No God???

True, but that is probabilistic. You will never know exactly what they will do.
 
Did you not read the Moose's post? Non-free-willers would state that they say stuff for the same reason a computer displays stuff. It in their programming.
 
False consciousness as a form of adaptation, very interesting MooseKnuckle. We are indeed no more than the sum of our parts, but I think the difficulty in common comprehension of the robot=man idea is the infancy of robots. We are very advance robots in that the most advanced mechanism of now is equivalent to a rodent. It is a simple gap in processing power and a lack of certain asthetics leading to ease of anthropomorphism of machines.
 
But a computer do nothing unless we teel it to do. If it is so, then there has to be something or someone controling us to some extent.
 
We are referring to fully autonomous computers. Self-repair, consciousness, and full mobility. It isn't that hard to see that all of these are inevitable. Also the robot comparison is in no way meant to denegrate humans. Any negative feelings toward the concept is the result of insufficient understanding of the full capabilities of programming.

In no scenario is a puppet master deity required. You say your god wants you to be aware of its presence. I f so then why would there not be some clear manifestation of such. You can rant all day long about miracles, prophets or some sort of elegance of (insert borrowed scientific principle). If said deity existed and wanted us to pray to it for its own edification then it is not benevolent because: there are multiple cultures with different theories of said god with multiple methods of worship and even sometimes multiple gods within the same religion. Add to that a significant population atheists. So either this god is cruel or ineffectual.
 
Prayers and worship are for the edification of the church and its poeple, not of God.
 
There is always, including silent, homage that is demanded by any religion. You may do that in church or in your home or in your mind. Either way you are trying to assert your obedience to some deity. Otherwise you would not belong to a religion.
 
If there had been a creator, his second act would have been to disappear. -- John Fowles, "The Aristos"
 
The best refutation of God for an intelligent person is the Occam's razor. Science does not need God -- it can logically explain or hope to explain every phenomenon in the universe without evocation of the supernatural element. Science and religion are absolutely mutually exclusive, whatever some persons maintain. If miracles are possible then anybody has the right to insert any random term in any Hamiltonian and claim that it is legitimate to do it. This would be a total collapse of science.

Since it is impossible to suppose that science with its multicentennial overwhelming success in its explanations, predictions and (!!) concrete practical results may be totally wrong, religion must be a fallacy.
 
Originally posted by TruthSeeker
MooseKnuckle,


You wrote:

How can you choose to write THIS if you have no free will?
Click to expand...

Very simple. MooseKnuckle chose to write that expression because you influenced him by your preceding question. And there were also millions of other factors which have played their role. There might be also unnumbered factors that could have prevented him from writing that phrase (say, a meteor might fall on his roof), even from pondering over your question, even from reading your question, thus proving that it is not only MooseKnuckle who defines the resulting action.
 
Last edited:
CHRISCUNNINGHAM

For anyone and everyone who doesn't believe in God; what are your BEST refutations against His existence????
Click to expand...

Belief = Acceptance without proof.

Reworded Question = "For anyone and everyone who doesn't accept the existence of God without proof; what are your BEST
refutations against His existence????"

Answer: No proof.

Funny part is, I probably have the closest thing to a proof that
exists to date and I am betting that you have no idea what that
is.
 
yea snakelord.....chaos theory.

in india an institute actually used it to experimentally grow better crops somewhere. (in quality and quantity)
 
I think its funny how religious people say that their religion opens their mind, yet most of them get excited over something as simple as the idea of having no free-will.

"But a computer do nothing unless we teel it to do."

This is only a half truth meant for people who suck at computers. Computers have been built, by the use of some theory and some trial and error. Do we tell a computer to crash? No. Computers are completely separate from us and do what their molecular structure allows. We can alter its molecular structure to make it do what we want, and I would assume thats what god would do with us if he existed.
 
1. Suffering. Why would God create suffering, and I don't want to hear you spin me any tales about the first two humans, we're out of bible school...I think we all know that that is make believe.

2. God could not be inefficient. What reason would he have to be? But the world is inefficient.

3. This entity 'God' we all believe to be caring and all-powerful. But if he was caring there would be no suffering. So either he's not caring. Or he's not all-powerful...like he can't contol everything.

Seriously....need I go on?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top