Blogging Theology


Sohail Speaks Yasir's Blog Fazeer's Focus

User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 80 of 128
  1. #1
    Debut
    Nov 2011
    Runs
    9,391
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Blogging Theology

    I started viewing this channel a few months ago and this White English Christian (Paul Williams) who runs the channel has seemingly reverted and become Muslim with some great content and guests. One of the best was an interview with former Oxford University Professor of Divinity Revered Keith Ward who amongst other things admitted that the Bible contains errors and that he believes Muhammad (SAW) is a Prophet of God and that most Theologians even Christian theologians he knows accept these facts

    Some quite extraordinary revelations

    Worth checking out this channel


  2. #2
    Debut
    Nov 2011
    Runs
    9,391
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Here is part of the interview with Professor Keith Ward. The full interview is over an hour long and well worth a watch as well


  3. #3
    Debut
    Jan 2010
    Runs
    40,009
    Mentioned
    803 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Thanks ,will check it out


    Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of Sheep

  4. #4
    Debut
    Dec 2019
    Runs
    2,456
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There are quite a few convert stories - many are based self awakening and many on scholarly research, (Dr. Jeffery Lang, and Dr. Lawrence Brown being two of my favorite ones) but this one right here is based on, more of a logical assertion. Its fascinating that logic indeed varies from person to person, but his logical thought processes sits pretty well with my own.



  5. #5
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    The first link isn’t saying anything that didn’t occur to me twenty years ago.

    The Gospels were not written by anyone who knew the person Jesus, they came decades after he died.

    The Council of Nicaea basically jammed the doctrine of Trinity together in order to try to get the Gospel texts to agree.

    Other Gospels, such as the Gospel of Mary got left out because they didn’t jibe with the others (and because the Paul sect hated women).

  6. Google Ad Manager-
  7. #6
    Debut
    Nov 2011
    Runs
    9,391
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Colorblind Genius View Post
    There are quite a few convert stories - many are based self awakening and many on scholarly research, (Dr. Jeffery Lang, and Dr. Lawrence Brown being two of my favorite ones) but this one right here is based on, more of a logical assertion. Its fascinating that logic indeed varies from person to person, but his logical thought processes sits pretty well with my own.


    Actually a new video on Blogging Theology channel featuring Dr Laurence Brown this week. First time I'd heard his amazing story

  8. #7
    Debut
    Nov 2011
    Runs
    9,391
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    This guy was Geert Wilders 'right hand man' and ended up converting to Islam

    Another amazing video on Blogging Theology channel

    Interesting to hear in this case how conversations with Abdul Hakim Murad (Tim Winter) and Sheikh Hamza Yusuf played a part in his transition


  9. #8
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Seems like these guys need a faith. Christianity didn’t work for them due to internal inconsistencies and contradictions so they chose something similar and more coherent.

    In my case, when my Christian faith collapsed, *all* faith collapsed and I needed no replacement.

  10. #9
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    348
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm a fan and have been a subscriber for quite a while.

    Really interesting content and thoughtful and considered discussions.

  11. #10
    Debut
    Jul 2010
    Runs
    14,333
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Brilliant - Thanks for sharing.

    I also see Abdal Hakim Murad and Imam Hamza Yusuf mentioned! These guys are titans of Islamic scholarship. Especially Abdul Hakim Murad. I'd imagine someone like you @Robert would very much relate to Sheikh Murad and his thoughts on British culture ( from a non religious POV).

    This may sound strange but seeing these men who are for more clever than I, argue about Islam so passionately only helps cement my faith.

  12. #11
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadlyVenom View Post
    Brilliant - Thanks for sharing.

    I also see Abdal Hakim Murad and Imam Hamza Yusuf mentioned! These guys are titans of Islamic scholarship. Especially Abdul Hakim Murad. I'd imagine someone like you @Robert would very much relate to Sheikh Murad and his thoughts on British culture ( from a non religious POV).

    This may sound strange but seeing these men who are for more clever than I, argue about Islam so passionately only helps cement my faith.
    Thanks for suggestion @DeadlyVenom.

  13. #12
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Religions boils down to faith.

    Either you have it or you don't have it. If you don't have it, most of the religious elements doesn't make much sense and which does makes sense, are just commonsense which should be practiced in day to day life whether you are religious or not.

    But faith may lead to blindness which is dangerous as in case of religious extremism. It's easier to use religion as weapon to drive agendas than anything else in the world.

  14. #13
    Debut
    Nov 2011
    Runs
    9,391
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    Religions boils down to faith.

    Either you have it or you don't have it. If you don't have it, most of the religious elements doesn't make much sense and which does makes sense, are just commonsense which should be practiced in day to day life whether you are religious or not.

    But faith may lead to blindness which is dangerous as in case of religious extremism. It's easier to use religion as weapon to drive agendas than anything else in the world.
    Utter nonsense

    The most murderous ideologies in human history have been

    Capitalism/Colonialism/Imperialism (African slave trade)
    Communism (Mao et al caused multi million deaths)
    Nazism - Holocaust and World War 2

    None of those were 'religious' if anything anti-religious in their targeting of different races/religions

  15. #14
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by s28 View Post
    Utter nonsense

    The most murderous ideologies in human history have been

    Capitalism/Colonialism/Imperialism (African slave trade)
    Communism (Mao et al caused multi million deaths)
    Nazism - Holocaust and World War 2

    None of those were 'religious' if anything anti-religious in their targeting of different races/religions
    isis, al qaeda are myths then.

  16. #15
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    348
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    isis, al qaeda are myths then.
    Your claim was that religion is the easiest to manipulate people with.

    With one completely made up dossier, through a democratic process and "free media", over a million Iraqis lost their lives.

    Just one example.

    Nobody is saying that religion isn't used to manipulate. Your claim is simply being challenged.

  17. #16
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Halaribo View Post
    Your claim was that religion is the easiest to manipulate people with.

    With one completely made up dossier, through a democratic process and "free media", over a million Iraqis lost their lives.

    Just one example.

    Nobody is saying that religion isn't used to manipulate. Your claim is simply being challenged.
    1. How is capitalism killing people?

    2. Colonialism/nazism/communism/imperialism have no impact now. They were short lived and ran its course over few centuries.

    But religion as a weapon has a long history and even today it continues.

  18. #17
    Debut
    Jan 2010
    Runs
    40,009
    Mentioned
    803 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    Religions boils down to faith.

    Either you have it or you don't have it. If you don't have it, most of the religious elements doesn't make much sense and which does makes sense, are just commonsense which should be practiced in day to day life whether you are religious or not.

    But faith may lead to blindness which is dangerous as in case of religious extremism. It's easier to use religion as weapon to drive agendas than anything else in the world.
    You cannot know the thoughts of everyone who follows a religion. It maybe faith to believe but there are many logical reasons which lead to faith.

    Do you believe in God?


    Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of Sheep

  19. #18
    Debut
    Jul 2010
    Runs
    14,333
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    Religions boils down to faith.

    Either you have it or you don't have it. If you don't have it, most of the religious elements doesn't make much sense and which does makes sense, are just commonsense which should be practiced in day to day life whether you are religious or not.

    But faith may lead to blindness which is dangerous as in case of religious extremism. It's easier to use religion as weapon to drive agendas than anything else in the world.
    The irreligious remind me of those people whose souls aren't stirred by beautiful architecture, art or music.

    Unfortunately, they have sealed their hearts towards the beauty of the divine.

    I genuinely pity them.

  20. #19
    Debut
    Nov 2015
    Runs
    1,365
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadlyVenom View Post
    The irreligious remind me of those people whose souls aren't stirred by beautiful architecture, art or music.

    Unfortunately, they have sealed their hearts towards the beauty of the divine.

    I genuinely pity them.
    You can still enjoy all those aspects of life without attributing it to some divinity. You will have a more balanced view. And it's not an easy task to come out of religious brainwashing.

  21. #20
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingKhanWC View Post
    You cannot know the thoughts of everyone who follows a religion. It maybe faith to believe but there are many logical reasons which lead to faith.

    Do you believe in God?
    I don't believe in God.

    There will be logical reasons why extremists resort to religion to push their agenda. But does it make it justified?


  22. #21
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadlyVenom View Post
    The irreligious remind me of those people whose souls aren't stirred by beautiful architecture, art or music.

    Unfortunately, they have sealed their hearts towards the beauty of the divine.

    I genuinely pity them.
    Its about choice. You chose to believe the divine entity while I didn't.

    Same as some people may love Ariana grande's songs and find beauty in them while I don't.

  23. #22
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    348
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    1. How is capitalism killing people?

    2. Colonialism/nazism/communism/imperialism have no impact now. They were short lived and ran its course over few centuries.

    But religion as a weapon has a long history and even today it continues.
    Sorry, but your response is incredibly naive.

    No impact? The world has been shaped by that impact and it has deep roots. A small example... inferiority complex with having dark skin. The social stigma and discrimination based around it.

    And the capitalism that allows for skin lightening products to actually be a thing. The money has more value than the moral repugnance that should be shown to such products.

    How does capitalism kill people? One example is the weapons and arms industry. Follow the money. That's an obvious one.

    Another example? Watch Erin Brockovich. Or Dark Water.

    Simple fact is, you're willing to overlook harm and violence in general, unless it is somehow linked to religion.

  24. #23
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Halaribo View Post
    Sorry, but your response is incredibly naive.

    No impact? The world has been shaped by that impact and it has deep roots. A small example... inferiority complex with having dark skin. The social stigma and discrimination based around it.

    And the capitalism that allows for skin lightening products to actually be a thing. The money has more value than the moral repugnance that should be shown to such products.

    How does capitalism kill people? One example is the weapons and arms industry. Follow the money. That's an obvious one.

    Another example? Watch Erin Brockovich. Or Dark Water.

    Simple fact is, you're willing to overlook harm and violence in general, unless it is somehow linked to religion.
    Weapons and arms industry existed even before capitalism kicked in. Can you explain this point?

  25. #24
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingKhanWC View Post
    You cannot know the thoughts of everyone who follows a religion. It maybe faith to believe but there are many logical reasons which lead to faith.

    Do you believe in God?
    No logical reason at all. Faith and logic preclude each other. Faith requires an a priori assumption which violates logic.

  26. #25
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadlyVenom View Post
    The irreligious remind me of those people whose souls aren't stirred by beautiful architecture, art or music.

    Unfortunately, they have sealed their hearts towards the beauty of the divine.

    I genuinely pity them.
    Well, one can appreciate music or be awed by a landscape without religious faith.

  27. #26
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Halaribo View Post
    Sorry, but your response is incredibly naive.

    No impact? The world has been shaped by that impact and it has deep roots. A small example... inferiority complex with having dark skin. The social stigma and discrimination based around it.

    And the capitalism that allows for skin lightening products to actually be a thing. The money has more value than the moral repugnance that should be shown to such products.

    How does capitalism kill people? One example is the weapons and arms industry. Follow the money. That's an obvious one.

    Another example? Watch Erin Brockovich. Or Dark Water.

    Simple fact is, you're willing to overlook harm and violence in general, unless it is somehow linked to religion.
    How does one explain collagen injections and buttock implants then - white women trying to look like black women?

    The weapons and industry does not of itself lead to violence. It’s a tool for the various robber barons out there to inflict their will on populations. They have always done this since the days before capitalism.

  28. #27
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    348
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    How does one explain collagen injections and buttock implants then - white women trying to look like black women?

    The weapons and industry does not of itself lead to violence. It’s a tool for the various robber barons out there to inflict their will on populations. They have always done this since the days before capitalism.
    I'm not the one asking questions like "how does capitalism kill people" and trying to make a case that religion is an exceptional case when it comes to the ills it brings to the world.

    This is where people try and then change the goalposts.

    Do you think Saudi would be killing and starving the Yemeni's as effectively as they are if the US and UK didn't need the money? Where is the moral authority to say no, it would be quite simple to tell them to jog on? So yes, the industry is killing people, because they know where their arms are ending up.

    WW1 was the result of an arms race. How many people died for that? What did religion have to do with it?

    My point is that to single out religion as the most significant influencer of violence is ridiculous, considering that any peace in our society is based on a hierarchy of value in which some people are just going to have a crapper life based on how much money thsy have. Which we know will result in premature deaths.

    I note you commented on the arms industry, but didn't comment on industrial practices that result on toxic substances being jettisoned into water supplies to cut on costs and to serve the interest of shareholders. Is that not a result of capitalist objectives? You may argue, we have legislation that can regulate. So why is it that so many organisations do the bare minimum to legally fulfil obligations, but avoid extra costs that might impact profits?

    Then you end up with some poor cancer ridden family, drinking water that the CEOs and local politicians of the area don't dare drink.

    What point are you trying to make?

    I personally wouldn't argue this point, but since it's been brought up... I would wager more people die on a daily basis because it is more important for some people to make money than any religious belief or practice is responsible for.

    I would wager that when you look at many of the significant religious reasonings behind harm and violence, a simple solution would be education.

    What's the solution when the educated are morally and ethically void and are barbaric with the advantages of power they have?

  29. #28
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    348
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Oh, another capitalism kills point.

    News and media are individually/collectively owned by people/companies seeking a profit, which ultimately dictates what news is fed to the masses.

    Do you think that the media you digest doesn't influence your views that feed into your cognitive dissonance and desensitisation of the bad things going on in the world, that allow the public to overlook the harm their governments are doing and not questioning the interests people have to maintain a particular status quo?

    How many people have died as a result of Tory underfunding of the NHS and people still voting like Turkeys voting for Christmas?

    You might call the above a stretch, but then I'd argue, so is claiming religion is an exceptional catalyst for violence.

  30. #29
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    348
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As for butt implants, I don't think that's really a comparable point.

    I'd say the above has come from the way women are made to feel inadequate and the mental health issues associated with being told you're not beautiful enough. Or cultural sensationalisation of bodily features depending on what the flavour of the day is.

    Issues like fairer skin being better is pure colonialist leftovers based on associating white skin with power and success.

    In the words of Paul Mooney, "everybody want to be a n***a, but nobody wants to be a n***a"

  31. #30
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Halaribo View Post
    considering that any peace in our society is based on a hierarchy of value in which some people are just going to have a crapper life based on how much money thsy have. Which we know will result in premature deaths.
    So.... Peace is dependent upon how much money people have.

    If you believe that, I guess there is no point to argue since your perspective establishes that money is the ultimate path for peace while mine doesn't.

    May be above is true for you, but not for me. Money doesn't buy happiness nor peace in my case.

  32. #31
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    348
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    So.... Peace is dependent upon how much money people have.

    If you believe that, I guess there is no point to argue since your perspective establishes that money is the ultimate path for peace while mine doesn't.

    May be above is true for you, but not for me. Money doesn't buy happiness nor peace in my case.
    I didn't say that. I'm commenting on the existing sociological perspective people have. Home ownership. High interest saving. Economic market manipulation. Immoral tax relief and loopholes.

    Let me give you an example.

    The media says there's a petrol shortage. People flock to buy petrol, even if they don't need it. Basic services begin to fail, and society goes nuts.

    Covid hits and a lockdown is announced. People start hoarding and beating each other up over toilet rolls and hand sanitiser.

    What is it that has had this effect that people can't even act sensibly despite there actually being no shortages? If this is how people behave over lack of toilet roll, what's going to happen when something really goes wrong?

    Where does this then leave people who don't have the financial means to compete with the above?

    You're the one who cited religion is the most influential cause for violence.

    Sorry, fact is you're so used to having facile arguments over religion and the harm it causes that you can't even relate to the bigger picture which is more to do with human behaviour.

  33. #32
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    348
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Not to mention you've not commented on anything else I've said.

    Like I said, you came out with a very big claim and now you're just going right off track and to be honest, I don't think you're going to engage because fact is, arguing that religion is the most exceptional and influential factor to harm and violence is just a really rubbish conversation to have.

    You will sit on your high horse having in your mind, belittled and debased faith and religion, while then contributing to the very systems that are killing people or destroying their lives on a daily basis.

    People like you claim to be looking out for the human race, but will also argue that not everyone can be fed or medically treated because there's not enough money.

    If you believe there is no God, then it is you responsible for the ills in the world.

    From your perspective, you can only then believe that everything has a price and its a price you're willing to pay. Your happy thoughts and well wishes and the odd tenner you might throw to charity every now and then ultimately means nothing. You will live and die, that's that.

    Fine.

    Don't claim that you're aiming to build a better world, especially as your first question was about how many people are killed by capitalism. That question tells me all I need to know.
    Last edited by Halaribo; 24th October 2021 at 18:38.

  34. #33
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Halaribo View Post
    I didn't say that. I'm commenting on the existing sociological perspective people have. Home ownership. High interest saving. Economic market manipulation. Immoral tax relief and loopholes.

    Let me give you an example.

    The media says there's a petrol shortage. People flock to buy petrol, even if they don't need it. Basic services begin to fail, and society goes nuts.

    Covid hits and a lockdown is announced. People start hoarding and beating each other up over toilet rolls and hand sanitiser.

    What is it that has had this effect that people can't even act sensibly despite there actually being no shortages? If this is how people behave over lack of toilet roll, what's going to happen when something really goes wrong?

    Where does this then leave people who don't have the financial means to compete with the above?

    You're the one who cited religion is the most influential cause for violence.

    Sorry, fact is you're so used to having facile arguments over religion and the harm it causes that you can't even relate to the bigger picture which is more to do with human behaviour.
    Actually you touched the point that I said. Religion is the most influential cause for human behavior when it comes to violence. There could be other factor such as revenge, hatred but religion can trigger the most as it has been seen time to time.

    The difference between your and mine argument is, you believe it's human behavior. I too believe it's human behavior but religion can put gas on that behavior much quicker and effectively than other entities to which you disagree.

  35. #34
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Halaribo View Post
    Not to mention you've not commented on anything else I've said.

    Like I said, you came out with a very big claim and now you're just going right off track and to be honest, I don't think you're going to engage because fact is, arguing that religion is the most exceptional and influential factor to harm and violence is just a really rubbish conversation to have.

    You will sit on your high horse having in your mind, belittled and debased faith and religion, while then contributing to the very systems that are killing people or destroying their lives on a daily basis.

    People like you claim to be looking out for the human race, but will also argue that not everyone can be fed or medically treated because there's not enough money.

    If you believe there is no God, then it is you responsible for the ills in the world.

    From your perspective, you can only then believe that everything has a price and its a price you're willing to pay. Your happy thoughts and well wishes and the odd tenner you might throw to charity every now and then ultimately means nothing. You will live and die, that's that.

    Fine.

    Don't claim that you're aiming to build a better world, especially as your first question was about how many people are killed by capitalism. That question tells me all I need to know.
    I am not looking out for human race. No one needs to look after. Just go good under your own domain and the system will be in equilibrium.

    You are bringing food shortage, petrol shortage, scarcity.... I don't understand where does it fits in the argument.

    What you have posted is jumble of thoughts which are not coherent with each other.

    Sit down, relax. And then string the elements with one another and come up with a post that is in line with the argument. You may have justified reasons but as of now, they are so much scattered through out that it's hard to understand.

  36. #35
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    348
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's hard to understand only because you have skewed the conversation to one particular angle to justify your point, without acknowledging that the symptoms and failings of human behaviour are the same, influenced by religion or otherwise.

    Religion influences violence no more or less than patriotism, nationalism, corruption, Imperialism, Dictatorships etc

    If you want to explain the actual variance of why things happen more often in some places than others, you will find they have little to do with religion.

    I am relaxed btw, all I'm saying is, you won't ever get far in the point you're trying to make in a serious discussion.

    History is testament to that.

  37. #36
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Halaribo View Post
    It's hard to understand only because you have skewed the conversation to one particular angle to justify your point, without acknowledging that the symptoms and failings of human behaviour are the same, influenced by religion or otherwise.

    Religion influences violence no more or less than patriotism, nationalism, corruption, Imperialism, Dictatorships etc

    If you want to explain the actual variance of why things happen more often in some places than others, you will find they have little to do with religion.

    I am relaxed btw, all I'm saying is, you won't ever get far in the point you're trying to make in a serious discussion.

    History is testament to that.
    If I've mistakenly starred the direction to a different direction, then apologies and let's reset.

    You stated that we can't have a serious discussion about it. Why though?

  38. #37
    Debut
    Aug 2017
    Runs
    348
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    If I've mistakenly starred the direction to a different direction, then apologies and let's reset.

    You stated that we can't have a serious discussion about it. Why though?
    No need to apologise, will respond later!

  39. #38
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Halaribo View Post
    I'm not the one asking questions like "how does capitalism kill people" and trying to make a case that religion is an exceptional case when it comes to the ills it brings to the world.

    This is where people try and then change the goalposts.

    Do you think Saudi would be killing and starving the Yemeni's as effectively as they are if the US and UK didn't need the money? Where is the moral authority to say no, it would be quite simple to tell them to jog on? So yes, the industry is killing people, because they know where their arms are ending up.

    WW1 was the result of an arms race. How many people died for that? What did religion have to do with it?

    My point is that to single out religion as the most significant influencer of violence is ridiculous, considering that any peace in our society is based on a hierarchy of value in which some people are just going to have a crapper life based on how much money thsy have. Which we know will result in premature deaths.

    I note you commented on the arms industry, but didn't comment on industrial practices that result on toxic substances being jettisoned into water supplies to cut on costs and to serve the interest of shareholders. Is that not a result of capitalist objectives? You may argue, we have legislation that can regulate. So why is it that so many organisations do the bare minimum to legally fulfil obligations, but avoid extra costs that might impact profits?

    Then you end up with some poor cancer ridden family, drinking water that the CEOs and local politicians of the area don't dare drink.

    What point are you trying to make?

    I personally wouldn't argue this point, but since it's been brought up... I would wager more people die on a daily basis because it is more important for some people to make money than any religious belief or practice is responsible for.

    I would wager that when you look at many of the significant religious reasonings behind harm and violence, a simple solution would be education.

    What's the solution when the educated are morally and ethically void and are barbaric with the advantages of power they have?
    Saudis are killing people in Yemen. British Aerospace and Vickers are not, any more than owning a set of Sabbatier kitchen knives makes me a murderer.

    That industrial processes create toxic byproducts is not a function of capitalism in itself. Green technology is also built by capitalists.

    WW1 was more the product of the colonial powers running out of space to expand into and turning on each other.

    Point is that capitalism itself doesn’t kill, people kill other people because they don’t care. It’s possible to pursue the ‘triple bottom line’ where people and environment are as important as profit.

  40. #39
    Debut
    Jan 2021
    Runs
    927
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Great channel, his work on the failings of the church and bringing world renowned experts from the Christian field, debunking their own myths on The Trinity, Crucifixion etc is truly mind blowing.

  41. #40
    Debut
    Feb 2019
    Runs
    6,640
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    Saudis are killing people in Yemen. British Aerospace and Vickers are not, any more than owning a set of Sabbatier kitchen knives makes me a murderer.

    That industrial processes create toxic byproducts is not a function of capitalism in itself. Green technology is also built by capitalists.

    WW1 was more the product of the colonial powers running out of space to expand into and turning on each other.

    Point is that capitalism itself doesn’t kill, people kill other people because they don’t care. It’s possible to pursue the ‘triple bottom line’ where people and environment are as important as profit.
    How many wars did the West wage because of oil?

    How many people are suffering because of capitalist debt?

    How many wars by USA to protect the USD?

    How many people killed by guns in the USA?

    Whats more, the West manufacture weapons, inc chemical, sell them to Saudi Arabia, who then frop them on Yemen.

    The statement that religious wars have killed more than any other ideology is false, ideologies such as capitalism and socialism have killed way more.

    As for the environment, just because the West is caring, doesn’t mean the rest of the world should.

  42. #41
    Debut
    Feb 2019
    Runs
    6,640
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    Actually you touched the point that I said. Religion is the most influential cause for human behavior when it comes to violence. There could be other factor such as revenge, hatred but religion can trigger the most as it has been seen time to time.

    The difference between your and mine argument is, you believe it's human behavior. I too believe it's human behavior but religion can put gas on that behavior much quicker and effectively than other entities to which you disagree.
    World War 1 and 2 have killed more people combined compared to religious violence. Political and economical ideologies influence human behaviour more than anything when it comes to violence.

    Come back with facts, not skewed view points because you are an Atheist (pro Hindutva) and want to feel relevant.

  43. #42
    Debut
    Jan 2010
    Runs
    40,009
    Mentioned
    803 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    I don't believe in God.

    There will be logical reasons why extremists resort to religion to push their agenda. But does it make it justified?
    Yet you defend the BJP/RSS?

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    No logical reason at all. Faith and logic preclude each other. Faith requires an a priori assumption which violates logic.
    Not at all.

    The question is always, how did we get here? Where did we come from?

    So logic dictates its either by RANDOM chance or there is an all powerful creator. Random chance doesn't make any sense to me as the laws of the universe aren't random in many ways.

    The point was, most people who accept God, an all powerful creator is because they have thought of these two scenarios.

    Faith is when you accept there is a creator but cannot understand very accept of his creation or his laws.


    Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of Sheep

  44. #43
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingKhanWC View Post
    The question is always, how did we get here? Where did we come from?

    So logic dictates its either by RANDOM chance or there is an all powerful creator. Random chance doesn't make any sense to me as the laws of the universe aren't random in many ways.

    .
    No, you have not applied logic. Logic does not dictate. You have made an a priori assumption in each of your two cases.

    Believe in a creator if you like, it’s up to you, but this is not a logical position to take, because the god hypothesis is untestable. It’s a position of faith. Which is fine by me

  45. #44
    Debut
    Jan 2010
    Runs
    40,009
    Mentioned
    803 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    No, you have not applied logic. Logic does not dictate. You have made an a priori assumption in each of your two cases.

    Believe in a creator if you like, it’s up to you, but this is not a logical position to take, because the god hypothesis is untestable. It’s a position of faith. Which is fine by me
    Its a logical question. Let me give you an easier one.

    1. How did the universe begin? We know the big bang but science doesn't know anything prior. So logic says as we are unable to answer this, could there be an all powerful creator. Or are we an experiment of aliens? etc.

    Nobody would believe in God or a faith based religion of God(s) if we knew the answer was nothing to do with an all powerful creator.


    Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of Sheep

  46. #45
    Debut
    Dec 2019
    Runs
    2,456
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingKhanWC View Post
    Its a logical question. Let me give you an easier one.

    1. How did the universe begin? We know the big bang but science doesn't know anything prior. So logic says as we are unable to answer this, could there be an all powerful creator. Or are we an experiment of aliens? etc.

    Nobody would believe in God or a faith based religion of God(s) if we knew the answer was nothing to do with an all powerful creator.


  47. #46
    Debut
    Mar 2016
    Runs
    378
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingKhanWC View Post
    Its a logical question. Let me give you an easier one.

    1. How did the universe begin? We know the big bang but science doesn't know anything prior. So logic says as we are unable to answer this, could there be an all powerful creator. Or are we an experiment of aliens? etc.

    Nobody would believe in God or a faith based religion of God(s) if we knew the answer was nothing to do with an all powerful creator.
    1st of all big bang is one of the many theoreies, though at present it's the most well accepted one due to experimental data supporting hypothesises conjectured assuming big bang. Now if you accept big bang then the question of anything prior doesn't arise, because time itself started with big bang, and without time there is no prior.

  48. #47
    Debut
    Jan 2010
    Runs
    40,009
    Mentioned
    803 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by anikrc1 View Post
    1st of all big bang is one of the many theoreies, though at present it's the most well accepted one due to experimental data supporting hypothesises conjectured assuming big bang. Now if you accept big bang then the question of anything prior doesn't arise, because time itself started with big bang, and without time there is no prior.
    Time and space not existing before the big bang doesn't nullify the question how did the big bang occur? Scientists have no clue, they can only make random guesses or suggestions. Therefore its logical to ask how did this happen. Some may think its an all powerful creator or others simply have nothing to say. Either way its logical to think if there is a creator. To suggest logic and reason doesn't has nothing to do with believing in God, is daft to say the least.


    Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of Sheep

  49. #48
    Debut
    Jan 2010
    Runs
    40,009
    Mentioned
    803 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    [QUOTE=Colorblind Genius;11326257[/QUOTE]

    He makes some fair points.


    Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of Sheep

  50. #49
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    1,420
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by s28 View Post
    Utter nonsense

    The most murderous ideologies in human history have been

    Capitalism/Colonialism/Imperialism (African slave trade)
    Communism (Mao et al caused multi million deaths)
    Nazism - Holocaust and World War 2

    None of those were 'religious' if anything anti-religious in their targeting of different races/religions
    Capitalism/Colonialism/Imperialism (African slave trade)

    And what justification was used for the slave trade? The Europeans used the Biblical verses on slavery, and the Arabs used the Quranic verses and hadith on slavery.

    Communism (Mao et al caused multi[sic] million deaths)

    And what about communism necessitated that? Communism isn't a rigid ideology which necessitates slaughter. It is a political philosophy. Mao wanted a cultural revolution, and would stop at nothing to do it. Sure, perhaps it was aligned with some sort of Marxian commentary on class struggle, but it is wrong to say that Communism is a murderous ideology just because Mao did some bad things.

    Nazism did align itself with the Church when it was convenient. It wasn't an entirely irreligious ideology. It Anti Semitism also has a long history within Christianity (and Islam, but that isn't relevant to Nazism).

  51. #50
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    1,420
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingKhanWC View Post
    Time and space not existing before the big bang doesn't nullify the question how did the big bang occur? Scientists have no clue, they can only make random guesses or suggestions. Therefore its logical to ask how did this happen. Some may think its an all powerful creator or others simply have nothing to say. Either way its logical to think if there is a creator. To suggest logic and reason doesn't has nothing to do with believing in God, is daft to say the least.
    We don't know for certain. It could be the case that the universe is on an infinite loop, or that it phases in and out of observability and unobservability. The bottom line is this, there is absolutely no evidence of god, and there is no reason to believe in one until such evidence arises. Therefore, agnostic atheism is the most rational belief (disbelief due to not knowing/having any evidence). To say 'we don't know where everything came from exactly, therefore god' is an argument from ignorance fallacy.

  52. #51
    Debut
    Dec 2019
    Runs
    2,456
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingKhanWC View Post
    He makes some fair points.
    IMO, he makes a great logical assertion without using any faith or any scientific formulas.

    His logic thought process and pondering upon the origin of the universe, sits pretty well with my own.

  53. #52
    Debut
    Dec 2019
    Runs
    2,456
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingKhanWC View Post
    He makes some fair points.
    IMO, he makes a great logical assertion without using any faith or any scientific formulae.

    His logical thought process and pondering upon the origin of the universe, sits pretty well with my own.

  54. #53
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingKhanWC View Post
    Time and space not existing before the big bang doesn't nullify the question how did the big bang occur? Scientists have no clue, they can only make random guesses or suggestions. Therefore its logical to ask how did this happen. Some may think its an all powerful creator or others simply have nothing to say. Either way its logical to think if there is a creator. To suggest logic and reason doesn't has nothing to do with believing in God, is daft to say the least.
    I think you are misunderstanding the term logic. This is a formal system of thought which you are not applying.

    Or if you are then you have to be intellectually honest and ask what created God? And what created that which created God? And on and on back into an infinity of time with no beginning, which violates the Big Bang theory which is born out by repeatable observable evidence.

    Visualise spacetime since the beginning as and expanding cone from the Big Bang. Now do what Hawking did on the train and imagine time rolling backwards so spacetime is now a funnel converging on a single point. There is nothing before this point because there can be nothing, no room and no time for anything to exist in or happen in, and that the only thing a single point in spacetime with infinite mass can do is explode.

    This is unsatisfying to some. Not me - I find it elegant and marvellous. Some people would be unhappy with it because they believe that cause and effect is universally applicable. But it isn’t as when things get very, very big or small or massive the law of cause and effect no longer applies.

    So you see, logic won’t get you to God. Only a leap of faith will.

  55. #54
    Debut
    Feb 2019
    Runs
    6,640
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No one has observed something coming out of nothing. Theories do not count. So a leap of faith is also required.

    We must also remember ‘logic’ is based on human cognitive thinking; it is ignorant to believe human logic is the correct and only logic in the universe.

  56. #55
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Technics 1210 View Post
    No one has observed something coming out of nothing. Theories do not count. So a leap of faith is also required.

    We must also remember ‘logic’ is based on human cognitive thinking; it is ignorant to believe human logic is the correct and only logic in the universe.
    Theory is how we understand the physical world. Gravity is a theory. Electricity is a theory.

    “Human logic” is our discovery of a realm where we can make exact statements about the universe. The realm of maths and logic is the only place we can do this with absolute certainty. You’re a coder - you know that a Boolean statement is either true or false, nothing in between, and you can say so with absolute certainty.

  57. #56
    Debut
    Feb 2019
    Runs
    6,640
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    Theory is how we understand the physical world. Gravity is a theory. Electricity is a theory.

    “Human logic” is our discovery of a realm where we can make exact statements about the universe. The realm of maths and logic is the only place we can do this with absolute certainty. You’re a coder - you know that a Boolean statement is either true or false, nothing in between, and you can say so with absolute certainty.
    The maths says you cannot create from zero.

    Logic says, a computer program requires a programmer.

    Our understanding is based on observation of the physical world, metaphysics on the other hand can be used to ‘suggest’ anything without observation.

  58. #57
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Technics 1210 View Post
    The maths says you cannot create from zero.

    Logic says, a computer program requires a programmer.

    Our understanding is based on observation of the physical world, metaphysics on the other hand can be used to ‘suggest’ anything without observation.
    There was no “zero” in the Big Bang, there was a single point with near-infinite mass.

    If code needs a coder, then a creator god needs a bigger creator god, and that god an even bigger one still, and so on back into infinity.

    My point is that logic exists irrespective of humans - we discovered it not invented it.

  59. #58
    Debut
    Feb 2019
    Runs
    6,640
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    There was no “zero” in the Big Bang, there was a single point with near-infinite mass.

    If code needs a coder, then a creator god needs a bigger creator god, and that god an even bigger one still, and so on back into infinity.

    My point is that logic exists irrespective of humans - we discovered it not invented it.
    Where did the single point of infinite mass come from? If you believe it was just 'there', then using your logic 'god' can also be just there just like infinite point of mass with no explnation required. If you believe the single infinite mass came from nothing, then how? Which is it? Or let me guess, you're going to come out with the 'science doesn't know yet' line?

    Yes code needs a coder. There is no if, no buts. This is empirical logic that is demonstrable time after time. Feel free to disprove this logic by citing an example of code coming from nothing.

    Your point is your logic is based on human observation and understanding, but this isn't universal, in the same way the laws of physics considered universal by do not do not apply to quantum behaviour.

    The issue with your view is that you say god is faith, which is true, but you try an± disprove God using laws/logic within the known universe, when logic dictates that these laws do not apply to a creator because said creator resides outside the universe inorder to create the universe.

  60. #59
    Debut
    Dec 2017
    Runs
    1,420
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Technics 1210 View Post
    Where did the single point of infinite mass come from? If you believe it was just 'there', then using your logic 'god' can also be just there just like infinite point of mass with no explnation required. If you believe the single infinite mass came from nothing, then how? Which is it? Or let me guess, you're going to come out with the 'science doesn't know yet' line?

    Yes code needs a coder. There is no if, no buts. This is empirical logic that is demonstrable time after time. Feel free to disprove this logic by citing an example of code coming from nothing.

    Your point is your logic is based on human observation and understanding, but this isn't universal, in the same way the laws of physics considered universal by do not do not apply to quantum behaviour.

    The issue with your view is that you say god is faith, which is true, but you try an± disprove God using laws/logic within the known universe, when logic dictates that these laws do not apply to a creator because said creator resides outside the universe inorder to create the universe.
    Since you mention the word 'logic' a lot, I wonder if you could name the 3 laws of logic without Googling. Or even any of the rules of inference. What about the laws of logic say that a code needs a coder? But let's take your analogy, if everything needs a creator of some sort, then god needs one. I see that you're trying to handwave the need for a god needing a god-er by saying god isn't bound by the same laws, but if you make a universal statement (i.e, everything needs a creator) but then say the thing you're arguing for doesn't need to follow that such statement, then that is a special pleading fallacy.

    You vaguely gesture about quantum behaviour. We can observe quantum indeterminacy and other aspects of quantum mechanics. However, we cannot observe a god, nor can we even test any hypotheses about a god, making it unfalsifiable. And any unfalsifiable claims are thrown out, because they are no better than assertions.

  61. #60
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Technics 1210 View Post
    Where did the single point of infinite mass come from? If you believe it was just 'there', then using your logic 'god' can also be just there just like infinite point of mass with no explnation required. If you believe the single infinite mass came from nothing, then how? Which is it? Or let me guess, you're going to come out with the 'science doesn't know yet' line?

    Yes code needs a coder. There is no if, no buts. This is empirical logic that is demonstrable time after time. Feel free to disprove this logic by citing an example of code coming from nothing.

    Your point is your logic is based on human observation and understanding, but this isn't universal, in the same way the laws of physics considered universal by do not do not apply to quantum behaviour.

    The issue with your view is that you say god is faith, which is true, but you try an± disprove God using laws/logic within the known universe, when logic dictates that these laws do not apply to a creator because said creator resides outside the universe inorder to create the universe.
    It didn’t “come from” anywhere, there was no time and no place for it to come from. There is no evidence for God, but there is mathematical proof of and scientific evidence for the primordial atom.

    Asking how the primordial atom got there is like asking how you get further north than the North Pole. It’s meaningless.

    You’ve missed the point about the coder. I mean that we can make absolutely correct statements about the meta-universe which logic and maths inhabit. These are concepts we discovered, not invented. They were here before us, and are independent of us now. Whereas physical laws such as laws of motion, left-hand rule, and relativity are close approximations of nature.

    You cannot disprove God with logic because logic does not work that way. It’s like saying you can’t disprove pink unicorns on Mars. You can only prove things are there, not disprove things that aren’t.

  62. #61
    Debut
    Feb 2019
    Runs
    6,640
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    It didn’t “come from” anywhere, there was no time and no place for it to come from. There is no evidence for God, but there is mathematical proof of and scientific evidence for the primordial atom.

    Asking how the primordial atom got there is like asking how you get further north than the North Pole. It’s meaningless.

    You’ve missed the point about the coder. I mean that we can make absolutely correct statements about the meta-universe which logic and maths inhabit. These are concepts we discovered, not invented. They were here before us, and are independent of us now. Whereas physical laws such as laws of motion, left-hand rule, and relativity are close approximations of nature.

    You cannot disprove God with logic because logic does not work that way. It’s like saying you can’t disprove pink unicorns on Mars. You can only prove things are there, not disprove things that aren’t.
    No, that’s not what I asked you.

    Where did the infinite mass come from?

    If you are going to use science, then lets talk Physics. Causation is a primary tenet in Physics. Yet here you are saying that the infinite mass came from nowhere and was just there? Steady state theory died an ignominious death ages ago. Still, if you want to go with the - it didn’t come from nowhere - answer, then God didn’t come from nowhere either. So your arguement about what created what infinity, has also died a death.

    Our current knowledge and understanding tells us that mass and energy are interchangeable; so where there is mass there is energy.

    Logically, where did infinite mass come from can be answered from 1 of the 3

    1. Something
    2. Nothing
    3. Was always there

    Here’s the thing, you believe science and God oppose each other, I believe the two compliment each other and easily coexist; yet both you and I still make leaps of faith.

    On the point of the coder - intelligence begets intelligence.

  63. #62
    Debut
    Feb 2019
    Runs
    6,640
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Essentially Robert what you are saying is this :

    When someone posits a God, you ask where did God come from. Yet when someone asks you where did infinite mass in the Big Bang theory come from, you say, it didn’t come from anywhere.

  64. #63
    Debut
    Jan 2010
    Runs
    40,009
    Mentioned
    803 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    I think you are misunderstanding the term logic. This is a formal system of thought which you are not applying.

    Or if you are then you have to be intellectually honest and ask what created God? And what created that which created God? And on and on back into an infinity of time with no beginning, which violates the Big Bang theory which is born out by repeatable observable evidence.

    Visualise spacetime since the beginning as and expanding cone from the Big Bang. Now do what Hawking did on the train and imagine time rolling backwards so spacetime is now a funnel converging on a single point. There is nothing before this point because there can be nothing, no room and no time for anything to exist in or happen in, and that the only thing a single point in spacetime with infinite mass can do is explode.

    This is unsatisfying to some. Not me - I find it elegant and marvellous. Some people would be unhappy with it because they believe that cause and effect is universally applicable. But it isn’t as when things get very, very big or small or massive the law of cause and effect no longer applies.

    So you see, logic won’t get you to God. Only a leap of faith will.
    I think you are looking too deep into logic. Its just reasoning. esp in this subject. There is also logic in computer terminology.

    I agree its logical to ask if there is a God , who created God. The answer is simple, God has always existed, space and time are his creation.

    This makes more sense than some strange chance , after chance, after chance x 1trillion chance meaning its just chance everything has come together. With the complexity of the universe inc life, this isn't very logical.

    Im not here to convince anyone but to suggest those who believe in God are illogical is very lame.


    Lions don't lose sleep over the opinions of Sheep

  65. #64
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Technics 1210 View Post
    No, that’s not what I asked you.

    Where did the infinite mass come from? .
    Already answered twice further up. Didn’t come “from” anywhere because there was no “where”.

    See what I posted about Hawking on the train. His explanation is elegant.

  66. #65
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by KingKhanWC View Post
    I think you are looking too deep into logic. Its just reasoning. esp in this subject. There is also logic in computer terminology.

    I agree its logical to ask if there is a God , who created God. The answer is simple, God has always existed, space and time are his creation.

    This makes more sense than some strange chance , after chance, after chance x 1trillion chance meaning its just chance everything has come together. With the complexity of the universe inc life, this isn't very logical.

    Im not here to convince anyone but to suggest those who believe in God are illogical is very lame.
    That’s not simple at all, it’s complex. You are trying to use logic to prove that something unlikely (the universe) has to come from something more unlikely (creator) then you have to extend this back to what created the creator, else you are not following your own thought process to conclusion and therefore are being intellectually dishonest and copping out.

    This business about “chance”. When the four forces came into being, the universe becoming this shape was not “chance” - evolution of stars because inevitable and inexorable. Then some of these stars reached their end and blew up which was inevitable and inexorable, and the elemental rubble from these stars formed planets inevitably and inexorably, then these were pulled into orbit around new second generation stars which formed inevitably and inexorably, such as our Sun. Some of these planets fall in the “Goldilocks Zone” where water is liquid and amino acids will form inevitably and then become proteins inevitably. On at least one planet in the sky (we call it Earth) a self-replicating molecule formed from proteins, and at that point life became inevitable and inexorable, as did eventual human life. We happen to be in a favourable test tube because we have a planet with electromagnetic poles which deflect mush of the solar radiation which would prevent life, and we also have Jupiter and Saturn whose gravity hoovers up most of the big space rocks which would otherwise hit us and cause eco-catastrophe as in the event that ended the dinosaurs.

    So there is no “chance” - it was bound to happen this way, and no creator is required. It’s just nature doing what nature does.

    Eventually the four forces will combine to bring the universe to a close hundreds of billions of years hence, which is sad for me, but on at least one planet the four forces have evolved beings which are self-aware and capable of asking these questions. And I think that’s marvellous.
    Last edited by Robert; 27th October 2021 at 12:09.

  67. #66
    Debut
    Feb 2019
    Runs
    6,640
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    Already answered twice further up. Didn’t come “from” anywhere because there was no “where”.

    See what I posted about Hawking on the train. His explanation is elegant.
    Forget Hawkin and his metaphysical train.

    So your answer is infinite mass came from nowhere. Got it. Very illogical, still you are free to believe the universe popped out of a cosmic hat.

  68. #67
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Technics 1210 View Post
    Forget Hawkin and his metaphysical train.

    So your answer is infinite mass came from nowhere. Got it. Very illogical, still you are free to believe the universe popped out of a cosmic hat.
    Hawking cannot be forgotten in this discussion because he worked out the equations underpinning the Big Bang theory. His equations are born out by observable data.

    Not “from nowhere”. There was no nowhere to pop out of, no space for the cosmic hat to exist in. There wasn’t anywhere it could come from and no time for it to exist in. Time and dimensions are products of the Bang.

    Not illogical, just difficult to comprehend because we are taught to believe cause and effect is a universal law. But it cannot exist outside the universe. Cause and effect is a product of the beginning of the universe, not somehow outside it.

  69. #68
    Debut
    Feb 2019
    Runs
    6,640
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    Hawking cannot be forgotten in this discussion because he worked out the equations underpinning the Big Bang theory. His equations are born out by observable data.

    Not “from nowhere”. There was no nowhere to pop out of, no space for the cosmic hat to exist in. There wasn’t anywhere it could come from and no time for it to exist in. Time and dimensions are products of the Bang.

    Not illogical, just difficult to comprehend because we are taught to believe cause and effect is a universal law. But it cannot exist outside the universe. Cause and effect is a product of the beginning of the universe, not somehow outside it.
    You are playing with words.

    Hawkins has been wrong in the past, and you are confusing observable data with circumstantial evidence.

    You make no sense. You claim we are taught cause and effect, yet claim infinite mass came from nowhere.

    Like I said, if you believe the universe had a beginning with no cause or anything existing before it, (infinite mass existed from nowhere), then you should have no problem accepting the notion a god can exist with no beginning either.

  70. #69
    Debut
    May 2010
    Venue
    UK
    Runs
    34,144
    Mentioned
    298 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    I don't believe in God.

    There will be logical reasons why extremists resort to religion to push their agenda. But does it make it justified?
    Everything can be justified from the viewpoint of the atheist. You can just say "this is the outcome of the world shaped by preceding events".


    Name:  tumblr_phwwkwCQSZ1u9qgcf_500.jpeg
Views: 123
Size:  52.9 KB


    I for one welcome our new In____ overlords - Kent Brockman

  71. #70
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpt. Rishwat View Post
    Everything can be justified from the viewpoint of the atheist. You can just say "this is the outcome of the world shaped by preceding events".


    Name:  tumblr_phwwkwCQSZ1u9qgcf_500.jpeg
Views: 123
Size:  52.9 KB
    Well a religious person can not understand what is justified for an athiest and vice versa.

  72. #71
    Debut
    May 2010
    Venue
    UK
    Runs
    34,144
    Mentioned
    298 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Itachi View Post
    Well a religious person can not understand what is justified for an athiest and vice versa.
    Agreed, that is why it is pointless debating it beyond a certain stage. But I suppose these topics keep reappearing because everyone is looking for some magic pill answer.


    I for one welcome our new In____ overlords - Kent Brockman

  73. #72
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Technics 1210 View Post
    You are playing with words.

    Hawkins has been wrong in the past, and you are confusing observable data with circumstantial evidence.

    You make no sense. You claim we are taught cause and effect, yet claim infinite mass came from nowhere.

    Like I said, if you believe the universe had a beginning with no cause or anything existing before it, (infinite mass existed from nowhere), then you should have no problem accepting the notion a god can exist with no beginning either.
    Not playing with words. You’re asking a question which is operationally meaningless, like “what is north of the North Pole?”

    There was a beginning - the infinite mass point at the beginning of time. There is mathematical proof of this, and measurable evidence confirming when the point occurred.

    But there is no evidence of God. Doesn’t mean God is not there. But the God hypothesis is untestable.

  74. #73
    Debut
    May 2016
    Runs
    10,728
    Mentioned
    519 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    Not playing with words. You’re asking a question which is operationally meaningless, like “what is north of the North Pole?”

    There was a beginning - the infinite mass point at the beginning of time. There is mathematical proof of this, and measurable evidence confirming when the point occurred.

    But there is no evidence of God. Doesn’t mean God is not there. But the God hypothesis is untestable.
    Were mathematical rules already in existence?


    A skilled hawk conceals its talons.

  75. #74
    Debut
    Feb 2019
    Runs
    6,640
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    Not playing with words. You’re asking a question which is operationally meaningless, like “what is north of the North Pole?”

    There was a beginning - the infinite mass point at the beginning of time. There is mathematical proof of this, and measurable evidence confirming when the point occurred.

    But there is no evidence of God. Doesn’t mean God is not there. But the God hypothesis is untestable.
    So now you claim my question is meaningless because you cannot answer it? LOL.

    Actually you did, you said infinite mass came from nothing/nowhere

    The fact you keep repeating the line there’s is no evidence of God is irrelevant; what is relevant is your logic, and how it is flawed and at best hypocritical.

    You shouldn’t be asking where God came from when you believe the universe was created from nothing.

    Mathematical proof? What’s your point? Who said there was no beginning? I just asked you where the infinite mass came from and the rest we can see.

    Atheism at its finest - cannot answer, will not answer, play on words, then claim questions are meaningless.

    Your faith is weak.

  76. #75
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chief Destroyer View Post
    Were mathematical rules already in existence?
    Oooh good one. I am not a mathematician but my understanding is that maths doesn’t work in a singularity when mass = infinity and there is no space and no time.

    I would guess that the meta-universe of mathematical laws came into being at the BB as did the physical universe.

    You’d have to ask a mathematician.

  77. #76
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Technics 1210 View Post
    So now you claim my question is meaningless because you cannot answer it? LOL.

    Actually you did, you said infinite mass came from nothing/nowhere

    The fact you keep repeating the line there’s is no evidence of God is irrelevant; what is relevant is your logic, and how it is flawed and at best hypocritical.

    You shouldn’t be asking where God came from when you believe the universe was created from nothing.

    Mathematical proof? What’s your point? Who said there was no beginning? I just asked you where the infinite mass came from and the rest we can see.

    Atheism at its finest - cannot answer, will not answer, play on words, then claim questions are meaningless.

    Your faith is weak.
    Of course I cannot answer meaningless questions. Can you answer the question “is laughter purple?” You cannot because it makes no linguistic sense.

    I don’t have any faith, and am not trying to defend atheism. I am trying to explain the counter-intuitive concept of the Big Bang theory. Once again - at the beginning of time everything was concentrated into a single infinitely dense point, and the point went bang, and time and dimensions as the four forces and matter and energy came to be. There was no time prior to this for the single point to have come from. Time started at the bang.

  78. #77
    Debut
    Jun 2015
    Venue
    Srinagar
    Runs
    4,767
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert View Post
    Of course I cannot answer meaningless questions. Can you answer the question “is laughter purple?” You cannot because it makes no linguistic sense.

    I don’t have any faith, and am not trying to defend atheism. I am trying to explain the counter-intuitive concept of the Big Bang theory. Once again - at the beginning of time everything was concentrated into a single infinitely dense point, and the point went bang, and time and dimensions as the four forces and matter and energy came to be. There was no time prior to this for the single point to have come from. Time started at the bang.
    It's a simple question, how did the infinite mass pop into existence? Answer that and the issue is resolved

  79. #78
    Debut
    Mar 2016
    Runs
    221
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My view of God is that we are all it. We just have to realize it. There is no entity separate from us sitting in the clouds or some heaven and looking upon us.

    The problem with the discussion here is our brains are wired to find reason or causation for the existence. The existence can just be. There should be no reason for it to exist. There is a possibility of no-existence only when there is existence. Ying-Yang!!

  80. #79
    Debut
    Nov 2007
    Runs
    32,621
    Mentioned
    1146 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Adijazz1706 View Post
    It's a simple question, how did the infinite mass pop into existence? Answer that and the issue is resolved
    It’s not a simple question, because by asking it you are saying that the Big Bang Theory is wrong.

    The infinite mass didn’t pop into existence because there was no place and no time for it to pop out of. It just was. In a literal sense, time started 13.7 billion years ago. This is born out by mathematical proof and by

    Trouble is, people are trapped by the constraints of language into being unable to comprehend this.

    If you like you can consider M-Theory which posits two ten-dimensional sheets which ripple against each other, and when they touch then a Big Bang occurs and another universe appears in a separate space time bubble to the one we are in now. Like cabbages sprouting from some cosmic cabbage patch. I can’t visualise ten-dimensional sheets though. I can barely visualise four dimensions.

    But then we are back to where did the ten-dimensional sheets come from…..

  81. #80
    Debut
    Jun 2011
    Venue
    Delhi
    Runs
    14,551
    Mentioned
    215 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Adijazz1706 View Post
    It's a simple question, how did the infinite mass pop into existence? Answer that and the issue is resolved
    Time works in a different manner when you go for big bang theory. It's hard to see time as dimension but if you go for advanced physics, it is. Just not like length, breath but a dimension none the less.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •