- Oct 16, 2008
- 11,764
- 347
- 126
I wish I had a better argument.
Yes they are.
Based on the complete lack of evidence that supports any gods existence and the knowledge that supports the non-existence of any gods, then yes this atheist knows there are no gods.An Atheist does not need to Know that there is "no god". It merely needs to not believe that any god exists.
I guess my point is: despite the premise of your analogy that they are in a universe with many galaxies and an origin at the big bang, if it is fundamentally impossible to empirically instantiate those phenomena in the realities of those observers, does your premise have any meaning to them? Whereof one cannot speak...
Is There a God?
Does God exist? Here are six straightforward reasons to believe that God is really there.
By Marilyn Adamson
http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html
Then belive in one: to belive, stick with not knowing, or dis-believe all require a decision.That our universe was created by some kind of intelligent design is something even Dawkins doesn't rule out.. however this doesn't mean there is a God like in the bible for example.. like if God exist how come right now babies are born with HIV in Africa just to die in a couple of days.. or so many people being misformed by birth.. do you mean God is a very sadistic being or do you still believe those people have to suffer because of the deeds of others or whatever the bible says.. and what with all the other religions out there.. is there a heaven.. THAT'S what would interest me.. a creator who doesn't care about my existence is irrelevant to me. I sincerely wish there was a positive afterlife.
I'm not interested in making a God up to believe in something i know doesn't exist.. that's pointless.. i'm only interested to know what's actually there.Then belive in one: to belive, stick with not knowing, or dis-believe all require a decision.
I'm not interested in making a God up to believe in something i know doesn't exist.. that's pointless.. i'm only interested to know what's actually there.
Ideally, whatever the impact might be, the antecedent cause being impossible to infer from that phenomena, it would simply get ignored. Maybe the spontaneous decay of subatomic particles are actually determined by some event that occurred in an otherwise undetectable m-brane. If we can't infer it, we disregard it.However, what if the physically-real impact of something that is now empirically impossible still remains?
It's arguable that an observation of an event's effect is a type of observation of the event itself, but it is kind of just splitting pedantic hairs.In this case one would expect gamma ray bursts from distant galaxies to still be observable actants in the historic record... Leading to an unsolvable paradox: Something which cannot be observed now having had an impact that can still be observed.
Paradoxes have more to do with problems in our language than problems with reality, but paradoxes are perhaps just a poor example. I think I get your meaning.Perhaps this sort of thing has already happened, and explains basic paradoxes in existing physics.
The realization that God does not exist, the complete and total loss of my faith, is what lead me to find Him. In a world without meaning love is as meaningless as everything else. I lived in my head and believed that God and His love is what gives life meaning. When that died I died too. One night a gust of wind hit my house and I shifted from thought to being. I was the wind. In that moment I knew that it's not God's love for me that gives life meaning, but my love for Him. I am a window through which God manifests His being. I am one face of a multifaceted jewel. The knowledge of God, in my opinion, comes when the cup of grace is handed to those with longing.
Don't get me wrong but aren't you really saying you just wanna believe in a god because it makes you feel better, not necessarily because he exists? You start by saying "the realization that God does not exist".The realization that God does not exist, the complete and total loss of my faith, is what lead me to find Him. In a world without meaning love is as meaningless as everything else. I lived in my head and believed that God and His love is what gives life meaning. When that died I died too. One night a gust of wind hit my house and I shifted from thought to being. I was the wind. In that moment I knew that it's not God's love for me that gives life meaning, but my love for Him. I am a window through which God manifests His being. I am one face of a multifaceted jewel. The knowledge of God, in my opinion, comes when the cup of grace is handed to those with longing.
True knowledge would be if we die here, there would factually be an afterlife were our soul goes. Otherwise it's just believing in an ilusion just for the purpose of making us feel better, not because we believe God actually exists. You understand what i mean?And what do you consider true knowledge?
We just put my dad into hospice care. Drugs aren't nearly enough to manage the pain of his stage 4 cancer. I've been mentally prepared for him not to be around for 15 years, as that's when I was told he would die within a year. Yesterday I prayed and God granted me the additional time to forgive and learn to love that I told God I needed.
God granted that time... by giving me this last 15 years with my father. He'll die soon.
We know that everything is meaningless in the infinite nebula of the universe...
So we have to free ourselves to enact meaningfulness.
Like how do you explain that as i write 100's of babies in Africa are being born with HIV to die in a couple of hours or days. What kinda God would be ok with that.
Yahweh gave your dad cancer. That's not a deity you should be lovin'.
I really wish there was a God and an afterlife, but me wishing something of course doesn't mean it's true.
So do you actually believe in God and an afterlife existing or not and why?
The problem with religion is that there are too many to believe in and they tend to be mutually inconsistent. You can argue that they are all different expressions of the same thing and that's fine. But that tends to undermine any dogmatic beliefs. You end up having to adopt an attitude that can encompass all forms of belief.I am who I am because of all my father has gone through.
If you and me as we are is why we have existence: then everything that happened was necessary.
Do you know enough to know that this illusion must be an illusion?
Moon and I have dropped the idea of epistemic certainty.
If you believe in nothing you can fall for anything.
So we chose to fall for the idea of a better life.
Who I am is not what I say, but what I do.
Accordingly, I hope I believe in Jesus.
The problem with religion is that there are too many to believe in and they tend to be mutually inconsistent. You can argue that they are all different expressions of the same thing and that's fine. But that tends to undermine any dogmatic beliefs. You end up having to adopt an attitude that can encompass all forms of belief.
Personally, I think the strongest argument in favor of religion is quantum mechanics. It completely rejects any human notions of certainty, consistency, reality and even time. It requires that we transcend our traditionally linear forms of thought to adopt a new and conceptually inconsistent view of what is and isn't real. This is something Buddhism has taught for a couple of thousand years.
But the real problem with religion is that it is something learned rather than experienced. We have no way to directly experience the divine or metaphysical except through either chemicals or the altered states of mind created by various forms of mysticism. That's why ethnobotanicals have always been a part of religious practice from the dawn of time until fairly recently.
The problem with religion is that there are too many to believe in and they tend to be mutually inconsistent. You can argue that they are all different expressions of the same thing and that's fine. But that tends to undermine any dogmatic beliefs. You end up having to adopt an attitude that can encompass all forms of belief.
Personally, I think the strongest argument in favor of religion is quantum mechanics. It completely rejects any human notions of certainty, consistency, reality and even time. It requires that we transcend our traditionally linear forms of thought to adopt a new and conceptually inconsistent view of what is and isn't real. This is something Buddhism has taught for a couple of thousand years.
But the real problem with religion is that it is something learned rather than experienced. We have no way to directly experience the divine or metaphysical except through either chemicals or the altered states of mind created by various forms of mysticism. That's why ethnobotanicals have always been a part of religious practice from the dawn of time until fairly recently.
I experience the altered state of mind created by mysticism at least every week.
It's no a proof of God, the point is there is no proof of anything.
But it's evidence in favor of my continued belief.
Altered states of mind created by Mysticism? Evidence in favour of your continued belief?
So you feel a little tipsy and everything you Believe seems just a little more legit. Sounds like a typical Last Call One Night Stand story.
Feelings, Altered States, and Emotions are easy to manipulate.
