Land Der Volkeren wrote:Wouldn't a non-caused event be prove of a transcendent being?
Well there's a non sequitur. No.
Advertisement
by Sun Wukong » Tue Mar 31, 2015 7:11 am
Land Der Volkeren wrote:Wouldn't a non-caused event be prove of a transcendent being?
by Jute » Tue Mar 31, 2015 7:15 am
Carl Sagan, astrophysicist and atheist wrote:"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.
When we recognize our place in an immensity of light-years and in the passage of ages,
when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling,
that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual...
The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both."
Italios wrote:Jute's probably some sort of Robin Hood-type outlaw
"Boys and girls so happy, young and gay / Don't let false worldly joy carry your hearts away."
by Jute » Tue Mar 31, 2015 7:17 am
Well, that's the trade-off for giving humans free will, I guess? And who says preventing natural catastrophes or other terrible things wouldn't be worse in the end, theoretically at least? You would need to account for any sort of possible butterfly effect when contemplating divine intervention.The Creepoc Infinite wrote:Jute wrote:Uh... Christianity says God gave humans free will, so he is anything but dictating what happens in your life. Most terrible things in the world are either man-made (wars and hate, for example) or naturally caused (illnesses, natural catastrophes etc.) Would you rather have God change everyone's mind so they are like characters on a children's show, where arguments usually are about harmless things (like how to organize a party or what do at a sleepover) and all the villains are either not human and can be defeated and destroyed, or reformed to be "good"?
god is ultimately to blame for both man made awful shit and naturally caused awful shit, becaus ehe created them with full knowledge of their proclivity of being able to cause awful shit!
tolerating and condoning evil is still an evil in and of itself.
Carl Sagan, astrophysicist and atheist wrote:"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.
When we recognize our place in an immensity of light-years and in the passage of ages,
when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling,
that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual...
The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both."
Italios wrote:Jute's probably some sort of Robin Hood-type outlaw
"Boys and girls so happy, young and gay / Don't let false worldly joy carry your hearts away."
by The Creepoc Infinite » Tue Mar 31, 2015 7:20 am
Jute wrote:Well, that's the trade-off for giving humans free will, I guess? And who says preventing natural catastrophes or other terrible things wouldn't be worse in the end, theoretically at least? You would need to account for any sort of possible butterfly effect when contemplating divine intervention.The Creepoc Infinite wrote:god is ultimately to blame for both man made awful shit and naturally caused awful shit, becaus ehe created them with full knowledge of their proclivity of being able to cause awful shit!
tolerating and condoning evil is still an evil in and of itself.
by Jute » Tue Mar 31, 2015 7:22 am
The Creepoc Infinite wrote:Jute wrote:Well, that's the trade-off for giving humans free will, I guess? And who says preventing natural catastrophes or other terrible things wouldn't be worse in the end, theoretically at least? You would need to account for any sort of possible butterfly effect when contemplating divine intervention.
the trade off is that we have an asshole god? that's not a good trade off for temporary free will.
Carl Sagan, astrophysicist and atheist wrote:"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.
When we recognize our place in an immensity of light-years and in the passage of ages,
when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling,
that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual...
The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both."
Italios wrote:Jute's probably some sort of Robin Hood-type outlaw
"Boys and girls so happy, young and gay / Don't let false worldly joy carry your hearts away."
by Fralinia » Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:14 am
Jute wrote:The Creepoc Infinite wrote:why would you WANT god to exist?
i'm not exactly gonna be excited if there is an all powerful genocidal asshole in a bad mood dictating what happens in my life.
Uh... Christianity says God gave humans free will, so he is anything but dictating what happens in your life. Most terrible things in the world are either man-made (wars and hate, for example) or naturally caused (illnesses, natural catastrophes etc.) Would you rather have God change everyone's mind so they are like characters on a children's show, where arguments usually are about harmless things (like how to organize a party or what do at a sleepover) and all the villains are either not human and can be defeated and destroyed, or reformed to be "good"?
John Rawls wrote:Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought. A theory, however elegant and economical must be rejected or revised if it is untrue; likewise laws and institutions no matter how efficient and well-arranged must be reformed or abolished if they are unjust.
Che Guevera wrote: At a given moment it appears that there may have been a great commotion and a single great change. But that change has been gestating among men day by day, and sometimes generation by generation.
by The Creepoc Infinite » Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:15 am
Fralinia wrote:Jute wrote:Uh... Christianity says God gave humans free will, so he is anything but dictating what happens in your life. Most terrible things in the world are either man-made (wars and hate, for example) or naturally caused (illnesses, natural catastrophes etc.) Would you rather have God change everyone's mind so they are like characters on a children's show, where arguments usually are about harmless things (like how to organize a party or what do at a sleepover) and all the villains are either not human and can be defeated and destroyed, or reformed to be "good"?
Well, it's certainly not a bad thing. God would be capable of anything, and so he would have some way of inspiring us to creative and intellectual thinking without war and hardship to drive our passions. Such a world would be just fine by me. No war, no famine, no hate, and I'm sure that everyone would worship their perfect Creator, as well. Why God chose to include this level of evil in our world, short of "it'll spice things up", eludes me.
by Arbolvine » Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:17 pm
by Russels Orbiting Teapot » Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:18 pm
by United Marxist Nations » Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:22 pm
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by Zottistan » Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:51 pm
Jute wrote:The Creepoc Infinite wrote:why would you WANT god to exist?
i'm not exactly gonna be excited if there is an all powerful genocidal asshole in a bad mood dictating what happens in my life.
Uh... Christianity says God gave humans free will, so he is anything but dictating what happens in your life. Most terrible things in the world are either man-made (wars and hate, for example) or naturally caused (illnesses, natural catastrophes etc.) Would you rather have God change everyone's mind so they are like characters on a children's show, where arguments usually are about harmless things (like how to organize a party or what do at a sleepover) and all the villains are either not human and can be defeated and destroyed, or reformed to be "good"?
by The Rich Port » Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:55 pm
by Risottia » Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:58 pm
Jute wrote:The Creepoc Infinite wrote:why would you WANT god to exist?
i'm not exactly gonna be excited if there is an all powerful genocidal asshole in a bad mood dictating what happens in my life.
Uh... Christianity says God gave humans free will, so he is anything but dictating what happens in your life. Most terrible things in the world are either man-made (wars and hate, for example) or naturally caused (illnesses, natural catastrophes etc.)
Would you rather have God change everyone's mind so they are like characters on a children's show, where arguments usually are about harmless things (like how to organize a party or what do at a sleepover) and all the villains are either not human and can be defeated and destroyed, or reformed to be "good"?
by Neutraligon » Tue Mar 31, 2015 3:07 pm
by Conscentia » Tue Mar 31, 2015 3:12 pm
Neutraligon wrote:Is it possible for an omniscient god to forget something?
Misc. Test Results And Assorted Other | The NSG Soviet Last Updated: Test Results (2018/02/02) | ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ |
by The Rich Port » Tue Mar 31, 2015 3:16 pm
by Neutraligon » Tue Mar 31, 2015 5:11 pm
by Shaggai » Tue Mar 31, 2015 5:44 pm
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:Russels Orbiting Teapot wrote:
In the same way that "there are no black swans" would be a positive claim.
Isn't that a negative claim as well?
You're probably more knowledgeable on this than I am, so I'll try to avoid snark.Vilatania wrote:Err actually pretantia there is a pretty big difference between claiming that something doesnt' exist and claiming that something can't exist. Claiming that something can't exist assumes there is a logical reason as to why it cannot exist. The lack of evidence to support it's existence is insufficient to make a negative claim about the possibility of it's existence. Stated frankly, you cannot make this claim logically.
It's the opposite claim to,"X can exist." I still don't see how it's positive.
by The Empire of Pretantia » Tue Mar 31, 2015 6:02 pm
Shaggai wrote:The Empire of Pretantia wrote:Isn't that a negative claim as well?
You're probably more knowledgeable on this than I am, so I'll try to avoid snark.
It's the opposite claim to,"X can exist." I still don't see how it's positive.
The default for the probability of any hypothesis is 50%, weighted by complexity and normalized over all possible hypotheses. A claim that something cannot exist is saying that the probability of that hypothesis is 0%. This is lower than the default, so you are claiming that the probability of that hypothesis should be changed. Any change in probability requires evidence.
by Grave_n_idle » Tue Mar 31, 2015 6:41 pm
Land Der Volkeren wrote:Wouldn't a non-caused event be prove of a transcendent being?
by Jack O Land » Tue Mar 31, 2015 6:46 pm
by Neutraligon » Tue Mar 31, 2015 6:50 pm
Jack O Land wrote:
They're not whipping it out in public, they're doing it in the privacy of their own forum. I think we can all agree that this is one of the best possible places for theological debate outside an academic setting.
Guys, I have a question, and I think it's relevant to the argument:
Do you think humans are inherently rational beings?
by Sun Wukong » Tue Mar 31, 2015 6:51 pm
Jack O Land wrote:
They're not whipping it out in public, they're doing it in the privacy of their own forum. I think we can all agree that this is one of the best possible places for theological debate outside an academic setting.
Guys, I have a question, and I think it's relevant to the argument:
Do you think humans are inherently rational beings?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: -Britain-, Al-Haqiqah, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Dutch Socialist States, Elejamie, Riviere Renard
Advertisement