Existence of god

[Mazulu]

Into a culture where people are considered equal regardless of their immutable qualities. Into a culture of not just tolerance, but acceptance. We're not all the way there yet, but we've made huge strides, and only because we stopped deferring to the authority of scripture. At least in certain areas; we're still climbing the hill of religious influence when it comes to the sovereignty of a woman's body.

I told you what i really am. I support women's rights, human rights, civil rights, minority rights, the right to practice one's religion, even an atheists right to freedom of speech. But I still have freedom of speech, and I think that atheism is the wrong way to go.

 

[Write4U]

OMG, is Mazulu actually admitting it was all a dream? An illusion that vanished once he was fully awake? Complete the thought Mazulu. Say it. It was just an illusion, a crazy idea in your very small head.

This is Halloween spooky, it reminds me of the "The Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown", where Linus spends all night in the pumpkin patch waiting for the Great Pumpkin to appear.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Yes, I agree that order was there all along except only in latent potential form before it emerged along with spacetime and physical objects in this universe.
I don't believe you can throw a whole bunch of sticks up in the air and they will fall in the exact place every time. IMO, this is part of the probability function. We cannot do this with photons in the double slit experiment and it wouldn't work here. There are only probabilities, some of which have the potential for a 100% probability (the Implicate) to become reality.

Yes. However, the probabilities follow certain patterns, and if at any given time you have enough information, you can technically infer the result with 100% accuracy. The issue arises with time, as the farther back in the past you go, the hardest it is to infer any probability, to such an extent that our very existence and the fact that I'm typing this in my space-time continuum and you are reading this in this space-time continuum is, literally, a 0% probability, if perceived from a moment far enough in the past. Yet, the probability of what I described is actually 100%.

I believe so. Is there a specific law which forbids chaos from becoming orderly, when certain physical properties are present?

That is not what I'm contesting, what I'm contesting is the understanding that there was ever any chaos. Something may look chaotic to us, but only because we don't understand the underlying patterns of interaction.

True, it is part of the ultimate ordering of the universe, starting from the dynamic inflation of an infinitely small singularity containing all the potential energy of the universe, to a static infinitely large singularity, inflated to such size that existing energy slowly begins to dissipate and decays, robbing from the potential energy for causal action. A dead zone. A dead zone may be orderly but it is not causally dynamic.

Possible, but I'm not sure rather the "big bang" ever existed or rather we truly understand it, if it ever existed.

Entropy plays a relatively small part at our level of existence. We get old and die. But in between we experience the most wonderous experience of self awareness, even if distorted or illusionary.

It depends on your definition of entropy, but I agree with your point.

The OP asks about the existence of God. IMO there are as many aspiring gods as there are living species on earth. We are the god we see reflected in the mirror.

I would say so, yes.

 

[cole grey]

Great counter-point.
But seriously, look at the rationale behind segregation, behind the subservient role of the woman, behind the ill treatment of homosexuals and racial minorities. Religion is inexorably linked to bigotry in this country's history. Where there is mistreatment of a class of person based on their immutable qualities, you will always--always--find a biblical passage endorsing the behavior.

first, i disagree there is any biblical passage that can be used to contradict the greater commandment

Matthew 22:36-40 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

All the law and everything hangs on that, so if you interpret something not in accord with that, that thing has to be reinterpreted. The fact that religious people ignore their own religious texts to do what they they want to do and reinforce their own prejudice and greed, is NOT in accord with basic logic. All the teaching follows from the two above, otherwise it is incorrect, period.

secondly, think about how religion (as a mass practice, not as some small group of nutjobs) has been re-interpreted to be kinder and gentler over the centuries, as humans have become (slightly) more kind and gentle. Religion was unfortunately used in evil ways, by evil people, to reinforce their grabs for power and wealth, and resources. Try to find an example of a religious evil that didn't achieve a political end, or gather massive amounts of wealth... maybe you could find one to go along with the 99 to 100 percent of religious evils that achieved monetary and political ends.
I don't care if you credit secular thought for moving us forward, go ahead, but the fact is that religion has changed as acceptable political and social functions have changed. If it was the religious teaching that caused the problems in the first place, back then when humans would have acted better then the religion would have led them to act (you would say), then why doesn't the pope still ask people to kill and so forth? If religion is inherently evil stuff, then the religious teachers wouldn't be able to teach it as nicey-nicey stuff. There would be no methodists and unitarians, because religion would teach them to be evil.
No,no, no - politics have changed, the way we destroy each other for resources has changed, and our interpretations of religion have changed, because the religion depends on people to interpret it. Would my grandmother go out and start a crusade with her religious belief? No, obviously not. Good people have good religion, bad people have bad religion.

 

[Balerion]

first, i disagree there is any biblical passage that can be used to contradict the greater commandment

Except there are plenty of passages that directly contradict that "greater" commandment, including (but not limited to) this one:

Matthew 10:14-15 "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."

Entire cities razed for not hearing Jesus' disciples. That doesn't sound like loving thy neighbor as yourself.

All the law and everything hangs on that, so if you interpret something not in accord with that, that thing has to be reinterpreted. The fact that religious people ignore their own religious texts to do what they they want to do and reinforce their own prejudice and greed, is NOT in accord with basic logic. All the teaching follows from the two above, otherwise it is incorrect, period.

Not only are you wrong about that, but it's beside the point. Whether it's in the scripture (which it is) or merely a misinterpretation of it, it's still religiosity. That's what we're talking about. Which interpretation of some dusty old Stone Age book you people decide upon doesn't matter; what matters is that society has largely stopped listening to you.

secondly, think about how religion (as a mass practice, not as some small group of nutjobs) has been re-interpreted to be kinder and gentler over the centuries, as humans have become (slightly) more kind and gentle. Religion was unfortunately used in evil ways, by evil people, to reinforce their grabs for power and wealth, and resources. Try to find an example of a religious evil that didn't achieve a political end, or gather massive amounts of wealth... maybe you could find one to go along with the 99 to 100 percent of religious evils that achieved monetary and political ends.
I don't care if you credit secular thought for moving us forward, go ahead, but the fact is that religion has changed as acceptable political and social functions have changed. If it was the religious teaching that caused the problems in the first place, back then when humans would have acted better then the religion would have led them to act (you would say), then why doesn't the pope still ask people to kill and so forth? If religion is inherently evil stuff, then the religious teachers wouldn't be able to teach it as nicey-nicey stuff. There would be no methodists and unitarians, because religion would teach them to be evil.
No,no, no - politics have changed, the way we destroy each other for resources has changed, and our interpretations of religion have changed, because the religion depends on people to interpret it. Would my grandmother go out and start a crusade with her religious belief? No, obviously not. Good people have good religion, bad people have bad religion.

Tons of straw men here, most not even worth responding to. I'll keep it relevant: Secular influence is the reason the major monotheisms in the west don't have the influence they once did. It isn't so much that the religions are kinder and gentler, it's that they can't get away with the type of shit here that they get away with in, say, Iran or Russia.

 

[Write4U]

Yes. However, the probabilities follow certain patterns, and if at any given time you have enough information, you can technically infer the result with 100% accuracy. The issue arises with time, as the farther back in the past you go, the hardest it is to infer any probability, to such an extent that our very existence and the fact that I'm typing this in my space-time continuum and you are reading this in this space-time continuum is, literally, a 0% probability, if perceived from a moment far enough in the past. Yet, the probability of what I described is actually 100%.

It was never 0 % , the potential (possibility) for this reality always existed among a near infinite number of other potential possible realities (Bohm calls this the Implicate order). But the causal 100% probability for Now exists only the quantum instant before the event. IOW, it could not be any different way at that moment in spacetime. But it can logically exist also in the abstract. My objection to the assumption of God is that it is so ill defined. And the assumption of a motivated independend agent is not satisfactory.

That is not what I'm contesting, what I'm contesting is the understanding that there was ever any chaos. Something may look chaotic to us, but only because we don't understand the underlying patterns of interaction.

I believe there can be a temporary state of chaos. Apparently the "inflationary epoch" was such a state. Don't forget that this state only existed for 10^-36 (Planck scale moment of superluminal expansion) after which it began to order itself in accordance with the four fundamental forces. But apparently during that incredibly small time span "inflation" broke all universal laws and may be properly classified as purely energetic chaos.

Possible, but I'm not sure rather the "big bang" ever existed or rather we truly understand it, if it ever existed.

I see no other option. IMO the law of conservation of energy is a cosmic constant, part of the timeless metaphysical condition present at the very instant before the BB, when this latent energy (potential) converted from metaphysical to physical.

It depends on your definition of entropy, but I agree with your point. I would say so, yes.

I am a (layman) fan of David Bohm's marriage of physics and metaphysics in his book "Wholeness and the Implicate Order".
What I find particularly attractive is Bohm's qualifications (actual contributions) in several areas of Physics, Neurology, and Theology. Of all propositions involving a metaphysical aspect to existence (reality), Bohm's vision can be supported in all three disciplines. He achieves this by utilizing all three disciplines, as well as resolving the apparent conflicts between GR and QM.

The holomovement is a key concept in David Bohm's interpretation of quantum mechanics and for his overall worldview. It brings together the holistic principle of "undivided wholeness" with the idea that everything is in a state of process or becoming (or what he calls the "universal flux"). For Bohm, wholeness is not a static oneness, but a dynamic wholeness-in-motion in which everything moves together in an interconnected process. The concept is presented most fully in Wholeness and the Implicate Order, published in 1980.

and

The holomovement concept is introduced in incremental steps. It is first presented under the aspect of wholeness in the lead essay, called "Fragmentation and Wholeness". There Bohm states the major claim of the book: "The new form of insight can perhaps best be called Undivided Wholeness in Flowing Movement" (Bohm, 1980, 11). This view implies that flow is, in some sense, prior to that of the ‘things’ that can be seen to form and dissolve in this flow. He notes how "each relatively autonomous and stable structure is to be understood not as something independently and permanently existent but rather as a product that has been formed in the whole flowing movement and what will ultimately dissolve back into this movement. How it forms and maintains itself, then, depends on its place function within the whole" (14). For Bohm, movement is what is primary; and what seem like permanent structures are only relatively autonomous sub-entities which emerge out of the whole of flowing movement and then dissolve back into it an unceasing process of becoming.

Look up Holomovement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holomovement

 

[rr6]

Hurricanes, Tsunamis, Earthquakes, Floods, Volcanoes do cause misery.

Yeah thats true also.

Good counter point!

Pollution doesn't exist, unless chemicals, light, noise ionizing radiation etc, found in places we would rather they did not be.

God is one, composed of many parts.

Religion is an everyday practice i.e. something we do religously ergo consistent reoccurring patterns in our lives that assist us living orderly life.

r6

 

[rr6]

Ultra-micro Existent Likend to Hyperspace

TruthSeeker Something may look chaotic to us, but only because we don't understand the underlying patterns of interaction.

I agree with TS here, as it is pretty much what I've been saying for years and specifically in regards to quasi-physical, ultra-micro gravity.

We cannnot access this level of gravitational spacetimes, micro existence ergo it is likened to a hyperspace, and even if we could, to ever map/chart/account for ultra-immense amount of interrelationships ergo ultra-complex.

Our finite, occupied space Universe/God( ess ) is cause and effect deterministic only.

r6

 

[rr6]

Write4U.."when this latent energy (potential) converted from metaphysical to physical."

Gravity can be considered meta( beyond ) the physical but it is not;

metaphysical, non-occupied space, nor is gravity metaphysical mind/intelligence, ergo,

at best physical can arise from quasi-physical gravity, but physical( occupied space ) can never ever arise from non-occupied space nor mind/intelligence.

METAPHYSICAL = beyond the physical

1) mind/intelligence aka concepts/ideas,
-------------------------
2) non-occupied space,

3) gravity buffer-zone of occupied space

Physical = fermionic matter and bosonic forces other than gravity.

This is the top of thecosmic/cosmos hierarchy.

SPACE = infinite

1) non-occupied macro-micro infinite space,

2) occupied space, gravity, fermions and bosons other than gravity.

This is the top of the cosmic/cosmos spatial heirachy.

MIND/INTELLIGENCE

1) absolute truths ex cosmic laws/principles,

2) relative truths ex everyday thought process's.

Fuller states that, mathematics is the highest faculty of humans mind/intelligence and mathematics falls into both absolute and relative.

r6

 

[Write4U]

Yeah thats true also.

Good counter point!

Pollution doesn't exist, unless chemicals, light, noise ionizing radiation etc, found in places we would rather they did not be.

God is one, composed of many parts.

Religion is an everyday practice i.e. something we do religously ergo consistent reoccurring patterns in our lives that assist us living orderly life.
r6

Tell me the difference between your statement and the following statement.

"Humanism is an everyday practice, i.e. something we do consistently ergo consistent reoccurring patterns in our lives that assist us living orderly life".

I prefer the evolution of social values in a secular environment over the evolution of social values in a theocratic environment. You cannot declare yourself better than another, because of a certain belief. That is a very dangerous path to follow. "Beware the false prophet".

IMO, the safest way is to not believe in a "motivated supernatural being(ness)", and first try to exhaust every possible physical examination, before making any kind of definitive (but unsupported) statements about the causality for an event as large as "cosmic inflation".

 

[(Q)]

I told you what i really am. I support women's rights, human rights, civil rights, minority rights, the right to practice one's religion, even an atheists right to freedom of speech. But I still have freedom of speech, and I think that atheism is the wrong way to go.

In other words, you are actually in support of a secular society, contradictory to what you claimed in another thread.

 

[wegs]

I agree with TS here, as it is pretty much what I've been saying for years and specifically in regards to quasi-physical, ultra-micro gravity.

We cannnot access this level of gravitational spacetimes, micro existence ergo it is likened to a hyperspace, and even if we could, to ever map/chart/account for ultra-immense amount of interrelationships ergo ultra-complex.

Our finite, occupied space Universe/God( ess ) is cause and effect deterministic only.

r6

ah, there it is...shades of Pantheism, again. lol

 

[wegs]

What's wrong with reality? Have you ever watched the news?

Not often. You should put yourself on a ''news fast'' once in a while. While it's important to stay informed relating to the world around us, it has become increasingly more difficult to sort fact from fiction in terms of solid news coverage. So, I tune it out more often than not.

There is always something terrible going on in the world: warzones, starvation, killing, international conflicts, ... I am one of the lucky ones who has a good job. We're having another round of layoffs; thank God in heaven I'm not one of them. But my job is getting harder and harder to perform because they keep laying off engineers. Do you have a job?

Yes, I have a very good job, which I too am thankful, considering this economy.
I'm not sure what this has to do with what I posted, however.

Do you understand what reality is really all about? I don't use illegal drugs, but sometimes I wish I did, I wish I could. I wish I could not give a damn about what's happening in the world. I think about how much I wish life could go on after we die, in an afterlife; and then I think about African warlords hacking up women and children because they think it's fun. I got my opportunity to experience what life has to offer; if I died tomorrow, then I've lived a good life. But life is oneshot, we only get one try and that's it. There is no afterlife.

Now, you no longer think there is an afterlife? You are ''evolving'', hooray.

And I think about all those people whose live's were wasted. People who are in prison in countries like Saudi Arabia, Mexico, China, and other hell holes where there is no liberty. Religion eases the suffering of people around the world. it gives them hope and shows them mercy.

It gives them false hope.

I had hoped there was a silver lining to the suffering of the world. I had hoped there was good news.

There is still a lot of beauty in this world, you just need to stay open to finding it. It is very easy to become depressed and despair over all of the atrocities we see on the news, or even in our everyday lives. Each of us has our own tales of woe, too. But, to set your sights on the spiritual world, it will take you away from the real world, of which you can make a difference. You can't make a difference, escaping into a spiritual world.

But sorry! Evil people like Cheezle win!

Cheezle isn't 'evil.'

Atheists win. There really isn't any hope anywhere in the universe, in existence.

Why do you say this?

On a happier note, my chantilly Tiffany cat is demanding attention. Wolfie looks like this

Aw, too cute.
If there is an afterlife, I'd like to come back as one of my cats.

[/QUOTE]

 

[(Q)]

I can't fault you in the least for your very honest observations. For my point of view, it's more about the hateful comments from atheists that deserve a response. I'm not ready to forgive them.

In other words, you're not ready to exhibit Christ-like behavior, even though you talk about that's what a Christian is supposed to do. LOL.

 

[(Q)]

Sorry, but it's true. They are incredibly apathetic to the suffering of others in China. Here is some proof.

LOL. So, you base your opinions of an entire nation of millions on one youtube video. Hilarious.

Of course, we can find all kinds of videos of apathy and suffering with Christians acting in the main roles.

 

[Write4U]

and peace reigned over the kingdom.

 

[wegs]

and peace reigned over the kingdom.

haha, nice summary of this thread.

 

[pluto2]

We may never understand how the universe really works at the most fundamental level and why it even works like that. I think that the universe is just too complicated for even the most intelligent human being on this planet to figure out.

H._P._Lovecraft wrote that in his philosophy called cosmicism. Lovecraft believed in a meaningless, mechanical, and uncaring universe that human beings, with their naturally limited faculties, could never completely understand.

You can read more about Lovecraft's cosmicism here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmicism

Also Matthew S. McCormick in his book "Atheism and the Case Against Christ" makes 100 interesting points against the existence of God.

http://www.provingthenegative.com/2008/05/100-reasons-to-believe-that-god-does.html

 

[cole grey]

Except there are plenty of passages that directly contradict that "greater" commandment, including (but not limited to) this one:Entire cities razed for not hearing Jesus' disciples. That doesn't sound like loving thy neighbor as yourself."

You seem to have a problem applying first principles. A biblical interpretation of this passage in accord with the first two principles of the religion would be, "if some place doesn't want to hear, move on, you can't force people to learn about these matters. Someday they will suffer, by tearing themselves apart and killing and terrorizing each other (which is what evil people do), which is actually worse than just instantly being turned to ash, because of the suffering and because they will have each other's blood on their hands." Your interpretation contradicts the greatest commandment obviously. If people interpreted logically there wouldn't be interpretation that creates the evils you attribute to religion, which are actually human evils occurring with or without religion.

Also you didn't find any examples of religious evil activities that had no monetary or political gain I'm sure, although you might find a percent or two of those activities as such. You can't just say, "you are wrong", you need to show why I am wrong about that point.

Not only are you wrong about that, but it's beside the point.

How can I be wrong about the passage where Jesus explains the two commands that everything hangs on? That is pretty much impossible. Jesus is wrong about his own religion he started, while you are right? That's just weird.

Whether it's in the scripture (which it is) or merely a misinterpretation of it, it's still religiosity. That's what we're talking about. Which interpretation of some dusty old Stone Age book you people decide upon doesn't matter; what matters is that society has largely stopped listening to you.

not that you have shown any correlation between religious non-political activity and evil acts, so unfortunately for humanity in contradiction to your ideas, lack of religion isn't going to make us better people. There are still going to companies who, for their bottom line, will try to get farmers on a seed that doesn't self-propagate (Iraq right now,and pretty much everywhere else). There is going to be government which kills and subjugates other people groups for their own needs (Tibet). Your secular golden age is just as much pie in the sky as any heaven, especially if people like you mis-attribute the real evils of humanity to bogey men, and shuffle responsibility away from evil people and onto a social practice, which is mostly harmless in the hands of decent normal people who aren't the few maniacs who strive for political power and control of other humans.

Tons of straw men here, most not even worth responding to. I'll keep it relevant: Secular influence is the reason the major monotheisms in the west don't have the influence they once did. It isn't so much that the religions are kinder and gentler, it's that they can't get away with the type of shit here that they get away with in, say, Iran or Russia.

You are obviously speaking from ignorance if you can't see that religious teachings have changed, especially over the last century or two. When you understand that fact, then perhaps you should express a thought about why that is. It certainly is not a situation where unchanged teachings are being controlled by secular means. If you dont know that much, you don't even know what you are arguing against.

Edit - Catholic teaching is changing in front of our eyes, regarding homosexuality. How you can't recognize that in light of the most powerful church of history changing what it is teaching, not even just different religious groups popping up and evolving is beyond me.

 

[wegs]

Edit - Catholic teaching is changing in front of our eyes, regarding homosexuality.

How so?

How you can't recognize that in light of the most powerful church of history changing what it is teaching, not even just different religious groups popping up and evolving is beyond me.

So, who is bringing about all these changes? God? Or mere men?

And if religious dogma is that 'easy' to change, then how could it ever have originated from 'God?' The Catholic Church wants to be popular, and it seems to be doing what it needs to, in order to become just that--popular. Even if that means turning on its own faith teachings. This is why it's capable of appearing as though it supports the theory of evolution. This isn't something to be proud of, it just flagrantly shows that it will contort its own dogma, or banish it altogether, if it doesn't fit with its social agenda. The reason it's troubling is because it doesn't take a firm stand for faith or for science, as a religion. I'm no longer religious, but religious dogma should never 'change,' because it is based on the supposed ''word of God.'' How on earth does the Word of God, poof....just change? This is what led me away from Christianity, in general. If religious teachings can just change on a dime...then, they can't be based on anything supernatural, but rather just designed to suit the whimsical nature of mankind. (with the purpose of controlling mankind through fear)

The Catholic Church didn't become 'powerful' by being docile.