Talking About God is NOT Religious.

[A-Unit]

A clarification, talking about God is NOT religious.
Not by any stretch of the imagination.
Granted, this is a PUA/seduction board/community, but people who want to convene will talk and palaver over topics of interest.

There was not talk of any SPECIFIC religion, therefore was no religious talk. The idea that God exists dedicated to one specific religion is precisely what's wrong.

I realize this will be locked, and it might be a total waste of a thread. Perhaps I should take my toys elsewhere and play, but its a mistake to lock a thread before it's seen where it goes, especially when it wasn't religious. YET.

Thank You,


A-Unit

 

[S1NN3R]

If you are talking about cars, it's automotive talk, even if you don't mention a specific car.

If you're talking about football, it's sports talk, even if you don't mention a specific team.

If you're talking about god, it's religious talk, even if you don't mention a specific religion.

 

[SELF-MASTERY]

I thought we were talking about the origins of life.

Oh well....

 

[Nocturnal]

I agree.

Anyway, I was about to reply when I realized the thread was closed.

A-Unit, the reason that God cannot exist is because "its" existence would contradict the law of identity. For something to exist independantly of consciousness, there would be an underlying implication of the primacy of existance. For a conscious being to create existence, there would be an underlying implication of the primacy of consciousness. You can't have both without violating the definition of identity.

In truth, primacy of consciousness is impossible, because it requires the use of a stolen concept (trying to disprove a concept by using the concept itself). Consciousness is to be conscious of something, which means that something has to exist. You cannot have consciousness without existence, which is one reason God could not have "existed" as a conscious being without any existence. Primacy of existance is absolutely true, as the universe would still exist even if no one was conscious of it.

You mentioned the senses and perception. We live in reality by using our senses to perceive it and to observe facts, which can be integrated into concepts. Since God exists in the supernatural realm, he cannot be directly perceived. He is completely outside of reality. We cannot use reason to validate his existence because we'd be using a stolen concept again of trying to disprove that reason within our reality is always valid, by trying to use reason to formulate our argument.

In essence, the whole idea of "God" is full of contradictions within reality, and to believe in those contradictions, you have to reject reality outright. You would bring reason to the point where a clinically insane, mentally unstable mental patient's random outbursts of meaningless words and phrases would be as valid in representing the truths of reality as any of the world's scientist's greatest proofs.

 

[Brian20o2]

I'm gonna take the agnostic view and say that it's impossible to tell for sure. There are so many different arguements and loopholes and contradictions that being able to even percive a god is beyond what I would consider possible by a human.

 

[Nocturnal]

By the way, just because religion implies a god or supernatural, "God" does not itself imply religion.

 

[A-Unit]

Re:

I'm not even getting into a pissing contest on this one, because I'll juuuuust sneak in before the lock. Initially I was going to take the low road an ole kook would by saying "you're 19"...well I just did that so that's that.

Point is God isn't NECESSARILY religious, but that's your 'perception,' my friend. To a person with a denominaton, it is. To a person who is discussing the topic as if we were palavering around a campfire, it isn't. I've done the same talk over poker, if nothing else to distract those people who are playing well, knowing full well it will throw them off their game. To new-agers, God is a power, not unlike what was spoken of in LOA. What he/she/it is is to be determined by the individual. I was merely seeking responses and conversation on questions I raised. I'll learn from here on out that they can't be had and move on.

And to the point of what Visceral said...perhaps my cranium isn't big enough to swallow your logic, but you lost me at "A-Unit..." I get your logistical basis on things. It's a very Ayn Randian/Objectivist/Analytic perspective, all the power to you. But I feel like the Right Brain Battling the Left Brain whom explans all existence with a few words of purported logic and authority, thereby suffocating all creativity and thought beyond.

To each his own. This was certainly an experiment in why religious threads are locked...


A-Unit

 

[SamMalone]

"So God created the universe, and since then, he's just chilled?"

It's impossible to KNOW for sure whether God exists or not, and it's probably a waste of time discussing it.

 

[Desdinova]

Since I'm the one who closed the thread, I feel some need to defend myself.

I personally enjoy religious banter and debate (whether you view god part of, or not part of religion). I also believe that discussion of this subject would very well help us grow individually as human beings.

If this was my forum, I'd allow the discussion of the subject. Unfortunately, I'm not the one who has decided that this topic along with politics is off limits on the forum.

You may want to do what I did - find a religious forum to grow and learn in that particular area of life.

 

[Nocturnal]

When I say that God does not imply religion, I am not referring to anyone's particular god or their specific beliefs, but the idea of a supernatural being. If religion did not exist whatsoever, the same concept of a God could be discussed without ever hitting on religion. In that sense I believe my statement still stands.

As to creativity, I have nothing against it. But it can NEVER take precedence over logic. Once you pass, "yeah I know it's illogical but," your point or idea is completely irrelevant to reality, and can have no more substance than any random whim or ridiculous idea that I might make up in jest.

And if you're still wondering why I posted what I did, you said, "Given the infiniteness of the universe, and the fact we can't cover the whole thing in any given lifetime, it's egotistical to proclaim there's NO GOD, or some such being of similar importance." Well, I am egotistical (why shouldn't I be?) and I don't see why I shouldn't explain my side of the argument.

Lastly, while the universe is infinite, there are certain rules and laws that we can observe and make conclusions from. I've never been to Antarctica, but I know that it cannot be solid plutonium, because if it was, we would have all died long ago from radioactivity. You don't have to cover the entire expanse of the universe to draw conclusions about it.

 

[Deep Dish]

I routinely say "My god"!, "OMG!", "OMFG!", "Holy sh-t!" As an atheist, I probably say "god" more often than god itself. So, yes, saying "god" isn't necessarily religious. :crackup:

On a serious note, however, talking about god is intrinsically religious. You might squirm your semantics that you're not talking about a specific version you're talking about... but regardless.

 

[dannowillbookem]

we made god, not the other way around.

 

[Nighthawk]

If God knows everything, he can't watch a movie or read a book because He knows the ending already.

 

[Brian20o2]

If God knows everything, he can't watch a movie or read a book because He knows the ending already.

Wow! Im glad I'm not god.

 

[Helter Skelter]

Well I started the thread that got closed. So let me elaborate.

My father died six months ago so I've been doing a lot of thinking about life and death. So naturally your also going to be thinking about God and the universe. Trying to make sense of my life and those I have loved.

Is God about religion? I suppose that's a "gray area"

In my mind I was thinking more science. Because that makes more sense to me. But everybody's different.

I went to the Darwin exhibit at the Museum of Natural History in NYC recently and it got me thinking about what life is all about and how we got here.

Science believes the Universe was created by the "Big Bang" Others believe God created the universe.

My thoughts were if in fact God created the universe what did "God do before then"

If God created the universe God must have existed in some form prior to that, whether it be a spirit or some other unknown form. What was God doing before the universe was made?

Could be a question for Carl Sagan

 

[SELF-MASTERY]

making other universes??

 

[Helter Skelter]

making other universes??

The American Hertitage dictionary defines "universe"
as "All existing things regarded as a collective entity"

There can only be one universe as it means "everything"

Unlike solar systems of which their are many.

If you created everything what would have been God's role or meaning prior to creating everything.

Since it seems to be well established the universe did have a beginning.

 

[Nocturnal]

Actually, when you start getting into theories about higher dimensions, multiple universes can co-exist. http://www.tenthdimension.com/flash2.php

If we were points on a line, the line might be analagous to our universe... every "thing" (in terms of points, which is what our dimension consists of) that exists (on the line). Then you could have multiple lines which make up the next dimension of a plane.

 

[Helter Skelter]

Actually, when you start getting into theories about higher dimensions, multiple universes can co-exist. http://www.tenthdimension.com/flash2.php

If we were points on a line, the line might be analagous to our universe... every "thing" (in terms of points, which is what our dimension consists of) that exists (on the line). Then you could have multiple lines which make up the next dimension of a plane.

Anybody can write a book, but a theory in the scientific community has to be tested and peer reviewed to be considered true.

The theory of evolution, for example is a well established theory in science. The National Academy of Sciences states "evolution is the central unifying concept of biology"
NAS is considered the United States most presitigous science organization with over 190 Nobel prize winners as members.

Are their well respected large associations in science that have concluded their is more than one universe?

From my readings, universe has always included all things. Otherwise, it wouldn't fit the definition of universe.

It would be like saying the definition of "everything" no longer means everything.

 

[Nighthawk]

The multiverse is shaped like a snowflake. I wrote a book about it once. Or a million times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse_(science)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation