RE: GOD AND EVIL

RE: GOD AND EVIL (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

HatesParisHilton -> RE: GOD AND EVIL (10/22/2009 10:57:35 PM)
"Indeed you can, though when there is In-n-Out in this world, why one would seek out a Wimpy Bar is beyond me!" WELL, it's a posterity thing. Wimpy to In and Out is like the Papacy to Church of England/Episcopalian. sometimes you just miss the wacky shit with all the grease and salt.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: GOD AND EVIL (10/23/2009 5:59:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Rule The process of evolution through natural selection, though, does provide for the opportunity to evolve an omniscient being - me - who may correctly understand its realities. Hey, you too? It's a bitch to explain it to anyone though. K. I disagree with the basic premise (despite the attempt at irony). The brain, as a machine, has a finite capacity that is far smaller than the knowledge of everything. There is no single random mutation that could expand the capacity to that extent. Furrther, Natural selection would not result in the gradual expansion to that level because sufficient ( but incomplete )knowledge such that there would be no survival advantage to an incremental increase. (Some would argue that humans have already evolved as far as they can for that reason.) You are talking about memory / data storage. I wasn't. Lol. Omniscience require memory/data storage, or everything couldnt be known.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: GOD AND EVIL (10/23/2009 6:02:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xBullx Science would have less trouble proving God than disproving his existence. But neither discovery would find acceptability within the believers of the counter argument. Obviously true, because you cant disprove the existence of something that is purported to have the ability to hide or to clouds men's minds. More importantly, I agree, science would have no trouble proving the existence of god. All it would take is one shred of credible evidence in the centuries that people have attempted to find any. Ergo god as a " scientific theory" has absolutely no support.

Kirata -> RE: GOD AND EVIL (10/23/2009 7:38:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Obviously true, because you cant disprove the existence of something that is purported to have the ability to hide or to clouds men's minds. More importantly, I agree, science would have no trouble proving the existence of god. All it would take is one shred of credible evidence in the centuries that people have attempted to find any. Ergo god as a " scientific theory" has absolutely no support. Let's see here. We can't prove God's non-existence because of his purported ability to "hide or to cloud men's minds." But, that purported ability would present "no trouble" for proving that he does exist if he did. Hmm. You wanna spell that one out for me? K.

Rule -> RE: GOD AND EVIL (10/23/2009 7:48:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Lol. Omniscience require memory/data storage, or everything couldnt be known. I wonder what you had for breakfast and how many times you scratched your butt today? No, do not tell me! There is tons of boring stuff like that which omniscient me does not want to know. That is for the Divine to keep tabs on - and I assure you that the Divine does not want to know either, usually. One has to distinguish between relevant omniscience and irrelevant omniscience. (Yes, omniscience is a bit more complex of a concept than people / philosophers credit it with.)

Rule -> RE: GOD AND EVIL (10/23/2009 7:51:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy you cant disprove the existence of something that is purported to have the ability to hide or to clouds men's minds. People would see more if they opened their eyes and drank less alcohol.

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 5 [6]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125