan approach to resolve God exists or not?

originally posted by: Pachomius

Wanted Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3497)
=============================================================================================


Addressing Oh ye atheists and all kinds and manners of God-deniers, let you and me work together in a non-partisan approach to resolve the existence or non-existence of God, okay?

That means that we will or we can arrive at the conclusion that God exists, or God does not exist, do you get me?

So, when we get to the conclusion that God does not exist, then Christians will no longer take to converting fellow humans to be Christians, and atheists and all manners and kinds of God-deniers, they will get to be accepted by erstwhile Christians to for example get voted to be say president of America.

Are you keen on us working together in a non-partisan approach to resolve God exists or not?

Wanted Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not. -Title of thread (3499)
============================================================================================


"What about you anyone else?
Or are you all scared stiff to answer my in effect challenge to you all, namely again: 'Are you keen on us working together in a non-partisan approach to resolve God exists or not?'"


What indeed is a non-partisan approach to resolve the issue God exists or not?

Is there such an animal as a non-partisan approach to resolve any issue at all?

Yes, I can think up a panel of honest intelligent productive humans, who will first work to concur on the criteria to be applied in the resolution of any issue at all.

In re the issue God exists or not, the criteria will be the concurred on definitions of the words/concepts: existence, God, proof - reached by the humans who work together honestly, intelligently, and productively, as to arrive at the final agreed on definitions of the words/concepts: existence, God, proof.

Dear fellow colleague posters here, please tell me what are your provisional definitions of these words: existence, God, proof?

From my part, here are my proposed definitions of existence, God, and proof - for the consideration of such a non-partisan panel of humans to work on: as to arrive at the communally agreed on final definitions of existence, God, and proof:

Existence in concept is anything at all that we experience directly with our senses and consciousness, and/or indirectly by our honest intelligent productive thinking on what it is from what we know with our senses and consciousness.

God in concept is the permanent self-existent cause of man and the universe and everything transient, i.e. with a beginning and an ending.

Proof is the process by which we humans ascertain the existence of something directly by our conscious experience of the object of concern, and/or indirectly by reasoning from the data of our conscious experience.

Now the non-partisan panel of honest intelligent productive humans can use our provisional definitions of the words/concepts of existence, God, proof, and work to produce their own concurred definitions, which they will employ as to determine a common definitive finding on Yes, God exists, or No, God does not exist.