|
Author
|
Topic: What are the odds of God existing?
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 266 of 304 (308777)
05-03-2006 12:49 PM
|
Reply to: Message 253 by cavediver
05-03-2006 11:21 AM
|
|
Re: Defining the only two options
Surely we are part of Nature? Via our conciousness, Nature is one total being. If not, what do you define as the delimiter of our individual conciousnesses? Our physical bodies? One speaks of discreet entities even though something can be seen as part of something else. My stomach is a discreet entity, but it also a part of me. But the point is to find a distinguishing characteristic of God that would distinguish God from nature. So the question is whether the characteristic of consciousness is arbitrary or not. Might we pick some other quality such as twitchiness or redness? I don't think so, but I'm not sure how to express the idea yet. As for as those ideas about God being "outside of our particular time"--this makes no sense to me.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 253 by cavediver, posted 05-03-2006 11:21 AM | | cavediver has replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
Re: Defining the only two options
Accoring to conventional 20th/21st century physics (GR) time is just as much a contained (created) part of the universe as anything else. If God is not outside our time, then he is part of our universe and hence not God at all... It seems to me a contradiction to say that something can be both finite in time and also eternal. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 267 by cavediver, posted 05-03-2006 1:48 PM | | cavediver has not replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 272 of 304 (308806)
05-03-2006 3:07 PM
|
Reply to: Message 271 by iano
05-03-2006 2:59 PM
|
|
Re: Ouch..that hurt!
Maybe there is less. There is no universe, there is no us. If something can come from nothing then there can also be nothing. And this is it. We cannot prove anythings existance without using things which we are trying to prove exist as moorings. It seems somewhat circular to me. As does nothing proving it is nothing - but then again we have nothing to say nothing is actually something attempting to prove anything Once unreason enters the picture, "anything's possible."
God does not "exist."---Paul Tillich, Christian theologian
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 271 by iano, posted 05-03-2006 2:59 PM | | iano has not replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
Re: Ouch..that hurt!
"Unreason" is not simply whatever you decide you don't want to deal with. Yeah, well, maybe so. I know one thing. This sci-fi babble gives me a headache.
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 276 of 304 (308823)
05-03-2006 4:27 PM
|
Reply to: Message 274 by iano
05-03-2006 4:10 PM
|
|
Re: Saving Private Rohan
I liked that, iano. I'm sure Omnivorous will like it too. I get the picture. But Cavediver, I think, was talking about something else. Very creative. This message has been edited by robinrohan, 05-03-2006 03:28 PM
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 274 by iano, posted 05-03-2006 4:10 PM | | iano has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 277 by iano, posted 05-03-2006 4:32 PM | | robinrohan has not replied | | | Message 293 by cavediver, posted 05-03-2006 7:13 PM | | robinrohan has not replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
Re: Ouch..that hurt!
Just because you "get a head ache" doesn't make something "sci-fi babble". There might be a connection.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 278 by Chiroptera, posted 05-03-2006 4:33 PM | | Chiroptera has not replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
Re: Ouch..that hurt!
I think all science can tell us is that the "universe is," as Mr. Jack, I think, said. But then we knew that already. What we want to know is how, and also, of course, why.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 278 by Chiroptera, posted 05-03-2006 4:33 PM | | Chiroptera has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 282 by iano, posted 05-03-2006 5:22 PM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 283 of 304 (308845)
05-03-2006 5:32 PM
|
Reply to: Message 282 by iano
05-03-2006 5:22 PM
|
|
Re: Ouch..that hurt!
Science says--not sure how certain it is--that time and space were created at the Big Bang. So this means there was no time "before" the BB, i.e., there was no before. Nothing existed "before" the Big Bang. I suppose out of this--with maybe a dash of Quantum Mechanics, which of course we are all very conversant in--comes the strange idea that something can come from nothing.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 282 by iano, posted 05-03-2006 5:22 PM | | iano has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 284 by iano, posted 05-03-2006 6:17 PM | | robinrohan has not replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
Re: Pretzel
It is perfectly reasonable and logical to recognize the possibility that there is something (such as the universe) that has not existed for all eternity but yet had no cause. Just because you say it's perfectly reasonable and logical doesn't mean it's perfectly reasonable and logical.
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
Where is the contradiction? Just because you say there's no contradiction doesn't mean there's no contradiction.
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 295 of 304 (308985)
05-04-2006 5:58 AM
|
Reply to: Message 294 by iano
05-03-2006 7:26 PM
|
|
Re: Saving Private Anybody
Its the predestination/freewill.... interface/(in time only)paradox in sharp relief I don't like these paradoxes, iano. This message has been edited by robinrohan, 05-04-2006 04:58 AM
God does not "exist."---Paul Tillich, Christian theologian
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 294 by iano, posted 05-03-2006 7:26 PM | | iano has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 296 by iano, posted 05-04-2006 7:00 AM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 297 of 304 (308994)
05-04-2006 7:41 AM
|
Reply to: Message 296 by iano
05-04-2006 7:00 AM
|
|
Re: Saving Private Anybody
There is sufficient in what you all ready know (if I have read you correctly these last months) for the paradox to satisfy much of what you already know. I don't "already know" anything, and the something-from-nothing idea has got me totally confused. I don't get it.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 296 by iano, posted 05-04-2006 7:00 AM | | iano has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 298 by iano, posted 05-04-2006 8:36 AM | | robinrohan has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2