"Why do people believe in this Santa-like myth"
Naaahhh... it wouldn't have sold.
selfruled wrote:neologist wrote:I saved your Santa tombstone. Quite a hoot. Thanks.
Any one looking at the condition of the world today would be justified in wondering whether there ever was a god or if he, in fact, died
I wonder if God has given us an answer to that.
How do you know god is a "he"?
God probably has an answer for that as well, though you would have to look.
God begins where science ends. The moment science can explain everything, god will be truly dead.
If what you say is true, God must be very much alive.
selfruled wrote:
Sorry, you can't come back from the grave to settle past disputes; that's the purpose of a war, to annihilate your adversary... are you saying monarchies still have a chance?
Monarchy is a very general term, I can't anwser you.
najmelliw wrote:God begins where science ends. The moment science can explain everything, god will be truly dead.
And what science explains today, regarding the universal phenomena as a total? I would not say a lot. We are far from talking about explaining everything.
Is god playing hide&seek? :wink:
And that is exactly what I believe. I sincerely doubt science will ever be able to explain everything, and so there will always be room for a God. When I phrase it like this, he sounds more like a 'fill the gap' kind of idea then as an entity per sé. What I mean to say is that we can never completely and convincingly prove that there is no need and no room for a God in our worldview.
But he could be omnipotent and omniscent, and simply not care enough to intervene here. Perhaps we are his version of a wide screen tv. You just watch, and change the channels, you don't interact with the thing.
Naj:
What about Ra, Zeus, Tlaloc and Thor?
Didn't they used to explain a lot of things?
What happened to them?
People wondered where the sun went at night and where thunder and rain came from; we've explained that to ourselves already.
Which god do you believe in now? or rather;
why do you think you keep looking for a way out? a way out of the realization that nothing exists but stardust and a few personal opinions?
By your own words selfruled...you must prove God existed to even claim God is dead.
Lightfoot said:
"Cause those that "believe" know he is'nt and those that "believe" as you do...... DO. Now give us your fact's to prove your right."
Your response:
"Prove"?
Last time I read it was up to those who claimed its existence to produce the evidence...
I don't believe in santa claus either... do you need "proof" of that too?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You claimed it's existence when you said "it" was dead. How can something that does'nt exist......die?
Gods were used by early societies to explain the otherwise unexplainable.
Later on in history the more abstract, monotheistic deities of the large religions, and more importantly their scriptures became the primary foundation of society by providing a 'community' of sorts in which believers all had a place and in which both religious and political leaders could define nad back up their position by the divine authority.
These are of course generalizations.
My main point is, that gods were 'used' so to speak to either explain what could not be explained otherwise and/or to bring structure and a sense of morality to a society. With the advent of modern science, both of these 'usages' for gods were needed less, since other theories were developed as alternatives based on scientific principles.
But this is making statements about god from our own, human, point of view of course. We state that since we have no more need of a god, there simply is no such thing as a god. So the existence of a god is derived from our supposed need of one.
But if there is indeed such a thing as a god out there, he probably doesn't comply to our idea of one. He isn't defined by our standards, after all. We might very well have been defined by his. If such a god exists, he predates us. Whereas the gods you named were defined by humanity, as stated above. Big diff.
I'm not looking for a way out. I just find it funny that where scientists have spend centuries in Europe trying to show that christianity and science can co-exist, and one does not preclude the other, nowadays most people of a scientific bend ridicule and belittle those who believe as being irrational. First, Christianity had the foothold, and the scientists had to struggle to get their worldview in. Nowadays, in our culture at least, science is generally accepted as being the plausible worldview, and they do their utmost best to make sure theirs is the only worldview.
And just as there was a powerstruggle in the old church hierarchy, so there is one in the scientific community.
Selfruled...
...it appears to me that you are full of shyt.
I wonder why you haven't noticed?????
Oh...you are also illogical...and a poor wordsmith.
Bartikus wrote:By your own words selfruled...you must prove God existed to even claim God is dead.
Lightfoot said:
"Cause those that "believe" know he is'nt and those that "believe" as you do...... DO. Now give us your fact's to prove your right."
Your response:
"Prove"?
Last time I read it was up to those who claimed its existence to produce the evidence...
I don't believe in santa claus either... do you need "proof" of that too?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You claimed it's existence when you said "it" was dead. How can something that does'nt exist......die?
Bartikus:
I hate to explain the obvious that's why I hadn't concerned myself with this question. Did you see me referring to god as "it"? did you read me asking questions like "how do you know god is a "he"? because to me god is a CONCEPT; therefore it can die; yet those who claim its existence still are responsible to produce PROOF; not the ones who don't need to imagine or to wish its existence.
Naj:
I understand perfectly what you're saying.
I call it "agnostic insurance". That way in the "afterlife" you'll be able to say should there was a god after all:
"See? I didn't commit blasphemy; therefore you can't send me to no fiery hell". :wink:
Frank Apisa wrote:Selfruled...
...it appears to me that you are full of shyt.
I wonder why you haven't noticed?????
Oh...you are also illogical...and a poor wordsmith.
Notwithstanding all the ad hominem, do you have anything to say?
selfruled wrote:Frank Apisa wrote:Selfruled...
...it appears to me that you are full of shyt.
I wonder why you haven't noticed?????
Oh...you are also illogical...and a poor wordsmith.
Notwithstanding all the ad hominem, do you have anything to say?
Yeah!
And I already have said it.
1) I think you are full of shyt.
2) You are illogical.
3) You are a poor wordsmith.
Jeez...I woulda thunk you could have figured that out without me explaining.
Jeremiah wrote:
Quote: I hate to explain the obvious that's why I hadn't concerned myself with this question. Did you see me referring to god as "it"? did you read me asking questions like "how do you know god is a "he"? because to me god is a CONCEPT; therefore it can die; yet those who claim its existence still are responsible to produce PROOF; not the ones who don't need to imagine or to wish its existence.
What a bunch of horseshyt.
Do you have help torturing logic...or do you do it all on your own?
selfruled wrote:Naj:
I understand perfectly what you're saying.
I call it "agnostic insurance". That way in the "afterlife" you'll be able to say should there was a god after all:
"See? I didn't commit blasphemy; therefore you can't send me to no fiery hell". :wink:
Now you are really fukin' up the wrong tree.
Do you hope that'll bring your god back from the grave?
