I'm an Agnostic Deist. (Page 5)

Zanjan: It’s a curious thing there are people like me who KNOW for certain God exists; the proofs are endless because we have such a fine daily relationship with Him, we wouldn’t trade it for anything else in existence.

That, alone, should cause one to ponder with due diligence. Just saying.

MagicMoments: After pondering with due diligence, I'm wondering why you're trading in the quality time of your fine daily relationship with God for the forums of a social network website. After all, you did just say (directly above) that you wouldn't trade it in for anything. Are you only allowed an hour a day with him or something?

Moreover -- "the proofs are endless because we have such a fine daily relationship with Him" -- is a manifest non-sequitur. I fail to see how "having such a fine daily relationship with Him" CAUSES an infinity of proofs.

Perhaps you might request that God devote his hour with you tomorrow to a lesson in logic.

Just saying.

MagicMoments: Then again, I suppose you might claim in your defense that you're "multi-tasking", so to speak; i.e., contributing to Wireclub while simultaneously enjoying the ineffable bliss of divine communion.

If it was me, I'd say screw Wireclub and focus on the bliss.

Why don't you?

After all, good bliss is hard to find these days.

RadIntentions: I'm not sitting on a fence, I'm in another yard completely, I've made up my mind. Neither of your sides are for me, as I do not have enough evidence to claim a belief. That may change with evidence, but I am certain in my position.

Zanjan: Magic: "I'm wondering why you're trading in the quality time of your fine daily relationship with God for the forums of a social network website. "

It's not a trade - God told me to be here. I serve Him first. Afterwards, comes housework. Which do you think I like best? God grants me a short reprieve from grueling worldly labour.

I don't multi-task - it's really hard to pray while typing.....praying is my response to God. When God is responding to me, He sends shafts of light my way, even while I'm typing; it's God Who's multi-tasking, you see.


" I fail to see how "having such a fine daily relationship with Him" CAUSES an infinity of proofs."

Well, it's like when my husband comes home from work - I suddenly have proof he exists, especially when he sports an armful of roses as a love offering, recognizing my own existence. The proof of his appearance CAUSES me to be re-assured he's not dead.

I can smell the scent of the roses, even when he's back at work - that CAUSES me to remember (acknowledge) him, even when I don't see him. I continue to receive proof my husband is not dead when I do on-line banking and suddenly find a mysterious deposit of money to pay the bills. I have no cause to attribute this bestowal to anyone but him. Need I say more?

Zanjan: Logic: "I'm not sitting on a fence, I'm in another yard completely, I've made up my mind."

I wouldn't call it that - I'd say that's where your mind is because you've given up. There are only two sides to the coin, sir. It doesn't matter where you *think* you are because the lost don't know. After all, we're talking about those who know and those who don't.

Those who put in a consistent effort to find truth are called "seekers", even if they're agnostics.

RadIntentions: You call it "giving up." I call it spending my time more productively. I dedicate the majority of my day to helping people. I don't need a God to do it, I don't care if I get rewarded for it, and I don't care if you look down on me for following my own path.

From your point of view, we're talking about "those who know, and those who don't." From mine we're talking about "Those who think they know, and those who admit they don't." But I'm not going to just proclaim my point of view to be absolute, because that would be arrogant and demeaning.

Zanjan: Logic: " I dedicate the majority of my day to helping people".

That's what people do when they're employed. It's not a sign of truth or an answer to every problem.

" "I don't care if I get rewarded for it"

Perhaps you volunteer - don't tell me there's no reward in that!

"From mine we're talking about "Those who think they know, and those who admit they don't."

If you admit you don't know, does that make you any more knowledgeable? You're still in the camp of the lost on the given issue.

People don't often say they *think* they know but, when they do, they're either nearly on to something or being sarcastic. To say 'I *think* I know the sun is shining' is a retort to someone who has challenged their perception.

deuce916: Logic, what proof would you like that a god exists?

deuce916: Come on mate, there must be something around you that you consider is proof of a god.

deuce916: I'd like to see proof of a god. So, as it stands, there is no proof of a god so why would you believe in one?

Lautlos: You do not *know* God is real; you *believe* He is. That's the way everyone is regarding God. No one *knows.* That's why it's called "faith," and not "knowledge of a fact." Facts require substantive, concrete (read: objective, not "I've experienced xyz" evidence in order to be facts.

The fact that Theists exist and are taught their beliefs from youth doesn't mean that the god they worship exists. Muslims, Hindus, and Pagans are all Theist or Deist. Are their gods as real as yours? They would be, by that logic.

MagicMoments: Zanjan: "It's not a trade - God told me to be here. I serve Him first."

Hmm, strikes me as a bum deal. Moses was entrusted with leading God's chosen people out of bondage in Egypt; Noah was commissioned to save life on Earth; you got Wireclub . Well, gotta start small, I suppose, eh?

Zanjan: "Well, it's like when my husband comes home from work - I suddenly have proof he exists..."

Hmm, the first misgiving that comes to mind is why your spouse's existence would be in doubt prior to his return from work , but never mind... we were discussing logic. Supposing what you say about your daily rendezvous with God (or hubbie) is indeed true, then his appearance would surely CONSTITUTE proof, not CAUSE proof (as you claimed). His appearance JUST IS the proof. Moreover, presumably this daily encounter would be the same form of proof repeated on a quotidian basis. My seeing the Eiffel Tower ten times (by opening and closing my eyes rapidly perhaps ) presumably constitutes one proof of said erection's existence, not ten.

There are many proofs (i.e., different proofs) of the Pythagorean theorem. But surely adducing the same proof a hundred times does not constitute a hundred proofs? Proof has never been so cheap .

Zanjan: "Need I say more?"

Need I beg?

micheal_geist1958: Why did you make this thread, Lautlos...

MagicMoments: I would, however, respectfully take issue with Lautlos' comment above:

"Facts require substantive, concrete (read: objective, not "I've experienced xyz" evidence in order to be facts."

I think we're confusing metaphysics (what is the case) with epistemology (how we KNOW what is the case), if you'll pardon the fancy jargon.

Is a fact not a fact regardless of whether or not we know, or have evidence to support our belief, that it is a fact?

Trivia time, folks: What was the highest mountain on Earth before Mt Everest was established as such?

Lautlos: Vox: to measure my abilities.

Zanjan: Lautlos: "You do not *know* God is real; you *believe* He is. That's the way everyone is regarding God. No one *knows.* That's why it's called "faith," "

That's the same as telling me I don't know math is real. Where is the evidence of math - can you see it or touch it? Does math exist when you don't think about it? Did it exist before humans appeared on the planet? Can you answer those questions correctly? I can.

Fact is, you don't have a clue what *I* know. Since you're not religious, how is it you feel you can assert what faith is? Whatever anyone believes is NOT called faith - faith is TRUST and so few people have it these days, even the religious.

For example, I'm familiar with God's ways and, since I can see how He operates, I trust (have faith) that God will unfailingly continue to operate that way. That God never changes is something I can count on. I've seen plenty of proof of that throughout history; the reason we record history is to preserve the facts.

On the other hand, If I merely *believed* God is real, I'd be following my imagination and everything that goes with that. If I were to believe He'll help me by throwing money at me or curing my friend's cancer, I'd be sadly mistaken. We don't tell God what to do because we TRUST He will do what's best for all of us, whether we like it or not.

Lautlos: "That's the same as telling me I don't know math is real. Where is the evidence of math - can you see it or touch it?"

No, but you can measure and test it, and it has tangible results.

"Does math exist when you don't think about it?"

Yes.

"Did it exist before humans appeared on the planet?"

Yes, but there wasn't a term for it yet. Patterns are math, too. They're prevalent throughout the universe's formation and our Earth's evolution.

"Since you're not religious, how is it you feel you can assert what faith is?"

I was raised religious and left the church at 18. I can assert what faith is just as easily as anyone else.

"Whatever anyone believes is NOT called faith - faith is TRUST and so few people have it these days, even the religious."

No, faith is defined as "strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof," according to Webster. It's not "trust." Those are different, albeit related, things.

"I'm familiar with God's ways..."

No you're not. No one is. Hell, even your Bible says that in 1 Corinthians 2:11: "For who knows a person's thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God."

"We don't tell God what to do because we TRUST He will do what's best for all of us, whether we like it or not."

That's a cop-out argument used to avoid having to think through why, for example, God allegedly cares about who wins the election, while children systematically die of starvation and illness in Africa.

MagicMoments: Just a thought: If, say, I had Bigfoot locked up in my dungeon at home, wouldn't that constitute proof of Bigfoot's existence... for me at least? Of course, my testimony is unlikely to convince anyone else who hasn't been invited to a private viewing.

Wouldn't you be convinced yourself, Lautlos, if said sasquatch were in your own dungeon? Wouldn't the matter of Bigfoot's existence be "proven" to your own satisfaction?

Similarly, if Zanjan is indeed in daily communion with God, as she claims to be, why would you deny that she has proof?

Of course, once again, her personal proof is unlikely to convince anyone else, and personally I have grave doubts that she is, in fact, flirting with some superpowerful supernatural entity, but if she IS.... I'd call that proof (although not the infinity of proofs she hinted at earlier).

Wouldn't you?

Zanjan: Magic: "then his appearance would surely CONSTITUTE proof, not CAUSE proof (as you claimed)."

The word "constitute" can mean "to make or create". Before a thing comes into being, there is no proof for its existence.

If my husband is supposed to be driving home from work in a blizzard but he's very late, I wouldn't accept that he's still alive until something causes proof to appear. What if I merely saw a vision of him? What if I were dreaming? I'll either wait forever, like the young soldier's poor mother, who was told her son was missing in action or, I'll call the Mounties to send out a search party because I imagine he might still be alive.

What causes proof to appear? Once it appears, the proof can be denied, no matter how many different facts (explanations) are presented.

For example, God's proof is His own Book. Therefore, it's not a condition one 'makes' or 'creates' via thought and imagination, linking bits of information together to contrive an end story.

The reality is that particular Book existed but was not yet revealed to you. God caused the proof of its existence to appear to you at the time He chose. Ergo, you might have been a Jew for 40 years then suddenly you realize Christ was God's Revelator, so you accept the Book that's been around for a very long time.

MagicMoments: Zanjan, is it your position that a bloody dagger, say, in a murder trial constitutes evidence or causes evidence?

MagicMoments: Now watch her wriggle... not entirely without skill, we do grant

MagicMoments: If it's the latter (the corner you've painted yourself into), please explain exactly what evidence the dagger CAUSES?

MagicMoments: Well, let's not be silly, the dagger JUST IS evidence (it constitutes evidence; it does not CAUSE evidence).

And my seeing Elvis in that chipshop last night JUST IS the proof of his existence (for me at least)

Zanjan: Lautlos: "I can assert what faith is just as easily as anyone else."

Not so fast - you left the church. That means you can only assert what faithlessness is. No doubt you had good reason to leave the church; yet it seems like you've thrown out the baby with the bath water. Since you admitted to leaving without knowing much about God, is that God's fault or yours?

By the way, God CAN be tested with measurable results. It's not a good idea to push that button too often though.

I wouldn't trust Webster dictionary as my source of truth and reality.

Only the faithless judge others by their own standard. They're not people who know God's ways. They're people who weigh God's Book by their own finite human mind, rather than by His all-encompassing wisdom.

PS - the Bible doesn't belong to me. I'm neither Christian or Jew. The Book I follow has been authenticated and I don't need to quote it to others in an effort to reason with them.