Post Reply
Page 5 of 46  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 46 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Circumstantial evidence for God
3 years ago  ::  Feb 16, 2010 - 3:42PM #41
rangerken
rangerken
Posts: 13,714

My position has been, is, and will remain that here is no conflict btween science and religion. Science is all about how. Religion is all about why. As long as each keeps to its aea of expertise there need never be a conflict.


Furthermore, whenever religion fights science, religion always ends up not only losing, but looks stupid. And remember, I AM a believer!


Ken


 

Conservative, Libertarian, Life member of the NRA and VFW
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 16, 2010 - 7:28PM #42
Blü
Blü
Posts: 21,153

Christianlib


whether there can be more than one empty set in the universe.


So, you're saying, if G is the set of all gods, and if we set out to create set R, the set of all gods that exist in reality, then we end up with the empty set instead?
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 16, 2010 - 7:43PM #43
stardustpilgrim
stardustpilgrim
Posts: 5,136

Feb 15, 2010 -- 10:31PM, Ken wrote:


Feb 15, 2010 -- 9:54PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:


Feb 15, 2010 -- 8:38AM, Ken wrote:


Feb 14, 2010 -- 8:36PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:

Presenting a solution that makes God unnecessary is not the same as presenting a solution that makes God possible.



How does positing a singularity make God possible?



It doesn't. That wasn't Hawking's intention. I stated his intention.



Then why bring it up?




sdp: Let me ask a question. Is it possible that God exists?


"Ken": Yes. (Sorry, not meaning to speak for you......but I think the answer obvious....just skipping to my reply........sdp).


sdp: Then I don't need to posit a singularity (or more specifically, a beginning boundary) to make God possible. The existence of God is possible, period.


Now, is it still unclear to you why Hawking went to the trouble to "create" a universe without a beginning boundary?


sdp 




The purpose of words is to convey ideas. When the ideas are grasped, the words are forgotten.
Where can I find a man who has forgotten words? He is the one I would like to talk to.
The Way of Chuang Tzu by Thomas Merton

A map is not the territory.                                                                 Alfred Korzybski

When supposedly skeptical atheists and scientists pick on monotheistic religion in books, speeches and debates, they are simply beating up a court jester in a clown crown. They think that by clobbering the clown of religion, they have overthrown the kingdom of transphysical reality, but such arguments cannot sway anyone established in the integrated, co-creative state, which is the serious reality underlying the circus of religion.           
                                            Jed McKenna's Theory of Everything: The Enlightened Perspective, 57%
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 16, 2010 - 7:47PM #44
Wendyness
Wendyness
Posts: 3,013

Feb 16, 2010 -- 7:43PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:


Feb 15, 2010 -- 10:31PM, Ken wrote:


Feb 15, 2010 -- 9:54PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:


Feb 15, 2010 -- 8:38AM, Ken wrote:


Feb 14, 2010 -- 8:36PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:

Presenting a solution that makes God unnecessary is not the same as presenting a solution that makes God possible.



How does positing a singularity make God possible?



It doesn't. That wasn't Hawking's intention. I stated his intention.



Then why bring it up?




sdp: Let me ask a question. Is it possible that God exists?


"Ken": Yes. (Sorry, not meaning to speak for you......but I think the answer obvious....just skipping to my reply........sdp).


sdp: Then I don't need to posit a singularity (or more specifically, a beginning boundary) to make God possible. The existence of God is possible, period.


Now, is it still unclear to you why Hawking went to the trouble to "create" a universe without a beginning boundary?


sdp 


 




What a brave soul you are to assume that Ken would answer "Yes"!  ROFLMFAO!
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 16, 2010 - 9:15PM #45
stardustpilgrim
stardustpilgrim
Posts: 5,136

Feb 16, 2010 -- 7:47PM, Wendyness wrote:


Feb 16, 2010 -- 7:43PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:


Feb 15, 2010 -- 10:31PM, Ken wrote:


Feb 15, 2010 -- 9:54PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:


Feb 15, 2010 -- 8:38AM, Ken wrote:


Feb 14, 2010 -- 8:36PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:

Presenting a solution that makes God unnecessary is not the same as presenting a solution that makes God possible.



How does positing a singularity make God possible?



It doesn't. That wasn't Hawking's intention. I stated his intention.



Then why bring it up?




sdp: Let me ask a question. Is it possible that God exists?


"Ken": Yes. (Sorry, not meaning to speak for you......but I think the answer obvious....just skipping to my reply........sdp).


sdp: Then I don't need to posit a singularity (or more specifically, a beginning boundary) to make God possible. The existence of God is possible, period.


Now, is it still unclear to you why Hawking went to the trouble to "create" a universe without a beginning boundary?


sdp 


 




What a brave soul you are to assume that Ken would answer "Yes"!  ROFLMFAO!




Well.........I hope I wasn't too presumptuous, but I like your style..........anyway.......


sdp

The purpose of words is to convey ideas. When the ideas are grasped, the words are forgotten.
Where can I find a man who has forgotten words? He is the one I would like to talk to.
The Way of Chuang Tzu by Thomas Merton

A map is not the territory.                                                                 Alfred Korzybski

When supposedly skeptical atheists and scientists pick on monotheistic religion in books, speeches and debates, they are simply beating up a court jester in a clown crown. They think that by clobbering the clown of religion, they have overthrown the kingdom of transphysical reality, but such arguments cannot sway anyone established in the integrated, co-creative state, which is the serious reality underlying the circus of religion.           
                                            Jed McKenna's Theory of Everything: The Enlightened Perspective, 57%
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 16, 2010 - 9:19PM #46
stardustpilgrim
stardustpilgrim
Posts: 5,136

Feb 16, 2010 -- 11:46AM, Metis wrote:


If any two groups should maybe be able to get closer to what the reality may be it would most likely be the cosmologists and physicists since both groups specialize in attempting to determine what may have been here before the Big Bang and what may have caused it 13.7 billion years ago.  According to a poll I saw last year, 92% of all cosmologists and over 80% of all physicists are atheists or agnostics (mostly the latter).


I find agnosticism quite honorable. 


sdp

The purpose of words is to convey ideas. When the ideas are grasped, the words are forgotten.
Where can I find a man who has forgotten words? He is the one I would like to talk to.
The Way of Chuang Tzu by Thomas Merton

A map is not the territory.                                                                 Alfred Korzybski

When supposedly skeptical atheists and scientists pick on monotheistic religion in books, speeches and debates, they are simply beating up a court jester in a clown crown. They think that by clobbering the clown of religion, they have overthrown the kingdom of transphysical reality, but such arguments cannot sway anyone established in the integrated, co-creative state, which is the serious reality underlying the circus of religion.           
                                            Jed McKenna's Theory of Everything: The Enlightened Perspective, 57%
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 16, 2010 - 9:27PM #47
Ken
Ken
Posts: 33,841

Feb 16, 2010 -- 7:43PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:

sdp: Let me ask a question. Is it possible that God exists?


"Ken": Yes. (Sorry, not meaning to speak for you......but I think the answer obvious....just skipping to my reply........sdp).


sdp: Then I don't need to posit a singularity (or more specifically, a beginning boundary) to make God possible. The existence of God is possible, period.


Now, is it still unclear to you why Hawking went to the trouble to "create" a universe without a beginning boundary?


sdp 






If God is possible, what difference would it make whether the universe had a beginning boundary or not?
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 16, 2010 - 9:32PM #48
stardustpilgrim
stardustpilgrim
Posts: 5,136

Feb 15, 2010 -- 11:43PM, Cryano wrote:


SDP:


You have a really WEIRD way of moving from statement to conclusion.


Try this little experiment. I'll arguendo concede that your SOI created the universe and life. I will even arguendo concede that this SOI is still around.


Now, based on those concessions demonstrate how you make any statements about this thing's personality, its attitude toward the universe, its attitude toward us, or any motive it might have had - even now have - for creating ANYTHING.


Have at it. I am really anxious to see this brilliant display of deductive reasoning at work.




I don't know anything about SOI. I only know what I observe.


sdp

The purpose of words is to convey ideas. When the ideas are grasped, the words are forgotten.
Where can I find a man who has forgotten words? He is the one I would like to talk to.
The Way of Chuang Tzu by Thomas Merton

A map is not the territory.                                                                 Alfred Korzybski

When supposedly skeptical atheists and scientists pick on monotheistic religion in books, speeches and debates, they are simply beating up a court jester in a clown crown. They think that by clobbering the clown of religion, they have overthrown the kingdom of transphysical reality, but such arguments cannot sway anyone established in the integrated, co-creative state, which is the serious reality underlying the circus of religion.           
                                            Jed McKenna's Theory of Everything: The Enlightened Perspective, 57%
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 16, 2010 - 9:38PM #49
stardustpilgrim
stardustpilgrim
Posts: 5,136

Feb 15, 2010 -- 10:16PM, F1fan wrote:


Feb 15, 2010 -- 9:41PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:



 


Your sense of logic evades me.



Logic isn't a sense, it's a set of rules.  You either follow the rules or you don't. 


 




My point, precisely.


sdp

The purpose of words is to convey ideas. When the ideas are grasped, the words are forgotten.
Where can I find a man who has forgotten words? He is the one I would like to talk to.
The Way of Chuang Tzu by Thomas Merton

A map is not the territory.                                                                 Alfred Korzybski

When supposedly skeptical atheists and scientists pick on monotheistic religion in books, speeches and debates, they are simply beating up a court jester in a clown crown. They think that by clobbering the clown of religion, they have overthrown the kingdom of transphysical reality, but such arguments cannot sway anyone established in the integrated, co-creative state, which is the serious reality underlying the circus of religion.           
                                            Jed McKenna's Theory of Everything: The Enlightened Perspective, 57%
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 16, 2010 - 9:49PM #50
Cryano
Cryano
Posts: 2,828

Feb 16, 2010 -- 9:32PM, stardustpilgrim wrote:


Feb 15, 2010 -- 11:43PM, Cryano wrote:


SDP:


You have a really WEIRD way of moving from statement to conclusion.


Try this little experiment. I'll arguendoconcede that your SOI created the universe and life. I will even arguendoconcede that this SOI is still around.


Now, based on those concessions demonstrate how you make any statements about this thing's personality, its attitude toward the universe, its attitude toward us, or any motive it might have had - even now have - for creating ANYTHING.


Have at it. I am really anxious to see this brilliant display of deductive reasoning at work.



I don't know anything about SOI. I only know what I observe.sdp



And THAT is just a gutless co-out.Frown

Religion is the longest running most successful con game in history. It works because the victims never realize they have been taken. They die first.

Although certain modern catholics are beginning to see the light.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 5 of 46  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 46 Next
Post Reply
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook