Dear Pericles

You said:

You make the fundamental assumption that the Universe was actually "created"....

Actually no, I make the assumption that the grandure of Creation is enough for an open mind to percieve it's Creator. There is a difference.

Paul.... a man who encountered the risen Lord, says that this self evident truth is supressed by the wickedness of man.

You see.. if you look further afield to the ways people think in various countries and cultures, you will find a very common theme.
'Spirits..God...Creator'....

I wonder if it has occurred to you that the reason you don't believe is not lack of evidence, but a carefully crafted 'plausability structure' which has emerged with the so called enlightenment in Western countries?

The 'plausability' of God's existence has been assigned a very low value by those who saw it as being in their philosophical and/or (im)moral interests to have it so.
This then filters down into our education, art, and popular consciousness and one day people wake up and declare "Oh.. I can't see how there could be a Creator" and 'lo', they think they are being original :) It's only in Western Countries (including Socialist) that this issue even arises. The existence of God is not even a question anywhere else.

In Pauls case.. the post resurrection disciples case.. in my own case.. our faith depends on an encounter with a real person... a resurrected Lord. There are those who believe simply through faith.. as Jesus said to Thomas, just after Thomas had felt the wounds in his risen body "Blessed are those who have not seen, yet believe".

These truths are not 'weapons' only in a destructive sense Pericles..they are to pull down strongholds of false belief and no belief..... You have to tear down the old decrepid building before you can build the new one.....that's constructive.

BUGSY....you might give some deeper thought to Cogito ergo sum.... I don't think you have tapped it's true riches.
If that doesn't take you to a good place.. try a study of the resurrection of Christ.

"The existence of God is not even a question anywhere else." - India with it's 700million plus Hindu's possibly meets that criteria but then the ide of god is very different. Buddism seems to get by quite well without a god. Other faith systems have believed in a spirit world but nothing like the moothiests god. There is a lot of spin and misrepresentation in that post.

Perhaps we could also look at the civil rights/quality of life/human safety /warmaking records of those parts of the world where the idea of god is readily accepted compared to those where it has been largely left behind.

R0bert

This post has degenerated into an argument about whether God exists.

In this thread, for the sake of argument only, we make the following ASSUMPTION:

GOD EXISTS.

ASUMPTION: GOD EXISTS.

ASUMPTION: GOD EXISTS.

ASUMPTION: GOD EXISTS.

So let's quit arguing about whether God exists and assume that it does.

By that I mean an actual God whose existence is INDEPENDENT OF OUR IMAGINATION.

Now what sort of an entity would God be?

I hope the atheists here can uncouple the question of the existence of a deity from the various "GOD MODELS" punted by different religions. Let's forget about the koran, the bible or any other so-called "holy book" and try to derive the nature of our hypothetical God from first principle.

Let's also refrain from anthropomorphising God. It is no good calling God "capricious" if we do not know what purpose, if any, it had in creating the multiverse.

For all we know God is NOT omnipotent.

A related question is this:

DID GOD CREATE THE UNIVERSE FOR US?

ARE WE THE PURPOSE OF CREATION OR MERELY AN UNINTENDED SIDESHOW?

Steven

Settle down - what did you expect? That people would conform to your rules?

OK, in answer to your question; we are simply a sideshow. Compared to the immensity of the universe, planet Earth's placement in an arm of one of an uncountable galaxies, we are hardly at the centre of creation. We are deluded if we think that the entirety of the universe was created merely for us.

We are a part of something magnificent, but not its only purpose.

steven ,appologies are in order,
i had presumed your mind closed, clearly it isnt

i will respond to your restatement
[quote]..>>DID GOD CREATE THE UNIVERSE FOR US?..<<

my pa-Rents created my body[and my name]
education shaped my mind

as science confirms EVERY 'thing' has its cause

as we are the result
and human nature being what it is

no god did not 'make' the universe[ITY] for us
but for our accelorated learning that our SPIRITS grow up

[where i do support evolution[is in the evolution of spirit]
you see how clearly here[in this material realm]
we grow [mentally][ie our SPIRIT evolves

we begin as spirits animating our hearts to beat
then evolve though the life stages
[from helpless infant to helpless old person#

surely in this is a sign for the thinking man

as our minds questions reflect our spiritual actions
we ALL began our spiritual 'evolution'
as single cellular life forms

there are reportedly many realms[uncountable realms]
where we 'evolve' our spirits

many are now at the verge of the highest evolution
to become a realised sun of god

for the heavens have many 'stars'

all suns of the one good

[why call ye me good?;there is one good [god]

we are ALL destined to fully evolve as a new born again SUN
when we stop hiding our light
[unders these veils of flesh
[veil/veil/evil/live

to have our own 'let there be light' moment

but we can devolve as much as evolve
many of us reflect our previous beastly incarnations
but in time we 'evolve away from the childish things
and learn the meat of the matter

the sky will in time be reflecting our collective light
as we ALL become true SUNS of the one god

ARE WE THE PURPOSE OF CREATION
[no our elivation into suns of love[light life logic] is

we are close
getting better

ARE WE CLOSER OR or will we reject the love light a
nd be MERELY AN UNINTENDED SIDESHOW?...of course
we will get as we give
only god cant fail

Sorry, stevenlmeyer, I know this is supposed to be a thread on the nature of God, not its existence, but I can't let garbage like this pass without comment.

>>Pericles You said: You make the fundamental assumption that the Universe was actually "created".... Actually no, I make the assumption that the grandure of Creation is enough for an open mind to percieve it's Creator. There is a difference.<<

Creation requires a creator, Boaz. Without the specific act of "creation", there is no creator. Simple application of the English language.

You have taken the word "Creation", complete with its unnecessary capitalization, and provided it with "grandeur".

The universe we live in is indeed spectacular. Mind-bogglingly so. But is exists, Boaz. It doesn't need a specific act of "creation" in order for it to be "created" by a "creator".

And will you please stop making unqualified, outlandish and insupportable claims for witnesses.

>>Paul.... a man who encountered the risen Lord<<

When you say "encountered the risen Lord" you mean "claims to have had a vision of someone who was already dead".

Hardly the stuff of evidence, I would suggest.

Talking of which:

>>I wonder if it has occurred to you that the reason you don't believe is not lack of evidence...<<

Not lack, Boaz. Absence.

>>...but a carefully crafted 'plausability structure' which has emerged with the so called enlightenment<<

So are we now in the realms of conspiracy theory?

Can you think of any reason - since you introduce plausibility - who would be engineering this, and why?

>>"Blessed are those who have not seen, yet believe"<<

Aaaaah, the catch-cry of confidence tricksters throughout the ages. The medium at the seance. The huckster selling patent medicine. The property developer selling off the plan that doesn't have planning permission. The Nigerian widow with $5million "just for you".

Blessed indeed.