yeah, and the bible is full of stories about schizophrenics then.
yeah, and the bible is full of stories about schizophrenics then.
yes, keep telling yourself that everything you don't WANT to believe is fiction.
i on the other hand, can relate very well to those stories, because i have experience.
it's not my fault that you don't. it's your own.
To demonstrate god exists of course.
I think god is a human psychological phenomenon.
Asking a question is not manipulation.
Ask the question sincerely and with humility.
God doesn't respond to me.
perhaps it's your lack of sincerity and humility and/or open-mindedness. why would god respond to you when you think god is a psychological phenomenon?
listen, i know better ok? i know god. and you would be better off with a magic 8 ball. sorry.
No, not OK. There is no such thing as a "static object" of that description. It's self contradictory, inherently incoherent.crunchy said:
Not agreed. A span of time cannot be created "at once", for the same reason a span of space cannot be created in one spot.crunchy said:
Natural laws are created, or "discovered" in that sense, by people. Often we can specify the year and the circumstances of their formulation. Meanwhile, nothing "then" happens to the intent of a creator "outside of time".
A classic of its kind.believer said:
Perhaps you are introducing a cop-out... the ol' "you're not doing it right" fallacy. I have asked god questions when I was a believer. No responses ever came as well. The current question is sincere. Open mindedness is a willingness to change my mind based on evidence. No supportive evidence was ever presented. As far as humility is concerned, the question has neither opportunity for pride or arrogance. It's a simple question and nothing more.
It's a rather stupid question. How could I possibly imagine what would motivate a deity to do or not do anything; however, if that deity did value truth then I am sure he would want me to ask questions in a truthful context.
Excellent, ask him the question then.
here's a question...
how in the hell were you a "believer" when you actually had no idea??????
:wtf:well, i do know he doesn't do anything in futility.
i sincerely have absolutely no interest in what your father's name is. if i did, then i would just ask you CC.
god isn't a lab rat ok? if you sincerely want to have a relationship with god and are willing to go through all that entails, which is the most intense and comprehensively impactive thing you could ever do, then go for it, but that is not my responsibility. i can't do that for you. no one can.
What he said is compatible with the Many Worlds theory of the universe:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation
He's talking about a deity doing it. Not a natural process.
here's a question...
how in the hell were you a "believer" when you actually had no idea??????
I was indoctrinated as a child.
Or anything ;3.
You could have a sincere interest in demonstrating gods existence to me via criteria I committed would do it. That's just a winning scenario.
If it wasn't clear, I don't believe god exists. I can't have a relationship with something that isn't there; however, if you can ask him one teeeny tiny question, a correct answer means an *instant* change in my beliefs. Not too shabby for a simple question eh?
well that doesn't mean anything except that you're most likely jaded.
well he's put a fucking hammer to my head more than once. that's something.
i'm not CC. i want god to do it.
god is there. if you really want to know him, then i absolutely refuse to believe that he won't do for you what he's done for me.
No, it isn't. That theory provides theoretical universes other than our universe, but not a situation in which motion through time does not happen within our universe.crunchy said:
He's talking about something akin to a square circle - not so much impossible as meaningless. There is no meaning to the term "at once" outside of time as we know it, just as there is no meaning to a span of distance that occupies a single point on the relevant dimension.crunchy said:
Actually that is the exact reason I believed. It's not an emotional statement (something to be jaded about). It's a fact.
It's something alright.
Hypothetically, if you did do it and the answer was wrong, what would you think?
What you believe or refuse to believe is entirely up to you.
how can you really believe something you don't know?
yes.
i would think i did you and god a grave disservice.
and to you.
That interpretation is incorrect. What the theory models is a universe where every event that could have multiple outcomes has those multiple outcomes. They all exist at the same time, completely distinct from each other. Additionally when you try and reconcile GR and quantum mechanics, time often disappears altogether (ex. the Wheeler-DeWitt equation for quantum gravity). This suggest time might be not be real and that would make every possibility of all the past, present, and future exist at the same time as one large static structure.
You and I know that, but he doesn't.
That is why he introduced a "god-time", which of course dooms his god by making it have an environment and a dependency on it.
Last edited:
Our species is genetically prone to belief because it has survival advantages. It's espeically true a childs learning. For example, uf mom and dad want you to believe that playing with alligators is bad, you're likely going to believe it even if you know very little or nothing about alligators.
Interesting, most notably it wouldn't put any doubt in your mind.
well what's the point of that if you're never going to come into contact with an alligator?
and you know what? i believe any and every thing people tell me unless i have a damn good reason not to. and me not ever coming into contact with an alligator myself, is not a good reason.
i just know him. and from what i know it's not what he wants for me, or for you. i know my place, and that is NOT my place.
Then just explain how you came to have your faith.
None of which have a 'God' shaped gap in them. You are seeing something that just isn't there.
There is no observation of God. None. We can look at the same things, and I do not see God. So something else is at work in your head.
I work in IT, and that's a bad analogy. You have introduced complexity, and then tried using Occam's razor. That is incorrect.
I am objecting with reason. You offer no evidence, no logic, and claim to have an argument for God that I can't argue against, but you yourself cannot justify. It's really not a good case you are presenting.
Go learn some science, and see that there aren't God shaped gaps in it? perhaps?
If you do know what you are talking about, present your case
Ah, so you resort to the ad hom and cop out.
Simply, you have not presented a logical case for your faith. You cannot, and now you blame me for that. Get your house in order, and come back.
Proof! Do share.
You what? 'atheists' ? It's astronomers that are looking at the Universe, not 'atheists'.
But here's the thing. All we know about the Universe was formulated using the scientific method, and we have discovered quite a bit. NONE of science was given to us through revelation. NONE.
Your method is completely and utterly useless, whereas science yields results.