What is this evidence of God atheists talks about?

@David_Killens @Get_off_my_lawn @Nyarlathotep @Whitefire13 @Cognostic @MrDawn @JoelInbody @Sheldon and everyone,

Now, how I think or prove God exists?

There are two ways I prove God exists. Both are good but one is just a design in consciousness, but represents and works like a God. The other way is worship. Now, I will explain how both of the evidences look a like.

First one:

First one is God and Satan within you, which is just a necessary design on which human conscious work. If this wouldn’t be this way, consciousness will not work. It can be observed and it can be understood that how consciousness work in moral matters at least.

For understanding God exists within you along with Satan or devil, you first need to accept that mind controls you, and you don’t control your mind. You can control mind but with mind itself. I somewhere posted the link about scientific research where it is said that decisions are made unconsciously by mind. That means mind takes decision prior to our decision. This is the first thing you need to remember in understanding God exists within you. Please remember it.

Now, you might have understood, that if mind takes decision unconsciously, then it is a mind which talks, think and do things. But as you know, it does so on the basis of genetics, upbringing, beliefs and knowledge. But it is not the only things on the basis of which mind works. It also do things in such a way that evil is either maintained or spread. Among most individuals mind works this way, especially those who believe in God and religion. It can be observed. Try to see human behaviour in this way.

@Whitefire13 asked me somewhere that since when you can know ā€œwhat is trueā€ through observation? I would like to say that if you find a pattern in working of something even though observations, you can say with confidence that you found something. Finding pattern is main thing.

Now one more thing to remember is mind works majorly in two ways. For example, if you told a joke to two people, and one is laughing and other got angry, then this two opposite reactions for one thing is certainly from two different things. Physically speaking, it is not possible for one thing to react in two different ways with only one thing. If it does, it’s a mixture of two different things. This thing might require carefully understanding it. Please try to understand it.

Let’s take a little explanation; suppose a compound of elements A and B. There are two mixture of exactly these two elements. When reacted with fire one explode and other doesn’t, even when both the mixture is of only A and B. Why it is so? If both the mixture is of A and B, then they must react with fire in same way, isn’t it? Certainly, there’s a difference between concentration of A and B. One has more concentration of A, and other has B, and that is why the difference. This same thing happens with mind. One part of mind supports belief and hate knowledge and logic especially against belief, and another part of mind supports knowledge and logic and oppose beliefs especially when it is wrong. The part which supports beliefs is devilish, and the part which supports knowledge is godly. When you understand all the qualities in godly part, you can understand how and why godly part is actually a godly part. I will speak more on this, but now you tell me what you get from this post. And please try to understand, it is not very easy.

After this I will try to post how evidence through worship look a like, as soon as possible.

Do you understand this is an assertion? Asserting doesn’t make it so. I realize you are describing your god belief BUT you state it as fact instead of ā€œI believe god is this, that or the other thingā€¦ā€

You are also defining your god by an opposite of what you think most believe.

If a good exists, it could be an asshole. There’s nothing stopping it. Just because you want something…(like Justice, etc)

I reject this assertion. The brain :brain: evolved. Do you know what ā€œconsciousnessā€ is?

Quote me in context next time please. I do not accept your recall of what I would ask or in what situation. Observation is a fundamental basis of science.

1 Like

@Phoenix101

You claimed you could demonstrate objective evidence for a deity.

Get fucking on with it please.

2 Likes

Bait and switch: proofs were mentioned, but no proofs were posted. Proofs don’t contain ā€œevidence(s)ā€, they contain postulates and conclusions. It seems you have not posted any proofs.

[quote=ā€œWhitefire13, post:183, topic:1638ā€]
Do you understand this is an assertion? Asserting doesn’t make it so. I realize you are describing your god belief BUT you state it as fact instead of ā€œI believe god is this, that or the other thingā€¦ā€[/quote]

Yes, I know it’s an assertion, and I explained it in next post, and I expect you to try to understand it. First assume it to be true, and discuss it like a possibility.

Yes. So what?

Good himself is stopping himself. He could be an asshole, but couldn’t be because of his self-restrained limitations.

Well Sheldon, I think you don’t understand in online discussions we cannot demonstrate anything, but can explain. It’s about human, so it’s about observations. We cannot experiment on human.

I don’t think anyone here is going to fall for that.

Earlier you said you could.

1 Like

To discuss ideas you just need to do that. That is how philosophical subjects are discussed and new possibilities can be found.

No, never. I never used the word ā€œdemonstrateā€ about what can I do here.

You did say you could demonstrate it! :exploding_head:


It seems your English is so bad that you keep accidentally lying. You should be more careful.

2 Likes

No.

This is irrational.

1 Like

Someone used the word ā€œdemonstrateā€ and I got the essence, and I just said ā€œyesā€. I never said that I can demonstrate. I can give you clue, which you need to consider first. Then I will show you what I am saying is the possibility.

For example: in an explanation, I talked about a scientific findings that mind takes decisions almost unconsciously. Considering this to be true, all we speak, think is actually mind doing things, we mostly don’t, in some areas where decision making is required. I mean to say someone else takes the decision as per his desires. This needs to be understood carefully.

I will try to explain it again what I want to say.

And that made you a liar.
ps: as I suggested earlier, you should be more careful. I don’t think you are going to be able to convince many people about your big picture (god and everything) while you demonstrate that you are fundamentally sloppy.

This is rational. This is how rationality is practiced.

Do you really want to know something, or just like to reply back whatever comes to mind?

I’d love for you to post those 2 proofs you suggested you have. But I’m betting you won’t. I’m betting you don’t even have them. I’m betting it was another (accidental?) lie.

No. I am not satisfied.

You have made several assertions, that is all.

So much verbiage. So little content. So incoherent. How is it possible?

[quote=ā€œPhoenix101, post:196, topic:1638, full:trueā€]

No,one does not accept blindly. A skeptical mind does not accept anything without verification. For a casual everyday statement such as ā€œI took my dog for a walkā€, it can be easily accepted because we know what dogs are, we know what a ā€œwalkā€ is, and we know this is done by thousands of people hourly. But in the god claim, there is no evidence, this is about a magical being that is supposed to have created everything. The burden of proof is high.

Additionally, you are attempting to reverse the burden of proof. Instead of having to prove your god claim, you ask us to accept this claim and then disprove a god.