Sign Up | Log In
GENERAL DISCUSSIONS
What are your thoughts on god?
Friday, July 7, 2006 9:51 AM
HOTPOINT
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Having just looked at that thread again what I've come across are only three ways cited to, "prove," that god exists, and none are possible even in the hypothetical.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: The first was: Well one possible way to prove the existance of a God would be if science discovered that life required a creator. Or another might be if there was something intrinsic to the universe that required with certainty "divine intervention" or it could not take place. The problems with this are several. First off being the creator of life does not make one a god, that has been done by scientists but Hotpoint does not believe them to be gods, otherwise Hotpoint would believe in gods.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Also "divine intervention" is an undefined term, without definition it can not be considered but we do know something about it: if it could be proven then it is, by definition, part of nature. Whether or not we can work with that I don't know. Perhaps there is some well defined version of "divine intervention" for which it is possible to hypothetically prove god. If there is such a thing I'll change my whole stance on this.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: The second one was so much nicer: Like I said. If there was a mechanism in the universe that required a creator that would be proof of "God". It is simple, requires no undefined terms, and is just as much a way to prove something as saying: "If there was a mechanism in the universe that prohibited a creator that would be proof of the nonexistance of 'God'." It sounds nice when you hear it, but it is no more a way of proving god than what I said is a way of disproving god.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: This one also mentioned evidence that falls short of proof: Otherwise having the almighty appear one day and demonstrate "miracles" under laboratory conditions would be pretty strong evidence in my book. Evidence for you perhaps, but hardly useful as proof. I'd like to know which miracles that would convince for though.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Everything, even god, could be created by random chance, that's what makes it RANDOM. Because anything can come out of it. If there were something that couldn't come out of it then it would not be random now would it? It would follow a pattern.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: The statment isn't a possible proof because it isn't possible. Even in the hypothetical it breaks down because saying, "What if there were something that couldn't evolve randomly?" is like saying, "What if the statement, 'This statment is false,' were true?" It's a fun little paradox, but useless for proof. I suppose you could claim that the possiblity of showing that the statement, 'This statement is false,' is proof that logic is falsifiable, the same way, "something that could't happen randomly," is being used here. But even if it were proven what would that do? Force us to reevalute probability and evolution, nothing to do with god. Even if evolution is false it doesn't mean god is true. All that it means is that the Catholic Church was wrong when it embraced evolution as, "More than just theory."
Friday, July 7, 2006 9:57 AM
EXODUS
Friday, July 7, 2006 9:59 AM
Friday, July 7, 2006 11:35 AM
CHRISTHECYNIC
Quote:Originally posted by Hotpoint: You just haven't thought them through properly (and there were only three because you never came back to either refute those or ask for more).
Quote: Totally fallacious argument that completely misses the point. The issue is whether life in its original form can come into existance without a creator, whether life (an Intelligent Designer such as ourselves) can recreate life has nothing to do with our own existance one way or another.
Quote:"Divine Intervention" in that something happens that violates the basic laws of physics. A Deus ex Machina as it were
Quote:An example could be if it were demonstrated that matter could definitely not spontaneously appear by nothing more than random chance. This would mean the Universe would have to be created, it could not simply happen.
Quote:Well for a start how about water into wine under full lab conditions
Quote:I'm sure you could think of something yourself if you really had an open mind.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Random chance operates within probability, there are things that are so improbable that the universe simply isn't old enough for them to have happened by random chance anywhere but in any case please read up on Irreducable Complexity because you clearly need to understand it better.
Quote:If something can be found that could have neither evolved, nor realistically happened by random chance (the infinitely improbable), then that would be a good indication of the existance of a "God" in some form.
Quote:It's certainly better than the utter lack of possible proof for the non-existance of God.
Friday, July 7, 2006 12:16 PM
SLICKT0MMY
Friday, July 7, 2006 12:38 PM
Quote:Originally posted by slickt0mmy: I believe in God. Not religion.
Quote:But, to each his own. I have no interest in arguing with anyone over God. I'm just telling you my belief.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: My point is that if it was proved that life had to have a creator that would not mean that the creator was a god of any sort.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Unless you define god as, "Creator," in which case we could make a god if we want to, it wouldn't include most of the members of most of the pantheons of the world, and it says nothing as to the power or current existance of that god (could be long dead, might have only existed for thirty seconds.)
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Most versions of god include some form of power besides sneezing life into existance.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Well that's happened often enough in the past. That's why the laws of physics CHANGE. Whenever something violates them that something is incorperated into them. In essence it is, by definition, impossible to observe such a thing because once it is observed it is no longer a violation.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: You're talking about proving the non-existance of something, an event rather than an entity, but none the less I thought your whole point was that that can't be done. One might be able to prove that it can't happen now, but not that it couldn't have happened before. Again, it's impossible, even in the hypothetical.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Well that would only require us to reevaluate our understanding of matter. You know that. Nothing divine or godly about matter. Its ability to be changed from one substance to another at a molecular level without apparent cause other than someone telling it to does not have anything I know of to do with god.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: If Jesus himself showed up and did it in the lab all it would do was make the scientists of the world rethink the way the human mind interacts with the physical universe. The only people it would convert to the side of god would be agnostics waiting for a single sign, or people who believe that the magic tricks they see on TV are really defing the laws of physics. Wouldn't have any bearing on god in terms of proof or disproof, for public relations it might be nice, but in terms of proof it's worthless.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: If I were THAT open minded I'd worship the first con man to come by. And surely you're not advocating believing someone is god just because they've shown the current understanding of the laws of physics to be wrong.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: First off, whenever we find something that we think couldn't have come about in the time that the universe has existed (and we have) we just say the universe must be older than whe thought. How would finding another such thing be treated differently than the other times we've found such things?
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Also, I understand probability. For your information any state that is possible is possible at any time if the system is truely random. The age of the universe doesn't matter. Something that is possible the 5 billionth time you flip a coin is also possible the first.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Ok please define, "realistically." And remember that evolution makes not claims as to speed
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: A less unlikely, yet still out there, totally possible and in keeping with the laws of physics thing is to point out that something could evolve by having each gene in it mutate in a single generation producing a new well-adapted species on the spot.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Physics says it is possible, random chance is what makes it possible, and evolution says that if it happened it would survive. So taking into account that a complete change is possible every generation, and a generation can be a day or less, how can something be too complex for evolution?
Friday, July 7, 2006 1:27 PM
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Quote:It's certainly better than the utter lack of possible proof for the non-existance of God. How so? You are arguing that the way to prove there is a god is to prove that the universe, as we know it, can not exist without one. You're arguing that god can be proved by proving the nonexistance of a godless universe.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: It's still an issue of nonexistance and the examples you give of how to do it don't stack up, because even if I am wrong about irreducable complexity, and even if you could prove that life required a creator and that something that somehow couldn't evolve came into being anyway it doesn't even imply a consciousness at work, just another force mixed in with all of the other non-god related forces of nature.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: If consciousness is not a facet of god I concede that god can be proven, and I shall do it:
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Many religions say, "God is everything," and if you look around you can see that everything that does exist really does exist. It's nice how that works. Thus god exists.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: What's more since god comprises all things god must have all of the power in existance, and furthermore god must know all that is known because every brain is a part of god.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Of course I can't prove that there is some overarching consciousness connecting those things, but there need not be one, consciousness is not assumed to be a facet of god.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: The argument is valid, if I didn't type it incorrectly, but also completely pointless. There are a lot of different versions of god and it does make the question of falsiablility harder, but I think if you want to say that god can be proven you need to come up with a hypothetically possible situation in which the consciousness of whatever god you're trying to prove is included.
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Otherwise you've already got it, near as we can tell life did need a creator, it needed a certain type of atmosphere and that atmosphere wouldn't come about on it's own. Current theory says were were broadsided by another planet, that created the right conditions and thus life on this earth. But if it was just a mindless natural process then it hardly qualifies as a god of any kind.
Friday, July 7, 2006 1:37 PM
ALLHAILJOSSWHEDON
Friday, July 7, 2006 2:48 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Hotpoint: It would unless you were being picky on how you defined "God"
Quote:Originally posted by christhecynic: Whether or not the Creator God still exists or not is irrelevant. If there had to be a Creator it would demonstrate there had to be a "God" of some description even if they weren't necessarily the omnipotent, eternal Deity people tend to imagine.
Quote:The laws of physics never change, what we think those laws are sometimes changes
Quote:If at the time we have a concrete theory of everything (Unified Relativity and Quantum Physics will be a big leap here) and we then find something that just defies everything we know that would be a decent clue to the "hand of God" at work.
Quote:You're not grasping it I'm afraid. It's not trying to prove non-existance at all it's showing that something requires a "supernatural" causation.
Quote:If when we get there we find it had to be started by something, and could not just happen on its own, that would indicate creation and/or design. Again a hypothetical but certainly a possibility.
Quote:What is your definition of God then? Omnipotence would be pretty high on most peoples lists surely. If you don't like the classics like water into wine how about "can you turn Jupiter into a star for a few minutes then turn it back"?
Quote:Hardly worthless, in this case just not as overwhelming perhaps as some might like. If you turn your mind to it there are certainly other things a "God" could do to demonstrate their power. If you believe the Holy Books of a multitde of different religions their God made a good show of proving his existance beyond reasonable doubt.
Quote:I'mmore open minded on the issue than you and I'm the sceptic non-believer here remember
Quote:I've been giving examples of possible evidence for the existance of a God or Gods. Whether you think they're perfect or not (and irreducable complexity is pretty good o that standpoint) the fact remains that there are possible evidences for God's existance but no such possible evidences for non-existance. Even if you think the evidence in one form is weak. That would still be infinitely more evidence than is possible for the other side.
Quote:Okay. How about the chances of all the air molecules in a football stadium suddenly rushing out of the doors leaving a vacuum. It's certainly possible but work out the odds and "highly improbable" would be the understatement of the epoch
Quote:Yes but scale that a trillion fold and consider the chances. It's not an issue of certainty it's one of taking the safe bet.
Quote:If the stadium scenario happened I'd have to play the odds and think there was a higher power at work there.
Quote:Realistically as in remotely probable. Your direct Fish/Human scenario must be quadrillions to one against.
Quote:It's a question of how likely it is. Think about the odds against it happening.
Friday, July 7, 2006 4:53 PM
GUYWHOWANTSAFIREFLYOFHISOWN
Friday, July 7, 2006 5:45 PM
SHADOWFLY
Friday, July 7, 2006 6:25 PM
Saturday, July 8, 2006 6:38 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Guywhowantsafireflyofhisown: too...many...posts, my eyes are still hurting from the unending wall of white
Sunday, November 29, 2015 9:34 PM
JAYNEZTOWN
Quote:Originally posted by CaptBryan: Ridin the Ocean's boring when there aint no waves
Monday, November 30, 2015 11:41 AM
SECOND
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
Quote:Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN: A supreme God may exist but as of now its the Atheists, Agnostics and Free Thinkers who make more rational sense
Monday, November 30, 2015 2:59 PM
WISHIMAY
Monday, November 30, 2015 6:01 PM
ECGORDON
There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.
Tuesday, December 1, 2015 1:42 PM
Quote:Originally posted by G: Quote:Originally posted by second: I am unimpressed with your Bill Maher quote, "I see the computer hackers Anonymous are going after Isis - if successful, it'd mean martyrs DO get screwed by virgins!" Come on, that's a good line. Bill Maher is almost never that funny or clever.
Quote:Originally posted by second: I am unimpressed with your Bill Maher quote, "I see the computer hackers Anonymous are going after Isis - if successful, it'd mean martyrs DO get screwed by virgins!"
Wednesday, December 2, 2015 10:26 AM
Quote:Originally posted by G: Those are 5 good minutes - my ears are starting to ring a bit and I'm catching the faint but unmistakeable smell of a burning fissure...
Wednesday, December 2, 2015 12:00 PM
Wednesday, December 2, 2015 3:05 PM
Thursday, December 3, 2015 5:43 AM
RAHLMACLAREN
"Damn yokels, can't even tell a transport ship ain't got no guns on it." - Jayne Cobb
Thursday, December 3, 2015 8:27 AM
Quote:Originally posted by RahlMaclaren: All current gods and religions should be reclassified as mythologies. See how easy that was?
Thursday, December 3, 2015 9:00 AM
Quote:Originally posted by second: Quote:Originally posted by RahlMaclaren: All current gods and religions should be reclassified as mythologies. See how easy that was? Is worship of Capitalism's Invisible Hand included in that class of mythologies? Or is the Hand real, not a metaphor?
Quote:In economics, the invisible hand is a metaphor used by Adam Smith to describe unintended social benefits resulting from individual actions. The phrase is employed by Smith with respect to income distribution (1759) and production (1776).
Thursday, December 3, 2015 9:22 AM
Quote:Originally posted by RahlMaclaren: It is a metaphor, Mr. False Dichotomy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_hand
Wednesday, December 30, 2015 2:24 AM
Quote:Originally posted by tanstaafl28: Science is an open system of inquiry
Tuesday, January 12, 2016 5:53 AM
SHINYGOODGUY
Quote:Originally posted by ecgordon: I lied. I'll say something else. If there is a god, and he wanted to tell us what he wanted from us, don't you think it would make more sense for him to impart that knowledge to all societies at the same time and in a similar manner? Why should I accept what some obscure tribe wandering the deserts of the Middle East had to say about it? First he's a vengeful, wrathful god that demands sacrifice, then he's full of love and grace as long as we say Jesus was his son. Make up your mind. Man was not created in god's image, the concept of god was created in the mind of men. That's why there are so many crazy variants.
Tuesday, January 12, 2016 9:28 AM
Tuesday, January 12, 2016 6:18 PM
Quote:Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN: Where do you rank Atheists? Some of them seem kinda angry
Tuesday, January 12, 2016 6:32 PM
Quote:Originally posted by ecgordon: I don't think it matters either way, but if one was to lead their life using his teachings they would be a very good person.
Tuesday, May 28, 2024 8:39 AM
Tuesday, May 28, 2024 9:06 PM
6IXSTRINGJACK
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL