@Dida -- Because we have a marvelous, though incomplete, record of the development of man, and with the advent of the field of genetics, there is no room for the creation of man or anything else on this planet except the first single celled critters from which all life was generated. So, at that point when life first appeared, there may be some wiggle room for direct action by some other being(s), but then we are faced with the same problem when it comes to them. Where did they come from? Even more to the point, what motivation would anyone have for coming down to a planet still in its embryonic form to seed it with life? At the time the first critters came into being, this planet was inhospitable to any other form of life.

Can you elaborate a bit on one point you made? I'm not sure I follow you on the statement that if people know what you mean by "God" then it must exist in some fashion. If I talk about Satan or unicorns or fairies or Superman or the multiverse or magic, most of us have some idea what's being discussed. That understanding of the general concepts doesn't seem to lend credence to them necessarily being anything more than concepts, though. I would further argue that if you had 100 people from this community give you their detailed descriptions of what they think people mean by "God," you'd receive some overlap and a lot of disparity — so even if there were some truth that shared conceptualization necessitated manifestation, which doesn't ring true to me, the nebulous nature of people's concepts seems to be a problem, as there's no truly shared understanding.

@resserts my reply there would be that concepts are creations, that gain more validity the more ppl "believe" in them. Or to put it another way, i perceive as much overlap and disparity in any mutual def of "multiverse" as i do @ "God," and for whatever reason i am led to insert in here that you "create" a spirit just by walking into a room, that the others in the room could even describe with words; apropos of nothing i guess, sorry lol.

that we might be at odds in any understanding describes our lack of understanding of each other, iow, not the failure of any creation. Or iow i, who believe there is a Creative Force, can agree with you on some level that there is no God such as has been (overly) defined, and the Bible even states that God cannot be known, "Unknown God."

but i have to be able to hear you, to agree with you; i cannot agree with you by insisting that you agree with me; or at least i might gain some sycophants that way--mindless followers--but it won't work with anyone rationally.

John the Baptist is considered by us to be some religious Jesus Freak, see, but really baptising ppl in the Jordan River is tantamount to sedition, in a Theocracy, right? The Bible is a collection of Man's Wisdom, written in the Eastern Dialectic, which logic cannot penetrate imo, hence why the Bible, which roundly condemns religion at every turn, is nonetheless appropriated by the religious.

@resserts if a concept is so nebulous that only one person believes it, it essentially dies, and concepts that are shared live, in a sense

@bbyrd009 It just seems that anything can be justified or validated by that method, and I don't agree that words or concepts illustrate or manifest the existence of what they describe. Concepts themselves are real, but are distinct from what is being conceptualized — which may or may not exist. Just because an idea has influence doesn't mean that what is described by the idea exists or is true or has merit. We could just as easily say that white supremacy is real because it exists in a lot of people's minds, so they've created white supremacy. They believe it and it's had a significant influence on society and history, I'll grant that, and the rest of us know what they mean. But does that mean that what they believe is real? Does it really mean that dark-skinned people are inherently inferior? Of course not. So, in terms of "God," it exists as a word and a vague collection of concepts that's held great sway over society, but that says nothing about whether God — the entity — exists.

@resserts "It just seems that anything can be justified or validated by that method"

i agree; hence the importance of "witnesses"

"and I don't agree that words or concepts illustrate or manifest the existence of what they describe."

yet having a convo even 20 years ago about going to Mars would have been pointless, but today it is being manifest as we speak it, essentially, yes? Enough witnesses agreeing to the pov is what will cause it to manifest. One guy saying "we can go to Mars" = "nutcase."

"Just because an idea has influence doesn't mean that what is described by the idea exists or is true or has merit. We could just as easily say that white supremacy is real because it exists in a lot of people's minds, so they've created white supremacy. "

well imo a black person would argue that White Supremacy is very real, i guess, right. Where did it come from, if not a bunch of ppl agreeing that it was true?

"But does that mean that what they believe is real? Does it really mean that dark-skinned people are inherently inferior? Of course not."

unfortunately to the dead black guy hanging from Jim Crow, these distinctions are irrelevant tho, see, his perception of "real" will trump ours here

@bbyrd009

Whether we can get to Mars is different from whether Mars exists. Action can be taken, but it says nothing about the current state of being. "White supremacism" is different from "white supremacy." People believe they are superior based on skin color but they aren't actually superior. These distinctions are relevant to whether belief itself makes God real. Regardless, this discussion feels like it's gone as far as it can and is no longer bearing fruit. Thanks for the conversation.

@resserts "see, his perception of "real" will trump ours here"

an exercise i currently enjoy--bc i am evil lol--is telling Fundies that they cannot state a single absolute truth from the Bible, and trust me, they cannot. Or rather don't trust me, and try lol, but i'm pretty sure i'm agreeing with you here already, right? There was a girl doing it this morning, i end up having to console them lol

100% sure is oracle, fwiw i'd stick with 99.9 lol

@bbyrd009 so we're back to "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" 99.9 vs 100?

@EricTrommater a point being that you cannot be both 100% sure of something, and also open to other interpretations lol

@bbyrd009 so you can't be 100% sure of something yourself and still respect that other people don't agree with you? That's very illiberal, fundementslist thinking. I'm fact that's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

@bbyrd009 but I respect your interpretation of the facts.

@EricTrommater "one of these things
is not like the other..."
lol
i mean c'mon bro, that's the dumbest thing you ever heard, but you respect my interpretation lol, what's itgonnabe