Does God Exist? Evidence & Arguments For & Against

[Dave]

OK, I thought that, because of his belief in God he tryed to hard to prove the UPs wrong...

 

[The Grimmus]

personaly i think god was, yes as siad before, used to control and set morals and laws for people and yes give people reason, explantion and hope. But now all that separates those who believe and don't beilve is the hope and explantion parts (the government aka american jesus has taken over morals and control and reason quite nicely) Those who don't need hope don't need religion if your ok about not really haveing a will or a "soul" that after you die you kind of don't exist. But, i don't think that people who don't beilve should be going around telling eveyrone god dosent exist (unless it is here where everyone is entiteled to their opinions) becuase that will disalusion them and make their meaningless existence apperant and that ofcourse would be bad for the american jesus becuase it will make their workers unhappy.

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
It's worth noting that this is a common misconception. Einstein's god was not the conventional guy with beard, but the god of Spinoza. In short, his god was simply the personification of his belief in the beauty and order at the heart of the universe. Einstein left organised religion. Hence the context of his assertion that "god does not play dice". He means that he cannot belief that a beautiful and ordered universe would have a random and inexplicable basis.

And yet this is the same belief a lot of people hold (myself included), which speaks more of God "in essence" (spiritually), as opposed to customs and rituals which are practiced by religion.

This is very well put FZ+!

 

[MasterBlaster]

That original post Alex, is effing sickening. I know to you as to me, I wonder why it is I have to live in a time period where I am so much more advanced in logic and reason than this scum.

 

[FZ+]

Originally posted by MasterBlaster
That original post Alex, is effing sickening. I know to you as to me, I wonder why it is I have to live in a time period where I am so much more advanced in logic and reason than this scum.

Erm... I don't think we need quite that great an ego, hmm? Always to ready to accept being wrong, regardless of probabilities. When talking about God, it helps not to elevate oneself to a position of omniscient entity as well... Watch out, you might disprove yourself...

 

[MasterBlaster]

Originally posted by FZ+
Erm... I don't think we need quite that great an ego, hmm? Always to ready to accept being wrong, regardless of probabilities. When talking about God, it helps not to elevate oneself to a position of omniscient entity as well... Watch out, you might disprove yourself...

I have no more ego than I have worked for by being rational and logical.

I'm not omniscient - I have plenty of very worth colleages. However some people are certainly of a greater ability than others. There is scum in the world, it's the hate-filled maniacs who try to enslave others into their world.

 

[Iacchus32]

I wonder whatever happened to Logical Atheist? Hmm ...

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
I wonder whatever happened to Logical Atheist? Hmm ...

Wonder no more!

 

[MasterBlaster]

Originally posted by quantumcarl
If you say so.

What you believe is true... for you.

Next question.

NO. What is true is true - weather you effin' like it or not.

Deal with it. There is NO such thing as a God.

 

[heusdens]

Originally posted by MasterBlaster
NO. What is true is true - weather you effin' like it or not.

Deal with it. There is NO such thing as a God.

When dealing with the issue of existence, it is perhaps trivial to ask as to what existence category a certain 'thing' or 'concept' belongs.

When one is asked wether or not a duck that can talk exists, the answer given by most people will be no.

But when it is asked wether or not one is familiar with the comic figure Donals Duck (who, as we know, is a duck that can talk), then most people will answer yes.

So, does a duck that can talk exist?

Conclusion:

It is important to know what we define as our existence category, in order to answer the question. If that is not given implicitly, we need to ask and define for it explicitly.

So, does God exist?

No, since there does not exist a 'creator' of the universe. God has no real physical existence.

Yes, since God is defined as such in books as the Bible, and therefore does exist.

Like in the previous example, there is no real contradiction. Even though a duck that really can talk is not something we can conceive of, we have no problem in accepting the existence of Donald Duck.

In the same way, for the real world, which exists objectively, apart from and outside of our mind, we can not conceive of that it was 'created' by a mere concept of the mind itself. Despite that, some pepople nevertheless seem to have no problem to believe in such deities, to fullfill there 'spiritual needs'.

 

[TENYEARS]

If two damm fools agree on a topic what do we have? And three four five. And so the fish continue to swim in the tank. Their unconciousness spewing garbage upon the planet as long as their video games, CD players, etc... are functional. They have no clue about god, the universe or what it is made of and yet we have these wonderful senseless conversations. None of you have found the truth because it is to scary to go there.

It would be better if every conversation was focused upon the wheather because on issues like these you do not comprehend. The truth is not a polling place children and adults alike where we can say oh yea I believe or I don't. Either you understand what the universe is made of or you don't. If you do, we would not be having this conversation. It is better to believe nothing and walk in a vacuum than to settle for an answer. What you are doing is just like playing russian rollete and the gun is fully loaded with mountains of loaded clips.

Please continue.

 

[FZ+]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
these wonderful senseless conversations.

Such irony...

 

[megashawn]

Tenyears:

They have no clue about god, the universe or what it is made of and yet we have these wonderful senseless conversations. None of you have found the truth because it is to scary to go there.

Lemme tell you something. I've seen your POV, I was raised with your religous beliefs, I know your truth.

You do nothing but sit around and make blind speculations, based on blind faith and come up with rediculous conclusions. Things such as there is no afterlife being supported by christian beliefs and the bible. I assure you, if this was preached at a church, people would not be christian.

You've got no more evidence on whether or not a god exists then anyone else on this forum. The difference is, I'm willing to accept that I may never know if there is some all powerfull being or not, and try to live a good, decent life.

If there are any more requirments on me then that, I cannot comply. If I'm to spend minutes or hours praying nightly and dedicate my sundays to some being that can't even take the time to say "Hey, hows it going?", and this method you and/or others propose is infact the true path, then I can't wait to meet satan and start plotting the holy war on heaven.

But if all you care to do is come here and tell us we are all wrong and are going to burn in hell ("playing russian roulette", I speak in metaphors as well) then why do you bother? I think that no idea can reach its fullest state without arguement, or as I told my mechanic buddy when I was playing devils advocate and arguing with him on something I agree, "No cylinder can be honed, without resistance."

In fact, it is people such as yourself who drive me further from religion. Your bullish attitude and your "My way or the highway to hell" approach is rediculous to say the least. Then the way you manipulate beliefs, apparently to suit your own personal agenda.

But again, unless you've got some kind of solid evidence to support your claim, you should not speak from a position like you are already correct. Frankly, you don't know (neither do I). Honestly, claiming you do only reveals how deep the ignorance flows.

And to the whole lil Russian roulette line of reasoning, it does make sense. I've seen it worded like:

If god exists, and you don't believe in him, you suffer eternally

If God doesn't exist, and you did believe in him, you've nothing to lose.

And people really cling to this as there last line of hope in a world that is more and more losing there religous restrictions.

Now, here is one to shoot your russian roulette thing up out the water, and smash it in a few pieces.

If god doesn't exist, and I did believe in him, worshipping, and die believing I'm going to heaven, only to never have another cognitive thought, then a great atrocity has been committed as I and countless others have been duped into living a restricted life in hopes of having a awesome afterlife.

In fact, that is what God is all about nowadays. People don't want to die. People are afraid to die, with good reason with all the horror stories about it.

In deed, you do not know if your particular flavor of religion is the correct path as well. There are many religions, and many versions of the same religion. Are you absolutly certain your beliefs are correct and will earn you a seat in heaven? Or is there a little nagging doubt that maybe you should go mormon or protestant, maybe southern babtist? I know your answer, but I also know the truth.

 

[Iacchus32]

The Heathen in Heaven

Excerpt from http://www.swedenborg.com/ work, Heaven and Hell ...

There is a general opinion that those born outside of the church, who are caled the nations, or heathen, cannot be saved, because not having the Word they know nothing about the Lord, and apart from the Lord there is no salvation. But that these are also saved this alone makes certain, that the mercy of the Lord is universal, that is, extends to every individual; that these equally with those within the church, who are few in comparison, are born men, and that their ignorance of the Lord is not their fault. Any one who thinks from any enlightened reason can see that no man is born for hell, for the Lord is love itself and His love is to will the salvation of all. Therefore He has provided a religion for every one, and by it acknowledment of the Divine and interior life; for to live in accordance with one's religion is to live interiorly, since one then looks to the Divine, and so far as he looks to the Divine he does not look to the world but separates himself from the world, that is, from the life of the world, which is exterior life.

 

[TENYEARS]

I am not recuiting believers or condeming anyone and never have. There is not eternal hell and there is not eternal heavean. Truth does exist and it is 100% in accordance with science. I find truth in many religions, christian, hindu, Zen budist, tao, american indian, south american, voodoo, science, atheism, etc... There are only misunderstanings in all of the interpetations of these religions. This I know. Megashawn, in 1987 I witnessed god, I became enlightened and understood the meaning of life, satori, shamdi whatever you would like to call it.

If a person is a pure atheist in my opinion this is good. In my opinion what this should mean is they do not "belive in god" this is ok as long as they do not say god does not exist because this would not be logical. It would be like saying I have never seen whatever but that does not mean that whatever does not exist. So I can say I do not believe it exists because my experience to this point and time has not come across it. I cannot deny it's existence but I can say I do not believe it exists. There is a difference than saying god does not exist. You are just being honest.

A person like this would be no different than one who goes to church and belives but does not understand. There is the possibility that the atheist is actually closer to a real experience of truth than the one who socalled goes to church. Nothing is in stone. (Try the parable about the vineyard owner who is hiring workers).

The problem my friend is that we create paths of action in life. The path humanity is taking is destroying the planet in the name of materialism because they want to defer responsibility to the next generation. If they knew the truth of an after life, would they continue to do what they do? I must try.

I have seen oceans of sludge with lifeless ocean.

I was once told something by someone who was told by someone. I said I don't believe in that crap and I am the master of my destiny. There came a day that event happened and I was about to incur the event which was spoken and in a split second realization of memory turned the event into a non event. Sometime life is a razors edge. Good movie you should probably see it the Bill Murray version.

Megashawn, do me a favor. A little experiment if you would. Blank your mind and then say you were a witness to god. You knew god was real and that a human being had incredible potential and that the afterlife was real. You also had visions or whatever.

What would you do with this? You don't have to believe here just place yourself in these shoes. What would you do? Hell any of you what would you do?

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
I am not recuiting believers or condeming anyone and never have. There is not eternal hell and there is not eternal heavean. Truth does exist and it is 100% in accordance with science. I find truth in many religions, christian, hindu, Zen budist, tao, american indian, south american, voodoo, science, atheism, etc... There are only misunderstanings in all of the interpetations of these religions. This I know. Megashawn, in 1987 I witnessed god, I became enlightened and understood the meaning of life, satori, shamdi whatever you would like to call it.

What's the point of religion, besides teaching us morals, if not to prepare us for an afterlife? Are you saying you don't believe an afterlife exists? Why would God even "tease us" with such an idea?

 

[TENYEARS]

The afterlife exists, but heaven and hell are not eternal. They will always exist but the relative experience of them will not as the relative mind becomes less relative(process of what the hindus call reincarnation). Would you believe that there is perfect physics behind this.

 

[Iacchus32]

Physics is one thing and metaphysics is another, at least in the sense that metaphysics is the cause of which physics is the effect. So I think we need to go beneath the surface a little in order to answer to your question.

 

[megashawn]

Truth does exist and it is 100% in accordance with science. I find truth in many religions, christian, hindu, Zen budist, tao, american indian, south american, voodoo, science, atheism, etc... There are only misunderstanings in all of the interpetations of these religions.

Get something right about me. I do not say "God does not exist." I say that God in this christian idea of him CANNOT exist. I've often agreed that there is good things to learn from all religions. It is the foundation that has helped humanity advance so far.

A favorite quote of mine, not sure of the writer is "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it". Religous texts, while they may or may not be historically accurate, do reflect humanity at that point in time. There are good things to learn even from the most atrocicous and graphic stories. Regardless of the truthfullness, one can learn a valueble lesson from almost any religous belief. Hence, the purpose of the religion.

If a person is a pure atheist in my opinion this is good. In my opinion what this should mean is they do not "belive in god" this is ok as long as they do not say god does not exist because this would not be logical.

As I said above, I'm not so bold as to say God does not exist. My typical answer is "I don't know if god does or does not exist, none can prove it." This is, IMO, the most honest answer one can give regarding said matters.

Of course, if a person has had some personal expieriance that has swayed them to one belief or another, then they develop a bias. Even if this personal expieriance has left the person empty handed only with a "Big one that got away" story.

I know there is more to life then what we are aware of. I often think of reincarnation as being the most viable afterlife solution. And reincarnation is an afterlife, its just a never ending cycle of life and death, and rebirth. Do you also believe in Karma? If so, does this not make christian "sinning" irrellavent?

Reincarnation, as hindus described it, is an automated type system. It does not require a god type figure to ensure the operation of it. Karma is used as the reward/punishment system. A good person reincarnates into a higher life, while the evil person reincarnates into a lesser lifeform. Reincarnation also agrees more with reality, and the stress in that religion is your present life, not some eternal dream state where all is happy.

A person like this would be no different than one who goes to church and belives but does not understand. There is the possibility that the atheist is actually closer to a real experience of truth than the one who socalled goes to church. Nothing is in stone. (Try the parable about the vineyard owner who is hiring workers).

This I have to disagree on. A person who acknowledges the fact that we, as a whole, have no idea if there is or is not a god, and cannot prove it is in no ways comparable to a person who goes to church, believes in that churches version of god, and uses that churches religous texts as there scientific understanding of the world around them.

A person who goes to church will likely believe in creation over evolution. This person will likely believe there was a great flood that covered the earth, although lacking any true evidence of how this feat was pulled off. This person is also likely to believe a man, just like you and me, was sentanced to death, killed, and come back to life.

You see, a person, atheist, such as you described, or by my response to the "Is there a god" question, is not nearly the same. The person who goes to church already has the answer to all his/her questions, and anything that contradicts those answers is considered wrong and evil, simply because it doesn't agree with what they learned in church.

The problem my friend is that we create paths of action in life. The path humanity is taking is destroying the planet in the name of materialism because they want to defer responsibility to the next generation. If they knew the truth of an after life, would they continue to do what they do? I must try.

This is garbage. I agree that humanity is destroying the earth. In the name of materialism? If anything, I'd think the Earth would be the absolute most precious possesion to a materialist. No, I'd be more inclined to believe that the destruction of this Earth is at the hands of people who believe God will be back at anytime now, and do not see any purpose in striving to protect our planet.

In fact, the bible tells us that we have dominion over the planet, essentially saying it is ours to do with as we please.

In reality, we are the planets possesion, atleast, this much we can both agree to be true, I'd hope.

I was once told something by someone who was told by someone. I said I don't believe in that crap and I am the master of my destiny. There came a day that event happened and I was about to incur the event which was spoken and in a split second realization of memory turned the event into a non event. Sometime life is a razors edge. Good movie you should probably see it the Bill Murray version

Huh?

Megashawn, do me a favor. A little experiment if you would. Blank your mind and then say you were a witness to god. You knew god was real and that a human being had incredible potential and that the afterlife was real. You also had visions or whatever.

Hmm. I can blank my mind. I can not force myself into having some contact, make believe or not, with a supreme being. I should not have to. Such an all powerfull being should be able to snap his fingers and make us all understand his plan for us.

I personally believe all human beings have unlimited potential. That is, unlimited within our bounds of course. But with our newest friend, technology, we are forever more changning the boundries.

I really wish you'd quit contradicting yourself. First you tell me there is no hell, no heaven. Then you say you believe in reincarnation. Now your telling me to convince myself that the afterlife is real. What gives Cletus?

And if this is much the same way you had your meeting with god, then I would say this is merely your innerself, sub-concious, whatever, that has told you exactly what you wanted to hear.

Do please remember that I'm not a stranger to religion. I grew up believe in god, jesus, holy ghost, etc. I've ventured out and tried a few other belief systems. One thing is always true between any religion. If you sit around and wait on your god to get things done for you, you'll sit there till you die.

Well, I think this may very well be my largest post ever.

 

[megashawn]

Physics is one thing and metaphysics is another, at least in the sense that metaphysics is the cause of which physics is the effect. So I think we need to go beneath the surface a little in order to answer to your question.

I agree with the bolded section, but from there on I've got issues.

Yes, physics and metaphysics is 2 different things.

Physics is proven, substantiated, and operates on the principles described in a physics book.

Metaphysics is much more complex, as any piece of fiction is. There is no proof for metaphysical claims (got some?) and no basis in the real world.

And if there was, then why hasnt The amazing Randy hand over the million bucks?

 

[TENYEARS]

Megashawn, if you asked any elightened human being a question they would all answer from the same source no matter what the relgion. God does not rule us, god is part of all things becuase "God Is Everything". This was what I witnessed.

Truth may only be found in a place where you are afraid to go. Our egos keep us from it with incredible tricks, but it does exist.

Technology will not save us, only the truth will set anyone free.

And yes the messiah is comming again, the jews as well as the christians as well as the hindus, etc.. are all waiting. The messiah must be born from one place. You will find that place tomarrow morning when you wake up and wash you face in the mirror.

This is the truth of all christians, hindus, buddists, etc... Only a dam fools of each religion would argue the points.

 

[megashawn]

So then, essentially what your telling me is I'm god and pretty much the majority of the population is a bunch of idiots.

This is the truth of all christians, hindus, buddists, etc... Only a dam fools of each religion would argue the points

Because by the above logic, and noting the violence of one religion towards another, that most of them are complete fools.

You see, if things actually worked like you claim they do, things would in fact be much better then they are.

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by megashawn
I agree with the bolded section, but from there on I've got issues.

Yes, physics and metaphysics is 2 different things.

Physics is proven, substantiated, and operates on the principles described in a physics book.

Metaphysics is much more complex, as any piece of fiction is. There is no proof for metaphysical claims (got some?) and no basis in the real world.

And if there was, then why hasnt The amazing Randy hand over the million bucks?

Well let's just say that out of the blue I happened to be a philanthropic billionaire who had the desire to hand over a million bucks to the next person I saw at random which, happened to be "you." But let's say I didn't want to be found out, so I would follow you home and wait for the opportunity to slip "the package" into your mailbox. Which I would, and I would leave, without none being the wiser.

So here you are, when you go out to check the mail the next day, you find yourself the beneficiary of a million bucks (the effect), but you haven't a clue as to how it got there? (the cause). Doesn't this kind of belie the way life works in general? Where we have the whole of creation in front of us (the effect), but without truly understanding the "hidden hand" that put it there? (the cause). This is really all that metaphysics is supposed entail -- be it spiritual or otherwise -- an attempt to understand the "first cause" of things. Or at least this is one of the definitions in the dictionary.

Oh, if you would like to read a different take on James Randi's million bucks, please follow this thread ... Tonight I Visit The The Bowlless Bowl (originally posted by TENYEARS).

 

[TENYEARS]

Iacchus32, your post about a vision of chief Joesph intrigues me. I know it's quality of experience and for some reason it repeats upon me and I do know know why. Maybe this is the way in which it must be done. It can, the question is should it? Maybe the fishbowls are there for a reason? Maybe humankind is not ready for the truth or maybe it is I do not know. It seems in 5000 years humanity has not changed much.

There are a few where I work that have asked of visions which I have had. One day my response was why should I say anything anymore, you have not learned and only avoid things so you don't have to learn. People sometimes have to walk through the fire in order to learn.

 

[megashawn]

So here you are, when you go out to check the mail the next day, you find yourself the beneficiary of a million bucks (the effect), but you haven't a clue as to how it got there? (the cause).

Well, because I might happen to have a security camera on my mailbox. Lot of ppl are doing it to catch mailbox vandals.

I understand your point of view.

edit: My dog would definately bark as well.

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
Iacchus32, your post about a vision of chief Joesph intrigues me. I know it's quality of experience and for some reason it repeats upon me and I do know know why. Maybe this is the way in which it must be done. It can, the question is should it? Maybe the fishbowls are there for a reason? Maybe humankind is not ready for the truth or maybe it is I do not know. It seems in 5000 years humanity has not changed much.

There are a few where I work that have asked of visions which I have had. One day my response was why should I say anything anymore, you have not learned and only avoid things so you don't have to learn. People sometimes have to walk through the fire in order to learn.

And then again, what does a grub know about being a butterfly, that is, until that time comes? ... Which isn't to say it shouldn't be alluded to from to time to time, but maybe this is the purpose behind myths and fables?

 

[Zero]

What if there are no gods, no magic? That single thought seems to scare people more than anything, except one other thought: what if there are no answers?

 

[radagast]

Originally posted by Zero
...except one other thought: what if there are no answers?

Better no answers, than no questions.

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
What if there are no gods, no magic? That single thought seems to scare people more than anything, except one other thought: what if there are no answers?

Life itself is magic. And yet if there were no wonder or sense of awe about it, then what's the point? Why endow us with such a large brain and extensive nervous system, if not for the sake of realizing "the experience?"

 

[megashawn]

Life itself is magic. And yet if there were no wonder or sense of awe about it, then what's the point? Why endow us with such a large brain and extensive nervous system, if not for the sake of realizing "the experience?"

Perhaps, not only realizing the experience, but maybe someday being able to create our own "experience".

I mean, why would god create a society, knowing he'll have to destroy it, only to take the good ones out and start a new one, while torturing the bad.

It seems more our duty to turn our society into the dreams of the people who wrote the bible.

We can wait for god to do it.

Or we can try to get it done without him.

Don't you think god would be so proud?

I don't really see what you mean by saying life is magic. Life is understood. Magic is just another word for trick.

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by megashawn
Perhaps, not only realizing the experience, but maybe someday being able to create our own "experience".

I mean, why would god create a society, knowing he'll have to destroy it, only to take the good ones out and start a new one, while torturing the bad.

Why separate the wheat from the chaff? It's not God who tortures the bad, it's the bad who torture themselves. This is the only reason why hell was created.

It seems more our duty to turn our society into the dreams of the people who wrote the bible.

In which case you would have to acknowledge there was a God.

We can wait for god to do it.

Or we can try to get it done without him.

Don't you think god would be so proud?

If you mean something similar to what the founding fathers did when founding this country, then I would say you had the right idea.

I don't really see what you mean by saying life is magic. Life is understood. Magic is just another word for trick.

With all the beauty, the splendor and diversity that exists, I would have to say yes, life is magical.

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Life itself is magic. And yet if there were no wonder or sense of awe about it, then what's the point? Why endow us with such a large brain and extensive nervous system, if not for the sake of realizing "the experience?"

And why is it that everything with you has to be mystical? Why does there have to be 'magic' beyond tables and cars and Chex Mix?

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by radagast
Better no answers, than no questions.

Better to ask useful questions, than to ask 'questions' for which we just make up answers.

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
And why is it that everything with you has to be mystical? Why does there have to be 'magic' beyond tables and cars and Chex Mix?

Hey I don't get a 'buzz' out of everything I do in life. Nor do I hit on the 'bong' every five minutes, as another of the PF Mentors 'implied.' And yet for the sake of consistency on this forum, this is one of those questions which can only be answered with a 'yes' or a 'no.'

Does God exist? Yes. Is the means by which we understand God mystical? Yes. If this is true and always has been true, then is there another means by which I can explain it? No.

If on the other hand God didn't exist, then the only answer could be 'no.'

 

[maximus]

IACCHUS32: i believe your problem (no offense meant) is that you are unable to abandon the idea of a purpose to life. in thread after thread you ask "why do we exist, if not for a Purpose?". i would ask you, do you believe what science proves (<<i use this word lightly<<)? becuase purpose is impossible in QM, because no intended result can come from comlete randomness. therefore, life is an accident. will you respond, please? i wonder how it can be that you won't accept this.

 

[Iacchus32]

The Life Within

Originally posted by maximus
IACCHUS32: i believe your problem (no offense meant) is that you are unable to abandon the idea of a purpose to life. in thread after thread you ask "why do we exist, if not for a Purpose?". i would ask you, do you believe what science proves (<<i use this word lightly<<)? becuase purpose is impossible in QM, because no intended result can come from comlete randomness. therefore, life is an accident. will you respond, please? i wonder how it can be that you won't accept this.

Hey, no offense taken. And yet I'm not prepared to accept that which is unfounded and illogical. Ha ha ha!

You see the argument exists between what we deem "external reality" (the science aspect) and "internal reality" (the religious aspect), which I don't necessarily see as disparaging, but rather that of a relationship, between "essence and form." And, while it's entirely possible to have a totally "objective reality" (i.e., as form), it could only happen if the subjective reality (the life within or essence) had died and there was nothing to animate or give life to the form, in which case it would be considered a "dead reality."

In other words, what is reality without the life (or soul) to animate it?

While consider what it would be like stumbling across the ruins of an acient civilization, bereft of the "actual life" that it entailed. It would be a "dead civilization" now wouldn't it?

This I think is the danger with science today, in its attempts to "objectify" everything and "cancel out" any notion of a "life within" (which to most of us is represented by God). Indeed one of these days it will be the ruins of our own civilization that someone will be "gawking at."

Remember, the founding of the United States was based upon one very important principle, The Freedom of Religion.

 

[heusdens]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Remember, the founding of the United States was based upon one very important principle, The Freedom of Religion.

Seems as if this principle has recently been updated.
It has now been added to this principle the Freedom to Conquer Others ...

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by heusdens
Seems as if this principle has recently been updated.
It has now been added to this principle the Freedom to Conquer Others ...

Do you mean like when Iraq tried to conquer Iran, and proceeded to invade Kuwait? It's not like we arrived at their doorstep arbitrarily.

Besides that, you just side-stepped my whole argument! Hmm ... although it basically reiterates what I said in the previous thread, https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=50364#post50364

 

[heusdens]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Do you mean like when Iraq tried to conquer Iran, and proceeded to invade Kuwait? It's not like we arrived at their doorstep arbitrarily.

I mean exactly that yes, when the US was helping Iraq in their conquering Iran, and at some instant later, US was helping Iran to conquer Iraq, and thereafter, US had no problems Iraq invading Kuwait, but thereafter started a war against Iraq to liberate Kuwait.

And that is why the US is now occupying , ehhh liberating Iraq.

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by heusdens
I mean exactly that yes, when the US was helping Iraq in their conquering Iran, and at some instant later, US was helping Iran to conquer Iraq, and thereafter, US had no problems Iraq invading Kuwait, but thereafter started a war against Iraq to liberate Kuwait.

And that is why the US is now occupying , ehhh liberating Iraq.

So what does this really have to do with you side-stepping my previous post? This is all politics anyway, and has very little to do with the "ethics" of religion.

 

[radagast]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
This I think is the danger with science today, in its attempts to "objectify" everything and "cancel out" any notion of a "life within" (which to most of us is represented by God).

It seems as if this is an anthropomorphizing of science. Science is a means to determine information about the objective, the internal (as in subjective) is outside the domain of science in that it cannot be deemed repeatable by others, it doesn't seem to be something which theories can be created and falsifiable predictions made.

It could also be said that the study of navel lint "objectify" navel lint and "cancel out" any notion of a "life within". Given the "life within" would be outside the domain of navel lint, is perhaps, an important consideration.

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by radagast
It seems as if this is an anthropomorphizing of science. Science is a means to determine information about the objective, the internal (as in subjective) is outside the domain of science in that it cannot be deemed repeatable by others, it doesn't seem to be something which theories can be created and falsifiable predictions made.

If, by and large science is a result of the "human endeavor," and by and large effects its outcome, then what can I say? Are you saying science is a non-human agency, run by non-humans? Then hey, why don't we just pass a law, saying only monkeys can be scientists?

It could also be said that the study of navel lint "objectify" navel lint and "cancel out" any notion of a "life within". Given the "life within" would be outside the domain of navel lint, is perhaps, an important consideration.

The subjective reality is "you" man. The subjective reality is "me." If you wish to cancel out your own existence, then I guess that's your choice. Of course if you believe in determinism then I suppose that means there is no choice. Too bad.

See what I mean by "canceling out?"

And by the way, the "objective reality" is only the aftermath, of a lot of "internal things" at work which, have come and gone. In which case I would say you're living in the past. Aren't we all? This is why we can't find God, because He only exists in The Present.

 

[Ejderha]

First of all HELLO to all. I am new here. I didn't know where to begin. So I post my opinion about god. English is not my mother language, so I am sorry for mistakes and everybody welcome for any correction.

In my opinion god is simply created by human beings for control. Of course by the help of holly books, surely they served some good purposes in the past as law...(!) They look different in the surface and in practice but all the books are telling the same thing. There is a god and he is unquestionably the creator... Honestly I have to say that it makes me sick. With all respect to believers...
The idea of a mighty god is simply pointing the arrogance of human being. "God created us and gave us our most precious abilities to worship himself" Well, everything about the god and the religions today serve for money and a domination fight over the planet. It is a very good basic to force people to murder and do horrible things also.
Of course there are lots of things to discuss about the god thing. In the terms of philosophy or science... But in my opinion the most important thing about god and the religion that they are the most dangerous socialogical problems. Social drugs. They provide the needed adrenaline and anger for war, peace and harmony for an ordered social life, which are infact only a kind of a mental terrorism practised on countless people.
By religion I mean all of them...

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32


Does God exist? Yes. Is the means by which we understand God mystical? Yes. If this is true and always has been true, then is there another means by which I can explain it? No.

So you can't explain or justify it at all. We knew this, of course, since your mode of debate is a hallmark of religious thought. Intellectual laziness combined with a desire for pretty ideas to be true combine to form most religious and philisophical thought. 'God exists, therefore God exists' should be your sig line.

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
So you can't explain or justify it at all. We knew this, of course, since your mode of debate is a hallmark of religious thought. Intellectual laziness combined with a desire for pretty ideas to be true combine to form most religious and philisophical thought. 'God exists, therefore God exists' should be your sig line.

Are you trying to tell me God doesn't exist? It's like I said it's either yes or no.

Originally posted by Iacchus32
If on the other hand God didn't exist, then the only answer could be 'no.'

And yet neither you nor anyone else has been able to demonstrate that He doesn't exist. So who or "what" am I supposed to believe?

 

[Royce]

Yes, God exists. No, it does not take a mystical experience to know that he exist or to know or talk with him. Can I prove it? Yes and have to myself nearly every day. Can I prove it to you? No.
That is something that only you can do for yourself. Even if I could you wouldn't accept it and would be right not to.

"If you see the Buddha walking down the street, kill it."

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Are you trying to tell me God doesn't exist? It's like I said it's either yes or no.


And yet neither you nor anyone else has been able to demonstrate that He doesn't exist. So who or "what" am I supposed to believe?

Believe as little as possible...that will get you farther than your current 'believe in the pretty lies' attitude.

 

[radagast]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
And yet neither you nor anyone else has been able to demonstrate that He doesn't exist. So who or "what" am I supposed to believe?

Assuming this was a debating point, this would be considered a "Shifting the Burden of Proof" argument flaw.

With regards to debating the point:
The default position, with regards to existence of a god, where god doesn't have characteristics that allow for a simple, straightforward demonstration of her/his existence, is the negative. The reason for this is basic common sense. To prove her/his existence, only requires demonstrating unequivocal and unambiguious evidence of said existence, yet the proof that he/her doesn't exist requires the searching of all possible places of said existence [simultaneously] - which is both impractical and blatently impossible.

Just as with the question of the existence of Unicorns - the default is that they don't. It would only take one to prove such, but the searching of all possible places, in the universe, simultaneously, to prove they didn't.

If you have proven to yourself that god exists, fine, but in an argument where the evidence isn't unambiguous and unequivocal by all parties, then the rational default position for god existence has to be the negative. The argument for his existence would be require the debator to provide evidence for said argument.

This only pertains to debate. As to what you believe, the criteria for what you believe is strickly up to you.

Originally posted by Royce
If you meet the Buddha walking down the street, kill it

Picky point: The quote is 'If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him'.

I know very few in the west that understand the intent of this quote, though you may.

 

[Royce]

I stand corrected. I obviously westernized unintentionally. Yes I understand its full meaning. BTW, years ago I read a book of that title. That's where I got the quote. It's one of my favorites. If I need to say it, we can only find the Buddha (or God) within ourselves, which we all have within us. If we encounter a/the Buddha outside of ourselves "it" is an imposter and probably in their words a demon or evil spirit bent on deceiving us. That was my point.

This is completely off topic, but everytime I think of that quote, I think that that is exactly what we (the Jews and Romans at least) did to Jesus. I don't yet know what to think of that or what the connection is other than the obvious. There is some deeper meaning or connection there or at least I feel there is. Any thoughts on that one?

 

[radagast]

Originally posted by Ejderha
In my opinion god is simply created by human beings for control. Of course by the help of holly books, surely they served some good purposes in the past as law...(!) They look different in the surface and in practice but all the books are telling the same thing. There is a god and he is unquestionably the creator... Honestly I have to say that it makes me sick. With all respect to believers...
The idea of a mighty god is simply pointing the arrogance of human being. "God created us and gave us our most precious abilities to worship himself" Well, everything about the god and the religions today serve for money and a domination fight over the planet. It is a very good basic to force people to murder and do horrible things also.
Of course there are lots of things to discuss about the god thing. In the terms of philosophy or science... But in my opinion the most important thing about god and the religion that they are the most dangerous socialogical problems. Social drugs. They provide the needed adrenaline and anger for war, peace and harmony for an ordered social life, which are infact only a kind of a mental terrorism practised on countless people.
By religion I mean all of them...

Hello,

Since you say you mean all of them, answer me this:

1) Explain how Buddhism and Taoism have been used to 'murder and do horrible things'. How about Jainism?

2) Considering Buddhism and Taoism do not have the concept of sin, how have they been used to control humans?

3) Buddhism and Taoism have no god, no creator, or actual supernatural beings, how does this fit with what you just wrote?