From: (Anonymous)	Date: October 7th, 2003 03:06 pm (UTC)		(Link)
Noah's ark

The thing u wrote abt noah's ark is not quite true, although i understand where you are coming from. now don't get me mixed up as being a believer, im actually a proud atheist. noah did exist, although he was just like any other person in pre-biblical times and was just like n e other person today, a sentient being from a species that evolved over time, etc. scientists recently discovered however that the med. sea was actually a large plain in that time, and there was a great wall/ land bridge across gibralter. also at this time a great earthquake broke the land barrier at giblralter causing the atlantic ocean to pour in to the low lying plain. this is where the great "flood" came from, not a mandate from god. of course, as explanation at the time, the only logical thing since science was not evolved was some great being, god. passed down by word of mouth, as things were in those days, the story obviously got twisted to the point where it is in the bible today. from a flood of that magnitude, other land area such as the mountains of arat were covered with water or nearly covered, being the place where noah's ark is thought to be resting in a glacier. therefore, the existance of noah does not prove the existence of god in any way, only that science once again proved religion wrong, being that religion in that time was simply a primative science which sought to explain things. more misconceptions about the red sea crossing of moses as well...

From: (Anonymous)	Date: December 9th, 2003 12:06 pm (UTC)		(Link)
johnmcdonagh

We have to be begin to understand we are locked behind our senses. That is our senses or collectively our consciousness is limited, but not confined.
How do we know? How do we know we know…the answer is we don’t but relative to what we did know and some objective evidence we judge something right or wrong (This I call marginal sense use). Take the study of most scientific endeavours and you shall find no end stage, no beginning with an end point, just more theory. The answer at this end is that we just don’t know.
Imagination and science are attempts to go beyond the senses in order to provide possible clues/answers to hard or paradoxical questions. It has to be understood that paradox signals the limit of human consciousness at this point in time. To go beyond paradox requires an understanding of consciousness and a willingness to increase the developmental evolution of consciousness. Questions such as god, infinity, good and evil could be to us what a human being is to a bacterium. The consciousness distance between being able to know that you have a question and what that question is may have a dimensional context that our consciousness has not reached.
The feeble attempts to answer questions such as ‘Why are free market mechanisms not perfect’ betray themselves as questions beyond our evolutional dimensional consciousness. This is also the problem for A.I. ‘Why won’t the thing think for us if we give it enough information?’ We can go on collecting knowledge but if we are not conscious of why we collect knowledge or by attempting to answer these questions with reference to the big questions – paradoxes, we are effectively citing knowledge as the precursor to greater consciousness; It is this that I disagree with for if I don’t see what I know then I am blind! If greater consciousness begets greater knowledge then perhaps then the big questions will yield; but the paradox of consciousness and knowledge is the paradox of the chicken and the egg.
An example might elucidate this idea. A foetus must have written within it’s DNA an algorithm either for consciousness leading to learning or learning leading to consciousness. What comes first? Perhaps knowledge has blinded us to the pursuit of consciousness and that more attention to consciousness is in order, yes, yes I know this is also the pursuit of knowledge.

jmcb3@lycos.co.uk

From: (Anonymous)	Date: December 15th, 2003 03:51 pm (UTC)		(Link)
Suffering

Everybody thinks God can't existence because there is evil and what not, but good can't existence because you can't claim something is good without something being evil and pain, its the idea of Yin and Yang, its all about balance.

	From: yellow_jester	Date: February 22nd, 2004 01:14 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: Suffering

Good and evil, right and wrong, yin and yang do not exist. They are merely subjective constructions of mankind. What an arrogant species, to believe that the universe abides by the illusionary dictates of one of it's smallest components.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: July 9th, 2007 05:19 pm (UTC)		(Link)
Re: Suffering

1. Let us assume there is no God.

Here are some conclusions we can make related to suffering.

- It is un-important to anyone not directly being affected by it. Basically, who gives a crap if someone else is suffering since there is not absolute right/wrong or enduring reality beyong what we experience.

- Personal suffering is the meere result of a bio chemical reaction to and experience. Hence, we can overcome personal suffering through sheer intellectual will. example: Baby dies, mother recognizes loss as simply the absence of organic life form recently present in her environment.

Of course, I do happen to believe God exists and the above is a load of shit. The reality is we do suffer, we do feel and belief deeply that there is something inherently unjust about suffering. Let's say your penis gets sheared off by an angry dog while you were resting on a lovely beach. You will believe with every fiber of your being that this was just WRONG!!. All humans have a concept of injustice and dislike for suffering (unless they condition themselves to like suffering, in which case denying suffering whould be suffering :)).

Anyway, conclusion is Suffering exists and God exists. If God doesn't exist then suffering is simply meaningless and shouldn't bother us.

	From: vexen	Date: July 11th, 2007 04:56 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: Suffering

Suffering is very real. Just because they're biochemical (like gravity is a natural force), doesn't mean that you neglect the cause, or effect (of suffering, or gravity), once you understand its constituency.

Only a heartless, inhumane person would seriously stand by the immoral comments you have made. Thankfully, you yourself say you don't believe them.

But you also say you believe in God who, after all, created suffering as part of a 'good' creation, so I'm not entirely sure that you are sincere in your disclaiming of suffering.

Yes, people have a nature that lends itself to the understanding of suffering, but, this nature is driven by natural needs, genetics and experience (the famous genotype/phenotype or nature & nature dichotomies).

For all your talk, you haven't actually provided any evidence or logical reason why a god would exist, could exist, or does exist. What, exactly, are you trying to prove?

From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 3rd, 2008 08:18 pm (UTC)		(Link)
Re: Suffering

We are called from death to celebrate the news of His Love.

Prove God does not exist.
Prove suffering is not a way to offer reparation to God for offences against His great Love and Mercy and in union with His own Eternal Sacrifice.
Those that refuse to believe should not assume that they are correct.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 21st, 2004 06:27 pm (UTC)		(Link)
Does God exist

Arguments will not make God exist nor not-exist. Either there is a God or there isn't so all your arguments are just games. If there is no God then it's best to find some more useful pursuit (such as long walks). If there is a God so what? Does he/she really want us to worship ? What for ? Do you think worship will save your soul ! I suspect that if God exists then she/he would rather see you going on long walks!

From: (Anonymous)	Date: October 31st, 2004 07:22 am (UTC)		(Link)
Re: Does God exist, site out of context

I really don't think this website nor many of its respondants engage in actual deep research to try and support their vague assumptions/ "games." It's amazing I have read several articles and have not seen one quote from the bible through your so seemed logical conclusions about how God exists. And for the "does god exist" post, God is not a he/she becaue if you're going to refer to god at all at least get the jist of it all correct. Also God does not want you to worship him, he wants you to "love him" as you should learn to love everyone else in this world. You would then possibly come to worship him but that kind of reasoning is something I see all over this website, TAKING THINGS OUT OF CONTEXT. REad and learn my friends, ps on a logical note: since/if the existence of God "couldn't be proven" your following options are : A live a life God calls you to and have a wonderful eternal reward in heaven, B don't live your 80 or so years how God calls you to live and spend eternity in Hell, C live a great life God would have called you to and nothing happens, or D live ur 80 years that God didn't call u to live and nothing happens. Logically your chances are best with living the life God has called you to live, but how could you love God just being drawn in by simple logic? well there's no such thing as love at first sight, read!

From: (Anonymous)	Date: December 21st, 2005 08:27 pm (UTC)		(Link)
Re: Does God exist, site out of context

i see the point you are trying to make but please consider how stupid you are begining to sound. the bible though many do believe in its teachings is fundementaly flawed and contradictory. not to mention a little hard to believe. but before you accuse me of making assumptions like others i have red the bible and almost every translation of the bible admitts to removing the divine name of god ( god is not it's name)yahweh with LORD. despit the fact that there is a warning at the back of the bible sateing quite plainly that if you alter,add or change and of the words in the bible you shall be condemed to the eternal hell etc. etc. so this proves that thoes who follow the bible have turned a bit of a blind eye to some of "gods words" if you will. on a personal note i am not of any particular religion i do not not believe in god or believe in it. i just don't see why if you don't believe in him you have to completly turn you back on the whole "just be civil to people because 9 times out of 10 they will be civil back".Also incase you think i am some sad middle aged guy infront of a computer, i'm merly a sad 13 year old girl with no one my age who understands the phrases or concepts i use to describe my thoughts and feelings.but i'm rambaling now so i shall stop.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: February 23rd, 2005 12:55 am (UTC)		(Link)
http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/theodicy_absence.html

"The professor of a university challenged his students with this question. "Did God create everything that exists?" A student answered bravely, "Yes, he did".

The professor then asked, "If God created everything, then he created evil. Since evil exists (as noticed by our own actions), so God is evil. The student couldn't respond to that statement causing the professor to conclude that he had "proved" that "belief in God" was a fairy tale, and therefore worthless.

Another student raised his hand and asked the professor, "May I pose a question? " "Of course" answered the professor. The young student stood up and asked : "Professor does Cold exists?" The professor answered, "What kind of question is that?...Of course the cold exists... haven't you ever been cold?" The young student answered, "In fact sir, Cold does not exist. According to the laws of Physics, what we consider cold, in fact is the absence of heat. Anything is able to be studied as long as it transmits energy (heat). Absolute Zero is the total absence of heat, but cold does not exist. What we have done is create a term to describe how we feel if we don't have body heat or we are not hot." "And, does Dark exist?", he continued. The professor answered "Of course". This time the student responded, "Again you're wrong,Sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in fact simply the absence of light. Light can be studied, darkness can not. Darkness cannot be broken down. A simple ray of light tears the darkness and illuminates the surface where the! light beam finishes. Dark is a term that we humans have created to describe what happens when there's lack of light." Finally, the student asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?" The professor replied, "Of course it exists, as I mentioned at the beginning, we see violations, crimes and violence anywhere in the world, and those things are evil."

The student responded, "Sir, Evil does not exist. Just as in the previous cases, Evil is a term which man has created to describe the result of the absence of God's presence in the hearts of man.

After this, the professor bowed down his head, and didn't answer back.

The young man's name was ALBERT EINSTEIN."

Was it truely einstein or not? What does that matter? Whomever the student was is irrelavant. What matters is that, the student is 100% correct in every word he spoke to the teacher. Take off the last sentenece in this conversation, and the arguement of the student could have been anyone.

	From: vexen	Date: February 23rd, 2005 08:43 am (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/theodicy_absence.html

Absence of God? But God is all-powerful and omnipresent, everywhere. If God isn't somewhere, it is because God chooses not to be there. Even if someone was foolish enough to choose to renounce all good, God needn't create EVIL, just neutrality. But that's not how it is: God has reasons for creating evil and suffering BEYOND those of free will. What are those reasons? It is because God isn't all-good. Simple!

From: (Anonymous)	Date: June 23rd, 2007 10:40 pm (UTC)		(Link)
Re: http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/theodicy_absence.html

God created evil? God created you and you arenrt evil aRE YOU?

	From: vexen	Date: December 13th, 2007 09:41 am (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/theodicy_absence.html

What kind of crazy logic is that? Just because God created evil wouldn't mean that everything God created was evil!

And... returning back to reality, I am neither "evil" nor "good", but somewhere inbetween... like every other person.

From: (Anonymous)	Date: January 1st, 2007 08:40 pm (UTC)		(Link)
re: good and evil ?

If there can be no sound (as we know it) without ears and eardrums anywhere on earth to hear it, is there still sound? Would there be light and color without eyes and optical nerves to see it or would all be total darkness? If so then why wouldn't it follow that there can be no evil or good (as we know it) without human minds to interpret what is good and what is evil?
Animals can see and hear and feel but don't seem concerned about good and evil. IMHO good and evil are not absolutes and what is good and what is evil is determined only through the logic and/or the emotions of the beholder.

	From: vexen	Date: March 21st, 2007 08:42 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	Re: re: good and evil ?

1) Sound and light are both waves; they are a sequence of real physical events. Information can be gained about them using various techniques - eyes aren't necessary to know about light, and ears aren't necessary to know sound. Likewise, God can make us know about things without us experiencing them directly. All animals including us have instinctive behaviours, feelings and knowledges about the world.

These things exist, and remain to be physical, real events that have effects on the universe, whether or not there are human minds to witness them.

Good and evil, however, are largely homocentric designs that are relevent only to us. For example, disease may be an evil of the world to us, but for bacteria our methods of disease reduction (antibiotics etc), are evil to them. Species suffer and experience subjective evil whether or not Humans are around to witness it.