Dude, I'm pretty stoned and I just read how you believe everything outside the universe is two powerful dragons sitting on rocks looking down into a dragon mosh pit.
How do you think that would go like?
If God is real, how would you know?
- Thread starter Jan Ardena
- Start date
How do you think that would go like?
davewhite04
Valued Senior Member
Do you know what the name of the stuff you're smoking?Dude, I'm pretty stoned and I just read how you believe everything outside the universe is two powerful dragons sitting on rocks looking down into a dragon mosh pit.
How do you think that would go like?
The dragon was the only life in the beginning of the universe, We have a big old dragon to thank for coming up with clever ideas like gravity, evolution, making a watch. Order out of chaos.
I think there is no God and I think I can prove that there is no God.
Many people on this planet are suffering or are struggling in life. Some even take their own life because they are in so much pain so if there was a caring and loving God then not so many people will have to endure so much pain, hardship and disappointment in their lives.
All of this can be explained if there is no God.
I think this world is completely ruled by science and not by God and not by religion and also not by superstition.
Many people on this planet are suffering or are struggling in life. Some even take their own life because they are in so much pain so if there was a caring and loving God then not so many people will have to endure so much pain, hardship and disappointment in their lives.
All of this can be explained if there is no God.
I think this world is completely ruled by science and not by God and not by religion and also not by superstition.
Sure, but it's not proof insofar as, while God isn't necessary to such outcomes, you presume to know what God thinks, wants, feels, &c., as essential components of the proof. You're assigning the character of what you disqualify because you require it be something else. This is not an uncommon error; articles of faith, such as how God should be, are not proof of anything.
Meanwhile, a world "completely ruled by science" is a very interesting proposition.
If we all, take all science and its outcomes, out of the equation, where would we be?
A very interesting proposition!
Can you imagine if one of the theistic advocates who gets you so worked up actually said something about a "world is completely ruled by science"? Maybe not, I've had enough regressive discussions over the years I can certainly imagine someone in your position pointing out that "science" doesn't "rule" anything. I know some skeptics, for instance, who do a similar thing atheism.
Still, it was only a few days ago I noted a proposition by which science is juxtaposed against fairness↗, which in its context seems a bit smaller than a world completely ruled by science, but between dystopia projected from assessment of history, to the one, and shiny-happy fantastic mystery outcome behind door A, to the other, what does that kind of scientific influence actually mean?
Honestly, the dystopias are easy to name: Camazotz, for instance. And while it's not quite gravity on a spaceship—though there was that, too—the Earthling society depicted, and Jean Rasczak (Michael Ironsides) describes, in the cinematic Starship Troopers, does not account for the psychological state of such an ostenisbly objectivist result. In truth, that actually becomes a fascinating discussion of its own. And nobody ever really knows what to say—(where to begin)—in this context with Rand's Galtian revolution, because of the hideous irony thereof, but the psychoemotional immaturity about it is evident.
And somewhere along the line the shiny-happy fantastic outcome runs into the need to resolve a certain question about what the whole endeavor intends to accomplish, as this becomes the general justification for particular applications of the science. That is to say, let me know when science either discovers the meaning and purpose of life, or figures out how to make people stop wondering.
Then again, it was only a few days ago↗ I said, of basic religious impulse: Outgrowing our empathy, or our need for meaning, is outgrowing our humanity.
But I never said anything about a world ruled by science.
While certainly better then many other propositions, that would be unworkable, without delving and thinking about it too much. I said a world without science. I don't think too much needs to be said about that. And really, while at times, I have got rather hot under the collar, it has never really been with creationists and religious zealots.? Yes, as I said and agreed. And I'm not trying to promote atheism, in fact I reject the label. I see the scientific methodology and what it entails as while not perfect [what is?] is still by far the best we have.
Human nature needs plenty of explaining, and yes, as yet, there is much science has yet to explain. And there is much religion cannot explain, but instead, substitutes unsupported myth.
Anyway, other then answering questions directed at me, I will be avoiding this crap as much as possible.
Last edited:
That attempts to prove that there is no loving, caring, personally involved God. There are plenty of versions of God that do not propose he is all those things.
Given the holy wars and jihads and crusades and science denial and creationist causes we've seen, that's demonstrably not true.
In the face of what the average, "enlightened" person knows about religions and their history, it seems that the scientific, rational frame of mind is a better option for a modern life.
Absolutely, try denying the need for working headlights, or a helicopter pilot's licence, when certain activities are considered. But we still have this tendency to mythologise anyway; in fact we not only can't help it, but we need to do it, even with science itself.
Absolutely, try denying the need for working headlights, or a helicopter pilot's licence, when certain activities are considered. But we still have this tendency to mythologise anyway; in fact we not only can't help it, but we need to do it, even with science itself.
--The Parable of the Beast 1976 edn.John Bleibtreu said:
It's just too far-fetched in my opinion to take God seriously.
He is a loving and caring god yet allows unspeakable atrocities and bad things to happen to good people and yet does nothing. This loving and caring God supposedly sees that some people are oppressed yet he does nothing to free those oppressed and deter the oppressors.
He created humans in his image yet decided to punish everyone because some lady ate an apple from a garden, bullshit. He flooded the entire earth, had Noah stuff it with two of EVERY animal and then left zero credible evidence for said flood. He is peaceful but allows thousands of people to be killed every year "in his name."
Plus there's the whole blind faith requirement.
If I were a god, I like to think that I would make an appearance on earth periodically and give a speech. Maybe pass out t-shrits with interesting slogans to market myself a little better rather than relying on some 2,000 year old material.
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-atheis...-who-believe-in-God-prove-that-there-is-a-god
Last edited:
Well, you're here now, right? Maybe this is your big chance.
Well, yes, the one you describe is unquestionably absurd.
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
Is there one that you would describe as less absurd. I get the feeling there is this god that those with greater experience entertain, perhaps folk like yourself, and I ask what if anything do you see that is not privy to those who just do not get it. Is it some place holder that although not real all things of virtue can be attributed to and that the reality of its existence is irrelevant to the machinery employed to have something in which we can accumulate virtue and decency?
I suggest a fiction that somehow does all those things that humans need to be done such that they can avoid the reality that they are no more than human without some special place in the universe.
Alex
Here ya go, you might want to brush up on the meaning of "friendship", I do not think it means what you think it means.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frien...p of,psychology, anthropology, and philosophy.
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
Every thing about religion is "might be"...that is what it is built upon a great big "might be".
One "might be" that should be included given all evidence points to this...God "might be" just a human invention.
While we work with "might be" I suppose the propositions "might be" limitless.
It is a pity that all we deal with is "might be".
Alex
kx000
Valued Senior Member
You believe in God without aprehension for a reason, because belief is the same thing as knowledge. You might not know God scientifically, but you can know him as a friend.
I know that God very very probably isn't real.
If God were real then this world would have been a much better place that it is right now. It would have been a world without poverty, without suffering, without pain, without sadness and without injustice, discrimination, death and suicide.
If God is really loving and forgiving and also omnicapable, that is he is capable of doing everything or even capable of doing almost everything then I think he could have created a much better, much happier and more just world than what we got now.
If God were real then this world would have been a much better place that it is right now. It would have been a world without poverty, without suffering, without pain, without sadness and without injustice, discrimination, death and suicide.
If God is really loving and forgiving and also omnicapable, that is he is capable of doing everything or even capable of doing almost everything then I think he could have created a much better, much happier and more just world than what we got now.
So to you, God comes with some conditions attached? Since they aren't met, these expectations, this means God is . . . a disappointment?
Hmm. Maybe this all-powerful God that created the universe doesn't really know that humans exist, or doesn't care, after all.
The God-as-Monopoly-Man approach, means you can ask yourself why he hasn't given you a million dollars yet, say.