Proletaria, I think the only thing I really need to say here is: There is no "simple" and no "complex". Those things do not exist.
The most difficult part about explaining this is breaking the language barrier. It is inadequate and not able to handle these topics. Why? Language is bound by the concept of time and space.
Edit:
@Diehard- We just said the same thing again lol.
i like when we had multiple gods, it sounded endlessly more fun...
I'm still considered the God of sexiness, perfection, and abs in a lot of circles.
CAN YOU AT LEAST TRY TO NOT BE SO OBVIOUS?!?!?!?
/FACEPLANT
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
The thing that all people are misunderstanding here is that most religious folk don't believe anything...they Know their God exists, they Know they are going to heaven or something when they die, and they Know it is the right way of thinking...if you try to prove them wrong, they will tell you all of the things they Know whether you want to hear it or not.
Trying to make a religious person prove to you that their God exists is just silly and stupid.
Here is a list of what is going to happen.
1. You ask a person to prove to you God exists.
2. They tell you what they Know.
3. You don't believe it.
4. You call them stupid.
5. They go home and pray for you.
6. Nobody feels different the next day.
God isn't evil. God isn't anything. Good and evil don't exist. Death/war/poverty/making-you-lose-at-call-of-duty isn't evil, it's just stuff that happens, without any moral connotation.
That was quite an obvious answer though. I feel like I'm making points a 5-year-old could make.
Good answer, but that rules out most every concieved of God in history. I hope you are not attempting to take this viewpoint as a theist. Also, if we allowing god to be so neutral as to affect nothing, what really is the point of calling such a thing "god?" Why not just say "the universe." Wouldn't that be a more apt description?
Proletaria, I think the only thing I really need to say here is: There is no "simple" and no "complex". Those things do not exist.
The most difficult part about explaining this is breaking the language barrier. It is inadequate and not able to handle these topics. Why? Language is bound by the concept of time and space.
Edit:
@Diehard- We just said the same thing again lol.
i like when we had multiple gods, it sounded endlessly more fun...
I'm still considered the God of sexiness, perfection, and abs in a lot of circles.
CAN YOU AT LEAST TRY TO NOT BE SO OBVIOUS?!?!?!?
/FACEPLANT
Look, all this talk about not believing in God and all that jibber jabber has convinced me that, as a God, I should supply the heathens and non-believers with some proof. Sue me!
The thing that all people are misunderstanding here is that most religious folk don't believe anything...they Know their God exists, they Know they are going to heaven or something when they die, and they Know it is the right way of thinking...if you try to prove them wrong, they will tell you all of the things they Know whether you want to hear it or not.
Trying to make a religious person prove to you that their God exists is just silly and stupid.
Here is a list of what is going to happen.
1. You ask a person to prove to you God exists.
2. They tell you what they Know.
3. You don't believe it.
4. You call them stupid.
5. They go home and pray for you.
6. Nobody feels different the next day.
That was hilarious. I think I'll save this somewhere...
@Prole- You pointed out that matter of origin arguments can be proven to have a significant flaw because of the lack of logic behind why something would be complex when everything around us says that the process would start simple and not complex.
My response is that your argument literally cannot actually show a flaw in my idea because in my idea, time and space do not exist so "simple" and "complex" do not exist. Therefore, your statement about said flaw, is in itself flawed because it is not taking into account the lack of time and space.
It's like long division. You're trying to go the next step, but you forgot the remainder. You can't move forward against my ideas until you take into account that there is no such thing as simple and complex.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
@Prole- You pointed out that matter of origin arguments can be proven to have a significant flaw because of the lack of logic behind why something would be complex when everything around us says that the process would start simple and not complex.
My response is that your argument literally cannot actually show a flaw in my concept because in my concept, time and space do not exist so "simple" and "complex" do not exist. Therefore, your statement about said flaw, is in itself flawed because it is not taking into account the lack of time and space.
It's like long division. You're trying to go the next step, but you forgot the remainder. You can't move forward against my ideas until you take into account that there is no such thing as simple and complex.
I was also careful to mention in the OP, that the universe is no proof of god, and that reductio ad absurdum arguments for first-cause god were not valid for obvious reasons. And if I incorrectly identified this as a first-cause argument, i'm sorry, but it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck. I'm assuming it's a duck. =)
God isn't evil. God isn't anything. Good and evil don't exist. Death/war/poverty/making-you-lose-at-call-of-duty isn't evil, it's just stuff that happens, without any moral connotation.
That was quite an obvious answer though. I feel like I'm making points a 5-year-old could make.
Good answer, but that rules out most every concieved of God in history. I hope you are not attempting to take this viewpoint as a theist. Also, if we allowing god to be so neutral as to affect nothing, what really is the point of calling such a thing "god?" Why not just say "the universe." Wouldn't that be a more apt description?
Yes, exactly. That was the point I was trying to make... I think. There is no god in the strick sense. I'm gonna go with the word "divine", even though it sounds silly, to explain myself. The existance of the universe cannot be explained, it has no reason or purpose. It just happens to exist. That qualifies it as divine.
Although now that I think of it, if I follow that definition, everything is divine, so the definition loses it's purpose. And now I'm not making any sense. Let me grab a bite and come back :P.
How absurd is it? Space has literally traveled faster than time up to today at least. Maybe tomorrow it will be proven false. But for today, time and space must not exist.
Those neutrinos arrived at their destination before they even left.
Therefore, our language needs to evolve and so does our concepts on just about everything.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Yes, exactly. That was the point I was trying to make... I think. There is no god in the strick sense. I'm gonna go with the word "divine", even though it sounds silly, to explain myself. The existance of the universe cannot be explained, it has no reason or purpose. It just happens to exist. That qualifies it as divine.
Divine simply means godly. It doesn't mean inexplicable (and honestly, i'm not at all convinced we might not one day understand our universe's beginnings in more detail). The universe as "god," waters down that word (and divine) to the point where they loose all meaning. You are occupying the atheist position already it seems.
Although now that I think of it, if I follow that definition, everything is divine, so the definition loses it's purpose. And now I'm not making any sense. Let me grab a bite and come back :P.
How absurd is it? Space has literally traveled faster than time up to today at least. Maybe tomorrow it will be proven false. But for today, time and space must not exist.
Those neutrinos arrived at their destination before they even left.
Therefore, our language needs to evolve and so does our concepts on just about everything.
Are you suggesting to me that your entire concept of god revolves around the speed at which neutrinos can move?
Space expansion (note: space and light are not one in the same - in case you are trying to apply the speed limit) is also not proof of god. The expansion of space following the big-bang is extensively and accruately described by the laws of physics and theories of quantum physics and even if those tools of understanding were proved to be flawed, that would not suggest god either.
As far as the title says, I say I can't prove it (although I don't actually believe in a muscled man in the clouds).
But I think that's what a lot of Atheists want to hear, is that you can't prove it, and I don't believe anyone can, that's why it's called faith. I don't knock on religions (unless their God wants me dead, then that's where I draw the line) But I don't have a religion either. I think it helps a lot of people cope with dying, and I'm cool with that if people think they have found peace.
As far as the universe (and I need to do some more research on this) but from what I've found so far, it is perfectly explainable by physics that something can be made out of nothing. Crazy, yes, and I'll find some sort of proof and report back later, so I don't sound so quacky. ( I also have a couple theories on why time travel would work both ways, and some theories that try to refute my theories =P ).
But I'll also admit that there is some sort of ingrained fear in me (maybe from hearing about hell my whole life?) that tells me that if I don't believe in God, then he's going to get pissed. I usually fight that off, because from a logical standpoint I don't actually see a reason for hell to exist. But then again I'm also pretty sure (self opinion) that when we die, we don't exist anymore. I mean really, how selfish is it that when WE die, WE get a soul and go to heaven, but every single other living organism gets a worse fate? That just seems arrogant to me.
Yes, exactly. That was the point I was trying to make... I think. There is no god in the strick sense. I'm gonna go with the word "divine", even though it sounds silly, to explain myself. The existance of the universe cannot be explained, it has no reason or purpose. It just happens to exist. That qualifies it as divine.
Divine simply means godly. It doesn't mean inexplicable (and honestly, i'm not at all convinced we might not one day understand our universe's beginnings in more detail). The universe as "god," waters down that word (and divine) to the point where they loose all meaning. You are occupying the atheist position already it seems.
Although now that I think of it, if I follow that definition, everything is divine, so the definition loses it's purpose. And now I'm not making any sense. Let me grab a bite and come back :P.
How absurd is it? Space has literally traveled faster than time up to today at least. Maybe tomorrow it will be proven false. But for today, time and space must not exist.
Those neutrinos arrived at their destination before they even left.
Therefore, our language needs to evolve and so does our concepts on just about everything.
Are you suggesting to me that your entire concept of god revolves around the speed at which neutrinos can move?
Nope! I'm suggesting that if something arrives before it leaves, we may have to rethink what we think we know...I think.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Since you are already talking about gods and godesses, i'd like to offer a certain point of view here...
All of this pondering about our existence is totally relevant. It is by all means what defines us. What makes us a thinking organism. It seperates us from 90% of the other species on our planet.
Whenever a person thinks about creation he reaches the ultimate question, the origin. The seeking of the origin. It is a proccess that could happen in many different ways like becoming more religious or starting to research the subject of Ufo's and extraterrestrial inteligence, etc. In recent times, much of the information about all of this knowledge that involves ancient civilizations and a more "modern" understanding of ancient texts, with the addition of channeled material and the understanding of the meta is totally in the reach of hand.
If we, as a species, evolved on planet earth, Gaia. Then there must be many other planets in many distant galaxies and solar systems that also had the same proccess going on. We can see that today with our plethora of radiation telescopes. We can see planets that look very similar to earth... millions of years ago... But then again, that could be because of the difference of light, time, space, etc.
So yes. Other civilizations exist. In fact, they have always been right next to us. The explanation to that would be the idea of the density of light. Basically, our sun like many others, shines the whole spectrum of light. Our environment as we know it, works on a specific range of the spectrum which is visible, and the other parts of it are detected as radiation, waves, vibration.
Einstien once said that, if we would precieve all types of energy, we would experience new things including parallel realities. Sorry for not qoutiong the exact saying but hey... Anyway, different realities exist on different parts of the spectrum. This also means that we are affecting and being affected by different environments all of the time. Its a net that we are a part of.
So, Yahweh or whoever, could be an entity from some solar system, millions of light years away from us, that reached a certain level of being. Imagine that planets live for billions of years... Some civilizations have been existing and even prospering for atleast millions of years. Their levels of technology enables them to appear to us as gods and whatnot. We are the ones who make them gods simply because we are so simple... Or atleast we were.
Back in the days of the prophets, there were many stories about gods appearing to humans. Legends about whole nations being raised and demolished by gods. Beings that would appear human but possess great powers. I might sound crazy when i say that this all actually makes sense.
Some great entity decided to be in charge of our solar system which in the last 100 thousand years had three living, populated planets. Maldek, Mars and Earth. Maldek was a planet that was eventually destroyed and turned nto the astroid belt that resides between Mars and Jupiter. Mars, reached a point of self destruction through warfare and occupations. And Earth, present until today.
This all sounds like a fairy tale and thats basically what it is. It is just food for thought. Not for one second have i been serious about anyone here actually believing these words... But! I totally expect people to admit that this information is relevant just like any other.
Point is, the more you think of and the more you know, the less you know shit about life and about yourself. Its an unending loop. I like to hear all of the versions of the scenario and build my own probable timeline.
I think that in a few years, we will be teaching these things in schools. Not precisely these things but this way of thought. Giving relevance to every thought and analyzing everything. There should be a class for kids from ages 6-18 about thinking. Just a teacher that opens a subject and encourages the students to think and come up with ideas and solutions. This is how a modern society could really develop a new mentality. Not that we are not doing this all the time but seriously, we are fucking it up.
3. What then, seperates the agnostic from the Atheist? Good question. There is some debate on this, but my take is this: Agnostics just don't care about the question and Atheists have pursued the question and found all answers wanting. If you are a professed agnostic and find a problem with my diffirentiation, please let me know how you see yourself. I am quite interested in this dichotomy.
I wouldn't go as far as saying agnostics don't care about the question. Being agnostic means, from what I understand, that you don't believe in a god, but you're also not entirely ruling out the possibility that a god exists. I consider myself an agnostic, and my personal view is that at this point in our history, we're not equipped to provide evidence for or against the existence of a god. So my stance to the question is more of an "I can't know" rather than an "I don't care".
From my perspective atheists are religious as well. "A-theism" means they do not believe in a deity. They do not "believe" in a deity, which is a belief on itself.
Belief means you think something is true without any proof or evidence. Athiests (as I explained) have said there is no proof and therefor do not hold a belief.
I should also note, anyone who is deistic, pantheistic, christian, jewish, muslim, pagan, or whatever is also an atheist about any number of gods or concepts of god. You know about Zeus, you might have read that a lot of Greeks worshiped him, and you might have even read some myths about him: but you do not hold a belief that he exists since none of these things are proof.
Atheists simply take that one-step further and say "well, there's actually proof for none of those gods."
You seemed to ignore the other part of my post where I explain how agnostics are different from atheists. The second ones' are in direct opposition of theism and therefore any religion, while the first do not clearly state "I do not believe as there is no proof", they say "I don't know, its what we're trying to find out".
Hm, English not being my mother language, I might be having simple communication disabilities in explaining.
Let's rephrase it like this. Speaking strictly about the roots of both philosophies Agnosticism encompasses a huge range of ideas, while Atheism is just a few aspects of it. There are Agnostic Atheists and Agnostic Theists but overall they are simply people that don't put borders around their beliefs. As I said earlier, as an example, there is no proof that God exists, but there also isn't proof that he does not. In this situation, as you pointed out, atheists say there is no proof and therefore it does not exist. But there is no proof so far. Just a few weeks ago there was no proof of anything that can travel beyond the speed of light, yet here the neutrino is. In that sense atheists still simply have a "belief" that there is no God, simply because our technology hasn't evolved enough to prove that He might actually be there.
At the end of the day I might just be messing around with semantics in other people's points of view, but from where I see it atheists are agnostics by default as they pursue truth through evidence. But so do a lot of religious commutes, and they are considered Agnostic Theists. "We'll hopefully, one day, prove, through science, that our God does exist. Though he might not be an old man in the sky as other religions consider Him."
I wouldn't go as far as saying agnostics don't care about the question. Being agnostic means, from what I understand, that you don't believe in a god, but you're also not entirely ruling out the possibility that a god exists. I consider myself an agnostic, and my personal view is that at this point in our history, we're not equipped to provide evidence for or against the existence of a god. So my stance to the question is more of an "I can't know" rather than an "I don't care".
With respect to OP, I consider myself either agnostic or as I recently looked up the definition for, deist. Any deity acknowledged my mankind is not worth believing because it would simply be a projection of the unexplainable onto an non-physical body.
How absurd is it? Space has literally traveled faster than time up to today at least. Maybe tomorrow it will be proven false. But for today, time and space must not exist.
Those neutrinos arrived at their destination before they even left.
Therefore, our language needs to evolve and so does our concepts on just about everything.
By traveled, I'm guessing you mean "Going from point A to point B, where B != A." But if it wasn't displaced at all, it didn't travel.
It did not travel. Because there is no time and no space.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Since you are already talking about gods and godesses, i'd like to offer a certain point of view here...
All of this pondering about our existence is totally relevant. It is by all means what defines us. What makes us a thinking organism. It seperates us from 90% of the other species on our planet.
Whenever a person thinks about creation he reaches the ultimate question, the origin. The seeking of the origin. It is a proccess that could happen in many different ways like becoming more religious or starting to research the subject of Ufo's and extraterrestrial inteligence, etc. In recent times, much of the information about all of this knowledge that involves ancient civilizations and a more "modern" understanding of ancient texts, with the addition of channeled material and the understanding of the meta is totally in the reach of hand.
If we, as a species, evolved on planet earth, Gaia. Then there must be many other planets in many distant galaxies and solar systems that also had the same proccess going on. We can see that today with our plethora of radiation telescopes. We can see planets that look very similar to earth... millions of years ago... But then again, that could be because of the difference of light, time, space, etc.
So yes. Other civilizations exist. In fact, they have always been right next to us. The explanation to that would be the idea of the density of light. Basically, our sun like many others, shines the whole spectrum of light. Our environment as we know it, works on a specific range of the spectrum which is visible, and the other parts of it are detected as radiation, waves, vibration.
Einstien once said that, if we would precieve all types of energy, we would experience new things including parallel realities. Sorry for not qoutiong the exact saying but hey... Anyway, different realities exist on different parts of the spectrum. This also means that we are affecting and being affected by different environments all of the time. Its a net that we are a part of.
So, Yahweh or whoever, could be an entity from some solar system, millions of light years away from us, that reached a certain level of being. Imagine that planets live for billions of years... Some civilizations have been existing and even prospering for atleast millions of years. Their levels of technology enables them to appear to us as gods and whatnot. We are the ones who make them gods simply because we are so simple... Or atleast we were.
Back in the days of the prophets, there were many stories about gods appearing to humans. Legends about whole nations being raised and demolished by gods. Beings that would appear human but possess great powers. I might sound crazy when i say that this all actually makes sense.
Some great entity decided to be in charge of our solar system which in the last 100 thousand years had three living, populated planets. Maldek, Mars and Earth. Maldek was a planet that was eventually destroyed and turned nto the astroid belt that resides between Mars and Jupiter. Mars, reached a point of self destruction through warfare and occupations. And Earth, present until today.
This all sounds like a fairy tale and thats basically what it is. It is just food for thought. Not for one second have i been serious about anyone here actually believing these words... But! I totally expect people to admit that this information is relevant just like any other.
Point is, the more you think of and the more you know, the less you know shit about life and about yourself. Its an unending loop. I like to hear all of the versions of the scenario and build my own probable timeline.
I think that in a few years, we will be teaching these things in schools. Not precisely these things but this way of thought. Giving relevance to every thought and analyzing everything. There should be a class for kids from ages 6-18 about thinking. Just a teacher that opens a subject and encourages the students to think and come up with ideas and solutions. This is how a modern society could really develop a new mentality. Not that we are not doing this all the time but seriously, we are fucking it up.
First-off, i'd like to thank everyone for the good replies that I haven't got to yet. I'm running low on time tonight and have to grade. Do not despair! I'll get back to these wonderful long-posts tomorrow =).
I wouldn't go as far as saying agnostics don't care about the question. Being agnostic means, from what I understand, that you don't believe in a god, but you're also not entirely ruling out the possibility that a god exists. I consider myself an agnostic, and my personal view is that at this point in our history, we're not equipped to provide evidence for or against the existence of a god. So my stance to the question is more of an "I can't know" rather than an "I don't care".
If god is a deist god, it canot be known (see the god=universe argument) one way or the other. Your position is that of an atheist to a theistic god. That, would make you the same kind of atheist as I am.
But I think that's what a lot of Atheists want to hear, is that you can't prove it, and I don't believe anyone can, that's why it's called faith.
I'd just like to point out before I go, while that is obviously a dead-end to an argument like this, it isn't the argument I asked for. I have invited people who want to prove to me that god exists (or fellows who, like me, want to provide their skeptial critique of these arguments). Avoiding the argument doesn't really further our debate.
I'll leave you all tonight with a short and sweet video by the late Dr. Feynman:
The most difficult part about explaining this is breaking the language barrier. It is inadequate and not able to handle these topics. Why? Language is bound by the concept of time and space.
Edit:
@Diehard- We just said the same thing again lol.
CAN YOU AT LEAST TRY TO NOT BE SO OBVIOUS?!?!?!?
/FACEPLANT
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Trying to make a religious person prove to you that their God exists is just silly and stupid.
Here is a list of what is going to happen.
1. You ask a person to prove to you God exists.
2. They tell you what they Know.
3. You don't believe it.
4. You call them stupid.
5. They go home and pray for you.
6. Nobody feels different the next day.
Bait implies that i'm fishing for a given response, but that isn't the case there. Although I confess to knowing the popular ones.
Good answer, but that rules out most every concieved of God in history. I hope you are not attempting to take this viewpoint as a theist. Also, if we allowing god to be so neutral as to affect nothing, what really is the point of calling such a thing "god?" Why not just say "the universe." Wouldn't that be a more apt description?
I will chock that up to the language barrier because I literally do not understand what you mean to convey with that sentence. (No offense intended)
Incorrect. They wouldn't "know," their god without proof, which I am asking them to present. They have a belief in god.
I acknowledged that there are not likely to be flagrantly changed minds, but I reject the notion this is a fruitless endeavor.
Look, all this talk about not believing in God and all that jibber jabber has convinced me that, as a God, I should supply the heathens and non-believers with some proof. Sue me!
That was hilarious. I think I'll save this somewhere...
@Prole- You pointed out that matter of origin arguments can be proven to have a significant flaw because of the lack of logic behind why something would be complex when everything around us says that the process would start simple and not complex.
My response is that your argument literally cannot actually show a flaw in my idea because in my idea, time and space do not exist so "simple" and "complex" do not exist. Therefore, your statement about said flaw, is in itself flawed because it is not taking into account the lack of time and space.
It's like long division. You're trying to go the next step, but you forgot the remainder. You can't move forward against my ideas until you take into account that there is no such thing as simple and complex.
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Ha. Bagstone.
I was also careful to mention in the OP, that the universe is no proof of god, and that reductio ad absurdum arguments for first-cause god were not valid for obvious reasons. And if I incorrectly identified this as a first-cause argument, i'm sorry, but it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck. I'm assuming it's a duck. =)
Yes, exactly. That was the point I was trying to make... I think. There is no god in the strick sense. I'm gonna go with the word "divine", even though it sounds silly, to explain myself. The existance of the universe cannot be explained, it has no reason or purpose. It just happens to exist. That qualifies it as divine.
Although now that I think of it, if I follow that definition, everything is divine, so the definition loses it's purpose. And now I'm not making any sense. Let me grab a bite and come back :P.
Those neutrinos arrived at their destination before they even left.
Therefore, our language needs to evolve and so does our concepts on just about everything.
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Divine simply means godly. It doesn't mean inexplicable (and honestly, i'm not at all convinced we might not one day understand our universe's beginnings in more detail). The universe as "god," waters down that word (and divine) to the point where they loose all meaning. You are occupying the atheist position already it seems.
Precisely.
Are you suggesting to me that your entire concept of god revolves around the speed at which neutrinos can move?
Space expansion (note: space and light are not one in the same - in case you are trying to apply the speed limit) is also not proof of god. The expansion of space following the big-bang is extensively and accruately described by the laws of physics and theories of quantum physics and even if those tools of understanding were proved to be flawed, that would not suggest god either.
I know what you mean.
Check my last post on the first page. I got to you both in there.
But I think that's what a lot of Atheists want to hear, is that you can't prove it, and I don't believe anyone can, that's why it's called faith. I don't knock on religions (unless their God wants me dead, then that's where I draw the line) But I don't have a religion either. I think it helps a lot of people cope with dying, and I'm cool with that if people think they have found peace.
As far as the universe (and I need to do some more research on this) but from what I've found so far, it is perfectly explainable by physics that something can be made out of nothing. Crazy, yes, and I'll find some sort of proof and report back later, so I don't sound so quacky. ( I also have a couple theories on why time travel would work both ways, and some theories that try to refute my theories =P ).
But I'll also admit that there is some sort of ingrained fear in me (maybe from hearing about hell my whole life?) that tells me that if I don't believe in God, then he's going to get pissed. I usually fight that off, because from a logical standpoint I don't actually see a reason for hell to exist. But then again I'm also pretty sure (self opinion) that when we die, we don't exist anymore. I mean really, how selfish is it that when WE die, WE get a soul and go to heaven, but every single other living organism gets a worse fate? That just seems arrogant to me.
Anyway. MY 2 COPPER
Nope! I'm suggesting that if something arrives before it leaves, we may have to rethink what we think we know...I think.
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Since you are already talking about gods and godesses, i'd like to offer a certain point of view here...
All of this pondering about our existence is totally relevant. It is by all means what defines us. What makes us a thinking organism. It seperates us from 90% of the other species on our planet.
Whenever a person thinks about creation he reaches the ultimate question, the origin. The seeking of the origin. It is a proccess that could happen in many different ways like becoming more religious or starting to research the subject of Ufo's and extraterrestrial inteligence, etc. In recent times, much of the information about all of this knowledge that involves ancient civilizations and a more "modern" understanding of ancient texts, with the addition of channeled material and the understanding of the meta is totally in the reach of hand.
If we, as a species, evolved on planet earth, Gaia. Then there must be many other planets in many distant galaxies and solar systems that also had the same proccess going on. We can see that today with our plethora of radiation telescopes. We can see planets that look very similar to earth... millions of years ago... But then again, that could be because of the difference of light, time, space, etc.
So yes. Other civilizations exist. In fact, they have always been right next to us. The explanation to that would be the idea of the density of light. Basically, our sun like many others, shines the whole spectrum of light. Our environment as we know it, works on a specific range of the spectrum which is visible, and the other parts of it are detected as radiation, waves, vibration.
Einstien once said that, if we would precieve all types of energy, we would experience new things including parallel realities. Sorry for not qoutiong the exact saying but hey... Anyway, different realities exist on different parts of the spectrum. This also means that we are affecting and being affected by different environments all of the time. Its a net that we are a part of.
So, Yahweh or whoever, could be an entity from some solar system, millions of light years away from us, that reached a certain level of being. Imagine that planets live for billions of years... Some civilizations have been existing and even prospering for atleast millions of years. Their levels of technology enables them to appear to us as gods and whatnot. We are the ones who make them gods simply because we are so simple... Or atleast we were.
Back in the days of the prophets, there were many stories about gods appearing to humans. Legends about whole nations being raised and demolished by gods. Beings that would appear human but possess great powers. I might sound crazy when i say that this all actually makes sense.
Some great entity decided to be in charge of our solar system which in the last 100 thousand years had three living, populated planets. Maldek, Mars and Earth. Maldek was a planet that was eventually destroyed and turned nto the astroid belt that resides between Mars and Jupiter. Mars, reached a point of self destruction through warfare and occupations. And Earth, present until today.
This all sounds like a fairy tale and thats basically what it is. It is just food for thought. Not for one second have i been serious about anyone here actually believing these words... But! I totally expect people to admit that this information is relevant just like any other.
Point is, the more you think of and the more you know, the less you know shit about life and about yourself. Its an unending loop. I like to hear all of the versions of the scenario and build my own probable timeline.
I think that in a few years, we will be teaching these things in schools. Not precisely these things but this way of thought. Giving relevance to every thought and analyzing everything. There should be a class for kids from ages 6-18 about thinking. Just a teacher that opens a subject and encourages the students to think and come up with ideas and solutions. This is how a modern society could really develop a new mentality. Not that we are not doing this all the time but seriously, we are fucking it up.
Anyway, have a good one xD
Peace.
I wouldn't go as far as saying agnostics don't care about the question. Being agnostic means, from what I understand, that you don't believe in a god, but you're also not entirely ruling out the possibility that a god exists. I consider myself an agnostic, and my personal view is that at this point in our history, we're not equipped to provide evidence for or against the existence of a god. So my stance to the question is more of an "I can't know" rather than an "I don't care".
You seemed to ignore the other part of my post where I explain how agnostics are different from atheists. The second ones' are in direct opposition of theism and therefore any religion, while the first do not clearly state "I do not believe as there is no proof", they say "I don't know, its what we're trying to find out".
Hm, English not being my mother language, I might be having simple communication disabilities in explaining.
Let's rephrase it like this. Speaking strictly about the roots of both philosophies Agnosticism encompasses a huge range of ideas, while Atheism is just a few aspects of it. There are Agnostic Atheists and Agnostic Theists but overall they are simply people that don't put borders around their beliefs. As I said earlier, as an example, there is no proof that God exists, but there also isn't proof that he does not. In this situation, as you pointed out, atheists say there is no proof and therefore it does not exist. But there is no proof so far. Just a few weeks ago there was no proof of anything that can travel beyond the speed of light, yet here the neutrino is. In that sense atheists still simply have a "belief" that there is no God, simply because our technology hasn't evolved enough to prove that He might actually be there.
At the end of the day I might just be messing around with semantics in other people's points of view, but from where I see it atheists are agnostics by default as they pursue truth through evidence. But so do a lot of religious commutes, and they are considered Agnostic Theists. "We'll hopefully, one day, prove, through science, that our God does exist. Though he might not be an old man in the sky as other religions consider Him."
edit:
Also what this fine scholar said.
Ha. Bagstone.
It did not travel. Because there is no time and no space.
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
If god is a deist god, it canot be known (see the god=universe argument) one way or the other. Your position is that of an atheist to a theistic god. That, would make you the same kind of atheist as I am.
I'd just like to point out before I go, while that is obviously a dead-end to an argument like this, it isn't the argument I asked for. I have invited people who want to prove to me that god exists (or fellows who, like me, want to provide their skeptial critique of these arguments). Avoiding the argument doesn't really further our debate.
I'll leave you all tonight with a short and sweet video by the late Dr. Feynman:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=cRmbwczTC6E