^ Fair enough, but how do you think the universe & reality in general came about then?
^ I'm not just talking about morals & the way you treat your neighbors though, I'm talking about god himself. As in, whoever created earth, surely someone must have, right?
And adjl, I don't really think "unbreakable laws of nature" can count as a sentient being, let alone the sentient being that was supposed to have made those very same laws of nature. The creation can't be the creator, that just doesn't make sense.
If we can't even figure out "where" god is or how he operates, how can we ask questions like "where did god come from?"?. If you didn't know me at all, would you ask someone where I came from? Of course not, you'd first have to meet me.
-sentient-
adjective
1. able to perceive or feel things.
Why wouldn't God be sentient? When I used the word Sentient I was just meaning that god surly must be a being capable of thought, like humans.
When I said about the "watching over us" part I was just meaning that surely it there is a god that created this universe he'd be watching over it now & observing it, wouldn't he? Or do you believe he just made it & then immediately moved on to another project?
Really, why would a god have to be sentient in the same way we are?
Personally I think there simply has to be a mind behind this universe. Its just too vast & complex to be random...there simply must be someone behind all this.
Don't know how anyone can not believe in a god. We did elect a god-emperor after all
Personally I think there simply has to be a mind behind this universe. Its just too vast & complex to be random. Whether we as humans are picturing "god" accurately or not is anyone's guess, but there simply must be someone behind all this.
Any mind that could create a universe would have to be more complex than the universe itself. And by your logic a mind that is able to create a universe would be so complex it would have to have a creator. And that creator would have to have a creator, etc, etc.
Logic dictates that something or someone has always existed. Why not draw the line at the Big Bang?
Not surprised at all by the poll results. A lot of the schmucks on here are cynical Millennials who only care about gaming and getting laid.
FourthDimension posted...
Any mind that could create a universe would have to be more complex than the universe itself. And by your logic a mind that is able to create a universe would be so complex it would have to have a creator. And that creator would have to have a creator, etc, etc.
No, because logic dictates there has to be a first creator at some point. Something had to be that first mover that got the universe created.
I can tell you with a high level of certainty that this is not true.
Being hostile like that won't convince the no voters that your other assumption -that there is a god- is worth anything.
Since creators lead to the neverending creators paradox, it's unlikely there is a creator.
Why do you assume that an omnipotent being would be comprehensible to the human mind? That's pretty arrogant.
benbeverfaqs posted...
I can tell you with a high level of certainty that this is not true.
Really? If you're "very certain", then you probably have data. Where is it?
benbeverfaqs posted...
Since creators lead to the neverending creators paradox, it's unlikely there is a creator.
Or maybe the actual first creator is beyond human understanding of paradoxes? Why do you assume that an omnipotent being would be comprehensible to the human mind? That's pretty arrogant.
I agree with this, which is why it's silly (and arrogant) to think it would reward us for being, what is generally considered, morally "good".
Or that it gives a f*** about us at all.
I based my doubts about your assumption on reading other topics
they tend to care about more, or about other things, than just gaming and sexual pleasures.
I can't even comprehend the universe, let alone an entity that created it. Why call me arrogant?
To me, it is you who sounds arrogant with your made up claims.
I never assumed that an omnipotent being would be comprehensible to a human mind
benbeverfaqs posted...
I based my doubts about your assumption on reading other topics
An excellent sample size I'm sure. 10/10 social science.
benbeverfaqs posted...
they tend to care about more, or about other things, than just gaming and sexual pleasures.
Yeah, they also care about the dankest memes.
benbeverfaqs posted...
I can't even comprehend the universe, let alone an entity that created it. Why call me arrogant?
Because you assume that a creator cannot exist because of some paradox. You're implying that a hypothetical creator would have to submit to the law of this paradox which exists according to human logic. This means you're implying that a creator would have to be bound by human logic. It is arrogant to presume that a creator would be subject to human logic.
I didn't even make up these claims. These claims have been around for thousands of years if not more.
benbeverfaqs posted...
I never assumed that an omnipotent being would be comprehensible to a human mind
But you did imply it.
I'm not proving anything, I'm just doubting your claim about cynical hedonistic millennial gamers. For which you, despite my request, did not give any data or proof. I can therefore conclude that you made a nonsense claim.
You are the most cynical of all millennials in this topic.
I never said that a creator cannot exist. In fact I said the opposite, that I'm agnostic. You are the only one making claims, making you the only arrogant one.
What I don't understand is why you are not ok with a complex universe with no creator?
And why you are ok with a complex universe with a (by laws of nature) even more complex creator?
Even if the second one is more complex and more unlikely.
People back then knew nothing about for instance redshift.
