Author Topic: The Idea of God is not Topical Henceforth  (Read 2095 times)


  • Has Received Bacon
  • *
  • Posts: 113
(No subject)
« Reply #15 on: January 23, 2007, 12:43:04 AM »
That's certainly one way of looking at it.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Kestrel »
The thing that I call living is just being satisfied, with knowing I've got no one left to blame. - Gordon Lightfoot

Big Mac

  • Buddies With Uncle Bert
  • ****
  • Posts: 1226
(No subject)
« Reply #16 on: January 23, 2007, 03:28:43 AM »
Yeah that way is called "being rational".
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Big Mac »
Quote from: "PoopShoot"
And what if pigs shit candy?


  • Beginning to See the Wedge
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: The Idea of God is not Topical Henceforth
« Reply #17 on: January 24, 2007, 08:54:58 PM »
Quote from: "laetusatheos"
I found this on the AN and thought it was's hard for me to understand the wording (maybe someone here can give an expanded simplification of what is being stated?) but was simplified by another member as:

Quote from: "Archmonoth"
I doubt our typical drive-by theist have the brain power to understand what you are suggesting.

However i will attempt to simplify ....

The universe can be self caused because causality can be a closed system.

The OP ( ):

Quote from: "Lonely_Warrior"
Well educated intellectual people, especially scientists, at all times demonstrate considerably smaller adherence of religiosity, than the others. However and now there are still believers of idea of the God in scientific medium. If to exclude from their number of those who feels painful requirement for external protection and a support by virtue of heavy living circumstances there are those who comes to idea of the God as a result of amazement concerning finesse of world around and absence of the answer to a problem: as all this the surprising diversification of subjects and entities in principle could be formed and as it can sustain the quasistable condition and demonstrate development.

    The common sense suggests, that for explanation of observable raging life it is necessary to admit, that each separate subject, each organism, each social unit and even a separate computer program product should contain the special internal causative engine, a source of a local determinism which maintains specific autonomous internal life in it.

    The conventional concept of determinism for today does not suppose existence of such sources. In it scandalous weakness of this concept. Not finding a required causative source within the framework of philosophy, people are compelled to address there, where always in readiness a number of exotic, exciting fancy of irrational causative sources that is in religion and mysticism.  

   Today the situation can be considerably rectified. Recently published concept Ring Determinism discovers a required internal causative source by the way a closed on itself plot of customary causal chain, a selfcontained causative circuit which, it turned out, is contained in entrails of each separate natural formation.
This selfcontained causative circuit just is that ontological base due to which each separate natural formation finds out and saves the exclusive individuality, asserts itself in the capacity of “ causa sui ” – the cause of itself.


                                  Fig. 1. A diagram of the causal chain:

A) A starting fragment of linear causal chain;
B) The closed on itself plot of the causal chain.

    Internal local causative action, continuously circulating inside a separate body, being transmitted in succession from an element to an element, ensures its systemic wholeness, synergetic wholeness in operation of its elements and subsystems, phenomenon of “emergence”, special internal policy, resistance to external actions, aggression directed to outside, egoism, an egocentricity, a self-preservation, self-organization and, at last, self-development.

    One of principled conclusions of a ring determinism will be, that under the supervisory control of the internal cause continuously circulating inside a body and under continuous pressure on the part of external factors just and there is a miracle of the self-development, resulting in to originating of observable diversification of surprising properties of subjects, organisms, social units, human products and other.

 The local causative circuit, is once randomly or designedly become closed and then finding out ability to the long-lived quasistable self-maintenance, self-resumption, or, in an event of dynamically developing systems, the determining vortex, is that high-power engine which creates, saves and induces flock of alive and nonliving natural formations to development.

So that educated people can to sigh with relief now: for them rather weighty rational argument against idea of creationism has appeared and necessity to appeal to irrational imaginations has vanished.

Probably not a good idea, but I'm going to argue with the admin's post and/or friend of admin and their post.

Causality is a fallacy, the posted information is invalid.  

Hume sank this one long ago.  No two events are tied together by any function, we induce the causal link, because we are incapable of logically accepting the events as separate because we perceive change, but lack the cognitive capacity to actually address "time".
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by Mastriani »
Praedatorious culminis; hominis necis


  • Made of Star Stuff
  • *
  • Posts: 71
(No subject)
« Reply #18 on: March 08, 2007, 10:41:22 PM »
Quote from: "Theist"
Quote from: "Big Mac"
if God is loving, why is there a hell?

We all hear that God is loving, most of us have heard the sunday school lectures. Among these things, we hear that God loves us all. But what of those who refuse to love him? I'm not trying to tell you you're all condemned to hell because you don't love him, but I believe that Hell is so horrible only because God is not there, it's the only location he's completely absent from. If a child stops loving their parents, and continues fighting and fighting against them, the parents will still love them but they have to let their kids go their own way because there's nothing else they can do. God doesn't abandon us if we find we are going to hell, I think he's simply saying "There's nothing more I can do for you, I've done all I can, I even sacrificed my own son for you, I'll have to let you go your own way." I don't think it's any decision of God's.

Why do you believe all of this?  What evidence do you have which convinces you that any of this really happens when we die?

I'm not trying to "convert" you to atheism, I'm honestly just trying to follow your logic.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 01:00:00 AM by User192021 »