0
   

Axiom(s) relating to belief in God.

 
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 12:30 am
neologist,

Not quite, I am saying " physical laws" are irrelevant to a primary axiom other than those of "conservation". The concept of "understanding" is incestuously related to that of "physical laws" and for the believer, "God surpasseth understanding".
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 08:30 am
Cyracuz wrote:
real life wrote:


Cyracuz wrote:
If the first law of thermodynamics states that matter cannot be created, then god did not create it.



Why not?


Because it cannot be created.



So, how did matter get here?
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 08:34 am
It's always been her, in one form or another. But that is a misgiving answr, because "always" isn't a very long time. It is just this moment. The only thing that suggests otherwise is our memory, and if you think about it, even that memory is a thing of this moment. And this moment has neither beginning nor end. Those are meaningless concepts in a holistic worldview.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 10:00 am
fresco wrote:
neologist,

Not quite, I am saying " physical laws" are irrelevant to a primary axiom other than those of "conservation". The concept of "understanding" is incestuously related to that of "physical laws" and for the believer, "God surpasseth understanding".
So is this your thesis?

God cannot be understood.
We use natural laws, as we discover them, in order to understand reality, our physical universe.
Therefore, the concept of God is irrelevant to natural law.

Correct me if I have misstated your position.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 10:07 am
Cyracuz wrote:
It's always been her, in one form or another. But that is a misgiving answr, because "always" isn't a very long time. It is just this moment. The only thing that suggests otherwise is our memory, and if you think about it, even that memory is a thing of this moment. And this moment has neither beginning nor end. Those are meaningless concepts in a holistic worldview.
But is the holistic view, as you describe it, a viable representation of our meat and potatoes reality?

We perceive time as a stream of cause and effect. The greater reality may be that time is an ocean. Perhaps it may be to one for whom "a thousand years is as a watch in the night". (Psalm 90:4) But will that work for us?
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 10:13 am
It is a viable view when seeking to understand the true nature of self and how it is truly inseperable from all the things it uses to reflect itself off.

When drawing a picture I use tricks to create the illusion of three dimentional space on a two dimentional surface. I do it because it's useful to achieve the end I seek. Similarly, we refer to time as a stream of cause and effect because it's useful, not because it's truly how it is. But with time, it is an illusion we maintain constantly, and therefore it is one it is harder to see through.

But concerning past and future, are they real, as anything but memories and expectations maintained here in the presence? My answer, and I believe it is the true answer, is no.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 10:15 am
Can I borrow $5?
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 10:19 am
I'll say yes, even though I'm dead broke these days, just so that you can get to the point. Smile
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 10:40 am
Lets just say I remember that I owe you $5 for a latte at Starbucks.

How can you be sure?
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 11:35 am
neo,

Yes, my thesis for that for the believer God cannot be understood.

For the believer the "entity" may be a catch -all "answer" to the origin of "creation", "natural laws" and "morality" but despite the ad hoc proposition that man was created in God's image " His purpose" is ineffable. Note that with the transcendence of "time" (omnipresence) the very concept of "purpose" becomes meaningless.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 11:43 am
How I can be sure you owe me $5?

Because I have the memory of giving you the money and you telling me i'd get it back. But that exchange didn't happen in the past. It happened in the present, just as the repayment will happen in the present. And the memory I have of this exchange is also something I have in the present. The past is not. Nor is the future.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Dec, 2007 12:06 pm
Oh yeah? Well the repayment did not just happen . . .

However, you are welcome to visit for coffee, anytime.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 02/05/2025 at 10:47:11