can somebody help me understand this?!

[Redzeppelin]

That may well be the case, but if I die and find out there really is a God (like the one portrayed in the Bible), I intend to spend the rest of eternity trying to kill it. Sure, it's not likely to be easy, but at least I'll never get bored!

As likely as a sand-crab challenging a tsunami. There won't be time to get "bored": once God has fully been rejected and God accepts your final rejection, your existence ceases.

How can God not be all, if God is omnipresent?

Exactly. Omnipresence = Pantheism. If god is omnipresent, monotheism is impossible.

Then he is not, by definition, omniscient.

Cake - have it - eat it - too.

Have a nice day.

Oh please. Both of you really cannot believe this, can you? If I am "present" in a room, I am not the room or the furniture in the room. Come on - do you both really misunderstand this concept that badly? Omnipresence means that God - in His unconfined-by-4-dimensional existence - can be everywhere at once; to be everywhere is not to be everything.

Those raised in monotheism - basically, those in the "West" - must deal with these considerations, because they were inculcated with them as children.

A silly statement. Plenty of believers chose Christianity as adults - leaving agnostic or atheistic belief systems behind. Please don't stereotype - it weakens your credibility.

What could it possibly mean to be "outside of time"? That's a meaningless phrase. Just because English words can be strung together in an apparently grammatically correct form doesn't automatially indicate that the phrase thus formed has any meaning. If God were outside of time, he could never do anything at all, because there would have to be a "before" he did it, and an "after" he did it, which necessitates time.

You're trying to understand a transcendant being by putting Him into our 4-dimensional box. That will work as good as trying to explain to 2-dimensional people what a 3-dimensional figure is. Good luck. Time has not always existed - for the simple fact that we have a "now." An infinite number of seconds cannot have existed before the moment we known of as "now." Time has a beginning. God transcends time.

[stella]

Those raised in monotheism - basically, those in the "West" - must deal with these considerations, because they were inculcated with them as children.

Most of the people in most of the "East” - not so much. They are taught a different set of assumptions. E.g., regarding philosophy in particular, there are words in Chinese (and also Sanskrit) that have no English or Romance language equivalents, and vice versa.

i find it funny that you told me to think" out of the box" when you can't think outside of yours . that is a generalization that you can't be sure of .

[Unbeliever]

As likely as a sand-crab challenging a tsunami. There won't be time to get "bored": once God has fully been rejected and God accepts your final rejection, your existence ceases.

I fully expect oblivion after my demise, and am not the least bit afraid of it.

Oh please. Both of you really cannot believe this, can you? If I am "present" in a room, I am not the room or the furniture in the room. Come on - do you both really misunderstand this concept that badly? Omnipresence means that God - in His unconfined-by-4-dimensional existence - can be everywhere at once; to be everywhere is not to be everything.

If you're in a room, you're not God, and not omnipresent. If you were God, in a room, and omnipresent, then you'd be in every molecule of the room, not just standing in one spot. That argument says nothing at all about God.

A silly statement. Plenty of believers chose Christianity as adults - leaving agnostic or atheistic belief systems behind. Please don't stereotype - it weakens your credibility.

That may be, but the vast majority of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, etc., adopted the religion of their parents and community.

You're trying to understand a transcendant being by putting Him into our 4-dimensional box. That will work as good as trying to explain to 2-dimensional people what a 3-dimensional figure is. Good luck.

There are no 2-dimensional people, except in fiction. There are four dimensional people, us - 3 dimensions of space, and one of time. If God is so far beyond our understanding, how is it that you understand him so well?

Time has not always existed - for the simple fact that we have a "now." An infinite number of seconds cannot have existed before the moment we known of as "now."

Why not?

Time has a beginning. God transcends time.

How do you know?

[Amra]

If you were God, in a room, and omnipresent, then you'd be in every molecule of the room, not just standing in one spot. That argument says nothing at all about God.

There seems to be a fundamentally incorrect assertion about what omnipresence is. Namely, we believe that God is omnipresent with His absolute knowledge, not necessarily with His being. We do not know WHERE God is, and even asking such questions is blashpemy in itself because we are indirectly assigning a place to the Almighty who is not bound by space or time.

He is with you, wherever you are. Qur'an 57:4

[Laporis]

"If God didn't exist it would be necessary for us to invent Him"
my question is how can someone not believe in anything how can you be an atheist?

Very simple! When you're an atheist you believe that anything that happens has a natural explanation and if nature can't explain you can believe it's luck or fate! God is too weird and fantasy speaking to believe so it's easier to believe in something logical than in something that no one knows what is or if it exists!

i do believe that humans have this urge to believe in something bigger than they are no matter what this thing is....

It's true and I think it's proved! I think many atheist aren't happy becuase it misses also the glow of the believers!

[Redzeppelin]

I fully expect oblivion after my demise, and am not the least bit afraid of it.

Perhaps. Seeing God and all He had to offer you that you rejected might make oblivion not so much scary but a disappointment beyond what your soul could tolerate.

If you're in a room, you're not God, and not omnipresent. If you were God, in a room, and omnipresent, then you'd be in every molecule of the room, not just standing in one spot. That argument says nothing at all about God.

No - you're talking about pantheism - where God is everything. That does not agree with Christian theology. You're still wrong.

That may be, but the vast majority of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, etc., adopted the religion of their parents and community.

That doesn't invalidate religious belief. What is passed on can be true or false - it's interesting that people often assume that religious belief is only upheld because our parents passed it on to us - but there is plenty about our parents' upbringing of us that we accept, reject, alter.

There are no 2-dimensional people, except in fiction. There are four dimensional people, us - 3 dimensions of space, and one of time. If God is so far beyond our understanding, how is it that you understand him so well?

Because I read the Bible, listen to intelligent people preach about Him, and I ask Him for understanding everyday.

Why not?

Go look up "potential infinities" and "actual infinities."

How do you know?

The illogical results of actual infinities says so. (Cf. the Kalam Cosmological Argument).

[PrinceMyshkin]

I have 1) a question and 2) a proposition:

1) Isn't it odd that we're so hung up on each other, I mean the theists and the non-believers (lumping together atheists & agnostics)? We're like the Montague and the Capulets, sworn enemies and yet, somehow drawn to each other, unable to leave each other alone.

2) Whether this is a gift from God (which I personally doubt) or the most current stage of evolution, we are blessed - sometimes cursed - with consciousness and the capacity or need to wonder. I doubt that there is any preordained reason for our being here, which means that we are free to wonder, to perfect the condition of being human. That will mean being terrified at times, lost at times, and hopefully brave enough to pick ourselves up and try to do better.

Believers on the whole impress me as people who lack "negative capability, as defined by Keats: "that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason."

[Charles Darnay]

I have 1) a question and 2) a proposition:

1) Isn't it odd that we're so hung up on each other, I mean the theists and the non-believers (lumping together atheists & agnostics)? We're like the Montague and the Capulets, sworn enemies and yet, somehow drawn to each other, unable to leave each other alone.

2) Whether this is a gift from God (which I personally doubt) or the most current stage of evolution, we are blessed - sometimes cursed - with consciousness and the capacity or need to wonder. I doubt that there is any preordained reason for our being here, which means that we are free to wonder, to perfect the condition of being human. That will mean being terrified at times, lost at times, and hopefully brave enough to pick ourselves up and try to do better.

Believers on the whole impress me as people who lack "negative capability, as defined by Keats: "that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason."

I don't think it's so much a matter of being hung up on each other, nor do I think there is a Montegue/Capulet relationship here. It is a debate. Each side forces its argument against the other, until ideally (not likely) so middle ground is reached.......or at best, some understanding of each other's views:

I don't see myself brandishing an imaginary sword: "Redzeppelin, I am for you!!!!", tempting as it is....

[PrinceMyshkin]

I don't think it's so much a matter of being hung up on each other, nor do I think there is a Montegue/Capulet relationship here. It is a debate. Each side forces its argument against the other, until ideally (not likely) so middle ground is reached.......or at best, some understanding of each other's views:

I don't see myself brandishing an imaginary sword: "Redzeppelin, I am for you!!!!", tempting as it is....

Well, frankly, there is NO middle ground as far as I personally am concerned. I see belief in the unseen or in ancient texts that were written by we don't know who and then elaborated on, over and over again, interpreted and reinterpreted as it suited each particular interpreter or the corporation to which he belonged, as the fulfilment of a need. I want to talk about the psychology of belief: why some need to believe (as I see it) and I need not to believe or rather to disabuse those who do believe...

[Amra]

I want to talk about the psychology of belief: why some need to believe (as I see it) and I need not to believe or rather to disabuse those who do believe...

Why do you need to talk about the psychology of belief if you claim to NOT need to disabuse those who do believe? If you indeed do not have that need, then your presence here is quite contradictory to that.

[Redzeppelin]

I don't see myself brandishing an imaginary sword: "Redzeppelin, I am for you!!!!", tempting as it is....

Oh how fun - I love Shakespeare: "A pox on the house of Darwin!"

[kilted exile]

Why do you need to talk about the psychology of belief if you claim to NOT need to disabuse those who do believe? If you indeed do not have that need, then your presence here is quite contradictory to that.

Well I know for me the only thing I'm interested in is the reasons why people believe what they do. Understanding why people believe goes a long way to understanding cultures and people. This is useful for other reasons than to abuse people

[PrinceMyshkin]

Why do you need to talk about the psychology of belief if you claim to NOT need to disabuse those who do believe? If you indeed do not have that need, then your presence here is quite contradictory to that.

Apologies for not having expressed myself clearly. I meant to say that I DO have a need to disabuse those who hold what appear to me to be chimerical notions, especially when those notions are clung to fanatically and sometimes lead to war. There is a word in German, lebensluge, which means, I believe, the lie that is vital to one's life.

Perhaps. Seeing God and all He had to offer you that you rejected might make oblivion not so much scary but a disappointment beyond what your soul could tolerate.

Like Pascal, you're trying to construct a wager that you cannot possibly lose. The converse of what you propose is that after your death you will not encounter God...but neither will you be disappointed because you'll have no way of knowing you were wrong.

The true measure of your integrity as a free agent is whether you would live by the values you now hold if there were no God or indeed there were one who held contrary values?

[nomoredrama28]

jeepers you guys think way too much.

well sorry to make this off topic but bazarov, i like your signature! that poem was in dead poems society right?

[Unbeliever]

jeepers you guys think way too much.

Better to think too much than not enough, perhaps.