Critical thinking on the existence of God

@Frank Apisa,

What part of Joisey, dya tink?
Seacaucus is nice this timma year

@neologist,

Quote:

What part of Joisey, dya tink?

The part where ya don't NEVER diss nobody's Mama, eh, Neo? At least not directly. I mean, like, its obvious where his "creator" has been, but, still....

I mean, like, if he wanna beg for it and ask where, then there aint really but one answer, eh? To wit:

Yo Mama's ****.

1 Reply

@neologist,

0 Replies

@layman,

Hmmm. . .
Hohokus?

0 Replies

@Susmariosep,

I see you are seeking an intelligent discourse.

I don't believe I am the best when it comes to critical thinking, but I will do as best I can.

I believe that the current sensory layer that we exist in is just that - a layer. A sector on a grid of dimensions that overlap each other. This is where String theory (superstring theory) comes into play, as well as the world of quantum physics. When the Bible is talking about the spiritual realm, it is likely referencing a layer on the grid in which quantum beings (or beings made of something yet to be discovered) travel and reside. And because they (the realms) all overlap each other, that means wherever you travel in that other realm also equals where you travel in the physical realm, or the sensory realm, if you travel a certain way* *perhaps this only applies to one realm at which they can switch to, and not applicable to others, if there are any (I am, of course, not sure.)

Thus, the creation of the physical universe was just the formation of another layer of energy, and doesn't scientific observation profess that energy always has been and always will be, flowing into and out of form? This concept of layering explains how, in the Bible, angels can materialize, levitate, and affect physical matter in this realm and not get affected by anything in it (such as that one time a single angel destroyed an entire army of Assyrians: Isaiah 37:36 reads: "36 And the angel of Jehovah went out and struck down 185,000 men in the camp of the As·syr′i·ans. When people rose up early in the morning, they saw all the dead bodies"
JW.org New World Translation 2013

Also, taking into account this fact, it is important to keep in mind that God is in the very particles to which we are made up of. He is quite literally the Boson field which gives particles mass and shape, and as such he is in effect the (operator) of the universe, and his holy spirit is simply energy in the purest form, whatever that may be.

This is just a theory of mine based on what I have studied and meditated upon, but perhaps it contains some merit. Let me know, please, what you think.

1 Reply

@Nova Flare Q,

Many are loath to refer to the Higgs Boson as the "God Particle" (including Higgs). But it does at least seem to explain how God might observe the entire race of mankind in real time. And, if true, should give us all cause for reflection.

1 Reply

Hehehe . . .

Hehehehehehehe . . .

Ah-hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha . . .

Wooooo . . .

0 Replies

@neologist,

Or, if not all, perhaps a few

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Leadfoot wrote:

Quote:
You seem very eager to characterize almost anything as "evidence" for your creator. What next? The wind? Rainbows?
That reminds me of when I was in the Army and what the 'brothers' would say when someone asked them a rhetorical question meant only to belittle them. They'd always answer,

"Your Mother's ****".

Well, I stand behind the message behind my rhetorical question.

1 Reply

@FBM,

Quote:

You seem very eager to characterize almost anything as "evidence" for your creator. What next? The wind? Rainbows?

Leadfoot replied:
That reminds me of when I was in the Army and what the 'brothers' would say when someone asked them a rhetorical question meant only to belittle them. They'd always answer,

"Your Mother's ****".

Quote:

Well, I stand behind the message behind my rhetorical question.

I do want to acknowledge that message beyond the belittling bit. You are commendably consistent in your embrace of the bleakest aspect of atheism and the reveling in the rejection of answers outside of science.

I was just furthering that along. That being, that there is no meaning to life and the awe you experience when seeing nature is explained by nothing more than the diffraction of light through water or other phenomenon of physics, or perhaps the genetically programmed urge left over from primitive ancestors. That the lump of flesh that emerged from your mother's birth canal is but a lucky mutation that enables you to ponder these questions and grasp the concepts that give you the courage to face the cold fact of your ultimate mortality.

I encourage you to follow that message to its very bottom, for to give it up prematurely is never to be certain of anything that might replace or illuminate it.

1 Reply

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

What part of Joisey, dya tink?
Seacaucus is nice this timma year

The more I read...the less likely I am to guess, "Princeton?"

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Leadfoot wrote:

I do want to acknowledge that message beyond the belittling bit. You are commendably consistent in your embrace of the bleakest aspect of atheism and the reveling in the rejection of answers outside of science.

I try to keep the belittling directed at the argument, not the person. Sometimes I fail, but I usually regret it when I do.

Quote:

I was just furthering that along. That being, that there is no meaning to life and the awe you experience when seeing nature is explained by nothing more than the diffraction of light through water or other phenomenon of physics, or perhaps the genetically programmed urge left over from primitive ancestors. That the lump of flesh that emerged from your mother's birth canal is but a lucky mutation that enables you to ponder these questions and grasp the concepts that give you the courage to face the cold fact of your ultimate mortality.

I encourage you to follow that message to its very bottom, for to give it up prematurely is never to be certain of anything that might replace or illuminate it.

Well, I see in this a collection of ad homs, strawmen, appeals to emotion, etc. You seem to think that the totality of my being is expressed in my online posts. Well, I'm pretty sure that you and I know approximately the same amount about each other: next to nothing. Emotions have their place, but not so much in a thread about critical thinking on the origins of the universe. Your post has done nothing to further your god hypothesis.

0 Replies

The notion that not believing in a magic sky daddy makes one's life meaningless is pretty hilarious. It is also pathetic, and given the number of people who do believe in some flavor of magic sky daddy, it's rather frightening. But the core belief--that sustaining in our minds a completely unsubstantiated delusion gives meaning to our lives (not to mention "morality")--is truly sad. The frightening part comes from the number of theistic zombies who are willing kill those who don't along with their delusion.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

I'm not sure but wasn't it you who posted the link to that brilliant atheist giving the talk to some graduating class? Could have been a fellow atheist instead. His catch line was that life really was meaningless, and he reiterated it several times. I don't mean joyless nor immoral, there are plenty of happy and humanitarian atheists. I have written elsewhere that we don't need theists to tell us how to be moral, plenty of atheists can do that just as well and in some cases better. But if their theories of human existence are correct, their (and everyone else's) lives truly are meaningless. It's not an insult.

But the 'dangerous theist zombie' thing is the classic straw man. That's even more pathetic than the frightened rabbit people who think terrorists are the biggest threat to their safety.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

No, that wasn't me. I don't do links to atheist talks because i don't listen to atheist talks. I have this radical idea that i can think for myself.

Saying that theists are dangerous because they are theists is not a straw man fallacy. First because a straw man fallacy is predicated upon someone advancing an argument which they have not in fact advanced. I was not imputing such a position to anyone. Second because we know that on a daily basis people kill others and people are killed by others because of the religious beliefs of the killers. I have no idea what you are babbling about with your reference to "frightened rabbit people," as i've never mentioned that. Could you be attempting to erect your own straw man?

Keep in mind, by the way, that i was not addressing you.

1 Reply

The notion that not believing in democracy makes one's life meaningless is pretty hilarious. It is also pathetic, and given the number of people who do believe in some flavor of anti-commieism, it's rather frightening. But the core belief--that sustaining in our minds a completely unsubstantiated delusion such as "freedom" gives meaning to our lives (not to mention "morality")--is truly sad. The frightening part comes from the number of capitalist pigs who are willing kill commies who don't along with their delusion.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

No, that wasn't me. I don't do links to atheist talks because i don't listen to atheist talks. I have this radical idea that i can think for myself.

It wasn't an 'atheist talk' and he didn't identify himself as an atheist. I made that assumption based on his statements about life being meaningless. I can think for myself too ya know.

Quote:

Saying that theists are dangerous because they are theists is not a straw man fallacy.

Really? Are you in fear of theists?

Quote:

I have no idea what you are babbling about with your reference to "frightened rabbit people," as i've never mentioned that. Could you be attempting to erect your own straw man?

See answer above.

Quote:

Keep in mind, by the way, that i was not addressing you.

Oh, of course not. But are you aware that this is a - Forum?

1 Reply

Do all atheists think life is meaningless? Do only atheists think life is meaningless?

1 Reply

@FBM,

If you read carefully, I said if atheists are right, All our lives are meaningless. It's not an insult, just the fact. I thought you were comfortable with that unpleasant fact.

Edit: I think the people who are most keenly aware of life being meaningless are the ones who never think about theism one way or another.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Here's a compact hypothetical syllogism we can work with:

Quote:

if atheists are right, All our lives are meaningless

This seems to based on some implicit assumptions that I'm not aware of. Would you unpack those a bit? That is, how did you get from premise A to conclusion B? Something is missing.

1 Reply

Critical thinking on the existence of God

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know