Workch:
I don't know, but generally deist agree that this god does not interfere in the proceedings on the universe. I think it's characterisric is unknown. They also argue from ignorance just like atheists: they argue that universe cannot start itself, the opposite of what atheists propose.

we don't know what created the universe, we don't even know if the universe was created it not. Atheists and theists should just agree that we don't know.

Because deism is not an organized sect, where people come together to do rituals and worship a deity. In religion, people worship deities, deists don't. They are usually apathetic to the God, they don't think that it should be worshipped since it doesn't manipulate the universe to Favour anyone.

My bad, I thought you are a deist. You would have just ignored the questions.

Workch:
Because deism is not an organized sect, where people come together to do rituals and worship a deity. In religion, people worship deities, deists don't. They are usually apathetic to the God, they don't think that it should be worshipped since it doesn't manipulate the universe to Favour anyone.

Theism is also not an organized sect.
We have different types of theism, same way we have different types of deism,what kind of illiteracy is this?

I’m glad that this is the little you know and drawing your conclusions from it.

Workch:
I don't know, but generally deist agree that this god does not interfere in the proceedings on the universe. I think it's characterisric is unknown. They also argue from ignorance just like atheists: they argue that universe cannot start itself, the opposite of what atheists propose.

If his characteristics is unknown, how then did you know any god can create anything?
What if this god is affected by gravity?
Can you define ignorance?


Atheists reject all gods, how the universe came to be is not the business of atheism.
An atheist can believe in aliens, that doesn’t stop him from being an atheist.

There are many religions that don’t worship gods.

Workch:
13billion of big bang doesn't tell how everything started, it only explains how our current perception of reality with respect to spacetime started expanding from singularity.
The appearance of singularity which was an infinite dense matter that contained everything that is in the universe today cannot be explained by science. Science does not know, atheists don't know, nobody knows.

Deists, atheists and theists are just rationalizing their own personal opinions, they don't know anything.

That is not the issue. Anybody is free to speculate however when it comes to the likelihood of finding evidence that is when that gap begins to be significant. If aliens or wormholes exist, they exist within parameter we can find.

HisSplendor:


You need to read me again. I never said everything around you is a figment of your imagination. Your phone reference is irrelevant. I said everything around you started as a figment of someone's imagination.

Every dig has its rules. There's a mental side to all digs. There's the faith and hope side.
You Never know what lies under. Digging leads to a destination to prove or disprove. Until you dig, you cannot prove anything. You cannot conclude anything.

Sure they started there but didn't remain there because there was a way to make them real. We are yet to see any real god. All gods remain mental constructs even after thousands of years of digging deep.

Workch:
I don't know, but generally deist agree that this god does not interfere in the proceedings on the universe. I think it's characterisric is unknown. They also argue from ignorance just like atheists: they argue that universe cannot start itself, the opposite of what atheists propose.

Atheists are not proposing anything about the start of the universe, get that straight.

Childfree:


My bad, I thought you are a deist. You would have just ignored the questions.

I don't have to be a deist to answer your questions. I use to be an atheist, but the moment I realize that deism is hard to disprove and that we may never be able to disprove deism, I realized that Atheism is wrong and agnosticism is the best answer.

LordReed:


Atheists are not proposing anything about the start of the universe, get that straight.

no one is even proposing anything, not even the scientists but atheists assume that the universe and everything started on its own since they don't believe in a creator.
That's wrong because no one knows for sure

Workch:
I don't have to be a deist to answer your questions. I use to be an atheist, but the moment I realize that deism is hard to disprove and that we may never be able to disprove deism, I realized that Atheism is wrong and agnosticism is the best answer.

You don’t know what an atheist is and you are a hypocrite theist sympathizer.

You are without knowledge indeed.

Workch:
no one is even proposing anything, not even the scientists but atheists assume that the universe and everything started on its own since they don't believe in a creator.
That's wrong because no one knows for sure

Is the creator and everything also not starting on its own?
At the end of the same is something not starting on his own?

Look up the origin of the word “nature”, ziren in Chinese.

LordReed:


That is not the issue. Anybody is free to speculate however when it comes to the likelihood of finding evidence that is when that gap begins to be significant. If aliens or wormholes exist, they exist within parameter we can find.

Does it mean that because you are incapable of finding something, so that thing does not exist?

The subject matter is not about whether we can find it, the issue here is irrespective of whether we can find it or not, does it mean that it does or does not exist. If something is becoming difficult for you to grasp, just say that "you don't know" and let it end there.

The existence of a creator is a big conundrum even for science, science thinks that it's impossible to know. Because when you find a creator, you have to find infinite amount of creators or find how that creator created itself. Just say that you don't know.

Workch:

The subject matter is not about whether we can find it, the issue here is irrespective of whether we can find it or not, does it mean that it does or does not exist. If something is becoming difficult for you to grasp, just say that "you don't know" and let it end there.

Since you don’t know how the universe came to be, why are you an agnostic or deist?
If you are, You already think the universe can come from a god.
If “you don’t know”, then you will reject all assumptions be it gods or santas or flying reindeer.

Workch:

The existence of a creator is a big conundrum even for science, science thinks that it's impossible to know. Because when you find a creator, you have to find infinite amount of creators or find how that creator created itself. Just say that you don't know.

A house is built by a bricklayer, the bricks and equipment used were not created by this same bricklayer.

The creator of the universe, what did he use to create the universe?
Who created the materials that was used, and if it is the creator that created the material, from where did he create it from, thin air?
Who created the air?

Workch:
Does it mean that because you are incapable of finding something, so that thing does not exist?

The subject matter is not about whether we can find it, the issue here is irrespective of whether we can find it or not, does it mean that it does or does not exist. If something is becoming difficult for you to grasp, just say that "you don't know" and let it end there.

The existence of a creator is a big conundrum even for science, science thinks that it's impossible to know. Because when you find a creator, you have to find infinite amount of creators or find how that creator created itself. Just say that you don't know.

No but what it means is it's groundless, in my view, to construct an identity around what is essentially baseless speculation. Yes say you don't know and end it instead of inserting an imaginary character and imbue it with attributes.

LordReed:


No but what it means is it's groundless, in my view, to construct an identity around what is essentially baseless speculation. Yes say you don't know and end it instead of inserting an imaginary character and imbue it with attributes.

I agree with you that it's groundless, but it doesn't mean that you will assert that it doesn't exist.

There's an aspect of agnosticism called apathetic Agnosticism: they are of the opinion that the existence of God is unknown or unknowable or both and that even if God exist, it's immaterial and God may not even be interested in creating anything. To them, it's immaterial, I think I agree with them.
There's also apathetic deism, they think God exist but as he exist, it's immaterial because he cannot directly influence anything.

If you say you don't know and the it's ends there, you are an agnostic.
If you say you don't know and then says it does not exist, then you re are atheist. You are wrong, you cannot say it doesn't exist when you actually do not know.

Workch:
no one is even proposing anything, not even the scientists but atheists assume that the universe and everything started on its own since they don't believe in a creator.
That's wrong because no one knows for sure

Again that is not correct since atheism DOES NOT address the issue. What any atheist assumes about the origins of the universe is a personally held assumption and not a feature of atheism so you cannot say "atheists assume that the universe and everything started on its own since they don't believe in a creator".

Workch:
There's an aspect of agnosticism called apathetic Agnosticism: they are of the opinion that the existence of God is unknown or unknowable or both and that even if God exist, it's immaterial and God may not even be interested in creating anything. To them, it's immaterial, I think I agree with them.
There's also apathetic deism, they think God exist but as he exist, it's immaterial because he cannot directly influence anything.

If

God is unknowable but you know there is a god and this god is a creator and immaterial, yet this god is unknowable 😂😂

LordReed:


Again that is not correct since atheism DOES NOT address the issue. What any atheist assumes about the origins of the universe is a personally held assumption and not a feature of atheism so you cannot say "atheists assume that the universe and everything started on its own since they don't believe in a creator".

Okay, answer the question.
As an atheist, do you agree that a creator exist or not?

Workch:
I agree with you that it's groundless, but it doesn't mean that you will assert that it doesn't exist.

There's an aspect of agnosticism called apathetic Agnosticism: they are of the opinion that the existence of God is unknown or unknowable or both and that even if God exist, it's immaterial and God may not even be interested in creating anything. To them, it's immaterial, I think I agree with them.
There's also apathetic deism, they think God exist but as he exist, it's immaterial because he cannot directly influence anything.

If you say you don't know and the it's ends there, you are an agnostic.
If you say you don't know and then says it does not exist, then you re are atheist. You are wrong, you cannot say it doesn't exist when you actually do not know.

Where have I said a god does not exist? I do not believe in any god I didn't say a god does not exist. I am an agnostic atheist so it is you who is wrong in making assumptions about what I think.

Workch:
Okay, answer the question.
As an atheist, do you agree that a creator exist or not?

I don't know if a creator exists or not. I have no evidence to sway me towards believing in such a thing.

Workch:
Okay, answer the question.
As an atheist, do you agree that a creator exist or not?

Why do you think the universe was created?

LordReed:


Where have I said a god does not exist? I do not believe in any god I didn't say a god does not exist. I am an agnostic atheist so it is you who is wrong in making assumptions about what I think.

one what ground do you disbelieve the existence of at least one God?

Do you believe that aliens exist or not?

Saying God exists or not is an extreme position based on ignorance and hasty conclusion, especially since neither side has solid evidence to back their position. If all things in existence have a source, scientists will eventually discover it.

Hence, agnosticism is the most reasonable position about the existence of God for now.

Having said that, anyone that does a deep study of Otem's writings will simply realize atheism doesn't make sense. That guy has the best and most reasonable answer about the nature of God.

Apart from the fact that his approach to the God problem looks abstract to me, I don't really have any issues with his position which simply states God is consciousness and energy — all that really exists.

This is a statement with a lot of depth that when researched could even make scientists create a new field of Physics.

Science is still the best tool to solve all problems, including the God problem, not religion.

Workch:
one what ground do you disbelieve the existence of at least one God?

Do you believe that aliens exist or not?

Why are you so obsessed with “believe”.

LordReed:


I don't know if a creator exists or not. I have no evidence to sway me towards believing in such a thing.

We are not too far from each other.
For me, i don't know if a creator exist or not and I don't believe or disbelieve it either. This is because when it comes to the issue of belief or disbelief, it doesn't work with evidence.

People don't believe evidence, people accept it. Evidence is not a matter of belief or disbelief, this is why I think atheism is not scientific.

A001:
Saying God exists or not is an extreme position based on ignorance and hasty conclusion, especially since neither side has solid evidence to back their position. If all things in existence have a source, scientists will eventually discover it.

We should first start by defining what “god” means, what characteristics does it have, most agnostics are theists sympathizers.

MayntheeMayn:

We should first start by defining what “god” means, what characteristics does it have, most agnostics are theists sympathizers.

If you don't have a definition of what god is, then why are you on this thread? I don't have time to waste on frivolous discussion. So, I'll simply bin your mentions.

LordReed:


I don't know if a creator exists or not. I have no evidence to sway me towards believing in such a thing.

tyou don't have to believe gravity, it is accepted as fact because it's demonstrable.

What you would have said is that "you do not accept the existence of a god because of lack of evidence".

A001:

If you don't have a definition of what god is, then why are you on this thread? I don't have time to waste on frivolous discussion. So, I'll simply bin your mentions.

god means idol. Different worshippers of gods attributes different characteristics to their god.
A yahweh idol does not act the same way as zeus, yet they are all “god”.

I think most people are ignorant of what “god” means.
They use a monotheistic definition of god.

Workch:
tyou don't have to believe gravity, it is accepted as fact because it's demonstrable.

What you would have said is that "you do not accept the existence of a god because of lack of evidence".

We started experiencing gravity after it was accepted as “fact”?

Workch:
one what ground do you disbelieve the existence of at least one God?

Do you believe that aliens exist or not?

I don't disbelieve that a god might exist.

I don't know if aliens exist.

LordReed:


Sure they started there but didn't remain there because there was a way to make them real. We are yet to see any real god. All gods remain mental constructs even after thousands of years of digging deep.

Absolutely incorrect.

You've not been digging for thousands of years, have you? We're talking of individual digging. Stop relying on others for your finds. Talk for yourself.