Does God exist?

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Jul 13, 2008 18:39:41 GMT -5 burningthought said:

God isnt just a lack of physical access, we dont have real evidence, its like believing in the boogie man or santa claus or a pokemon universe living under my bed, I just dont believe their real.

And why is that? (I'm not trying to come across as sarcastic, I was trying to get to a point).

[Dja Majista]

I'm still not convinced that it's logically impossible. What do we know for certain that implies that God can't exist?

As to not having evidence, I can't agree with that at all. I would not believe in God unless he had shown me some kind of intelligent miracle. That has happened to me many times, and other people I know innumerable times. The problem is, they're merely personal miracles. After they go through me, they're just testimony. And we all know no one believes testimony if there's any reason for disbelief.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Jul 13, 2008 19:42:30 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

I'm still not convinced that it's logically impossible. What do we know for certain that implies that God can't exist?

As to not having evidence, I can't agree with that at all. I would not believe in God unless he had shown me some kind of intelligent miracle. That has happened to me many times, and other people I know innumerable times. The problem is, they're merely personal miracles. After they go through me, they're just testimony. And we all know no one believes testimony if there's any reason for disbelief.

I must agree that we all aren't blind followers, and it's even totally normal to have some doubts and questions, it's all part of being human and having intelligence.

[burningthought]

Jul 13, 2008 19:24:17 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

Jul 13, 2008 18:39:41 GMT -5 burningthought said:

God isnt just a lack of physical access, we dont have real evidence, its like believing in the boogie man or santa claus or a pokemon universe living under my bed, I just dont believe their real.

And why is that? (I'm not trying to come across as sarcastic, I was trying to get to a point).

because as i said, thers no real evidence, theres no reason for me to belive in Santa, ive never seen the guy, its an imaginative story, humans made him up like I belive they made God and the boogie man up and how they made up pokemon etc etc

I have a question for you, do you belive in Santa? or a Pokemon universe excisting? or the boogie man living under your bed?

Jul 13, 2008 19:42:30 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

I'm still not convinced that it's logically impossible. What do we know for certain that implies that God can't exist?

As to not having evidence, I can't agree with that at all. I would not believe in God unless he had shown me some kind of intelligent miracle. That has happened to me many times, and other people I know innumerable times. The problem is, they're merely personal miracles. After they go through me, they're just testimony. And we all know no one believes testimony if there's any reason for disbelief.

The very lack of proof is the evidence we have to not belive in such an entity, all the stories in the bible are so far fetched and unatural, why would some of these events happen? why would some all powerful being create the world in 7 days was it? thats one of those old stories the church invented or whoever before them, and then we laugh at it because the guys obviously didnt think that they have already dubbed God all powerful, so why would he take 7 days?

Theres a lot of things like that, in the end, the Human race, how are they such a worthy subject of interest for some almighty? he could recreate us a billion times over if hes as powerful as the stories claim and the very idea of a spirit, thats invisible that we cant see but is always there, its just as I said, a story imo. sort of like beliveing the world is square, we will soon find a way to see beyond such belief.

Also you talk of miracles, but what kind? I bet its not people walking on water.....or turning water into wine, although ive seen many a good magician be able to do something of the sorts but is that sorcery and we should burn them for a witch or perhaps its just slgiht of hand and smoke and mirrors theatrics?

Miracles are all well and good, but you cant really call htem that, since things can happen either explainable by science that used to be miracles or magics OR something we just dont know yet, another science, but an omnipotent all knowing godlike entity? not imo.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Jul 14, 2008 3:27:32 GMT -5 burningthought said:

Jul 13, 2008 19:24:17 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

And why is that? (I'm not trying to come across as sarcastic, I was trying to get to a point).

because as i said, thers no real evidence, theres no reason for me to belive in Santa, ive never seen the guy, its an imaginative story, humans made him up like I belive they made God and the boogie man up and how they made up pokemon etc etc

I have a question for you, do you belive in Santa? or a Pokemon universe excisting? or the boogie man living under your bed?

I believe that the stories on them make them exist, sure Pokemon exist, I have their cards in my bookshelf. I've seen Santa at the mall, and the boogie man also.

My point is that you mean by "no proof" that there's a lack of physical access to him. That's what you mean, because if you had "seen" him, or had experienced him in some physical sense that envelop our 5 senses, you would say it's real. If that isn't the case, then validating what is real and what isn't can get into a really deep and tricky discussion. How do you know that the computer is real and life is real? Many humans discard what they can't immediately sense.

The bottom line is that it comes down to faith, if you don't have it, then it won't make sense. If you do have it, and even if it's just a small amount and you try to believe, things will make sense. People believe in different things whether they "exist" or not, which shows their tendency to do so based on many factors.

I believe you or another poster said something about beliefs being made up out of lack of knowledge to find the answer. I can see what you mean by that, because many ancient civilizations and religions had such beliefs. But the oldest religion around has been around despite technological advances, and even the best scientific minds believe there is a God. So we can argue that since all of these our factors, it can't be wrong, but that wouldn't be fair by itself. Ultimately the answer comes from itself, and I think the most fair answer is that "I'm not sure if he exists yet." Because who knows what man may dig up in the future.

[Dja Majista]

very well, I won't call it a miracle. But I will call them ridiculously-unlikely-yet-perfectly-natural events. If you prayed to God for a sign, a specific sign, as a response to your question to him or something. Say one of the times you look at your clock that day, it will read a specific sequence of numbers. three numbers. Like 3:33. Say, you go off and start goofing around and you just basically lose track of time. You check what time it is on your digital clock, and it reads 3:33:33. It would as if the God you prayed to is demanding that not only can He show you the number sequence you wanted to see, but he'd fill up the whole display with that same number. Perfectly natural, yet highly unlikely, especially if it happens the same day you ask the question. I can't really help what I know I saw. Replace the number 3 with a 2 and that's exactly what happened to me. And it really didn't just happen once. Several variations of the same thing have happened within the year: including a display on my tripodometer, which happened right after I parked from a trip that was upwards of a hundred miles (It went all the way to the tenths place because that's all the digits the thing would display). I can't speak for anyone else, but the only way you could convince me that this is the same thing as Santa Claus is if I saw flying reindeer outside my window.

[burningthought]

Exactley, C master so you belive God is on exactley the same level of reality as an evil entity who wants to scare children and lives under their beds, a fat man in red who climbs down chimneys and deposits presents and flies a magic sleigh around the world? Thats my belief, God is just as real as all these things, God is just as real as an imaginary friend.

By no proof I mean theres nothing like a photograph, ive never seen a bird eating spider in person, but ive seen videos, photograpy etc of one, so i belive it excists, wheras the most you get of God is an old book, written in human letters and pictures of paint, never photographs, videos, nothing substantial.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Jul 14, 2008 13:39:54 GMT -5 burningthought said:

Exactley, C master so you belive God is on exactley the same level of reality as an evil entity who wants to scare children and lives under their beds, a fat man in red who climbs down chimneys and deposits presents and flies a magic sleigh around the world? Thats my belief, God is just as real as all these things, God is just as real as an imaginary friend.

By no proof I mean theres nothing like a photograph, ive never seen a bird eating spider in person, but ive seen videos, photograpy etc of one, so i belive it excists, wheras the most you get of God is an old book, written in human letters and pictures of paint, never photographs, videos, nothing substantial.

Have you done deep research on this subject? Because there is good evidence out there, but it all comes down to faith. I can present someone without faith all of the evidence I want and they will still deny the existence, if they have faith they are more willing to believe.

[Magic attack]

Jul 14, 2008 20:09:13 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

Jul 14, 2008 13:39:54 GMT -5 burningthought said:

Exactley, C master so you belive God is on exactley the same level of reality as an evil entity who wants to scare children and lives under their beds, a fat man in red who climbs down chimneys and deposits presents and flies a magic sleigh around the world? Thats my belief, God is just as real as all these things, God is just as real as an imaginary friend.

By no proof I mean theres nothing like a photograph, ive never seen a bird eating spider in person, but ive seen videos, photograpy etc of one, so i belive it excists, wheras the most you get of God is an old book, written in human letters and pictures of paint, never photographs, videos, nothing substantial.

Have you done deep research on this subject? Because there is good evidence out there, but it all comes down to faith. I can present someone without faith all of the evidence I want and they will still deny the existence, if they have faith they are more willing to believe.

I do agree with you- that someone with no faith wont believe in God no matter what proof you bring forth. And that is something that I am fully comforable with.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Jul 14, 2008 20:59:51 GMT -5 Magic attack said:

Jul 14, 2008 20:09:13 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

Have you done deep research on this subject? Because there is good evidence out there, but it all comes down to faith. I can present someone without faith all of the evidence I want and they will still deny the existence, if they have faith they are more willing to believe.

I do agree with you- that someone with no faith wont believe in God no matter what proof you bring forth. And that is something that I am fully comforable with.

Are you agnostic or atheist at the moment? Not trying to be sarcastic, just curious.

[Squid Lord]

god, IMO, not real.

my honest take on what "it" has done for the people in the bible. Things that happened in said scriptures have not and cannot be reproduced. Has anyone in here been able to reproduce the turning of water into wine, with no other additives in their house-hold? By simply wanting the water to be wine? So now, if I may ask "How Do?"

Then comes to my question of the entity itself. Why was ancient times during the "B.C." period so damned special? Why make yourself appear ONLY then. Why not now? Are we so corrupt now using electricity and synthesized materials for homes rather than mud and clay [not sure if clay is a mixture...don't quote that part]. Did people "see" "it" because people lacked heavy intelligence to question these "see-ers"? Could they get away with it so easily? Why the past, and why the hell not the present?

Then, where's the evidence of his very existence? Where's the evidence of his sons existence? No physical evidence, no evidence of either of them, except word of mouth and these holy scriptures that are spoken of.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Jul 14, 2008 22:12:11 GMT -5 Squid Lord said:

god, IMO, not real.

my honest take on what "it" has done for the people in the bible. Things that happened in said scriptures have not and cannot be reproduced. Has anyone in here been able to reproduce the turning of water into wine, with no other additives in their house-hold? By simply wanting the water to be wine? So now, if I may ask "How Do?"

Then comes to my question of the entity itself. Why was ancient times during the "B.C." period so damned special? Why make yourself appear ONLY then. Why not now? Are we so corrupt now using electricity and synthesized materials for homes rather than mud and clay [not sure if clay is a mixture...don't quote that part]. Did people "see" "it" because people lacked heavy intelligence to question these "see-ers"? Could they get away with it so easily? Why the past, and why the hell not the present?

Then, where's the evidence of his very existence? Where's the evidence of his sons existence? No physical evidence, no evidence of either of them, except word of mouth and these holy scriptures that are spoken of.

Yea, I can see where that's frustrating. Why are people seeing all of these things that we can't seem to ever see?

But you do know that there are actual records of Jesus existing right?

[burningthought]

Jul 14, 2008 20:09:13 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

Have you done deep research on this subject? Because there is good evidence out there, but it all comes down to faith. I can present someone without faith all of the evidence I want and they will still deny the existence, if they have faith they are more willing to believe.[/quote]

What do you mean deep research? into what in peticulour? I mean what do you call good evidence? some old man claiming to see a light at the end of a tunnel?

Everything comes down to Faith, and no, you dont have any evidence by what ive seen so far, although can you show me any? And no, if they are born into a society, they are more likely to gain faith of non real beings, just like a child belives in Santa because they are told he is there, its like the human race, were still children and evolving, weve made progress but we still need to understand Santa (God) is not real.

Also please answer my question ,do you belive in Santa, the boogie man, smerths, do you believe they excist beyond human imagination?

Jul 14, 2008 20:59:51 GMT -5 Magic attack said:

I do agree with you- that someone with no faith wont believe in God no matter what proof you bring forth. And that is something that I am fully comforable with.

No, i dont agree, people with no faith, are those who dont belive in something ,to make someone belive you need to show them proof, thats how it works but since no proof is usually any good when descirbing God (mainly imo its because hes not real). Since God inreligion highly seen as real by the many that follow it he is imprinted in the minds of the young, even if certain families are not christian for example, young children cna still belive in things like that if their friends or others do.

Santa is just another character much like God, only ofcourse not as populour, since people have come to understand he is not real just as children do.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

What do you mean deep research? into what in peticulour? I mean what do you call good evidence? some old man claiming to see a light at the end of a tunnel?

Have you done research into this deeply, have you *tried* to see if he exists, or have you already told yourself he doesn't exist and therefore close your mind off to anything that might be out there. It isn't fair to say that he absolutely doesn't exist, especially if you're going to believe in science and that would mean that our technology and knowledge is still limited.

And yes, I'm the proof that God exists.

Everything comes down to Faith, and no, you dont have any evidence by what ive seen so far, although can you show me any? And no, if they are born into a society, they are more likely to gain faith of non real beings, just like a child belives in Santa because they are told he is there, its like the human race, were still children and evolving, weve made progress but we still need to understand Santa (God) is not real.

Well you said it yourself, it all comes down to faith, what would be the point of choosing this type of lifestyle if everything had to be presented in front of you? I'm under the belief that I chose this lifestyle and it was because I believed, not because everyone else did it.

And to be fair, you can't prove he *doesn't* exist either. Which means you have to at least say "we can't prove he exists at the moment, but that may change sometime in the near or distant future"

And how is believing in God and treating our brothers and sisters wrong a bad thing to begin with, why do we *need* to stop doing this.

Also please answer my question ,do you belive in Santa, the boogie man, smerths, do you believe they excist beyond human imagination?

Already answered it.

No, i dont agree, people with no faith, are those who dont belive in something ,to make someone belive you need to show them proof, thats how it works but since no proof is usually any good when descirbing God (mainly imo its because hes not real). Since God inreligion highly seen as real by the many that follow it he is imprinted in the minds of the young, even if certain families are not christian for example, young children cna still belive in things like that if their friends or others do.

Ron is atheist, or agnostic I believe (he switches here and then), but his point is solid. If you read this whole thread you'll see good arguments to the point that he does, and no matter what people will deny it. Which goes to my point that if you don't have faith, then I can show you what I want.

People are quick to believe in science even though it can't prove everything. Prove the Big Bang Theory is true?

And your last point would mean that the large number of people who became Christian late into their lives wouldn't exist. We have a person at our church (or one of mine), who grew up in a different religion altogether, but he became Christian. So no it isn't all planted in our head like Santa.

Santa is just another character much like God, only ofcourse not as populour, since people have come to understand he is not real just as children do.

99% of these people didn't "come to understand" anything, they didn't believe he existed in the first place.

[Dja Majista]

www.whiteafrican.com/wp-content/Shark_Attack_01.jpg

There's a nice photo for ya. Looks pretty really but it turns out it was edited. Photographs and videos are secondary to solid empirical evidence, always. Now tell me I should take a photo of some kind of apparition. Let's say I did. No one in their right mind would believe it. Don't ask for photos if your gonna deny everything in it could actually happen. Photo editing nowadays is pretty impressive stuff as you can see. If there is any reason to speculate, speculation will be made. It's that simple. That's why I think personal experiences like the one I described are much more effective. If I'm not supposed to believe in God after all I've seen, please let me know what alternative there is. Intelligent Coincidences? Or maybe I'm God, and I'm controlling all these things inadvertently?

Regarding proof. I can assure you, there are very few things you believe that you have actually seen the proof for. Just because a textbook tells you something about human anatomy doesn't mean it's been proven to you. In fact, we can't even prove that our senses aren't decieving us, which means everything in science is merely virtually certain, not perfectly proven. Likewise you might have used the pythagorean theorem many times, and in every case, it worked. But have you actually seen the proof for it? How about Newtonian mechanics? You can use it in just about every case you can think of, and it will work. Isn't that proof enough? No, not really. Newtonian mechanics is not very reliable when applied to motion on the subatomic level, so while it is a practical set of laws, they still aren't correct. In conclusion, you should not need proof to believe something. Merely evidence.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Jul 15, 2008 7:51:14 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

www.whiteafrican.com/wp-content/Shark_Attack_01.jpg

There's a nice photo for ya. Looks pretty really but it turns out it was edited. Photographs and videos are secondary to solid empirical evidence, always. Now tell me I should take a photo of some kind of apparition. Let's say I did. No one in their right mind would believe it. Don't ask for photos if your gonna deny everything in it could actually happen. Photo editing nowadays is pretty impressive stuff as you can see. If there is any reason to speculate, speculation will be made. It's that simple. That's why I think personal experiences like the one I described are much more effective. If I'm not supposed to believe in God after all I've seen, please let me know what alternative there is. Intelligent Coincidences? Or maybe I'm God, and I'm controlling all these things inadvertently?

Regarding proof. I can assure you, there are very few things you believe that you have actually seen the proof for. Just because a textbook tells you something about human anatomy doesn't mean it's been proven to you. In fact, we can't even prove that our senses aren't decieving us, which means everything in science is merely virtually certain, not perfectly proven. Likewise you might have used the pythagorean theorem many times, and in every case, it worked. But have you actually seen the proof for it? How about Newtonian mechanics? You can use it in just about every case you can think of, and it will work. Isn't that proof enough? No, not really. Newtonian mechanics is not very reliable when applied to motion on the subatomic level, so while it is a practical set of laws, they still aren't correct. In conclusion, you should not need proof to believe something. Merely evidence.

Good point you brought up, how many things do we believe because they are presented to us, without actually going out and looking for them?

[burningthought]

Jul 15, 2008 7:15:54 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

Have you done research into this deeply, have you *tried* to see if he exists, or have you already told yourself he doesn't exist and therefore close your mind off to anything that might be out there. It isn't fair to say that he absolutely doesn't exist, especially if you're going to believe in science and that would mean that our technology and knowledge is still limited.

And yes, I'm the proof that God exists.

Well you said it yourself, it all comes down to faith, what would be the point of choosing this type of lifestyle if everything had to be presented in front of you? I'm under the belief that I chose this lifestyle and it was because I believed, not because everyone else did it.

And to be fair, you can't prove he *doesn't* exist either. Which means you have to at least say "we can't prove he exists at the moment, but that may change sometime in the near or distant future"

And how is believing in God and treating our brothers and sisters wrong a bad thing to begin with, why do we *need* to stop doing this.



Already answered it.



Ron is atheist, or agnostic I believe (he switches here and then), but his point is solid. If you read this whole thread you'll see good arguments to the point that he does, and no matter what people will deny it. Which goes to my point that if you don't have faith, then I can show you what I want.

People are quick to believe in science even though it can't prove everything. Prove the Big Bang Theory is true?

And your last point would mean that the large number of people who became Christian late into their lives wouldn't exist. We have a person at our church (or one of mine), who grew up in a different religion altogether, but he became Christian. So no it isn't all planted in our head like Santa.

99% of these people didn't "come to understand" anything, they didn't believe he existed in the first place.

What do you mean by "tried"? how can you try and see if he exists? Its simply common sense that he doesnt exist imo, you cant see, hear, smell or touch the entity and half the stories in the bible are unlikely nonsense that are thrown out every now and then or reduced in flavour ,for example the "Genesis" story has many flaws, the idea of Adam and Eve and all that.

Your not the proof at all, thats only a standpoint of belief, saying your the proof means that that proof is terribly weak, since thats only suggesting that you belive you were made by God, I say diffrent and belive diffrent, I belive that your father and your mother made you, God had nothing to do with it, wheras if I was holding a spider in my hand, the proof of the spider being real is right there.

Faith is not a answer to Gods excistence however

Well as i said, the fact there is no evidence for his excistence IS the proof I need that he doesnt, otherwise its like saying theres an invisible monkey following people around, and saying you cant prove there isnt one, if you cant use senses to see, touch, smell etc etc something, then its not there especially something as an invsible spirit that apparently created the human race etc etc

We need to stop the same way we stopped beliveving in certain things, like how we stopped beliving in God putting the poor in their place back in the 1800's in Britain, we stopped beliving in that and we grew stronger because of it, furthermore, as ive said already, Religion can be used to control people for good and bad, and we already have Law to try and control people for Good anyway, all these Churches and sinkholes of wealth for instance, we dont need that, knock a church to rubble and put a hospital or science lab there, an office building or houses, something useful to civilisation, ime all for people using their imagination but its not necessary to build the church of "Superman" or w/e.

Have you? must hae missed it, I was looking for a yes/no answer, can you outline it please or say it again?

Ill read the thread again and see for some good arguments but Ive never in my life had a good argument that he excits, almost every question you put to a priest thats awkward is answered with "God works in mysterious ways", which imo translates too "damn he got me there, ive not a clue why!".

Science can prove a lot of things to human udnerstanding BY real humans however, and it can be explained in a lot of ways, the big bang theory can be explained well by some people, ime no scientist or big bang theorist but it has been explained well, and been made more feasable, same with the creation of the world theory, how we were made over time by rocks and matter and meteors hitting us etc etc, not by some being.

It can be planted in anyones head, theres been grown men who have belived things just because someone says it over and over or if their in an area of high religious culture.

No, ime saying that eventually everyone may had belived in Santa, then realised its not true.

Jul 15, 2008 7:51:14 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

www.whiteafrican.com/wp-content/Shark_Attack_01.jpg

There's a nice photo for ya. Looks pretty really but it turns out it was edited. Photographs and videos are secondary to solid empirical evidence, always. Now tell me I should take a photo of some kind of apparition. Let's say I did. No one in their right mind would believe it. Don't ask for photos if your gonna deny everything in it could actually happen. Photo editing nowadays is pretty impressive stuff as you can see. If there is any reason to speculate, speculation will be made. It's that simple. That's why I think personal experiences like the one I described are much more effective. If I'm not supposed to believe in God after all I've seen, please let me know what alternative there is. Intelligent Coincidences? Or maybe I'm God, and I'm controlling all these things inadvertently?

Regarding proof. I can assure you, there are very few things you believe that you have actually seen the proof for. Just because a textbook tells you something about human anatomy doesn't mean it's been proven to you. In fact, we can't even prove that our senses aren't decieving us, which means everything in science is merely virtually certain, not perfectly proven. Likewise you might have used the pythagorean theorem many times, and in every case, it worked. But have you actually seen the proof for it? How about Newtonian mechanics? You can use it in just about every case you can think of, and it will work. Isn't that proof enough? No, not really. Newtonian mechanics is not very reliable when applied to motion on the subatomic level, so while it is a practical set of laws, they still aren't correct. In conclusion, you should not need proof to believe something. Merely evidence.

Ofcourse they are secndary, but their better than a Church or word of mouth from another beliver. Well there is no photo of God, okie so thats a picture of a shark thats not real but theres many pictures of sharks, and many pictures of helicopters, both ive seen in real life so I know their real, so yes that picture is not real, but then theres zero good evidence for God, wheras Sharks attacking helicopters are possible. In a way your right, you are God, because Humans created him, so in your imagination you could make yourself God because imo God is imagination. Also youve described various times about the number thing? thats not ncesserily a Godly act, also ask yourself why wouod God do something like this? dont you think an all powerful entity would bother doing something like that? ime sure if you sat down and thought about it, in the end youll realise it could easily be a coincidence, everyone has had creepy coincidences but none of it proves any God or entity is doing it, its simply that, coindidence, its physically possible by the means of that object to show numbers like that.

Indeed, and Good evidence too, in the end though, these are manmade things, recorded through time, and technically logical, wheras someone could think of a 101 ways why God is not logical, many being that not only is there no reason for one when Science can give alternatives, as soon as theres viable alternatives some of which can be explained by human minds anyway, there is no real need for a God entity, I mean seriously, there would be zero logical reason for such an enetity to not just show itself, or walk among us, name why an all powerful entity would want to make the human race in the first place? apprently he is also all knowing so its not to see what we can do either.....none of the stories of God make sense when compared to eachother, they can contradict eachother. Hell doesnt moses call upon God? yet the power of God is made in the form of a swarm of pests? .......

[Dja Majista]

Jul 15, 2008 11:13:19 GMT -5 burningthought said:

Jul 15, 2008 7:51:14 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

www.whiteafrican.com/wp-content/Shark_Attack_01.jpg

There's a nice photo for ya. Looks pretty really but it turns out it was edited. Photographs and videos are secondary to solid empirical evidence, always. Now tell me I should take a photo of some kind of apparition. Let's say I did. No one in their right mind would believe it. Don't ask for photos if your gonna deny everything in it could actually happen. Photo editing nowadays is pretty impressive stuff as you can see. If there is any reason to speculate, speculation will be made. It's that simple. That's why I think personal experiences like the one I described are much more effective. If I'm not supposed to believe in God after all I've seen, please let me know what alternative there is. Intelligent Coincidences? Or maybe I'm God, and I'm controlling all these things inadvertently?

Regarding proof. I can assure you, there are very few things you believe that you have actually seen the proof for. Just because a textbook tells you something about human anatomy doesn't mean it's been proven to you. In fact, we can't even prove that our senses aren't decieving us, which means everything in science is merely virtually certain, not perfectly proven. Likewise you might have used the pythagorean theorem many times, and in every case, it worked. But have you actually seen the proof for it? How about Newtonian mechanics? You can use it in just about every case you can think of, and it will work. Isn't that proof enough? No, not really. Newtonian mechanics is not very reliable when applied to motion on the subatomic level, so while it is a practical set of laws, they still aren't correct. In conclusion, you should not need proof to believe something. Merely evidence.

Ofcourse they are secndary, but their better than a Church or word of mouth from another beliver. Well there is no photo of God, okie so thats a picture of a shark thats not real but theres many pictures of sharks, and many pictures of helicopters, both ive seen in real life so I know their real, so yes that picture is not real, but then theres zero good evidence for God, wheras Sharks attacking helicopters are possible.

You're telling me the only reason you believe there are helicopters and sharks, is because you've seen them in real life? That's pretty hard core. How about a harder one, do you believe atoms exist?

Testimony does not prove anything. But abundance of testimony makes it more likely. I hold the philosophy that humans cannot prove anything at all with their senses, though through habit (hence why science uses multiple trials) things become virtually certain. I believe that because there is an abundance of testimony supporting the existence of God, that it is a subject worth researching. That simple. I would never try to prove God's existence. It's impossible, just like it's impossible to disprove it. However, based on what I've seen, God's existence seems highly probable, and that's why I can be certain of it.

In a way your right, you are God, because Humans created him, so in your imagination you could make yourself God because imo God is imagination. Also youve described various times about the number thing? thats not ncesserily a Godly act, also ask yourself why wouod God do something like this? dont you think an all powerful entity would bother doing something like that? ime sure if you sat down and thought about it, in the end youll realise it could easily be a coincidence, everyone has had creepy coincidences but none of it proves any God or entity is doing it, its simply that, coindidence, its physically possible by the means of that object to show numbers like that.

It's funny you should mention: If I sat down and thought about it. That's like telling me to inhale when I breathe. I'm very skeptical, I think about it all the time. But look, the great thing is they are numbers because that allows me to calculate how unlikely it is. Ok, there's 86,400 seconds in a day. I'm asleep for say about 8 hours (during those 8 hours is another appearance of that number sequence); that's a third of the day. So subtract 29,000 seconds. 57,400. I check the time I guess... I'll be generous and say maybe 15 times in a day. Also, we'll assume that I'm just as likely to check my watch at almost any time, because I have things going on all day.... Ok calculator time... approximately a one in 3827 chance, that this will happen on the specified day, which it did. Bear in mind, I have no intention of convincing you that God exists with this; after all, it's just a testimony. But I wouldn't mind you convincing me.

Indeed, and Good evidence too, in the end though, these are manmade things, recorded through time, and technically logical, wheras someone could think of a 101 ways why God is not logical, many being that not only is there no reason for one when Science can give alternatives, as soon as theres viable alternatives some of which can be explained by human minds anyway, there is no real need for a God entity, I mean seriously, there would be zero logical reason for such an enetity to not just show itself, or walk among us, name why an all powerful entity would want to make the human race in the first place? apprently he is also all knowing so its not to see what we can do either..... none of the stories of God make sense when compared to eachother, they can contradict eachother. Hell doesnt moses call upon God? yet the power of God is made in the form of a swarm of pests? .......

Perhaps the God entity would be defeating the purpose of putting us here if he showed himself like that. There would be no need for faith, and it seems God values this thing quite highly.

wheras someone could think of a 101 ways why God is not logical,

Give me one.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

What do you mean by "tried"?

I mean have you spent, or are you spending extensive time researching and reading multiple works, and doing deep labor into proving it isn’t true? Or are you simply saying you haven’t seen him therefore he doesn’t exist, and waiting on the opposing side to provide the evidence?

I can tell you now, it isn’t my job to *make* you believe, and I don’t believe by simply discussing this with you, that you’ll change your mind, because most will just argue anyways in these discussions. I’m simply saying it wouldn’t hurt to approach it from an objective point of view, or a different one.

how can you try and see if he exists?

Read above. And ultimately faith is needed, because no matter what someone else shows you, or tells you, or you see and don’t see, you won’t see it anyways and the biggest part is having faith, or otherwise it’s pointless.

Its simply common sense that he doesnt exist imo, you cant see, hear, smell or touch the entity

So you are admitting that the reason you don’t believe in him is because you lack the physical evidence as I stated earlier, as going by your basic five senses.

You can feel him, love him, and believe in him. In that sense how can I feel something that doesn’t exist in some way or another, note that feeling is different than touching.

and half the stories in the bible are unlikely nonsense that are thrown out every now and then or reduced in flavour ,for example the "Genesis" story has many flaws, the idea of Adam and Eve and all that.

Based off of what? Have you actually sat down and analyzed the entire Bible and read it, or are you going off of secondary information? Not trying to be offensive but there is a difference.

Your not the proof at all, thats only a standpoint of belief,

No different than your belief he doesn’t exist and your “proof” is a standpoint of belief.

saying your the proof means that that proof is terribly weak, since thats only suggesting that you belive you were made by God, I say diffrent and belive diffrent, I belive that your father and your mother made you, God had nothing to do with it, wheras if I was holding a spider in my hand, the proof of the spider being real is right there.

But whose to say that Spider is a spider and not something else? And who is to say that we have accumulated all aforementioned knowledge of everything, because human reasoning and science is still very limited.

Faith is not a answer to Gods excistence however

But you would have to have faith to truly understand it.

Well as i said, the fact there is no evidence for his excistence IS the proof I need that he doesnt,

That’s just the proof that you don’t have the right proof… yet. Unless you believe that you have all evidence of everything that is known throughout the vast stretches of the multiverse at your disposal. Mankind hasn’t even put a *dent* inside the depths of the planes around us.

otherwise its like saying theres an invisible monkey following people around, and saying you cant prove there isnt one, if you cant use senses to see, touch, smell etc etc something, then its not there especially something as an invsible spirit that apparently created the human race etc etc

So by that meaning love doesn’t really exist, as we can’t detect it with our five senses.

We need to stop the same way we stopped beliveving in certain things, like how we stopped beliving in God putting the poor in their place back in the 1800's in Britain, we stopped beliving in that and we grew stronger because of it, furthermore, as ive said already, Religion can be used to control people for good and bad, and we already have Law to try and control people for Good anyway, all these Churches and sinkholes of wealth for instance, we dont need that, knock a church to rubble and put a hospital or science lab there, an office building or houses, something useful to civilisation, ime all for people using their imagination but its not necessary to build the church of "Superman" or w/e.

You do realize that most laws have a religious background to them? You do realize many or a vast majority of our practices and cultures have a religious background to them?

Have you? must hae missed it, I was looking for a yes/no answer, can you outline it please or say it again?

I simply said that those said things exist in the term that you put it because I have pokemon cards in my shelf, so surely pokemon exist in one fashion or another.

Ill read the thread again and see for some good arguments but Ive never in my life had a good argument that he excits, almost every question you put to a priest thats awkward is answered with "God works in mysterious ways", which imo translates too "damn he got me there, ive not a clue why!".

Well that’s the same thing as saying I have heard no good argument to that he doesn’t absolutely exist other than, “Science is the answer to everything” which it isn’t. That’s also a way of saying, “I don’t know the answer”. And you have to realize it is *you* that determine what is a good or bad argument, it isn’t objective. Like I said I can tell you everything and anyone else can but that won’t make you a believer, whether you “won” or “lost” an argument, if you don’t have faith you won’t believe and that is a fact that I’m comfortable with, like Ron said earlier.

Science can prove a lot of things to human udnerstanding BY real humans however, and it can be explained in a lot of ways, the big bang theory can be explained well by some people,

But that’s in your opinion. Have you seen the big bang? Touched it? Tasted it? The only difference is that you are willing to put your faith into the fact that the Big Bang Theory is reasonable, because you trust that more.

ime no scientist or big bang theorist but it has been explained well,

Okay so you are admitting that you haven’t fully researched this to see that it’s true, you are saying that “It works for you”. Because honestly the theory sounds absolutely silly to me, and there is no way you can prove that happened either.

and been made more feasable,

Because a bunch of people decided this is what they wanted to teach. Science has flaws all of the time, they changed Pluto into no longer being a planet, so the basis of what they go on changes all of the time.

same with the creation of the world theory, how we were made over time by rocks and matter and meteors hitting us etc etc, not by some being.

So you believe we came from slime? Is there any actual proof of this step by step? Are there photos of people going completely from slime into human. I agree people have changed over time, but is there proof that they ever *weren’t* humans?

It can be planted in anyones head, theres been grown men who have belived things just because someone says it over and over or if their in an area of high religious culture.

But some of these people are some of the greatest scientific minds on earth and they still believe in it. Why?

No, ime saying that eventually everyone may had belived in Santa, then realised its not true.

Santa can exist. A man can make toys and drop through the chimney and put them in a house. There are many ways something can exist, but you have to specify which.

Ofcourse they are secndary, but their better than a Church or word of mouth from another beliver. Well there is no photo of God, okie so thats a picture of a shark thats not real but theres many pictures of sharks, and many pictures of helicopters, both ive seen in real life so I know their real, so yes that picture is not real, but then theres zero good evidence for God, wheras Sharks attacking helicopters are possible. In a way your right, you are God, because Humans created him, so in your imagination you could make yourself God because imo God is imagination. Also youve described various times about the number thing? thats not ncesserily a Godly act, also ask yourself why wouod God do something like this? dont you think an all powerful entity would bother doing something like that? ime sure if you sat down and thought about it, in the end youll realise it could easily be a coincidence, everyone has had creepy coincidences but none of it proves any God or entity is doing it, its simply that, coindidence, its physically possible by the means of that object to show numbers like that.

So I should believe the Big Bang Theory because a scientist or a text book said so? Even though there is no “proof” to any of it? Do you see how that works against the same argument?

I know from sheer experience that many coincidences are anything but, but that’s just me I suppose.

How do we know what we imagine and what we don’t?

Indeed, and Good evidence too, in the end though, these are manmade things, recorded through time, and technically logical, wheras someone could think of a 101 ways why God is not logical, many being that not only is there no reason for one when Science can give alternatives, as soon as theres viable alternatives some of which can be explained by human minds anyway, there is no real need for a God entity, I mean seriously, there would be zero logical reason for such an enetity to not just show itself, or walk among us, name why an all powerful entity would want to make the human race in the first place? apprently he is also all knowing so its not to see what we can do either.....none of the stories of God make sense when compared to eachother, they can contradict eachother. Hell doesnt moses call upon God? yet the power of God is made in the form of a swarm of pests? .......

I can think of 101 reasons why I believe the Big Bang Theory is illogical as well. Logic isn’t really everything, actually it is only a small part of anything. We humans are not only dictated by logic, but by need and emotions. People aren’t “touched” by logic, they don’t go and change their lives around by logic.

People smoke all of the time knowing that it’s bad for them, but people change their lives because someone they knew died from smoking, or some other event that changed them.

People drink knowing it’s bad for them, but they don’t stop because of that. They stop because they had a family member killed by a drunk driver, and that person can never be brought back.

Logic alone doesn’t move people, faith and emotion does.

[Magic attack]

Jul 14, 2008 21:47:49 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

Jul 14, 2008 20:59:51 GMT -5 Magic attack said:

I do agree with you- that someone with no faith wont believe in God no matter what proof you bring forth. And that is something that I am fully comforable with.

Are you agnostic or atheist at the moment? Not trying to be sarcastic, just curious.

I am going with Agnostic at the moment.

Jul 14, 2008 22:12:11 GMT -5 Squid Lord said:

god, IMO, not real.

I shall call "it" "The Great Pototo"

Jul 14, 2008 22:12:11 GMT -5 Squid Lord said:

my honest take on what "it" has done for the people in the bible. Things that happened in said scriptures have not and cannot be reproduced. Has anyone in here been able to reproduce the turning of water into wine, with no other additives in their house-hold? By simply wanting the water to be wine? So now, if I may ask "How Do?"

By having great faith. If you believe, than miracles can and will happen.

Jul 14, 2008 22:12:11 GMT -5 Squid Lord said:

Then comes to my question of the entity itself. Why was ancient times during the "B.C." period so damned special? Why make yourself appear ONLY then. Why not now? Are we so corrupt now using electricity and synthesized materials for homes rather than mud and clay [not sure if clay is a mixture...don't quote that part]. Did people "see" "it" because people lacked heavy intelligence to question these "see-ers"? Could they get away with it so easily? Why the past, and why the hell not the present?

The Great Potato shows itself in different ways to everyone. You are to hung up on giving this entity some humanly form.

Jul 14, 2008 22:12:11 GMT -5 Squid Lord said:

Then, where's the evidence of his very existence? Where's the evidence of his sons existence? No physical evidence, no evidence of either of them, except word of mouth and these holy scriptures that are spoken of.

There is a book, you should go read it. Give it a chance, just read it and perhaps you will understand.

People that have faith have seen The Great Potato's work first hand. Without faith, you would discount the miracle as just a coincidence. So it would do you know good for people to site any examples.

Jul 15, 2008 5:50:09 GMT -5 burningthought said:

No, i dont agree, people with no faith, are those who dont belive in something, to make someone belive you need to show them proof, thats how it works but since no proof is usually any good when descirbing God (mainly imo its because hes not real). Since God inreligion highly seen as real by the many that follow it he is imprinted in the minds of the young, even if certain families are not christian for example, young children cna still belive in things like that if their friends or others do.

Santa is just another character much like God, only ofcourse not as populour, since people have come to understand he is not real just as children do.

I answered this in the answer to Squid.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Ok so you're agnostic, I figured you were on that side atm.

[Squid Lord]

Jul 15, 2008 7:51:14 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

www.whiteafrican.com/wp-content/Shark_Attack_01.jpg

There's a nice photo for ya. Looks pretty really but it turns out it was edited. Photographs and videos are secondary to solid empirical evidence, always. Now tell me I should take a photo of some kind of apparition. Let's say I did. No one in their right mind would believe it. Don't ask for photos if your gonna deny everything in it could actually happen. Photo editing nowadays is pretty impressive stuff as you can see. If there is any reason to speculate, speculation will be made. It's that simple. That's why I think personal experiences like the one I described are much more effective. If I'm not supposed to believe in God after all I've seen, please let me know what alternative there is. Intelligent Coincidences? Or maybe I'm God, and I'm controlling all these things inadvertently?

Regarding proof. I can assure you, there are very few things you believe that you have actually seen the proof for. Just because a textbook tells you something about human anatomy doesn't mean it's been proven to you. In fact, we can't even prove that our senses aren't decieving us, which means everything in science is merely virtually certain, not perfectly proven. Likewise you might have used the pythagorean theorem many times, and in every case, it worked. But have you actually seen the proof for it? How about Newtonian mechanics? You can use it in just about every case you can think of, and it will work. Isn't that proof enough? No, not really. Newtonian mechanics is not very reliable when applied to motion on the subatomic level, so while it is a practical set of laws, they still aren't correct. In conclusion, you should not need proof to believe something. Merely evidence.

I'm sorry, but your saying that the law of gravitational pull is non-existent? That is displayed to us in science, hell, we feel it's effects, and if gravity isn't keeping us "glued" to earth, what is? Vision via light is also science, that's true. As the lights go down, less light is able to "bounce" and "reflect" off of objects to make them "appear" to you. Not all science is "merely virtually certain".

Jul 15, 2008 18:58:38 GMT -5 Magic attack said:

The Great Potato shows itself in different ways to everyone. You are to hung up on giving this entity some humanly form.

I have to kindly disagree on the "hung-upness". Everywhere, The Great Potato is described as a humanly figure, so are his angels. In famous paintings and in the "scriptures" themselves.:

[Dja Majista]

Jul 15, 2008 23:17:51 GMT -5 Squid Lord said:

Jul 15, 2008 7:51:14 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

www.whiteafrican.com/wp-content/Shark_Attack_01.jpg

There's a nice photo for ya. Looks pretty really but it turns out it was edited. Photographs and videos are secondary to solid empirical evidence, always. Now tell me I should take a photo of some kind of apparition. Let's say I did. No one in their right mind would believe it. Don't ask for photos if your gonna deny everything in it could actually happen. Photo editing nowadays is pretty impressive stuff as you can see. If there is any reason to speculate, speculation will be made. It's that simple. That's why I think personal experiences like the one I described are much more effective. If I'm not supposed to believe in God after all I've seen, please let me know what alternative there is. Intelligent Coincidences? Or maybe I'm God, and I'm controlling all these things inadvertently?

Regarding proof. I can assure you, there are very few things you believe that you have actually seen the proof for. Just because a textbook tells you something about human anatomy doesn't mean it's been proven to you. In fact, we can't even prove that our senses aren't decieving us, which means everything in science is merely virtually certain, not perfectly proven. Likewise you might have used the pythagorean theorem many times, and in every case, it worked. But have you actually seen the proof for it? How about Newtonian mechanics? You can use it in just about every case you can think of, and it will work. Isn't that proof enough? No, not really. Newtonian mechanics is not very reliable when applied to motion on the subatomic level, so while it is a practical set of laws, they still aren't correct. In conclusion, you should not need proof to believe something. Merely evidence.

I'm sorry, but your saying that the law of gravitational pull is non-existent? That is displayed to us in science, hell, we feel it's effects, and if gravity isn't keeping us "glued" to earth, what is? Vision via light is also science, that's true. As the lights go down, less light is able to "bounce" and "reflect" off of objects to make them "appear" to you. Not all science is "merely virtually certain".

Nonexistent? Of course not. That's not what I'm implying either. There is nothing wrong with believing something that is virtually certain. In fact you'd probably have to be out of your mind to disbelieve something that's virtually certain. I've simply been saying that, we can't truly prove much of anything without using assumptions that haven't been proven themselves. Technically, it's not 100% certain that the Sun will rise tomorrow; it is virtually certain however. Also you have no way of proving that your senses might be feeding you some kind of virtual reality--not the real thing. Though most people, including me, don't think that is very likely at all, it is still an alternate possibility. That means your senses are not proven to be reliable, therefore, just because you can see something doesn't mean you have proven that it actually exists. Though it almost definitely does.

Jul 15, 2008 18:58:38 GMT -5 Magic attack said:

The Great Potato shows itself in different ways to everyone. You are to hung up on giving this entity some humanly form.

I have to kindly disagree on the "hung-upness". Everywhere, The Great Potato is described as a humanly figure, so are his angels. In famous paintings and in the "scriptures" themselves.:

Define everywhere. Milton's Paradise Lost, despite popular belief, is not biblical canon. Put simply, there are places in the bible that suggest that God and humans are similar in some ways.

[Magic attack]

Jul 15, 2008 23:17:51 GMT -5 Squid Lord said:

Jul 15, 2008 7:51:14 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

www.whiteafrican.com/wp-content/Shark_Attack_01.jpg

There's a nice photo for ya. Looks pretty really but it turns out it was edited. Photographs and videos are secondary to solid empirical evidence, always. Now tell me I should take a photo of some kind of apparition. Let's say I did. No one in their right mind would believe it. Don't ask for photos if your gonna deny everything in it could actually happen. Photo editing nowadays is pretty impressive stuff as you can see. If there is any reason to speculate, speculation will be made. It's that simple. That's why I think personal experiences like the one I described are much more effective. If I'm not supposed to believe in God after all I've seen, please let me know what alternative there is. Intelligent Coincidences? Or maybe I'm God, and I'm controlling all these things inadvertently?

Regarding proof. I can assure you, there are very few things you believe that you have actually seen the proof for. Just because a textbook tells you something about human anatomy doesn't mean it's been proven to you. In fact, we can't even prove that our senses aren't decieving us, which means everything in science is merely virtually certain, not perfectly proven. Likewise you might have used the pythagorean theorem many times, and in every case, it worked. But have you actually seen the proof for it? How about Newtonian mechanics? You can use it in just about every case you can think of, and it will work. Isn't that proof enough? No, not really. Newtonian mechanics is not very reliable when applied to motion on the subatomic level, so while it is a practical set of laws, they still aren't correct. In conclusion, you should not need proof to believe something. Merely evidence.

I'm sorry, but your saying that the law of gravitational pull is non-existent? That is displayed to us in science, hell, we feel it's effects, and if gravity isn't keeping us "glued" to earth, what is? Vision via light is also science, that's true. As the lights go down, less light is able to "bounce" and "reflect" off of objects to make them "appear" to you. Not all science is "merely virtually certain".

Jul 15, 2008 18:58:38 GMT -5 Magic attack said:

The Great Potato shows itself in different ways to everyone. You are to hung up on giving this entity some humanly form.

I have to kindly disagree on the "hung-upness". Everywhere, The Great Potato is described as a humanly figure, so are his angels. In famous paintings and in the "scriptures" themselves.:

i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff119/Wall_Ninja/michelangelo-sistine-chapel-adam.jpg

Dja Majista answered for me.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Jul 16, 2008 18:55:40 GMT -5 Magic attack said:

Jul 15, 2008 23:17:51 GMT -5 Squid Lord said:

I'm sorry, but your saying that the law of gravitational pull is non-existent? That is displayed to us in science, hell, we feel it's effects, and if gravity isn't keeping us "glued" to earth, what is? Vision via light is also science, that's true. As the lights go down, less light is able to "bounce" and "reflect" off of objects to make them "appear" to you. Not all science is "merely virtually certain".









I have to kindly disagree on the "hung-upness". Everywhere, The Great Potato is described as a humanly figure, so are his angels. In famous paintings and in the "scriptures" themselves.:

i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff119/Wall_Ninja/michelangelo-sistine-chapel-adam.jpg

Dja Majista answered for me.

Man, you're always in the right place at the right time then... luck you.

[Squid Lord]

Look around a church's stained glass windows, depictions of god and...idk what you'd call them "sub-humans"? [no really, not trying to be mean at all, it escapes me as to what to call people during that time in the glass]. Paintings, as you said in the Bible, cartoons. Now the biggie, we say Him and Her. Captilizing the first letter as if a nickname of some sort, and saying "him" and "her" as we call our fellow humans. Also fellow animals I should say, Humans do fall under the "Animal" category...that is undeniable [referring the animal statement in this last sentence].

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Jul 20, 2008 0:19:13 GMT -5 Squid Lord said:

Look around a church's stained glass windows, depictions of god and...idk what you'd call them "sub-humans"? [no really, not trying to be mean at all, it escapes me as to what to call people during that time in the glass]. Paintings, as you said in the Bible, cartoons. Now the biggie, we say Him and Her. Captilizing the first letter as if a nickname of some sort, and saying "him" and "her" as we call our fellow humans. Also fellow animals I should say, Humans do fall under the "Animal" category...that is undeniable [referring the animal statement in this last sentence].

So what exactly are you asking? What humans are referenced as? You could say we are creations of God Biblically.

[Squid Lord]

I'm not asking, DjaM asked me to define everywhere god is defined, labled, and described as a humanly figure, so I did.

[Dja Majista]

I did?
...
oh! "define everywhere" huh?
When I said this, I was challenging your statement:

Everywhere, The Great Potato is described as a humanly figure, so are his angels. In famous paintings and in the "scriptures" themselves.

You're suggesting that "everywhere" includes the scriptures themselves. As far as I know, the bible contains very few passages that describe God's appearance. None of them are very specific. And many of them might just be metaphorical.

Also...

Now the biggie, we say Him and Her. Captilizing the first letter as if a nickname of some sort, and saying "him" and "her" as we call our fellow humans. Also fellow animals I should say, Humans do fall under the "Animal" category...that is undeniable [referring the animal statement in this last sentence].

Ok, I can't really tell where you're going with this. Are you making some kind of hypothetical syllogism to say God is animal?
(God is human
human is animal
God is animal)

Paintings, as you said in the Bible, cartoons.

The scriptures themselves are simply written text. The biblical canon doesn't include any illustrations that I'm aware of.

[Squid Lord]

aahh, well, then I did

The next 2 quotes fall under this next statement. I'm not saying that directly, nor am I trying to say that as my main point in that thought. We call each other "him" and "her", same goes for animals [which we are (throwing in the scientific aspect to say that we are animals, all of us)]. Since we are calling each other "him" and "her" and we name god with "him" and "her", one must assume that god is human. Not only are we capitalizing the 'H' in both instances but we also capitalize the 'G' as well.

Now "simply written text" is where i shall begin, they are written, back in a long while, and taken too seriously, thus the churches/religious areas were formed. I haven't seen any illustrations myself, but you did say it mentions at points where god and humans [...or human and humans, to follow my previous statement] are similar.