jonsnow399
Well-Known Member
God can't be ruled out, but the probability is very low. Specific gods like Jesus can easily be ruled out.
Last edited:
Do you believe in God?
- Thread starter tortie
- Start date
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Nobody "fully understands". Anyone who says they do is lying. We have to ask ourselves why they're lying. Their motives expose their agenda. If ever a $ sign comes into play, you know they're lying.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
"(Bohm) summarizes the idea of the implicate order as follows:
The essential feature of this idea was that the whole universe is in some way enfolded in everything and that each thing is enfolded in the whole. From this it follows that in some way, and to some degree everything enfolds or implicates everything, but in such a manner that under typical conditions of ordinary experience, there is a great deal of relative independence of things. The basic proposal is then that this enfoldment relationship is not merely passive or superficial. Rather, it is active and essential to what each thing is. It follows that each thing is internally related to the whole, and therefore, to everything else. The external relationships are then displayed in the unfolded or explicate order in which each thing is seen, as has already indeed been indicated, as relatively separate and extended, and related only externally to other things. The explicate order, which dominates ordinary experience as well as classical (Newtonian) physics, thus appears to stand by itself. But actually, it cannot be understood properly apart from its ground in the primary reality of the implicate order.[31]"
^ a closer understanding of how something comes from "nothing"?
The essential feature of this idea was that the whole universe is in some way enfolded in everything and that each thing is enfolded in the whole. From this it follows that in some way, and to some degree everything enfolds or implicates everything, but in such a manner that under typical conditions of ordinary experience, there is a great deal of relative independence of things. The basic proposal is then that this enfoldment relationship is not merely passive or superficial. Rather, it is active and essential to what each thing is. It follows that each thing is internally related to the whole, and therefore, to everything else. The external relationships are then displayed in the unfolded or explicate order in which each thing is seen, as has already indeed been indicated, as relatively separate and extended, and related only externally to other things. The explicate order, which dominates ordinary experience as well as classical (Newtonian) physics, thus appears to stand by itself. But actually, it cannot be understood properly apart from its ground in the primary reality of the implicate order.[31]"
^ a closer understanding of how something comes from "nothing"?
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
100% atheist right here.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
This is what we call agnostic. A gnostic person says that they know. An agnostic says that they don't know. Many people would describe themselves as agnostic.
The confusing thing is that knowing someone is agnostic still doesn't tell you if they are a theist or an atheist. That's because theism is about belief, not knowledge. Knowledge is a subset of belief. You don't need to have knowledge of something before you can believe in it. So, we can have people who admit they do not fully understand everything, but still believe in God, and people who say they do not fully understand everything, but still are not convinced of God.
I am an agnostic atheist. I have no knowledge of God, and I also have no belief in a God.
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
Heya Heis, nice to see you kickin' around.
SageFromZen
Well-Known Member
See, I was dead on the table 6:47(That's six minutes forty seven seconds), when the defibrillator brought me back. I was awake and lucid during those near seven minutes... and there are no pearly gates nor fire of a Hell nor cherubs nor St Peter and certainly no omnipotent bearded guy in a robe. It isn't a human experience. It is an energetic experience. There is no God. What lies over there is not what you think it is.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
When it happened to me, the lights just went out, it wasn't good or bad, it was just it. That's it. That's what I think death is like, the lights just go out, that's it.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
In order to believe in a *god or not believe in a *god, you must first define it.
Everyone has their own way of describing life, so, naturally this can get messy (many people who believe in a first cause (which is a scientific notion to begin with) are not to be labelled Christian.) (Those people have always described a *god as energy, potentiality, UM, etc.)
Maybe threads like this need a goal post, or it's the same deal over again. Paradoxically, though, it fits. Much in the same way as Tao (...), it's no longer there once it is defined.
That sounds very wave / particle.
Either way, I guess that points to respectful dialogue if a person has common sense.
Everyone has their own way of describing life, so, naturally this can get messy (many people who believe in a first cause (which is a scientific notion to begin with) are not to be labelled Christian.) (Those people have always described a *god as energy, potentiality, UM, etc.)
Maybe threads like this need a goal post, or it's the same deal over again. Paradoxically, though, it fits. Much in the same way as Tao (...), it's no longer there once it is defined.
That sounds very wave / particle.
Either way, I guess that points to respectful dialogue if a person has common sense.
SageFromZen
Well-Known Member
It is indeed subject to one's personal interpretation. What I do find amusing though is that when we in the Science/Physics community don't have an answer for something, we own it. We say, we don't know the answer. Philosophical Belief and Religion not only have the answer(s), they k-n-o-w the answer(s).
GreenLogician
Well-Known Member
Pretty sure it's not, it's purely a notion of theological apologetics, ancient religious philosophy. There no evidence or reason to think such a thing would exist in the world of science, there are just things like the old arguments of Aquinas, where he claims an infinite past is absurd, without explaining how.
abalonehx
Well-Known Member
This, of course. All religions define their God. There's zero proof or evidence for any of it.
The scientific answer to 'does anything exist outside of the natural world that we know?' is we don't have any evidence of any such thing. End of argument for me.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
Read again, you completely missed the point.
re: proof - In no way did I discuss proof. You need it? Cool. Makes no difference to me.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
100% scientific notion. Early religious endeavours tended to all BUT theology.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
Why do you say "we in the science / physics community"? Higgs himself discuss his counterparts that have a belief in a *god, and goes on to say that it is not incompatible with science. He said that he could well have been in the same spot had he been born into a different family.
I take his word to heart a little more so than those in the *community, ones that he referred to as "embarrassing".
jonsnow399
Well-Known Member
Higgs was wrong.
SageFromZen
Well-Known Member
I say it that way because I am in with a small group that study the physics behind tectonic movement. The Electric Universe Summit takes place in Albuquerque this month and I will be present as well.
http://www.observatoryproject.com/otf2018.html
So when I say "We in the science/physics community" I am referring to my Mensa cohorts. "God" only applies to those of a 130 Intellectual Quota and below.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
How so?
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
Slight point of contention with the notion that 130 and below is a "god" category. I've known multiple-PhD scientists who didn't worry much about Mensa because they were concerned with solving world-wide health issues with WHO, UNRWA, etc etc etc. These folks were also concerned with what lies behind empirical reality - call that what you will.
I don't care to talk about what being a part of something "could" mean, but you brought the M word in lol.
chiqifella
Well-Known Member
no god. Pig humanoids lived on mars mined earth fucked up mars, then gmo'd some earthling monkey types "in their image". they loved sexing up our children and making babies with them, and here we are, children of those pig masked self proclaimed gods and their dirty dna.
Those pig miners still got you all believing the dog masked assholes were gods...while you tithe up your daughters, slaughters and gold lol
Those pig miners still got you all believing the dog masked assholes were gods...while you tithe up your daughters, slaughters and gold lol