Proof of the existence of God through logic

[Allahs_Mathematics]

And science accepts that it's speculation and works to find the truth. Religion says it has the truth- thus it gives up the search. There was a time when medicine was 'new' to man. They made wild potions out of any shit they could find, probably killing many people in the process. Now in 2003 i know when i have a headache i should buy some paracetamol. Science advances, religion does not- namely because religion has found it's truth- where's it going to advance to? Science is aware things are speculation until they are proven to work. Imagine a calculator being speculation- the idea of it does not help you solve maths problems. Once the speculation leads to study and research it ends up giving us calculators. They work, they can be tried and tested and cannot be disputed.

But Im not arguing religion here with you , Im arguing theology . And i know interestingly these 2 seem to be the same , but thats a lie they are not nearly . Weither you will take this theology beyond the points of aesthetics and ethics , into epistemology and ontology , or you stay there , its not religion .
Now for science , what is science . Are ethics science ?

By the same as i was asked: Tell me where this version of information comes from please.

Actually u were asked that in another thread already , but thats not the point an you know it .

Yeah, we're god- our brains are. Still no need to summize a big invisible space dood as being fact.

Finally we're getting somewhere . Nobody here is summizing an invisible space dood , not me anyways . Now Im not going to want to fill Gaps with God , but I do want to fill them with whatever they are filled with . And the biggest gap is life itself , the eternel question of why is answered with either "the universe/some force/blablabla" , or with "me" , or with some combination between the 2 . The other solution is complete nihilism , and even complete nihilism has a force , its called natural selection . I mean its not like there isnt anything , nothingness is something to as you have said yourself . Now why exactly we should or should call it God would be theology , and thats what Im getting at here . Not some big space-alien who plays the earth-game all day up in heaven .

 

[SnakeLord]

But Im not arguing religion here with you , Im arguing theology . And i know interestingly these 2 seem to be the same , but thats a lie they are not nearly . Weither you will take this theology beyond the points of aesthetics and ethics , into epistemology and ontology , or you stay there , its not religion .
Now for science , what is science . Are ethics science ?

Theology:

1) The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.
2) A system or school of opinions concerning God and religious questions: Protestant theology; Jewish theology.
3) A course of specialized religious study usually at a college or seminary

Aren't i questioning and debating within the realms of theology? I try to look at religious matters and instances in a 'rational' and questioning manner in order to ascertain answers relating to god etc etc.

What is science? Well aside from taking the dictionary default my best explanation of how i refer to science is this: Science=asking questions in order to find an answer. Religion=Giving an answer without knowing the question.

Actually u were asked that in another thread already , but thats not the point an you know it .

Im interested so i can do some research on it, so if you don't mind the extra work of typing it here please do.

Now Im not going to want to fill Gaps with God , but I do want to fill them with whatever they are filled with

The gaps are there whether we like it or not- why think we are in a position to fill those gaps? As much as I, and im sure everyone on this planet, would like to fill those gaps it isn't right to use playdoh. We are in a position where we could be god unto ourselves or we could be at the feet of some gigantic invisible space dood. I can't attain to answer one way or the other- im just left with mights and might nots. We can put playdoh in the gaps but it will fall apart pretty soon. It's obvious we all have gaps or nobody would be in here debating, but those gaps will remain gaps no matter what you put in them. As such i will debate an issue with you because it's a start on a long journey to truth- and even though it's unlikely we'll never find that truth- it gives us something to aim for. My brain might be god- leading me along the winding road of life, but by that same token it might be my soul leading my brain. By that same token it might be god leading my soul to lead my brain. It's sick not knowing the answers- but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

 

[Allahs_Mathematics]

Theology:
1) The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.
2) A system or school of opinions concerning God and religious questions: Protestant theology; Jewish theology.
3) A course of specialized religious study usually at a college or seminary
Aren't i questioning and debating within the realms of theology? I try to look at religious matters and instances in a 'rational' and questioning manner in order to ascertain answers relating to god etc etc.
What is science? Well aside from taking the dictionary default my best explanation of how i refer to science is this: Science=asking questions in order to find an answer. Religion=Giving an answer without knowing the question.

No man , your definitions are incorrect . You see , there is theology without religion , there hardly is religion without theology (Taoism , but if you consider Tao to be God , its the same) .
Theology = Theos Logos , Knowledge of God .
Thats all . Religion brings in tradition/culture/customs

Now if we consider those Abrahmic religions , it is obvious that they are dealing with some invisible space alien , and and that is merely a definition of theology . Theology is much more than that , God can also be a chicken , gas , electricity or whatever people make up God is .

So if we debate theology , we shouldnt think just in those terms the religions of Abrahams God present us to be God .
Now if you would compare theology to science , you could just as easily compare philosophy to science , I absolutely see no difference between philosophy and theology only in the sence that theology is part of philosophy . Now u understand the major differences between philosophy and religion I suppose ?

But as you compare science to religion , I couldnt agree with you more . My question to you , is philosophy a science ?

Im interested so i can do some research on it, so if you don't mind the extra work of typing it here please do.

No problem , but I just dont know what exactly you mean ?

We are in a position where we could be god unto ourselves or we could be at the feet of some gigantic invisible space dood

Im sure u agree that the space dude is out of the question ?
At least he is out of the question as being something good and beautifull

As far as ethics aesthetics go....there is no doubt we are God ourselves . I mean its all the same , weither you wouldnt recognize them as real knowledge but made emotional concepts by people , bringing in Goddism as some superior thing is what it could possibly give it some value . Than u could say , I made up this superieur picture of what is this and that , and I try to follow it . It will be the same as when you say , hey..its all bullshit Im making it up myself .

I do believe you should reconsider the gapfilling , because do we not try to fill gaps all the time always with everything . I mean I understand you believe we see something and we question it , instead of putting something somwehere where its empty , but isnt that what questioning in the first place is all about ? I mean u believe u see this or that , and asks what is it , but how do you know it isnt there and what you see is the construction of your wondering what is there . Not that nothing is there (a gap isnt nothing , its just unknown) .

My brain might be god- leading me along the winding road of life, but by that same token it might be my soul leading my brain. By that same token it might be god leading my soul to lead my brain. It's sick not knowing the answers- but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Sure , but we can figure out what a brain is , what a soul is , and what life is , perhaps if we do that we can end up with who's leading what where if anything is been lead anywhere to begin with .

 

[SnakeLord]

No man , your definitions are incorrect

They were not my definitions. They were the meaning of the word 'theology' according to several different dictionaries but everything evolves. Well either way, it's not a big issue

Actually i think it's all pretty similar. Religion, theology, philosophy, science. It all shares distinct similarity but at the same time has a lot to keep it dinstinctly separate.

I asked if you could show where your statement of the origins of the word Allah came from. If you can i'd like to look up on it.

Well this is the thing.... I can't say the space dood, (sorry slang spelling of dude ), is out of the question because i do not know that for fact. There could be a space dood, i could be leading myself into a giant fiery abyss and so on and so forth but i require facts to commit fully, not speculation. As for his attitude if he exists i would say by the evidence prevalent within religious writing show he is a meany. I will at this point concur with you that it looks likely he's not quite like the religious establishments protray him.

I also concur we are god unto ourselves. We rule and lead and obey ourselves, (not always), and usually as far as things go are in complete control of our own being. However some in the religious camps would claim to state such a thing is going against god yada yada. We cannot just deny that claim, and we cannot just accept it. To all intents and purposes it would seem very apparent we are the rulers of ourselves, the creators of all that we know and do but at the same time we could be mere automotons doing what we do because we are programmed to do so by a higher entity.

It depends how we perceive gap filling. To me it's putting something in place to hold the outer walls, to fill something that is currently empty. I'd like that more than anything else but cannot do so if the gap filler is not concrete solid. Of course i could just be filling gaps by saying i dont want to fill gaps, i understand from that side aswell but i seem to have little choice being the person i am. Due to circumstances of upbringing, experience and whatever else, i am the person i am today. The seemingly main debate to these kinds of issues is our 'acceptance' of gravity. What i accept is the fact i stay firmly on the ground- it's an undeniable thing and that isn't in my eyes gap filling with playdoh, it's gap filling with permanent concrete. I guess that's it in whole: I need permanent gap filling as opposed to temporary answer that might well fall apart at any given moment.

As for your last statement... we might very well be able to work out the answers to the brain, the soul and life eventually but that's exactly why i don't gap fill- we don't know those answers yet. We could be mindless automotons as i said driven to do, say and think what we do because that's what we're told.

Regards.

P.S Apologies for not quoting and showing the reference of my replies but i was told quoting shows a lack of intelligence and is bad for debating.

 

[Allahs_Mathematics]

the defintion , well then its not you who is incorrect its those several dictionaries

On the origins of the word Allah , my conclusions come from a combination of many bullshit put together with what I know of Arabic concerning this issue , Ill post some time on that as soon as I have it all organized .
for now :

http://www.plim.org/1Allah.html
(not quite my conclusion but a very possible thing leading to the same distinction between the pagan god and Abrahams god )

http://www.blessedquietness.com/alhaj/yitha.htm#TABLE
(very christian anti-islamic biased ebook on the origins of Allah)

However some in the religious camps would claim to state such a thing is going against god yada yada. We cannot just deny that claim, and we cannot just accept it

Oh but we can deny that claim . As far as I know there are 2 basic and necesarry characteristics of god everybody agrees on .
1)He is the creator . Now thats the problem right there , they claim the spaceman did it , we cant refute it . Although we can very very easily refute THEIR spaceman .
2)He is superior . And that is something what we can prove . For instance , as I refute the point of that spacedude , I am being superior (in some way) to them and their Gods . In this 2-person/group etc relation , one only deals with the other . Now the one least superior surely could say but God is superieur to both of us , but I as being superieur would refute this by saying : How do you know whats between me and God when u are beneath me ?

quoting shows a lack of intelligence

LMAO

this is the craziest statement I have read today
who told u that ? Id say making such statements shows a lack of intelligence , and that one on making debating easier.......not really . Prhaps for the one who is not quoting .

 

[SnakeLord]

Firstly thanks for the links, they're interesting.

1)He is the creator . Now thats the problem right there , they claim the spaceman did it , we cant refute it . Although we can very very easily refute THEIR spaceman .
2)He is superior . And that is something what we can prove . For instance , as I refute the point of that spacedude , I am being superior (in some way) to them and their Gods . In this 2-person/group etc relation , one only deals with the other . Now the one least superior surely could say but God is superieur to both of us , but I as being superieur would refute this by saying : How do you know whats between me and God when u are beneath me ?

From what i have currently analysed i don't really see god as superior, (aside from his ability to destroy). However nowadays man has the ability to destroy on a massive scale so i would say the running for first place is very close. Aside from the destruction, god seems to be overly afflicted by human frailties and problems. I can get into this at a later date once my website is ready. Even the ten plagues.... God was competing against simple human magicians who could recreate quite a few of his tricks, (even turning the water to blood). God did win out in the end but 2000+ year old man put up a hell of a good challenge against him. The problem with being god is the meaning attributed to the word god. I don't even think you could label yourself as master unto yourself. In ways you do make decisions and master certain aspects of your own being... however you are also at the mercy of occurence. I think perhaps saying the planet earth is god would be more to the point. It feeds us, let's us breathe, clothes us, etc etc and so on. The problem with earth being our god is that the debate would arise that god is earths god and so on in such circular fashion it would make you dizzy. The reason i don't really wholly support a person being god unto themselves is the lack of control they have over so many things in life. We are at the sole mercy of a planet, or a god and have very little say in the matter.

LMAO

this is the craziest statement I have read today
who told u that ? Id say making such statements shows a lack of intelligence , and that one on making debating easier.......not really . Prhaps for the one who is not quoting .

Prisme. He's been having a go at me Kindly go into science vs religion thread and tell him to stop bullying me I told him exactly the same thing you've just said so he labelled me "Over-argumentative." Tragic.

 

[Allahs_Mathematics]

From what i have currently analysed i don't really see god as superior, (aside from his ability to destroy). However nowadays man has the ability to destroy on a massive scale so i would say the running for first place is very close. Aside from the destruction, god seems to be overly afflicted by human frailties and problems. I can get into this at a later date once my website is ready. Even the ten plagues.... God was competing against simple human magicians who could recreate quite a few of his tricks, (even turning the water to blood). God did win out in the end but 2000+ year old man put up a hell of a good challenge against him.

But what God are you speaking of , is it not so U have only analyzed the God of the Bible and even through one specific traditional theologic concept . God is the superieur creature by definition , it is what gods stands for as a philosophic understanding . Now that religions couldnt have come up with a perfect God , thats not Gods fault is it ? God is flawless , you should start reading the Qu'ran instead of that Bible , ull find a much more intelligent approach of God even traditionally . Did u know the traditional Qu'ranic God already solved the incest problem adam and eve had , by simply creating other tribes ?
And thats not even the kind of progress Im speaking of , either way my point is there are many understandings of God , some where God is far more superior then others , God is the most superieur by definition . If he wasnt , there would be a God for him too . And that makes the entire word God pretty meaningless wouldnt u say ?

The problem with being god is the meaning attributed to the word god. I don't even think you could label yourself as master unto yourself. In ways you do make decisions and master certain aspects of your own being... however you are also at the mercy of occurence. I think perhaps saying the planet earth is god would be more to the point. It feeds us, let's us breathe, clothes us, etc etc and so on. The problem with earth being our god is that the debate would arise that god is earths god and so on in such circular fashion it would make you dizzy. The reason i don't really wholly support a person being god unto themselves is the lack of control they have over so many things in life. We are at the sole mercy of a planet, or a god and have very little say in the matter.

Not really , thats the great part of being God , it actually gives certain attributes some meaning , they are attributes because you are God . But a person ebing God , should not be understood as a statical thing , it fluctuates , because nothing IS , everything becomes . Thus the more superior man becomes , the more God he is . Now the earth could surely play God as long as it feeds us , but surely God would find another way , and there goes the earth concept . So this whole being god , is actually a proces of becoming perfection , the perfection once creates for himself . Sufist perfact man theory , or Aristotelean vurtue ethics perfectly fit in this concept of reasoning .

Indeed the persons seems to not have controll , but he does if he wishes , he developes and gaines more and more controll , becoming more and more God every day , year , milennia ..before you know we dont even have to physically exist anymore but use all sorts of mad connections to teleport our minds , or something I dont know Im just making shit up as I type .
My point is , the whole of idea of being God , relies on the fact that there is no such thing as being , just becoming more perfect ....at least thats when you are indeed being God and not being......yes yes , SATAN . I suggest the lacking of becoming God , means the becoming Satan . Ofcourse this is based on the fact that a concept is Gods perfect opposite .

Aesthetics : God=Beatifull , Devil=Ugly
Ethics : God= Good , Devil=Bad
Epistemology : God = Intelligence , Devil=Ignorance
Ontology : God=Existing , Devil=Unexisting ?

In each aspect , the gain in control(if its controll it should be defined by and i dont think it should really) would be becoming God , the loss in controll would be becoming Satan .

Prisme. He's been having a go at me Kindly go into science vs religion thread and tell him to stop bullying me I told him exactly the same thing you've just said so he labelled me "Over-argumentative." Tragic.

Over-argumentative ?

Is that something like-over right , or over-relevant , or over-true ?
Man I cant believe these people , Im serious , I come across this kind of ignorance a thousand times a day everywhere I am , and after so many years being conscious of this FACT , i still cant believe it and everytime I see such retardedness I just simply cant handle it for being real , Im like.......fuck are these people serious , and I know they are , still I wonder , I oftenly ask them even if they are serious and even when they say yes , i just cant believe them .

 

[Binary]

Atheist are just as illogical illogical as most theist. Like two brothers of the same stature, grown up seperate, groomed towards the accepting and endowment of different disciplines of the same continuum. One never comprehending the knowledge of the other, thus leaving them both incomplete and ignorant of the entirety of their existance. Through the assumption of their own ignorance, they premise that they're twain in origin, and contrary. Never realizing that there are not many truths, but one.

P.S. We've been here, God does Exist