|
|
God did not create the universe, says Hawking
By Saiii 2010-09-02 20:03:55
Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury said: Saiii said: Considering this, it those who don't believe in "God" would do better to stop asking for objective proof when they know it does not exist.
We're not asking for proof as a method of evidence acquisition.
We know the truth, that god is a fictional being created by human faith.
We ask for "proof" to degrade those who believe in "god" simply because once a believer is presented with that question, they have absolutely nothing to offer.
This isn't entirely true. Only that the type of proof someone who believes can provide is simply not the type of proof that a non believer requires.
If you ask me if I think a painting is beautiful or not, I can only tell you how the experience of the painting affected me. I cannot "prove" the beauty to you or anyone else, but I can know that I thought it was beautiful.
If you were to tell me that the painting was not beautiful and that I was wrong for believing so, it would actually reflect on your own ignorance on trying to dictate someone else' subjective experience to them.
 Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury
Server: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2601
By Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury 2010-09-02 20:04:47
Leviathan.Dissonant said: I am talking about average people, not scientists or priests.
Average people tend to draw conclusions based off visual signals received by their retinal receptors. Which is why just about every ancient intelligent species on this planet believed the sun was a god. It gave the earth life and saved us from the cold night time. Which is why religion is so powerful today. Without it, average people would be lost without some (thing or one) to fall back on.
Smarter people will explore the physical aspects of those properties and figure out the physics of matter, including gravity, fusion etc.
Fenrir.Tool
Server: Fenrir
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3848
By Fenrir.Tool 2010-09-02 20:05:50
Saiii said: Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury said: Saiii said: Considering this, it those who don't believe in "God" would do better to stop asking for objective proof when they know it does not exist.
We're not asking for proof as a method of evidence acquisition.
We know the truth, that god is a fictional being created by human faith.
We ask for "proof" to degrade those who believe in "god" simply because once a believer is presented with that question, they have absolutely nothing to offer.
This isn't entirely true. Only that the type of proof someone who believes can provide is simply not the type of proof that a non believer requires.
If you ask me if I think a painting is beautiful or not, I can only tell you how the experience of the painting affected me. I cannot "prove" the beauty to you or anyone else, but I can know that I thought it was beautiful.
If you were to tell me that the painting was not beautiful and that I was wrong for believing so, it would actually reflect on your own ignorance on trying to dictate someone else' subjective experience to them.
So in other words, God's existence cannot be tangible, but rather exist strictly in one's outlook and perception?
 Lakshmi.JaerikAdministrator
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3834
By Lakshmi.Jaerik 2010-09-02 20:06:12
Saiii said: Considering this, it those who don't believe in "God" would do better to stop asking for objective proof when they know it does not exist.
If one is self-admittedly unwilling or unable to furnish objective proof, that's fine. Let people believe whatever they want.
But once you've admitted that, you shouldn't be able to then volunteer those same beliefs as an objective basis for society or laws.
We have this huge disconnect, here. If I said "God says Saiii shot JFK, and I can't prove it and never will be able to, because it's God" you would think I'm insane. Without a human judge, a human jury, and human standards of objective proof, there's no way.
But if I say "God said that gay folks shouldn't marry," for some reason this serves as a completely rational basis for human law.
It's completely nuts. The standards of proof are all over the map, and aren't even consistent within believers' own heads.
 Phoenix.Darki
Server: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9949
By Phoenix.Darki 2010-09-02 20:06:44
well it's not much about being intelligent, also people who hunger to study the possibilityes to make self judgement instead of being told what to believe on.
it's based off mental independence too, no fear of defying what youre told.
 Leviathan.Dissonant
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
Posts: 818
By Leviathan.Dissonant 2010-09-02 20:07:06
Saiii said: This isn't entirely true. Only that the type of proof someone who believes can provide is simply not the type of proof that a non believer requires.
If you ask me if I think a painting is beautiful or not, I can only tell you how the experience of the painting affected me. I cannot "prove" the beauty to you or anyone else, but I can know that I thought it was beautiful.
If you were to tell me that the painting was not beautiful and that I was wrong for believing so, it would actually reflect on your own ignorance on trying to dictate someone else' subjective experience to them. I initially read your posts because Fry is amazing. I continued reading them because they make sense.
By Saiii 2010-09-02 20:07:32
Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury said: Leviathan.Dissonant said: I am talking about average people, not scientists or priests.
Average people tend to draw conclusions based off visual signals received by their retinal receptors. Which is why just about every ancient intelligent species on this planet believed the sun was a god. It gave the earth life and saved us from the cold night time. Which is why religion is so powerful today. Without it, average people would be lost without some (thing or one) to fall back on.
Smarter people will explore the physical aspects of those properties and figure out the physics of matter, including gravity, fusion etc.
And then some of those smart people will be able to reconcile their subjective experiences of "God" with their objective observations of the universe that we live in, and see that they do not have to be opposed to one another.
Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury
Server: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2601
By Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury 2010-09-02 20:07:41
Saiii said: Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury said: Saiii said: Considering this, it those who don't believe in "God" would do better to stop asking for objective proof when they know it does not exist.
We're not asking for proof as a method of evidence acquisition.
We know the truth, that god is a fictional being created by human faith.
We ask for "proof" to degrade those who believe in "god" simply because once a believer is presented with that question, they have absolutely nothing to offer.
This isn't entirely true. Only that the type of proof someone who believes can provide is simply not the type of proof that a non believer requires.
If you ask me if I think a painting is beautiful or not, I can only tell you how the experience of the painting affected me. I cannot "prove" the beauty to you or anyone else, but I can know that I thought it was beautiful.
If you were to tell me that the painting was not beautiful and that I was wrong for believing so, it would actually reflect on your own ignorance on trying to dictate someone else' subjective experience to them.
Notice how 100% of your reply to my post is based off opinion and thought.
The opinion and thought of how beautiful a painting.
The opinion and thought of whether or not god exists.
God is a thought, nothing more. No one can prove that otherwise.
I'm not arguing the ability to persuade someone for standing behind a thought.
I'm stating, once you ask a believer to prove god exists, they can't do anything but say "I believe in _ _ _".
Valefor.Bladerah
Server: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 32
By Valefor.Bladerah 2010-09-02 20:08:34
well in light of this information, there's only one thing i'd like to say.
*** Stephen Hawking
That is all.
[+]
Phoenix.Darki
Server: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9949
By Phoenix.Darki 2010-09-02 20:08:57
Fenrir.Tool said: Saiii said: Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury said: Saiii said: Considering this, it those who don't believe in "God" would do better to stop asking for objective proof when they know it does not exist.
We're not asking for proof as a method of evidence acquisition.
We know the truth, that god is a fictional being created by human faith.
We ask for "proof" to degrade those who believe in "god" simply because once a believer is presented with that question, they have absolutely nothing to offer.
This isn't entirely true. Only that the type of proof someone who believes can provide is simply not the type of proof that a non believer requires.
If you ask me if I think a painting is beautiful or not, I can only tell you how the experience of the painting affected me. I cannot "prove" the beauty to you or anyone else, but I can know that I thought it was beautiful.
If you were to tell me that the painting was not beautiful and that I was wrong for believing so, it would actually reflect on your own ignorance on trying to dictate someone else' subjective experience to them.
So in other words, God's existence cannot be tangible, but rather exist strictly in one's outlook and perception?
so in other words god is a relative truth lol
By Saiii 2010-09-02 20:10:01
Lakshmi.Jaerik said: Saiii said: Considering this, it those who don't believe in "God" would do better to stop asking for objective proof when they know it does not exist.
If one is self-admittedly unwilling or unable to furnish objective proof, that's fine. Let people believe whatever they want.
But once you've admitted that, you shouldn't be able to then volunteer those same beliefs as an objective basis for society or laws.
We have this huge disconnect, here. If I said "God says Saiii shot JFK, and I can't prove it and never will be able to, because it's God" you would think I'm insane. Without a human judge, a human jury, and human standards of objective proof, there's no way.
But if I say "God said that gay folks shouldn't marry," for some reason this serves as a completely rational basis for human law.
It's completely nuts. The standards of proof are all over the map, and aren't even consistent within believers' own heads.
No one ever said that the majority of those who believe in "God" aren't complete morons.
Just simply that, just because many stupid people believe one thing, that doesn't automatically make the belief stupid or that all those who believe it are by association stupid also.
Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury
Server: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2601
By Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury 2010-09-02 20:10:29
Valefor.Bladerah said: well in light of this information, there's only one thing i'd like to say.
*** Stephen Hawking
That is all.
What did he ever do to you to deserve anal penetration by your instruction?
Phoenix.Darki
Server: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9949
By Phoenix.Darki 2010-09-02 20:11:13
Saiii said: Lakshmi.Jaerik said: Saiii said: Considering this, it those who don't believe in "God" would do better to stop asking for objective proof when they know it does not exist.
If one is self-admittedly unwilling or unable to furnish objective proof, that's fine. Let people believe whatever they want.
But once you've admitted that, you shouldn't be able to then volunteer those same beliefs as an objective basis for society or laws.
We have this huge disconnect, here. If I said "God says Saiii shot JFK, and I can't prove it and never will be able to, because it's God" you would think I'm insane. Without a human judge, a human jury, and human standards of objective proof, there's no way.
But if I say "God said that gay folks shouldn't marry," for some reason this serves as a completely rational basis for human law.
It's completely nuts. The standards of proof are all over the map, and aren't even consistent within believers' own heads.
No one ever said that the majority of those who believe in "God" aren't complete morons.
Just simply that, just because many stupid people believe one thing, that doesn't automatically make the belief stupid or that all those who believe it are by association stupid also.
i think that if a selective group of people believe the sun is god...yes the belief is stupid and so are the people involved at certain levels lol just an example
By EtienneLoire 2010-09-02 20:11:23
Phoenix.Darki said: Fenrir.Tool said: Saiii said: Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury said: Saiii said: Considering this, it those who don't believe in "God" would do better to stop asking for objective proof when they know it does not exist.
We're not asking for proof as a method of evidence acquisition.
We know the truth, that god is a fictional being created by human faith.
We ask for "proof" to degrade those who believe in "god" simply because once a believer is presented with that question, they have absolutely nothing to offer.
This isn't entirely true. Only that the type of proof someone who believes can provide is simply not the type of proof that a non believer requires.
If you ask me if I think a painting is beautiful or not, I can only tell you how the experience of the painting affected me. I cannot "prove" the beauty to you or anyone else, but I can know that I thought it was beautiful.
If you were to tell me that the painting was not beautiful and that I was wrong for believing so, it would actually reflect on your own ignorance on trying to dictate someone else' subjective experience to them.
So in other words, God's existence cannot be tangible, but rather exist strictly in one's outlook and perception?
so in other words god is a relative truth lol
Big bang is god /thread bye bye.
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 23653
By Shiva.Flionheart 2010-09-02 20:12:25
EtienneLoire said: Phoenix.Darki said: Fenrir.Tool said: Saiii said: Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury said: Saiii said: Considering this, it those who don't believe in "God" would do better to stop asking for objective proof when they know it does not exist.
We're not asking for proof as a method of evidence acquisition.
We know the truth, that god is a fictional being created by human faith.
We ask for "proof" to degrade those who believe in "god" simply because once a believer is presented with that question, they have absolutely nothing to offer.
This isn't entirely true. Only that the type of proof someone who believes can provide is simply not the type of proof that a non believer requires.
If you ask me if I think a painting is beautiful or not, I can only tell you how the experience of the painting affected me. I cannot "prove" the beauty to you or anyone else, but I can know that I thought it was beautiful.
If you were to tell me that the painting was not beautiful and that I was wrong for believing so, it would actually reflect on your own ignorance on trying to dictate someone else' subjective experience to them.
So in other words, God's existence cannot be tangible, but rather exist strictly in one's outlook and perception?
so in other words god is a relative truth lol
Big bang is god /thread bye bye.
That's kind of pushing it isn't it?
Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury
Server: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2601
By Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury 2010-09-02 20:13:59
EtienneLoire said: Big bang is god /thread bye bye.
We know you're not serious, but this is a perfect example of stupidity masked by religious beliefs.
You believe god exists. The end.
You believe whatever the highest level of proven existence is, is god. The end.
So at the end of the day, why not just say you believe in science and you're just labeling something god. And the god you believe in, one who typically answers prayers and performs miracles does not exist?
The big bang doesn't answer prayers or work miracles to your wishes.
By Saiii 2010-09-02 20:14:08
Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury said:
Notice how 100% of your reply to my post is based off opinion and thought.
The opinion and thought of how beautiful a painting.
The opinion and thought of whether or not god exists.
God is a thought, nothing more. No one can prove that otherwise.
I'm not arguing the ability to persuade someone for standing behind a thought.
I'm stating, once you ask a believer to prove god exists, they can't do anything but say "I believe in _ _ _".
Yes, it is based completely off opinion and thought.
But aren't these concepts not equally as important to our lives as those of science and observation?
At a deeper level, would this not be required to explain the "Free-Will" paradox in the christian belief system?
Phoenix.Darki
Server: Phoenix
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9949
By Phoenix.Darki 2010-09-02 20:14:30
If god exists 'outside' this universe, then he can't be material like we are, and he is at the same level of our thoughts....
 Sylph.Spency
Server: Sylph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6969
By Sylph.Spency 2010-09-02 20:14:51
Who wants to hop in my special blue box and find out first hand how it was started?!
By Saiii 2010-09-02 20:15:34
Pandemonium.Spicyryan said: Lakshmi.Mabrook said: What is God?
He's a designer. self righteous jealous ***.
What does he design?
Natural law. A flawed system of chaos.
If it's natural then why should there be a designer for it?
That's what makes it perfect. It is as natural as the natural flavors in your Mountain Dew is why!
Ya but I still don't get it.
Get what? You and me both.
How does "God" enforce natural law?
He created it to be perfect, why would he need to enforce it? Generally with threats of unhappy violence against you at some point in time.
Okay, if he is perfect then why are humans imperfect?
The human body was originally created to be perfect, but free will is a human's downside and upside. "He" is not perfect.
What about human bodies that are born disfigured or other wise lacking brain function, surely God created that too?
No, pollution created that. This goes along with his imperfections.
That's usually what happens most of the time when it comes to Science/Religion; the never ending debate of who's fault is it lol.
There's that whole, positive perception of atheists thing again.
By EtienneLoire 2010-09-02 20:15:37
Sylph.Spency said: Who wants to hop in my special blue box and find out first hand how it was started?!
If we traveled that far back into the past we would die instantly.
Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury
Server: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2601
By Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury 2010-09-02 20:16:09
EtienneLoire said: If we traveled that far back into the past we would die instantly.
I'm sure god wouldn't be that cruel.
By Saiii 2010-09-02 20:16:26
Phoenix.Darki said: If god exists 'outside' this universe, then he can't be material like we are, and he is at the same level of our thoughts....
If "God" exists, the explanation I gave above, should answer your question.
By EtienneLoire 2010-09-02 20:17:03
Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury said: EtienneLoire said: If we traveled that far back into the past we would die instantly.
I'm sure god wouldn't be that cruel.
You do know that once upon a time, the planet was inhabitable for life?
By Saiii 2010-09-02 20:17:58
EtienneLoire said: Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury said: EtienneLoire said: If we traveled that far back into the past we would die instantly.
I'm sure god wouldn't be that cruel.
You do know that once upon a time, the planet was inhabitable for life?
If one were to build a magical time machine phone booth, I'm sure it would be equipped with life support.
Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury
Server: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2601
By Quetzalcoatl.Princemercury 2010-09-02 20:18:11
Saiii said: Phoenix.Darki said: If god exists 'outside' this universe, then he can't be material like we are, and he is at the same level of our thoughts....
If "God" exists, the explanation I gave above, should answer your question. Saiii said: Yes, it is based completely off opinion and thought.
But aren't these concepts not equally as important to our lives as those of science and observation?
At a deeper level, would this not be required to explain the "Free-Will" paradox in the christian belief system?
I'm sorry, but "thoughts" are a series of chemical and electrical reactions in cased inside a human organ called a brain.
|
|
