Does God exist? (7 Viewers)

[Cookie182]

I believe there has always been something. It's hard to fathom, though. Mind blowing.

Something always existing pretty much breaks every the chain of everything else in the universe. I was thinking today, God is often described as omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient.

Omnipotence (Omni Potens: "all power") is unlimited power.

Energy was said to have created matter, which was the catalyst for the most powerful scientific reaction ever (big bang). It, therefore, is the most powerful thing known to man. It is omnipotent

Omnipresence is the ability to be present in every place at any, and/or every, time; unbounded or universal presence. It is related to the concept of ubiquity, the ability to be everywhere at a certain point in time.

Energy is everywhere, if I am not mistaken. It existed before the big-bang, therefore it is present in every time. It essentially fits the definition of omnipresence.

Omniscience (IPA: /ɒm'nɪsɪəns/)[1] (or Omniscient Point-of-View in writing) is the capacity to know everything infinitely

This one is a little more harder to comment on. Though, the very thing that created everything essentially IS us. It is essentially the medium through which we, and everything else, are derived. Therefore, its capacity to know everything infinitely is bound within its very make up.

I just found it interesting that the idea of energy in science actually perfectly (to an extent) fits the definition of God. I'm not saying it's a God as in the guy in the clouds who watches us all day, but just simply, a powerful presence, a higher power in our Universe.

P.s: Kfunk, what do you plan to do with yourself after uni?

My mind needs a formula for everything and I've agreed with you since High School Physics. With the help of Einstein-

God=mc^2

Until I get a better equation that's what i'm going off.

 

[Kwayera]

but it was the meaning of lief. sif im even spamming. and stop banning me, it isn't funny anymore

Actually, he's got a point there. Sex pretty much is the meaning of life, from a Darwinian point of view.

 

[Miffstaa]

Actually, he's got a point there. Sex pretty much is the meaning of life, from a Darwinian point of view.

yep.
And there are several sects who do believe that God exists and that every one has the opportunity to get close to Him. So they think that having sex is committing a sin and the more you sin (have sex) the more closer you get to Him.
All of this= orgys

 

[samtrotman]

Why not question why religion revolves around 'god'?

I suppose that the term religion has certain connotations in our culture. We have developed from a largely Christian society. I suppose that if we came from certain Eastern cultures, then we would not assume that religion required a God at all.

 

[Dis Amrahs]

yeah they don't, your right. But alot, and the biggest ones at that, do. And after all, if we are discussing god, shouldnt we look at the ones that promote him?

Edit: Actually stuff what i just said. its flawed.

 

[*bj*]

OMG.

I can't believe there are still religious people in our supposedly 'developed' society. What a joke. 'God' is a cop-out explanation of the universe for the stupid and ignorant. And 'religion' - the biggest joke of all - is just another exercise of power and exploitation!

The evidence for god is so weak it makes me laugh. Stop dreaming and accept the physical evidence and the hypotheses they support!!

I know posting this isn't going to change anyone's mind (you're all dumb fucks) but at least I can remind myself of my superiority.

Churchies, get fucked!

 

[Kwayera]

The evidence for god is so weak it makes me laugh. Stop dreaming and accept the physical evidence and the hypotheses they support!!

By "so weak" I assume you mean "by definition, non-existant".

 

[Cookie182]

OMG.

I can't believe there are still religious people in our supposedly 'developed' society. What a joke. 'God' is a cop-out explanation of the universe for the stupid and ignorant. And 'religion' - the biggest joke of all - is just another exercise of power and exploitation!

The evidence for god is so weak it makes me laugh. Stop dreaming and accept the physical evidence and the hypotheses they support!!

Oh and another thing:

I know posting this isn't going to change anyone's mind (you're all dumb fucks) but at least I can remind myself of my superiority.

Churchies, get fucked!

G=mc^2 as i outlined above.

 

[samtrotman]

yeah they don't, your right. But alot, and the biggest ones at that, do. And after all, if we are discussing god, shouldnt we look at the ones that promote him?

Yeah, I suppose that makes sense. But it's difficult due to the fact that the major theist religions, whilst all abrahamic, have such different views of God and religion. It would be easier to argue against the existence of specific gods than the concept of God in general.

 

[samtrotman]

OMG.

I can't believe there are still religious people in our supposedly 'developed' society. What a joke. 'God' is a cop-out explanation of the universe for the stupid and ignorant. And 'religion' - the biggest joke of all - is just another exercise of power and exploitation!

The evidence for god is so weak it makes me laugh. Stop dreaming and accept the physical evidence and the hypotheses they support!!

Oh and another thing:

I know posting this isn't going to change anyone's mind (you're all dumb fucks) but at least I can remind myself of my superiority.

Churchies, get fucked!

Haha, your link just outlined 2 major myths pertaining to science and religion.

The first being that science and religion contradict each other. This isn't true for most religions. Science, using the empirical method, attempts to prove a hypothesis using controlled experiments and repeated observation. Science is concerned with how things happen. Religions are most often concerned with the 'why?' and 'who?' questions. Science and religion deal with different things. They aren't mutually exclusive.

The second mistake you made was assuming that all religions require blind faith. Many religious people believe that faith, rather than being belief in the absence of or contrary to the evidence, is just belief and trust due to logical and rational thinking.

 

[Dis Amrahs]

Not only the abrahamic ones, but even the polytheistic religions like modern hinduism. And in the instance of 'hinduism' i can argue that it developed from animastic roots where 'gods' are manifestations of energy or of concepts. My main qualm is not with religion but with idolatry. They are two different things.

 

[Cookie182]

Some1 smart or more experienced in physics/philosophy then myself (I’m thinking along the lines of KFunk’s) critically review this article-

http://www.unhinderedliving.com/energyGod.html

I found i today when i was procrastinating, it's very interesting. The premise is that we are arguing for nothing as science/religion is essentially the same thing. As the author puts it, due to the conservation of energy, god is the total sum of energy just divided into parts. Essentially everything is god and that still allows theists to believe in God and a personal connection because God is what they are made of (energy).

 

[*bj*]

Many religious people believe that faith, rather than being belief in the absence of or contrary to the evidence, is just belief and trust due to logical and rational thinking.

How about you apply "logical and rational thinking" to that sentence and re-write it?

 

[moll.]

How about you apply "logical and rational thinking" to that sentence and re-write it?

You're annoying.
Go away troll.
You're not helping us.
You're just making atheists look bad.
And i'm mostly referring to your previous post here.

 

[nikolas]

Haha, your link just outlined 2 major myths pertaining to science and religion.

The first being that science and religion contradict each other. This isn't true for most religions. Science, using the empirical method, attempts to prove a hypothesis using controlled experiments and repeated observation. Science is concerned with how things happen. Religions are most often concerned with the 'why?' and 'who?' questions. Science and religion deal with different things. They aren't mutually exclusive.

The second mistake you made was assuming that all religions require blind faith. Many religious people believe that faith, rather than being belief in the absence of or contrary to the evidence, is just belief and trust due to logical and rational thinking.

But by no means mutually inclusive either.

I have yet to learn of a religion that does not require a leap of faith.

 

[Dis Amrahs]

That article that Chrisso Posted (while i agree with the general idea that energy is our source and existential crux) heavily implies that the universe is calculated and its creation by energy was an intentional occurrence. Its interesting because it implies 2 things.

1. That the Universe has a 'divine' directive which gives the argument a sense of absolutism. This implies a definite and certain purpose of life. I don't like this because it pins human intelligence as subservient to a single irrefutable philosophy.

2. The 'self corrective' nature of the universe (while obviously true on a micro level; i.e. we polute the planet, we get fucked over by global warming - kind of like rational 'karma') asserts a notion of destiny which we are bound to. In my opinion, the concept of destiny contradicts the above point that there is one single philosophy by which to live life. Infinite and separate destinies would mean infinite and separate paths through life so theres no single way. That doesn't mean that the goal can't be the same; i.e. death.

EDIT: You guys can probably spot the hole in my above arguments. The meaning of life (or goal of life) doesnt neccessarily decry a single way by which to live life. That is unless the meaning of life is an essentially moral one (say for instance, serving god). The notion of a 'meaning' of life rather than simple destination implies a common sense of morality ipso facto a universal moral code whereby to live life. The exclusivity of destiny and the implied universality of morality contradict each other.

 

[nikolas]

yep.
And there are several sects who do believe that God exists and that every one has the opportunity to get close to Him. So they think that having sex is committing a sin and the more you sin (have sex) the more closer you get to Him.
All of this= orgys

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_bombing

Pretty sure there is also one religion that believes that when your having sex/masturbating you should imagine your partner is Jesus, to literally love Jesus.

if your a man, you should pretend your a woman though, to avoid having gay sex

 

[Miffstaa]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_bombing

Pretty sure there is also one religion that believes that when your having sex/masturbating you should imagine your partner is Jesus, to literally love Jesus.

if your a man, you should pretend your a woman though, to avoid having gay sex

oh god. what has this world come to?
mmmm Jesus. Arousing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khlysty

yeah thats the name of the sect and Rasputin was apparently one of the members. That explains it all.

 

[Blamz]

That's pretty idiotic. Disbelieving in god because you hate religion is really not an argument at all.

George Carlin has the answers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o Religion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Djohakx_FE The Sanctity of Life

 

[HalcyonSky]

George Carlin has the answers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o Religion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Djohakx_FE The Sanctity of Life

nice, never seen this guy

reminds me of bill hicks