Moesker

So this was just taking the long road in order to throw out one specific point of view? Shocking. Although my premise that a creator who has no desire to interact with her creation still stands under this view. I wonder how that God feels about worship of false Gods? Hope its not a jealous God.

I disagree. A person does not have to decide which god or which religion to come to the conclusion that a higher power caused this all to come about. And it is a logic leap to claim that because humans have come up with multiple versions of God that there must be more than one and for some reason now we have to choose which one. What if there really is only one true God and mankind's attempt to explain him has simply left us with all these multiple "gods" and religions you trot out in every thread like this? I think there is one true God with a multitude of human attempts at explaining him. Sure doesn't mean there is really more than one, and if there isn't more than one, then it is not necessary to choose which one and it doesn't matter where you were born or the predominate religion in the area. Too many people get hung up on the constraints generated by mere human beings. Yeah, humans probably don't have it right. So what? The existence of one God, one creator, one all powerful being, is not dependent on our ability to explain him. Once a person can accept that there is one true God (however, whoever that may be) then it becomes very easy to realize we were created and not just some random accident. Then the only challenge is figuring out which religion, which explanation, which description of God a person is going to gravitate towards. Then, at that point, you are correct, it depends where your were born, how your were raised and what you were exposed to. But none of those human inspired details are the least bit important to come to the conclusion that there must be a higher power, an architect, a God. Even if there is one true God, that doesn't mean that any of man's religions is correct. God's existence doesn't automatically point to a known religion as being true. I think the fact that there are so many religions points to man having a need to create ways to explain things he does not understand. The concept of God is likely not completely understandable to humans thus, its likely no earthly religion is the truth.

Because it becomes the answer for anything too difficult or complex. Ancient man asked, "What is lightning?" They didn't have an answer for that, so they decided it was the weapon of some god - Zeus, in that case. Ancient man asked, "What is that crazy shiny thing up in the sky?" They didn't have an answer, so it became a god - Aten, Apollo, Helios, Freyr, Sol, etc. Ancient man asked, "Why does the ground shake?" They didn't know, so they invented another god - Vulcan, Neptune, Poseidon, Cabrakan, etc. It's a cop-out answer. Lightning is caused by differences in electric polarity between cloud and ground. The sun is a star. Earthquakes are tectonic activity. Once man reasoned these puzzles out long enough, they discovered the answer. If anything you can't understand is answered by "god," you're just pushing the Easy Button.

I believe it is far-fetched that God would want us to worship him/her. I feel if there is a God, he would likely watch his creation from a distance and not interact with it. Because of that, I feel the first option is more far-fetched.

Is saying that the bible is untrue any more offensive to Christians than saying it is true is to a non-Christian? There seems to be a double-standard which is the only thing I am pointing out. I am not offended when people use bible passages despite not believing their validity. Maybe I just don't have thin skin. I get the feeling that its not how I put it but the actual fact that I feel that way is the real issue for many. And doesn't the premise of the question lead to the possibility that the bibles version is incorrect?

The Bible records a lot of interaction wt His creation - especially through the life of Jesus Christ. I believe He was the "First Cause" behind creation. He established the physical & moral laws by which the universe operates. I know it does. But the bible is fictional. I am talking about if there truly was a God. Well this is real f'n productive. How about it you don't want to have a reasonable, civil discussion about this that you just stay out of the discussion? Thanks in advance for not continuing to be a dick. Interesting...I laid out a scenario where God didn't interact with his creation and it was ignored by TGH because he only wanted to present his version of God. So then I relay my outlook (yada yada yada) . Sorry everyone hasn't conformed to your arrogant way of looking at things.

The Bible records a lot of interaction wt His creation - especially through the life of Jesus Christ. I believe He was the "First Cause" behind creation. He established the physical & moral laws by which the universe operates. I know it does. But the bible is fictional. I am talking about if there truly was a God.

Sounds like a deadbeat dad Better than an abusive one.

Sure. There are plenty of possibilities, most of which we aren't even aware of. But I tried my best to winnow it down to two basic possibilities. My intent is to show how implausible each seems without introducing my own bias towards God. I am not sure what I believe as I can't see concrete proof of any versions that have been put out there so far. I know that the human versions of God that have been presented are purely fictional in my opinion.

Isn't it possible that the universe was created by a higher being but that being does not interact with his creation?

That is such a minor thing politically. Our country has so many more important things to worry about.

Shouldn't be hard for Gods 'chosen one'.

Neat picture though - I'll give you that. No it's not. It made me dizzy and gave me a seizure. I slumped over and hit my head on the keyboard. It was Gods will, my child.

Sounds like Taylor Swift Sounds like most versions of God. Can't end on that. therefore: John 3:16-17New King James Version (NKJV) 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. Sorry Charlie, more to it than that. Neat picture though - I'll give you that. But not in the mood to address apologetics at this point - done that so many times on other threads. I would hope there is more to it as "my religion is different because my religious text says so" is very weak. But circular reasoning is pretty much the totality of your argument for your version of God.

Sounds like Taylor Swift Sounds like most versions of God. Can't end on that. therefore: John 3:16-17New King James Version (NKJV) 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

Get ready to be amazed!!! We could win 20+ and go 12-6 in the Big 10 and I am sure some would still find things to bitch about.

He's listed as the same height and 15-25 pounds lighter than Hammond. I guess I don't see how he will be able to do any better at C. While I agree that the ability to throw your weight around down low is important, especially in the Big10, there is something to be said for athleticism. He is currently 6'11", 215. If he can use quickness and moves, that can counter lack of weight somewhat. Hammond didn't have a lot of that.

Gorjok Gak maybe??? http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/osusportsextra/osu-sports-center-gorjok-gak-receives-release-from-oklahoma-state/article_39d08fe4-44db-57ba-83cb-bbbbf58ab2f9.html

Ugly uniforms come in all brands.

Is this a thread for favorite videos?

It won't be Daryl as it was made to look like it is going to be Daryl. Typical television tactics. I voted Glenn and Carol, plus a tertiary character.

Very important. The secondary can only cover for so long and any decent QB will pick apart a defense if he has enough time to do so.

Say what you want about this pope. A lot of people probably think he's in the limelight too much. But he's an OG. PR Pope.

Really, 95% of Muslims? I guess the five Muslims I know fall in the 5%. Me too. I wonder how dangerous Ameer Abdullah is to 84?