|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 7:02 am
Friedrich Nietchze put forward the theory that god did exisist and that the big bang was god's death then so on into the big bang theory and universal creation and so on. does anyone have an opinion on this???
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 8:00 am
Seems a bit far-fetched for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 9:51 am
An interesting idea, but I've never put much behind it. It seems a little far fectched to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 11:09 am
It is true that it seems far fetched but it does piss off Jehovah Witnesses and the like. However it is worth bearing some thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 4:41 am
A bigger problem I have with the idea of God is the problem of perfection.
Perfection cannot change, it is static, it is the ultimate state at which an entity can exist. It cannot change. You cannot change from one state to another, and have both of them as perfection. Perfection is an ultimate absolute. It cannot be shared.
And yet... God is a thinking entity? A feeling entity? Thought is nothing but change! You change from one state to another as thoughts are processed. You change from one state to another as decisions are made. So... the ultimate perfection cannot be a thinking entity. It cannot change, so it cannot think. If it cannot think, it cannot love, not freely. It cannot be moral.
It cannot be free. It is a slave, a computer program running in the background. At best God IS the universe. At worst... there is no God.
And creation... the universe cannot be created by such an entity, if it cannot think, or change, it cannot create.
I am speaking of the idea of a perfect, benevolant, loving, thinking god. I... do not think such a being is possible.
Then either Spinoza's god the only realistic possibility for a perfect being, or a non-perfect deity the only possibility.
It was this specific thought that marked my deconversion from Catholicism.
Reading over this it seems a confused mess, but it makes a lot of sense in my head xd
I've never put it in words before though.
But when I was about 15 I was a good little catholic struggling with my faith and my rationalistic approach to life. I read the bible for inspiration, and... nothing I read there helped, much of it disgusted me.
Then i had this thought... which was the final straw, it wasn't instant, but I simply couldn't reconcile belief with it. It is what lead me to agnosticism, then atheism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:50 pm
If God happened to be the universe, the universe itself is ever changing then God would have to change thus not being perfect. For example why change if you're perfect. Argument B would be perfection is obtained by evrlasting adaptation thus staying perfect with the times or something along those lines. But I do find a valid and worthy thought amongsrt your words redem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 3:31 pm
Agreed.
If God is the universe, It's not perfection. But what else can God be?
If a perfect God cannot create a universe, then God, as a creator, cannot be perfect.
What else is there worthy of calling by that name? The God that is the universe? Or a being that far suppasses us, but is not perfect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:12 am
Hmm in ancient times people who could predict the weather by the obvious signs and animals reactions were considered divine, or oracles ect. They were revered because they could tell something that nobody else could for like in the bible Jeseus cured the guy thast couldn't walk was that possibly a dislocation that he happened to know how to back in place??? So God could just be someone or something with an ability that seems divine but later will probably be common knowledge. However I personally think that God would most likly be a being that is more advanced than the human race at present therefore being a god. In addition in terms of god gave life to everything I would think that Akenaten and the Aztec, Mayan and similar civilizations got the right idea worship the sun for it essentially gives life to all so Akenaten the rebel Pharoah worshiped the Aten the sun disc to myself it seems the most plauisible religion in terms of a believable godlike figure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:27 am
If God was perfect, in our considered meaning of the term.
He would not let what is happening, happen.
I don't care what the christians say and give excuses for; because in the accepted meaning he wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:59 pm
I think the problem with the discussion in this thread is that while you all seem very intelligent, when you make conjectures about perfection and God I think you open yourself to error.
Consider this. Can an imperfect mind (people) concieve or understand something perfect (God?) ?
While I have little trouble agreeing with Spinoza on most points before mentioned, at the end of the day I still think that his conclusions are incoherent. They dont resolve. When I would attempt accept his views I feel as if the lense upon the world fogs up. I have an almost subconsious fear that perhaps I am not capable of making diffinitive conclusions about such things. And until I know whether or not that is the case, I dont believe I should rush into factualizing those conclusions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
