Einstein's Letter on God Uncovered

[Type Username Here]

@nomayo 15

I accept all possibilities. lol, I guess I would be foolish to say that I'm not agnostic because, I just said that atheist are too closed minded to be agnostic... but I'm not.

That statement was my opinon. And imo atheism shuts out possibilities. Agnosticism opens up those possibilities. Theism realizes those possibilities. ........


And theism should, but rarely does, leave room for this - Do you accept the possibility that no deity exists?

Then again Muslims are one of the groups that brought the world to a higher level of thinking in the first place, so it's natural for a follower of Islam to think extensively about these things

Friend, you gave me a long politician's answer.

Are you agnostic? Yes or no?

Do you accept the possibility that no deity exists? Yes or No?

 

[Type Username Here]

Replace "horse" with "centaur" and read it again.

But I know a centaur is a work of fiction. Are you asking me to compare humans to manmade created concepts of god?

If so, I can easily compare human beings to Greek gods, and say that yes, god is a human with super powers.

Now we're back to square one friend.

 

[NoMayo15]

Most mathematicians and people how deal with statistically data believe in some thing more that physical matter in the universe.

You've brought this up before, I want to know why it's relevant?

And I say that if very intelligent and logical people believe then how is it illogical?

I'm guessing this is ultimately your answer to that previous question, so let me address it.

First, I mean, you do realize what you're doing is the appeal to authority fallacy, right? It doesn't matter how "smart" someone is generally when discussing this topic. Someone can be a mathematical genius, and be dumb regarding another subject. ....I shouldn't have to say anything else about that.

It's not a logical position to hold because theism makes a claim that isn't supported by any evidence. There isn't any direct, physical, objective evidence for a god. I don't know how else to say this, so I'm just going to leave it at that.

I guess I would be foolish to say that I'm not agnostic because, I just said that atheist are too closed minded to be agnostic... but I'm not.

And I'm glad you finally admit that theists can be agnostics as well. Now if you would only accept that atheists can be agnostics too. You need to give up any preconceived notions you have of atheism. It's not as absolute as you believe.

 

[Blackking]

Friend, you gave me a long politician's answer.
Yes i did.

And I don't like any label except Black person.

But I did say I'm Muslim 100 times.

What would it implicate about me if the answer was yes or no? I'm curious.

 

[Type Username Here]

I understand you're a Muslim. There are such things as Agnostic theists. I am asking if you are one of those?

Do you believe there exists a possibility that a deity does not exist? It's a very simple question. I'm not trying to have a "gotcha" moment of any kind.

 

[NZA]

But I know a centaur is a work of fiction. Are you asking me to compare humans to manmade created concepts of god?

If so, I can easily compare human beings to Greek gods, and say that yes, god is a human with super powers.

Now we're back to square one friend.

humans are apes, greek gods are greek gods. they are not the same

 

[Type Username Here]

humans are apes, greek gods are greek gods. they are not the same

They knew humans were apes back in those days? The Greeks have always depicted their gods in human form. In Greek Mythology, the first "humans" had god like powers, and thus had no reason to worship the "gods". They were destroyed and eventually replaced with powerless humans.

Anyway, that's not what's important. What is important is that my friend said the Greek concept of god can't be correct because they are just humans with super powers. My point is, how does he know this isn't right?

 

[Johnny Kilroy]

But I know a centaur is a work of fiction. Are you asking me to compare humans to manmade created concepts of god?

If so, I can easily compare human beings to Greek gods, and say that yes, god is a human with super powers.

Now we're back to square one friend.

Look, I know you're having fun and all but I'm logging off. Not out of surrender or anything, but I truly feel you're wasting my time. No offense. Take that however you want.

 

[Type Username Here]

Look, I know you're having fun and all but I'm logging off. Not out of surrender or anything, but I truly feel you're wasting my time. No offense. Take that however you want.

No offense taken. Good night.

 

[Blackking]

You've brought this up before, I want to know why it's relevant?



I'm guessing this is ultimately your answer to that previous question, so let me address it. Yes it is.

First, I mean, you do realize what you're doing is the appeal to authority fallacy, right? It doesn't matter how "smart" someone is generally when discussing this topic. Someone can be a mathematical genius, and be dumb regarding another subject. ....I shouldn't have to say anything else about that.

It's not a logical position to hold because theism makes a claim that isn't supported by any evidence. There isn't any direct, physical, objective evidence for a god. I don't know how else to say this, so I'm just going to leave it at that.

Appeal to authority can be used against an appeal to authority based argument, imo.

"supported by evidence". Natural selection is supported by the scientific theory and hard core evidence. There are many things we accept as true that isn't supported by scientific evidence. We can't prove that it's immoral to rape a goat. We can't prove existential truth either - meaning we can't use this 'evidence' to prove that the world and moon aren't the only structures (besides sun) in our galaxy with the other planets being holograms put there by the same beings that are making our planet seem 4.5 B years old when it's really 300 thousand years with a false appearance of older age.

NTM 'supported by evidence' can be hard core in science like mating habits of bonabo monkeys (using all steps including observation) or with very loose evidence built on assumptions- like monkeys coming from LUA along with mushrooms.

If a theory is prone to debunking how is someone asinine for not accepting it as absolute fact?

Also, so what if we prove the BBT? It's something that I sorta believe in, can't fully believe because it's just a theory.. AND it's a theory that explains how our universe developed, not it's origin. Theist have a theory about the origin, science can fill in the Gaps... and there is evidence to support that. And just so you know, just because evidence doesn't fit into an institutionalized method that doesn't make it invalid.

 

[Blackking]

I'm not trying to have a "gotcha" moment of any kind.

well, in that case, yes.

Though that is meaningless coming from me. From the pov that nothing in this life or our perceptions, can be proven to be more than a figment of someones imagination or game.. I don't truly know anything. From that pov,, God's existence is inherently unknowable.

however, if we don't think we are living within our own imaginations... then

 

[NZA]

They knew humans were apes back in those days? The Greeks have always depicted their gods in human form. In Greek Mythology, the first "humans" had god like powers, and thus had no reason to worship the "gods". They were destroyed and eventually replaced with powerless humans.

Anyway, that's not what's important. What is important is that my friend said the Greek concept of god can't be correct because they are just humans with super powers. My point is, how does he know this isn't right?

the point is that the greeks made their myths too tangible, so we can easily disprove them now. belief in greek gods fails for a whole host of practical reasons.

the jews were a bit smarter. instead of relying on a pantheon of relatively weak gods, they started gathering them all together into fewer beings (god, messiah, holy spirit) and the nature of these beings become increasingly obscure (messiah is very human, god is sorta human, holy spirit is not quite human)

 

[NoMayo15]

Appeal to authority can be used against an appeal to authority based argument, imo.

No. Your argument fails because you appeal to those who aren't experts on the subject we're discussing. Appealing to biologists when talking about evolution isn't a fallacy because it's likely they know the subject better than laypeople. Appealing to mathematicians and statisticians because they are also "smart" is a logical fallacy.

There are many things we accept as true that isn't supported by scientific evidence. We can't prove that it's immoral to rape a goat.

The morality of an act is subjective. Science might be able to prove that raping a goat harms it, and some might find that to be immoral.

We can't prove existential truth either - meaning we can't use this 'evidence' to prove that the world and moon aren't the only structures (besides sun) in our galaxy with the other planets being holograms put there by the same beings that are making our planet seem 4.5 B years old when it's really 300 thousand years with a false appearance of older age.

Um. No, actually the science suggests that other planets are actually tangible things. Any belief contrary to that would need to be justified and demonstrated by....science.

NTM 'supported by evidence' can be hardcore in science like mating habits of bonabo monkeys (using all steps including observation) or with very loose evidence built on assumptions- like monkeys coming from LUA along with mushrooms.

You're missing me with a lot of the acronyms.

If a theory is prone to debunking how is someone asinine for not accepting it as absolute fact?

Because every theory is prone to debunking. That's the nature of science. You don't just immediately have all the answers ... it's a slow and gradual process, but it's the best method we have to find the most correct answer to any question. Faith is the opposite, and not a pathway to truth.

Also, so what if we prove the BBT? It's something that I sorta believe in, can't fully believe because it's just a theory.. AND it's a theory that explains how our universe developed, not it's origin. Theist have a theory about the origin, science can fill in the Gaps... and there is evidence to support that. .

What do you mean "just a theory"? Do you understand what a scientific theory is?

And just so you know, just because evidence doesn't fit into an institutionalized method that doesn't make it invalid

I don't know what you mean by this.

From the pov that nothing in this life or our perceptions, can be proven to be more than a figment of someones imagination or game.. I don't truly know anything. From that pov,, God's existence is inherently unknowable.

Oh god, AND you're a solipsist?

 

[Blackking]

No. Your argument fails because you appeal to those who aren't experts on the subject we're discussing. Appealing to biologists when talking about evolution isn't a fallacy because it's likely they know the subject better than laypeople. Appealing to mathematicians and statisticians because they are also "smart" is a logical fallacy.



The morality of an act is subjective. Science might be able to prove that raping a goat harms it, and some might find that to be immoral.



Um. No, actually the science suggests that other planets are actually tangible things. Any belief contrary to that would need to be justified and demonstrated by....science.



You're missing me with a lot of the acronyms.



Because every theory is prone to debunking. That's the nature of science. You don't just immediately have all the answers ... it's a slow and gradual process, but it's the best method we have to find the most correct answer to any question. Faith is the opposite, and not a pathway to truth.



What do you mean "just a theory"? Do you understand what a scientific theory is?



I don't know what you mean by this.

science isn't the only measure of every truth. just a theory means not an absolute fact. And biologist are the authority on organisms not theological ideas or the universes creation. illogical is used to describe a belief in God, so I was just saying that many logical people believe in God.

 

[Blackking]

AND you're a solipsist?

no, but I thought we already established that I'm open to most philosophical ideas.