Religion is one thing... but god is a lot more... read about the Golden Ratio - see how Science can explain something about god.
I believe in God, a variation of God. My theory is, someone, something, or God created everything we know, placed the first humans on earth, and than once they/it was done creating everything they quite simply, f**ed off. So, we can't blame God for any of the sin in this world, because we brought it all onto ourselves. I think, no particular religion is the right religion, feel free to believe in whatever you want. I'm saying, God or a higher power left this planet once everything was set to a never ending cycle. Of course, there is no way to prove that a higher power exists, my theory is what i stated earlier, God created everything and placed the first humans on the planet. After he was done, he left, the humans couldn't record it for us because they had no language, so basically, we are alone, ruled by the rules we made. Thats what i think, i like my theory, i think its interesting. So yeah, science will never be able to explain God, because science is what we know, the facts. Of course, we do not know how this earth was formed, no body does, nobody was there to record it, so all we can do is speculate. <--- my point of view
yeah so simple but vague, it rise a lot of questions but anyway metaphysics. it is physics and science talked about it a lot.
My theory is that we're living in a simulated reality similar to The Matrix. This simulated reality is simply a computer program so real that we consider it real. When we die, the program will just keep running and we will go through while loops. While human is dead, another human will be born. Something like that. Even though we are living in The Matrix, it shouldn't change how we think of the world. The only thing we can do is move on and accept it. We will never know whether we really live in this simulation, unless the simulator(s) really want us to know. It's even possible that we're living within a reality in another reality and we're in machines that we can't wake up from. Usually programs have glitches and flaws and the programmers have to fix them. However, the reality we live in has been programmed so well, that the programmer has lines of code that will automatically fix glitches when we see them. For example, some popular first person shooter games made in C++ had glitches that gave players unlimited health. Similarly, in the reality we live in, there could be a point where we gain unlimited life and just when we realize it, the glitch automatically fixes itself. No matter what, the program will repeat the lines of code and the program will go through all possible randomized births and deaths. (which is unlimited) We're on birth number 629392569. Eventually, it will reach a point where 24386348349934 humans have been born and the number will just keep increasing. As to the motive of the programmer...Well, I'm not exactly sure why the programmer would create such a reality but it could be for scientific or artistic reasons. Now, my theory is just a simple hypothesis and I don't really have much proof to back it up, but I do know that we have come up with advanced programs and applications that are becoming more sophisticated each day and out reality is similar to the lines of code in these complex programs. There is indeed a high possibility of my theory being true, but some of you may have different beliefs and that's perfectly fine. Our computers are not powerful enough to support the levels of memory that these programs take, but they are becoming more powerful. We started from serial ports, then moved on to parallel ports, to USB ports. Eventually someone in our reality will make the next simulated reality and I have a feeling that this is only part of the program that we're living in. It is expected to happen, and will most likely happen.
every one chooses the fantasy that better suits their desires and need for consolation There may be many career options for you, but science doesn't seem to be the optimal
Yes. It's possible, but it depends on whether you believe it. I'm more of the philosopher type. I come up with possibilities, not conclusions. I make the theories. Others do the research. I like the fun stuff that involves creativity
And this ladies and gents is why atheist philosophers are losing debates to christian philosophers as well as other theist philosophers. This is why the true intellectuals either are spiritual or believe in God. In terms of understanding God you seem to not have hit the puberty level of deep thought my friend. Materialism is dying out and will be obsolute within the next 20 years, the research into near death experiences alone (especially remote viewing) are starting to redicule materialist beliefs right now and materialist intellectuals are starting to backtrack and are starting to warn their brainless followers to try to come up with a materialistic explanation of near death experiences that wont be laughed at by the real intellectuals. No wonder why 80% of doctors either are spiritual or believe in God. They have seen these events close up and arent stuckbehind a petri dish like their narrow minded world view atheist counterpart. This is probably the most infantile argument against God that I have encountered yet, its funny how atheists like to brand themselves as intellectuals , but whenI see statements like this it shows how low in the intellectual totem pole atheists have become.
Its funny how people like you make these statements as if they are fact. If you could actually get out of your narrow minded world view you would understand that with theism science wouldnt have advanced as far as it did in the west today, but then again instead of researching this you make blanket statements , hoping that if you do it enough times that people will be brainwashed into believing you. You can start by first researching Professor Joseph Needham the famous sinnologist that was curious as to why science advanced further in the west then in places like China in the 16th and 17th century. You should be curious as to what he came up with, and how much he hated what he found, but at least he was honest enough to admit the truth. Another great website if you want to easily counter these nitwit atheists here is http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com. Perry Marshall isnt the greatest debater but his argument is rock solid and even took it to the next level on the infedil forum and they got so desperate there that they denied that dna was a code. Information theory is the best out there for the existence of God. But then again you allready knew all this stuff right Mister Intellectual? needham also in his study warned future generations against the threat of scientism (that science is the only way to find out truth), that it is a very narrow minded worldview. The was brilliant and in this study he spoke out against the vehicles that atheists use today , and the laugher is that he was an atheist himself. He was honest enough to see the truth but like many atheists today was emotionally too stubborn to admit to Gods existence. Im sure Glad that I wont be posting much in this section as the level of atheistic intelligence is just way to high for me
I think you missed the whole point of that text you just read. Go back a thread and watch the VIDEO before making any more stupid posts. It started with a video where a dude compared child birth to the creation of universe. Now that is some stupid shit. I quoted these comments that were rated the highest on youtube: "and where did god come from? he is infinite, he didn't come from anything. and that is proof that he doesn't exist, because he did not come from anything. The universe exists, and it acme from something. something that we have yet to identify. but believing an old book over theories based off years of scientific research and fact is pure foolishness." "The concept of childbirth have been proven to be true, has been witnessed firsthand and is generally understood by everyone. The concept of God has NOT been proven to be true and there's absolutely no evidence to support it. Your existence is NOT evidence for the existence of God, it's evidence for the existence of your mother, who gave birth to you using the understood method explained above. Your analogy completely fails, and I think you should shave your poo-beard and jump off a bridge." And then I got accused for "bluffing". Please go troll someone else, you seem to be so good at it.
When someone that is basically a "dot" (even smaller) in this great universe, says: "there is no God", then he is pretending to have knowledge that he does not have, therefore we can safely say you are bluffing. So until you so called atheists have something that can disprove God stay in your basements.
You've been playing too much pokémon dude. I do not believe in a god, nor do I believe in the big bang theory. I do however believe that we should never stop searching for an answer. And I do know that you're that type of guy that is only holding everyone back with your nonsense theories that has already hit a dead end decades ago. Even if someone finds the ultimate truth of how universe and everything we know was created you will still be that guy denying everything untill you die. And that's sad.
Wulkanen: I do however believe that we should never stop searching for an answer. But you have excluded Spirituality as a possibility?
Quote from Wikipedia: "Whilst the terms spirituality and religion can both refer to the search for the Absolute or God, an increasing number of people have come to see the two as separate entities, religion being just one way in which humans can experience spirituality." and "Religion is not identical with spirituality; rather religion is the form spirituality takes in civilization." I do not think that our answers lies within religion, because religion is unable to keep up with the present reality. I have excluded god because there's no proof of his/her/its existance. Science does not stand still. The Internet, cars, buildings, phones, clothes, books. None of them would exist if science did not exist. If you think about it, the bible would not exist if science didn't exist. It's funny that so many religious people hate science when they use it daily. ||||Science from the Latin scientia, meaning knowledge.
Your response is actually causing thy foot to go deeper into thy mouth my friend. I really dont even need to see the video to understand that the point of this video and your response was all about setting up strawmen to knock down. The fact that idiots are even commenting about some video that makes a poor analogy is what is laughable. There you go again making assumptions that come out of the other end of you. You say there is absolutely no proof that there is a God, but you are making this statement based on a very hardcore definition of scientism, which is why I brought up Joseph Needham. I knew someone like you would ignore this statement and not dig deeper because your basically only interested in statements that would support your ignorant , narrow minded world view. If the video was a childish view of God , it means 2 things, either you go around wasting your time searching for poor analogies that you dont have the intellect to comprehend, or you do this on purpose. I would rather have it that you do it on purpose because that would mean that you do have some shred of intellectuality but are too stubborn to understand this. If your really a seeker you wouldhave never made that statement about there being no evidence for God. If you want a Good starting point instead of responding to a video. If you need to start your journey I would first start with Doctor Gary Habermas and his accumulation of studies into nde's and why they shatter the myth of materialism that so many atheists and agnostic atheists hold so dear to them. Israel brought up a good point,that the worldview of modernism has been shattered a long time ago by post-modernism. Again im asking you , do you know who professor that I brought up is or will you keep ranting about a video. Have you heard of information theory, have you heard of dr shanon?
"""I do not think that our answers lies within religion, because religion is unable to keep up with the present reality. I have excluded god because there's no proof of his/her/its existance."""" Wulkanen: obviously you have read all evidences, searched all possible literature and looked through it all. Your , making absolute blanket statements and if you were in a debate they would show you through the door. What your talking about is secular spirituality which is some mumbo jumbo way of either atheists or quasi atheists to dry to make a compromise between religion and spirituality. Your trying to put God intoa convenient box that suits your views of truth. My grandfather was saved from death by one of Gods angels. I cant put this miracle from God in a petri dish and test it over and over again but I know its the truth. My advice is to get out of your science laboratory and into the world. God is viewed by the major theist religions as the ultimate immaterial reality and for you to postulate that this immaterial reality is some dumb process of chance is rediculous. Sounds like you really just started on yourjourney towards God, I just hope you keep your eyes and heart open.
@ pingpong123 1. I didn't not post that video here on DP, some religios person did. And apparently most people think as I do if you look at the comments. 2. Who's the narrow minded person here? You're not even giving it a chanse that there might not be a god. A quote of you: "And this ladies and gents is why atheist philosophers are losing debates to christian philosophers as well as other theist philosophers. This is why the true intellectuals either are spiritual or believe in God." clearly stating that you think that anyone not believing the same as you are stupid. Where is your statistics of atheists losing arguments? It's rather you that are losing because you're not opening your eyes. 3. Another quote from you: "I knew someone like you would ignore this statement and not dig deeper because your basically only interested in statements that would support your ignorant , narrow minded world view." You never mentioned Joseph Needham to me. You responded to cientificoloco you stupid ***. So I don't really know why you called me ignorant. Please, I do not wish to have a fuckin e-penis fight over the Internet. If you however do have time to try to convince people that everything that is not the way you want is wrong, then please go ahead. But don't do it with me. The truth is that I'm raised in a non-religious country and you probably are not, thats why we will most likely never come to a conclusion online. If we however met in real world (which I doubt) I would be glad to spend some time discussing these things without any false statements or similar. Have a nice day.