- Joined
- Aug 22, 2016
- Messages
- 2,260
- Trophies
- 0
- Location
- Constant Fear
- Website
- Gbatemp.net
- XP
- 2,293
- Country
STOP PLEASE, you acting just as stupid as him.WTH!?
STOP PLEASE, you acting just as stupid as him.WTH!?
Because of stupid people that corrupt it, when Jesus was here on earth, the High priest were to pious, and used the faith as99% of all wars are caused by religion.
STOP.Hmmmmmm what?
Sometimes absence and changes of little things can make a huge difference, though sometimes they don't.Because of stupid people that corrupt it, when Jesus was here on earth, the High priest were to pious, and used the faith as
an excuse
Some of my proposed possibilities were. Some were not.Wouldn't that be infinite?
You're applying what you perceive to be rules of the universe to the formation of those very rules, which is a huge flaw in your thinking. Requiring a cause to causality is like asking what came before time; they're both nonsensical. If you had read my post, you would have seen numerous non-god things that could have caused the universe, and you would have seen numerous reasons why the universe doesn't necessarily require a cause.By definition, there was a time for everything finite in which each finite thing did not exist. By observation of the universe as we know it, finite things do not come into being without a a cause.
Those aren't the only two options. See above.Therefore, either something infinite is involved, or our understanding of the nature of finite things is incorrect.
I'm not claiming that there is anything wrong with our understanding of the natural world. I'm saying you have no idea what the nature of universe-formation is, and you can't apply the rules of the universe to the formation of those rules. I am not making any claims that require a faith-based belief.Trying to say that our understanding of the nature of finite things is incorrect without any evidence would require just as much, if not more, faith than believing in God.
I have not made a claim that has any sort of burden of proof. You, however, are making the positive claim that a god exists, and in order for that belief to be at all reasonable, you must be able to articulate a sound reason to believe a god exists.Then I believe that we've reached a stalemate. While we each have reasons to believe what we believe, neither of us have actual proof.
He isn't going to stop, he has a brain malfunctioning!Because of stupid people that corrupt it, when Jesus was here on earth, the High priest were to pious, and used the faith as
an excuse
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
STOP.
At least he has one.He isn't going to stop, he has a brain malfunctioning!
Some of my proposed possibilities were. Some were not [infinite].
Isn't that saying that the universe is infinite in time, having have always existing, needing no cause?Might the universe have had a cause? Sure. Is there any reason to think the universe is required to have had a cause? Not really. If causality is a property of the universe, it's a bit silly to talk about causality requiring a cause. It's also possible the universe in some form has always existed. In essence, there's no excuse for a hypothetical god not requiring a cause that couldn't also be applied to the universe. In fact, it might be fair to say the universe has always existed when time as we know it exists a finite amount backwards, but that's a matter of semantics.
no light is always moving.When I look into mysticism there has always been entity referred as being of light (I can do astral projection and I have dealt with entities before. Sadly I don't know how to kill one but I do doubt it'd be necessary). But they, unlike photon is not travelling at speed of light which would make them only stay on earth for a second or two consider their collision is not the same as ours. And if it is indeed referring to photon that must mean photon can somehow solidify (though not in the normal context of chemistry), or assume a standing wave state that does not constantly move in great speed, and also allowed some form of construct to allow more complicated functionality, for example think.
If mysticism can somewhat be connected to modern physics then perhaps we will get a certain answers, and in addition of engineering, well, just think about the possibilities.
Sadly none of this is can be confirmed for the moment, but maybe in 200 years or so. Good thing we have a very good foundation and have some of the smartest people doing things. But on the other hand will god seems so power then?Some of my proposed possibilities were. Some were not.
You're applying what you perceive to be rules of the universe to the formation of those very rules, which is a huge flaw in your thinking. Requiring a cause to causality is like asking what came before time; they're both nonsensical. If you had read my post, you would have seen numerous non-god things that could have caused the universe, and you would have seen numerous reasons why the universe doesn't necessarily require a cause.
Those aren't the only two options. See above.
I'm not claiming that there is anything wrong with our understanding of the natural world. I'm saying you have no idea what the nature of universe-formation is, and you can't apply the rules of the universe to the formation of those rules. I am not making any claims that require a faith-based belief.
I have not made a claim that has any sort of burden of proof. You, however, are making the positive claim that a god exists, and in order for that belief to be at all reasonable, you must be able to articulate a sound reason to believe a god exists.
For some of the possibilities I offered, yes. For others, no. It doesn't really matter though, since a failure to offer any alternative to God is no reason to believe a god exists.Isn't that saying that the universe is infinite in time, having have always existing, needing no cause?
More people have died from ideology and nationalism in the past century alone.99% of all wars are caused by religion.
Infinity doesnt exist in reality. It's qualitative not quantitive. A good example is if i had infinite you's and took away 5 of them how many would I have left?For some of the possibilities I offered, yes. For others, no. It doesn't really matter though, since a failure to offer any alternative to God is no reason to believe a god exists.
I know in a normal state light is always in that case. But first this may very well not be photon or second photon does indeed have an alternative standing wave/ particle like state, or third it is transmuted into some else.no light is always moving.
But really what caused time or why are things changing in that way?For some of the possibilities I offered, yes. For others, no. It doesn't really matter though, since a failure to offer any alternative to God is no reason to believe a god exists.
no, While maybe this being emits light it probably isnt light itself.I know in a normal state light is always in that case. But first this may very well not be photon or second photon does indeed have an alternative standing wave/ particle like state, or third it is transmuted into some else.
By the way is mysticism forbidden?no, While maybe this being emits light it probably isnt light itself.
No it's that God is infinite in time, having have always existing, needing no cause.Isn't that saying that the universe is infinite in time, having have always existing, needing no cause?
Aside: It looks like this thread has become a flame war. If it doesn't stop soon, the thread will likely be closed. Remember everyone, don't directly attack your opponent in an argument.