Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
this is actually not true. What science seems to be showing is that an omni-god type thing is not needed. It doesn't show that 'something' isn't needed.
Then what are the theist misrepresenting or misunderstanding about how the universe works? We know the god part is wrong, so, in your opinion, what is it they are misunderstanding and calling it god?
this is actually not true. What science seems to be showing is that an omni-god type thing is not needed. It doesn't show that 'something' isn't needed.
"ALL" (The Universe) IS the "omni-god type thing" A A.
It logically and reasonably does, and is, everything.
That is the main attribute known to be indicative and definitive of an Omni-God Entity. No?
"ALL" (The Universe) IS the "omni-god type thing" A A.
It logically and reasonably does, and is, everything.
That is the main attribute known to be indicative and definitive of an Omni-God Entity. No?
when I think of omni I think of 'controlling". for example, my life does create the blood cells in me but i don't knowingly control them. So, to that blood cell Iam everything, but I am not.
Then what are the theist misrepresenting or misunderstanding about how the universe works? We know the god part is wrong, so, in your opinion, what is it they are misunderstanding and calling it god?
no you do not know "the god part is wrong."
you do not know this.
and science does not know this.
there is a difference between "your opinion" "your belief" "your views" and "your knowledge"
if a person does not understand that and does not make that distinction, then it demonstrates confusion in their thought process and a lack of comprehension.
a primary point in the opening post is that science is not capable of articulating qualitative experience. the relationship a person has with the Divine is a qualitative experience.
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof / see opening post of this thread "... the qualitative aspects being those aspects that we cannot, even in principle, convey the full lived-experience meaning of to other people by simply discussing physics formulas, chemical bonding, neurological data, and so forth... you could literally spend the rest of eternity pouring over every objective physical fact about the qualitative experience....and stillnever, ever, ever, ever, fully convey it is really like.... The exact same situation applies to every qualitative aspect of every conceivable moment of subjective experience."
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 06-20-2018 at 03:14 PM..
no you do not know "the god part is wrong."
you do not know this.
and science does not know this.
there is a difference between "your opinion" "your belief" "your views" and "knowledge"
if a person does not understand that and does not make that distinction, then it demonstrates confusion in their thought process and a lack of comprehension
no, we are sure that the overseer type thing is not correct. It fits personal needs just like those that have to deny everything for personal needs.
gray has is philosophy and you have yours. I'll stick to engineering. Engineers don't need peer reviews, we need it to hold up under as many conditions as possible.
overseer does not hold up, qualia is limited to only a portion of the 'verse, and deny everything is all but useless except to the broken spirits out for revenge. well, maybe not broken, but revenge is all they have left.
Who claimed that anyone NEEDS peer reviews? Peer-reviewed journals are generally considered "primary source" material: When a new scientific discovery is made, a peer-reviewed journal is often--but not always--the first place it appears.
However there are plenty of engineering peer review journals. I'm pretty sure if you were an actual engineer that you would know this.
when I think of omni I think of 'controlling". for example, my life does create the blood cells in me but i don't knowingly control them. So, to that blood cell Iam everything, but I am not.
i kind of think the same thing for the universe.
The Universe (God) does control that which has been made by and through it by way of rearrangement of the energy/matter that comprises it.
This is done through Laws and Processes (Gravity, Thermodynamics, Evolution, etc) we know to exist. We can observe this controlling, and its effects.
MOF...The Universe/ALL (God) has done all the controlling that has ever occured. Along with anything and everything else that has ever happened.
A somewhat tangential question: I'm wondering why theists are generally so adamant about trying to prove that the natural world could not possibly have come about by natural means (i.e., non-Intelligent Design). Of course, in some sense I understand this desire perfectly well. Faith in God will seem more rational if it could somehow be proven that an Intelligent Designer is logically necessary, and most theists want their faith to appear rational and, ideally, scientifically supported. I can see why that would be desirable. But is it this really what theists should be focused on? It this very likely to be what God would want theists to be doing?
Consider an alternative:
Yes, it is logically and naturally possible that the world could have come about by natural means, but I happen to know that, in fact, it was designed by God because God has granted me the insight, through faith, to see the truth of how the world came to exist. Scientists demonstrating that the world could have come about by spontaneous self-organizing means does nothing to shake my faith because my faith is not based on science, but on God. Period.
Couldn't God have purposefully designed the natural world in accordance with natural laws that could have, in principle, brought the world into being without Him? This would be an ultimate test of faith. The truly faithful - the ultimate believers - will be revealed as those who keep their faith, despite even the most powerful evidence that favors non-theistic origins of the world. Let the scientists prove what they will; God has shown me better.
If there really is an Intelligent-Designer type of God, then my own intuitions tell me that something along these lines is probably what God has done. He designed a system of logic and natural laws that would, ultimately, allow our world to be self-starting and self-sustaining.
And from this it follows that science is in the business of discovering those basic rules of logic and nature. They are finding exactly what God intended them to find - a genuinely emergent, evolving natural world.
The elephant in the room, Gaylen, is the assumption that applying a label like nature or adjectives like natural laws, in any way EXPLAINS anything. It is no more explanatory than using the label God or adjectives like God's laws. We essentially investigate what WE DO NOT KNOW, find its laws, and then label them Nature and natural laws by preference because we STILL DO NOT KNOW. Any pretense that it is other than preference is disingenuous and deceitful.
The elephant in the room, Gaylen, is the assumption that applying a label like nature or adjectives like natural laws, in any way EXPLAINS anything. It is no more explanatory than using the label God or adjectives like God's laws. We essentially investigate what WE DO NOT KNOW, find its laws, and then label them Nature and natural laws by preferencebecause we STILL DO NOT KNOW. Any pretense that it is other than preference is disingenuous and deceitful.
so then your claim to "know God" because of your "encounter" is "disingenuous and deceitful" ?
or you prefer to claim it is "God" but you really "do not know"
which is it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
