Re: Yes Wes?...
Originally posted by MarcAC
About me comprehending time, good question. But my point is that what we know or think we know about God and what we know or think we know about science have no bearing on each other - mutually exclusive - when it comes to proof of God's existence.
That's not entirely true. Science can in fact generously debunk the claims made by those who purport "truth" regarding religious events in history. For instance, science tells us the world is not the center of the universe... but before copernicus, you weren't supposed to imply such things. Did he pay for his life with his sin of science? They interact directly and have over thousands of years. Generally with power asserting itself in the name of religion to tread upon science. Thank "god" that's mostly over with eh? *cough* Hell man, creationist idiots have successfully removed EVOLUTION from the educational mix in Kansas right? (not sure, thought that's what I read not too long ago). Yeah, mutually exclusive. Well, you're off on a technicality "the existence of god" could be constrewed as indepedent from religion, but it's YOU who quotes the bible and implies dependency, so I believe you're wrong even by your own reasoning.
Therefore if you go and explain that there was pure energy and then something happened. It doesn't disprove my notion/knowledge of/faith in God's existence - it doesn't give me a reason to disbelieve - the only way I can disbelieve is - well - I guess never - I was gonna say after I die but that's something else.
Well then why do you debate it? Just want to understand the other side? I understand your side, I just want to educate you. Of course it never works, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't try. Plus I get intellectual excercise. I like you, but IMO, you've exactly demonstrated that you are unreasonable with your statement "the only way I can disbelieve is - well - I guess never". That makes me sick. Not only from the content, but from the phrasing. You put it in terms of "disbelief" rather than belief. Your assertion "god exists" is unwavering in your mind to the point that there is no way NOT to believe.
I have faith that reason will lead me towards truth, you have faith that "jesus christ (who is DEAD mind you) is your savior." I'll stick with my faith thank you, as it is reasonable by definition. Plus, I'd hate to distract you from your efforts to confound your mind with retarded assertions regarding old fairy tales.
They have that notion about energy cannot be created or destroyed. I can say God created energy. God cannot be created or destroyed. I don't think it is wierd to think like that [what exisated before time - hell it's fun]. If you don't think like that how on earth will you ever begin to comprehend what happened back then? What existed back then - if anything? It's either something existed or there was nothing.
You missed my point. I didn't say "don't think like that" or "I can't think like that" I said "it's weird to think like that" which I should have stated as "there are a lot of unknowns about the foundations of physics that might change the results of any analysis regarding the formation of the universe" or something like that. My bad for not having typed more clearly.
I don't know about you but I'd be curious. I need to know.
I'm the same way but I've learned to accept that my knowledge is tentative and permanently incomplete. It doesn't take much of a lesson in history to understand how one might come to those conclusions. I would say that it is exactly your "need to know" that is the compelling factor in your inability to accept the truth that about certain topics "nobody knows". As such you bullshit yourself into thinking "well the whole jesus thing is pretty plausible" and being a bright guy, can twist your observations to fit your interpretation of christianity (or whatever it is that you believe). Your only big problem is if someone who is actually as bright as YOU with reasonable communication skills questions you on the foundations of your shit. You are then faced with a dillema. You apparently just cling to your initial assumption with a death grip in the face of unwavering reasonable analysis. That would be fine if you would just admit that that is what you are doing. Of course if you did I'd ask "well why to you assume that?" and you'd say "because I do (or something like that)" and I'd say, "well, that's a shitty assumption" and we've likely have to agree to disagree (which is where this is heading I'm sure, since you cannot change your mind...).
If you think that's wierd then you should think that Einstein is one wierd cookie for dreaming up relativity. That type of thinking is required for you to fully comprehend what the hell time is - my view. That type of thinking drives hypotheses and scientific discovery - my view. That type of thinking battles scientific 'inertia'.
Well, since I miscommunicated my point, you've responded in a manner attempting to correct that which I did not misunderstand.
You are right though, you definitely don't have to say anything; even the bible acknowledges that, but that stance has consequences.It is worth it. Either way. I know it seems presumptious. You can see it that way if you wish.
It's not a matter of me seeing it that way. It IS, regardless of what I think.
I can't see it that way.
Of course not, it would interfere with your programming (which you've apparently accepted voluntarily)
I might find it presumptious that you would think that my condition is due to some 'mind virus' or something - or that it is not a worthy stance, because in truth, you obviously can't say for sure, you can only criticize it.
It that right? I know this sounds bad, but to the victim of the virus it's basically impossible to accept the idea of having the virus.
About your perception. That within itself is or could be an illusion, you will look at the world in visible light and the bee will see it in ultraviolet. Dog's see it in black and white and red and green - it is assmued. You might look at a "crowd" of zebras and see zebras - lions will look and see an amalgam of stripes - so they can't isolate any to attack. Who is really seeing it as it is? You or the lion? You or the dog? You or the bee? Who are you; the human who sees zebras individually, or the lion who sees just stripes? I see the huge hole in this potential argument but hopefully you'll 'walk past it without noticing'
I like that argument, very pretty. You've got some good points too.... but they're superfluous to the argument at hand. We're talking about an objective property of the universe, an entity. Does said entity exist. I say "the answer is currently unknowable". You say "yes, the entity exists". I say to that "you're full of shit". I believe that's the gist of the argument. I believe that implies that it doesn’t matter what the dog thinks. There IS or ISN’T a ‘god’.
I didn't say just for sport. What if there was a girl you really loved, the next question is what logical reason you would have to love her?
he heh.
I don't require a logical reason to love my wife. Of course, in terms of survival of the species I could probably dole out a few reasonable theories as to why I "love" anything in the first place, but that's a different thread. Further, what if loving my wife gives me pleasure? What if by loving her, I recieve love in return? Love gives me pleasure, thusly it is logical to love. Is that too illogical for you?
And there was this other guy that she loved - you and him equally - you saw an opportunity to tamper with this guys car and run him off the road - and make sure he doesn't tell anybody about it - hey - then you'd get the girl. Logical don't you think?
To a simpleton I suppose that's logical. To me, I'd find it pretty stupid. For instance to me the more logical point is as follows.... if she went with me and I'd screwed that kind that way, she'd be worse off for being with a murderous fuckard. Through my love, I want the both of us to be improved. If she were to love me though I'd killed someone for wanting that love, she would not be improved.. rather, she'd be with a murderous fuck with no self respect. Sure, it may SEEM better at first, but a love like that is doomed before conception.
That's not the question, the question is what is preventing you from taking that persons life?
Two things really: 1) I have empathy for the other humans, it’s emotional. Emotions affect my thoughts and resulting actions. 2) It wouldn’t be fair. I don’t like the notion of someone killing me for no reason, thusly I reciprocate.
Why???... anyway... Holy crap!?!? Do you know that a paraphrase of that is in the Bible?!?!?!
My point is that I reached my conclusion independently of fairy tale texts. I take personal responsibility for it because I derived it from my own mind, regardless of how many times it's been printed, I understand WHY it should. I thought about it and reached a conclusion and behave according to what I think is right. I'm no lemming, so reading it in a stupid book is just going to make me ask "why is this?". You sound as if to be saying "you could have just read that cool book and saved yourself a lot of time" and to that I say... "I'm not a lemming".
I quoted a similar sentiment on the previous page in a post to one/a few of the apparent Christians - including myself. Have you been reading and holding out on us wes??? Luke 6:31; "Treat others just as you want to be treated." [Contemporary English Version] Well damn... wes?... it would seem that... according to your principles... the Bible has some use after all... LOL. Maybe you should have a read?
No, I didn’t need that silly book to tell me how to behave.
I guess God, or those people who "didn't even know the world was round or that gunpowder goes bang..."? were possibly as smart as you?!?... LOL.
What does intellect have to do with being a lemming? You think since you read it in a book I should be impressed? Good boy, you can read. I’m proud of you. Let’s try “thinking” now.
Wierdly enough, that 'poorly placed faith' provides me with the same sentiments that you seemingly have.
Jeez from your continued objections to my argument, I wouldn’t have imagined that you’d concede so readily… but as you wish, I am worthy of your faith.
LMAO. Hell, maybe it's not so 'poorly placed' after all!?!
Well, if it was in “god” and “jesus” and “the bible”, then yes… it was, because that’s all a bunch of dramatic crap to keep the lemmings from killing each other.
