Who or what would want nothing over something? So there you have it.
If given a choice between a suffering existence and nothing, I would choose nothing. Eternal life in hell for example would definitely not be preferred over nothingness. |
|
|
|
|
Winning Eleven is the clear winner for me. I love playing soccer games, watching them, and playing the sport.
|
|
|
|
I never had a problem with working recaptchas, but the virtually impossible ones to bypass are those reCAPTCHA V1 IS SHUTDOWN messages  |
|
|
|
Science has found cause and effect. If, as the standard understanding of science is, there is no spirit or soul, then all things that we attribute to spirit and soul, are simply bio-electrical (or other) impulses that operate via C&E. All electrical impulses follow exact physical laws. Everything is programmed from the beginning... programming called cause and effect. No free will. Only programming. But the scientists who think this way, still feel that they have free will to some extent. So, is the feeling of free will, really free will? Or is it artificial free will via C&E? If it is artificial free will, and there is nothing scientific that shows real free will, how do we know that we have free will, scientifically speaking? The atheist who is a science buff, doesn't know that he has free will. He knows that he feels free will. But he doesn't know if it is artificial or real. He can only suggest artificial, because C&E is proven, but spontaneity hasn't been proven. To the atheist, everything is programmed, except that he guesses that there might be true free will that we don't know about. The theist understands that there is free will, because God tells him that there is free will. But where does the free will lie? Just because a theist knows that he has free will, doesn't remove him from C&E programming, which programming says that free will is artificial. From a theistic standpoint, we have free will. But our free will isn't what we think it is. We use artificial free will in our daily operations in lives, just like the atheists. We also use real free will daily (just like the atheists who don't know it), but we don't really know how we use it. It is a complete mystery. But we feel and use our artificial free will all the time.  “DNA neither cares nor knows. DNA just is. And we dance to its music.” - Richard Dawkins I disagree with Dawkins though. I believe that we are more than the sum of our genetic makeup and environment. We also have the spirit which can go against those two factors. The soul/spirit, which is independent of our genes and environment, gives us this free will. You quoted Jesus yourself, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are "gods"' |
|
|
|
Thats why we will look for the root of the problem. why they reject this very innovative bitcoin system. when I asked my friends why
they refused. they only know that bitcoin is just a scam, ponzi and mlm investment. I think it's just their disobedience
It is a fact of life that things that have no intrinsic value would be held with suspicion, especially one that has also been attacked by the media and by several trustworthy people in the investment world. |
|
|
|
Do you often wear sunglasses in real life? I like wearing sunglasses. I live in a hot, sunny country  |
|
|
|
In my opinion, a theist believes in an eternal being, but an atheist does not. This is the primary difference. To say that an atheist denies "one more god" than a theist would be misleading |
|
|
|
|
Frankly, I am struggling to follow the rationale too lol
For what it is worth, I believe in free will. I don't know if BADecker is for or against the idea that we have free will, but I assume he is for because he believes in God.
There is no way God would create humans with no free will, that would be self-defeating.
|
|
|
|
This is a theory of many crypto nay-sayers is that we will all lose our total investment in the long run.
Not fair to assume this, if you ask me, since there are already people who have turned their investment into returns of profit.
I think the fact that there are people who have already turned their investments into returns of profit does not necessarily support the idea that cryptocurrency is a good investment in the long run. In ponzi schemes, the people who invested in the beginning also get to turn their investments into huge returns of profit, but they are still fraudulent schemes in the long run. That said, crypto is not a ponzi scheme, these are the characteristics of a ponzi scheme: A guaranteed promise of high returns with little risk Consistent flow of returns regardless of market conditions Investments that have not been registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Investment strategies that are a secret or described as too complex Clients not allowed to view official paperwork for their investment Clients facing difficulties removing their money Evidently, the characteristics do not fit crypto at all. |
|
|
|
I have enough food and water at home to only live for a couple of hours. I don't even know what to do.
Lol Surviving an apocalypse? Yes, it would be tough, but only because of the zombies roaming around! Yes, I watch Netflix too |
|
|
|
We could always ask questions for whatever happens. If nothing exists, the question would be, "how come nothing ever exists?" Of course, there would be no one to ask that question, but philosophically speaking, the question would be a mystery.
Is it more probable for nothing to exist at all than it is for at least something to exist?
What are you speaking about? I am saying the human mind questions everything |
|
|
|
It is not an arrogant view, it is a plain fact.
Manipulation ie. rigged elections, shady polls, media control = less power to the citizens = more power to the elite minority
There is a difference between less and not at all! Seems a bit extreme to say democracy doesn't work at all for me... But hey who am I to judge? Yes, I only read the part where m0lgiE quoted, I didn't read the unquoted statement about democracy being the worst form of government. |
|
|
|
An eternal being is just as weird as something coming into existence spontaneously.
Lol, that's true, and that's why there is theism and atheism A couple things I want to add. If there is such a thing as an eternal first cause or God, then this implies that something can exist eternally. Thus even the universe could exist eternally as well, and requires no creator. In such a scenario, Occam's razor would indicate that the universe is itself eternal. However modern cosmology seems to indicate that our universe is not eternal but rather has a beginning, and so in order to support the eternal universe model, we create a theory where the universe goes through endless expansion-contraction cycles forever. I personally do not believe our universe goes through endless expansion-contraction cycles, because I believe in intelligent design. |
|
|
|
Then they are not eternal, boom! An atheist simply doesn't believe ridiculous claims without evidence. I never rejected the idea that the universe is created by some being somehow somewhere. There is no way to know that right now.
If the aliens came into existence by themselves (nobody created them), then this implies that something can spontaneously come into existence by itself. Thus even the universe could come into existence by itself as well, and requires no creator. In such a scenario, Occam's razor would indicate that the universe did not need aliens to create it. If the aliens were created by someone, we need to find out whether their creator is eternal, and so on until we identify the first cause, or the eternal being that always exist. Thus we would identify him/her as God. Many theists go back to the first cause from the get-go, they don't bother with intermediary creators, they care about the ultimate creator of everything and who always exists. |
|
|
|
It is unfortunate that God is misunderstood to be the "god of the gaps" Given a choice between "god of the gaps" and science, who would choose the former? God is not the god of the gaps. |
|
|
|
As soon as manipulation works, and it does, then "democracy" does not mean "Power to the citizens."
That's an incredibly elitist and arrogant point of view. The people are too stupid to be able to govern themselves? I'm not sure what was wrong with what he said m0gliE, could you elaborate on it? It is not an arrogant view, it is a plain fact. Manipulation ie. rigged elections, shady polls, media control = less power to the citizens = more power to the elite minority |
|
|
|
Yes and mr super creator that I just invented is now by definition the creator of the universe, therefore mr super creator is the creator of the universe. You see any flaws with that argument?
It is not an argument mate. I was simply saying that a person who believes that this universe was created by an eternal alien race is a theist, not an atheist. To him, the aliens are gods/deities. I am not saying that you believe this mate, I know you are an atheist. An atheist does not subscribe to the idea that this universe was created by anyone, not even aliens. |
|
|
|
Yeah, no.. God from the bible is clearly defined as 1 being, perhaps 3 but not 100 or 1000. A very advanced alien race outside the universe could have created it and no, that's not god, sorry.
Exactly, but the God of the bible is a monotheistic view of God. Many theists do not believe in the God of the bible. I understand but it doesn't have to be a ''god''. There are thousands of different gods, the other option is simply super advanced civilizations that created the universe without being omnipotent etc etc. True mate. It comes down to this, are these aliens uncreated? ie always exist, eternal? God is uncreated by definition. God always exist. If these aliens had a point of origin then they are not God. The reason why I described them as God earlier was because of the this statement. "If those aliens create the universe and exist outside of space and time, then they are by definition, God" Something(s) that create this world and exist outside of space and time must logically be independent of time, ie eternal. |
|
|
|
Yeah, no.. God from the bible is clearly defined as 1 being, perhaps 3 but not 100 or 1000. A very advanced alien race outside the universe could have created it and no, that's not god, sorry.
Exactly, but the God of the bible is a monotheistic view of God. Many theists do not believe in the God of the bible. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
