My atheist search for God: Were debating science and religion all wrong: This article by scientist and author NANCY ELLEN ABRAMS I found very interesting and thought provoking. It's...

magicray Loc: Tampa Bay, Florida

This article by scientist and author NANCY ELLEN ABRAMS I found very interesting and thought provoking. It's rather long so only interested parties need apply.

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/07/my_atheist_search_for_god_were_debating_science_and_religion_all_wrong/

taffthetooth Loc: U.K

Interesting but a bit New Agey. So what did you find interesting about it?

joehel2 Loc: Cherry Hill, NJ

Thank you for posting the link; her article motivated me to purchase her book.

Day.Old.Pizza Loc: Maple Grove, MN

magicray wrote:

This article by scientist and author NANCY ELLEN ABRAMS I found very interesting and thought provoking. It's rather long so only interested parties need apply.

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/07/my_atheist_search_for_god_were_debating_science_and_religion_all_wrong/

You're right, it's a long article! To me, she doesn't seem to reach a conclusion on the subject. Like she wants tangible proof of God, like her husband wants to actually "find" Dark Matter and Dark Energy, and not just theorize on its existence. With that drive he just might, because it is out there.

I believe God exists. I have faith He exists. There are many ideas proposed about who and what God is, but if He could be measured and quantified he wouldn't be God. I believe he gives us clues that amount to something like proof, but then you reach that one last step which has to be taken in faith. For a Scientist or someone who thinks like one, it is difficult to admit that something is not knowable in the sense they want to know things.

The author seems to be exhausting her reservations about the existence of God. Will she take that last step of faith? I don't know, but if she does, with her experience, she could have a better grasp of what it means to have faith than I do.

melismus Loc: Chesapeake Bay Country

Magicray, I am dismayed to see that this thread has been relegated to The Attic, where few will see it. This is not opinionated junk; you have uncovered a jewel, and I am grateful.

We define the Universe as Everything That Is, then search for God inside it, overlooking the obvious point that no Creator could possibly be inside Creation. God, Creator of Space and Time, is not bounded by Space and Time.

I am indebted to Morton Kelsey for his concept of the Spiritual Domain which encompasses the Universe. His booklet, The reality of the Spiritual World, was publsihed by Dove Publications, Pecos, NM 87552 in 1974. If you cannot get it, tell me and I will mail you a copy.

Blessings,

Paul

James Shaw

magicray wrote:

This article by scientist and author NANCY ELLEN ABRAMS I found very interesting and thought provoking. It's rather long so only interested parties need apply.

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/07/my_atheist_search_for_god_were_debating_science_and_religion_all_wrong/

To understand "God" one must first understand the evolutionary progression from "Gods" to "a-God" in man's early history.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Day.Old.Pizza wrote:

You're right, it's a long article! To me, she does... (show quote)

You summed it up perfectly. There is no proof. you simply must have faith. That is the point that Athiests profess. There is no proof. The question is, why would any one believe in anything for which there is no proof. Just because you can't proove that there are no green men on Mars, does not mean they are not there. That is what's called the Null Hypothosis, which states that " you can't disprove a negative". In other words I can't prove that God does not exist. But you can't prove that a god exists. Therefore if you can prove that a god exists(and you agree that you cannot), I will change my mind, but untill you can I will not.

James Shaw

Day.Old.Pizza wrote:

You're right, it's a long article! To me, she does... (show quote)

I like your last paragraph, but would have inserted "leap" instead of "step." It is a leap, across a gap, if it is faith.

melismus Loc: Chesapeake Bay Country

James Shaw wrote:

I like your last paragraph, but would have inserted "leap" instead of "step." It is a leap, across a gap, if it is faith.

:thumbup:

GeorgeH Loc: Jonesboro, GA

I agree that this interesting post would be far more suited to Chit Chat than to the Attic. It is refreshing that the discussion thus far has been polite and reasoned.

I haven't finished the entire post, but I intend to do so. I have been exploring religions and the question of a supreme being for many years, and for me, at least, there is insufficient evidence for either the existence or non-existence of a god or gods. Should there be such a being I cannot conceive of other than sort of a ground of being, ultimately unconcerned with our existence as individuals. The problem of theodicy seems never to have been solved any religion, at least to my satisfaction.

So I remain agnostic. I have no problem with others being theists or atheists, but we all should please respect the personal validity of others' beliefs, and live and let live. I've grown so weary of well-meaning believers approaching me with the "good news," seemingly unaware of the fact or possibility that I've spent many years considering matters of faith, or the "lack" thereof.

Peace to All.

taffthetooth Loc: U.K

boberic wrote:

You summed it up perfectly. There is no proof. yo... (show quote)

I think part of the problem here is " proof ". What do you consider proof?
And how much that will interfere with free will? God will not force himself on you, so giving you "proof" as you call it would force your hand.

James Shaw

GeorgeH wrote:

I agree that this interesting post would be far mo... (show quote)

Those you refer to as approaching (pestering) you with "The Good News," care not about your belief, or how many years you have spent thinking about the subject, as their only concern is that you might believe differently from them, and, if so, you are wrong.

Day.Old.Pizza Loc: Maple Grove, MN

boberic wrote:

You summed it up perfectly. There is no proof. yo... (show quote)

Boberic,
I did not say there was no proof. I accept the Bible as truth and Jesus being God as truth. Some of these truths may be tested and have been found to be true while others cannot be tested and require faith to believe. I'm not going further into a debate on the topic except to steer you to, "Mere Christianity", a very short book written by C.S. Lewis, a former atheist, who clearly lays out his logic for the truth of Christianity and the existence of God.

GeorgeH Loc: Jonesboro, GA

James Shaw wrote:

Those you refer to as approaching (pestering) you with "The Good News," care not about your belief, or how many years you have spent thinking about the subject, as their only concern is that you might believe differently from them, and, if so, you are wrong.

I'm afraid you're right.

James Shaw

Day.Old.Pizza wrote:

Boberic,
I did not say there was no proof. I accept the Bible as truth and Jesus being God as truth. Some of these truths may be tested and have been found to be true while others cannot be tested and require faith to believe. I'm not going further into a debate on the topic except to steer you to, "Mere Christianity", a very short book written by C.S. Lewis, a former atheist, who clearly lays out his logic for the truth of Christianity and the existence of God.

Several good books by C.S. Lewis on faith and believing. I highly recommend them. But, no proof, as such, is offered, as there is no proof when it comes to faith (belief), unless one considers belief, alone, as "proof."