ARCAN'S PROFILE
Search
Filter
Faith, religion, and you
That's exactly my point. Understanding definitions of such things is the very basis of differing beliefs. If two people are debating about something and they use different definitions then disagreements will always occur. Most people won't go further to really define vague concepts such reality or god as energy or even just god. Even they don't really know those things mean to them so they use explanations like "I just know" when they can't come up with a real answer.
Btw, I totally agree with what you just said.
Btw, I totally agree with what you just said.
Faith, religion, and you
True, if he doesn't interact with reality then he can't physically be defined, but a definition would still be out there and that wouldn't make him above logic. My real beef is with the vagueness of your answer. You haven't really defined what "outside of reality" really means.
Faith, religion, and you
author=kentona
but the thing is god isn't part of reality, so far as I understand the hypothesis. So by that logic, we can't define a god using logic.
Meh, this is just a vague statement to explain away a very important question. What does this even mean? As far as I'm concerned, if god interacts with reality then he is part of reality.
Faith, religion, and you
author=Versalia
On a more agnostic note, if there IS any kind of supreme being or creator etc, I FIRMLY believe the human mind is completely incapable of properly understanding or perceiving the truth around it.
This never made any sense to me. Some things are more complex than others, but they can always be understood if they follow the principles of logic. If you say that god doesn't follow logic then that doesn't make any sense either. Logic isn't the set of rules that comes about before reality, but rather how we define reality. So logic applies in every situation and everything that follows logic can be understood. I don't even know if logical evidence for your claim is even possible.
Faith, religion, and you
Most theists aren't even aware that there are two types of atheism and they just lump them into the same category. Agnostic atheists are those who believe that there is likely no god, but do not claim certainty. Gnostic atheists do believe that there are definitely no gods. Most people that are agnostics already fit into the former and they just don't realize it or they fear the label. Agnostic atheism is not a belief, but a mere rejection of the evidence and because of that they do not bear the burden of proof. On the other hand, gnostic atheism is a belief and does require proof. Most theists unknowingly believe that atheists are gnostic and this is what causes many arguments when they try to explain that they don't have the burden of proof. Please learn the difference.
Another thing that bothers me is that people (both sides) will always state the argument as creationism vs evolution as if they were the only two choices. By disproving evolution you do not automatically prove your god or any god for that matter. Those are entirely separate matters. And another thing, you need to believe in a god in order to be a theist, but an atheist doesn't need evolution to be an atheist.
Another thing that bothers me is that people (both sides) will always state the argument as creationism vs evolution as if they were the only two choices. By disproving evolution you do not automatically prove your god or any god for that matter. Those are entirely separate matters. And another thing, you need to believe in a god in order to be a theist, but an atheist doesn't need evolution to be an atheist.
Super RMN Bros. 3
Super RMN Bros. 3
Anyone need a RPG VX mapper?
Wow this is the first time I'm noticing this thread. I find it funny that all XP maps on the first page are way better than the VX ones. It's not you it's just VX.













