Is non-belief a thing? (Judaism, Hinduism, atheist, Islam)
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.
How do we know which? That the universe exists, which is self evident ? Or that God is an unproven hypothesis? Even you argue that the lack of evidence both for and against God is equal , so you have admitted in past posts that we don't have solid proof of such. You merely try to rename the universe God, which circles back to the topic here. We KNOW the universe exists, so it only makes sense to use the word we KNOW is factual and not dependent on an unprovable hypothesis.
Thats not what he is actually saying. You are wording it azz backwards.
He is saying that spacetime is interaction via QED to form everything we see. Some of that stuff is aware and alive. That the system may actually be that also. He then calls that god because its the reason we are here.
So should I deny the fact that the observations he is using do line up with what we see? I know I know ... lmao.
How do we know which? That the universe exists, which is self evident ? Or that God is an unproven hypothesis? Even you argue that the lack of evidence both for and against God is equal , so you have admitted in past posts that we don't have solid proof of such. You merely try to rename the universe God, which circles back to the topic here. We KNOW the universe exists, so it only makes sense to use the word we KNOW is factual and not dependent on an unprovable hypothesis.
You do NOT know that the universe by that name exists and that the name God is not applicable. They are equally applicable names for the same evidence and the main attributes of it belie your rejection of the God name, period. You have no equivalent discriminating attribute that supports your preference for the name you prefer. At least I DO.
You do NOT know that the universe by that name exists and that the name God is not applicable. They are equally applicable names for the same evidence and the main attributes of it belie your rejection of the God name, period. You have no equivalent discriminating attribute that supports your preference for the name you prefer. At least I DO.
I don't know that the physical natural universe I say we should simply call the universe doesn't exist?
As far as being equally applicable , they are not. One describes a physical reality we know exists. The other describes a metaphysical concept we do not know for sure exists.
Unless we are back to your universe=god argument. In which case, we circle back to the topic. Why use a word that has theistic connotations when the word we have, the universe, is 100% accurate for what we do know?
I don't know that the physical natural universe I say we should simply call the universe doesn't exist?
As far as being equally applicable , they are not. One describes a physical reality we know exists. The other describes a metaphysical concept we do not know for sure exists.
Unless we are back to your universe=god argument. In which case, we circle back to the topic. Why use a word that has theistic connotations when the word we have, the universe, is 100% accurate for what we do know?
Because the main attributes which we do know and you seek to bury under your BS HAVE theistic connotations and have for millennia.
Because the main attributes which we do know and you seek to bury under your BS HAVE theistic connotations and have for millennia.
They had theistic connotations for primitive minds that didn't understand the scientific processes. If you are stuck in that mode, so be it. They no longer have theistic connotations when we know that there isn't some god needing pacifying behind them.
They had theistic connotations for primitive minds that didn't understand the scientific processes. If you are stuck in that mode, so be it. They no longer have theistic connotations when we know that there isn't some god needing pacifying behind them.
I never said a God needed pacifying behind them just that God's EXISTENCE, life processes, and consciousness IS behind them - all attributes also know to exist besides those responsible for the existence of everything else we have measured and described. Science has discovered nothing to dissuade me that God is behind it all.
I never said a God needed pacifying behind them just that God's EXISTENCE, life processes, and consciousness IS behind them - all attributes also know to exist besides those responsible for the existence of everything else we have measured and described. Science has discovered nothing to dissuade me that God is behind it all.
Yet you simply define gods attributes the same as the universes attributes, and come up with a mere pantheistic version of god that even atheists can accept , as there are atheistic pantheists.
So there is nothing specifically theistic about it all.
Yet you simply define God's attributes the same as the universes attributes, and come up with a mere pantheistic version of god that even atheists can accept, as there are atheistic pantheists.
So there is nothing specifically theistic about it all.
None of that is true just because you do not understand my Christian panentheism or my reasoning about the transcendent role of consciousness.
Yet you simply define gods attributes the same as the universes attributes, and come up with a mere pantheistic version of god that even atheists can accept , as there are atheistic pantheists.
So there is nothing specifically theistic about it all.
lets see. we have atheist pantheists now, yet more proof that atheist and theist think a like.
Don't worry I know ...lmao.
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.
