Where is your God?

No God , whichever religion you would quote, advocates one human being committing the atrocities to which they subject one another.

So you never read the Wholely Babble, then?

 

---------- Post added 02-09-2014 at 05:57 ----------

 

Why make such an issue of me saying I'd done a 20th century history course, and then gone into a little personal detail.

Er... YOU made an issue of it by posting it on a discussion forum. I merely commented on your post.

 

It isn't as if you've never done that!

But it is that I've never done that. Please quote me on this or any forum posting about my history qualifications.

 

(I failed history O level, for what it's worth.)

Logic can be used to make inferences to the best decision.

Of course it can, if it's sound, I was simply pointing out that your "logic" had already proved unsound earlier by coming to a conclusion based on a false dichotomy choice.

 

Also I am not suggesting there is anything wrong with 'we don't know' answer- but it is down faith at the end of the day.

Funny that, because you said here...

It is all guess work as any scientist would tell you- nothing wrong with that but please spare me the ' we don't know yet'.

Saying that there's nothing wrong with X but spare me the Y very much suggests that X is okay whilst Y is not

 

As stated before, science has no tool to look in to anything it cannot or did not observe!

I never said it did. What I said was:

"Unless, of course, we discover a new method of observation which does make it observable. Then we might know."

 

The thing with science is, it's constantly (vastly) improving and advancing, while religion tends not to be.

 

Going back to my mention of Dark Matter- it has no scientific foundations, zero.

I never mentioned anything about dark matter, but since you brought it up, see the above statement. So far it's a theory, based on observable effects on luminous matter. At some point it may well be proved true. That's how science works.

 

It may be down the years the ultimate question could end being answered as the origin of the Universe was by Purpose- it is one of the 4 options that do exist today, the others being Chance, Randomness and Probability- but even if one tried to prove any of these, it stills leaves open the question of the First Cause- as everything that begins to exist needs a cause.

Why believe in the least rational though?

Why, after deciding there's four possibilities without conclusive proof of any, jump to a conclusion about one?

 

 

I will leave it there as these type of discussions (as much as I love) are not appropriate on a thread- though feel free to PM me if you have some burning issues.

I can't think of a thread where it'd be any more appropriate than in one titled "Where is your God?"

Logic can be used to make inferences to the best decision.

...which may be incorrect, nonetheless.

 

Also I am not suggesting there is anything wrong with 'we don't know' answer- but it is down faith at the end of the day.

"We don't know" is a true statement. It is a factual statement. Where is faith involved?

 

As stated before, science has no tool to look in to anything it cannot or did not observe! Going back to my mention of Dark Matter- it has no scientific foundations, zero.

Dark matter is a 'placheolder' name for effects which have been observed in the universe, until the cause can be explained (which may be never, but the effects are still real and observed).

 

Compare with gravity. (Or do you suppose that things just floated around in the air until a certain Mr. Newton came up with the theory of gravity? )

 

It may be down the years the ultimate question could end being answered as the origin of the Universe was by Purpose- it is one of the 4 options that do exist today, the others being Chance, Randomness and Probability- but even if one tried to prove any of these, it stills leaves open the question of the First Cause- as everything that begins to exist needs a cause.

 

Oh, I recognise all those words. It's just that... Did you just pick them out of the dictionary at random?

 

I will leave it there as these type of discussions (as much as I love) are not appropriate on a thread...

Why?

 

---------- Post added 02-09-2014 at 06:41 ----------

 

Which god?

 

---------- Post added 31-08-2014 at 07:15 ----------

 

So is rendering unto Caesar.

 

 

Ah:- soul! (Pun intended.)

 

First demonstrate that souls exist, then we can discuss that.

 

 

FIFY

 

---------- Post added 31-08-2014 at 07:29 ----------

 

Appeal to authority!

 

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

 

Such an overworked logical fallacy!

 

The Hebrew term for “soul” is nephesh and it is found more than 780 times in the Old Testament. Because of the variety of contextual meanings, it is not always rendered by the English word “soul.” The King James Version uses 28 different words by which to translate the original term. Nephesh, therefore, signifies different things, depending upon the passage in which it occurs.

 

Similarly, in the Greek New Testament, the original word for “soul” is psuche, found 103 times. Our modern word “psychology” derives from this Greek term.

 

Here are some uses of “soul” in the Scriptures.

 

“Soul” may signify merely an individual person. The prophet Ezekiel declared that the “soul” (i.e., the person) who sins will surely die (Ezek. 18:20), or, as Peter would write centuries later, “eight souls” were saved by water in the days of Noah (1 Pet. 3:20). See also Exodus 1:5.

 

In some contexts, “soul” simply has reference to biological life, the animating principle that is common to both humans and animals. All creatures have “life” (see Gen. 1:30; cf. ASV footnote). The wicked king, Herod the Great, sought to take the “life” of baby Jesus (Mt. 2:20; cf. Rev. 12:11). In one of the visions of the Apocalypse, certain creatures of the sea were said to possess psuche, or life (Rev. 8:9).

“Soul” can have to do with that aspect of man that is characterized by the intellectual and emotional (Gen. 27:25; Job 30:16). It is the eternal component of man that is fashioned in the very image of God (Gen. 1:26), and that can exist apart from the physical body (Mt. 10:28; Rev. 6:9).

In the Old Testament, “spirit” is ruach, found some 378 times in the Hebrew Old Testament, and literally meaning “breath,” “wind,” etc. The corresponding Greek term is pneuma, occurring 379 times in the New Testament (the original form being found in our English word, pneumonia). Again, though, as with “soul,” the word “spirit” may take on different senses, depending upon its contextual setting.

I think we give unto ceaser in many ways , Council tax , car tax , etc

Please sort out the quote tags if you wish me to respond to the above.

 

I did not say all the things you have quoted me as saying.

 

---------- Post added 02-09-2014 at 06:54 ----------

 

How does quoting from scriptures prove we have a soul? no proof whatsoever.

Don't ask me. I never said it did. The quote tags are buggered.

redwhine/RootsB..

 

I understand the Scientific Method - and have been interested in Science for a long time.

 

I buy the whole Science thing-but I do not and can not logically conclude that something comes from nothing.

 

And lets face it, science cannot explain that which it cannot observe or measure.

 

It won't ever explain the 'why' and 'where'. I do not pretend to have those answers , nor do I think Science will ever.

 

I've come across many atheists (who I say are actually agnostics), and sat and listened to various theories- be it multiverse or string theories et al.

 

But these will remain untestable ,and unable to be falsified .

 

You simply have a hard time accepting the fact that there are simply things science can not resolve nor will ever answer. So hence why I say it comes down to a matter of FAITH.

 

You simply believe a different fairy tale . You have no proof.

 

If I believe there was a Superior force or intelligent Being who created the Universe- that does not make it any different to you believeing the Universe popped out in to existence by itself- that which I do hold illogical.

 

 

Why? Because we do not associate anything to create itself in the natural world, as we know it. Also time, space and matter all originated after the BB.

 

Science cannot calculate backwards, it has no maths to go back to just before the BB- so it is all hypothesis. Hence why I state that Dark matter is simply an hypothesis , a guess , devoid of any observation or mathematic equation.

 

Final point, although some atheists like to mock religion, and may be some of it could be- believing in Purpose behind the Universe is not religious in any way or shape.

 

In fact, looking at it, the Universe smacks of design- and we associate design/purpose with everything we see and observe dont't we?

 

Just to use a simple illustration of what I mean- if someone was given a gigantic puzzle of all the flags of every country in existence, all stripes and colours - and it was left in a room for a period (whichever time)- would you or anyone expect this jigsaw to re-assemble by itself?

 

If you saw it assembled after returning from this period of gap- what would be your belief of how it came about> BY itself? Through some natural force, By Chance/Random or SOMEONE put it together- someone with a MIND and PURPOSE.

 

You see, that is where I am happy to believe logically that the Universe (which is so more vast with all its intricate details) has a purpose behind it.

 

So I will happily live with that because Science won't change my view as it cannot know and never will- like I said, you have hope and live in hope- so it is FAITH.

 

Bye.

 

If I believe there was a Superior force or intelligent Being who created the Universe- that does not make it any different to you believeing the Universe popped out in to existence by itself- that which I do hold illogical.

 

 

.

 

So believing there is a Superior force is also illogical ? (you said it's no different to to believing in the big bang which you said is illogical))

How does quoting from scriptures prove we have a soul? no proof whatsoever.

 

you cannot prove we don't either ?

redwhine/RootsB..

 

I understand the Scientific Method - and have been interested in Science for a long time.

 

I buy the whole Science thing-but I do not and can not logically conclude that something comes from nothing.

You don't have to, but how can you logically conclude that a God created everything?

Why jump to a conclusion at all?

 

And lets face it, science cannot explain that which it cannot observe or measure.

 

It won't ever explain the 'why' and 'where'. I do not pretend to have those answers , nor do I think Science will ever.

Science may or science may not. Religious texts, however, certainly won't, there will be no advances in those.

 

I've come across many atheists (who I say are actually agnostics), and sat and listened to various theories- be it multiverse or string theories et al.

 

But these will remain untestable ,and unable to be falsified .

 

You simply have a hard time accepting the fact that there are simply things science can not resolve nor will ever answer. So hence why I say it comes down to a matter of FAITH.

No, I don't

 

You simply believe a different fairy tale . You have no proof.

 

If I believe there was a Superior force or intelligent Being who created the Universe- that does not make it any different to you believeing the Universe popped out in to existence by itself- that which I do hold illogical.

 

 

Why? Because we do not associate anything to create itself in the natural world, as we know it. Also time, space and matter all originated after the BB.

 

Science cannot calculate backwards, it has no maths to go back to just before the BB- so it is all hypothesis. Hence why I state that Dark matter is simply an hypothesis , a guess , devoid of any observation or mathematic equation.

 

Final point, although some atheists like to mock religion, and may be some of it could be- believing in Purpose behind the Universe is not religious in any way or shape.

 

In fact, looking at it, the Universe smacks of design- and we associate design/purpose with everything we see and observe dont't we?

 

Just to use a simple illustration of what I mean- if someone was given a gigantic puzzle of all the flags of every country in existence, all stripes and colours - and it was left in a room for a period (whichever time)- would you or anyone expect this jigsaw to re-assemble by itself?

 

If you saw it assembled after returning from this period of gap- what would be your belief of how it came about> BY itself? Through some natural force, By Chance/Random or SOMEONE put it together- someone with a MIND and PURPOSE.

 

You see, that is where I am happy to believe logically that the Universe (which is so more vast with all its intricate details) has a purpose behind it.

 

So I will happily live with that because Science won't change my view as it cannot know and never will- like I said, you have hope and live in hope- so it is FAITH.

 

Bye.

 

A couple of questions;

 

1) Why do you prefer to call atheists agnostics?

 

2) What is this "fairy tale" I believe in?

 

3) You keep mentioning logic and that scientific theories have no proof, just like religion. Wouldn't the logical step be to simply not accept either then, rather than embrace one and reject the other?

Why couldn't the universe be eternal like the creator,just as likely.

Why couldn't the universe be eternal like the creator,just as likely.

 

No, not "just as likely"

The Universe being eternal is more likely than any gods being eternal because we know that the Universe already exists. The same cannot be said for gods.

 

 

But it is that I've never done that. Please quote me on this or any forum posting about my history qualifications.

 

(I failed history O level, for what it's worth.)

I wasn't meaning anything to do with your educational qualifications.

I recall you mentioning on a thread your association with Richard Dawkins and some other detail relating to a personal experience, therefore you were introducing something about your personal life into a discussion.

 

I felt you were implying I was boasting or attempting to create an impression by mentioning the history course, when that wasn't the reason at all.

No, not "just as likely"

The Universe being eternal is more likely than any gods being eternal because we know that the Universe already exists. The same cannot be said for gods.

 

What I meant was as theist say god is eternal so why not an eternal universe.

A matter of personal choice I suppose.

 

but if you want a fairly simplified (not simple or for the simple) yet very credible explanation of why we can not fully explain the universe its origins or even its shape and size.

 

Do not be put off by the principle author's name. The science explanations in his other works in this series are actually very good and quite understandable by non scientists.

 

I refer to: a work by Terry Pratchett Ian Stewart & Jack Cohen

The Science of Discworld IV

Prior reading of other books in this series or any of the discworld books is not necessary to follow the actual science bits.

 

By the way things can appear out of nothing and do so all the time.

.

.