| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
I'm finding more and more absolute truth in the admonition to avoid casting pearls before swine. | ||
| Blake |
Need to be clear. Not implying you are swine at all! LOL! | ||
| Blake |
I do wonder if Dave H. would quote that scriptural metaphor and tell me that "Christians are not allowed to throw jewelry away" or "God collects jewelry"... That would be on par with some of his other readings of the Bible. | ||
| Not_purple_s2 |
That isn't proof of an existence of a "man in the sky" through the laws of science. Only if you reject logic. At one time, "A" did not exist. True. "A" cannot create itself. True. Yet "A" exists. True "A" was created. Truth. A creator of "A" exists or existed. Truth So if God is "A" then you must also believe that he had a creator... and he had a creator and so on and so on. Is this the "logic" you use to justify belief in God? If you can accept God as a creator then you have to believe He; A. came from nothing or B. has always been. But why do you need him to play cosmic middle-man? | ||
| Slaughter |
If the god/gods are infinite, why not the universe? Both concepts are not mutually exclusive. God must have been a lonely, lonely entity before he/she/it/they created this thing called the universe about 7,000 years ago as some have claimed. Infinitely bored - why not have "created" the universe a godzillion years before he/she/it/they decided to create this whole shooting match just a "blink" ago in the scheme of time-as-infinity | ||
| Blake |
>>> So if God is "A" then you must also believe that he had a creator... and he had a creator and so on and so on. Untrue. You're stuck in four dimensions. Imagine that you only knew three dimensions, two of space, one of space-time. Everything you know and sense would be limited to a flat 2-dimensional plane. How would you fathom the 3rd spacial dimension? Or if you had no sense of time, all you knew was the present with no sense of a past or future. How could you fathom time and the abilities that it allows? How then may we comprehend existence in five or six dimensions? We do have laws of science for our realm that state that matter cannot appear from non-matter and that life cannot spring from non-life. Those are the laws of science upon which the proof is based. We don't have any laws of science that state that it is impossible for a being to exist in a realm of greater dimensions that our own. In fact Hawking at one time proposed just that notion wrt God. | ||
| Blake |
>>> If the god/gods are infinite, why not the universe? Which one? Is it good science to presume that ours is the only universe? What lies above "universe" in the hierarchy of reality? The error it seems to me is to assume that our universe is uppermost in hierarchy. Would it be good science to presume that the same physical laws that govern here also apply there? Great discussion. | ||
| Hootowl |
The math for membrane theory (the unification of the competing string theories) only works if there are 11 dimensions. So is God an 11th dimensional entity? | ||
| Blake |
What's in a name? Could it be truth? The Bible offers some incredibly deep insights and concepts if one is willing to read it, really read it. Tough to imagine folks from thousands of years ago contemplating such things and then just making up stories about them. | ||
| Blake |
>>> So is God an 11th dimensional entity? Beer too is good. Sorry, that's all I got. | ||
| Not_purple_s2 |
I've earlier stated that I don't dismiss the possibility of extra-diminsional forces. The "imagine youself in a 2D world" is an old one to me. And diminsions, they build on each other. you need points to have lines, lines to have shapes, shapes to have space, and space to have time.... what comes next I'm not sure but I'm betting that it will also contain time, it might "look" different though. However, I find the chance of any extra diminsional forces resembling anything like any of man's gods to be so unlikely as to be impossible. Therefore belief in any of man's god is pointless. | ||
| Not_purple_s2 |
Also if God is in the next diminsion up do you think he's there alone? Or do you think he and his buddies sit around and argue over who created them and what is in the next universe up? | ||
| Hootowl |
I'm fairly certain that Homo Sapiens existed long before the first Hebrew letter was put to paper (or rock or whatever) so the fact that stacking letters on top of each other make a stick figure is not a persuasive argument. It started out interesting but then... The way it was written reminds me of the guy on this board who claimed he was going to share with us all the secret to making XL engines not puke oil if we would just keep reading his seemingly endless posts, and it turned out he was full of crap and selling stuff. | ||
| Blake |
Oh, I didn't mean to imply that the stick figure was any kind of evidence for anything. Just the name and it's meaning and implications. | ||
| Blake |
>>> However, I find the chance of any extra dimensional forces Not "forces", but rather being(s) that exist and navigate among higher dimensions that our own. >>> ...resembling anything like any of man's gods How do you describe the Christian God? >>> to be so unlikely as to be impossible. Unlikely based on what, besides belief I mean? >>> Therefore belief in any of man's god is pointless. How so? How can it be pointless to believe in a higher power that will hold us accountable for our behavior? You can argue for or against the existence of God, but saying there is no point to belief in God is untenable. Our own nation's founders, some of them deists, even said as much. | ||
| Moxnix |
Timeline: Creation Man Woman Birth Death Infinity It appears to me that athiests and agnostics can't grok infinity. Infinity happens in time and space, matter and energy. Struggling with the concept doesn't help. | ||
| Hootowl |
"Just the name and it's meaning and implications." I liked that part too. | ||
| Slaughter |
You missed one point on the timeline - Infinity Creation Man Woman Birth Death Infinity Or not | ||
| Back_again |
Hi I'm new to this forum and just wondering if you guys do this often or is it seasonally related? Not meaning to unduly criticize, but some outgrowth of Seasonal Effective Disorder exacerbated by a reduced opportunities to ride motorcycles comes to mind A long time ago I met a psychiatrist at a party and some of the guests were asking him about his work and he told quite a few interesting stories of folks with what to us seemed to be pretty clear cases of self-destructive behaviors. He summed it up with the following riddle: Question: How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb? Answer: Just one - but the light bulb has to want to change. Seems like that's what I'm seeing here. I'd venture to say almost no one has changed their position as a result of anything that's been posted here. On the contrary, the negative tones and derogatory words have probably driven opposing viewpoints further apart that they were when the debate opened. Just like statistics, almost anyone can find an author, an essay or a poll that seems to support their position and it's just as likely their opponent in the debate will dismiss the cited work as false, or even worse as an intentional attempt to mislead or misrepresent, implying the the author of the cited work knows the "truth" yet inexplicably chooses to take a position 180 degrees away from that. I have to admit I find some of the posts amusing but so do I find some of the posts disturbing. I find certain posts disturbing not because of the basic point they try to make but because of the malicious tone and overly aggressive personal attacks. Seems more like those posters care less about trying to convince the other side that they are wrong and more about trying to convince themselves they are right. An analyst might attribute that kind of behavior as an unprocessed reaction to fear, which often manifests itself as anger ( at least in adolescents and the emotionally immature) Rather than accept an opposing viewpoint as, well, an opposing viewpoint, it's seen as threat to their core beliefs, values, and faith ( or lack of faith). It's also interesting to see some folks employing semantical gymnastics and calling it logic. I'm no philosopher but I did have to take Philosophy 101 (logic) 30 years ago in college and even I remember enough of the course to see what's often been presented as "logic" is any thing but. Christian, Jews, Muslim or atheist - I think everyone's entitled to their own beliefs. Faith is great - but it's faith. It may very well be fact but no one on this earth can truly "know" that. I would submit none of us are going to know of the existence or absence of "God" as long as we're in our current state. If there is a God and afterlife, we may truly know it when we experience it. If there's not and afterlife - well will probably never know that - one day we're just going to wake up dead (that's a joke). A friend of mine back in college once proclaimed that be believed "the purpose of religion is to defeat death". Maybe he was right So knock yourselves out - you just might want to realize that this outsider is telling you all the discussion I've read here does more to polarize the factions than offer any real debate of stand any chance of enlightening the other side to see the error of their ways or even consider that the other side may have a valid point or two. I like to fall back to what I call the "impact statement" . Try to identify what you are really trying to accomplish here and then evaluate your success. If you're trying to tell us that you believe in "X" and this is why, you may have made a good case. If you are trying to change mindsets or "prove" you're right and the other guys are wrong, you've failed. Miserably. We now rejoin the tumultuous, hate-filled and futile chest-beating (think King Kong) already in progress. edited for typos Have a nice day! Stanley (Message edited by back_again on January 20, 2011) | ||
| Slaughter |
By jove he's GOT IT! (true dat, Stanley!) | ||
| Moxnix |
Stanley, this is the "I'm pink, therefore I'm Spam" thread on a Buell motorcycle forum. Pagans vs. Christians is always good for lively chatter. | ||
| Blake |
Stanley, Welcome to BadWeB. I think you mean "psychologist." Oddly you seem to be suffering under the delusion that we care what you may or may not think of our discussion here. Your new and impudent, not a great combination. Many of us have known each other personally for years now. We're enjoying ourselves. No hostility in this thread that I can see. Just discussion. One thing you'll inevitably learn if you stick around here for long, and I hope you do, you seem quite intelligent... one thing you'll find is that we don't much care for self-appointed, pontificating critics or nannies pretending to be above it all. If you see a serious problem, by all means call it out. Otherwise, just sit back and enjoy or join in on the fun. "Hate-filled?" Which posts please? I need to review and reconsider. Rhetoric is cheap. If you see "semantic gymnastics" that are falsely being designated as logic, or logical analysis (Socratic method), then address that issue and show us the error. Vague innuendo is the realm of the intellectual coward. Either take on the debate, or hush up. How's that for polarizing?  Just wondering, what are you trying to accomplish here? Did the internet call and tell you that we needed critiquing? | ||
| Moxnix |
Snicker. | ||
| Kenm123t |
I dated a psychologist for several years typically they end up one of two ways famous like Dr Phil or drooling in the corner. She taught at her university and we attended faculty functions. Most of the students were frankly nuts of some type trying to fix themselves. The Drs of the dept were either animal torturers or the whackos in child development these are the nuts that came up with self esteem issues. And the female and male profs that thought the students were there for sexual predation of the faculty. Slinky people for the most part "Pretty much useless but kinda fun when you shove them down the stairs"! A prime example of the 90 10 rule 90% useless 10% do some actual good. | ||
| Blake |
I keep forgetting to use that "slinky people" line. Tomorrow's the day! LOL. | ||
| Moxnix |
Way back when, I cast my jaundiced eye at the puppy mill psych dept of the school, realizing I'd not met one with enough mental health to share with future clients. | ||
| Blake |
Crazy puppies are scary. | ||
| Pammy |
Sorry Blake, I agree with "Stanley". This thread is kinda like an internet train wreck. You can't help but look. Plus you changed the title, so I almost feel like I was tricked through the door. I don't want to participate in the discussion(and yet here I am), but I figure the reason that it it on HERE, in this very place, is that I can if I choose. If one isn't welcome to voice an opinion or view, it should be posted in the rules right at the beginning of the discussion. Kind of like another thread I saw around here "Don't look" or something like that. Action required(or lack thereof) is clear, right in the title of the thread, don't look! Of course it doesn't say don't post.... Anyway, I was just posting to say that I agree with Stanley...for the most part. The one thing I disagree with is his statement that he is new here...he just doesn't seem new. | ||
| Pammy |
Oh, and don't try to smite me down. I may remind you that I am an all powerful female and I will overwhelm you and take all your stuff. Ha Ha. | ||
| Blake |
I might agree with some of what Stanley said too. Certainly not all. I just don't appreciate his delivery, especially from a claimed newb and the way he said it. My ego rebelled. From a friend, it's entirely different. From a sweetheart like you, someone I trust and know to be well-intentioned... I must still rebel! ![: ]](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/clipart/proud.gif) Blame Tom (Reindog) for the title change. Run Reindog! RUN!  |
