# No kidding



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 15, 2015)

I was going to share this last night before something else happened, and I didn't get around to it. Please, keep in mind that I'm being entirely serious throughout all of this, and this is exactly how it went down. 

Last week, those of you who hang out in the PF got to see a good bit of the story of what's going on with my kids. Me losing my faith was in the works for a long time, but that is probably the single biggest event that can have the claim of the "straw" that broke me. There were other things surrounding it, and other things since that have corroborated my lack of faith, but there have been others that have kept me in the middle. 

So last week I'm re-opening this wound in me in the PF, while looking forward to the OWL event on Saturday, and hoping to have a good showing. Actively hoping. 

Well, Saturday comes and it's an awesome time. My guest and I, along with my co-captain, get along swimmingly. We're cracking jokes, having fun, and even catching a couple of spots. Then the striper hit. I knew it was big when it hit. Long story short, it ended up being a lifetime-class catch for my guest, and I was humbled to be able to have been the boat and team that drew the lucky card, on the lucky spot, at the lucky time with the lucky bait. I carried this huge smile with me all weekend, even while doing tons of chores on Sunday. 

Fast forward to yesterday, and I'm on my way home from work and I'm re-living it in my head and I get this shiver. It's not cold. I do have the windows down, but it's nowhere near cold for me. Then I get it again. 

So I start thinking about it more. The sheer odds against all of that happening the way that it did are just staggering. Combined with my active hope, maybe there's a possibility that something reached down into the waters of Lanier on Saturday to change our lives that day. Maybe that was one of the signs that I so often ask for, and either miss or just aren't there. I mean I'm really thinking about it. Then I'm reminded of the wound I had ripped open over the last week. 

Maybe this was a pat on the head along with a sign that I should be looking for more. I don't know. So I, no joke, ask for confirmation. If I am being spoken to, please show me something else that will tell me for sure. 

When I get home, the dogs have poohed in the house. And all I can do is laugh at it, well and be upset with the pups for whom this is not a regular occurrence since we got their probiotics straightened out, but I'm still laughing on the inside because I'm thinking that if this IS a sign, what could it possibly mean? Maybe there is a God and he just likes being mean to me. 

I don't know the truth, and while this weekend was a powerful experience for me, and the circumstances were certainly lottery-level chance of occurring, I still don't see anything to make me think that the universe is anything other than random. 

I wanted to share that with you guys to show you that I do think about these things outside of here.


----------



## 660griz (Apr 15, 2015)

For lack of a better explanation, that is our 'spiritual' nature. 

A few years back, I was riding my motorcycle up to Yellowstone. My wife is on the back. It is a beautiful morning, beautiful road. We round a corner and there is a huge green valley with the Grand Tetons covered in snow in the background. 
I told my wife that it was good for the soul. I think we are just sometimes overwhelmed with beauty and in your case, joy. Perhaps we are not use to it or somehow don't think it will happen to us but, just enjoy life. There are some serious ups and downs. The downs, make the ups that much more appreciated.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 15, 2015)

660griz said:


> For lack of a better explanation, that is our 'spiritual' nature.
> 
> A few years back, I was riding my motorcycle up to Yellowstone. My wife is on the back. It is a beautiful morning, beautiful road. We round a corner and there is a huge green valley with the Grand Tetons covered in snow in the background.
> I told my wife that it was good for the soul. I think we are just sometimes overwhelmed with beauty and in your case, joy. Perhaps we are not use to it or somehow don't think it will happen to us but, just enjoy life. There are some serious ups and downs. The downs, make the ups that much more appreciated.



I'm a firm believer that one of the best lines came out of Vanilla Sky.

"Without the sour, the sweet ain't as sweet."

It's truth.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 15, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> I was going to share this last night before something else happened, and I didn't get around to it. Please, keep in mind that I'm being entirely serious throughout all of this, and this is exactly how it went down.
> 
> Last week, those of you who hang out in the PF got to see a good bit of the story of what's going on with my kids. Me losing my faith was in the works for a long time, but that is probably the single biggest event that can have the claim of the "straw" that broke me. There were other things surrounding it, and other things since that have corroborated my lack of faith, but there have been others that have kept me in the middle.
> 
> ...



It is gutsy to share those thoughts. I appreciate it.

I just think we are tuned into looking for signs we want to see when in reality everything that happened that you had noticed or didn't notice could have been taken as a sign and interpreted whatever way you wanted to interpret it.

Now, you walk in the house and find the puppy poop and one of the puppies says to you "Hey, that fish was sign from God and so is this" you might be onto something.


----------



## 660griz (Apr 15, 2015)

bullethead said:


> It is gutsy to share those thoughts. I appreciate it.
> 
> I just think we are tuned into looking for signs we want to see when in reality everything that happened that you had noticed or didn't notice could have been taken as a sign and interpreted whatever way you wanted to interpret it.
> 
> Now, you walk in the house and find the puppy poop and one of the puppies says to you "Hey, that fish was sign from God and so is this" you might be onto something.



 Amen.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 15, 2015)

bullethead said:


> It is gutsy to share those thoughts. I appreciate it.
> 
> I just think we are tuned into looking for signs we want to see when in reality everything that happened that you had noticed or didn't notice could have been taken as a sign and interpreted whatever way you wanted to interpret it.
> 
> Now, you walk in the house and find the puppy poop and one of the puppies says to you "Hey, that fish was sign from God and so is this" you might be onto something.



Hey, no worries. That's why I did it, because I do want the faithful to see that I do combat my own positions, and not just snipe things on here. 

I agree about our own desire to interpret. My thoughts on what it could mean came out of the blue, and that's why they were so jarring. 

It would be nice if the dog would also hold up a sign or actually tell me that's what the deal was.


----------



## 660griz (Apr 15, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> It would be nice if the dog would also hold up a sign or actually tell me that's what the deal was.



If you really want a sign from God, you can get one. Just ask Reba McEntire. 
God speaks to her all the time.
I am not talking, nice day fishing, nice fish, nice view, nice mountains, I am talking actually...talking. 
So, listen.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 15, 2015)

> the circumstances were certainly lottery-level chance of occurring


Of course the flip side to that is that SOMEONE wins the lottery darn near every week.
And congrats for getting your guest on a big fish!


----------



## j_seph (Apr 15, 2015)

Stripe, had you been catching fish on a regular basis this last month?


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 15, 2015)

660griz said:


> If you really want a sign from God, you can get one. Just ask Reba McEntire.
> God speaks to her all the time.
> I am not talking, nice day fishing, nice fish, nice view, nice mountains, I am talking actually...talking.
> So, listen.



I do. 



WaltL1 said:


> Of course the flip side to that is that SOMEONE wins the lottery darn near every week.
> And congrats for getting your guest on a big fish!



Thanks, but this is like writing a check to a charity and THEN buying the ticket. It inherently carries more meaning because of that. 



j_seph said:


> Stripe, had you been catching fish on a regular basis this last month?



Oh, no. Not even close. All year this year, during daylight hours, I maybe have had 3 fish in the boat prior to Saturday. 

Night is a different story, but those are also different tactics and conditions. 

There was no hope of making a promise to put fish in the boat. The only promise I could make was that we would have fun either way, and we did.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 15, 2015)

I don't know how many other boat captain's he's been around, but I sincerely doubt any of them had him a foot out of his seat jumping a wake. It was unintentional because the wake stood up at the last second, but it ended well and he had a good laugh at it.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 15, 2015)

Trying to interpret "signs" is dicey business.  

Believers see the hand of God in the veins of a leaf.  

All I know for CERTAIN is that leaves have veins.  That doesn't make them any less awesome.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 15, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> Trying to interpret "signs" is dicey business.
> 
> 
> All I know for CERTAIN is that leaves have veins.  That doesn't make them any less awesome.



I agree with this.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 15, 2015)

Thoughts about the nature of reality cross my mind every day.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 15, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> Thoughts about the nature of reality cross my mind every day.



Depending on how you mean that, same here.


----------



## j_seph (Apr 15, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> There was no hope of making a promise to put fish in the boat. The only promise I could make was that we would have fun either way, and we did.


One man made a promise to you brother and in him you will find your answers. I watched my wife go from a 26 yr old lady, full of life, adventure, and a big future for us both go to a vegetative state in 10 years. She never once lost faith and she knew that in the end, the victory was hers. Brother, never quit seeking answers and I can promise you as long as you are seeking your eyes will be open. Prayers for you


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 15, 2015)

j_seph said:


> One man made a promise to you brother and in him you will find your answers. I watched my wife go from a 26 yr old lady, full of life, adventure, and a big future for us both go to a vegetative state in 10 years. She never once lost faith and she knew that in the end, the victory was hers. Brother, never quit seeking answers and I can promise you as long as you are seeking your eyes will be open. Prayers for you



Thank you. I'm sorry you and your wife went through that. 

If you need an ear, or a shoulder, you got it.


----------



## welderguy (Apr 15, 2015)

"If any man be in Christ, he is a new creatureld things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."

It thrills my heart to think you may be a new creature in Christ brother!


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

welderguy said:


> "If any man be in Christ, he is a new creatureld things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."
> 
> It thrills my heart to think you may be a new creature in Christ brother!



I wouldn't count on it. 

A) Because, if you re-read, I said I felt something. I wasn't, not couldn't be, specific. Yes, I referred to it as "God" but,
B) I have no reason to believe that it was that God, in particular.


----------



## stringmusic (Apr 16, 2015)

I'm with Bullet, I think the dog is gonna have to talk to you, in English but with a British accent, about his poop.

After all, having animals talk to us is the only way we can be sure there is a God.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

stringmusic said:


> I'm with Bullet, I think the dog is gonna have to talk to you, in English but with a British accent, about his poop.
> 
> After all, having animals talk to us is the only way we can be sure there is a God.



Thanks for the contribution.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

Good read, SH.

Even though I'm a believer, I am generally skeptical of "signs."  Primarily because we will often see what we want to see in a given situation.  Or, if we already know the answer we want, there can be confirmation found in any sort of way.

Unlike you guys, I see the "signs" in every day mundane things.......like the veins in the leaf Ambush pointed out, or my daughter's giggles.  Or the wind.  Now, have I seen or been a part of things that I am certain were "signs," yes, and I have discussed them somewhat on here.  But, no burning bushes for me, or talking donkeys.

Since I am a believer, I will see it differently than you.  I don't think further proof is required when it's all around us.  We can see what we want to see in the evidence, and it seems plain to me, every bit as obvious as you guys claim it to be absent.

Either way, congrats on the big fish, and cool you took somebody along for the day.  Events like that worthy causes.  And, whether God revealed himself to you or not, you were doing a very cool thing takin' that guy fishin


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Good read, SH.
> 
> Even though I'm a believer, I am generally skeptical of "signs."  Primarily because we will often see what we want to see in a given situation.  Or, if we already know the answer we want, there can be confirmation found in any sort of way.
> 
> ...



Thanks, it really was awesome. 

Confirmation bias is hard to overcome.  That's why I made a point to stop, think about it, ask even though I doubted there would be an answer, and wait for it. I don't take the dog pooh as an answer. I think my question is still hanging in the air, honestly.


----------



## 660griz (Apr 16, 2015)

stringmusic said:


> After all, having animals talk to us is the only way we can be sure there is a God.



It worked with the first humans. 
Bible has serpents and donkeys talking. A dog should be just as easy.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

stringmusic said:


> I'm with Bullet, I think the dog is gonna have to talk to you, in English but with a British accent, about his poop.
> 
> After all, having animals talk to us is the only way we can be sure there is a God.



Please give us a breakdown of the events that transpired and then give us your detailed analysis on how that information( along with the 46,000 other things that went on all around him ) cannot be interpreted in any other ways except a sign from God, the God of the Bible.
I will pay careful attention to your in depth explanation as you break down how a supposed supreme being and his infinite ways will use a dog pooping on the floor (so rare it has never been documented by modern humans) as his end all proof that Yahweh himself has contacted the person. I am particularly interested because my Son will be visiting this weekend along with his 11month old Basset Hound and I will be on pins and needles as I walk that puppy prophet hoping he leaves me a "sign". I will be honest though, I am quite sure that sign like all the others will be quickly picked up and disposed of when smelled for what it really is.
But...String...the floor is yours...explain away.


----------



## stringmusic (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Please give us a breakdown of the events that transpired and then give us your detailed analysis on how that information( along with the 46,000 other things that went on all around him ) cannot be interpreted in any other ways except a sign from God, the God of the Bible.
> I will pay careful attention to your in depth explanation as you break down how a supposed supreme being and his infinite ways will use a dog pooping on the floor (so rare it has never been documented by modern humans) as his end all proof that Yahweh himself has contacted the person. I am particularly interested because my Son will be visiting this weekend along with his 11month old Basset Hound and I will be on pins and needles as I walk that puppy prophet hoping he leaves me a "sign". I will be honest though, I am quite sure that sign like all the others will be quickly picked up and disposed of when smelled for what it really is.
> But...String...the floor is yours...explain away.


LOL

Your premise is flawed.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

stringmusic said:


> LOL
> 
> Your premise is flawed.



Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
Maybe you can give us an unflawed premise and detailed explanation of what really went on since I am unable to grasp the magnitude of it all.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
> Maybe you can give us an unflawed premise and detailed explanation of what really went on since I am unable to grasp the magnitude of it all.



What really went on was that a fish was caught.  Whether God (whichever face you choose to put on the name for the sake of this discussion) was involved in the situation is the question, right?


----------



## 660griz (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Maybe you can give us an unflawed premise and detailed explanation of what really went on since I am unable to grasp the magnitude of it all.



God did it. We cannot hope to understand why or how...and should stop trying.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> What really went on was that a fish was caught.  Whether God (whichever face you choose to put on the name for the sake of this discussion) was involved in the situation is the question, right?



That's my take on it. Did I mess up my own OP? Man, I hate it when that happens.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> That's my take on it. Did I mess up my own OP? Man, I hate it when that happens.



Nah, I understood the point.  Then went and read your write-up on the event in the fishin' forum too.  I can tell the event had an impact.  What kind-of impact is an individual assessment.

I think God was involved in each of the 46K things that were going on around you........and the big fish, and the dog poo, and your subsequent soul searching.  But, that is because I am convinced God exists to beging with, and we are a product of his existence, so everything is linked together in that way, so we can see evidence of God all around us.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> What really went on was that a fish was caught.  Whether God (whichever face you choose to put on the name for the sake of this discussion) was involved in the situation is the question, right?


Fish caught. Thoughts pondered as to how/why. Dog poop on floor. Thoughts pondered as if it is a sign from God.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Nah, I understood the point.  Then went and read your write-up on the event in the fishin' forum too.  I can tell the event had an impact.  What kind-of impact is an individual assessment.
> 
> I think God was involved in each of the 46K things that were going on around you........and the big fish, and the dog poo, and your subsequent soul searching.  But, that is because I am convinced God exists to beging with, and we are a product of his existence, so everything is linked together in that way, so we can see evidence of God all around us.



I was making a joke about people wanting to derail it. 

It's hard to read on the webz sometimes.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

I must say, though, I am very jealous of your boat.  

If I ever get around to buying one, I want a good skiff that I can chase stripers, hybrids, whites, and also take into saltwater.  I like bass fishing, but, if given a choice between catching 10 largemouth and 1 striper, I'd take the striper...........and I'd sure 'nuff grill a 21# striper   Them's good eatin' fish!


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Fish caught. Thoughts pondered as to how/why. Dog poop on floor. Thoughts pondered as if it is a sign from God.



You're missing one. Re-living the darkest moment of my life and wondering if it, too, is also a sign, or a message.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Fish caught. Thoughts pondered as to how/why. Dog poop on floor. Thoughts pondered as if it is a sign from God.


Its kind of interesting that if a big fish WASNT caught, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
It would have been a typical day fishing capped off with coming home to dog poop on the floor. 
A cold beverage would have been popped and not another thought about it


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> Its kind of interesting that if a big fish WASNT caught, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
> It would have been a typical day fishing capped off with coming home to dog poop on the floor.
> A cold beverage would have been popped and not another thought about it



True. We wouldn't be talking about it, but I would still be thinking it.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Thoughts pondered as if it is a sign from God.



If God exists, it is certainly a sign.  If he doesn't, it ain't.  

Whether it is a sign specifically for SH's situation or generically because God created the fisherman and the fish is also a different question.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> Its kind of interesting that if a big fish WASNT caught, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
> It would have been a typical day fishing capped off with coming home to dog poop on the floor.
> A cold beverage would have been popped and not another thought about it



Did you read his write-up on the day in the fishing forum?  Seems there was a lot more involved than a big fish.......not syaing God, but, good times, connections, thoughts, all that after a lot of pondering regarding his life's situation.

And, either way, ending the day with a cold beer is always a good thing


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> You're missing one. Re-living the darkest moment of my life and wondering if it, too, is also a sign, or a message.


Yeah I am aware of your OP.
I was going along with Strings post and JBs quote of mine was from there.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> If God exists, it is certainly a sign.  If he doesn't, it ain't.
> 
> Whether it is a sign specifically for SH's situation or generically because God created the fisherman and the fish is also a different question.


If. The sticking point that no believer can get past.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> If. The sticking point that no believer can get past.



Or skeptic.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Did you read his write-up on the day in the fishing forum?  Seems there was a lot more involved than a big fish.......not syaing God, but, good times, connections, thoughts, all that after a lot of pondering regarding his life's situation.
> 
> And, either way, ending the day with a cold beer is always a good thing


No I haven't. Ive been mostly staying away from the PF. Its a scary place to me 
I was just going by this -


> Well, Saturday comes and it's an awesome time. My guest and I, along with my co-captain, get along swimmingly. We're cracking jokes, having fun, and even catching a couple of spots. Then the striper hit. I knew it was big when it hit. Long story short, it ended up being a lifetime-class catch for my guest, and I was humbled to be able to have been the boat and team that drew the lucky card, on the lucky spot, at the lucky time with the lucky bait. I carried this huge smile with me all weekend, even while doing tons of chores on Sunday.
> 
> Fast forward to yesterday, and I'm on my way home from work and I'm re-living it in my head and I get this shiver. It's not cold. I do have the windows down, but it's nowhere near cold for me. Then I get it again.
> 
> So I start thinking about it more. The sheer odds against all of that happening the way that it did are just staggering. Combined with my active hope, maybe there's a possibility that something reached down into the waters of Lanier on Saturday to change our lives that day. Maybe that was one of the signs that I so often ask for, and either miss or just aren't there. I mean I'm really thinking about it. Then I'm reminded of the wound I had ripped open over the last week.


It seems like the catching of the big fish was the catalyst for deeper thought. So Im wondering if there WASNT a big fish caught............
And StripeRR like I said I didn't read your post in the PF and I am in NO WAY trivializing what sounds like a serious subject.
My only point being that when something DOES happen we start wondering why but typically when something DOESNT happen we don't give it much thought.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> No I haven't. Ive been mostly staying away from the PF. Its a scary place to me



I get depressed when I hang out down there too much....


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> If God exists, it is certainly a sign.  If he doesn't, it ain't.
> 
> Whether it is a sign specifically for SH's situation or generically because God created the fisherman and the fish is also a different question.



If God created the guts in a duck, can he place clues about the future in the appearance of said guts?  Are the clues always there but require certain discernment to interpret correctly?


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> No I haven't. Ive been mostly staying away from the PF. Its a scary place to me
> I was just going by this -
> 
> It seems like the catching of the big fish was the catalyst for deeper thought. So Im wondering if there WASNT a big fish caught............
> ...



I wrote up the fishing trip in the fishing forum. The bit about my kids was in the PF. 

The big fish was the straw event, but the whole day was making me think. If there had been no fish it would have been a "normal" day for this year.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Or skeptic.


Burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
With "if" you can interject whatever criteria into the claim to make it appear legit. But,  the reality of it is you did nothing to actually prove the claim.

I can state an invisible spirit sits on my left shoulder and is responsible for the fish, dark experience and poop. There is no way you can prove me wrong because ALL it is  IS  an un-provable claim. It is not legitimate until I provide certifiable proof.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> If God created the guts in a duck, can he place clues about the future in the appearance of said guts?  Are the clues always there but require certain discernment to interpret correctly?



I don't know.  But I did see that in a movie recently.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I get depressed when I hang out down there too much....


Ok so I said in the above post PF (Political Forum).
But I think you actually said it was in the Fishing forum.
Then I called the person I was talking to on the phone JB and they were like "who is JB"?
Moral of the story, Im getting too old to multi task


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> Ok so I said in the above post PF (Political Forum).
> But I think you actually said it was in the Fishing forum.
> Then I called the person I was talking to on the phone JB and they were like "who is JB"
> Moral of the story, Im getting too old to multi task


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
> With "if" you can interject whatever criteria into the claim to make it appear legit. But,  the reality of it is you did nothing to actually prove the claim.
> 
> I can state an invisible spirit sits on my left shoulder and is responsible for the fish, dark experience and poop. There is no way you can prove me wrong because ALL it is  IS  an un-provable claim. It is not legitimate until I provide certifiable proof.



Right, and my claim is that the fish, the poop, and the expirience are all proof of a creator.

What you are looking for is a burning bush or a talking donkey, and, I really mean this, I hope one day you get it.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> Ok so I said in the above post PF (Political Forum).
> But I think you actually said it was in the Fishing forum.
> Then I called the person I was talking to on the phone JB and they were like "who is JB"?
> Moral of the story, Im getting too old to multi task



That gave me a good laugh.......

Which reminds me, we should all go fishing sometime soon!


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> If God created the guts in a duck, can he place clues about the future in the appearance of said guts?  Are the clues always there but require certain discernment to interpret correctly?


"IF" any of the tens of thousands of the other gods that are worshiped did it then they are responsible. And "IF" it is their intent then the clues will be interpreted correctly.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Right, and my claim is that the fish, the poop, and the expirience are all proof of a creator.



All that is missing is the proof to back up the claim.

Just making claims like that really waters down the content.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> That gave me a good laugh.......
> 
> Which reminds me, we should all go fishing sometime soon!



I hear that.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

SH, we had a cool time trout fishing last spring.  I'm hoping we can pull something similar together in the next month or so.......most of us AAA'ers don't have boats, so it'll prolly be a bank fishin' trip.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> SH, we had a cool time trout fishing last spring.  I'm hoping we can pull something similar together in the next month or so.......most of us AAA'ers don't have boats, so it'll prolly be a bank fishin' trip.



Probably. I don't have a yak or canoe.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I don't know.  But I did see that in a movie recently.




  The answer for you should always be "Of course he can!!"


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> All that is missing is the proof to back up the claim.



The fish, the poop, and the man.  All got here somehow.  They are proof of origins.  The origin is the creator.  

I got all the proof required to claim there is a creator.  "Which" creator, God or chance, is the next question.  I go with what seems logically the most likely conclusion, given the poop didn't come out of thin air....

You move the bar when you say none are evidence of a creator because you want to see something spectacular, supernatural, etc.  But, we are discussing the creator of the natural, wouldn't we look in nature to see the evidence?  Why would the evidence have to lay beyond the realm of creation?



bullethead said:


> Just making claims like that really waters down the content.



I think I've clarified it a little.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> SH, we had a cool time trout fishing last spring.  I'm hoping we can pull something similar together in the next month or so.......most of us AAA'ers don't have boats, so it'll prolly be a bank fishin' trip.



We should go back to" the spot".  Just to make it interesting, fly rods only.....(You'll still limit out)


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> Probably. I don't have a yak or canoe.



I've been wanting to send a PM out for a few weeks now, but the dang white bass run started and I can't even think about any other fish till that ends.  I'll send one soon.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> We should go back to" the spot".  Just to make it interesting, fly rods only.....(You'll still limit out)



I'm in!!......but, not sure if I have a fly rod........I can try to find one.

I have a trout net now, won't have near as many escape me this time


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> The fish, the poop, and the man.  All got here somehow.  They are proof of origins.  The origin is the creator.
> 
> I got all the proof required to claim there is a creator.  "Which" creator, God or chance, is the next question.  I go with what seems logically the most likely conclusion, given the poop didn't come out of thin air....
> 
> ...



"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I'm in!!......but, not sure if I have a fly rod........I can try to find one.
> 
> I have a trout net now, won't have near as many escape me this time



$40 combo at Walmart or Dicks.  Works just as good as anything.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> We should go back to" the spot".  Just to make it interesting, fly rods only.....(You'll still limit out)



I'll stick with my spinning rod. I don't want to give anyone, myself included, piercings.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> The answer for you should always be "Of course he can!!"



In the movie "Exodus," the duck guts got it right.......


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> In the movie "Exodus," the duck guts got it right.......




Ain't it funny how that soothsayer never got it wrong?  She applied the "Yes, No, Wait" technique.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> $40 combo at Walmart or Dicks.  Works just as good as anything.



I'll grab one......



			
				StripeRR HunteRR said:
			
		

> I'll stick with my spinning rod. I don't want to give anyone, myself included, piercings.



That's cool too.  I'll be sending a PM to y'all soon so we can start looking for a day that works for everybody.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> Ain't it funny how that soothsayer never got it wrong?  She applied the "Yes, No, Wait" technique.



I see where your going with this.  The duck guts were very specific, though.  Either way, she did apply the yes,no,wait to the plagues.  

She also got herself hanged eventually......


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I'll grab one......
> 
> 
> 
> That's cool too.  I'll be sending a PM to y'all soon so we can start looking for a day that works for everybody.



Suweet. Much appreciated.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."



What's extraordinary?  Are we only looking at our own environment, or universally extraordinary?

A rock on some blanet a billion light years away would think a pooping dog is pretty danged extraordinary.  Rings on Saturn are extraordinary.

My point is that these terms are subjective, and also have to be given a context to make sense.  Additionally, that is the subjective bar you have set, and not a universal truth.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> The fish, the poop, and the man.  All got here somehow.  They are proof of origins.  The origin is the creator.
> 
> I got all the proof required to claim there is a creator.  "Which" creator, God or chance, is the next question.  I go with what seems logically the most likely conclusion, given the poop didn't come out of thin air....
> 
> ...



You have moved the bar when you have taken it a step beyond nature.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> What's extraordinary?  Are we only looking at our own environment, or universally extraordinary?
> 
> A rock on some blanet a billion light years away would think a pooping dog is pretty danged extraordinary.  Rings on Saturn are extraordinary.
> 
> My point is that these terms are subjective, and also have to be given a context to make sense.  Additionally, that is the subjective bar you have set, and not a universal truth.


I think thinking rocks are extraordinary.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> I think thinking rocks are extraordinary.



What are we?


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> You have moved the bar when you have taken it a step beyond nature.



ISn't the creater of nature also natural?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> What are we?



A conglomeration of elements and chemicals to make us what we are.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> ISn't the creater of nature also natural?



I do not know who, what or if such a thing exists. Such a thing would be beyond natural.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> A conglomeration of elements and chemicals to make us what we are.



IS that any different than what a rock is?  We just have different parts arranged in different ways?


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Such a thing would be beyond nature.



I don't see how.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> IS that any different than what a rock is?  We just have different parts arranged in different ways?



Show me a thinking rock and I will agree.
It is the arrangement that is the difference.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I don't see how.



I will leave it up to you to look up the definition of nature.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> It is the arrangement that is the difference.



If the rock has been arranged to think, it would certainly think we were extraordinary, given our status as a peculiarly arranged group of elements that talks, thinks, acts, and feels.  All things that are not available to the overwhelming majority of the elements in this universe.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> I will leave it up to you to look up the definition of nature.



Why would you place a god outside of that realm?  PArticularly if it was the creator of nature.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> If the rock has been arranged to think, it would certainly think we were extraordinary, given our status as a peculiarly arranged group of elements that talks, thinks, acts, and feels.  All things that are not available to the overwhelming majority of the elements in this universe.


"IF"....again


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Why would you place a god outside of that realm?  PArticularly if it was the creator of nature.


The definition of nature places a god outside.

And another "if". 
I am dealing with what is.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

na·ture(nÄ�â€²chÉ™r)

n.

1.

a.The material world and its phenomena:scientists analyzing nature.

b.The forces and processes that produce and control these phenomena:the balance of nature.

2.The world of living things and the outdoors:spent the day enjoying nature.

3.A primitive state of existence, untouched and uninfluenced by civilization or social constraints:when people lived in a state of nature.

4.The basic character or qualities of humanity:It is only human nature to worry about the future.

5.The fundamental character or disposition of a person; temperament:a man of an irascible nature.See Synonyms 

6.The set of inherent characteristics or properties that distinguish something:trying to determine the nature of a newly discovered phenomenon.

7.A kind or sort:confidences of a personal nature.

8.

a.The processes and functions of the body, as in healing:The doctor decided not to do anything and let nature take its course.

b.Heredity:behavior more influenced by nature than nurture.


----------



## welderguy (Apr 16, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> I wouldn't count on it.
> 
> A) Because, if you re-read, I said I felt something. I wasn't, not couldn't be, specific. Yes, I referred to it as "God" but,
> B) I have no reason to believe that it was that God, in particular.



Well, as you say, no worries.

If and when the Spirit reveals Himself to you, I think it will probably be inwardly instead of outwardly.Meaning not by "signs" that are visible to the eyes, but by spiritual revelation.Not saying He can't or doesn't, but that He doesn't normally.

Having said that I say keep asking His confirmation. He called Samuel three times before Samuel understood it was the Lord calling him.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> "IF"....again



I see it too, JB...the mistake that you're making.  

A carbon based life form would be extraordinary if there were no carbon....but there is carbon, and all the other stuff that makes life possible.  That it is here is only proof that it is here.

What you guys claim is "intent".  It's only a claim.  There is no proof.  But as you admitted, you will see proof if you _assume_ there was intent.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

welderguy said:


> Well, as you say, no worries.
> 
> If and when the Spirit reveals Himself to you, I think it will probably be inwardly instead of outwardly.Meaning not by "signs" that are visible to the eyes, but by spiritual revelation.Not saying He can't or doesn't, but that He doesn't normally.
> 
> Having said that I say keep asking His confirmation. He called Samuel three times before Samuel understood it was the Lord calling him.



The chill is what got my attention. That's most definitely inward.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> I am dealing with what is.



This arrangement of elements does not speak, yet this other one does.  Which one is extraordinary in the context of our universe?

Also, the use of "if" does not disqualify the statement.  It's just the proper word to use to communicate the thought.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> I see it too, JB...the mistake that you're making.
> 
> A carbon based life form would be extraordinary if there were no carbon....but there is carbon, and all the other stuff that makes life possible.  That it is here is only proof that it is here.



Ok.  Now there is progress.  Carbon A is just carbon, Carbon B is arranged to think, ponder, and reason.  In context of Carbon A, what is carbon B?



ambush80 said:


> What you guys claim is "intent".  It's only a claim.  There is no proof.  But as you admitted, you will see proof if you _assume_ there was intent.



What I am saying is that proof of creation requires a created thing.  The poop is evidence of the critter that left it.  You guys say "we know of no such God, or anything capable of making the dog."  All I am saying is that you know of nothing capable of creating a rock either, yet the rock is here.  So are you.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

welderguy said:


> Well, as you say, no worries.
> 
> If and when the Spirit reveals Himself to you, I think it will probably be inwardly instead of outwardly.Meaning not by "signs" that are visible to the eyes, but by spiritual revelation.Not saying He can't or doesn't, but that He doesn't normally.
> 
> Having said that I say keep asking His confirmation. He called Samuel three times before Samuel understood it was the Lord calling him.



Isn't that curious?  These experiences believers talk about are so often of the kind that they will not be able to explain them to others.  It's always so personal and unique as to elude description.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> na·ture(nÄ�â€²chÉ™r)
> 
> n.
> 
> ...



Would God be qualified in def 2?


----------



## 660griz (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> This arrangement of elements does not speak, yet this other one does.


 Lots of animals 'speak'.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Ok.  Now there is progress.  Carbon A is just carbon, Carbon B is arranged to think, ponder, and reason.  In context of Carbon A, what is carbon B?



Carbon B has all kinds of other things attached to it to make it what it is. 





JB0704 said:


> What I am saying is that proof of creation requires a created thing.  The poop is evidence of the critter that left it.  You guys say "we know of no such God, or anything capable of making the dog."



That's a heavy phrase.  You'll have to do better than Willard did to make it undeniably true.




JB0704 said:


> All I am saying is that you know of nothing capable of creating a rock either, yet the rock is here.  So are you.



I don't and neither do you, REALLY.  What we can agree on all day is that there are rocks.  What you have is an untestable, unimaginable, undefinable catch all.  "He's there whether or not you believe it.  And no, I can't show him to you."


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

660griz said:


> Lots of animals 'speak'.



It applies the same.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> Carbon B has all kinds of other things attached to it to make it what it is.



Is it special or lucky to have them?  In the context of Carbon A's perspective......



ambush80 said:


> That's a heavy phrase.  You'll have to do better than Willard did to make it undeniably true.



If a creator has no created thing, then what has he created, and how can he be a creator?  What I'm saying is that a created thing implies a creator.......I am not saying "here's your proff of the Christian God."  What I am saying is that proof exists.  Everything we see got here somehow.  You can rule out a God in search of more naturally acceptable conclusions, in the same way I can look at the "proof" and see evidence of a creator.


----------



## 660griz (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> It applies the same.



You are saying the evidence of God is that some things can communicate(living) and somethings can't(rocks)?
Oh wait, rocks are evidence too. So, what does communication have to do with it again?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Would God be qualified in def 2?



No. There is no proof any such thing exists in the material world.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> I don't and neither do you, REALLY.  What we can agree on all day is that there are rocks.  What you have is an untestable, unimaginable, undefinable catch all.  "He's there whether or not you believe it.  And no, I can't show him to you."



I'm not syaing any of that.  I am saying "hey, there's a rock, a unique arrangement of elements.  Oh, this is another arrangement of natural elements capable of much more than that rock."  The 2nd arrangement is rare and extraordinary in context of the known universe.

If we were all just rocks we would not have this discussion.  We are not.  We all want answers.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

660griz said:


> You are saying the evidence of God is that some things can communicate(living) and somethings can't(rocks)?
> Oh wait, rocks are evidence too. So, what does communication have to do with it again?



Not at all.

I am saying we are extraordinary in context of everything else.  "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> No. There is no proof any such thing exists in the material world.



The fish, the poop, and the fisherman.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Ok.  Now there is progress.  Carbon A is just carbon, Carbon B is arranged to think, ponder, and reason.  In context of Carbon A, what is carbon B?
> 
> 
> 
> What I am saying is that proof of creation requires a created thing.  The poop is evidence of the critter that left it.  You guys say "we know of no such God, or anything capable of making the dog."  All I am saying is that you know of nothing capable of creating a rock either, yet the rock is here.  So are you.


 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_(geology)


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Is it special or lucky to have them?  In the context of Carbon A's perspective......



Not everyone sees that term as relevant.  There's an element of chance in my existing, to be sure.



JB0704 said:


> If a creator has no created thing, then what has he created, and how can he be a creator?  What I'm saying is that a created thing implies a creator.......I am not saying "here's your proof of the Christian God."  What I am saying is that proof exists.  Everything we see got here somehow.  You can rule out a God in search of more naturally acceptable conclusions, in the same way I can look at the "proof" and see evidence of a creator.



I don't rule out a God or even an "intent".  There's simply no REAL evidence (Measures, maths, beakers and what not)  to point conclusively towards one.  There isn't really a perfect philosophical argument for one either.  So I say lets just call it like we see it; like we can ALL see/experience it.  Straight up.  No personal feelings involved.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> The fish, the poop, and the fisherman.



Listen I have long seen the slow round abound way you want to lead back to a creator.
The problem is that we can only go back so far and then you have to insert a god of the gaps.

Take the time and deduce each and every one of those things you mentioned above to a god then use that info to show us the specific god. In the end one distinct god will stand alone atop of the massive evidence pile. 
Nobody has been able to do it before so here is your spotlight. Here is your chance to bring all the worlds unbelievers to their knees. 
The floor is yours JB.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Not at all.
> 
> I am saying we are extraordinary in context of everything else.  "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."



You're not gonna even wait till we leave our solar system?  You're gonna go straight to God?  You're doing the same thing that people who didn't know what germs are did.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> So I say lets just call it like we see it; like we can ALL see/experience it.  Straight up.  No personal feelings involved.



I don't claim to see anytihng that you can't/don't see.  I claim to have a different conclusion.  No, I can't show you God.  Yes, I can absolutely explain to you why I have concluded he exists.

After 5+ years of debating it, I think we can both agree you ain't buyin' it   But, these debates are great way to spend the day.


----------



## 660griz (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Not at all.
> 
> I am saying we are extraordinary in context of everything else.  "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."




You mean in what we know. We don't know everything else. 
There could be some folks out there that make us look like primitive man.

So, you are all in for a creator, and have settled on a religion that meets your criteria. A creator would want and demand to be worshipped, no other creators, etc.?
A creator, that if not worshipped, dooms one to torture for eternally? That really sounds like a good God to you?

I can almost understand folks thinking there has to be a creator. I mean, there is a lot we don't know. Give up, go with creator and get on with your life but, a God to worship? Just don't understand. 
It is exactly like ancient tribes but, totally different.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> You're not gonna even wait till we leave our solar system?  You're gonna go straight to God?  You're doing the same thing that people who didn't know what germs are did.



The solar system is our known universe.  All the evidence we have regarding what lies beyond seems to indicate more of the same type of arrangements.  The space rocks that hit earth are all generally composed of the same stuff.

We won't travel to another galaxy in my lifetime.  I'm working with what I have available.  I do not rule out the possibility of life in other solar systems.......in fact, I believe it likely exists.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

660griz said:


> You mean in what we know. We don't know everything else.
> There could be some folks out there that make us look like primitive man.
> 
> So, you are all in for a creator, and have settled on a religion that meets your criteria. A creator would want and demand to be worshipped, no other creators, etc.?
> ...



Ok, call me crazy.  I'm comfortable in my beliefs, as I assume you are too.......even though I can understand an agnostic much more than an atheist.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> After 5+ years of debating it, I think we can both agree you ain't buyin' it   But, these debates are great way to spend the day.



This is why I posted my story. It's something entirely new to discuss. 

What does God _feel_ like to a believer? For me, as I said, it was the chill that got my attention.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I don't claim to see anytihng that you can't/don't see.  I claim to have a different conclusion.  No, I can't show you God.  Yes, I can absolutely explain to you why I have concluded he exists.
> 
> After 5+ years of debating it, I think we can both agree you ain't buyin' it   But, these debates are great way to spend the day.




I'm waiting for you to be able to explain it so that I can see it through your eyes.

Our discussions and the ones I have in "real life" are  important to me because I still struggle with the "big questions".  I'm content with "I don't know" or "I might never know" but the search itself gives me purpose.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Listen I have long seen the slow round abound way you want to lead back to a creator.
> The problem is that we can only go back so far and then you have to insert a god of the gaps.
> 
> Take the time and deduce each and every one of those things you mentioned above to a god then use that info to show us the specific god. In the end one distinct god will stand alone atop of the massive evidence pile..




I'm not gonna bite the "which God" question, you know that.



bullethead said:


> Nobody has been able to do it before so here is your spotlight. Here is your chance to bring all the worlds unbelievers to their knees.
> The floor is yours JB.



Serious question, do you think I am proselytizing in here?  I see these more as a philosophical discussion between opposing views.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> The solar system is our known universe.  All the evidence we have regarding what lies beyond seems to indicate more of the same type of arrangements.  The space rocks that hit earth are all generally composed of the same stuff.
> 
> We won't travel to another galaxy in my lifetime.  I'm working with what I have available.  I do not rule out the possibility of life in other solar systems.......in fact, I believe it likely exists.



I would say you're taking liberties



JB0704 said:


> Ok, call me crazy.  I'm comfortable in my beliefs, as I assume you are too.......even though I can understand an agnostic much more than an atheist.



Oh, don't get comfy brother.....


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> I'm waiting for you to be able to explain it so that I can see it through your eyes.



Bullet just admonished me for my long slow methods, so I will try to summarize here.......I can't tell you anything I haven't already told you, or say anything which you haven't already heard.  My approach in here is simply to defend my position, as I am assuming that is your take as well.  Ultimately, it's for the individual to conclude what they want.,



ambush80 said:


> Our discussions and the ones I have in "real life" are  important to me because I still struggle with the "big questions".  I'm content with "I don't know" or "I might never know" but the search itself gives me purpose.



Then keep searching, if for nothing else than the purpose it gives you.

There is no burning bush or talking donkey to show you, if I had either, I would bring them on our upcoming fishing trip.  Instead, I can only give you the reasons why I believe.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> The fish, the poop, and the fisherman.


If they are evidence of a creator then the creator is evidence of it's own creator. Who is the creator of your God?


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I'm not gonna bite the "which God" question, you know that.



I almost wish you would because it points back to something you might find revealing. 



JB0704 said:


> Serious question, do you think I am proselytizing in here?  I see these more as a philosophical discussion between opposing views.



I think we're all having some amusement with the occasional revelation.  I think of all those brave souls that have come and gone; gave their finest efforts to spread the word....I like to think they learned something


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> I would say you're taking liberties
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, don't get comfy brother.....



I come in here to put my thoughts up against some serious debate and questioning.  It forces me outside of my box, and that is good.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Bullet just admonished me for my long slow methods, so I will try to summarize here.......I can't tell you anything I haven't already told you, or say anything which you haven't already heard.  My approach in here is simply to defend my position, as I am assuming that is your take as well.  Ultimately, it's for the individual to conclude what they want.,
> 
> 
> 
> ...




They're complicated ides.   They require alot of background and specific explanation.  I don't really have a position to defend.  I claim I don't know. You claim to know.  The ball's in your court.

I like what Sam Harris says "If my reasons are good, you will helplessly believe."


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Who is the creator of your God?



My God is also your god......and I'll put this on a T for ya......."IF" he exists.  

God cannot have a creator, or his creator would be God.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> I almost wish you would because it points back to something you might find revealing.



The reason I don't bite is that the explanation is complicated, and very, very few are willing to read past the first few sentences before I get PM's and snippy comments on here calling me a universalist.......neither of which make me feel happy to have posted my thoughts.

I'll leave it at this......I seriously do not see how there can be, from a logical perspective, a "created god."  IF God is not a creator, then he is not God.  That being said, the concept of the creator is a discussion of God.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I'm not gonna bite the "which God" question, you know that.
> 
> 
> 
> Serious question, do you think I am proselytizing in here?  I see these more as a philosophical discussion between opposing views.



I am genuinely interested in you breaking it down right to the point where the God of the Bible is the beginning and end result.  I would like to hear all the details of how a fisherman, a fish ,and some poop all deduce to one creator. I promise you that I will read every single letter if you type it all out going backwards through time to get to this creator.
You argue that a god is the creator but you stop short of taking any farther than the claim. 
You say creation is evidence of a creator. Who created that creator then?


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> I would like to hear all the details of how a fisherman, a fish ,and some poop all deduce to one creator.



I don't care how serious this discussion appears to someone, if you can't look at this line and laugh I don't know what to do to help you.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> I am genuinely interested in you breaking it down right to the point where the God of the Bible is the beginning and end result.  I would like to hear all the details of how a fisherman, a fish ,and some poop all deduce to one creator. I promise you that I will read every single letter if you type it all out going backwards through time to get to this creator.
> You argue that a god is the creator but you stop short of taking any farther than the claim.
> You say creation is evidence of a creator. Who created that creator then?



God can't have a creator, or he is not God.

You want me to break it down to the God of the Bible, but I think the Bible is discussing the God of the universe?  We can throw the Bible out of this discussion, as it is irrelevant until it is established that such a being even exists.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> I don't care how serious this discussion appears to someone, if you can't look at this line and laugh I don't know what to do to help you.



....I didn't see the humor till you pointed it out.  I was busy trying to word my way out of having to have a "this god or that god" debate, as it is based on a false assumption.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> My God is also your god......and I'll put this on a T for ya......."IF" he exists.
> 
> God cannot have a creator, or his creator would be God.


So in your terms our God may very well NOT be the God of the Bible?


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> So in your terms our God may very well NOT be the God of the Bible?



The Bible begins by telling us God created everything.  I don't see how that expressed concept can't be the discussion of the God of the universe.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> I don't care how serious this discussion appears to someone, if you can't look at this line and laugh I don't know what to do to help you.


I think it is hysterical.
The more interesting part is JB doing his best dodge ball to avoid breaking it all down.
I do not care what god it all deduces to.
I would like to see it all backtracked to something. The details are what will make or break the claims.

I would like to see more than fisherman..fish..poop..yadda yadda yadda= god.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> The more interesting part is JB doing his best dodge ball to avoid breaking it all down.



Bullet, I have not dodged anything in here.  I laid out my thoughts, you don't like em, so you believe differently.  Just because you don't agree doesn't mean I didn't lay out my thoughts


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> The Bible begins by telling us God created everything.  I don't see how that expressed concept can't be the discussion of the God of the universe.


So do the text and writings of other religions. 
Why should I hold the Bible to be any more accurate or reliable?


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Why should I hold the Bible to be any more accurate or reliable?



If I were you, I would reject all of them until I believed there was a creator.  Start at the beginning and work forward.  Until you cross the creator hurdle it is all nonsense anyway, right?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Bullet, I have not dodged anything in here.  I laid out my thoughts, you don't like em, so you believe differently.  Just because you don't agree doesn't mean I didn't lay out my thoughts



I love your thoughts. I just would like you to fill in the gaps of the thoughts and tie them all together.
Start with any one of the three subjects and deduce it backwards as to how it was created.
I would like you to walk us back through the journey


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> If I were you, I would reject all of them until I believed there was a creator.  Start at the beginning and work forward.  Until you cross the creator hurdle it is all nonsense anyway, right?


Where is the beginning?
I honestly do not know where a beginning is.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Where is the beginning?
> I honestly do not know where a beginning is.



I believe you.

I don't think it's "In the beginning...."


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

Edward Tryon reports:

... quantum electrodynamics reveals that an electron, positron, and photon occasionally emerge spontaneously in a perfect vacuum. When this happens, the three particles exist for a brief time, and then annihilate each other, leaving no trace behind. (Energy conservation is violated, but only for a particle lifetime Dt permitted by the uncertaintyDtDE~h where DE is the net energy of the particles and h is Planck's constant.) The spontaneous, temporary emergence of particles from a vacuum is called a vacuum fluctuation, and is utterly commonplace in quantum field theory.[6]

A particle produced by a vacuum fluctuation has no cause. Since vacuum fluctuations are commonplace, god cannot be the only thing that is uncaused.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> I believe you.
> 
> I don't think it's "In the beginning...."



We are back to everything is infinite or everything is created.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Edward Tryon reports:
> 
> ... quantum electrodynamics reveals that an electron, positron, and photon occasionally emerge spontaneously in a perfect vacuum. When this happens, the three particles exist for a brief time, and then annihilate each other, leaving no trace behind. (Energy conservation is violated, but only for a particle lifetime Dt permitted by the uncertaintyDtDE~h where DE is the net energy of the particles and h is Planck's constant.) The spontaneous, temporary emergence of particles from a vacuum is called a vacuum fluctuation, and is utterly commonplace in quantum field theory.[6]
> 
> A particle produced by a vacuum fluctuation has no cause. Since vacuum fluctuations are commonplace, god cannot be the only thing that is uncaused.




"I'll take 'Heresy' for five hundred, Alex."


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Edward Tryon reports:
> 
> ... quantum electrodynamics reveals that an electron, positron, and photon occasionally emerge spontaneously in a perfect vacuum. When this happens, the three particles exist for a brief time, and then annihilate each other, leaving no trace behind. (Energy conservation is violated, but only for a particle lifetime Dt permitted by the uncertaintyDtDE~h where DE is the net energy of the particles and h is Planck's constant.) The spontaneous, temporary emergence of particles from a vacuum is called a vacuum fluctuation, and is utterly commonplace in quantum field theory.[6]
> 
> A particle produced by a vacuum fluctuation has no cause. Since vacuum fluctuations are commonplace, god cannot be the only thing that is uncaused.



So electrodynamics violates the law of thermodynamics?  I would need to read more of this before I comment, cause I am thinking the emergence of energy and matter from nothing violates everything we know about energy and matter.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> We are back to everything is infinite or everything is created.



....or something else.  Why not wait for better evidence before coming to a truly odd conclusion?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> We are back to everything is infinite or everything is created.



Religion would have us believe nothing is infinite except God because everything NEEDS a creator except God.

Either of the two you mentioned above seems more reasonable than religions version.

I am OK with infinity.
I am OK with our creator having creators and so on..


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

bullethead said:


> I would like you to walk us back through the journey



The poop was once a dog biscuit which was assembled by a man in a factory in some town.......which, btw, if you love your pet, you should thank a pet food factory worker......anyway, the biscuit is a conglomeration of many different organic items assembled to be life sustaining, because, life requires life to sustain and reproduce itself without life, there is no life.

So, the dog eating the dog biscuit is an act of the above fact.  Lotsa plants and animals had to die in order to create that delicious treat which provides life to the dog.

This process has been repeated, in various forms, all the way through the millions of years of life's existence, through various differnet forms......life needing life to sustain and replicate.  We can trace life's progression through science to a point where you and I may both agree that life didn't exist.

Now, let's look at every envirnoment we are aware of where life does not exists.  In those envirnoments, comprised of the same elements and compounds, constrained by the same natural law you and I are, where life does not exist, sustain, or reproduce.  

Somewhere along the way, life began.....

Fro what did life begin?   Elements, compounds, stuff assumbled in such a way an acted on by energy in such a way that we have a naturally occurring phenomena that sustains and reproduces with other life?  Ok......

Energy, matter, big bang, all that suff which contained all the elements which would evertually become the wheat harvested by the man and assembled into the dog biscuit which got eaten to become the poop all exist in this universe.....from where?  

We are left with really only two options.......either these things were created, or, they are infinite.

I reject infinite everything because everything we know of seems cyclical, beginnings and ends.  We know the universe is expanding from a point (big bang?) to occupy whatever it is that it is going to occupy when it expands.  This indicates a cycle of the universe, and nothing we see or know about was always here........unless there is a "god particle" capable of creating it all.  

The problem is, we have to assume such a thing is possible in order to rule out the possibility of creation......we MUST assume everything is infinite, neglecting what we know about the universes creation, in order to say everything was always here.

I don't see it that way.  Makes more sense to me that every particle and natural law are a created thing because I also recognize the interdependency of everything in the universe.  The clues lead me to creation......they don't lead you there.

Now, that I have typed that up in a hurry, I expect we will no longer discuss me dodging things, and recognize that we both will view the evidence differenttly, all based on how we see the origins of our universe.....did they originate or were they always there?


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> God can't have a creator, or he is not God.
> 
> You want me to break it down to the God of the Bible, but I think the Bible is discussing the God of the universe?  We can throw the Bible out of this discussion, as it is irrelevant until it is established that such a being even exists.


But you do see that the line of thought of "we are here so there has to be a creator" and the line of thought "God cant have a creator" are two totally opposing ideas right?
My point being "we are here so there has to be a creator" is such a true and powerful thing to you that it gets you to God.
Once there, you have to now say its meaningless and powerless to believe the idea of what God "is".


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> But you do see that the line of thought of "we are here so there has to be a creator" and the line of thought "God cant have a creator" are two totally opposing ideas right?



That's why we aren't God, and why God is worshipped.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> We are left with really only two options.......either these things were created, or, they are infinite.
> 
> I reject infinite everything because everything we know of seems cyclical, beginnings and ends.  We know the universe is expanding from a point (big bang?) to occupy whatever it is that it is going to occupy when it expands.  This indicates a cycle of the universe, and nothing we see or know about was always here........unless there is a "god particle" capable of creating it all.



You're making an observation of nature to form a prediction of how the universe works.  That's good.  Is it accurate? Would it be an accurate observation that stuff gets re-cycled over and over, changing forms?  There are schools of thought that feel that re-incarnation makes sense.   Where does matter go when it ends? How about energy? 



JB0704 said:


> The problem is, we have to assume such a thing is possible in order to rule out the possibility of creation......we MUST assume everything is infinite, neglecting what we know about the universes creation, in order to say everything was always here.
> 
> I don't see it that way.  Makes more sense to me that every particle and natural law are a created thing because I also recognize the interdependency of everything in the universe.



You don't have a problem with something being infinite as long as it's a guy.  The part in blue is "Irreducible Complexity".  Is that a good enough argument for you?



JB0704 said:


> The clues lead me to creation......they don't lead you there.
> 
> Now, that I have typed that up in a hurry, I expect we will no longer discuss me dodging things, and recognize that we both will view the evidence differenttly, all based on how we see the origins of our universe.....did they originate or were they always there?




lets talk about the evidence like Perry Mason.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> That's why we aren't God, and why God is worshipped.


The escape clause 
Im talking about what you have to do with your thought process.
Maybe Im hard wired to not be able to think one way then discard it for the exact opposite way just to be able to believe in something that cant be even proven to exist.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> That's why we aren't God, and why God is worshipped.



You left out this really, really important point:




WaltL1 said:


> My point being "we are here so there has to be a creator" is such a true and powerful thing to you that it gets you to God.
> Once there, you have to now say its meaningless and powerless to believe the idea of what God "is".



"......except for this one thing.  Oh and by the way, it's a guy and he really loves you......"


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

Guys, Ima take a break from this......no......I'm not dodging......I'm just tired and wish I had taken a few hours to write that one post so it was a bit more coherent instead of defending porrly structured sentences.

Y'all pick it apart as much as possible, I promise I'll circle back and answer all the questions, but, for now most of what I type would be short replies with little value.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> The poop was once a dog biscuit which was assembled by a man in a factory in some town.......which, btw, if you love your pet, you should thank a pet food factory worker......anyway, the biscuit is a conglomeration of many different organic items assembled to be life sustaining, because, life requires life to sustain and reproduce itself without life, there is no life.
> 
> So, the dog eating the dog biscuit is an act of the above fact.  Lotsa plants and animals had to die in order to create that delicious treat which provides life to the dog.
> 
> ...


All we know that is the cosmic background radiation that we observe is consistent with an explosion of matter and energy, but no one has conclusively demonstrated that this could have only come from a singular source and that there was nothing in existence before this happening. 


JB0704 said:


> We are left with really only two options.......either these things were created, or, they are infinite.


Or Both. Possibly a finite number of particles that re-create an infinite number of times. As you go on to say...cyclical.. with the right amount of particles available to re-create



JB0704 said:


> I reject infinite everything because everything we know of seems cyclical, beginnings and ends.  We know the universe is expanding from a point (big bang?) to occupy whatever it is that it is going to occupy when it expands.  This indicates a cycle of the universe, and nothing we see or know about was always here........unless there is a "god particle" capable of creating it all.


What is it expanding into?
And again if it is cyclical wouldn't it stand to reason that it starts over again? Possibly very different each time? Possibly the same?
Possibly it gets to a point where another Big Bang occurs and a new Universe picks up where the last ended?




JB0704 said:


> The problem is, we have to assume such a thing is possible in order to rule out the possibility of creation......we MUST assume everything is infinite, neglecting what we know about the universes creation, in order to say everything was always here.
> 
> I don't see it that way.  Makes more sense to me that every particle and natural law are a created thing because I also recognize the interdependency of everything in the universe.  The clues lead me to creation......they don't lead you there.


Creation leads me to think along human constraints. We understand "creation". What I do not understand or pretend to understand is HOW it started or IF it all has been going on all along.
I just do not know so I cannot say definitely no matter what I want to be true.



JB0704 said:


> Now, that I have typed that up in a hurry, I expect we will no longer discuss me dodging things, and recognize that we both will view the evidence differenttly, all based on how we see the origins of our universe.....did they originate or were they always there?


Your time and effort is appreciated. I think your expectations are limited in that you are willing to get to a beginning only as far as you want to see it and get to a cause that is as far as you will believe without a solid case for either.

Creation has me questioning whether or not a God would make his creation finite or infinite.
Should we expect the creation to end? When it ends should we expect this God to start another one? Has this God started numerous creations(Universes) and we are just a small part of one? What is the point to create with a self destruct button built in?


----------



## 660griz (Apr 16, 2015)

Can 'nothingness' be a vacuum?  Does a vacuum have energy?
Can energy turn to matter?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

660griz said:


> Can 'nothingness' be a vacuum?  Does a vacuum have energy?
> Can energy turn to matter?



The article and replies below it have my head spinning....but....

http://profmattstrassler.com/articl...tter-etc/matter-and-energy-a-false-dichotomy/


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 16, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> The escape clause
> Im talking about what you have to do with your thought process.



It's the idea of an original cause, or, an uncaused cause.  It's either God or everything........I have more difficulty comprehending an infinite everything than an infinite God.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 16, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> It's the idea of an original cause, or, an uncaused cause.  It's either God or everything........I have more difficulty comprehending an infinite everything than an infinite God.


Everything does not have to be infinite. Just enough has to last long enough to keep the rest going.


----------



## tell sackett (Apr 16, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> This is why I posted my story. It's something entirely new to discuss.
> 
> What does God _feel_ like to a believer? For me, as I said, it was the chill that got my attention.



Peace.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 17, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> It's the idea of an original cause, or, an uncaused cause.  It's either God or everything........I have more difficulty comprehending an infinite everything than an infinite God.


For me, they both have the same level of difficulty.
I think that because Im not emotionally/psychologically invested in the idea of "God", I don't separate the two and see the same problem for both.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 17, 2015)

tell sackett said:


> Peace.



It feels like peace?


----------



## tell sackett (Apr 17, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> It feels like peace?



That was a rather cryptic answer wasn't it? I was hoping it would catch your eye though. It was my first post ever in this forum, I read some in here time to time, but that's it.

Let me start off by saying I read your posts about the situation you're in, and as a daddy, I can understand the hurt and anger you feel. I've never been in that situation, but if I were, I know I would struggle too.  That's a part of our legal system that's way, way overdue for an overhaul, I hope it works out for you.

Now, to your question "What does God feel like?". I'm not sure that's an answerable question, but I can try to tell you what a relationship with Him feels like.

It has given me a sense of peace in my life that I never had before. I know that no person or circumstance can take that peace from me, because it is from God. When I go through trials in my life (And, yes, all Christians go through trials and hard times in spite of what some of these characters on tv may say. Some have the erroneous idea that it's all cake and ice cream, but it ain't so.), I know that He is there with me all the way. I am His child, and He is my Father. 

Again, it's about a relationship. He has given me His promise, and He has proven Himself faithful to me time and time again, even when I fall short (as I do all too often). I know that He loves me and He will never leave me. His love for me is not based on my goodness, but on His. It is unchanging because He is unchanging. Therein lies my peace.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 17, 2015)

tell sackett said:


> That was a rather cryptic answer wasn't it? I was hoping it would catch your eye though. It was my first post ever in this forum, I read some in here time to time, but that's it.
> 
> Let me start off by saying I read your posts about the situation you're in, and as a daddy, I can understand the hurt and anger you feel. I've never been in that situation, but if I were, I know I would struggle too.  That's a part of our legal system that's way, way overdue for an overhaul, I hope it works out for you.
> 
> ...



Thanks for taking the time to expand on that.


----------



## welderguy (Apr 17, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> It feels like peace?



I heard a sermon the other day, I think it was David Jeremiah, speaking about some painters who were asked to put on canvas what they thought would best illustrate the peace of God.Some painted a calm glassy lake, others painted beautiful sunsets.But the one that won the prize was a painting of a tiny bird feeding its young in a nest she had built on a small branch hanging out over a massive, violent waterfall.

That brought home to me the fact that often peace is not the absence of turmoil, but rather the calm assurance even when turmoil is raging all around us.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 17, 2015)

welderguy said:


> I heard a sermon the other day, I think it was David Jeremiah, speaking about some painters who were asked to put on canvas what they thought would best illustrate the peace of God.Some painted a calm glassy lake, others painted beautiful sunsets.But the one that won the prize was a painting of a tiny bird feeding its young in a nest she had built on a small branch hanging out over a massive, violent waterfall.
> 
> That brought home to me the fact that often peace is not the absence of turmoil, but rather the calm assurance even when turmoil is raging all around us.



An excellent point. 

I've found mine.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 17, 2015)

bullethead said:


> Everything does not have to be infinite. Just enough has to last long enough to keep the rest going.



I think one of my first posts in this forum discussed this.....the idea of matter creating itself, or other matter.  

How much of it has to be infinite in order for the rest to not be infinite?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 17, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I think one of my first posts in this forum discussed this.....the idea of matter creating itself, or other matter.
> 
> How much of it has to be infinite in order for the rest to not be infinite?


The beauty of my answer is that I do not know and I do not have to insert something else equally as unknown that makes it sound good to me.

I would guess that there may be enough residual matter left at the end of cycles to generate or regenerate the new matter.

Black holes swallow all kinds of matter,light and energy but I have no idea where it goes.
Reason stands that because it is inside this Universe it stays inside the Universe but where how and in what form (s) I have no idea. Maybe it is gathering in a spot where another Big Bang can occur when conditions are right. But again I just do not know and when reading articles and theories by people that are much more informed than I am I have found that they do not know either. I would love to figure it out myself or have someone else figure it out in my lifetime but until then I am content guessing.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 17, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I think one of my first posts in this forum discussed this.....the idea of matter creating itself, or other matter.
> 
> How much of it has to be infinite in order for the rest to not be infinite?



http://bigthink.com/dr-kakus-universe/can-a-universe-create-itself-out-of-nothing
The article alone brings a lot of thought but then read the full comments below the article. Mind boggling.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 20, 2015)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ethansiegel/2015/04/20/the-biggest-mistake-about-the-big-bang/2/


> That idea, the idea you must be able to extrapolate the Universe back to an initial singularity,is the biggest mistake weâ€™ve ever made about the Big Bang. We can trace it all the way back to George Lemaîtreâ€™s use of the term â€œprimeval atomâ€� back in 1927, and while this was certainly a reasonable extrapolation to make (particularly before 1992), is no longer a given. Yes, the Universe started from a very hot, dense, rapidly expanding state, where the entirety of our observable Universe today was compressed in a volume smaller than our Solar System.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 21, 2015)

Volume smaller than our solar system.  So, this is now not a God particle, but a god mass?

I'm not being difficult, but do you see how it is hard to keep up?  Regardless of whether or not we are discussing a single atom begatting the whole universe, or a mass of atoms begatting the universe, we are at the point of almost agreeing that something begat everything?

God, a god mass, a god particle......responsible for all that exists.  Without a God, everything can only be a function of circumstance.  You and I are the fortunate benficiaries of natural laws that forced the creation of our universe, and ultimately you and me (back to the fish, the poop, and the fisherman).

I walked it all back to God in a brief sort-a way, but we are still at that point, regardless of how many particles we are now saying began the universe.  We are both filling the gap with something, I just think God makes a lot moresense than the presented alternatives.  I have never asked any of you to agree with me on that point.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 21, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Volume smaller than our solar system.  So, this is now not a God particle, but a god mass?
> 
> I'm not being difficult, but do you see how it is hard to keep up?  Regardless of whether or not we are discussing a single atom begatting the whole universe, or a mass of atoms begatting the universe, we are at the point of almost agreeing that something begat everything?
> 
> ...



All it took was a vibration.  

Why do you want to see it like a person throwing a pebble in a pond as opposed to an acorn falling from a tree into a pond?

I really think you should try to understand why you want it to be that way so much and when you figure it out, let me know.

Neither of us can surely know....yet.  So why do you want for it to be a "guy" so bad?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 21, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Volume smaller than our solar system.  So, this is now not a God particle, but a god mass?
> 
> I'm not being difficult, but do you see how it is hard to keep up?  Regardless of whether or not we are discussing a single atom begatting the whole universe, or a mass of atoms begatting the universe, we are at the point of almost agreeing that something begat everything?
> 
> ...


It is not a God anything.
I believe the point if the article was that it may very well have not been a singularity source that there seems to have always been something regarding the Universe. We can trace the big bang back to a time when it occurred  but there is no way to know what was in existence before that and for how long.
The article explained the possibilities quite well I thought.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 21, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> All it took was a vibration.



Caused by something, and on we go....  



ambush80 said:


> Why do you want to see it like a person throwing a pebble in a pond as opposed to an acorn falling from a tree into a pond?
> 
> I really think you should try to understand why you want it to be that way so much and when you figure it out, let me know.
> 
> Neither of us can surely know....yet.  So why do you want for it to be a "guy" so bad?



If given your preference of "knowing," would you rather be a creation or a random occurrence?  Seriously consider the question for a moment.

Beyond that, I keep wondering how the acorn got on the tree......and can't see chance as the driver.  Everything is too inter-related dependent.  I see a creation more than a circumstance.  Driven by bias?  Likely, but it's where I am.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 21, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> Caused by something, and on we go....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'd rather be random, personally. 

The meaning, and gravity, of our lives, then, is that which we make ourselves. It's empowering.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 21, 2015)

I would choose random also.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 21, 2015)

I differ from both of y'all.  It is what it is.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 21, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I differ from both of y'all.  It is what it is.



It is. But why it is interests me. 

I know why I want to be random over created, but do you know why you want to be created over random?


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 21, 2015)

YEs, I do.  IT won't make much sense to you, and I hesitate to post it since it will likely be discussed as an iferior position (obviously, I will disagree, but that's how opinions work).....

If we are created there is order and reason.  If we are not created there is no order, and certainly no reason.  Any evidence of order is just the current arrangement of chance, and will likely be something completely different the next moment (in context of infinite time). Once the universe collapses on itself, if it collapses, will the next expansion include the same arrangement of natural laws?  Or will the next big bang change natural law to something completely different?  Even so......what keeps the collapse/expansion from accelerating other than natural law which are an established circumstance of chance?  If that's what they are, what's to keep them from being re-arranged in another way? 

We can assign reason on an individual level (love your friends and family, be good to others sort of thing), but, that is a temporary thing based on the temporary whims of a particular arrangement of stardust (us without a creator).  Though the reason may be significant to the stardust (us), it matters no more than the reasoning of a differently arranged stardust (space rock) a billion light years away in the context of existence.

While it may be empowering to say "me against the universe," to me it is humbling, and chaotic because I recognize there is no "me" in this universe if I am not a created thing.  My thoughts, actions, life, etc are just a passing blip or an arrangement by chance no matter how significant I want them to be.  

Ultimately, if not created, I am not different than the space rock, nor is my reason.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 21, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> YEs, I do.  IT won't make much sense to you, and I hesitate to post it since it will likely be discussed as an iferior position (obviously, I will disagree, but that's how opinions work).....
> 
> If we are created there is order and reason.  If we are not created there is no order, and certainly no reason.  Any evidence of order is just the current arrangement of chance, and will likely be something completely different the next moment (in context of infinite time). Once the universe collapses on itself, if it collapses, will the next expansion include the same arrangement of natural laws?  Or will the next big bang change natural law to something completely different?  Even so......what keeps the collapse/expansion from accelerating other than natural law which are an established circumstance of chance?  If that's what they are, what's to keep them from being re-arranged in another way?
> 
> ...



I would hope that no one would say it's inferior. I certainly wouldn't. Thanks for sharing. It does make sense. I don't agree with the conclusions, but like you said that's where we will diverge anyway.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 21, 2015)

I'm off to a ball game.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 21, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> YEs, I do.  IT won't make much sense to you, and I hesitate to post it since it will likely be discussed as an iferior position (obviously, I will disagree, but that's how opinions work).....
> 
> If we are created there is order and reason.  If we are not created there is no order, and certainly no reason.  Any evidence of order is just the current arrangement of chance, and will likely be something completely different the next moment (in context of infinite time). Once the universe collapses on itself, if it collapses, will the next expansion include the same arrangement of natural laws?  Or will the next big bang change natural law to something completely different?  Even so......what keeps the collapse/expansion from accelerating other than natural law which are an established circumstance of chance?  If that's what they are, what's to keep them from being re-arranged in another way?
> 
> ...


First, as others have said, its not an inferior position.
Second, Im curious what is it about these things that bother you -


> My thoughts, actions, life, etc are just a passing blip or an arrangement by chance no matter how significant I want them to be.





> if not created, I am not different than the space rock, nor is my reason



Maybe you are thinking too big. Humanity may not end up knowing who you are but you can and are making a huge impact on some peoples lives.
You know those pictures you take with your kids fishing?
Those blips in time are going to last for generations.
What greater purpose or reason could you ask for?


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 21, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> YEs, I do.  IT won't make much sense to you, and I hesitate to post it since it will likely be discussed as an iferior position (obviously, I will disagree, but that's how opinions work).....



It's a position ultimately of ignorance just like ours.  We should (and we do) talk about how we infer our conclusions; how systematic and testable our data gathering methods are. 

I like the argument "Logic is the wrong tool to test faith".



JB0704 said:


> If we are created there is order and reason.  If we are not created there is no order, and certainly no reason.  Any evidence of order is just the current arrangement of chance, and will likely be something completely different the next moment (in context of infinite time). Once the universe collapses on itself, if it collapses, will the next expansion include the same arrangement of natural laws?  Or will the next big bang change natural law to something completely different?  Even so......what keeps the collapse/expansion from accelerating other than natural law which are an established circumstance of chance?  If that's what they are, what's to keep them from being re-arranged in another way?



What's to keep them indeed?  What if they do what they do?   



JB0704 said:


> We can assign reason on an individual level (love your friends and family, be good to others sort of thing), but, that is a temporary thing based on the temporary whims of a particular arrangement of stardust (us without a creator).  Though the reason may be significant to the stardust (us), it matters no more than the reasoning of a differently arranged stardust (space rock) a billion light years away in the context of existence.



Really, what else is there?  No matter what "system" you adopt it's an individual choice.



JB0704 said:


> While it may be empowering to say "me against the universe," to me it is humbling, and chaotic because I recognize there is no "me" in this universe if I am not a created thing.  My thoughts, actions, life, etc are just a passing blip or an arrangement by chance no matter how significant I want them to be.
> 
> Ultimately, if not created, I am not different than the space rock, nor is my reason.



Just for fun, think of yourself as not a distinct "Me" but a part of everything.  I'm not saying that that's the way it is, but it's an interesting exercise to see how your concept of self can be re-aligned.


----------



## ted_BSR (Apr 21, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> Trying to interpret "signs" is dicey business.
> 
> Believers see the hand of God in the veins of a leaf.
> 
> All I know for CERTAIN is that leaves have veins.  That doesn't make them any less awesome.



I did not read all the posts.

I agree with Ambush here. Trying to interpret "signs" is dicey business.

Your heart (figuratively speaking) will tell you if it was a sign. I have had a couple signs over the years. My "heart" reminds me on a regular basis.

Poop can be a powerful media!


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 21, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> First, as others have said, its not an inferior position.



I appreciate that Walt.



WaltL1 said:


> Second, Im curious what is it about these things that bother you -
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If I am an insignificant arrangement of stardust, occurring by chance, then so are my children, and the generations that come which will be impacted by me and my actions.

I like pondering ripples that we make in time.  It's fascinating.  The movie Cloud Atlas touched on the subject in an abstract sort of way.  They can be significant, but, ultimately, they are not if the end result is them vanishing in the distance, and being wiped by the next arrangement, whichever form it may be.....not even a memory left behind, as everything is a temporary circumstance if it is not there for a reason.

Now, I do believe we could have impact temporarily, and I do believe I would be equally motivated to be good to those I cared about and had dealings with even if I did not believe in a creator.  I see the aspect of skepticism which might motivate a person to be as good as possible in order to assure the impact of the ripples are as positive as possible, and to enjoy every moment as temporary.  This concept is not lost on me.

But, the question was "why" I prefer to believe I am a created thing.  And, the reason why I prefer that is summed up in the fact that no matter what I do, if uncreated, is simply circumstance of the current arrangement, no matter how important it is to me and those who are impacted by my ripples.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 21, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> Really, what else is there?  No matter what "system" you adopt it's an individual choice.



Yes.  But, it's nothing more than water eroding a river bank if there is no driver.  We are ultimately the same as the other if not created.  

Individual choice remains, but, if I am created, my choice is the result of intentional forces.  If I am chance, aren't my choices also a chance arrangement?  That does not eliminate morality, at all, but it does indicate that I could choose to be good and decent, or, I could just as easily be a rock.





ambush80 said:


> Just for fun, think of yourself as not a distinct "Me" but a part of everything.  I'm not saying that that's the way it is, but it's an interesting exercise to see how your concept of self can be re-aligned.



I often discuss the depenent nature of existence.  Everything works together, matter, energy, all that.  I do see myself as an individual, created.  But, I recognize that existence is within the context of creation.  I am uniquely created, but, part of a big picture.  

I think I would be more individualistic if I were a skeptic, because my place in existence would be my good fortune, not the choice of a creator.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 21, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> I appreciate that Walt.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's some deep thinking my friend 
Its kind of funny but all the things you listed, and Im not sure how to word this, as being negative or the way you would rather not be, is pretty much exactly how I see things as being. But in my mind its more of a "circle of life" kind of thing and doesn't trouble me at all.


----------



## 660griz (Apr 22, 2015)

What is the main difference in effect to an individual whether they believe the universe and all things were created or all things just happened over a long period of time?
In the immortal words of Hillary, "What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?"

If the only point of contention is whether the universe was created or just happened, then this discussion would probably be a lot less emotional. The true feeling revolves around the Bible and what happens when you die. The beginning of the world just happens to be in the book of fables as well.

In other words. To think differently risk eternal torture.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 22, 2015)

Griz, I spent several posts discussing the question, and it has little to do with what happens when we die........that particular aspect impacts both sides of the debate.


----------



## JB0704 (Apr 22, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> That's some deep thinking my friend



That's what happens when I mix a few beers and late night posts on philosophical subjects 



WaltL1 said:


> Its kind of funny but all the things you listed, and Im not sure how to word this, as being negative or the way you would rather not be, is pretty much exactly how I see things as being. But in my mind its more of a "circle of life" kind of thing and doesn't trouble me at all.



Sure.  It's not that it troubles me, it would just make me sad to think there is no reason or purpose to it all, and that the only significance found in everything we do is an arbitrary assignment by a chance arrangement (again, us if not created).  But, we are all different, and will have a different take on the matter.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 22, 2015)

ted_BSR said:


> I did not read all the posts.
> 
> I agree with Ambush here. Trying to interpret "signs" is dicey business.
> 
> ...


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 22, 2015)

ted_BSR said:


> I did not read all the posts.
> 
> I agree with Ambush here. Trying to interpret "signs" is dicey business.
> 
> ...



Unless it's God talking directly to you?


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 22, 2015)

JB0704 said:


> That's what happens when I mix a few beers and late night posts on philosophical subjects
> 
> 
> 
> Sure.  It's not that it troubles me, it would just make me sad to think there is no reason or purpose to it all, and that the only significance found in everything we do is an arbitrary assignment by a chance arrangement (again, us if not created).  But, we are all different, and will have a different take on the matter.





> That's what happens when I mix a few beers and late night posts on philosophical subjects





> Sure.  It's not that it troubles me, it would just make me sad to think there is no reason or purpose to it all, and that the only significance found in everything we do is an arbitrary assignment by a chance arrangement (again, us if not created).


I get what you are saying.
I think how I see it differently is even if we have a reason and  have a special purpose, (lets see who gets that joke) and are created, if we sit on a couch and do nothing, that's what will happen.....nothing.
On the flipside even if we are just a matter of circumstance we can get off that couch and create a reason or purpose in our lives. 
Or we can sit on the couch and do nothing and that's what will happen...... nothing.
So both scenarios  require us to get off the couch and do something or what will happen is ..... nothing.
That makes having a special purpose/reason or not having a special purpose/reason exactly the same to me.
I think the sadness you would feel is connected to your belief in God more so than having a pre-purpose/reason.
I guess because with your beliefs the two are linked together.


----------



## 660griz (Apr 22, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> special purpose, (lets see who gets that joke)



Steve Martin?


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 22, 2015)

660griz said:


> Steve Martin?


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 22, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> I get what you are saying.
> I think how I see it differently is even if we have a reason and  have a special purpose, (lets see who gets that joke) and are created, if we sit on a couch and do nothing, that's what will happen.....nothing.
> On the flipside even if we are just a matter of circumstance we can get off that couch and create a reason or purpose in our lives.
> Or we can sit on the couch and do nothing and that's what will happen...... nothing.
> ...




“The two most important days in your life are the day you are born and the day you find out why.”

― Mark Twain

I love that quote but I would have said "...decide why."


----------



## 660griz (Apr 23, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> “The two most important days in your life are the day you are born and the day you find out why.”
> 
> â€• Mark Twain
> 
> I love that quote but I would have said "...decide why."



It is not necessarily a good thing. See Hitler, Hillary, Manson, etc.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 23, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> “The two most important days in your life are the day you are born and the day you find out why.”
> 
> â€• Mark Twain
> 
> I love that quote but I would have said "...decide why."



Exactly.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 23, 2015)

660griz said:


> It is not necessarily a good thing. See Hitler, Hillary, Manson, etc.



How can anyone take _comfort_ thinking that those monsters (or a tsunami) were created for a reason; created for a reason like JB and his children or me and my child?

I get the argument that "We don't know the Master Plan" but if I were in a concentration camp begging God for mercy while I watched my wife and children stripped naked and executed I think I would get to a point where I would say "God, if this is part of your Master Plan then _expletive expletive expletive expletive_ You!"

I just don't see where the comfort part comes from in trusting in "God's plan" at that point.  Better that you were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.  I could accept that well.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 23, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> How can anyone take _comfort_ thinking that those monsters (or a tsunami) were created for a reason; created for a reason like JB and his children or me and my child?
> 
> I get the argument that "We don't know the Master Plan" but if I were in a concentration camp begging God for mercy while I watched my wife and children stripped naked and executed I think I would get to a point where I would say "God, if this is part of your Master Plan then _expletive expletive expletive expletive_ You!"
> 
> I just don't see where the comfort part comes from in trusting in "God's plan" at that point.  Better that you were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.  I could accept that well.



Much the same as Allah giving his _Chosen People_ the ME as their promised land. 

Really? No water, no chance to grow crops without 100x's the work of other places on the planet, and 135* air temps in the summer. 

Yeah, we're so blessed.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 23, 2015)

It took me two days to get through this. The OP was great, thought provoking... DIFFERENT!   Then we get back to the same old same old. JB has it right though... although it does seem like you're trying to convince others, you know you don't have anything new to bring to the table. You know what you're bringing.. 

I've had some recent "signs" that I've been dealing with and trying to understand myself. Still no burning bush.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 23, 2015)

TripleXBullies said:


> It took me two days to get through this. The OP was great, thought provoking... DIFFERENT!   Then we get back to the same old same old. JB has it right though... although it does seem like you're trying to convince others, you know you don't have anything new to bring to the table. You know what you're bringing..
> 
> I've had some recent "signs" that I've been dealing with and trying to understand myself. Still no burning bush.



Thanks, I had the same thoughts about it going from that to the "same ol' same ol'" but that was where it was destined to go. 

Any conversation started in here generally follows the same arc, because there is very little in the way of new "evidence" and all of it can be dismissed as circumstantial and unable to be proven.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 23, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> Thanks, I had the same thoughts about it going from that to the "same ol' same ol'" but that was where it was destined to go.
> 
> Any conversation started in here generally follows the same arc, because there is very little in the way of new "evidence" and all of it can be dismissed as circumstantial and unable to be proven.




It's important that we remember this everyday and try to get people that don't understand this to re-evaluate.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 23, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> It's important that we remember this everyday and try to get people that don't understand this to re-evaluate.



I disagree. Then again I'm not trying to convince anyone to abandon their faith, either.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 23, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> I disagree. Then again I'm not trying to convince anyone to abandon their faith, either.



I think you don't like the "..try to get people..." part.  There's nothing wrong with, whenever possible, trying to point out to people when they are basing their beliefs on sketchy evidence.  You can't force people.  

It's helpful.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Apr 23, 2015)

If there's anything I agree with trying to get people with that statement, it's just when they're trying to convert people. Try to get them to understand that in a lot of cases, they won't be saying anything new. If they just want to plant a seed, then mention something and leave it at that. Don't beat the dead horse.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 24, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> I think you don't like the "..try to get people..." part.  There's nothing wrong with, whenever possible, trying to point out to people when they are basing their beliefs on sketchy evidence.  You can't force people.
> 
> It's helpful.





TripleXBullies said:


> If there's anything I agree with trying to get people with that statement, it's just when they're trying to convert people. Try to get them to understand that in a lot of cases, they won't be saying anything new. If they just want to plant a seed, then mention something and leave it at that. Don't beat the dead horse.



Basically what TripleX is saying, or what I think they're saying. 

There's a line between showing someone something and rubbing their nose in it. 

If people want to base their lives on bad foundations, who are we to do anything about it besides show them that we think differently, and then let them keep on keepin on?


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 24, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> Basically what TripleX is saying, or what I think they're saying.
> 
> There's a line between showing someone something and rubbing their nose in it.
> 
> If people want to base their lives on bad foundations, who are we to do anything about it besides show them that we think differently, and then let them keep on keepin on?





> There's nothing wrong with, whenever possible, trying to point out to people when they are basing their beliefs on sketchy evidence.


I agree with this when it takes place for example on a forum such as this as at that point the debate/discussion is invited.


> If people want to base their lives on bad foundations, who are we to do anything about it besides show them that we think differently, and then let them keep on keepin on?


I also agree with this as unless the debate/discussion is invited (or personally directed at me) I keep my thoughts to myself.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 24, 2015)

WaltL1 said:


> I agree with this when it takes place for example on a forum such as this as at that point the debate/discussion is invited.
> 
> I also agree with this as unless the debate/discussion is invited (or personally directed at me) I keep my thoughts to myself.



That's what we're here for, exchange of ideas.

When the Jehova's Witnesses knock on MY door they are entitled to both barrels.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 24, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> That's what we're here for, exchange of ideas.
> 
> When the Jehova's Witnesses knock on MY door they are entitled to both barrels.



I agree, if they don't leave when asked nicely if they happened to see the "No Trespassing" sign right beside them. 

I've had solicitors come up and when I open the door I ask them the same thing. "I have a permit, sir." 

Yes, to solicit, not to trespass, which is what you're doing since I've posted it.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 24, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> That's what we're here for, exchange of ideas.
> 
> When the Jehova's Witnesses knock on MY door they are entitled to both barrels.


Agreed. And a reload 
Been a while since Ive had door knockers of any religion around here.
I was living in St. Louis a couple years ago and they would line up at the door according to religious alphabetical order every weekend.
At first I was nice.
But that didn't work.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 24, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> I agree, if they don't leave when asked nicely if they happened to see the "No Trespassing" sign right beside them.
> 
> I've had solicitors come up and when I open the door I ask them the same thing. "I have a permit, sir."
> 
> Yes, to solicit, not to trespass, which is what you're doing since I've posted it.





WaltL1 said:


> Agreed. And a reload
> Been a while since Ive had door knockers of any religion around here.
> I was living in St. Louis a couple years ago and they would line up at the door according to religious alphabetical order every weekend.
> At first I was nice.
> But that didn't work.





I meant "both barrels" figuratively.  

I have invited them in and when they sit down I do the talking.

Halfway through my ramble about "proof" they usually get up and thank me for my time.  "Y'all come back now!!  I can preach all day!!!"


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 24, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> I meant "both barrels" figuratively.
> 
> I have invited them in and when they sit down I do the talking.
> 
> Halfway through my ramble about "proof" they usually get up and thank me for my time.  "Y'all come back now!!  I can preach all day!!!"



You're better than I am. 

If I didn't invite you over, there's a fair chance that I don't really want you over. Unless you're a friend or family.


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 24, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> You're better than I am.
> 
> If I didn't invite you over, there's a fair chance that I don't really want you over. Unless you're a friend or family.



Like I said.  I'm just trying to help them out.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Apr 24, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> Like I said.  I'm just trying to help them out.



Well, I haven't had any religious folk come into the neighborhood yet, but we'll cross that bridge if we come to it. 

It's mainly solicitors coming now, even though the neighborhood has a no soliciting sign. I joke you not, I had a guy in an unmarked box truck come up trying to sell me furniture.

"Don't you care about getting great furniture at great prices, sir?"

"Don't you care about what GA says I can do to trespassers when it's clearly marked as forbidden, and I've already given you a verbal warning?"


----------



## ambush80 (Apr 24, 2015)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> Well, I haven't had any religious folk come into the neighborhood yet, but we'll cross that bridge if we come to it.
> 
> It's mainly solicitors coming now, even though the neighborhood has a no soliciting sign. I joke you not, I had a guy in an unmarked box truck come up trying to sell me furniture.
> 
> ...



I live in the 'Hood.  We get box trucks trying to sell meat....or break in.


----------



## drippin' rock (Apr 24, 2015)

ambush80 said:


> I live in the 'Hood.  We get box trucks trying to sell meat....or break in.



I got suckered into that once.  Worst money I ever spent.


----------

