can't know him until you study him..see above post.
you can know OF him..but until you devote study to him, you can't know him.
Why do people believe in god?
- Thread starter LuckAse
- Start date
can't know him until you study him..see above post.
you can know OF him..but until you devote study to him, you can't know him.
why? because science confuses them.
"God created everything in 7 days"
vs
"...Using the Big Bang model it is possible to calculate the concentration of helium-4, helium-3, deuterium and lithium-7 in the Universe as ratios to the amount of ordinary hydrogen, H.[40] All the abundances depend on a single parameter, the ratio of photons to baryons, which itself can be calculated independently from the detailed structure of CMB fluctuations. The ratios predicted (by mass, not by number) are about 0.25 for 4
He/H, about 10−3 for 2
H/H, about 10−4 for 3
He/H and about 10−9 for 7
Li/H.[40]..."
it's not hard to see which of the two is the "winning" theory here!
"God created everything in 7 days"
vs
"...Using the Big Bang model it is possible to calculate the concentration of helium-4, helium-3, deuterium and lithium-7 in the Universe as ratios to the amount of ordinary hydrogen, H.[40] All the abundances depend on a single parameter, the ratio of photons to baryons, which itself can be calculated independently from the detailed structure of CMB fluctuations. The ratios predicted (by mass, not by number) are about 0.25 for 4
He/H, about 10−3 for 2
H/H, about 10−4 for 3
He/H and about 10−9 for 7
Li/H.[40]..."
it's not hard to see which of the two is the "winning" theory here!
kx000
Valued Senior Member
And you know him?
kx000
Valued Senior Member
Still not close to explaining planets, let alone Earth.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
How is that studying god?
inquiries leveled at theory (book) and application (practitioners) - kind of a standard approach don't you think?
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
For standard subjects, yes. But god isn't a standard subject, isn't it?
Science books contain knowledge that can be gathered by any one. The writers studied the subject in the real world and wrote the book so that others can learn without doing the actual research all over again.
The practitioners get their information from those books.
It is different for the subject of god. If god can only be studied from reading the book, how did the writers gather their information?
It's like saying that physics can only be learned from a book.
Still doesn't solve the problem of which religion is the right one.
All kinds of books and people claim to be and talk "about God," but whether they really are and talk about God or not - how can one tell without being omniscient?
why not?
so can practical application of theism
same again
ditto
personal revelation - which is what application culminates in BTW
only if one insists on examining physics removed from what it culminates in (namely the observation of the microcosmic world)
back to the old "how can one know unless one knows" argument - a surefire method to put the brakes on any sort of inquiry under the sun.
Don't
You are simply arguing for caveat emptor.
and demanding that one knows before one knows is the reasonable platform to begin any sort of inquiry?
then you are simply entertaining a world view that has nature as an eternal element as opposed to god (or even one that has both god and nature as eternal elements) ... which is practically a hair breadth away from fully fledged atheism.
So even to run with your ideas of evolution - a god that shapes the existence of the higher wrung of species (ie humans) to take on characteristics similar to his own has necessarily rendered himself imaginary?
that is certainly not clear .....
You are not really saying anything - the super natural - by definition - is beyond nature (hence the adding of "super" before it)
about what?
the supernatural or the idea of god being false because humans share similar characteristics?
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Because god is, by definition, supernatural and thus unobservable.
Your response makes no sense. We were talking about studying god.
Wrong.
I know. So what?
Your mean fantasy or delusion. There is no evidence for any of it. Not the same as science. You can study evidence where there is evidence, not where there is none.
Reproducible evidence...