How can you honestly believe in God.

Look around this world and tell me it came around by chance. If you do you have more faith then I do. I put my bit of faith in God because it takes alot less of it then to believe the crap of luck and mistakes that is purmoted by the experts in macro evolution.

[edit on 22/08/06 by Canada_EH]

People talk about the NWO trying to take over the world.
If a group of people can't agree on 1 thing how will they rule
the whole world?

I actually think that this is more of a issue for another forum but thats just me.

Originally posted by 11 11
You think its flawed because you don't have the correct knowledge of what I am explaining to you.

It appears that way since what you are talking about is not scientifically proven and accepted.

Yes I am denying that. Prove to me that magnetism is just a reaction. Oh wait you can't do that without a human scientist right? Everything you know was handed to you, wrong or not, you believe it.

Wait, what? Human scientist? You somehow got access to a non-human scientist?

I highly suggest you read about Ed Leedskalnin. He proves science is wrong about electricity, and that electricity is not electrons, they are very small invinsible magnets that can pass through anything.

Actually, he didn't prove anything did he? Are you talking about the Coral Castle?

He spoke of unaccepted theories on magnetism and I'm the first to admit the Coral Castle is very intriguing indeed, but unfortunately he didn't explain or prove anything.


You claim atoms (and everything, I assume) are made of magnetism. And therefor 'god' is magnetism. OK but how are you expecting me to accept that? Or are you expecting me to make a leap of faith?

Something is a fact when it's proven, not when it is believed to to be case. What you have is a theory.

You say that 'no one has proven me wrong', well... but you haven't even proven the things you claim in the first place.

But if you have papers/research that show that magnetism is what atoms are created of, I would like to see them. If you are right about what you're saying, then obviously I would gladly correct and instruct myself in the process.

Thank you.

I find it quite interesting that the avatar of the one who is "the begining of the end" is ying and yang with light bisecting the core and alternate dark light and bright light exiting from opposite extremes. How chosen if one does not incline oneself to a measure of balanced perfection? How chosen if one has been denied favor? How then does one perceive this simple question of... Faith.

If you look for a fight you will find it. If you look for the dark you will dwell in it. If you look for the light you will be blinded by it. For which truth to you seek but still deny, yourself, the answer?

These statements are true for most but some refuse pride, prejudice, and ignorance. It is only then that the light does not blind, the dark cannot give residence, and the fight cannot be found. It is only then the one in each of us is wakened. It is only then we see without sight.

Many question God and the various names given by mortal man. None question it when they walk in the light, unbidden, tempered, and whole. It is then that ying and yang do not matter. It is then we are one.


[edit on 8/1/07 by rezial666]

[edit on 8/1/07 by rezial666]

Originally posted by danx
Wait.. what? Contemplation and thought? 'Led you to believe that god exists'?

I thought you said things need to be researched and proven...

I guess I should have been more clear. What I'm saying is that there are different kinds of proof. There's physical proof that you can see with your eyes and touch and feel with your senses, and there's also purely logical proof. Proof that exists only through thought, deduction, and reasoning, not through physical evidence. This is the kind of proof that has led me to believe in the existence of a higher being. It's also the kind of proof that philosophers used for ages to prove concepts which have only relatively recently been proven through science. Either my logic is different from yours or you can't grasp a concept without having physical evidence. Either way, we'll probably never agree on the issue.

Like I said before, the whole concept of God is that he/she/it does not exist in the physical world. Therefore, using science, which is based on the physical world, to disprove God is not valid.

Maybe the day will come when science can test the metaphysical as well as the physical, but until that day comes, I will continue to follow my own reasoning and logic. Science has no solid accepted explanation as to how our consciousness works, how all the matter in the universe came into existence, how life began, or why the laws of physics are the way they are. That's why I believe that these things are all metaphysical in origin. It's the only thing that logically makes sense. If science can one day prove that there's a valid physical explanation for all of these things, then I'll be willing to admit that there probably is no higher being.

I wish I could continue this debate, but unfortunately I have real life obligations to tend to. I'll probably be back later though cause I'm interested to see where this thread is going.

there's only one word for his question: Faith

that's what makes people believe in God, is the Faith they have in him/her/whomever.

God is always an interesting discussion. First off, I'll state that I'm agnostic... Anyhoo, here's my thoughts on it.

"Proof" is a funny thing. All throughout history, we have constantly "proven" what we previously thought of as "fact" to be indeed false. The earth is flat. The sun revolves around the earth, etc. Even our fundamental concepts of atoms, matter, etc. are constantly being challenged by today's physicists (and our "proof" rapidly disintegrates as we look at the quantum level).

That said, there is a difference between believing the Bible and believing in God. The Bible (historical "fact") is really just an assembly of different books, by different authors, that a bunch of guys (Council of Nicea) decided should be "canon". They threw out many books too, I might add...especially those that didn't support their "other" decision, i.e. that Jesus is "divine" and the "son of God". Any books that didn't support that were ommited. In addition, the Bible (not the idea of God) was assembled as a means to control...just as the clergy always attempted to dictate the actions of the populace. Early rule was always based in religion, regardless of culture...so this should hardly be a surprise. The Bible is a loose history, mythology, and collection of morality tales, all in one, but to hold it as the end all be all of God, is a bit presumptuous. (imho) (and often proven false, such as Creationism vs. Evolution, etc.)

As for intelligent design, that's an interesting one. Einstein was all for it. To be honest, the more I study on quantum mechanics, the more I agree with Einstein...quantum mechanics is bunk. I think the reason our science breaks down at the quantum level, is that we haven't yet developed the tools to properly observe the interactions we're trying to make decisions about. We see a particle that appears to exist in two different places at the same time, and simply try to "invent" ideas like string theory, M-theory, etc. to match those observations...when really, it's the observations themselves that are likely flawed. We can only experience 5 senses. Who's to say that's all there is? Our instruments eventually have to translate what they detect that we can't, to a sense we can acknowledge. Perhaps something is lost in the translation?

Enough of all that though... one thing we CAN observe, is that our thoughts do have certain interactions with our environment. (we can't explain why, but we can observe the effects) So, if that is so, then the idea of some kind of thought being behind creation of the Universe isn't so far off. Whether it's the combination of all intelligent thought (a gestalt, for example) or "God", who knows, but the argument is a sound one...at least as sound as the opposite idea, i.e. that we're all simply the result of a series of cosmic accidents.

Originally posted by TheCosmicSerpent
What I'm saying is that there are different kinds of proof. There's physical proof that you can see with your eyes and touch and feel with your senses, and there's also purely logical proof.

That's our problem right there - our perception of logical proof isn't the same.

Proof that exists only through thought, deduction, and reasoning, not through physical evidence. This is the kind of proof that has led me to believe in the existence of a higher being.

I wouldn't call that proof. I would call it theory or 'perception of something as being real'.

It's also the kind of proof that philosophers used for ages to prove concepts which have only relatively recently been proven through science.

I'm not being a smart ass or being sarcastic, but I would like to hear more about that.

Either my logic is different from yours or you can't grasp a concept without having physical evidence. Either way, we'll probably never agree on the issue.

Oh, yes.. we'll never agree on the issue but it's great to discuss and talk freely and openly about it.

I agree with you about the non-existence of God and the fallacy of shifting the burden of proof, but I think you;re way off target on the Bible. Scholars are converging on the dates when the original manuscripts (which they don't have) were written, and while not contemporaneous with events, they are pretty darned ancient. That doesn't mean they should be taken literally, though. The most dangerous religionists are those who long to take their scriptures literally, and will undertake any means to realize that.

Everybody read this... quite good
www.rationallink.org...

great post Super

I have often had your same discussion with the Kindly Jehova's Witness persons who come to my door.

It always ends the same... We will pray for you.. I always say... And I will pray for us all.

Relgion, like so many other things, was/is abused by those who seek control and power. It never ceases to amaze me how certain people in this world try to exert power over others. For what?? When you are gone its all done.

Grant me king for a day and I will rule the world. Grant me peace for a day and I will share the world.

[edit on 8/1/07 by rezial666]

[edit on 8/1/07 by rezial666]

[edit on 8/1/07 by rezial666]

Originally posted by ghostryder21
I have come to the conclusion that I don’t care what anyone believes as long as they don’t try to shove it down my throat. It’s a peaceful existence that way. Joe believes in god, Gerry believes in Buddha, and tom believes in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I really don’t care. Let them believe whatever they want to believe. Let them have their own choice in the matter but don’t criticize them for believing what they want to. I have a friend in California that is a scientologist. That’s the weirdest religion I ever seen but hell I still speak to him and I don’t chastise him for it. And he knows to not try to convert me over bc I wont be. His friends might try and do try when I visit him but he tells them not to.

Why care about that someone else believes? Believe what makes you happy and full. Believe what lets you move throughout the day, but don’t force it on someone else.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Does it really matter if someone else has differnet beliefs than you? Are you really that concerned with what they think that you have to change it? Let them believe what they what to believe. If they think there is no God, well, good for you. I think you're missing out, but that's just my own thoughts. If you believe in God, great! Keep on truckin.

Why we should believe....


I started out not believing in the bible, I never was raised in church, but my wife was. I personally always liked science and still do. My wife at the time we were married fell out of church, I think because of me. Anyway she decided some time ago she wanted to go back, I was not happy about church. Then one day we found on video on creation vs. evolution and we watch it. Being I like science I took it as challenge to disprove claims of a young earth and other science topic the guy talked about. I did allot of research on both creation and evolution. Not only can I not prove evolution, but found that most observed evidence supports creation.

Faith is good to have, however without anything to back up the faith Christianity would be no better then any other religion. There is allot of stuff out there to back-up the bible you just have to know were to find it.

I suggest to do a google video search for "Kent Hovind debate" and you'll get some good info on the science behind creation. That would a good START for anybody who really wants to know.

Originally posted by danx
It appears that way since what you are talking about is not scientifically proven and accepted.

Actually everything I have said so far is scientifically proven. Everything is made of magnetism. EVERYTHING.

Originally posted by danx
Wait, what? Human scientist? You somehow got access to a non-human scientist?

Actually, yes. I do have access to a non-human scientist. Its called Mother Nature, she teaches me everything about science. Seriously.

Originally posted by danx
Actually, he didn't prove anything did he? Are you talking about the Coral Castle?

No I'm not talking about Coral Castle, although he did create it. I am talking about his book he wrote about Magnetisim and Everything. In it he proves with experiments that human scientists are wrong about electricity. He then proves the magnetism is everything.

Originally posted by danx
He spoke of unaccepted theories on magnetism and I'm the first to admit the Coral Castle is very intriguing indeed, but unfortunately he didn't explain or prove anything.

Actually a lot of Ed's information in the book he wrote has been accepted. You say "he didn't explain or prove anything", which brings me back to what I said earlyer. You don't have the full knowledge to base your desicion.

Originally posted by danx
You claim atoms (and everything, I assume) are made of magnetism. And therefor 'god' is magnetism. OK but how are you expecting me to accept that? Or are you expecting me to make a leap of faith?

Everything is made of magnetism, its a proven fact. Nothing on Earth is non-magnetic, there is no such thing as non-magnetic. Your science even tells you that. If you don't want to except that, then fine, don't. The reason I say God is magnetism, because it is the only answer to the riddle of God.

The riddle: What is all powerfull, everywhere, controls the universe, controls our life, controls everything, is not human, is not visible, is the ruler of all, created us, created everything, knows all?

The answer = magnetism. Its the all powerfull force, its everywhere, it controls the universe, controls our life, controls everything, its not human, we can't see it, it rules all, it created us, it created everything. Knowledge itself is create by magnetism.

Originally posted by danx
Something is a fact when it's proven, not when it is believed to to be case. What you have is a theory.

No what I have is the answer to the life long riddle of God.

Originally posted by danx
You say that 'no one has proven me wrong', well... but you haven't even proven the things you claim in the first place.

I have proven that without magnetism, nothing would exist. Not even God. So God MUST be magnetism.

Originally posted by danx
But if you have papers/research that show that magnetism is what atoms are created of, I would like to see them. If you are right about what you're saying, then obviously I would gladly correct and instruct myself in the process.

Atoms, are made of Protons, Electrons, and Neutrons. Just read about those, they make electromagnetism. Actually, they ARE magnetism.

Research, research, research.

Do not base you faith on man. God exists, God is in everything, if you look hard enough you will see God's design.

Originally posted by Valdimer

Originally posted by ghostryder21
I have come to the conclusion that I don’t care what anyone believes as long as they don’t try to shove it down my throat. It’s a peaceful existence that way. Joe believes in god, Gerry believes in Buddha, and tom believes in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I really don’t care. Let them believe whatever they want to believe. Let them have their own choice in the matter but don’t criticize them for believing what they want to. I have a friend in California that is a scientologist. That’s the weirdest religion I ever seen but hell I still speak to him and I don’t chastise him for it. And he knows to not try to convert me over bc I wont be. His friends might try and do try when I visit him but he tells them not to.

Why care about that someone else believes? Believe what makes you happy and full. Believe what lets you move throughout the day, but don’t force it on someone else.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Does it really matter if someone else has differnet beliefs than you? Are you really that concerned with what they think that you have to change it? Let them believe what they what to believe. If they think there is no God, well, good for you. I think you're missing out, but that's just my own thoughts. If you believe in God, great! Keep on truckin.

As I once heard someone ask a professor of theology that don't people use religion as a crutch?

And the professor said "sure" but I see nothing wrong with a crutch. It helps you walk.

People that use religion as a crutch are wrong, I think. I don't think that a relationship with God should keep you from falling, but enlighten and lift you up so you can walk on your own.


It made sense in my mind.

This argument can and probably will continue for all time. Your asking for proof to something that is ingrained into people from an early age or that they come to a decision to later in life. You’re basically asking for proof for a certain persons belief system. When belief is established on faith.

Yes you have scientific proof about creationism and the existence of god. But those are your beliefs. That is your faith, and no one should challenge you for it because that is what you believe to be true.

Yes, John Doe believes in god because that is what he came to the conclusion to that has the ultimate answer. His beliefs are ingrained in faith. Faith is based upon the interpretation of the intangible feelings, emotions, instead of the physically tangible

Why is there such an argument over it? Let people believe what they want to believe and live happy. It is not disturbing you. You don’t have to go to church or synagogue, or even mass. Yes you will see those on the street preaching their beliefs on you and hoping to convert you, but isn’t that what your doing right now to us? Are you not giving us your belief system and shunning ours in hopes to convert us and make us believe what you believe?

As a society we have to understand everyone is not going to have the same views. There will always be discussions over everything. Religious or not. There will always be debates from how the grass grows to weather patterns located over a 3-mile area. Once we all start believing the same thing and having no differential views, originality goes out the window.

~Ghost~

Originally posted by disownedsky
I agree with you about the non-existence of God and the fallacy of shifting the burden of proof, but I think you;re way off target on the Bible. Scholars are converging on the dates when the original manuscripts (which they don't have) were written, and while not contemporaneous with events, they are pretty darned ancient. That doesn't mean they should be taken literally, though. The most dangerous religionists are those who long to take their scriptures literally, and will undertake any means to realize that.

There are trees in California thousands of years older then any scripture, older then the pyramids. Doesn't make them holy.


The way I see, if God is omnipotent, all powerful, all knowing, and full of love. How can we put that in one book. We need an entire encyclopedia set for the basics from badgers to xylophones. yet God can be explained in one little book?