Prove God Exists - Act Three

[Murrin]

Just a small point:

I beleive mathematics is an inherent facet of the universe.

Mathematics is purely human. It's something for us to compare the universe with, not something that governs it.
Actually, this applies to all the scientific 'evidence' in this thread - science is an art of approximation. We find a mathematical model that fits that real universe as closely as possible. For all we know, we could have gotten it completely wrong, but we don't realise it because the model fits almost as well as the 'real' explanation would.



A small theological point brought to mind by some of the recent posts - God made man in His image. Man is flawed. Is God perfect? Either God is as flawed as man (because man is an accurate image), or God was unable to make an accurate image of himself (in which case he is not perfect).

 

[polymath]

Is your second name 'Buchstansagar'?

 

[Phydeaux]

Of course the universe could just spontaneously exist. It's no less ridiculous than a God spontaneously existing and creating the universe, why creat a third party for no reason?

Or would that be a second party?

I don't know... I'll shut up now. =(

God isn't part of our law. He can come from nowhere.

 

[~Corsair#01~]

@FL2-
If you think true Christianity is the word of God without mans interference, then you must ignore the entire Bible as it was written by men, and was not dictated directly by God. None of the religious books were- they were by men who said they were acting in God's name- there is no proof if they are or are not, so I judge by the odds, the history of Christianity, the evidence either way (such as it is) etc., whether it is ture- I decided it is not.
Religious Fundamentalism stems from taking holy books too literally, especially since the Books were wrote in a rather barbaric time in the past, and many of the things mentioned would not be tolerated today, so the trick is, essentially to choose what part of the Bible to listen to, which even you yourself are guilty of- you choose yourself what you take to be literal or metaphoric, despite the fact that the very people who wrote the Bible often believed many things, such as the Garden of Eden to be literal. Then again, some didn't. Religious people simply seem to pick and choose what parts suit them.

 

[Phydeaux]

A small theological point brought to mind by some of the recent posts - God made man in His image. Man is flawed. Is God perfect? Either God is as flawed as man (because man is an accurate image), or God was unable to make an accurate image of himself (in which case he is not perfect).

I don't think He ment as in are body looks like Him. I think He ment as in the spiritual. God doesn't have a body (unless you count Jesus), and before they sined bad things didn't happen, it was more like Heaven.

 

[~Corsair#01~]

You see- this is what I'm talking about- the Bible doesn't give a strong enough view, and thus puts no strong boundaries between is literal and metaphorical- this is why Christianity is so divided. This is why all definitions have absolutely no grounds on which to say they are telling the truth, since even if the Bible was true, the faiths are variations on Bible themes and thus would be false.

EDIT- Oh ye Gods I've turned into FL2.

 

[Phydeaux]

@FL2-
If you think true Christianity is the word of God without mans interference, then you must ignore the entire Bible as it was written by men, and was not dictated directly by God. None of the religious books were- they were by men who said they were acting in God's name- there is no proof if they are or are not, so I judge by the odds, the history of Christianity, the evidence either way (such as it is) etc., whether it is ture- I decided it is not.

Some of them where told to be put there by God, some where things that God did, some where things that they learned from God, and I know of one that God did for Him self, the 10 commandments. Although God didn't come down to earth and wright most of these things for Him self, they where things that where coming from the heart of God, and that's all that matters.

Religious Fundamentalism stems from taking holy books too literally, especially since the Books were wrote in a rather barbaric time in the past, and many of the things mentioned would not be tolerated today, so the trick is, essentially to choose what part of the Bible to listen to, which even you yourself are guilty of- you choose yourself what you take to be literal or metaphoric, despite the fact that the very people who wrote the Bible often believed many things, such as the Garden of Eden to be literal. Then again, some didn't. Religious people simply seem to pick and choose what parts suit them.

I don't think that we should do this. People do this because, they don't want to do things to show love to God, or they don't understand it. Most people I know believe all of the bible.

 

[Phydeaux]

You see- this is what I'm talking about- the Bible doesn't give a strong enough view, and thus puts no strong boundaries between is literal and metaphorical- this is why Christianity is so divided. This is why all definitions have absolutely no grounds on which to say they are telling the truth, since even if the Bible was true, the faiths are variations on Bible themes and thus would be false.

EDIT- Oh ye Gods I've turned into FL2.

It doesn't even really matter, just as long as they find God. But I do think that they believe in all of the bible and see what God teachs them about it. The closer you get to God the more you understand what He means.

 

[~Corsair#01~]

"I don't think that we should do this. People do this because, they don't want to do things to show love to God, or they don't understand it. Most people I know believe all of the bible."

WTH? It has nothing to with showing love to God! I was just saying that it is utterly impossible to truly say what parts are literal and which are metaphor!

 

[Phydeaux]

"I don't think that we should do this. People do this because, they don't want to do things to show love to God, or they don't understand it. Most people I know believe all of the bible."

WTH? It has nothing to with showing love to God! I was just saying that it is utterly impossible to truly say what parts are literal and which are metaphor!

I was talking about the part when you said that people don't take every thing in the Bible literal. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that.

 

[nihilistic]

Just a small point:

Mathematics is purely human.

Umm ... no. There is nothing in mathematics that correlates to anything that is uniquely human, except for the fact that humans are the only species that we know of capable of the level of abstract thought required to process mathematics.

Mathematics itself though, is based solely on logic, and is valid wherever logic is valid, wherever thought is logical, regardless of whether or not humans exist, and certainly regardless of whether or not certain human-invented deities existed.

 

[Phydeaux]

Umm ... no. There is nothing in mathematics that correlates to anything that is uniquely human, except for the fact that humans are the only species that we know of capable of the level of abstract thought required to process mathematics.

Mathematics itself though, is based solely on logic, and is valid wherever logic is valid, wherever thought is logical, regardless of whether or not humans exist, and certainly regardless of whether or not certain human-invented deities existed.

But then again logic is human.

 

[CivCube]

But then again logic is human.

If that were true, physics would be a purely human idea. A single "Prove Gravity Exists" thread would have us all floating in mid-air!

Logic and interpretation of logic must be defined....

 

[Iggy]

But then again logic is human.

God, logic and mathematics just do not add up. Religion defies logic, it relies on a perception by an individual or as past of a collective belief group in the unprovable. It would be interesting to determine if there are common factors of chemical, mental, emotional, or circumstantial events in those who genuinely believe in God(s) and those who genuinely do not.

 

[Phydeaux]

If that were true, physics would be a purely human idea. A single "Prove Gravity Exists" thread would have us all floating in mid-air!

Logic and interpretation of logic must be defined....

Isn't logic just reasoning with the human mind?

 

[Phydeaux]

God, logic and mathematics just do not add up. Religion defies logic, it relies on a perception by an individual or as past of a collective belief group in the unprovable. It would be interesting to determine if there are common factors of chemical, mental, emotional, or circumstantial events in those who genuinely believe in God(s) and those who genuinely do not.

Don't you use logic to reason if there is a God or not? Like things had to be created so there must be a creator?

 

[CivCube]

Isn't logic just reasoning with the human mind?

The study of the principles of reasoning, especially of the structure of propositions as distinguished from their content and of method and validity in deductive reasoning.

Not necessarily. Even chimps have some form of logic skills.

Edit: Sidetracked myself...yes, you are right in that logic is not the workings of nature.

 

[~Corsair#01~]

Why must there be a creator? Our world was created from swirling matter- why do you believe that whatever started it all must be an intelligent and alive creature?

 

[nihilistic]

But then again logic is human.

Not really, see below:

Isn't logic just reasoning with the human mind?

The human mind is capable of logic. Well, most human minds are capable of logic. Logic, however, isn't distinctly human.

It's like the difference between all sheeps are mammals and all mammals are sheeps.

Don't you use logic to reason if there is a God or not?

Logic is essentially coherent thought. To have a meaningful discussion in anything it is most likely that logic should be used.

Like things had to be created so there must be a creator?

Huh? How did you come up witht he premise that things must have been "created"?

 

[Blasphemous]

I don't think He ment as in are body looks like Him. I think He ment as in the spiritual. God doesn't have a body (unless you count Jesus), and before they sined bad things didn't happen, it was more like Heaven.

Not true.
I happen to have studied the Bible (Old Testament, that is) in its original form - Hebrew - which is the spoken language here in Israel where I was born and raised (and the language in many respects is still very much the same as its ancient form). The specific word used is tzelem. This is from the same root as letzalem - to take a photograph; and tzilum a photograph, or photography. It denotes physical, visual form.
"Lost in translation."


RE: Logic
Logic is a purely human tool, designed to help us understand nature in its true form. It is the structuring of thought in a way that avoids error.
It does not define or affect anything, other than the way that we percieve and understand things.