Definition of God - one thread to rule them all

Discussion in 'Religion' started by James R, Apr 11, 2020.

  1. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Yes..I thought is was Friday past at first...but your reply confused me as you seemed to be talking about a future event and I thought how can he get his birthday wrong? I must reset the calender now that week saving is over...
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Appeal to my own authority? That's called having an opinion, and it's not a fallacy. Theism doesn't make any claims regarding "analyzing the way things work". And I haven't even presented theism as an authority of anything.

    No, religion also tackles many metaphysical questions, like ontology.

    No, again, you're ignorant to think science can tell us anything about metaphysics. We can certainly leverage science to speculate about metaphysical questions, but they are metaphysical because the scientific method cannot answer them. If science could, it wouldn't be metaphysics; it'd just be science. And religion has a few thousand year head start on proposing answers to metaphysical questions.

    What you fail to understand is that, if there was a creator, it's plan was for nature to obey said laws. Such order is what allows free will to be meaningful, instead of useless choices in a wholly capricious world.

    I didn't say anything different from most.

    It would behoove you not to joke, as your usual ignorance doesn't merit much benefit of the doubt when you're intentionally obtuse.

    Most Christians do accept most of my definition of God. Unlike you, I don't have a mission to convert the masses to my own beliefs.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    Ad Hominems....accusations...allegations...The Real Scientific Method at work!

    Meh...Alex, everything just has to be about the toad boy...he can't have it any other way...
    Vociferous likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Ah, the toads croaking in the summer evening.
  8. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    It is winter here.
    You made no comment re intelligent design you or don't you?
  9. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    I am sure there is enough room for all of us. You have a good day and just don't let folk annoy you I don't want to see you upset by anyone and from things I have noticed that you have said you don't need upset in your life now.
  10. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Your questions will likely go unanswered. Trolls tend not to post their own opinions on things, lest others do to them what they do to others.
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Actually, facts facts and more facts.
    Let me add my friend, that [in my how many years here has it been have that information?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ] I have made some enemies and also friends, and even had my run in with mods, in my support of science and the scientific method. But the one thing in common that most of my enemies and friends have, is that they generally view you as a troll. There is a reason for that.
  13. paddoboy Valued Senior Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Ahhh, what a nice double they make.My old never ending friend dmoe [god bless his little soul] and the vociferous loud mouthed supporter, the chief forum denier of science, the excuse maker for the lies and womanising and despicable red neck behaviour of Trump, and the promoter of mythical unsupported ideas of ID and creationism.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  14. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    And the proper defining of superfluous as obsolete or wasteful...or perhaps redundant or simply not needed, or maybe useless!!! In other words, whatever magic sky daddy any gullible individual sees the need to fabricate to ease his/her inner fear of the finality of death.Sad that some people need that crutch.
  15. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Thank billvon for resurrecting this from iggy.

    I'm not really satisfied with any formulation of intelligent design I've heard. Either God's plan was incorporated in the initial creation event, or some internal agency (whether intelligent or not) made contributions in its stead. What I don't buy is that God created the universe and then tweaked it as time went along.
  16. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    We can only wait and see but I could understand a hesitation and reluctance on Mr V making a definitive reply given my negative comments upon intelligent design on many occassions.
    He may feel I would ridicule him if he supports ID but I just would like to know and why he never pulls Paddo up one way or the other when he calls him an IDer ... I suppose if you say you believe in God then ID must be a given ... He may want to distance himself from the Discovery Institute and their manifesto to discredit science and "teach the controversy" sneakyness...Could you have a creator who was not a designer...well I guess you could not...I mean if you are god you just could not blink a goat into existence without thinking about the details like lungs and heart etc...the only other god involvement approach is that he blinked the chemical building blocks to start life and let evolution take it's course ...I find the more I try and figure out a god approach the more I come up with unrealistic propositions....I then wonder if believers think these things through to a similar if there is an intelligent designer is he god, their science says they don't know as you would expect if you wanted to be a make believe scientist, but let's face it that Discovery Institute is not to be trusted ... But say this designer is like a contractor god bought in to work out god pops out of eternity, stretches looks around gets an idea for a universe he is going to get in someone for sure as at his level he would by way past DIY stuff...and you could expect many designers, you know would have the landscape guy, the animal guy, a guy to do the Moon's and planets...another for water features.
    I would just love to hear a detailed explanation of just how it all came together via intelligent design or a god approach.
    paddoboy likes this.
  17. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Yes thanks to Billvon for getting me an audience.
    I don't buy that either.
    Thanks for your answer.
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Except of course that the Universe/space/time does not really give a hoot about any life that happened to undergo abiogenesis and evolution and whether said life is satisfied, or does not buy the science. And of course as most of us agree, any thought of ID and/or some magical spaghetti monster, is superfluous at best...Superfluous of course meaning, obsolete or wasteful...or perhaps redundant or simply not needed.
  19. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Careful any appeal to reality will get you on his Iggy...but there is a need it seems for many who can't accept personal responsibility to determine a personal code of morality and decency, who need the promise that their current presumably unsatisfactory life will be replaced by something they consider better and sooth their fear of dieing...but of course the problem is they need institutions and real estate in place to add to the illusion that their wish list is real.

    What I don't get is if they are so convinced there is another life waiting why the need to try and reject science.

    Why can't they see science as god given I wonder...

    When you think of the resources wasted in the name of religion, both human and material it is just so wrong..yet they can't see it...and I don't mean just the waste of life and materials in religious wars but just the incredible waste of lives devoted to religion and the waste of building materials going to churches and the like.

    Imagine if all the wealth was diverted to housing the homeless, providing universal health care and addressing the million deaths each year because of starvation...and education...just think of the waste of university resources on preparing folk to promote this outdated superstition.

    Imagine if religions paid tax.

    Then you look at these religious folk...they often seem devoid of compassion unless for folk in their particular tight group.

    It seems they are usually right wing holding only hatred for the left who after all are all about fairness to all. That tells you a great deal if you think about it.

    Do you ever watch "The Atheist Experience"? I have watched many shows and it is difficult to accept there are so many dingbats out there...oh and their standard statement to an atheist is that they will go to hell for not believing and worse is the glee they get when pointing that out. Nasty small minded and disgusting.

    And the fact is if you study history you can trace how the god of the West was invented by drawing on other cultures and how JCs MO was common back then due to all these human gods being based in is clear that it's all made up and even the plot defies all logic..yet this promise of after life has believers overlook all reality...get back to straight out Sun worship I created the Solar system and sustains most all life and we know those facts are indeed facts.

    They remind me of a poker machine player..they put in and put in in the hope of a payoff and any fool just has to look around them and realise the machines are there to make money for the club and the chance of you retiring on your winnings are zip and if you think management cares about you losing money ...well...there is a sucker on every stool...and the machines themes same approach to lacing the religion con with fantasy.

    I just hate how they destroy lives...I have seen it first hand and say religion is evil.
    Not the good folk who are conned mind you...
    Back to Iggy for me which is good because I have said all that can be need to deal with cute comments from a die hard.

    Borrow my soap box if you wish.

    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    But I'm already on his iggy, as he has told me a couple of times now when he feels like answering my post/s.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    The rest of your post makes some valid points, which he'll obviously ignore, or misinterpret or lie about.
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  21. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 70 years old Valued Senior Member

    On another forum something caught my attention

    The 10 commandments

    Though the numberings differ, the Ten Commandments are:
    Different people follow different traditions for interpreting and numbering them.

    What brought these into my spotlight was the analysis of number ONE

    Now if believers really really think these commandments are from god

    what the hell is up with No. ONE?

    Thou shalt have no other gods before me

    Seems like this implies there are other gods

    Who would have thought, god admitting there are others just like him?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  22. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    I'm tentatively inclined to agree with that. Science is concerned with describing the contents of physical reality and describing how different parts of physical reality are believed to interact. So science would seem to have no applicability to hypothetical realities that transcend physical reality. So to the extent that 'religion' posits transcendental sorts of being (God or whatever) it would seem to be outside the scope of science.

    Must something have a methodology in order for science to analyze it? I'm not convinced that physical reality has a methodology per se. It does display various kinds of order, which is why reason and ultimately science can get a grip on it. Of course religions display various kinds of order as well. That's that theologians write about.

    As far as methodology goes, as opposed to order, I'd say that the early Buddhism of the Pali canon is nothing if not a methodology. That's what Sila and Samadhi are all about. This sort of Buddhism is exceedingly empirical, if one is willing to expand the scope of empiricism from sensory experience to phenomenal experience in general. It's about a whole host of ethical and meditative processes that have profound effects on one's consciousness.

    'Mythology' isn't just another word for 'bullshit'. I'd define mythology as stories told to make sense of the world. And defined that way, science is nothing if it isn't mythology. The distinction between science and religion isn't that religion is and science isn't mythology. They are both mythology and the difference is in the kind of stories they tell and in how those stories are justified.

    I fully agree regarding physical reality. Science has certainly shown its superiority in that regard.

    But I disagree strongly regarding metaphysics. Science seems to me to be out of its depth when it comes to metaphysics.

    Now you are writing like you somehow possess the secret of the universe. That makes my agnostic klaxons sound. How do you (supposedly) know this?

    I damnably continue to consider reality the most profound of mysteries. I most emphatically do NOT think that I possess the secret of the universe. Simply attributing everything to mathematics, even if that was somehow possible which I strongly doubt, still wouldn't explain why mathematics exists in the first place.
  23. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    I speak from the perspective that the universe is fundamentally a mathematical construct. I cannot imagine any other functionally structured system that can replace the mathematical properties of the universe. This is why I maintain that; if there is a god it has to be or at least obey the mathematical laws of nature. IMO, the best religion can do is propose that God is a sentient (motivated) mathematician, which to me sounds much more complicated than any other possible inherent "quasi-intelligent" mathematical (orderly) causal function (potentialin a dynamic environment.

    Thus, if a God exists, it must be a mathematical construct.
    Without mathematical values and functions, the universe would still be in a state of chaos. Mathematics are everywhere you look, they are unavoidable properties of every single atom in the universe. We could not speak of "functional mechanics" without invoking mathematics.

    Mathematics exist in the first place because the universe could not exist without them. Mathematics constitute self-organizing quasi-intelligent Agency.

    Which of these two definitions sounds more scientifically defensible?


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Self-organization in micron-sized Nb3O7(OH) cubes during a hydrothermal treatment at 200 °C. Initially amorphous cubes gradually transform into ordered 3D meshes of crystalline nanowires as summarized in the model below.[1]

    Cosmologists tell us they are not inventing mathematics but "discovering" existing mathematics which they can describe via human symbolized mathematics.

    Perhaps recognition of the unbelievably large scope of the universe overwhelms our sense of order, but Science is especially good in pulling things apart and finding "common denominators" in many seemingly disparate patterns.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Wavefunctions of the electron in a hydrogen atom at different energy levels. Quantum mechanics cannot predict the exact location of a particle in space, only the probability of finding it at different locations.[1] The brighter areas represent a higher probability of finding the electron.

    Note the "self-organizing" mathematical patterns which become manifest under various conditions. These are recurring mathematical patterns and can be mathematically predicted to form and behave in specific orderly repeatable ways. No supernatural Agency is required (its a human invention) and is conceptually redundant.

    One "common denominator' of all things in the universe is the mathematical order in all physical objects , which can be identified and symbolized and used for imitating (copying) universal values and functions in a laboratory.

    The Higgs boson was produced by applied mathematics, without any prior observation of the existence of bosons.
    We mathematically teased the Higgs boson out from the Higgs field. This is clear proof of the power and universal applicability of mathematics. This is why the invention of human symbolic mathematics is considered the greatest
    triumph of human intellect.

    Maths themselves are very simple, orderly, and consistent. It is the sheer volume and varieties based on simple mathematical patterns that is the daunting part of scientific inquiry.

    The simplest geometric pattern (plane) is the triangle, no? How is it possible for such a simple pattern to be able to dynamically create the most astoundingly beautiful functional mathematical art forms.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    If I cut an apple into 4 pieces and we each consume 2 pieces, would you wonder if apples exist, even if that apple itself has been consumed and does no longer exist? If not, why would you question if mathematics exist?
    The only way we could each have 2 pieces of that apple is if "division" (cutting the apple into 4 pieces) is a mathematical function, by any other name, no?

    IMO, what is often overlooked is that the Human brain can only make "best guesses" of what the sensory perceived and processed information actually means in reality.
    As Anil Seth posits, "human experience of reality is by "agreement" of shared observations."

    The Universe has no such analytical weaknesses. It works via inviolable "universal mathematical constants".
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2020

Share This Page