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

a reply to: Out6of9Balance
I just finished watching this one:

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Nice video's I actually seem to under-stand on two feet.

all reply to: Out6of9Balance

Dear readers and posters here, I have found a good text from the web on how to know that a poster has lost in the battle of issues, in particular on how posters are into honest intelligent productive thinking or not.

25 minutes ago

New

#274

Dear readers here and my opponents here:


Today I will tell you when you know already that a poster is cognizant that he has lost in the battle of honest intelligent productive thinking, it is when he starts posting filthy texts in his posts, which filthy texts definitely reflect on his true filthy character - even though erstwhile he was acting as a gentleman intellectual.

Will he change from his now filthy character? That remains to be seen.


For filthy texts, e.g. like this text, "Sure, lets go with the whale fart."


Now dear readers and posters here, beware of filthy posters who have come to cognizance that they have lost in the battle for honest intelligent productive thinking.

Next to filthy posters are nonsense and/or derailing posters, you will see them all the time here in my thread, on the topic:

"The need to concur on how to prove God exists or not."
.
.


ANNEX

[For your orientation]

Title of thread: The need to concur on how to prove God exists or not.

Thread starter: Marius Dejess
Start date: Jun 7, 2016


Post #1

There is endless debate over God existing or not.

But there is no talk at all about how to concur on what it is or how to prove or disprove that something at all exists in objective reality outside of concepts in our mind.

I think I can and do so prove for myself that God exists, and you can also if you will concur with me on how to prove that something at all exists in objective reality outside of concepts in our mind.

Here is step No. 1 in proving or disproving that something at all, be it the nose in our face or God existing in objective reality outside of concepts in our mind:

No. 1 Parties engaged in proving or disproving something to exist must first work to concur on the concept of the thing, anything at all be it the nose in our face or God, otherwise it is an insane exchange of thoughts because parties will be talking past each other's head, and that is not communication at all or getting connected at all.

What do you guys here say?

When you accept my step No. 1, then I will or you guys here can propose step No. 2 for us all to work on to concur on it.
Click to expand...

.

.

.

.

SMOGZINN said:
The are literally infinite. Quantum Flux, a endless cycle of expansion and contraction, intelligent being, a whale fart that traveled backward in time, a golden teapot. I can type anything at all and claim it as an reason for the first cause. That last sentence could have caused the universe. Now this one could.


It is my observation that in almost every reply I write less than you.


Sure, lets go with the whale fart.
Click to expand...


forums.anandtech.com...
.

Anyone here knows about Neutron, what's he been up to?

He used to post a lot, but on my observation, with coming from nowhere and moving to nowhere - not that his habit is rare among posters in this my thread here.


He was from my observation a Biblical knower of God exists, but I can't get him to present in concise, clean, comprehensible words, what his concept of God is - not that such habit is rare among posters here in my thread, though.


But he drums on and on and on forever, that God is not a concept, but I keep reminding him that he can't think at all without concepts inside his brain.



Again, paging Neutron, what are you up to now? Making comments on God in the Bible?

Start with the first words of Genesis, In the beginning God made heaven and eatth, okay?

.

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


Okay, come here all ye so self smart guys, and shout out: circular logic, circular logic, circular logic, but altogether not daring to present in concise, clean, comprehensible words what is your concept of circular logic? Not that such dismaying habit is rare among posters in here my thread.

Here is a tip from yours truly, circular logic is only found inside your brain: when you string words together to draft a sentence, where the subject is identical to the predicate, and you know all the words in the sentence.

Come out of your brain, and admire the wonder of babies and roses in the neighborhood, they are the evidence to the conclusion that God exists, God corresponding to the concept - creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.



.

We're either all god, all of us together, EVERYWHERE, not just earth...

Or it's all just chaotic order.

The latter is one of the most wasteful and single serving event foundations, that it's very fact of being, makes the 1st more feasible.

All physical beings are manifested thoughts of a higher projected source.

TLR - We're all in god's head...

Not that I am replying to your post below, but in order to get you to connect with me.



Where you not asking where have you or all gotten to after so many pages of this thread?


Tell me then, do you know the subject of the present thread from yours truly, the title is as follows:

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


Do you now realize that you have been coming from nowhere and going to nowhere, because you don't give a care to comprehend what's going on, owing to perhaps lack of focus with your sojourn here in my thread, read the title of the thread, at least.

And for your complete grasp of this thread from yours truly, read the OP, I will reproduce it, as follows below - for your correct positioning of your brain in this my thread:


[For your orientation]

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:
On the assumption that mankind sincerely seeks knowledge, I submit that it is possible for any person to come to resolve the issue God exists or not, with honest intelligent productive thinking, i.e., thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas. Now, honest intelligent productive thinking on the said issue must start with working together to concur on the concept of God. What do you dear colleagues here say?

.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: pthena

You cannot petition the Lord with prayer!

There are

400 billion stars
At least 400 billion galaxies that we know of

And most can only name one star...

Each with several planets around them.

If aliens exist...

God exists...

originally posted by: gell1234
There are

400 billion stars
At least 400 billion galaxies that we know of

And most can only name one star...

Each with several planets around them.

If aliens exist...

God exists...

Good, gell, very good!


Stars exist (evidence), therefore God exists (conclusion), God in concept as the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.


Do we hear anyone with so much as a grumble that the above is an example of circular logic, that anyone is bereft of seeing the presence of stars in the sky and babies and roses in the neighborhood.

.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Hey, itsnow, there's no beginning and there's no end.

MONO



I am now noticing that the erstwhile busy posters here are absent, have they gotten tired of posting filthy messages, or nonsense, or irrelevant comments - in place of written words that represent honest intelligent productive thoughts, that contribute to the expatiation of my thread here?



For the orientation of readers and my fellow posters here, read the quote as follows below:

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:

On the assumption that mankind sincerely seeks knowledge, I submit that it is possible for any person to come to resolve the issue God exists or not, with honest intelligent productive thinking, i.e., thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas. Now, honest intelligent productive thinking on the said issue must start with working together to concur on the concept of God. What do you dear colleagues here say?

.

a reply to: Pachomius

Still preaching the gospel of empty circular logic while ignoring spiritual evil and what is sinful to the creator of human souls. Why don’t you copy and paste your dogmatic and religious definition of god again.

While you crap on people’s faith in a being of spiritual goodness, and mutilate and shred the definition of evidence.

Only you could anger atheists and the spiritual. Bravo to you.

originally posted by: Pachomius
MONO



I am now noticing that the erstwhile busy posters here are absent, have they gotten tired of posting filthy messages, or nonsense, or irrelevant comments - in place of written words that represent honest intelligent productive thoughts, that contribute to the expatiation of my thread here?



For the orientation of readers and my fellow posters here, read the quote as follows below:

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:

On the assumption that mankind sincerely seeks knowledge, I submit that it is possible for any person to come to resolve the issue God exists or not, with honest intelligent productive thinking, i.e., thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas. Now, honest intelligent productive thinking on the said issue must start with working together to concur on the concept of God. What do you dear colleagues here say?

.

We have jobs and hobbies and productive activities to complete. You are a passing amusement not unlike a new Snapchat filter. Eventually you too will be forgotten as will this entire thread. Be grateful you got close to a hundred pages, but that is due to quarantine and many people are still stuck at home bored out of their minds.

a reply to: Pachomius


Pachomius, many of us have had experiences on ATS where we try to elicit responses along a specific line of thinking, and immediately, it verges outside of what we wanted or expected.

That’s a common occurrence and happens all the time on ATS and just about any forum.

The reason for that is people are at various stages of development or, in some cases, regrettably, maldevelopment, so the responses will be all over the place.

Folks see through different lenses.

It will ALWAYS happen. I've never seen it NOT happen.

a reply to: neutronflux

God doesn't like sarcasm.

there are several different paradigms.
MonoTheists-believe in one God : Jews, Christians and Islam
Polytheists- believe in multiple gods- God of sun, moon, ocean, wind, and on and on
Pantheists-believe god is in everything
Agnostics -Not enough knowledge to prove or disprove the existence of god
and
Atheists- believe there is no god.
now an atheist does not spend time and thought and energy proving there is no leprechauns, or fairies or sprites because everyone knows they do not exist.
an atheist focuses his time energy and thought on the topic that there is no
God--precicely because there is.


a reply to: Pachomius

“Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning…”

”Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It’s like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way it splashes itself will give you a map of London. But if I can’t trust my own thinking, of course I can’t trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.”

God heals atheism.

a reply to: ontogeny55
Thought veils the truth.

What is the backdrop?
In what does thought and sensation appear in?

Here is a nice video that talks about about 'The quiet that contains the mind'.


The peace that surpasses all understanding is never not here......but it is overlooked.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: neutronflux

God doesn't like sarcasm.

Or maybe it's just you.