NationStates Jolt Archive

I dunno...The reason we have the free will that causes evil is because it makes him happy for us to love him of our own choice. Course, him being supernatural, doesn't have to follow natural laws, and could remove evil and give us free will at the same time if he wanted.

God is the same today, yesterday, and tomorrow...he cannot contradict himself...nor would he want to.
He does have to follow the natural laws but he knows them far better than we do
Lastly how can you know good without knowing evil? you must have both.

God is the same today, yesterday, and tomorrow...he cannot contradict himself...nor would he want to.
He does have to follow the natural laws but he knows them far better than we do
Lastly how can you know good without knowing evil? you must have both.

Well, he knows natural laws enough to make us know good without knowing evil.

*whispers to La Dame* Duuuude...God has billions of kids...What a pimp.
*whispers back* I heard he can reproduce asexually too. You think the old guy's lonely?

So he's self-absorbed? He makes a whole universe just to worship him.
Exactly the point I've been trying to make all along. God has the biggest ego in the universe. Hell, his ego *IS* the universe.

*whispers back* I heard he can reproduce asexually too. You think the old guy's lonely?

Well, imagine what kind of people can actually make it to heaven. You'd be lonely too.

Exactly the point I've been trying to make all along. God has the biggest ego in the universe. Hell, his ego *IS* the universe.

Is the universe? Heck, that link said God was outside the universe, man...He's spilling over the edges. Why do you think it's expanding so fast? Not some stupid Big Bang.

So he's self-absorbed? He makes a whole universe just to worship him.
No he seeks to make us like him, having all he has. But we gain it through obediance.

There have been a few posts about why God wants worship. I'll share a bit on this issue from what I always learned (The Jewish POV).

God doesn't actually want the worship because it fulfills his ego or gives him some sort of gratification. Rather, the reason we're commanded to worship is because it is good for us. Its suppossed to help us live good lives, be spiritually healthy, etc. It doesn't actually benefit God in any way, but it benefits us. So to say that God wants it would actually be a reference to God wanting something good for us.

Another thing that we believe in Judaism is that non-Jews are not required to actually believe or worship God. Non-Jews are simply required to abstain from idolatry, because its a harmful practice (socially and spiritually I guess). Thus, an Atheist would actually be more in line with what God wants than a Christian.

No he seeks to make us like him, having all he has. But we gain it through obediance.

If he wanted us to like him, he could start with some small talk maybe...buy us a drink or something, yanno? At least show us he exists?

Well, he knows natural laws enough to make us know good without knowing evil.
All i have to say to that is you can't appreciate the light without experieceing the dark.

*snip* Thus, an Atheist would actually be more in line with what God wants than a Christian.

If I may....Woot!

If he wanted us to like him, he could start with some small talk maybe...buy us a drink or something, yanno? At least show us he exists?
He shows us plenty we just have our eyes closed half the time

Well, imagine what kind of people can actually make it to heaven. You'd be lonely too.
Until Bill Clinton somehow made it into heaven. Then everybody will have a good time. ;)


Is the universe? Heck, that link said God was outside the universe, man...He's spilling over the edges. Why do you think it's expanding so fast? Not some stupid Big Bang.
:eek: That explains how the universe is infinite. Now, tell me, what is the meaning of life?

All i have to say to that is you can't appreciate the light without experieceing the dark.

You can't? How would you know, what with how little man understands logic and all. God understands it all, he coould make it so you could appreciate the light without experiencing the dark.

http://www.strangepersons.com/images/content/8531.jpg
Werd.

All i have to say to that is you can't appreciate the light without experieceing the dark.
But heaven is a place where there is no dark. therefore, without the dark to contrast, heaven is monotony.

He shows us plenty we just have our eyes closed half the time

Well, could he do it when our eyes are open? Or maybe just, I dunno, open up a rift in the sky and talk to us. He could do that, of course.

I dunno...The reason we have the free will that causes evil is because it makes him happy for us to love him of our own choice. Course, him being supernatural, doesn't have to follow natural laws, and could remove evil and give us free will at the same time if he wanted.

Actually according to the Scriptures, God creates evil (Isaiah 45 - Asah bara shalom ra). Our free will has nothing to do with the origin of evil, and you won't find any Scriptural backing for the idea that free will is what causes evil. This was the development of later Catholic theologians who weren't as well versed in Jewish scriptures as Jews were.

Until Bill Clinton somehow made it into heaven. Then everybody will have a good time. ;)


Aye...Then it's party time

:eek: That explains how the universe is infinite. Now, tell me, what is the meaning of life?

Hmm...I'm thinking Ice cream cake, Internet, and Intelligent thought. And the square root of -1.

Actually according to the Scriptures, God creates evil (Isaiah 45 - Asah bara shalom ra). Our free will has nothing to do with the origin of evil, and you won't find any Scriptural backing for the idea that free will is what causes evil. This was the development of later Catholic theologians who weren't as well versed in Jewish scriptures as Jews were.

Funny, tis' what every christian I argue with says evil comes from. So why'd God make evil?

Until Bill Clinton somehow made it into heaven. Then everybody will have a good time. ;)



:eek: That explains how the universe is infinite. Now, tell me, what is the meaning of life?
This life is a time to gain experience and knowledge nessecary to becoming like God, that is the whole reason for the Universe, theEarth and mortallity. God wants us to eventually become like him, creating our own worlds and continuing the cycle.

This life is a time to gain experience and knowledge nessecary to becoming like God, that is the whole reason for the Universe, theEarth and mortallity. God wants us to eventually become like him, creating our own worlds and continuing the cycle.

I imagine he could explain that then...or, give us some cheat codes, basically create us at like, demi-god level or something.

Funny, tis' what every christian I argue with says evil comes from. So why'd God make evil?

Because part of his plan for us requires us choosing his way God did not create evil he simply knew about it...when Adam partook of the fruit he gained that knowledge...this was actually essential becuase we now choose the way to God or the other way.

I imagine he could explain that then...or, give us some cheat codes, basically create us at like, demi-god level or something.
I'd rather have no clipping :p

You can't? How would you know, what with how little man understands logic and all. God understands it all, he coould make it so you could appreciate the light without experiencing the dark.

No he can't God would never force to do anything...that's Satan you're thinking of just becasue God knows everything doesn't mean he'll tell us everything at once. You can't teach an infant calculas can you?

Because part of his plan for us requires us choosing his way God did not create evil he simply knew about it...when Adam partook of the fruit he gained that knowledge...this was actually essential becuase we now choose the way to God or the other way.

Well, I suppose God could've taught Adam that himself yes? and he could stop us from choosing "the other way".

Hmm...I'm thinking Ice cream cake, Internet, and Intelligent thought. And the square root of -1.
uh oh...calculus flashback. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. *brain implodes*


This life is a time to gain experience and knowledge nessecary to becoming like God, that is the whole reason for the Universe, theEarth and mortallity. God wants us to eventually become like him, creating our own worlds and continuing the cycle.
does that mean I get my own universe? sw33t!

Well, I suppose God could've taught Adam that himself yes? and he could stop us from choosing "the other way".

No God cannot take our agency from us, that would be satan you are thinking about.

uh oh...calculus flashback. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. *brain implodes*

Eh? Since when was i calculus?

does that mean I get my own universe? sw33t!

I'm so filling mine with Asian Canadian schoolgirls.

No God cannot take our agency from us, that would be satan you are thinking about.

So Satan can stop us from choosing, but God can't? Why doesn't God get rid of Satan anyhow?

Well, I suppose God could've taught Adam that himself yes? and he could stop us from choosing "the other way".

No because God would contradict himself and cease to be God.

So Satan can stop us from choosing, but God can't? Why doesn't God get rid of Satan anyhow?

Becuase there needs to be that evil opposition. Satan has from the begining want us not to have agency, that was partly why he was cast from God's Presence

Eh? Since when was i calculus?
no, the mentioning of the squre root of -1. and possibly intelligent thought, often those that you can't understand.

The lesson here, boys and girls? Don't take a university course in Grade 10 if you value your sanity.

I would like to clarify and expound a bit on an earlier post.

Like I stated before, according to the Scriptures God creates evil as we see in Isaiah 45 (Asah bara shalom ra).

Now, this may come as a shock to many today, as Christianity has made good and evil synonymous with righteousness and sin. While there is a definate dichotomy between averia or sin, and tzaddik or righteousness, there is less of a dichotomy between tov (good) and ra (evil). A person can be a righteous man, and still do evil things. In the same respect, it was understood that God can do both good and evil, but still be a righteous God.

A lot of this stems from Jewish views on just what evil is. Scripturally, evil and good are very subjective, compared to sin and righteousness which are not. Keeping a commandment is a mitzvah, and righteous, but it does not necessarily equate to good. In the same respect, violating a commandment is sin, but it does not necessarily equate to evil. An example would be fighting in a war and killing a man - this is an example of ra, evil, but it is not a sin and can even be considered righteous.

Its very easy to see what sin is and what sin isn't, because sin is violating a law by definition. Righteousness is the same way, it would be keeping the law. Good and evil are much more subjective, the lines are blurred, and what one person considers good may be a sin and what one considers evil may be righteous.

I imagine he could explain that then...or, give us some cheat codes, basically create us at like, demi-god level or something.
We do have "cheat-codes" if you really want to know read the bible in conjunction with the book of mormon that's were I'm getting my answers.

Funny, tis' what every christian I argue with says evil comes from. So why'd God make evil?

I don't know why God made evil, all I know is that is what Scripture says. The question "why evil?" is one of the big mysteries of the universe.

Well, could he do it when our eyes are open? Or maybe just, I dunno, open up a rift in the sky and talk to us. He could do that, of course.

And if he did i garuntee you that people would pass it off as some sort of scientific phenomenon it would make no difference.

We do have "cheat-codes" if you really want to know read the bible in conjunction with the book of mormon that's were I'm getting my answers.
video game cheat codes are a lot easier to read. and they don't require belief or worship.

Because part of his plan for us requires us choosing his way God did not create evil he simply knew about it...when Adam partook of the fruit he gained that knowledge...this was actually essential becuase we now choose the way to God or the other way.

Actually the story of Adam and Eve is more Scriptural evidence that God created evil. Aside from the fact that Isaiah states, quite flatly, that God makes evil, we can develop that from this story as well.

For a tree of the knowledge of good and evil to exist, first good and evil would have to exist to have knowledge of. Since the tree was created before Adam, and good and evil would have to be created before the tree, the only one left to be the creator of good and evil is God.

Keep in mind that good and evil didn't magically appear once Adam and Eve ate the fruit. It existed beforehand, all they got from the fruit was the knowledge of what good and evil was.

video game cheat codes are a lot easier to read. and they don't require belief or worship.

Do you not believe that the codes will work before you put them in? Even sub-conciesly you do.

And if he did i garuntee you that people would pass it off as some sort of scientific phenomenon it would make no difference.

Well I think a big guy in the sky talking to you and answering questions, delivering lightning bolts on demand, and hanging around for some experiments would be hard to pass off....It'd also do something about that pesky lack of evidence.

no, the mentioning of the squre root of -1. and possibly intelligent thought, often those that you can't understand.

The lesson here, boys and girls? Don't take a university course in Grade 10 if you value your sanity.

I meant i, the sqaure root of -1, not the pronoun

Do you not believe that the codes will work before you put them in? Even sub-conciesly you do.

Because there is evidence that they work.

Actually the story of Adam and Eve is more Scriptural evidence that God created evil. Aside from the fact that Isaiah states, quite flatly, that God makes evil, we can develop that from this story as well.

For a tree of the knowledge of good and evil to exist, first good and evil would have to exist to have knowledge of. Since the tree was created before Adam, and good and evil would have to be created before the tree, the only one left to be the creator of good and evil is God.

Keep in mind that good and evil didn't magically appear once Adam and Eve ate the fruit. It existed beforehand, all they got from the fruit was the knowledge of what good and evil was.

Perhaps Good and evil were before God

All i have to say to that is you can't appreciate the light without experieceing the dark.

Thats a good point. On the whole good/evil topic, it reminded me of something else. In Judaism we have what is called the yetzer ra and the yetzer tov. These are the good and evil impulses.

Now, at first glance it might seem like you would want to deny your evil impulse and feed your good impulse. That isn't the case. You essentially want to balance them both out. Your evil impulse is the thing that makes you want to do little things like eat, brush your teeth, have sex, etc. By balancing it with the yetzer ra, the good impulse, you keep yourself from becoming a glutton, vein, or lustful, etc.

Both good and evil are essential parts of human nature is what this idea comes down to, and they are both required in balanced parts. Its when the evil impulse is fed too much that you see things typically understood to be "evil" - like murder, wars, etc.

Because there is evidence that they work.

Like?

Do you not believe that the codes will work before you put them in? Even sub-conciesly you do.
I believe they work because they've been proven to work. And if they don't work, I dismiss them. But how do you prove that God is real, and that the Bible wasn't written by a couple of guys high on shrooms in a cave?

No because God would contradict himself and cease to be God.

Anyone think maybe he did this already and ceased existing at some point in the past?

Thats a good point. On the whole good/evil topic, it reminded me of something else. In Judaism we have what is called the yetzer ra and the yetzer tov. These are the good and evil impulses.

Now, at first glance it might seem like you would want to deny your evil impulse and feed your good impulse. That isn't the case. You essentially want to balance them both out. Your evil impulse is the thing that makes you want to do little things like eat, brush your teeth, have sex, etc. By balancing it with the yetzer ra, the good impulse, you keep yourself from becoming a glutton, vein, or lustful, etc.

Both good and evil are essential parts of human nature is what this idea comes down to, and they are both required in balanced parts. Its when the evil impulse is fed too much that you see things typically understood to be "evil" - like murder, wars, etc.

Wow that sounds a little remminecent of my LDS beliefs

*snip*
you are one of those idealist christians, aren't you?

Anyone think maybe he did this already and ceased existing at some point in the past?
If you want to live in that hopeless state of mind fine. I on the other see evidence that he is still around.

Perhaps Good and evil were before God

I'm actually more inclined to believe that good and evil are subjective concepts that we apply to various things in life and dichotomous relations. In short, I don't think that either are actual things that have true existence outside of being concepts.

If God is eternal I don't think anything could be before God.

Like?

Well, getting them from a source where you've gotten working codes before, using similar codes that worked, the code having a credible effect (like unlimited ammo; common, expected, reasonable). Things like that I guess.

I meant i, the sqaure root of -1, not the pronoun
oookay, sorry. I misunderstood you. no, "i" is not implosion-worthy. The memories associated with it is.

you are one of those idealist christians, aren't you?

How do you mean?

If you want to live in that hopeless state of mind fine. I on the other see evidence that he is still around.

Oh yeah...a real pretty flower?

you are one of those idealist christians, aren't you?

No, I'm not a Christian. I'm Jewish.

Well, getting them from a source where you've gotten working codes before, using similar codes that worked, the code having a credible effect (like unlimited ammo; common, expected, reasonable). Things like that I guess.

Things in the scriptures have worked before...i trust it

Anyone think maybe he did this already and ceased existing at some point in the past?
i think he ceased to exist before the Bible was done. The bible contradicts itself in so many parts that it's ridiculous.

Is it just me, or is this a question where the answer is not on NS General?

Yet stragely this is probably the most common question on NS General...go figure...

oookay, sorry. I misunderstood you. no, "i" is not implosion-worthy. The memories associated with it is.

I see...*can't wait*...Maybe a math class where I actually need to stay awake?

Like?

Like them working. open the console in quake and type "give all" and you suddenly have all the weapons. no belief, no faith, just evidence. If there was no was to verify if a cheat worked then it would require faith, but no one would believe in it.

Is it just me, or is this a question where the answer is not on NS General?

Yet stragely this is probably the most common question on NS General...go figure...

Well, if'n the pro-existence side had evidence, or the other side wasn't consistently thwarted by arguements like "God is outside the universe" it might'n be.

No, I'm not a Christian. I'm Jewish.
I'm so sorry. *hits herself in the head for not realizing from all the hints*:headbang:

Oh yeah...a real pretty flower?
As a matter-of-fact yes. COnsider the remarkable process that takes place in a flower every day, far more complex than any man-made factory, and far too complex to be just a freak-of-nature. If you actually try you can see god's hand in everything.

Things in the scriptures have worked before...i trust it

Uh-huh...things being?

Like them working. open the console in quake and type "give all" and you suddenly have all the weapons. no belief, no faith, just evidence. If there was no was to verify if a cheat worked then it would require faith, but no one would believe in it.

There was still that one second of faith as you typed the word in, you believed it would do something.

As a matter-of-fact yes. COnsider the remarkable process that takes place in a flower every day, far more complex than any man-made factory, and far too complex to be just a freak-of-nature. If you actually try you can see god's hand in everything.

If I actually try I can see His Noodly Apendage in everything. Photosynthesis is far from being too complex for nature.

There was still that one second of faith as you typed the word in, you believed it would do something.

Yeah, and when I throw a ball up, there's that second I believe it'll come down.

God exists more then we do

Uh-huh...things being?
Okay take the book of Joshua. The Hebrews believed they had God on their side and ended up taking Canaan, which later became the Kingdom of Juda and the Kingdom of Israel...you can check the secular historial records they'll vouch for me.

If I actually try I can see His Noodly Apendage in everything. Photosynthesis is far from being too complex for nature.

hehehe, pirates

Actually this brings up a good point too. If the world and nature is evidence for God, which God? Claiming that its evidence for the FSM is just as valid as claiming its evidence for Jesus. Or why not multiple Gods? Why not natural beings we havn't discovered yet (psst, aliens)? The possibilities are endless if we just assume that it is evidence for some more powerful force, and thus using it as evidence for any specific God doesn't work.

Okay take the book of Joshua. The Hebrews believed they had God on their side and ended up taking Canaan, which later became the Kingdom of Juda and the Kingdom of Israel...you can check the secular historial records they'll vouch for me.

So, they believed in god and won a war...However, I don't see what makes those two things related, or one an effect of the other. What's to say they wouldn't of won if they didn't believe?

Alright those that don't believe in God give sufficient evidence that God does not exsist

Alright those that don't believe in God give sufficient evidence that God does not exsist
exactly, so why are you trying to hard to prove god does exist?

Alright those that don't believe in God give sufficient evidence that God does not exsist

Rather tough to prove a negative, but how about there being no evidence that he exists whatsoever? Or that, as described in the bible at least, is a logical impossibility. Or maybe that Santa and God show similar signs of existing.

Alright those that don't believe in God give sufficient evidence that God does not exsist

In general, no one can "prove" that God does not exist. There are good arguments against the existence of deities, but the type of proof sought simply doesn't (and may never) exist.

Keeping that in mind, using the lack of proof against God as evidence that God does exist would be the negative proof fallacy, or the argument from ignorance fallacy.

In general, no one can "prove" that God does not exist. There are good arguments against the existence of deities, but the type of proof sought simply doesn't (and may never) exist.

Keeping that in mind, using the lack of proof against God as evidence that God does exist would be the negative proof fallacy, or the argument from ignorance fallacy.

Same way I'd expect anyone to disprove Santa *nod* He exists darn it!

Same way I'd expect anyone to disprove Santa *nod* He exists darn it!
*pats on the head* You just believe that.

I thought in the last thread on this topic we came to the conclusion that all faith must be put in His Eternal Roundhousing Norrisness.

I was totally converted. :confused:

How many of these threads are there? I've been around for about 3 months now, i dont post much, just mostly read, and every day there is a new "Is there a God?" thread!!! :headbang:

*pats on the head* You just believe that.

Feh, go ahead, try and disprove it :p I dares ya. (Yay head pats! ^_^)

How many of these threads are there? I've been around for about 3 months now, i dont post much, just mostly read, and every day there is a new "Is there a God?" thread!!! :headbang:

Welcome to General?

God aint existin. That's it.
Yay evolution.
And yes, we did come here by chance.

I thought in the last thread on this topic we came to the conclusion that all faith must be put in His Eternal Roundhousing Norrisness.

I was totally converted. :confused:
And I made a Holy Church of Voltaire on one of the threads. Too bad the only member is Straughn...Anybody want to join? $24.99 a month for membership fees and you get free beer, scripture, and porn.

God aint existin. That's it.
Yay evolution.
And yes, we did come here by chance.

Yay probabiltiy and statistics!

but yes, i do believe there is a god, i was on an airplane once, flying from Miami International Airport to Frankfurt Germany, and at about 7 o'clock PM i looked out and saw the suns rays reflecting off the white clouds, creating a blinding (literally, i couldnt look for more than a few moments before having to shield my eyes) sea of gold for hundreds of miles, even farther than my eyes could see! In times like this, even my skeptical mind truly believed that there had to be a god, how else could a sight like that be possible?

just my opinion...:)

God exsits. :) Nuff said.

And I made a Holy Church of Voltaire on one of the threads. Too bad the only member is Straughn...Anybody want to join? $24.99 a month for membership fees and you get free beer, scripture, and porn.

Porn's already free, screw scripture, and I can't drink yet.

Welcome to General?


haha so true, so true

does god exsist

No. Superstition left over from the infancy of humanity.

And I made a Holy Church of Voltaire on one of the threads. Too bad the only member is Straughn...Anybody want to join? $24.99 a month for membership fees and you get free beer, scripture, and porn.

ah, see now those i can believe in. free beer is MY mana.

ah, see now those i can believe in. free beer is MY mana.

Beer restores my mana. =p

but yes, i do believe there is a god, i was on an airplane once, flying from Miami International Airport to Frankfurt Germany, and at about 7 o'clock PM i looked out and saw the suns rays reflecting off the white clouds, creating a blinding (literally, i couldnt look for more than a few moments before having to shield my eyes) sea of gold for hundreds of miles, even farther than my eyes could see! In times like this, even my skeptical mind truly believed that there had to be a god, how else could a sight like that be possible?

just my opinion...:)

Well, water evaporates from the surface, then rises and condenses into a layer of clouds. The nuclear reactions in the sun release light, which travels to the clouds, hits the water droplets, then reflects to your eye, the lenses of with focus the light onto the retina, where the cones and rods pick up the light and send electrical signals to your brain, which then deciphers them into the sight.

ah, see now those i can believe in. free beer is MY mana.
YAY! new converts?

Beer restores my mana. =p

Milk restores my HP.

YAY! new converts?

Hold on...if you're paying, is the beer really free?

Hold on...if you're paying, is the beer really free?

it damn well is, cause i drink more than 25$ in beer in a month. and anyways, we've already established it is mana.

it damn well is, cause i drink more than 25$ in beer in a month. and anyways, we've already established it is mana.

Eh, k. I recover mana while I wait anyways.

it damn well is, cause i drink more than 25$ in beer in a month. and anyways, we've already established it is mana.
You drink more than that?

...

Maybe you're not the best candidate for my church after all...:p

Eh, k. I recover mana while I wait anyways.

lol. think of it as rejuvenation potions.

besides the irritating frequency of these threads, it is still incredible (to me) how long the grow.

and how little they usually have to do with the OP by the end.

You drink more than that?

...

Maybe you're not the best candidate for my church after all...:p


don't worry, i don't go to church except on special holidays once a year :D

and how little they usually have to do with the OP by the end.

I think page 3 is the average on topic limit for General. Watch your Metaphysics thread La Dame.

don't worry, i don't go to church except on special holidays once a year :D
sweet. Then welcome aboard. The beer's on your left, scripture's on the right, and porn's around the back.

I think page 3 is the average on topic limit for General. Watch your Metaphysics thread La Dame.
eh. I've got all the information I needed anyway.

Because even if we disregard logical conventalism logic still isn't necessarily conceptual in the way that the argument runs (i.e. contained in a mind), it could simply be metaphysical which would require no mind to conceive of it.

I know this was like ten pages ago, but here:

Think of it like the "If a tree falls in the forest and nobody's there to hear it" kind of thing, except it's like, "If logical conventionalism means god doesn't exist, and nobody's there to realize it"... no... ugh... I know there's a parallel here somewhere.

"If a tree falls in a forest and nobody's there to hear it, does it make a sound."

"If god doesn't exist, is it because of logical conventionalism, even though nobody would be there to realize it?"

Maybe that one, but let's keep trying.

"If logical conventionalism keeps god from existing, and nobody's there to know it, does it have an effect on the universe?"

Something like that...

I don't know, you bastards know what I mean. =_= If nobody exists, then logic should still exist. The tree made a noise, even though nobody was there to hear it.

*snip*

Depends on what you consider a sound...The vibrations, or the sensation our brains decipher from those vibrations.

I know this was like ten pages ago, but here:

Think of it like the "If a tree falls in the forest and nobody's there to hear it" kind of thing, except it's like, "If logical conventionalism means god doesn't exist, and nobody's there to realize it"... no... ugh... I know there's a parallel here somewhere.

"If a tree falls in a forest and nobody's there to hear it, does it make a sound."

"If god doesn't exist, is it because of logical conventionalism, even though nobody would be there to realize it?"

Maybe that one, but let's keep trying.

"If logical conventionalism keeps god from existing, and nobody's there to know it, does it have an effect on the universe?"

Something like that...

I don't know, you bastards know what I mean. =_= If nobody exists, then logic should still exist. The tree made a noise, even though nobody was there to hear it.
But the empiricists would argue that without things there to perceive it, the tree falling doesn't make the sound.

I don't know, you bastards know what I mean. =_= If nobody exists, then logic should still exist. The tree made a noise, even though nobody was there to hear it.

if we consider the noise as a quantum state, then according to schrodinger it simultaneously exists as having made a noise and not having made a noise, until someone resolves the made-a-noise wave. i would not go so far as to assume that most of the posters here can resolve logic when they see it. zing!

Depends on what you consider a sound...The vibrations, or the sensation our brains decipher from those vibrations.

Because we're not there to experience something doesn't mean it didn't happen. Lots of shit happened before we came to be, and even more shit happened before we really understood that it was happening.

Tree falls, the sound causes the birds to scatter. You can't hear the sound, but you could see the birds flipping out and flying off. You walk over to where it was and see the fallen tree, and you deduct that the tree fell and made a bigass sound.

It's like, if you can't see it does it exist? It's the same thing. Many people have died from what they didn't know was there - you don't see the guy sneaking up behind you with a knife, but he's there regardless of whether or not your mind knows it. Depending on how good he is with that knife, you might not even know he was there after he kills you.

Because we're not there to experience something doesn't mean it didn't happen. Lots of shit happened before we came to be, and even more shit happened before we really understood that it was happening.

Tree falls, the sound causes the birds to scatter. You can't hear the sound, but you could see the birds flipping out and flying off. You walk over to where it was and see the fallen tree, and you deduct that the tree fell and made a bigass sound.

It's like, if you can't see it does it exist? It's the same thing. Many people have died from what they didn't know was there - you don't see the guy sneaking up behind you with a knife, but he's there regardless of whether or not your mind knows it. Depending on how good he is with that knife, you might not even know he was there after he kills you.

Well, the birds heard the sound, but what I'd deduce is that the tree hitting the ground caused nearby air to vibrate, and if I'd been there, I would've heard a sound.

Now, tell me, what is the meaning of life?


It changes from one lifetime to another.

As for the meaning of life,

Its cheese, according to Rufus on Kim Possible (when he became the almighty naked mole rat).

GO RUFUS :mp5:

Alright those that don't believe in God give sufficient evidence that God does not exsist

First prove to me that there is no butter in your fridge (it's surprisingly difficult).

Because we're not there to experience something doesn't mean it didn't happen. Lots of shit happened before we came to be, and even more shit happened before we really understood that it was happening.

Tree falls, the sound causes the birds to scatter. You can't hear the sound, but you could see the birds flipping out and flying off. You walk over to where it was and see the fallen tree, and you deduct that the tree fell and made a bigass sound.

It's like, if you can't see it does it exist? It's the same thing. Many people have died from what they didn't know was there - you don't see the guy sneaking up behind you with a knife, but he's there regardless of whether or not your mind knows it. Depending on how good he is with that knife, you might not even know he was there after he kills you.
The question more accurately posed is not, "If it falls does it make a sound?", but "If it falls can anybody hear (it)?" It's not about the sound, you see, but about reality beyond perception.

You know something is real by experiencing it. What if just this once a tree fell but made no sound? You don't know it didn't. No one does. You can only assume it with a large probability. That's reality: a large probability.

First prove to me that there is no butter in your fridge (it's surprisingly difficult).
No two blocks of butter have the same arrangement of molecules; therefore, any degree of unifying them into a single concept requires a generalisation and a loss of information. This thing called "butter" does not exist as a physical construct, but rather as a conceptual entity.

The thing that is called my fridge, on the other hand, must refer to a physical location, since I cannot possibly own a store of concepts that is not a subset of my own conscious awareness. (Furthermore, even if it was the conceptual fridge that you refer to, it is a separate one to the concept of butter. Both are ideas to represent individual objects; the fact that the "fridge" is capable of storing other "foodstuffs" does not mean that the "butter" it can potentially store is a part of the idea of the fridge - in fact, it must be separate in order to create such locational comparisons.)

Therefore, since the physical fridge cannot contain the metaphysical butter, there cannot be any butter in my fridge.

No two blocks of butter have the same arrangement of molecules; therefore, any degree of unifying them into a single concept requires a generalisation and a loss of information. This thing called "butter" does not exist as a physical construct, but rather as a conceptual entity.

The thing that is called my fridge, on the other hand, must refer to a physical location, since I cannot possibly own a store of concepts that is not a subset of my own conscious awareness. (Furthermore, even if it was the conceptual fridge that you refer to, it is a separate one to the concept of butter. Both are ideas to represent individual objects; the fact that the "fridge" is capable of storing other "foodstuffs" does not mean that the "butter" it can potentially store is a part of the idea of the fridge - in fact, it must be separate in order to create such locational comparisons.)

Therefore, since the physical fridge cannot contain the metaphysical butter, there cannot be any butter in my fridge.

Pedant. :p

I was talking about the commonly accepted definition of butter, limited as that might be.

Pedant. :p

I was talking about the commonly accepted definition of butter, limited as that might be.
Who's to say the commonly accepted definition is the entity itself?

Double meaning to that, of course. Proof for a priori ideas is inevitably derived from definitions and tautologies, but in order for these to match empirical reality the definitions need to be mirrored in practice. If what we define as butter isn't actually what butter is then our proofs are meaningless. Similarly, unless we create a definition of God that is rigidly supported in nature, we can neither prove nor disprove its existence in any meaningful way.

If, on the other hand, there was such a universally observable or tautological definition of God, then a proof or disproof would be relatively straightforward. The trick is getting everyone to agree on it.

See, I do have a point on the topic. :p

Who's to say the commonly accepted definition is the entity itself?

Double meaning to that, of course. Proof for a priori ideas is inevitably derived from definitions and tautologies, but in order for these to match empirical reality the definitions need to be mirrored in practice. If what we define as butter isn't actually what butter is then our proofs are meaningless. Similarly, unless we create a definition of God that is rigidly supported in nature, we can neither prove nor disprove its existence in any meaningful way.

If, on the other hand, there was such a universally observable or tautological definition of God, then a proof or disproof would be relatively straightforward. The trick is getting everyone to agree on it.

See, I do have a point on the topic. :p

:eek: *applauds frantically*

As I have stated previously people who use the word 'therefore' repetativly usually have no idea what they are talking about. But there are exeptions...

Who's to say the commonly accepted definition is the entity itself?

Double meaning to that, of course. Proof for a priori ideas is inevitably derived from definitions and tautologies, but in order for these to match empirical reality the definitions need to be mirrored in practice. If what we define as butter isn't actually what butter is then our proofs are meaningless. Similarly, unless we create a definition of God that is rigidly supported in nature, we can neither prove nor disprove its existence in any meaningful way.

If, on the other hand, there was such a universally observable or tautological definition of God, then a proof or disproof would be relatively straightforward. The trick is getting everyone to agree on it.

See, I do have a point on the topic. :p

By definition I could define One plus Two to be negative seven.

So arguements don't apply to God, because he's supernatural and doesn't have to follow the same rules, because he's outside them.
Quite simply, there are no "rules" that apply to the supernatural.

Quite simply, there are no "rules" that apply to the supernatural.
How... convenient.

Quite simply, there are no "rules" that apply to the supernatural.

How do we know that God is supernatural? May he not be both in the natural world and supernatural (at once)?

And how do we know that there are no rules that apply to the supernatural? Do you mean 'no rules that we know of', or do you mean that there is really no rules there? According to the Bible, the one rule that God lives by is that of love. It isn't that he made the rule, but that it is part of his nature, and thus while not strictly a rule, but a part of his nature from which he never deviates from.

How... convenient.
For us? Extremely. It allows that God be undefined and undefinable.

No, god doesn't exist. Give it a rest!

And how do we know that there are no rules that apply to the supernatural? Do you mean 'no rules that we know of', or do you mean that there is really no rules there? According to the Bible, the one rule that God lives by is that of love. It isn't that he made the rule, but that it is part of his nature, and thus while not strictly a rule, but a part of his nature from which he never deviates from.
What is the supernatural? What does it mean to us natural creatures for something to be "beyond" nature? Basically, "here be dragons"; it means the unknown. Because we are natural beings, limited to experience of and observation of nature, the supernatural will always be unknown to us.

This is where no rules can apply: if you limit the unknown in any way, especially by suggesting that parts of it are knowable, then it is no longer "the unknown". You have lost that supernatural element.


This is where it becomes necessary to differentiate between god (the thing) and the image of God, which is built by man in story and myth, and has a different purpose than god itself. The purpose of myth is not to teach about the reality of the thing (Brad forbid). Its purpose is to allow people to come to their own understanding of how to relate to this thing called god.

I would like to clarify and expound a bit on an earlier post.

Like I stated before, according to the Scriptures God creates evil as we see in Isaiah 45 (Asah bara shalom ra).

Now, this may come as a shock to many today, as Christianity has made good and evil synonymous with righteousness and sin. While there is a definate dichotomy between averia or sin, and tzaddik or righteousness, there is less of a dichotomy between tov (good) and ra (evil). A person can be a righteous man, and still do evil things. In the same respect, it was understood that God can do both good and evil, but still be a righteous God.

A lot of this stems from Jewish views on just what evil is. Scripturally, evil and good are very subjective, compared to sin and righteousness which are not. Keeping a commandment is a mitzvah, and righteous, but it does not necessarily equate to good. In the same respect, violating a commandment is sin, but it does not necessarily equate to evil. An example would be fighting in a war and killing a man - this is an example of ra, evil, but it is not a sin and can even be considered righteous.

Its very easy to see what sin is and what sin isn't, because sin is violating a law by definition. Righteousness is the same way, it would be keeping the law. Good and evil are much more subjective, the lines are blurred, and what one person considers good may be a sin and what one considers evil may be righteous.
Thanks for that, it was helpful.