God Is...

Post Reply New Topic

God is...

God is evil.
God is cruel.
God is hurt.
God is sorrow.
God is cursed.
God is deception.
God is psychopathy.
God is disease.
God is torment.
God is punishment.
God is dead children.
God is rape.
God is violence.
God is suffering.
God is Hitler.
God is Isis.
God is Stalin.
God is pedophilia.
God is hemophilia.
God is necrophilia.
God is hate.

I hate God.

Let the truth be known.

Know the true side of God.

God does not love you.

God cannot love.

God is evil.

God is phobophiliac.

WELL PUT!! !!

I just looked that up. He is a raging phobophiliac!

I'm sick of people making him out to be this loving, and benevolent force, who looks out for people's best interest. They feel the same way about the government! No one wants to see the truth right in front of their eyes.

I've had plenty of times, both in the past and recently, where I was going through incredibly rough times, had no answers, and in some of my more classic movie-style 'you're ---ed' moments I'd feel like someone was peering in on me. Best way I'd explain it, it was a bit like a really bright-eyed and innocent teenage or pre-teen girl was looking in at a cat that she adored and loved to play with. Essentially I was the adorable kitty. I've at least had more decisive run ins in the last several years with this, I don't know how else I can describe it than perceived observer, who rarely makes herself known aside from at the most profound points of decision in my life and she's clearly something - what I can't entirely tell.

That actually works I think pretty well in analogy for the kind of detachment I'm coming to understand deity (assuming It exists) to have with us. Essentially there is One and only One, it split its focus into googleplexes of meditations, and everything from an atom to a cell, to a colony of cells to animal or human is a stacking of those conscious units. It loves us absolutely unconditionally, whether or not that's of It's own generosity really isn't testable because there's nothing else but It. That said the unspeakable cruelty that we see in everything from the insect and animal kingdoms up through the human kingdom - if we're all eternal, if we're all loved infinitely and unconditionally, and if there's a huge Vanilla Sky or The Game ending to all of this, then there's no problem because nothing can be harmed anyway.

That's about the edge where unconditional love and sadistic psychopathy can start behaving in roughly the same manner.

I'm not sure what that means for my superhuman friend and those occasional looks she gives me as if she wants to scoop me up, whisk me away, and snuggle me to oblivion, but if she is what I think she is it means that she's held her focus to keep my vitals going, keep my mind aware, and done all of this my entire life with few intrusions over the long haul. She's not only seen all my suffering but been me for it and kept my face to the grindstone.

Moral of my story I guess - if you ever look at the night sky and feel like it's winking back at you, perhaps almost a bit lewdly even, you may not be completely loosing your marbles.

No God, No peace.
Know God, Know Peace.

You don't like it? More's the pity on you. You'd be a good candidate for Pascal's wager.

Also, God said it. I believe it. That Settles it. End of discussion.

I'm sure a lot of people in history knew peace without having a concept of God. Then some invaders came, using their own God as an excuse to take their land, kill or enslave them, and rape their women. Perhaps the conquerors said, "No God, no peace", i.e., "We won't let you have any peace without our God again".

I think the OP is in a lot of pain.

If God doesn't exist, why bother to offend something that cannot plausibly have feelings? Is that the implications of this thread?

By definition, there's no evidence for or against the existence of any metaphysical being, such as any god of the gaps. Gods claimed to interact with the world in ways conflicting with established science have been refuted. It is a well-known fact, however, that the human mind has a tendency to believe in that kind of entities regardless of evidence, and this has been regularly exploited throughout history to persuade large groups of people to commit atrocities they'd otherwise have considered abhorrent.

To someone scientifically minded, studying the existing concepts of gods only tells something about the human mind.

Although as a counterpoint, the cause of the universes's formation cannot easily be construed without a supernatural intervention. The formation of mass in our universe cannot be ascribed to any physical properties or phenomenon, because the second law of thermodynamics is clear: mass (energy) cannot exceed the input energy that is added into it. Who added that initial energy? Obviously these fundamental scientific laws were breached.

A deadbeat dad

What do you understand by cause in this context, and by the universe's formation?

No scientific theory needs to postulate those concepts. If they're not part of a theory which uses them to make empirically testable predictions, they're not scientific concepts, which means believing in them is an arbitrary choice.

Furthermore, if you decide everything needs a cause (whatever this may mean), what caused the supernatural being Who created the Universe? And, if you make an exception for Him, so as to avoid the problem of infinite recursion (assuming it is even a problem), why not let the Universe itself be "uncaused"? Ockham's razor would favor the last approach.



Scientific laws are not dogmas. We have observed energy (including rest mass as a form thereof) always being conserved, but we have no experience regarding anything before the Big Bang, assuming this phrase can even be made sense of somehow. According to general relativity, the Big Bang is a point of spacetime comparable to the North Pole on the Earth's surface. For a given inertial reference frame, time is a coördinate which takes its lowest possible value at the Big Bang. There's no time prior to the Big Bang just like there's nothing north of the North Pole. In fact, at the North Pole, geographic longitude and latitude cease to be a useful pair of coördinates to represent motion, because all directions are south; similarly, at the Big Bang, all directions in spacetime are future---there's no past anything could be conserved from.

I have an honors degree in physics so I do believe I can speak with some authority on this subject.

The universe did have an origin, this we know due to a progressive red shift between receding galaxies which obviously suggests expansion as well as the properties of background microwave radiation which lends support towards a formative chapter. As no laws of physics enable an ad hoc formation of matter without input energy, the very fact that matter exists cannot be postulated by a nature's strict adherence to scientific principles and phenomenons.

I have no clue why your bringing up occams razor to this topic, I have explained the idea as succinctly and simply as possible.

Ah, I read your reply again and have missed a few things. I cannot accept an argument that these are mere speculations absent evidence; they are in fact backed by scientific evidence that is sustained by the empirical scientific method. When a scientific law is breached, and the laws of physics are so widely contravened on such a scale as during the earlier stages of the universe, it lends support to the notion that an outside force or entity is not neccesairly bound by strict physical laws and may perhaps even choose to ignore them.. Or not.

You are jumping far too quickly when you suggest that it is the specific God that i am arguing in favour when I am simply arguing that my argument merely suggests the real possibility of a higher authority that is not neccesairly bound by natural physical law.

Deltaville;

As far as I can tell takes a lot of familiarity with Platonist/neoplatonist, Alexandrian Hermetic, and Chaldean pantheistic philosophies to come anywhere near a sane interpretation of it. That's something most modern Christians distinctly don't have.

Well at least they could bring it upon themselves to be aware of the hyper nihilistic nature of reality.