"I am not a Theist & not religious but I believe in

[Zzyzx]

.
Does the following seem self-contradictory?

From ONE post in a current thread –

God speaks through ALL His creation including us men, and just because we deny to hear Him (because of sin) doesn't mean it is lost.

Of course I don't expect you to believe in God just because I do, and that I believe it was His revelation

had very little education, and struggle to express myself, especially with the things God has revealed to me.

This is exactly why God used His Prophets and even His Son to personally talk to us.

I am here to 'reveal by Undeniable Scientific Evidence' our Creator.

Infinity, the origin of the universe, the beginning of life" may be beyond your understanding, or the refusal thereof, but is definitely not mine.

AND

I am not religious, how can I explain this to you?

I will not become a religious theist/atheist just to please you.

I'm serious my friend, since I have told you at least 500 times in debates that I am not a Theist, yet you still keep referring to me as a Theist.

Note: Theism is defined as: Belief in the existence of a god or gods

Religion is difficult to define but generally involves some belief in a supernatural entity that may (or may not) influence human affairs – or perhaps an afterlife


Question for debate: If one believes in God can they NOT be a Theist and NOT be religious?

[JonDarbyXIII]

Hello Jon, welcome to the forum. About God the Creator vs. god/gods I invite you to check out my claim in Zzyzx's OP; "Undeniable and Scientific Evidence of The Creator"

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... c&start=60

Glad you have joined us, I would love to hear your comments on that friend!

It took a while to weed through everything and put something together. (Mostly because I probably ended up saying way too much! ) But here are my thoughts.

[jerryxplu]

[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]

I think by definition believe in a God make you a theist no? However, it is just a label really. Such as, Christians were Atheist that did not believe in Zeus or Jupiter. In other news, there are plenty of religious people that believe in weird crap like vampire or werewolf or dragons. Some Atheist also believe in similar stuff as well as aliens and ghost and such.

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 32 by jerryxplu]

Yes, JX people appear to believe and promote all sorts of ideas – some of which seem quite irrational. That is why they are asked and required (in honorable debate and by Forum Rules) to substantiate their claims.

The objective of requiring substantiation is to expose the "evidence" upon which the claims are based and made. When the evidence presented is nothing more than testimonials, opinions, conjectures, folklore and unverifiable ancient tales, others are likely to consider the claims to be questionable at best and perhaps (or likely) false.

[justforme]

[Replying to post 4 by Zzyzx]


Your ending quote is right on.
Without pain there is no gain.
If you get my gist.

[arian]

[Replying to post 8 by arian]

"Z", .. Here is my reply to this OP, Post 8. As for the Undeniable Scientific evidence of The Creator, I answered and revealed God there, and it still remains 'undisputable', .. unless you strongly feel that "looking in the mirror" cannot trigger a scientific observation and that entire post is void because of it?

But then, staring out into space all night can? Or bird watching which triggered the "Evolution theory" can? How would you respond to this other genius scientist who came up with a brilliant discovery after an apple fell on his head, or next to him?

How did a Catholic priest come up with the "BB-theory"? Or that other Catholic priest to write the "Satanic Bible"?

If you are so critical, then please give me a list of things that you can, and things that you cannot accept to have triggered a scientific epiphany?

Let me guess, .. sitting on the toilet is out, right? It's just sooo un-scientific.

[Zzyzx]

.

[Replying to post 8 by arian]

"Z", .. Here is my reply to this OP, Post 8. As for the Undeniable Scientific evidence of The Creator, I answered and revealed God there, and it still remains 'undisputable', .. unless you strongly feel that "looking in the mirror" cannot trigger a scientific observation and that entire post is void because of it?

Looking in a mirror and musing about things may be "scientific" in your mind.

Shall we conduct a poll to see how many readers think you presented "indisputable and scientific evidence of our creator"?

But then, staring out into space all night can? Or bird watching which triggered the "Evolution theory" can?

Anything CAN trigger scientific study. That is the starting point. A scientific study BEGINS with observations and a question then gathers EVIDENCE (not mere conjecture) related to the topic.

How would you respond to this other genius scientist who came up with a brilliant discovery after an apple fell on his head, or next to him?

Observing a falling object might trigger scientific study. Had Newton not gone beyond musing about the topic he would not be regarded as a genius or a scientist – but just another person giving a testimonial about his opinions.

How did a Catholic priest come up with the "BB-theory"? Or that other Catholic priest to write the "Satanic Bible"?

I do not pretend to know the motivations of such people. Do you?

If you are so critical, then please give me a list of things that you can, and things that you cannot accept to have triggered a scientific epiphany?

As stated above, anything can trigger scientific study – and that is the BEGINNING point.

Let me guess, .. sitting on the toilet is out, right? It's just sooo un-scientific.

That you may consider musing on a toilet or looking in a mirror to be scientific evidence is not assurance that either are anything more than musings (defined as Absorbed in thought; contemplative) – that testimonials derive from musings do not constitute scientific evidence.

[arian]

.

[Replying to post 8 by arian]

"Z", .. Here is my reply to this OP, Post 8. As for the Undeniable Scientific evidence of The Creator, I answered and revealed God there, and it still remains 'undisputable', .. unless you strongly feel that "looking in the mirror" cannot trigger a scientific observation and that entire post is void because of it?

Looking in a mirror and musing about things may be "scientific" in your mind.

Shall we conduct a poll to see how many readers think you presented "indisputable and scientific evidence of our creator"?

Sorry for the delayed response Z.

Conduct a poll? LOL, ... now that is funny Z, yes, let's!
But then why bother, if it's like the poll on "Best, or Most Improved Debater" you have each year, I believe all 13 of your 'partners' will say "No, absolutely not, arian has NOT scientifically proven the existence of the Creator, and we all remain in our 'happy scientific-atheist' religion!" With our motto intact; "God, what god? What do you mean by god?" lol

But then, staring out into space all night can? Or bird watching which triggered the "Evolution theory" can?

Anything CAN trigger scientific study.

Oh come on now Z, admit it, anything "except arian's looking in the mirror"

That is the starting point. A scientific study BEGINS with observations and a question then gathers EVIDENCE (not mere conjecture) related to the topic.

You mean like:
Observation: "Here is the monkey, .. and then there is the human, two legs, two eyes, hands, feet and they both eat bananas!" OR, ..
"Look Professor Nugent, you see that! The primordial gasses from the Big-bang we just witnessed and documented a few billion years ago is now forming planet earth. And now its cooling, .. but the moisture isn't escaping, .. why? LOOK! The earth for some reason is creating a force field to keep the moisture in. We have to remember to blast a hole in that force field (renamed Ozone layer) in about 4.7 billion years, for observational reasons to see what happens?

EVIDENCE is 'duh!' obvious, just by looking at them now, see monkey, and see man? The monkey evolved to man, .. evidence. I mean who can deny seeing a man and a monkey?

The Proof; 4 billion years of scientific observation of single celled bacteria evolving reveals that humans are still animals of the ape (chimp-ish) family, with no mind or free-will as previously thought to have had. Those ignorant assumptions that man had a mind of his own with free will were called, 'the Dark Ages'. Now that man has been 'illuminated', and have evolved and reached the time of Enlightenment, we know better, especially now that the 'billions of years of documented AND verified observations' have been completed, the result; We are animals, and a mind with free-will that supposedly is separate from the brain we now know is the delusion created by the brains animal instinct. Nothing but nervous twitches accumulating in the brain from different parts of the body, or as someone else put it: "Muscle memory", which I suppose transcends into the brain as dreams, creativity, plans and so on, is this what you mean? This's just a brief summary of course, the long-winded story is in Wikipedia's; "Timeline of human Evolution" And I have to admit that Wikipedia's version is far more funnier than my brief summary.

How would you respond to this other genius scientist who came up with a brilliant discovery after an apple fell on his head, or next to him?

Observing a falling object might trigger scientific study. Had Newton not gone beyond musing about the topic he would not be regarded as a genius or a scientist – but just another person giving a testimonial about his opinions.

But reading Wikipedia's info on BB and evolution, not once does the information go beyond "musing";

Evidence:
"Look Dr. Dawkins, an insect eating mammal!"

Conclusion:
85-65 Ma
A group of small, nocturnal and arboreal, insect-eating mammals called the Euarchonta begins a speciation that will lead to the primate, treeshrew and flying lemur orders. The Primatomorpha is a subdivision of Euarchonta that includes the primates and the stem-primates Plesiadapiformes. One of the early stem-primates is Plesiadapis. Plesiadapis still had claws and the eyes located on each side of the head. Because of this they were faster on the ground than on the top of the trees, but they began to spend long times on lower branches of trees, feeding on fruits and leaves.

COME ON people, they seen an 'insect eating mammal', look at the musing that goes on after it! You want me to quote more? It gets funnier and funnier I promise!

I mean anyone can make up stories, start by looking at a fossil of a small lizard, and then we put the bones of an elephant next to it, and I can fill-in-the-blanks just like Wikipedia's Timeline of human evolution.
Yes we observe a lemur, yes we can see the leaves on the trees, yes we can see the fruits, but the millions of years of stories they make up has NEVER been observed. It is all fairytales!

What I have observed is what you can observe in the here and now, which is your, mine and our mind, and that it is Infinite and Eternal and is independent of the brain.

No million or billion years of made up fairytales, but just the facts sir, .. just the facts!
What we need is Sargent Friday of Dragnet here on this forum to straighten everyone out and keep us on-track.

How did a Catholic priest come up with the "BB-theory"? Or that other Catholic priest to write the "Satanic Bible"?

I do not pretend to know the motivations of such people. Do you?

Well isn't that what we're talking about? Was these ideas from their mind/spirit that is independent from the brain, .. or was it nervous muscle twitches from muscle memory creating these ideas in the brain?

If you are so critical, then please give me a list of things that you can, and things that you cannot accept to have triggered a scientific epiphany?

As stated above, anything can trigger scientific study – and that is the BEGINNING point.

Anything? So a round-rock could cause the eyes to create illusions of a bowling ball in the brain? Rock to brain: "Make me into a bowling-ball, .. make me into a bowling-ball!"

Let me guess, .. sitting on the toilet is out, right? It's just sooo un-scientific.

That you may consider musing on a toilet or looking in a mirror to be scientific evidence is not assurance that either are anything more than musings (defined as Absorbed in thought; contemplative) – that testimonials derive from musings do not constitute scientific evidence.

Well yea, .. because it's happening while sitting on the toilet or as I was looking in the mirror, so according to you, that cannot possibly constipate scientific evidence. But if I said that this musing happened 13.75 billion years ago, now THAT would make a big difference, it is how Big-bang Evolutionary evidence is always verified, by time, or more accurately; "Father Time". And I feel (by your debates) that you know what I'm talking about? Unless you have not yet 'evolved' to a higher degree of 'Illumination' yet?

can we get back on track please? I'm not a theist and not a gods-creating religionist. I believe in God who Is the Infinite, Eternal Creative Mind I Am Who I Am because of the evidence before me. And evidence shows that our Creator is not a divine demon, or 'one from' those that live in the supernatural realm and divine their lies through mediums called Diviners specifically trained by and IN the 'Christian Religion'

[Yochanan]

[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]

I still can't see what the man's trying to say but i think he meant he does not have much info or religious studies

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 37 by arian]

I will focus on debate with those who are serious and capable debaters – and who know the difference between science and personal opinion / emotion / testimonials. This thread has accomplished what was intended – demonstrate that the self-contradiction (or cognitive dissonance – holding contradictory positions simultaneously) in "I am not a theist but I believe in god" -- when Theism is defined as "belief in the existence of a god or gods"

The thread "Undeniable and Scientific Evidence of THE Creator" accomplished the objective of demonstrating that was a boastful, hollow, unsupportable claim (as anyone can verify by noting the total lack of scientific evidence presented).

Perhaps others will choose to respond to such things as:

'happy scientific-atheist' religion!"

"Here is the monkey, .. and then there is the human, two legs, two eyes, hands, feet and they both eat bananas!"

So a round-rock could cause the eyes to create illusions of a bowling ball in the brain? Rock to brain: "Make me into a bowling-ball, .. make me into a bowling-ball!"

Well yea, .. because it's happening while sitting on the toilet or as I was looking in the mirror, so according to you, that cannot possibly constipate scientific evidence

And I feel (by your debates) that you know what I'm talking about? Unless you have not yet 'evolved' to a higher degree of 'Illumination' yet?

As I say elsewhere, "Don't attempt to make anyone look foolish. Let them do so themselves."

[arian]

[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]

I still can't see what the man's trying to say but i think he meant he does not have much info or religious studies

No, it is that I don't give much thought about religion and their created gods. My last statement;

can we get back on track please? I'm not a theist and not a gods-creating religionist. I believe in God who Is the Infinite, Eternal Creative Mind I Am Who I Am because of the evidence before me. And evidence shows that our Creator is not a divine demon, or 'one from' those that live in the supernatural realm and divine their lies through mediums called Diviners specifically trained by and IN the 'Christian Religion'

Did you understand it? If not, which parts? The entire thing? Why? Was I not clear? Is there anything particular that threw you off? Were there words you never heard before, maybe I can define those for you!? Is the resolution of your monitor good enough to red small print? Do you understand what the word 'religion' stands for? Do you believe in God, or do you believe in one of the many gods of religion, you know, the one religionists study in 'theology'?

I am asking because when I don't understand someone, I keep asking and digging till they explain to me, or till I can clearly understand what they are trying to say.

This is a 'debating' forum and if you respond to a post, you are a participant, a fellow debater. If you are an observer who is here just to make comments, it's best done to whom you are addressing in a PM. Like this last post in a PM to Zzyzx for instance.

If I can be of any help, by all means, point out the parts you don't understand, and I can rephrase it for you with more Wikipedia definitions if you like. Do you want Bible verses? Different analogies, scenarios, in a science fiction context, or in a poem, I can do that too (I might need some help from Otseng on that though).
But your comment; "I think he meant he does not have much info or religious studies" doesn't tell me anything. Matter of fact it almost sounds like an insult; "I still can't see what the man's trying to say", .. not that I feel the insult was to me of course. This is why I'm offering to help.

Thank you my friend.