Page 5 of 6 [ 90 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,340
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

04 Apr 2015, 8:21 am

Lintar wrote:
Clarification: Above I said:

'Theists are constantly charged with making this mistake, of just assuming that God is real when, it is said, they have no reason to, even though they may have very good reasons to believe what they do. I thought the default option regarding any claim was always scepticism, until any evidence, such as there may be, can settle the issue? Why the double-standard?'

I did this because much (though not all) evidence that I have thus far seen has been interpreted to point in this specific direction, the one that was mentioned (the North Pole analogy). It should not have to be pointed out that any conclusions regarding the true nature of the universe is, at this point in time, purely provisional and not at all set in stone, and that is why whenever anyone mentions the latest evidence for... whatever, I always reserve judgement. The evidence in question may substantiate a specific claim, but it's always prudent to keep one's mind open to the possibility they may be completely wrong in their interpretation of what it actually all means.
The truth of the matter is that so much of what we hear from cosmologists is based upon very little, if any, real evidence, and much speculation (ex. Where is the evidence for the Multiverse Hypothesis?).


What about the evidence for God? There's not even any evidence that God exists, so how can there be evidence that he exists outside space and time?



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,639

04 Apr 2015, 11:18 am

Jono wrote:
Lintar wrote:
Clarification: Above I said:

'Theists are constantly charged with making this mistake, of just assuming that God is real when, it is said, they have no reason to, even though they may have very good reasons to believe what they do. I thought the default option regarding any claim was always scepticism, until any evidence, such as there may be, can settle the issue? Why the double-standard?'

I did this because much (though not all) evidence that I have thus far seen has been interpreted to point in this specific direction, the one that was mentioned (the North Pole analogy). It should not have to be pointed out that any conclusions regarding the true nature of the universe is, at this point in time, purely provisional and not at all set in stone, and that is why whenever anyone mentions the latest evidence for... whatever, I always reserve judgement. The evidence in question may substantiate a specific claim, but it's always prudent to keep one's mind open to the possibility they may be completely wrong in their interpretation of what it actually all means.
The truth of the matter is that so much of what we hear from cosmologists is based upon very little, if any, real evidence, and much speculation (ex. Where is the evidence for the Multiverse Hypothesis?).


What about the evidence for God? There's not even any evidence that God exists, so how can there be evidence that he exists outside space and time?


The first problem with THAT is the assumption that GOD is an anthropomorphic HE.

God Is Nature AND that is plain as the nose on the face of human beings
whether that nose can 'smell' GOD or NOT.

To 'smell' GOD is evidence of GOD.

And for folks who cannot understand metaphors or GOD per how GOD works as force of verb rather than noun of thing, there is no understanding GOD and for all practical intents and purposes THE force OF GOD DOES not fully exist in the lives of those folks who

CANNOT 'SMELL' GOD.

I BREATHE IN THE FORCE OF GOD AS VERB WITH ALL MY SENSES
AND EMOTIONS AS A 'SMELLY' 'FEELY' HUMAN BEING.

THEREFORE I PROVE GOD
WITH
MY
EXISTENCE
AS
IS
verb of FORCE
rather than just
noun
of
material
reductionist
nihilist
thing.

Any questions..;)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,340
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

06 Apr 2015, 3:49 pm

^ Again, I find it useless to speculate about the nature of something when we don't even have evidence of it's existence.

Personally, I think there's a reason why religions tend to assume that their God or gods are anthropomorphic. That reason is that the idea of gods were thought up in the imagination of humans, therefore it's only natural that the people who thought them up would imagine them to be like themselves. I forget the name but I think that there was a greek philosopher who said "If we were horses, then our gods would look like horses."



lostonearth35
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2010
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,637
Location: Lost on Earth, waddya think?

06 Apr 2015, 3:51 pm

I've learned that if you keep asking yourself questions where there will never be a real answer to, you will drive yourself insane. So I stopped.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,639

06 Apr 2015, 4:09 pm

Jono wrote:
^ Again, I find it useless to speculate about the nature of something when we don't even have evidence of it's existence.

Personally, I think there's a reason why religions tend to assume that their God or gods are anthropomorphic. That reason is that the idea of gods were thought up in the imagination of humans, therefore it's only natural that the people who thought them up would imagine them to be like themselves. I forget the name but I think that there was a greek philosopher who said "If we were horses, then our gods would look like horses."


Humans are just one rather interesting manifestation of the GOD of Nature.

And IN TRUTH AND LIGHT IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT;

MY friend.

It's not @ALL odd that a human manifestation of the GOD of Nature will see GOD through the gift of GOD of Nature
that IS HUMAN NATURE.

THIS ISN'T 'rocket science', AND HONESTLY my cat has more sense about this than the majority of the population existing on this planet now WHO use illusory abstract concepts of language and culture, as manifesting extension in tool of human nature and the GOD of Nature too, to confuse reality, as is gifted by the GOD of Nature, as Human Nature set free as human nature, as GOD's gift of human as is...

Honestly, it just 'boils' down to IT is what IS IS AS ALL THAT IS IS NOW.

HUMANS 'F' THE REST OF IT UP, often, and 'insanely', through illusory concepts of language in the Cultural abstract illusions of past and present concepts of NOT living NOW, as is Human Nature, with the GOD of Nature that yes,

CAN be
set free, with common sense, more fully sought, found, employed, utilized, AND practiced in a continual 'perfection' of practice through greater "I'sSA's", Innate Instinctual Intuitive Imagination skills and abilities AND creativity IN fuller physical intelligence driving emotional regulation (like emotions of faith, hope, belief, and human relative free will), sensory integration, and greater cognitive executive functioning in enhanced focus and short term working memory.


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


[email protected]
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Mar 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 709

06 Apr 2015, 4:12 pm

Jono wrote:
The argument goes that something as complex as yourself and the universe must of had a creator. However, given that God is more intelligent and more complex, shouldn't that same logic mean that something created God?


The entire question is predicated on ignorance. Time is an absolute only to someone viewing reality from inside the three (actually four) dimensional world of sensory experience. We know that this universe contains at least ten dimensions, meaning there are a great many aspects of our own world of which we are blind and unaware, and there's no reason to believe its the only universe there is. When you consider that consciousness may exist outside the confines of time, then the origin of any Prime Mover becomes moot.

If there is no time, there can be no beginning.

Also, the notion of the Origin of all things being "more complex" is an unnecessary assumption. Pure consciousness would be LESS complex than the coarse, clumsy physical universe descended from it. The complexity you perceive may be the result of individual simple impulses or concepts, layered one upon the other until they become more and more complex.


_________________
"I don't mean to sound bitter, cynical or cruel - but I am, so that's how it comes out." - Bill Hicks


AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

07 Apr 2015, 1:11 am

Man created god he is just a concept!


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


halleluhwah
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2015
Age: 26
Posts: 85

10 Apr 2015, 4:18 pm

I think the best answer is probably that God is causa sui, that whose essence necessitates existence.

God is infinite, which is to say that God does not depend on, or is not limited by, anything outside of God. Ultimately, if you take this view, then there is nothing outside of God.



slave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Age: 107
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,406
Location: Dystopia Planetia

11 Apr 2015, 3:38 pm

AspieOtaku wrote:
Man created god he is just a concept!


One of his best vid's :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

and yet people don't see it...


_________________
Since the birth of civilization, small sets of dominant individuals have controlled the numerical majority. Even a cursory reading of world history will substantiate this claim. Kings, Pharaohs, Emperors, Sultans, Czars, and Dictators have imposed their will upon their subjects. This pattern has not changed over the millennia and it remains so, today. Our Masters rule over every nation and no one can defy them. They will attain Absolute Power as we reach the Singularity. All those who oppose their will, will be destroyed. Given the obvious futility, I will not resist. 2+2=5.


slave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Age: 107
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,406
Location: Dystopia Planetia

11 Apr 2015, 3:39 pm

halleluhwah wrote:
God is infinite, which is to say that God does not depend on, or is not limited by, anything outside of God.


and you know this to be the case how exactly??? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


_________________
Since the birth of civilization, small sets of dominant individuals have controlled the numerical majority. Even a cursory reading of world history will substantiate this claim. Kings, Pharaohs, Emperors, Sultans, Czars, and Dictators have imposed their will upon their subjects. This pattern has not changed over the millennia and it remains so, today. Our Masters rule over every nation and no one can defy them. They will attain Absolute Power as we reach the Singularity. All those who oppose their will, will be destroyed. Given the obvious futility, I will not resist. 2+2=5.


[email protected]
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Mar 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 709

11 Apr 2015, 4:04 pm

slave wrote:
halleluhwah wrote:
God is infinite, which is to say that God does not depend on, or is not limited by, anything outside of God.


and you know this to be the case how exactly??? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


How do you know you aren't dreaming your entire existence right now from a pod inside The Matrix? Prove it.

Has no one read and understood Relativistic Physics? Quantum? String Theory? Time is a perceptual dimension, not an absolute. If time is not absolute, then there can be existence and consciousness without time (though our physical senses don't have the capacity to perceive it or know what its nature might be). If consciousness can exist without time, then the very notion of a "beginning" becomes moot. Concepts like "Beginning" and "Creation" are only relevant in a universe bound by Time.


_________________
"I don't mean to sound bitter, cynical or cruel - but I am, so that's how it comes out." - Bill Hicks


halleluhwah
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2015
Age: 26
Posts: 85

12 Apr 2015, 6:43 pm

slave wrote:
halleluhwah wrote:
God is infinite, which is to say that God does not depend on, or is not limited by, anything outside of God.


and you know this to be the case how exactly??? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


First of all, unless I'm misinterpreting something, I think it's pretty rude to use that smiley in the way you are.

Secondly, "God" is just a name, and frankly, if you really wanted to, you could call hot dogs "God." However, I was using God to refer to the infinite, that than which nothing greater can be conceived. I think there's a pretty solid historical-linguistic basis for using the word in that way. So if we understand God to be infinite, then it follows from the nature of infinity that it can't be limited by anything outside of itself. That which is limited by its other is finite, rather than infinite. This is hardly controversial, I think.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,639

12 Apr 2015, 9:28 pm

halleluhwah wrote:
slave wrote:
halleluhwah wrote:
God is infinite, which is to say that God does not depend on, or is not limited by, anything outside of God.


and you know this to be the case how exactly??? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


First of all, unless I'm misinterpreting something, I think it's pretty rude to use that smiley in the way you are.

Secondly, "God" is just a name, and frankly, if you really wanted to, you could call hot dogs "God." However, I was using God to refer to the infinite, that than which nothing greater can be conceived. I think there's a pretty solid historical-linguistic basis for using the word in that way. So if we understand God to be infinite, then it follows from the nature of infinity that it can't be limited by anything outside of itself. That which is limited by its other is finite, rather than infinite. This is hardly controversial, I think.


^^^

Great points of

common sense and logic..:)

And that's a real smile..:)

Some folks are here to fight,
and some folks are here to do IT
peacefully, AND RESPECTFULLY
FOR whatever,
IT
IS..;)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


slave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Age: 107
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,406
Location: Dystopia Planetia

14 Apr 2015, 11:22 am

halleluhwah wrote:
slave wrote:
halleluhwah wrote:
God is infinite, which is to say that God does not depend on, or is not limited by, anything outside of God.


and you know this to be the case how exactly??? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Secondly, "God" is just a name, and frankly, if you really wanted to, you could call hot dogs "God." However, I was using God to refer to the infinite, that than which nothing greater can be conceived. I think there's a pretty solid historical-linguistic basis for using the word in that way. So if we understand God to be infinite, then it follows from the nature of infinity that it can't be limited by anything outside of itself. That which is limited by its other is finite, rather than infinite. This is hardly controversial, I think.


"First of all, unless I'm misinterpreting something, I think it's pretty rude to use that smiley in the way you are."

It isn't a smiley, as they are static.
It is a lol emoticon( :lol: ).
I lol because you profess to know the nature of an imaginary being, a profession which I find to be humorous.
I am lol at your opinion, not you as a person.
You are probably a wonderful person and even if you are, I still find your opinion to be humorous.
:) (this is a smiley)


Are you referring to the infinite and 'God' as mere abstract equivalencies?
or do you believe in a deity/entity?

"I think there's a pretty solid historical-linguistic basis for using the word in that way."

No. Most people are referring to a deity when they use the word "God" and if that isn't what you mean you should clarify this to prevent people from misunderstanding your terms. Go ask people on the street whether the term "God" refers to an abstraction or a deity and the majority will say deity because they have a simplistic understanding of these issues.


_________________
Since the birth of civilization, small sets of dominant individuals have controlled the numerical majority. Even a cursory reading of world history will substantiate this claim. Kings, Pharaohs, Emperors, Sultans, Czars, and Dictators have imposed their will upon their subjects. This pattern has not changed over the millennia and it remains so, today. Our Masters rule over every nation and no one can defy them. They will attain Absolute Power as we reach the Singularity. All those who oppose their will, will be destroyed. Given the obvious futility, I will not resist. 2+2=5.


RhodyStruggle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Nov 2014
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 508

14 Apr 2015, 3:10 pm

The_Walrus wrote:
uwmonkdm wrote:
You don't know that.
You can't even say with certainty that time exists now, or when it started.
Let us not forget that time is only a created concept of the human mind... I suppose that means you're right though :lol:

Of course time exists. D/S=T.


That's a fallacious argument though, affirming the consequent. Velocity is defined in terms of time, so by citing the existence of velocity in support of the existence of time, you're assuming that time exists in order to show that it exists.

And actually, mathematically, the equation you provided simplifies to a simple identity.
Quote:
For:
velocity = displacement / time

Then:
displacement / velocity = time
displacement / (displacement / time) = time
(displacement / displacement)(time) = time
(1)(time) = time
time = time


_________________
From start to finish I've made you feel this
Uncomfort in turn with the world you've learned
To love through this hate to live with its weight
A burden discerned in the blood you taste