This topic is locked from further discussion.
God put all of you on this earth now praise him Bucked20Sounds like God is an arrogant ass if he demands people to praise him.
(imo before moderation, not offending people)
"Should" has a normative tone that I'm not entirely comfortable with. However, yes, butterscotch pudding specifically.[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="Tylendal"] Should we worship pudding?Tylendal
I google image searched Holy Pudding, and this is the first image I found. Clearly our religion is ridiculously hardcore.
[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]my parents put me on earth. God made the decision of letting you be born wheres your proof?[QUOTE="Bucked20"]God put all of you on this earth now praise him Bucked20
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]Sounds like God is an arrogant ass if he demands people to praise him.[QUOTE="Bucked20"]God put all of you on this earth now praise him Bucked20
(imo before moderation, not offending people)
God is a cool laid back dude So laid back that he demands praise.[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]my parents put me on earth. God made the decision of letting you be born no it was my parents decision to have a kid, or a broken condom.[QUOTE="Bucked20"]God put all of you on this earth now praise him Bucked20
One of the two.
God made the decision of letting you be born no it was my parents decision to have a kid, or a broken condom.[QUOTE="Bucked20"][QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]my parents put me on earth.
CaveJohnson1
One of the two.
Maybe God broke the condom, that scamp!I do appreciate him adducing the copypasta for us weak souls, also."Has anyone here seen The Invention of Lying? A fantastic religious satire that really puts religion into perspective."
Good movie[QUOTE="alexside1"]
[QUOTE="xaos"]
ultimameteora
"I knew it, I knew was something fishy going on with his post and you just prove that".
Actually I typed all of that from the book, I didn't know it was on the net, wish I did, it would have saved me some time.
So your faith is so weak that you resort to typing other people arguments that you didn't made and didn't bother read it critically. Gotcha.Those kinds of explanations are why people become atheists. KC_Hokieyou can't really become an atheist. unless you're admitting its a belief structure which most real atheists find detestable.
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Those kinds of explanations are why people become atheists. UniverseIXyou can't really become an atheist. unless you're admitting its a belief structure which most real atheists find detestable. What. Of course it's a belief structure and no one has ever argued it isn't. People argue it's not a religion, which it isn't.
Well my Mom and Dad created me out of billions of other humand they could mate with, so my parents are my creators and therefor god.
[QUOTE="Bucked20"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"] Sounds like God is an arrogant ass if he demands people to praise him.God is a cool laid back dude So laid back that he demands praise. he doesnt demand praise, humans do =)(imo before moderation, not offending people)
DroidPhysX
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="ultimameteora"]It's says man is weak, it doesn't say he's unable to create things.ultimameteora"It is certain and indisputable that the creator of man is not like man because a powerless creature cannot create another being" That says man is a powerless creature and that a powerless creature cannot create another being. It's saying God is the creator.This reminds me of Snipes_2.
It's saying God is the creator.This reminds me of Snipes_2. I don't remember him debating like this.[QUOTE="ultimameteora"][QUOTE="Ace6301"] "It is certain and indisputable that the creator of man is not like man because a powerless creature cannot create another being" That says man is a powerless creature and that a powerless creature cannot create another being. Teenaged
[QUOTE="Teenaged"]This reminds me of Snipes_2. I don't remember him debating like this.Why do you always object to what I say? :([QUOTE="ultimameteora"]It's saying God is the creator.alexside1
Besides I said "reminds me". That hardly means he is exactly like him. It's about a specific characteristic he so abundantly exudes.
I don't remember him debating like this.Why do you always object to what I say? :([QUOTE="alexside1"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]This reminds me of Snipes_2.
Teenaged
Besides I said "reminds me". That hardly means he is exactly like him. It's about a specific characteristic he so abundantly exudes.
How am I objecting you? I just said I don't remember him debating like this. Never said anything about you being wrong.[QUOTE="Teenaged"]Why do you always object to what I say? :([QUOTE="alexside1"] I don't remember him debating like this.alexside1
Besides I said "reminds me". That hardly means he is exactly like him. It's about a specific characteristic he so abundantly exudes.
How am I objecting you? I just said I don't remember him debating like this. Never said anything about you being wrong.And now you're being all defensive...When will this stop, Alexander?
[spoiler] I'm just kidding. :P [/spoiler]
[...] nothing is truely random everything can be calculated. so life wasn't an accident point blank. we were precalculated to exist trillions of years ago. its the domino effect. something had to "knock" us to give us motion in the first place.playmynutz1. You assume that the presumed "order" in the universe needs to be "guided" by a consciousness or being. 2. Life was not an "accident." It was the result of a series of events that lead up to its gradual formation. Again, not requiring any "guidance."
If I create my children does that make me their god?
hoola
yes, i saw my dad as a god when i was younger. then such as proper religion, i learned the nature of deceit
A quote from a friend's stash:
A. Einstein: "God doesn't play dice" [with the universe]
Niels Bohr: "Who are you to say what God does?"
Beyond that... didn't Douglas Adams deal with this question before he died in THGTTH?
The Babel fish is small, yellow and leech-like, and probably the oddest thing in the Universe. It feeds on brainwave energy received not from its own carrier but from those around it. It absorbs all unconscious mental frequencies from this brainwave energy to nourish itself with. It then excretes into the mind of its carrier a telepathic matrix formed by combining the conscious thought frequencies with the nerve signals picked up from the speech centres of the brain which has supplied them. The practical upshot of all this is that if you stick a Babel fish in your ear you can instantly understand anything said to you in any form of language. The speech patterns you actually hear decode the brainwave matrix which has been fed into your mind by your Babel fish.
Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen it to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes something like this: "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic."Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets killed on the next zebra crossing. Most leading theologians claim that this argument is a load of dingo's kidneys, but that didn't stop Oolon Colluphid making a small fortune when he used it as the central theme of his best-selling book Well That About Wraps It Up For God.Douglas Adams
[QUOTE="playmynutz"]I was gonna make a thread but hey theres already a god thread. Instead of talking to an ignorant. and no ignorant is not bliss get real. i have a bone to pick wit some of yall so called christians. you need to get your facts straight because your not helping the cause if you cant defend a simple question like does god exist. be realistic but have that confidence that what you believe in is for certain. god exist. nothing is truely random everything can be calculated. so life wasn't an accident point blank. we were precalculated to exist trillions of years ago. its the domino effect. something had to "knock" us to give us motion in the first place.TykainSo as everything has to be created from something and everything is precalculated, what created god ? Or is god the exception ? then if there can be exceptions, why couldn't life itself be that exception ? B**** please, induction only applies when I want it to apply.
So basicaly God = Nature with these arguments? Because natural selection imposes power on the planet, if your not more powerfull than someone else, you die out. Nature imposes sleep, death, hunger, thirst etc. because we're based on organic matter that needs these these things fulfilled or else face death. And yes evreything has a maker, that maker is called evoltuion. If humanity just came out of nowhere, why are there thousands of species of apes, pre-humanoids and early humanoids before Homo Sapiens appeared?One of the proofs and demonstrations of the existence of God is the fact that man did not create himself: nay, his creator and designer is another than himself.
It is certain and indisputable that the creator of man is not like man because a powerless creature cannot create another being. The maker, the creator, has to possess all perfections in order that he may create.
Can the creation be perfect and the creator imperfect? Can a picture be a masterpiece and the painter imperfect in his art? For it is his art and his creation. Moreover, the picture cannot be like the painter; otherwise, the painting would have created itself. However perfect the picture may be, in comparison with the painter it is in the utmost degree of imperfection.
The contingent world is the source of imperfections: God is the origin of perfections. The imperfections of the contingent world are in themselves a proof of the perfections of God.
For example, when you look at man, you see that he is weak. This very weakness of the creature is a proof of the power of the Eternal Almighty One, because, if there were no power, weakness could not be imagined. Then the weakness of the creature is a proof of the power of God; for if there were no power, there could be no weakness; so from this weakness it becomes evident that there is power in the world. Again, in the contingent world there is poverty; then necessarily wealth exists, since poverty is apparent in the world. In the contingent world there is ignorance; necessarily knowledge exists, because ignorance is found; for if there were no knowledge, neither would there be ignorance. Ignorance is the nonexistence of knowledge, and if there were no existence, nonexistence could not be realized.
It is certain that the whole contingent world is subjected to a law and rule which it can never disobey; even man is forced to submit to death, to sleep and to other conditions-that is to say, man in certain particulars is governed, and necessarily this state of being governed implies the existence of a governor. Because a characteristic of contingent beings is dependency, and this dependency is an essential necessity, therefore, there must be an independent being whose independence is essential.
In the same way it is understood from the man who is sick that there must be one who is in health; for if there were no health, his sickness could not be proved.
Therefore, it becomes evident that there is an Eternal Almighty One, Who is the possessor of all perfections, because unless He possessed all perfections He would be like His creation.
Throughout the world of existence it is the same; the smallest created thing proves that there is a creator. For instance, this piece of bread proves that it has a maker.
Praise be to God! the least change produced in the form of the smallest thing proves the existence of a creator: then can this great universe, which is endless, be self-created and come into existence from the action of matter and the elements? How self-evidently wrong is such a supposition!
These obvious arguments are adduced for weak souls; but if the inner perception be open, a hundred thousand clear proofs become visible. Thus, when man feels the indwelling spirit he is in no need of arguments for its existence; but for those who are deprived of the bounty of the spirit, it is necessary to establish external arguments.
Abdul Baha - Some Answered Questions: Part 1, Chapter 2.
ultimameteora
[QUOTE="ultimameteora"]So basicaly God = Nature with these arguments? Because natural selection imposes power on the planet, if your not more powerfull than someone else, you die out. Nature imposes sleep, death, hunger, thirst etc. because we're based on organic matter that needs these these things fulfilled or else face death. And yes evreything has a maker, that maker is called evoltuion. If humanity just came out of nowhere, why are there thousands of species of apes, pre-humanoids and early humanoids before Homo Sapiens appeared? Stop before he starts to think!One of the proofs and demonstrations of the existence of God is the fact that man did not create himself: nay, his creator and designer is another than himself.
It is certain and indisputable that the creator of man is not like man because a powerless creature cannot create another being. The maker, the creator, has to possess all perfections in order that he may create.
Can the creation be perfect and the creator imperfect? Can a picture be a masterpiece and the painter imperfect in his art? For it is his art and his creation. Moreover, the picture cannot be like the painter; otherwise, the painting would have created itself. However perfect the picture may be, in comparison with the painter it is in the utmost degree of imperfection.
The contingent world is the source of imperfections: God is the origin of perfections. The imperfections of the contingent world are in themselves a proof of the perfections of God.
For example, when you look at man, you see that he is weak. This very weakness of the creature is a proof of the power of the Eternal Almighty One, because, if there were no power, weakness could not be imagined. Then the weakness of the creature is a proof of the power of God; for if there were no power, there could be no weakness; so from this weakness it becomes evident that there is power in the world. Again, in the contingent world there is poverty; then necessarily wealth exists, since poverty is apparent in the world. In the contingent world there is ignorance; necessarily knowledge exists, because ignorance is found; for if there were no knowledge, neither would there be ignorance. Ignorance is the nonexistence of knowledge, and if there were no existence, nonexistence could not be realized.
It is certain that the whole contingent world is subjected to a law and rule which it can never disobey; even man is forced to submit to death, to sleep and to other conditions-that is to say, man in certain particulars is governed, and necessarily this state of being governed implies the existence of a governor. Because a characteristic of contingent beings is dependency, and this dependency is an essential necessity, therefore, there must be an independent being whose independence is essential.
In the same way it is understood from the man who is sick that there must be one who is in health; for if there were no health, his sickness could not be proved.
Therefore, it becomes evident that there is an Eternal Almighty One, Who is the possessor of all perfections, because unless He possessed all perfections He would be like His creation.
Throughout the world of existence it is the same; the smallest created thing proves that there is a creator. For instance, this piece of bread proves that it has a maker.
Praise be to God! the least change produced in the form of the smallest thing proves the existence of a creator: then can this great universe, which is endless, be self-created and come into existence from the action of matter and the elements? How self-evidently wrong is such a supposition!
These obvious arguments are adduced for weak souls; but if the inner perception be open, a hundred thousand clear proofs become visible. Thus, when man feels the indwelling spirit he is in no need of arguments for its existence; but for those who are deprived of the bounty of the spirit, it is necessary to establish external arguments.
Abdul Baha - Some Answered Questions: Part 1, Chapter 2.
chaplainDMK
A creation cannot be better than it's creator. Man is imperfect. Therefore, man's creator is perfect. Okay... so where do you prove that man is a creation?TylendalNot true, computers along side A.I. one day will easily be superior to us.
That was a surprising amount of text, it really is such a shame you built the argument on such a flimsy foundation. Take a note from René Descartes, who also made a similar argument in favor of god (one that I also find lacking, but nonetheless far better constructed than yours). Descartes was a logical man, and he understood that logical arguments need to be built on solid foundations, and that layered arguments require that the previous layer be strong enough to support the next. Think of putting four pillar blocks on a base, and then a base on top of the pillars, and continuing to do so building upward with the base blocks becoming smaller in area as you get higher; that's how a logical argument should be structured. Now what you're doing is standing one pillar block on its own, putting a base block on top of it, putting four pillar blocks on that, and continuing on on this fashion getting more complex as you go along, leading to an unstable argument. In short, I can knock down your argument by simply toppling the one small pillar on which you have built your entire argument. Sure, a sentence would have sufficed, but I figure you seem to have spent so much time creating a long and overly elaborate post in the first place that I could return the favor. You assume that man was created, without that assumption your argument falls apart.
Not true, computers along side A.I. one day will easily be superior to us. That's a mighty grand assumption you're sportin' there.[QUOTE="Tylendal"]A creation cannot be better than it's creator. Man is imperfect. Therefore, man's creator is perfect. Okay... so where do you prove that man is a creation?Jamiemydearx3
Not true, computers along side A.I. one day will easily be superior to us.[QUOTE="Tylendal"]A creation cannot be better than it's creator. Man is imperfect. Therefore, man's creator is perfect. Okay... so where do you prove that man is a creation?Jamiemydearx3
Mmm...not necessarily true. While it is true that computers are advancing at an incredible rate, the human brain is such a complex computer that we cannot be sure computers will ever catch up. In addition to processing great amounts of sensory information (just think that a computer, to mimic the human brain, would have to detect every little sense that human organs normally detect AND make snap decisions on which information is relevant enough to be sent to a central processor and which information needs to be discarded), human encoding and memory retrieval is incredibly complex. It is believed that the human storage capacity, for all intents and purposes, is limitless. The problem is primarily with encoding and retrieval of information. Speaking of which, whereas computers simply read files which they are instructed to, human brains retrieve information through a complex network of related ideas. This may not be as efficient in terms of quick access, but it is far more efficient in terms of storage. Finally, human brains are constantly being reshaped and increasing in efficiency. Children's brains actually have far more tissue than adult brains, this is because as adults mature their brains adapt and learn how to process information more efficiently. When a computer can actually increase its own efficiency, then maybe AI as complex as human brains will be possible.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment