cthia wrote:If God does not Exist
Then "What is the meaning of life" —>
The same as it is if God did exist. Whatever the hell you decide it is. It's your life either way. You decide it's meaning.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
Re: GOD EXISTS | |
---|---|
by gcomeau » Sun Jun 07, 2015 5:06 pm | |
gcomeau
Posts: 2747
|
The same as it is if God did exist. Whatever the hell you decide it is. It's your life either way. You decide it's meaning. |
Top |
Re: GOD EXISTS | |
---|---|
by gcomeau » Sun Jun 07, 2015 5:17 pm | |
gcomeau
Posts: 2747
|
Is this the kind of brilliant application of statistics and probability you employ in your very advanced scientific research too? Because boy would I love to be a fly on the wall of someone doing peer review on any paper you submit if so... Come on, be honest... are you just trolling us all? |
Top |
Re: GOD EXISTS | |
---|---|
by cthia » Sun Jun 07, 2015 5:54 pm | |
cthia
Posts: 14951
|
It is obvious that Satan exists too. And alive and well.
Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense |
Top |
Re: GOD EXISTS | |
---|---|
by gcomeau » Sun Jun 07, 2015 6:37 pm | |
gcomeau
Posts: 2747
|
Well sure, someone had to plant all those fossils... and I've been informed multiple times that's who it was... |
Top |
Re: GOD EXISTS | |
---|---|
by cthia » Sun Jun 07, 2015 6:49 pm | |
cthia
Posts: 14951
|
I don't know how old you are. But you come across as a child. If you are an adult, then your rudeness is magnified. If you cannot discern the difference between inspiration and formal theory, should we suffer for it? The God that I believe in believes in free will. If there is a God, you have free will. If there isn't, you still have free will. You are free to believe in God or not. You are free to turn on your computer or not. To log onto the forum or not. You are even free to steer clear of a thread discussing a subject that offends you. One in which you disagree to the point that you are embarrassing yourself with rudeness and uncouth exchanges. There are many other threads. You don't think God exists and you're coming very close to calling a poster a liar. I resent that, although you have shown that you're not capable of more. You do not know me at all. If this thread brings that out of you, why do you not just ignore it? Are you bored? Nothing else to do? If I am a "crank" as it were, then CERN will discern it for themselves, lest you think they're crackpots as well. They don't particularly give me a vibe that they're inept. And before they accept a paper for publishing, qualifying physics in a formal fashion must be submitted. Besides, I visited CERN as a guest of my young niece who herself was invited to visit. During our three day stay, I was approached because I taught my niece from the day that I snipped her cord. Actually, I was too busy to accept. My sister and niece prodded me. My pet project takes much of my time. An unprecedented CAS. So you see, your opinion means absolutely nothing to me, so stop embarrassing yourself. An intelligent and decent conversation is obviously something you're not capable of. Visit a church, that which you abhor. Your prescription isn't working. You've made your point. You do not believe that God Exists. Okay, we get it. Stop showing us that Satan does. Don't worry, all of my physics will be presented for my peers to review. And even you. (If you can follow the physics) And you'll be free to shoot as many holes in it as you can. I welcome it. That is one reason papers are submitted. And even if the physics is incorrect, perhaps others will draw inspiration. You do know that that is how it works don't you? Am I expecting too much of you? Now. I am busy. Please annoy someone else. You will be ignored. Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense |
Top |
Re: GOD EXISTS | |
---|---|
by PeterZ » Sun Jun 07, 2015 10:50 pm | |
PeterZ
Posts: 6432
|
Sorry but no. The absence of proof means that His existence is possible. In that circumstance the universe is God's creation and the fundamental laws are a product of God's mind. Your proof doesn't work in that circumstance and as so is not a proof. |
Top |
Re: GOD EXISTS | |
---|---|
by Daryl » Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:24 am | |
Daryl
Posts: 3564
|
I know that I'm wasting my keyboard time here, as I've asked this question before and not received a direct reply.
Accepting for a moment your proposal that a supreme being exists, then how are you all so sure that it is male, singular/trilogy, and best described by your christian mythology? Could it be asexual and/or multiple or something else altogether? To my mind it seems extremely provincial to say that out of all the possible beings on quadrillions of solar systems their creator appears to be best depicted as a WASP alpha male human. Suits me I suppose, as I am a large bearded senior human male who does tend to be bossy, so a good example to emulate. "The absence of proof means that His existence is possible. In that circumstance the universe is God's creation and the fundamental laws are a product of God's mind." |
Top |
Re: GOD EXISTS | |
---|---|
by Annachie » Mon Jun 08, 2015 2:07 am | |
Annachie
Posts: 3099
|
Politically?[/quote] Yes. It was most interesting reading. Down here a candidate for the lower house did actually die on election day. They declared it null and void and had a by election later. (Other elections could be different of course)
Politically?[/quote] Yes. It was most interesting reading. Down here a candidate for the lower house did Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ still not dead. |
Top |
Re: GOD EXISTS | |
---|---|
by MAD-4A » Mon Jun 08, 2015 3:45 am | |
MAD-4A
Posts: 719
|
1st) "HOLY SYNTAX BATMAN" 7 pages - lost track... anyway
To be fair, I do not doubt cthia got the figures from some source & think the reason for this whole "7"s in the list is because of the first point; the 7 day week, didn't bother to look them up but don't doubt them being listed somewhere, A) (assuming so) these were likely estimated average days and rounded to nearest weeks (1wk 2wks etc...). then listed by this estimate of days (call it sig-fig) which accounts for the multiple of 7s & does not warrant the outburst [/quote] who basically called cthia a "lair" because his source disagreed. & B) as for the validity of the source, that just goes back to my point of being willing to take every "science" book as "fact" on faith even though many have been PROVEN wrong by later "updates", but not being willing to extend the same courtesy to other text because they are labeled as "religious"? That seems extremely narrow minded. "The E" did you go out and test each of these figures yourself with multiple test subjects for each statistic? Or did you just look them up from your own source & take it on faith that YOUR source was the correct one? If so then I think you owe "cthia" an apology (unless already done & buried in the other 5 pages ) for effectively calling them a liar without testing for yourself & personally verifying the data. If you can't let others take text on "faith" then you have no right taking any on faith yourself. -
Almost only counts in Horseshoes and Nuclear Weapons. I almost got the Hand-Grenade out the window does not count. |
Top |
Re: GOD EXISTS | |
---|---|
by Zakharra » Mon Jun 08, 2015 3:48 am | |
Zakharra
Posts: 619
|
No. You are the one assuming that there are only two candidates. God and science. You cannot prove the first exists scientifically and the lack of proof does not mean there is a god either. You've said it is more or less impossible to scientifically prove god exists, yet you also say that you can prove that god -must- exist. So far though I have not seen any proof, just a claim made by you with the assumption that god -must- be one of the candidates and this assumption: There are two and only two inherent possibilities. 1 God is responsible. 2 God is not. God is inherently dealt into the ultimate question. Only God (as a living entity) has a 50/50 chance. Since God is the only living being in the running then probability jumps to 100 %. .. is just that. An assumption by -you-. There is no proof that what you said above is real other than your faith. And faith isn't scientific. Science is the other half of the equation in your above assumption. it is provable, yet you cast it aside by claiming that god must be a 100% probability with nothing to back it up. Again I ask, where is the proof? |
Top |