Are we the Creation of a Divine Being
Hmmmm. Was Irma "created" or did Irma "evolve" from a collection of natural phenomena ... pressures, winds, temperatures ... or the hand of a "god"?
Was it an act of a "loving god", or a vicious act of nature?
Is humanity a "creation" or did we "evolve" from a collection of natural phenomena? If we were created by a "god", especially one who "loves us", why would it cause so much misery, destroy so many of its creations?
I, personally, can't accept that as a reason to worship a "god". Still waiting for word of an 87 year old uncle in Sarasota and a grand daughter and Great Granddaughter in Largo. Mother Nature can be a BITCH! I'd rather not believe in a "vicious creator".
No, you do not want to believe in a creator that says to love even our enemies, love the innocent, treat others as you would have them treat you, etc.
Nah, the likes of you would rather believe in an evolutionary animal eat animal, survival of the fittest, and killer of our own innocent children for sake of convienence creation.
YOU TOTAL HYPOCRITE! Your side is monsterous and even supports killng viable special needs babies for simply beng different.
Do you have a mirror handy??? "The likes of me" is TOTALLY OPPOSITE to your perception. (Except that I don't want to believe in a creator). The rest is hogwash. Babies are not the only form of humanity, I prefer to look at it as a WHOLE, not just the little pieces of humanity. I had two "babies", I "inherited" two more and have many in my family. They are important to me. Mine have grown up, most are pushing 50 (or pulling it), THEY are important also. I can't be a "Johnny-one-note" as you seem to be. I'm not a Psychiatrist but you seem to me to be someone who has something to feel guilty about.
See, you have your opinion, I have mine. Simply being different.
Ultimately, this is a topic I absolutely adore but am still on the fence on.
Not because I've yet to be convinced by either side, but because I am convinced by both sides.
I think if I were to be pushed towards a conclusion, I'd say that if there were a God which created the entire universe, and in effect us, then it is not the God peddled by any mortal religion.
I find that one of the most convincing arguments by atheists is "God allows evil and suffering". In my opinion, the content of this argument is sufficient to completely dismiss religion as having solid truths. It does not, however, dismiss the claim that god exists independent of religion.
If God(s) exists, then he/she/it/them is/are certainly not omnibenevolent. I've posted a lot of arguments on this site regarding this topic so I won't oversaturate with the how and why, but that's the bare bones of my belief.
"God allows evil and suffering"
One who does not know the answer to this does not anything About God.
In my opinion, the content of this argument is sufficient to completely dismiss religion as having solid truths.
It does not, however, dismiss the claim that god exists independent of religion.
Religion is simply relationship with God.
Can your work boss be your father home(religious type of relationship)?
Can a creator supremebeing, have a relationship with his creation?
If not, and the creator knows not relationship, why would he create things in the opposite image of himself... where his creations have relationships .....love/affection, family etc.....
is that aspect independent of the creator's qualities?
If God(s) exists, then he/she/it/them is/are certainly not omnibenevolent.
i agree, God feels everything man feels.
Anger, love,pride, mercy, jealousy, punishes etc.... except for attractions of the human body, hunger, sexual lust, sleep because if God did have a human body material we should be seeing him.
But the difference is he is not bound by human laws of morality because he is the law himself. However he acts is law in the universe and the law forms part of his creations as convictions and evil conscious(some manage to dry it out).
Therefore doing evil without a physically written law, by your own conviction you are condemned to punishment.
Romans 1:20-32New King James Version (NKJV)
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.(God is like nothing we see on earth)
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,[a] wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,[b] unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
One who does not know the answer to this does not anything About God.
Firstly, it wasn't a question. Secondly, his argument was an argument against the existence of God. Using God to prove the existence of God is the very definition of circular reasoning.
Religion is simply relationship with God
No, I am afraid religion is simply a mind virus. The sickness in our society is so spectacular that a person can claim to have a relationship with Jesus or God and be respected, while another can claim to have a relationship with Elvis and be locked away in a padded cell for life. Nobody has ever produced any verifiable evidence of a relationship with God in the entire recorded history of mankind. You have literally nothing to support what you are saying, so you can't expect normal, rational adults to believe you. Religion is a parasitic virus which sustains itself by using the host (i.e. the parents, schoolteachers etc...) to indoctrinate children too young to have developed a propensity for rational thought. It reproduces itself just like any other virus does.
No offence, but your writing is the long blathering of one seriously unwell individual.
God being good and God being "omnibenevolent" are two different things. God is not benevolent toward evil, He is against evil and will punish evil. It is good to know that God will confine evil in the fire of Hell forever, and God is good for doing so..to punish evil. Evil doers will always look at God as if He were evil because He is against them and they cannot see, or will not see, His goodness.
You are being atheistic while pretending to be open-minded, bragging of your parroted points penned by atheists you admire, imitating them and not thinking for yourself. Atheism is mindless, it's a sham....a closed minded sham.
one might argue that humans evolved billions of years ago through the natural changes that took place in the earth. going back to the big bang which is ultimately thought of as the basis from which creation began, big bang is the violent explosion of compressed material. i am speaking in layman terms. now the question is, how did those gases come into being. i am sure someone will have an answer to that, then again the question arises, how did that thing come into being and so on... ultimately it comes down to God, he created us, whether you want to believe it to be in a direct or indirect manner is your wish.
I hope you are well. Could you expand upon your question please?
I think my initial response would be, well...why do we exist instead of nothing? Followed by, why wouldn't He?
The overly simplistic answer is, things happen. I don't know if I particularly care for that answer but it is a base to start.
Could you tell me your thoughts on that if you are comfortable in doing so? I don't think I've debated you enough to know your debate style. :D
That's actually a really fantastic question.
There are speculations of course:
1. He always existed.
2. Energy from the Universe created the Divine Being that we know as God.
3. He is a creature of unknown origin or is a being that belongs to a race of other creatures who are called Gods because of their abilities.
4. He only came into being by human creation.
I'm sure there are other ideas or theories out there, I'd be curious to see if others have different ideas.
Mohammed was a iiar, (also a child molester, thief, and murderer). He was not a prophet of God, he was a tool of Satan. Allah is the god of Islam, Satan in disguise trying to kill everybody and take them down to Hell. God's name is not Allah, Islam is from Hell and one day will be confined forever in it's fire and never bother the living again.
The creator of life would have not just made people but also was also the creator of the candiru fish which swims up men's urethra's when they pee in the Amazon River, and any other pest which inflicts suffering or pain.
You can choose to believe that's from natural selection and evolution, or, you can choose to believe they were all made from one uber-God. But if it's truly the latter then you need to embrace those other creatures as part of your God's plan.
As science developed to give us a more logical answer,
Please do you mind sharing the new discovery and the evidence backing it be it in the lab or witnessed or measurable natural phenomena, Experts involved and the degree of their expertise and experience , how it correlates and influence the evidence, questions thrown at them and what their replies were?
A divine being as in a supernatural power or deity .
Well most the world believes so without evidence .
What is a god ? 260 million Americans alone claim to devoutly believe in god yet not one of them can present one shred of solid evidence for the existence of this ghost they call god ; not one of them either can define their god in simple terminology.
Are we the creation of a god ? If the god that Christians speak off is perfect in every way and requires nothing why would he want to create multiple Universes and place humans on one planet so they could kiss his ass ?
I have to agree. What would be the point of a divine being which never offered any objective evidence that it exists? The concept of divine beings arose from ancient man's desire to answer questions without sufficient knowledge. So he made up magical beings and claimed they were "divine" and omnipotent.
In order to be a creation of anything, creation would have to be more than a fallacy. As it stands, the concept of creation is little more than a proclamation of magic, and we have no evidence that anything has ever been "created" (brought into existence from non-existence). We're very familiar with transformation but have no evidence for creation, no events of creation, and no reason to suspect that anything has ever been created. Therefore, it stands to reason that we aren't the "creation" of anything. And since we have no evidence of a divine being, that would seem to be a dead argument as well.
I would say we are the creation of a divine being. Science has developed tremendously, especially over the past century. However, I don't think that means that religion gets snuffed out so to speak. I would say science deals with the physical aspects of our existence while religion deals with the metaphysical aspects of our existence
But you end up excluding all aspects of divinity from the physical, and the precludes miracles, answers to prayers, etc. It leaves you with a God who does nothing of any consequence to physical beings. And while people like to claim we have a metaphysical (or non-physical) spirit, what we can show for certain is that we are physical beings. And despite a great deal of research attempting to find evidence of a soul (or "spirit"), no such evidence has been found. This leaves us with stories from ancient men who demonstrate a barbaric nature and no less ignorance than would be expected if they were speaking only from their own minds and beliefs.
I would say science deals with the physical aspects of our existence while religion deals with the metaphysical aspects of our existence
Your nomenclature is faulty. Metaphysics is another word for philosophy, not spirituality. Making up a story about a giant creature who lives in the sky deals with no metaphysical aspects of our existence because it follows no reliable chain of reasoning.
This is a curock of rubbish. You cannot remove God from nature. To practice science is to observe what God has made, and the decay in God's creation caused by sin.
People who claim to be scientists and espouse ideas of evolution and the big bang are religious philosophers who hate God and love death.