Do you believe in God?

I mean where is the guy that knows exactly what god is thinking but doesn't seem to be able to explain how that came about, and why its any different than all the other god emissaries.

What caused that lightning in the sky? What caused the tornado that blew my house apart?

Must be some god, preferably a dude (since we are chauvinist and patriarchal).

This kind of stuff is the origin of the religion that has a stranglehold on the USA and on the minds of its faux zealots.

Truer words were never spoken.

It's a participatory universe. So all manner of religions and philosophies can work. The religions are not mutually exclusive, as some hold, they just claim to be. If some believe in fairies and and some in poltergeists, and they claim they can't both exist, it means nothing as to any fundamental reality. And one could surely construct a religion around either belief, full of teachings, stories, origin ideas, etc. Every religion is exactly that -- a religion. If there is something to show the exclusive veracity of any one of them, it has never been remotely in evidence, and just the opposite is plainly true, namely, that humankind invents religions and gods.

I didn't used to. Now I do. Converted from atheism to Catholicism a few years ago.

Was an atheist for most of my life. Briefly explored some religions, including Buddhism and certain occult/esoteric practices. None of them really stuck
and I defaulted back down into plain old atheism.

Had a wild experience happen to me several years ago. Serious personal events transpired. I was cooked on drugs,
living as a trans woman, making awful decisions and heading towards suicide.

In the chaos, someone entered my life who was in danger and needed to be cared for for 3 months. The experience
was utterly transformative and incredibly painful, but rewarding. Around the same time,
I'd been debating with a guy online a lot about theology.

At the end of it all, I had a straight-up vision of the Sacred Heart of Christ.

In the end, I converted to Catholicism, considering it on reflection to likely be the true Church founded by Christ himself.
Was baptised and confirmed a few years ago. Now life is much, much better.
Still not perfect. Most days are still difficult. But I have a hope and a joy that keeps me going.

Now I play poker ad maiorem dei gloriam. It's a hobby to keep me busy and grounded in the bad times. Study keeps my mind busy.
God bless y'all.

Lagtight/geezerchess could not wait out his ban lmao. So ****ing obvious. Take your pills, Chuck.

Heh, 'fraid I'm not whoever that is. I've only been playing poker these last few weeks really, at least with any seriousness. NL2 mostly.
Sounds like you guys had a rough ride with whoever that is, sorry to hear that. Hope the dude's OK.

I mean, the mathematical equations for the universe existing this way, aren't all that friendly. But having the math, even in a drastic regard, is still plausible. Atheism, to me, is an emotional thing. I could be wrong. I know there could be this atheist 'other side to religion.' Is insane math better than a God? I used to say about atheists, They let their emotions dictate the cosmos/universe. To quote google in Einstein's belief in Spinoza's God, He believed in a God found in the harmony and rationality of the universe, a "cosmic religion". He famously said, "God does not play dice" to express his belief in an underlying order, though this has been misinterpreted. ... and he also spoke of how he resented how Atheists wanted him to be. Personally, I think God could be the prime mover. I like Thomas Aquinas 5 proofs of God... it does make sense. But to try to teach Stephen Hawking as an idiot, maybe in Trump's Evangelical dynasty. LOL edit: as far as insane math, I'm talking about birthing physics and everything else.

too objectified

but yeah, where you strike it is - being high (on god's spirit, light) or being void of god (low, dark).

and well, the dice ..

magnetic to spirit.

Aquinas was incredible. I actually took him as my confirmation saint, because his 5 proofs (especially the First Mover argument) had a profound effect on me and led me to genuinely consider Catholicism intellectually, rather than from a place of ego.

Unless I’m mistaken, the “First Mover” argument has as one of its premises that every event has a cause. Based on modern quantum physics, that statement is no longer taken to be true; there are many events that happen without any cause. Given that, it seems that the First Mover argument not logically sound.

Atheists are too wrapped up in their emotions to call themselves agnostic an actual thing to be. They are almost always dealing with some sort of trauma stemming from a religious upbringing. Not believing in something is literally nothing lol. You wouldn't run around telling people don't believe in gravity or the color blue as a spiritual belief.

This is a point I've explored before, and there's nuance here that needs to be captured.
There's a difference between physical causation and metaphysical causation.

Supposing for a moment that quantum movements (for example, decay) are truly, physically uncaused.
The Thomist's response to this is, "What caused the system of quantum physics itself to exist?"

Note the distinction; he's not saying "What caused the movements of quanta?" because we're willing to suppose for the moment that they are physically uncaused.
He's asking why there is such a system at all, regardless of whether or not it contains uncaused physical motion.

In the Thomist's view, that metaphysical cause is God.

Except I'm neither Catholic nor a relatively new believer.

Wurtlizer seems like a smart guy, so I suppose I should be flattered you think he and I are the same person.

The moderator can check our ISP's to confirm that you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

And the only pill I'm taking is "Once-daily Claritin", so thanks for reminding me to take it.

I'm fine, thanks.

BobtheSlob is a bona-fide troll.

He's one of the few people who gets temp- banned more often than me over at the Politics Forum.

Christ is King!

Viva Christo Rey! God bless, stay cool brother.

I think the 'new and improved' version of the argument recasts the premise as (roughly), "Everything that began to exist had a cause." That is to say, anything that always existed would be uncaused.

Something like: "All and only non-eternal things have a cause."

addendum: It's the Kalam Cosmological Argument:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalam_cosm...

A snippet:

Initial syllogism
The Kalam cosmological argument is a deductive argument. Therefore, if its premises are true, the conclusion follows necessarily.

Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
The universe began to exist.
Therefore, the universe has a cause.

Conceptual analysis of the conclusion:

Craig argues that the cause of the universe necessarily embodies specific properties, in being:[6]

Uncaused, otherwise an infinite regress of causes would arise.

Timeless (therefore changeless), spaceless, immaterial and enormously powerful, in creating spacetime and its contents ex nihilo.

Personal, possessing non-deterministic agency, in creating the universe from a timeless state (without prior determining conditions).

Singular, per Occam's razor, in the absence of good reasons to believe in the existence of more than one uncaused cause.
Based upon this analysis, he appends a further premise and conclusion:[6]

If the universe has a cause, then an uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists who sans (without) the universe[7] is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless and enormously powerful.

Therefore, an uncaused, personal Creator of the universe exists, who sans the universe is beginningless, changeless, immaterial, timeless, spaceless and enormously powerful.

Craig notes the theological implications that follow from the final conclusion of this argument.[8]

"Doubt is an uncomfortable condition, but certainty is a ridiculous one." -- Voltaire

This is food for thought for the "I know, that I know, that I know" mindset. Posing as moral, it is actually highly immoral and dishonest.

Are you certain that the Voltaire quote is true?

I’m not sure I agree with the premise that only eternally existing things have no cause. However, granting it for the sake of argument would not necessarily lead logically to the conclusion that God exists. Even if we accept that there must be an uncaused, eternal entity, that entity need not be a deity. It is entirely possible, for instance, that the universe itself is an eternal, uncaused entity. This especially is true now that modern cosmology fully recognizes that the Big Bang was not a creation event marking the beginning of the universe, but rather something more akin to a phase transition where a pre-existing universe in a state of inflation saw that inflation cease (possibly without cause due to a random fluctuation in a quantum field in the inflationary universe) and the energy of inflation get converted to radiation (“Let there be light!?”) and eventually matter.

If we can say “God has always existed” and not be required to account for a “god-creator”, why can we not substitute “the universe” for “God”. At most, it seems that the First Mover argument allows the possibility of a deity. It does not lead logically to the conclusion that a deity is necessary.

It's all just gaps ... god in the gaps. Creating, manufacturing, fictionalizing angles of gaps to smuggle god in. Aquinas too. He was totally ignorant of modern physics -- of course -- but he had god in all the unknown places. It amounts to: "Here is a massive mystery. Hmm. Must be god."

And you know what that is based on? Ancient myths, cultural memes, indoctrination, conditioning about "god" answers. Nothing more. Not a scintilla of evidence. There is just as much evidence for some negative black hole energy creator, or the spaghetti monster.

None.

god flows through mind, god flows through modern physics.

in a moment of mental stillness, the physicist meets god and his mystery in an intuitive revelation and lightful inspiration.

a meditative act where god appears magnetically and shines through space in his soul and mind.

in absence of light, there's chaos. spaghetti chaos.

diming the openness to light, protecting the absence of god - war.