Is it ok to believe in God......

Post Reply New Topic

Define "God"

I consider myself a non-deist. I believe that there are likely layers of reality beyond the matter/energy we currently are able to measure. It is quite possible that raw consciousness is a fundamental thing underlying everything. BUT I do not believe in a single all-governing deity similar to what is described in monotheistic religions.

I happen to agree a lot with Amit Goswami, a hindu physicist who did a documentary "The Quantum Activist".

But it is ok to believe whatever you want.
The imaginary universe is just as real as the physical one.

You just defined it friend..the people who have stolen the idea of GOD and made IT INTO a personality instead of a force are 'thieves' who have made the 'CHRIST' to use another metaphor that is originally expressed by the historical Jesus to mean the force of connection of ALL into a flesh and blood human being..in other words..these folks that do this are the TRUE ANTI-CHRIST in TOTAL EFFECT OF THE ALL OF CONNECTION THAT IS ALL....

AND YES IT IS DEFINITELY OK TO BELIEVE WHAT AN INDIVIDUAL WANTS...TRUE ENLIGHTENMENT CAN ONLY BE GAINED THROUGH THE UNIVERSES OF THE PERCEPTIONS OF EACH one of the ONE..IF one wills to understand thIS..IS...AS GOD..OR WHATEVER CONSTRUCT ONE MAY USE TO DESCRIBE THIS IS THAT IS..THE FORCE OF ALL...

Ok Firstly this, your belief in ID suggests that you believe in an external creative force, external from both earth and the universe. Secondly ID does not explain the creation of the earth. ID instead is an attempt to cling onto the biblical version of events in Genesis, it has zero evidence supporting it and zero credibility beyond those who fantasize about its existence.

The basic principles of evolution are a FACT. In the last 150 years since Darwin published the Origin of the Species not one single concept of it has been dis-proven, the opposite is true, his original findings and hypothesis have been expanded upon and and verified with an avalanche of data and knowledge, evolution is the means by which we have the incredible diversity of life on this planet. This is not open for argument it is a fact. What evolution does not explain and makes no attempt to explain, are the origins of life itself, this is still in the "we don't know" category, but Goddard, "we don't know" does not mean "god did it". You talk of the arrogance of Atheists, how about the outright arrogance of the people behind ID like Behe, who deny 150 years of solid science, who demand that ID be taught in schools as a valid alternative to evolutionary biology, that Goddard, is arrogance.

With reference to the "goldilocks zone" if we were the only planet to orbit a sun in this manner I would have to agree that it was a remarkable coincidence and maybe somewhat suspicious. However this is not the case, there are literally hundreds of BILLIONS of planets orbiting suns in the "Goldilocks zone" and by the way a few millimetres would not take us out of the zone.

Careful there, you're sounding about as close minded as you're claiming Goddard does. Evolution between species (as opposed to within species) may not have been disproven, but I also haven't seen it be undeniably proven either. If you're saying that evolution between species is undeniably proven, then please link the unarguable proof for it.

Evolution is the scientific theory that has not been falsified up to this day. That's the "proof" right there.

From wikipedia

"Fact is often used by scientists to refer to experimental or empirical data or objective verifiable observations.[15][16] "Fact" is also used in a wider sense to mean any theory for which there is overwhelming evidence. ........Evolution is a fact in the sense that it is overwhelmingly validated by the evidence. "

With specific regard to your claim regarding evolution between species what do you YECs need, stop motion photography, hang a minute I will just go back in time and set up the tripod.

What appears to be missing in the brains of creationists is the concept that the fossil record is only a very small abeit significant portion of the evidence for evolution. There is so much evidence for common descent, a veritable cavalcade of evidence across so many scientific fields, genetics, anatomy, geography, paleontology, observed natural selection the list goes on We have even observed it in the lab or are you going to deny the existence or the validity of speciation.
What more proof do you need, are we going to find it in the fossil record, possibly but I doubt it.

As stated by Ernst Mayr ""The basic theory of evolution has been confirmed so completely that most modern biologists consider evolution simply a fact. How else except by the word evolution can we designate the sequence of faunas and floras in precisely dated geological strata? And evolutionary change is also simply a fact owing to the changes in the content of gene pools from generation to generation."

So I suggest you are the one who needs to be careful in case you appear to be closed minded. ID has NO evidence, its "evidence" is essentially what you wrote, and is an argument from ignorance. Just because we do not have the fossil record or better still stop motion photography, does not in any way give credibility to the claims of ID. What gives a scientific hypothesis credibiltiy is supporting evidence ID has NONE. Evolution has so much evidence that it is essentially a scientific fact.

Nice argument for evolution but no one here is suggesting they do not believe in evolution..nor did Goddard state he believes in intelligent design..he said IT was a joke as comparison...with the quotes and emoticon indicating as such...

Not to mention the clarification as whole if IT passed anyone by...

I suppose Goddard may be sitting back having a laugh watching you argue an issue he is not supporting...


As clearly indicated in his quote here...

"More one time, if you think it, think wrong because i don't to say it. You noticed that I put an emoticon, making it clear that my comparison was based on a joke."

'Dude'..Joke means he was not serious about the intelligent design thingy....

But..I guess it's that metaphor thingy again..the same thing that helps people understand the force of GOD that is the issue again..but of course I am not reading anyone's mind here?