|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 9:22 pm
Arcane_Ninja24 Captain_Shinzo God Emperor Akhenaton Ledon Kester But there also isn't enough to go against him either. That means anyone who claims to know is a moron. You have a point there. There is no evidence to prove Atheism wrong and there is no evidence to prove a god is existent or not. However, there are theories proving the universe was created without a god. Hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm.......................................................... and there are theories proving god exists, thats the problem with theories. but... if god does exists (not saying i believe) and he is all powerful, he would opperate on an alternate plane of existence beyond our comprehension, he could drastically change the world from flat to round and then recreate all evidence and memories of anyone on the world without any conciquence. he could do anything, hell science could be just another form of god, you have faith in science you have faith in him. every attempt science makes at proving him wrong could just be proving him right even more. what if science is the modern name and new form of god? we look up to science we look up to god, if god is everything then would he not be that which goes against him as well? just a thought. Science is focused on disproving God's existance when they should be trying to prove. They can't test His existance therefore they write it off. Just as they should write evolution off because they can't test it. Anyone witness evolution happen? Can you experiment with evolution? Evolutionists are preachers too. They're just archeologist noticing trends that occured then but it isn't happening now. Just as proof of God is written then but isn't really happening now. Unless you consider all the prophecies coming true. Evolution has no prophecies and you can't measure it. Thus evolution as a science is like creationisim as a science. I am a spiritual person so my concerns are with spiritual happenings. I won't proclaim evolution as false I just don't care for it since it isn't a science you can test and measure in real time.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 9:48 pm
And I quote the song "Science" by System of a Down
"Science fails to recognise the single most
potent element of human existence
letting the reigns go to the unfolding
is faith, faith, faith, faith"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 10:46 pm
Whether or not a deity (or deities) of any sort exists is up for each person to determine. Ultimately, it's your viewpoint that determines whether or not something like that exists, because it's inherently beyond proof or disproof. Just make up your own goddamn mind, and ******** everyone else. Whatever religion you choose, whatever divinity you choose to believe or disbelieve in, is ultimately your choice and that's all.
For some people, life and the universe itself is evidence of God - for others, it isn't. Why give two ******** what someone else believes? Does it really affect what you believe? Unless someone is trying to force their beliefs on you, of course - otherwise, just worry about your own beliefs.
Also, science as a discipline has nothing to do with God, and does not seek to prove or disprove the existence of such an entity or entities. Science seeks to understand the universe, and to attempt to accurately measure, calculate, and and test the physical world as we know it. It literally has nothing to do with religion except when people (atheists, creationists, etc) choose to twist it into that view.
Who is "they" in science? Science isn't a person, it's a practice, a methodology. How people choose to use it is at their own discretion. Don't label the viewpoints of some people to an entire practice or concept. It's an ignorant thing to do, and demeans the accuser as much as the accused.
Also, Azkeel, you seem to have a veritable hard-on for trying to attack evolution. I'm not a particular proponent of evolution, but fyi, you can observe evolution. We have over the past hundred years or so, see; microbiology and antibiotics. Bacteria has adapted - evolved - to become immune to antibiotics.
On topic, I choose to believe that there is some sort of creator figure. Albeit, my beliefs run very close to the border of general agnosticism, but the belief is there. But I feel no need to get into much more detail than that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:01 am
The Darth Vizzle Whether or not a deity (or deities) of any sort exists is up for each person to determine. Ultimately, it's your viewpoint that determines whether or not something like that exists, because it's inherently beyond proof or disproof. Just make up your own goddamn mind, and ******** everyone else. Whatever religion you choose, whatever divinity you choose to believe or disbelieve in, is ultimately your choice and that's all. For some people, life and the universe itself is evidence of God - for others, it isn't. Why give two ******** what someone else believes? Does it really affect what you believe? Unless someone is trying to force their beliefs on you, of course - otherwise, just worry about your own beliefs. Also, science as a discipline has nothing to do with God, and does not seek to prove or disprove the existence of such an entity or entities. Science seeks to understand the universe, and to attempt to accurately measure, calculate, and and test the physical world as we know it. It literally has nothing to do with religion except when people (atheists, creationists, etc) choose to twist it into that view. Who is "they" in science? Science isn't a person, it's a practice, a methodology. How people choose to use it is at their own discretion. Don't label the viewpoints of some people to an entire practice or concept. It's an ignorant thing to do, and demeans the accuser as much as the accused. Also, Azkeel, you seem to have a veritable hard-on for trying to attack evolution. I'm not a particular proponent of evolution, but fyi, you can observe evolution. We have over the past hundred years or so, see; microbiology and antibiotics. Bacteria has adapted - evolved - to become immune to antibiotics. On topic, I choose to believe that there is some sort of creator figure. Albeit, my beliefs run very close to the border of general agnosticism, but the belief is there. But I feel no need to get into much more detail than that. Yes I love to attack evolution. And that evolution hasn't been physically observed happening it just happens. They don't see the adaptations happen in real time. (Greatest part of my attacks on evolution is I will also admit it can be a truth and a middle ground with creationisim, I see no reason for them to be seperate but I don't consider it a science.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 6:36 am
The Darth Vizzle Whether or not a deity (or deities) of any sort exists is up for each person to determine. Ultimately, it's your viewpoint that determines whether or not something like that exists, because it's inherently beyond proof or disproof. Just make up your own goddamn mind, and ******** everyone else. Whatever religion you choose, whatever divinity you choose to believe or disbelieve in, is ultimately your choice and that's all. For some people, life and the universe itself is evidence of God - for others, it isn't. Why give two ******** what someone else believes? Does it really affect what you believe? Unless someone is trying to force their beliefs on you, of course - otherwise, just worry about your own beliefs. Also, science as a discipline has nothing to do with God, and does not seek to prove or disprove the existence of such an entity or entities. Science seeks to understand the universe, and to attempt to accurately measure, calculate, and and test the physical world as we know it. It literally has nothing to do with religion except when people (atheists, creationists, etc) choose to twist it into that view. Who is "they" in science? Science isn't a person, it's a practice, a methodology. How people choose to use it is at their own discretion. Don't label the viewpoints of some people to an entire practice or concept. It's an ignorant thing to do, and demeans the accuser as much as the accused. On topic, I choose to believe that there is some sort of creator figure. Albeit, my beliefs run very close to the border of general agnosticism, but the belief is there. But I feel no need to get into much more detail than that. ^this^ except for that last part. I believe there is some sort of creator figure, but nowhere close to agnosticism.... Also, Darth Vizzle, you seem to have grouped the two types of evolution together. While it's true you can observe microevolution, it has never been verifiably proven that macroevolution has occurred at some point in the past, or continues to do so. Micro evolution, (that a certain species can change a few genes to adapt and survive more effectively) has happened on numerous occasions. Unfortunately, that adaptation is still only within a certain species. Bacteria evolving to become immune to an antibiotic is still bacteria, albeit of a certain strain. There hasn't been an occasion where Macroevolution (an organism/species changing from one species into another species/family/phylum/kingdom) has occurred; bacteria that evolves is still a bacteria, it hasn't suddenly become a virus or even some other organism altogether.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 9:10 am
Also on that note you can reason humans do the same thing. As bacteria become immune to anti-biotics humans become tollerant of let's say alcohol and even adapt to having a blood alcohol level that is constant. And I'll quote the Princess Bride, Westley: "They were both poisoned. I spent the last few years building up an immunity to iocane powder"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 1:34 pm
Azkeel Captain_Shinzo Azkeel God Emperor Akhenaton Ledon Kester But there also isn't enough to go against him either. That means anyone who claims to know is a moron. And what of those with personal proof? Personal proof should stay personal. You saw God in your kitchen and speak to you? That's awesome. However, I haven't. Till then, I cease to believe. But to proclaim anyone a moron for their knowledge is ignorant. I agree with you, but I never disagreed with you on this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 1:38 pm
Azkeel Arcane_Ninja24 Captain_Shinzo God Emperor Akhenaton Ledon Kester But there also isn't enough to go against him either. That means anyone who claims to know is a moron. You have a point there. There is no evidence to prove Atheism wrong and there is no evidence to prove a god is existent or not. However, there are theories proving the universe was created without a god. Hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm.......................................................... and there are theories proving god exists, thats the problem with theories. but... if god does exists (not saying i believe) and he is all powerful, he would opperate on an alternate plane of existence beyond our comprehension, he could drastically change the world from flat to round and then recreate all evidence and memories of anyone on the world without any conciquence. he could do anything, hell science could be just another form of god, you have faith in science you have faith in him. every attempt science makes at proving him wrong could just be proving him right even more. what if science is the modern name and new form of god? we look up to science we look up to god, if god is everything then would he not be that which goes against him as well? just a thought. Science is focused on disproving God's existance when they should be trying to prove. They can't test His existance therefore they write it off. Just as they should write evolution off because they can't test it. Anyone witness evolution happen? Can you experiment with evolution? Evolutionists are preachers too. They're just archeologist noticing trends that occured then but it isn't happening now. Just as proof of God is written then but isn't really happening now. Unless you consider all the prophecies coming true. Evolution has no prophecies and you can't measure it. Thus evolution as a science is like creationisim as a science. I am a spiritual person so my concerns are with spiritual happenings. I won't proclaim evolution as false I just don't care for it since it isn't a science you can test and measure in real time. No I can't agree with you on this because that notion is just absurd. You're implying that science must be physically proven within the NOW. However, presence and future tenses are perfect for proving evolution. Prehistoric fossils, adaptation, it's all there and it obviously proves evolution to be true. It IS a fact, and saying it's just a theory that can't be proven is pretty ignorant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 1:43 pm
Arcane_Ninja24 Captain_Shinzo God Emperor Akhenaton Ledon Kester But there also isn't enough to go against him either. That means anyone who claims to know is a moron. You have a point there. There is no evidence to prove Atheism wrong and there is no evidence to prove a god is existent or not. However, there are theories proving the universe was created without a god. Hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm.......................................................... and there are theories proving god exists, thats the problem with theories. but... if god does exists (not saying i believe) and he is all powerful, he would opperate on an alternate plane of existence beyond our comprehension, he could drastically change the world from flat to round and then recreate all evidence and memories of anyone on the world without any conciquence. he could do anything, hell science could be just another form of god, you have faith in science you have faith in him. every attempt science makes at proving him wrong could just be proving him right even more. what if science is the modern name and new form of god? we look up to science we look up to god, if god is everything then would he not be that which goes against him as well? just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:28 pm
Captain_Shinzo Azkeel Arcane_Ninja24 Captain_Shinzo God Emperor Akhenaton Ledon Kester But there also isn't enough to go against him either. That means anyone who claims to know is a moron. You have a point there. There is no evidence to prove Atheism wrong and there is no evidence to prove a god is existent or not. However, there are theories proving the universe was created without a god. Hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm.......................................................... and there are theories proving god exists, thats the problem with theories. but... if god does exists (not saying i believe) and he is all powerful, he would opperate on an alternate plane of existence beyond our comprehension, he could drastically change the world from flat to round and then recreate all evidence and memories of anyone on the world without any conciquence. he could do anything, hell science could be just another form of god, you have faith in science you have faith in him. every attempt science makes at proving him wrong could just be proving him right even more. what if science is the modern name and new form of god? we look up to science we look up to god, if god is everything then would he not be that which goes against him as well? just a thought. Science is focused on disproving God's existance when they should be trying to prove. They can't test His existance therefore they write it off. Just as they should write evolution off because they can't test it. Anyone witness evolution happen? Can you experiment with evolution? Evolutionists are preachers too. They're just archeologist noticing trends that occured then but it isn't happening now. Just as proof of God is written then but isn't really happening now. Unless you consider all the prophecies coming true. Evolution has no prophecies and you can't measure it. Thus evolution as a science is like creationisim as a science. I am a spiritual person so my concerns are with spiritual happenings. I won't proclaim evolution as false I just don't care for it since it isn't a science you can test and measure in real time. No I can't agree with you on this because that notion is just absurd. You're implying that science must be physically proven within the NOW. However, presence and future tenses are perfect for proving evolution. Prehistoric fossils, adaptation, it's all there and it obviously proves evolution to be true. It IS a fact, and saying it's just a theory that can't be proven is pretty ignorant. But it is a theory lol even the scientific community agrees because they have to. It's science! Remember the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol. That is science. Evolution has not been observed at work and cannot even be proved as an on-going process. This is not science.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:54 pm
Azkeel Captain_Shinzo Azkeel Arcane_Ninja24 Captain_Shinzo You have a point there. There is no evidence to prove Atheism wrong and there is no evidence to prove a god is existent or not. However, there are theories proving the universe was created without a god. Hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm.......................................................... and there are theories proving god exists, thats the problem with theories. but... if god does exists (not saying i believe) and he is all powerful, he would opperate on an alternate plane of existence beyond our comprehension, he could drastically change the world from flat to round and then recreate all evidence and memories of anyone on the world without any conciquence. he could do anything, hell science could be just another form of god, you have faith in science you have faith in him. every attempt science makes at proving him wrong could just be proving him right even more. what if science is the modern name and new form of god? we look up to science we look up to god, if god is everything then would he not be that which goes against him as well? just a thought. Science is focused on disproving God's existance when they should be trying to prove. They can't test His existance therefore they write it off. Just as they should write evolution off because they can't test it. Anyone witness evolution happen? Can you experiment with evolution? Evolutionists are preachers too. They're just archeologist noticing trends that occured then but it isn't happening now. Just as proof of God is written then but isn't really happening now. Unless you consider all the prophecies coming true. Evolution has no prophecies and you can't measure it. Thus evolution as a science is like creationisim as a science. I am a spiritual person so my concerns are with spiritual happenings. I won't proclaim evolution as false I just don't care for it since it isn't a science you can test and measure in real time. No I can't agree with you on this because that notion is just absurd. You're implying that science must be physically proven within the NOW. However, presence and future tenses are perfect for proving evolution. Prehistoric fossils, adaptation, it's all there and it obviously proves evolution to be true. It IS a fact, and saying it's just a theory that can't be proven is pretty ignorant. But it is a theory lol even the scientific community agrees because they have to. It's science! Remember the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol. That is science. Evolution has not been observed at work and cannot even be proved as an on-going process. This is not science. I never said it was science. I said it was fact, or atleast close to becoming fact. and, in defense, the only reason it can't be accepted as fact is because the human link is so long, it's almost continuous with always a missing link. Pretty much, it wont be completed for some time if it is going to be completed. So, for all the evidence that evolution has in support of that, the fossils and datings, all of that should be tossed because it can't be proven? ( It can, but it hasn't yet. )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 3:02 pm
Captain_Shinzo Azkeel Captain_Shinzo Azkeel Arcane_Ninja24 Captain_Shinzo You have a point there. There is no evidence to prove Atheism wrong and there is no evidence to prove a god is existent or not. However, there are theories proving the universe was created without a god. Hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmm.......................................................... and there are theories proving god exists, thats the problem with theories. but... if god does exists (not saying i believe) and he is all powerful, he would opperate on an alternate plane of existence beyond our comprehension, he could drastically change the world from flat to round and then recreate all evidence and memories of anyone on the world without any conciquence. he could do anything, hell science could be just another form of god, you have faith in science you have faith in him. every attempt science makes at proving him wrong could just be proving him right even more. what if science is the modern name and new form of god? we look up to science we look up to god, if god is everything then would he not be that which goes against him as well? just a thought. Science is focused on disproving God's existance when they should be trying to prove. They can't test His existance therefore they write it off. Just as they should write evolution off because they can't test it. Anyone witness evolution happen? Can you experiment with evolution? Evolutionists are preachers too. They're just archeologist noticing trends that occured then but it isn't happening now. Just as proof of God is written then but isn't really happening now. Unless you consider all the prophecies coming true. Evolution has no prophecies and you can't measure it. Thus evolution as a science is like creationisim as a science. I am a spiritual person so my concerns are with spiritual happenings. I won't proclaim evolution as false I just don't care for it since it isn't a science you can test and measure in real time. No I can't agree with you on this because that notion is just absurd. You're implying that science must be physically proven within the NOW. However, presence and future tenses are perfect for proving evolution. Prehistoric fossils, adaptation, it's all there and it obviously proves evolution to be true. It IS a fact, and saying it's just a theory that can't be proven is pretty ignorant. But it is a theory lol even the scientific community agrees because they have to. It's science! Remember the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol. That is science. Evolution has not been observed at work and cannot even be proved as an on-going process. This is not science. I never said it was science. I said it was fact, or atleast close to becoming fact. and, in defense, the only reason it can't be accepted as fact is because the human link is so long, it's almost continuous with always a missing link. Pretty much, it wont be completed for some time if it is going to be completed. So, for all the evidence that evolution has in support of that, the fossils and datings, all of that should be tossed because it can't be proven? ( It can, but it hasn't yet. ) I meant tossed in the same catagory as religion is with science. Wouldn't you suspect there would be tons of fossils of these links to humans? Not just a few for each "Phase" There are tons of fossils for dinosaurs of each spieces not just one set for each creature. You know the human race does have deformities and anomolies in it. All kinds of shapes sizes and bone structures. In fact we've been getting larger since we began history but we don't consider these humans that were smaller as a different species. The average height has been increasing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 3:49 pm
Azkeel And I quote the song "Science" by System of a Down "Science fails to recognise the single most potent element of human existence letting the reigns go to the unfolding is faith, faith, faith, faith" And yet faith has no basis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 3:58 pm
Kyramud ^this^ except for that last part. I believe there is some sort of creator figure, but nowhere close to agnosticism.... Also, Darth Vizzle, you seem to have grouped the two types of evolution together. While it's true you can observe microevolution, it has never been verifiably proven that macroevolution has occurred at some point in the past, or continues to do so. Micro evolution, (that a certain species can change a few genes to adapt and survive more effectively) has happened on numerous occasions. Unfortunately, that adaptation is still only within a certain species. Bacteria evolving to become immune to an antibiotic is still bacteria, albeit of a certain strain. There hasn't been an occasion where Macroevolution (an organism/species changing from one species into another species/family/phylum/kingdom) has occurred; bacteria that evolves is still a bacteria, it hasn't suddenly become a virus or even some other organism altogether. I'm well aware of the difference between micro and macro evolution; I've had to explain it in a previous thread in this guild. Microevolution and macroevolution are, obviously, facets of evolution. So yes, I did group them together - under the term evolution. Azkeel was talking about evolution in general, neither macro nor micro. Microevolution is still evolution, so if it happens, then evolution happens on some level, which was my point. Azkeel: If you want to attack it, perhaps you should build a better argument. Also, microevolution is physically observable through animal breeding, and I'm sure you could find scientific journals where they've watched bacteria adapt in a petri dish to outside stimuli such as antibiotics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 05, 2011 5:33 pm
Captain_Shinzo Ledon Kester Captain_Shinzo Ledon Kester Captain_Shinzo I don't believe in God. Not enough evidence to support his existence. Just theories and legends. But there also isn't enough to go against him either. You must always keep an open mind. What if we find out that God was just roaming the planet, causing havoc and making up stories to see how we'd react? What if Heaven and Hell are just states of mind that come as a reward for passing this test they call Life? There is a reason why they say "God works in mysterious ways". We can't be sure of anything, but we can be sure that nothing just happens. There's always a reason. Heck even God's existence could of been because of reason, but that would create an infinite loop of self-destruction that I'm sure we don't wanna know about. It's not impossible for a god or godly force to exist. If we can think of, describe, or imagine it, it's always possible through some means. The problem is how simple or complicated it is before it becomes possible. Life is a game with infinite combinations of characters, alliances, and paths, but who has the controller and who's being controlled? Who is the player and who is just a character?
With that said, your last paragraph is a tad bit wrong. Not everything you can imagine is possible. It doesn't work that way. For example, if I throw a normal ball on earth, I want it to never land. However, that will never happen due to physics. But then again, I just imagined that. Who would've thought?
I will admit, we can do MANY THINGS with are imaginations and try to make them true. However, the possibility of making every one of those things possibly just couldn't work.
Breaking it all down, you are right. There isn't enough evidence to disprove God. However, to most people, the fact that there isn't any valuable evidence proving God exists and the fact that most people don't find it sensible just makes people like me not want to believe. My last paragraph is truth. If you want the ball to never land, you can either tie it to something or create a powerful fan that keeps it up in the air. This is why I said it all depends on how complicated it is before it becomes possible. And those same reasonable theories against His existence never look at how what they prove never fits with the universe as a whole. It's like a rubix cube. Just because one side is completed, it doesn't mean you're done. It's only sensible to those who wish to know that there is a reason for everything and that death isn't just the end. In that case why not live life to fullest and not care about what others say? It won't change the outcome in the end. The idea of a god existing is for moral support and to keep order and control. Whether they exist or not, there will always be those who fear the invoking of their wrath and will do what they are told.
That doesn't make sense. They have theories that prove the universe AS a whole, it's just that the theories can't be completed yet. For example, the reason the Big Bang theory isn't complete is because their particle accelerators aren't working efficiently to reach a matching power to prove it's existence. However, they are getting somewhere. The fact there are theories out with increasingly good result with god having no kind of evidence what-so-ever kinda proves something here.
First off, if it's only sensible to those people, doesn't that make them delusional? Why believe in something that doesn't make sense to them and only comforts them with, personally, and false hope? The only thing that does is constantly leaves their care in something that doesn't exist which could have been valuable time helping them live longer. Then, when it's time to go, it's time to go.
As for why care what other people say, you shouldn't. If you don't care about other people's opinions, don't mess around with those people on such topic. However, because of our society, religion will never become a private thing because religion is the most public personal belief there is. Look around and you can easily see one's beliefs is mostly used to describe them, and is used in almost all kinds of media today.
Like, when I say Tom Cruise, do you first think ACTOR, or Scientologist?
( I know scientology is only a belief and not a religion but it's still involved.)
God isn't always used to keep order and moral support. Some people get that just by living life. Order? The law. Moral support? Living a normal, care-free life.
So exactly what are you getting at? Are you trying to say there is no real way to prove a god and it's really just used to make people feel better? Because it's REALLY sounding like that. In your vision it's not visible, it can still be there but if you wish to accomplish this as you see it, then it becomes more complicated but not impossible. We don't know the extent of the mind and the usage of the brain. Everything is based on inferences. Anything is possible if you're willing to fight for it. Nothing says it's not possible, therefore until then it is possible by some means. The point was merely to accomplish the main subject, if you wish to achieve more than that, there is more work to be done. Don't be limited to that which you are taught and shown. Even that is a theory or law that was once a theory that isn't entirely true, only true by what we can find. Even now laws and theories are being changed as more is being discovered. Nothing is absolute. If there can be antimatter, there can possibly be anti-gravity out there some where. The big bang happened, that I'm positive of, but why did it happen? This is the question of the neo-religious fighter. You must attack all sides to become absolute-like, but you can never become absolute. False hope gives birth to true hope and morals that define order in our chaotic society. If there was no afterlife, no god, no force that judges good and evil, why care? Why not live life to the fullest and do whatever you want? Rape a few people here. Kill a thousand there. Steal millions of dollars all over. The only thing that stops them are morals, and morals are being upheld by the follower and their beliefs. A god exists within these beliefs as one form or many. Even if God doesn't exist, what He stands for does, therefore requiring false hope to continue this standpoint. God is needed always to hold these concepts in form, but His existence has helped birthed it, possibly even giving that last push needed to create a foundation. No matter what, people will believe there is a reason to do good other than to help others because when you get deep down into the human mind and heart, you find a darkness that overcomes all good that do and crafts monsters or true humans. They are true because they are what they truly are when all truth has been established and they change accordingly. Oh and when you say Tom Cruise, I think of both the actor and Scientology. The fact that Scientology is possible and that the actor is a good damn actor, I must admit with the deepest truth. Glad he's back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
