[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]

Return ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 89415)
File  []
>> No. 89415 Anonymous
5th April 2020
Sunday 11:33 pm
89415 spacer
But, does a God exist?
Expand all images.
>> No. 89416 Anonymous
5th April 2020
Sunday 11:41 pm
89416 spacer

>> No. 89417 Anonymous
5th April 2020
Sunday 11:46 pm
89417 spacer
You know that's cool and all but we need to go back into the reality of things, ok, schizo?
>> No. 89418 Anonymous
5th April 2020
Sunday 11:52 pm
89418 spacer
The vid explains that a "God" comes down to what one's definition of a God is.
So to answer the lads question, it depends on what you define a God to be.
>> No. 89419 Anonymous
5th April 2020
Sunday 11:58 pm
89419 spacer

On the scale of things if an interventionist god exists they certainly seem to be doing a lot of hiding for reasons that don't seem terribly clear. and they don't seem wholly benevolent or powerful enough to exercise their benevolence.

The usual god works in mysterious ways Christian logic seems like an apologetics created after the fact to explain away the absence of benevolent control for people who believe anyway. The other day my mother told me that god created the corona virus to unite us- that’s her way of trying to find a meaning in it all.

A god that put things in motion is possible. But I don't see that as much different from just assuming that there is no god.
>> No. 89420 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:12 am
89420 spacer
I was a militant Christopher Hitchens style atheist for most of my 20s.

Went through some shit and I rang in my 30th birthday just a few weeks back as one of those "I guess I suppose I believe in something" types. The coronavirus crisis intensified across the globe and now I'm talking about getting baptised once this is all over.

I don't know how it happened, but you know what? I'm glad it did. Not believing is one thing but I can't even imagine how miserable and full of hate I must have been to resent others who found peace or strength from what are still quite obviously, with my sensible-hat on, fairy stories. Not everyone needs to take it as seriously as an angry Alabamian who uses it as proxy for their pre-existing prejudices.

I still love gay people, women and ethnic minorities. I'm still pro-choice and confused but supportive of trans people's rights to do what they do. I just... pray sometimes. I pray for my bipolar sister and my shcizophrenic cousin and their mental health. I pray for my almost-90-year-old Grandma to not get coronavirus. I pray for my disabled father with 50% lung capacity. It doesn't matter if it isn't true, I don't care. That was never the point and thinking it was is why I didn't get it.
>> No. 89421 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:13 am
89421 spacer

>The usual god works in mysterious ways Christian logic seems like an apologetics created after the fact to explain away the absence of benevolent control for people who believe anyway.
"The best of all possible worlds" as Leibniz would have it. If you would enjoy reading a send-up of this particular theological position then take a look at Voltaire's "Candide". It's 176 pages of Voltaire trolling the ever-loving fuck out of Leibniz. It is savage, and funny.
>> No. 89422 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:19 am
89422 spacer

So you're basically someone who doesn't believe in any of the religion but would like a magic sky daddy to look after their family for them? Cunts like you are what give militant atheists their best ammunition.
>> No. 89423 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:21 am
89423 spacer
Basically, yeah.

Sorry but it is what is.
>> No. 89425 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:29 am
89425 spacer
Fair enough. You'll be right at home in the church of England.
>> No. 89426 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:31 am
89426 spacer

I sympathise with your fears and all, but want to point out that compassionate atheism does exist. Rationality doesn't exclude respect for the very human need for some sense of order over the huge scope of "things we have no control over". Rationality might also help lessen suffering by expanding the realm of "things we have control over" a little further as we accumulate knowledge.

If your faith helps you deal with the former more easily, then I celebrate that. My caution though is that I've also known religious people who've lost faith because terrible things happen despite their beliefs. I suppose it's really all about where you set your expectations -- I think faith can help you live with your pain, but it can't prevent it.
>> No. 89427 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:35 am
89427 spacer
OP here, I seem to remember a couple of German scientists who proved Godel's ontological theorem with the power of computation data. Basically they ran it through their system, it didn't have any pitfalls, and I myself have no argument against it. I am surprised how atheists still try to combat this seeing how it is logically sound. But now that I know it's quite certain there is one, I still don't know if it is the Abrahamic deity that so many people think it is or, if it's just something else entirely.
>> No. 89428 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:39 am
89428 spacer
>proved Godel's ontological theorem with the power of computation data

What does this mean and how does it bear on the existence of a God?
>> No. 89429 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:47 am
89429 spacer
So this was a theorem that supposedly proves a God's existence, constructed and innovated from Leibniz (Anonymous mentions him above) and various churchmen of the ages by a modern scientist named Godel. It was further calculated to the minutest detail by computers, so I really don't see how you can argue against it.
>> No. 89430 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:48 am
89430 spacer
> Anonymous mentions him above

Is this some kind of invasion thread from the other place?
>> No. 89431 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:51 am
89431 spacer
>> No. 89432 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:52 am
89432 spacer
It makes about as much sense for a Creator or God to exist than it does for there to be/have been none at all, so I would never even pretend to be certain no God exists, but I also don't believe that their existence would be comprehensible or tangible enough to have any effect whatsoever on the way I interact with the universe.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Godel's theorem also hold true if you accept that the results of something "god-like" could also be explained as entropy or chaos?
>> No. 89433 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:56 am
89433 spacer
I really appreciate this response.

>compassionate atheism does exist

I know it does. Most of my friends are still compassionate atheists. I still love the Hitchens bit about how it's insulting to imagine some kind of society could have existed for 97,000 years without noticing that killing each other was bad until a sky-fairy on Mount Sinai told them.

I will always be culturally atheist, just as I remained a cultural virgin even after I started getting laid. Atheists are my friends, my family, some of the loves of my life. But I'm trying something else.

I know. Its either that or Methodism or maybe even Quakerism. I will never be one of those incense burning and chanting types even though I'm half-Greek and my dad is still Greek Orthodox. I just want to sit quietly in a building with other relatively sane people and sing the praises of an immortal sky-being.
>> No. 89436 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 2:14 am
89436 spacer
I'd wager no.

I don't know if anybody here is familiar with Feuerbach's Essence of Christianity (George Elliot translation), but it through and through reads an incredibly impassioned cry for atheism while understanding why faith exists in the first place. Faith being a voiceless question to the unspeakable. It asks why we need for an explanation as to why things happen that are beyond our ken which ends up in belief of a deity, or an aspect thereof. It doesn't doubt that worldviews, specifically theistic ones, provide a sense of community and place to believers. It's specifically the idea a deity and its aspects are formed of human belief, therefore the deity's existence is predicated and limited by both what the faith is grounded on and on whatever social mores were necessary. And the limit of imagination, but I think that's covered when he talks about Saints iirc.

I just reckon if you've found something OP, all power to you. I'm not some youtube cunt with a beard baiting people for no reason at all while saying I'm edgy, the only edginess from legit trolling strangers. I really, really deeply don't see the point in being a wanker to anyone about beliefs, I just remember Feuerbach and think of the sense of community I probably won't ever feel.
>> No. 89437 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 3:44 am
89437 spacer
It means they constructed an equation of sorts that checks out on a computer, but of course the computer is not pondering on the veracity of its axioms. If the axioms (principle arguments) turn out to be questionable, the house of cards falls down. The Wikipedia article on the topic addresses the criticism and effective dismissal of this theory. This is ignored by the OP, unsurprisingly.

From what you've said, I think it'd be worth giving the (British)* Quakers a shot. They're open to all theological positions, even atheism, as long as they are respectful and non-violent; the emphasis is on community. I'm not a Quaker myself, but I have a lot of respect for them - they've done a lot of good in the world (particularly their peace work), and vanishingly little bad, which is not something you can say for most organised religions.

*The American Quakers are a completely different kettle of fish - nutty evangelicals.
>> No. 89438 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 6:07 am
89438 spacer
Ugh. Threads like this remind me of my early twenties. It's horrible to move on from something because you learnt all the correct answers and to find out everyone else hasn't learnt a God damned thing.
>> No. 89439 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 7:43 am
89439 spacer
I've adopted a sort of syncretistic Discordian-Pyrrhonist-Gnosticism but I don't like talking about it much as I worry it sounds like I'm just taking the piss out of other people's beliefs when it's not really. It's compatible with ideas like
>but doesn't Godel's theorem also hold true if you accept that the results of something "god-like" could also be explained as entropy or chaos

I've never looked into what our Quakers believe but I have a lot of respect for them from my interactions with them. Brave, peaceful people.
>> No. 89440 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 7:43 am
89440 spacer

As someone who's a year deep into studies on Historical Jesus and the origins of biblical monotheism in ancient Israel I can only say Poo Poo. But you do you, lad.
>> No. 89441 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 10:38 am
89441 spacer
It's become fashionable to be agnostic these days, I feel, and atheism has become associated with those edgy, neckbeard fedora types. It's a tragedy if you ask me, because you have otherwise rational people excusing all sorts of nonsense brain-worms just because they don't want to look like a teenager from 4chan.

As far as I want to be able to give people the freedom to believe in what they want, I really truly can't reconcile how an otherwise intelligent person can practice faith, at least in the traditional, Jeduo-Christian/Iglooist way. It seems to me all too obvious that these religions in particular have, historically, been responsible for altogether more evil than good. Their very roots in culture exist as an early form of social control and manipulation, before we'd invented mass propaganda and the modern police state. Indeed that's the only reason they have become unnecessary.

I think it's a relic of our past we'd really be better off without. There are better philosophical approaches to dealing with the quandary of the unfathomable.
>> No. 89442 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:50 pm
89442 spacer

People who beleive something anyway prove something they believe anyway, yet fail to convince anyone else. Is the best way of summing up Godel's ontological theorem. it is circular reasoning plain and simple.
>> No. 89443 Anonymous
6th April 2020
Monday 12:58 pm
89443 spacer

>I was a militant Christopher Hitchens style atheist

I really hate the equivocation of atheism with this brand of it, it seems like an oversimplified Americanism. And I think the prevailing truth suffers from political tit for tat for it being treated like it is a counter point to Christianity when it isn't and shouldn't behave like it is.

Return ]

Delete Post []