The God Equation

Cypress said:
We all believe in a lot of things which cannot be scientifically tested in a mass spectrometer or particle accelerator.

The Declaration of Independence asserts that all humans are created equal and are endowed with natural rights which supercede any king, secular law, or social convention. The French Universal Declaration of Human Rights makes similar claims.

There is no laboratory or experimental evidence to support that belief.

It is a social construct rooted in the philosophical belief in natural law.

Soren Kierkegaard said that most religious belief is fake and inauthentic. In 19th century Denmark, he felt most people claimed and demostrated belief simply by attending Church once a week and listening to the pastor. Kierkegaard maintained that true belief was far more difficult and complex than that.
Click to expand...

"Believe in?"

We all?

I guess about some things; I speculate about some things; I hypothesize about some things. I do not hide the fact that I am guessing, speculating, or hypothesizing...by calling it "belief."

So, respectfully as possible, Cypress...not all of us do.
 
evince said:
Most religions agree with Kiekegaard


They say THEIR religion is the only true one

So they believe most are fake
Click to expand...

I do not think that is true of all religious traditions.

I am pretty sure Buddhism is silent on other religions. I doubt Hinduism Jainism, Daoism, animism have anything theologically or philosophically hostile to say about other religions.

I believe the Hindu-Muslim conflict in Kashmir, or the Buddhist-Muslim conflict in Myanmar originates from political differences, not religious.
 
Frank Apisa said:
"Believe in?"

We all?

I guess about some things; I speculate about some things; I hypothesize about some things. I do not hide the fact that I am guessing, speculating, or hypothesizing...by calling it "belief."

So, respectfully as possible, Cypress...not all of us do.
Click to expand...

Cypress cannot understand why everyone is not a fundamentalist Christian like himself.
 
Cypress said:
I do not think that is true of all religious traditions.

I am pretty sure Buddhism is silent on other religions. I doubt Hinduism Jainism, Daoism, animism have anything theologically or philosophically hostile to say about other religions.

I believe the Hindu-Muslim conflict in Kashmir, or the Buddhist-Muslim conflict in Myanmar originates from political differences, not religious.
Click to expand...

Which is why I said most and not all
 
Frank Apisa said:
"Believe in?"

We all?

I guess about some things; I speculate about some things; I hypothesize about some things. I do not hide the fact that I am guessing, speculating, or hypothesizing...by calling it "belief."

So, respectfully as possible, Cypress...not all of us do.
Click to expand...

According to the Oxford dictionary, belief is somewhat stronger than baseless opinion, but does not reach the level of an object of knowledge.

It is somewhere in between those two end points.

Therefore, when someone says they believe in natural law, in god, in a certain moral code, I myself cannot really quibble with that, or proceed to explain to them how wrong they are.

Just my two cents
 
Cypress said:
Christianity and Islam seem to present themselves as the only true path to spiritual liberation. I think that trends to be pretty unique in the pantheon of world religions
Click to expand...

Most religious people believe those fractured up faiths


There are many versions


And they can even hate each other’s interpretations
 
evince said:
What debate?

There are many debates


This is just one debate


So it isn’t THE debate
Click to expand...
Are mathematicians close to figuring out the universe?
Should mathematicians receive most of the funding for cosmology?
Will mathematicians come up with the next big breakthrough in astrophysics?
Is there any evidence that a black hole is actually dark matter?
 
evince said:
I know it’s a lot to ask


But did you listen to this guy?
Click to expand...



It’s pretty interesting

Well documented

This famous neurosurgeon had no reason to manufacture these experiences and all the experts and testing said his higher brain was reduced to basically puss infected dead cells


They could not find any explanation for how he was alive let alone with an intact brain






CAUTION: this poster forgot to fully investigate
 
Last edited:
goat said:
Are mathematicians close to figuring out the universe?
Should mathematicians receive most of the funding for cosmology?
Will mathematicians come up with the next big breakthrough in astrophysics?
Is there any evidence that a black hole is actually dark matter?
Click to expand...




Question 1. They are closer every day and discovery


Question 2. Per my Tesla quote I say no


Question 3.I say yes. That is where the finding is


Question 4. I’m not sure. I don’t think so


But Higgs bosen was just an idea for quite awhile until it was proven
 
goat said:
Are mathematicians close to figuring out the universe?
Should mathematicians receive most of the funding for cosmology?
Will mathematicians come up with the next big breakthrough in astrophysics?
Is there any evidence that a black hole is actually dark matter?
Click to expand...

The video before that one is an scholar in the field discussing the field and it’s documented cases



Ooops

I quoted the wrong poster


That was for cy
 
Jack said:
--->" My own point of view is that you can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God."<---
This is the Agnostic view.

"ag•nos•tic ăg-nŏs′tĭk►
n. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God."
Click to expand...

Disagree with this. The quote suggests that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. So science is agnostic, because God is not part of the natural world. Knowledge about anything is a sliding scale, not an absolute. So I guess that makes me agnostic about Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, Unicorns, leprechauns, and Harry Potter. It's why I think the term 'agnostic' is a dodge. It implies that both possibilities are equally probable, and they are absolutely not.
 
Concart said:
Disagree with this. The quote suggests that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. So science is agnostic, because God is not part of the natural world. Knowledge about anything is a sliding scale, not an absolute. So I guess that makes me agnostic about Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, Unicorns, leprechauns, and Harry Potter. It's why I think the term 'agnostic' is a dodge. It implies that both possibilities are equally probable, and they are absolutely not.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point about agnosticism, as well.
 
Concart said:
Disagree with this. The quote suggests that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. So science is agnostic, because God is not part of the natural world. Knowledge about anything is a sliding scale, not an absolute. So I guess that makes me agnostic about Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, Unicorns, leprechauns, and Harry Potter. It's why I think the term 'agnostic' is a dodge. It implies that both possibilities are equally probable, and they are absolutely not.
Click to expand...

Why don't people say they are agnostic about Zeus? Zeus is a God. Because they start off believing Zeus is a belief by ancient Greeks.
Why pretend the Christian God is no less a cultural construction? Why pretend to be agnostic about that God?
 
Concart said:
Disagree with this. The quote suggests that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. So science is agnostic, because God is not part of the natural world. Knowledge about anything is a sliding scale, not an absolute. So I guess that makes me agnostic about Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, Unicorns, leprechauns, and Harry Potter. It's why I think the term 'agnostic' is a dodge. It implies that both possibilities are equally probable, and they are absolutely not.
Click to expand...

Well. That is the definition of 'Agnostic'. You can call it whatever you want to call it, but that is the definition.
'God' may or may not be "part of the natural world". There may be some ultimate 'force' out there that created everything. (Probably not an old white guy with a beard that resembles Zeus though)

Concart: "It's why I think the term 'agnostic' is a dodge. It implies that both possibilities are equally probable, and they are absolutely not."
Jack: We all have our opinions. At this point, I can neither prove to myself there is or is not a 'God'. The people that are POSITIVE there IS (or ISN'T) a 'God' are just operating on 'Belief' ... or wishful thinking.
 
Jack said:
Well. That is the definition of 'Agnostic'. You can call it whatever you want to call it, but that is the definition.
'God' may or may not be "part of the natural world". There may be some ultimate 'force' out there that created everything. (Probably not an old white guy with a beard that resembles Zeus though)

Concart: "It's why I think the term 'agnostic' is a dodge. It implies that both possibilities are equally probable, and they are absolutely not."
Jack: We all have our opinions. At this point, I can neither prove to myself there is or is not a 'God'. The people that are POSITIVE there IS (or ISN'T) a 'God' are just operating on 'Belief' ... or wishful thinking.
Click to expand...

I think you are missing his point. You clearly have an idea of God and what God existing means. You only imagine the negation as its opposite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top