The Christians, the muslims and Jews always tell me that there is one God and that he is powerful. In fact, he is omnipotent and can do anything. He cares for us human beings and all we need to do is follow his commandments. This God also created our universe. He is perfect, he is the almighty creator.

However, I just cannot believe in this God. This God sounds like a fairytale super-alien.

How can a God be so powerful and yet so invisible? How is it that there is no physical or scientific evidence that can prove this God's existence? We cannot hear him but he supposedly answers prayers. We cannot see him but he heals the sick and cares for us. The only other invisible smooth operator is Santa claus. That fat bastard that delivers presents to children all over the world. Yet, we all accept that Santa is a fairy tale.

How can a God be omnipotent? Omnipotence is a ridiculous concept. An absurdity in principle. Being omnipotent means being all powerful without limits. Let's look at how ridiculous the concept is; if God can do anything, then he should be able to create a second God that is stronger than himself.

The funniest thing about this God is that most of the people preaching about him are not even sensible. If I were a powerful god, I would have sensible people representing me. Jesus and Muhammad were both illiterates by their own societal standards. Moses was literate but not a trained priest.

Going further about people who represent God, every believer is divided on who or what this God is. Some say that God is Male. Some say that God is gender neutral. Some represent him as an old white man in the sky. Some say God is a God of vengeance like the biblical old testament. Some say that he is a God of love.

Then, there is the philosophical problem of creation. Who created the creator? Where does God come from? Did he create himself or he just always existed? If he always existed, what was he doing with himself all those billions of years it took our galaxy to be formed?

I am getting my high on, its sallah after all, I will comment soon

Of what use is "God" though?

If a belief system doesn't help you understand electricity, gravity, weather, our solar system, medical aid, etc, then it can screw off.

"If God creates an immovable object, is he still omnipotent when he can't move it?" If stupid questions like this crap exist, then it can screw off.

If our civilization's advancements in technology and culture do not require god and/or religion, then it can screw off. (yes, many religious people have contributed to science, but was it their religion or their scientific method that made the contribution?)

If people are left with arguments that validate religion through its "therapeutic aspects" while disregarding the abuse, depression, oppression, antiquated and inefficient practices that are easily observable throughout history... Then. It. Can. Screw. The. Fùck. Off.

IAmSabrina:
Of what use is "God" though?

If a belief system doesn't help you understand electricity, gravity, weather, our solar system, medical aid, etc, then it can screw off.

"If God creates an immovable object, is he still omnipotent when he can't move it?" If stupid questions like this crap exist, then it can screw off.

If our civilization's advancements in technology and culture do not require god and/or religion, then it can screw off. (yes, many religious people have contributed to science, but was it their religion or their scientific method that made the contribution?)

If people are left with arguments that validate religion through its "therapeutic aspects" while disregarding the abuse, depression, oppression, antiquated and inefficient practices that are easily observable throughout history... Then. It. Can. Screw. The. Fùck. Off.

Calm down. I feel your stance.

I hope them religious people learn that their God is nothing but fairytales to non believers.

Cheers01:


Calm down. I feel your stance.

I hope them religious people learn that their God is nothing but fairytales to non believers.

LOL. I'm calm o

Cheers01:
The Christians, the muslims and Jews always tell me that there is one God and that he is powerful. In fact, he is omnipotent and can do anything. He cares for us human beings and all we need to do is follow his commandments. This God also created our universe. He is perfect, he is the almighty creator.

Yes and this is ridiculous.

However, I just cannot believe in this God. This God sounds like a fairytale super-alien.

Me too

How can a God be so powerful and yet so invisible? How is it that there is no physical or scientific evidence that can prove this God's existence? We cannot hear him but he supposedly answers prayers. We cannot see him but he heals the sick and cares for us. The only other invisible smooth operator is Santa claus. That fat bastard that delivers presents to children all over the world. Yet, we all accept that Santa is a fairy tale.

Lol... And people like kingebuka think this is a reasonable assumption.

How can a God be omnipotent? Omnipotence is a ridiculous concept. An absurdity in principle. Being omnipotent means being all powerful without limits. Let's look at how ridiculous the concept is; if God can do anything, then he should be able to create a second God that is stronger than himself.

Well I think u are going to far here...
Let a God so powerful show himself to his creation. Why will humans create a robot with sight and hide from it and expect them to imagine and believe him.

The funniest thing about this God is that most of the people preaching about him are not even sensible. If I were a powerful god, I would have sensible people representing me. Jesus and Muhammad were both illiterates by their own societal standards. Moses was literate but not a trained priest.

He also have people like felixomore defending him... I think God is a clown

Going further about people who represent God, every believer is divided on who or what this God is. Some say that God is Male. Some say that God is gender neutral. Some represent him as an old white man in the sky. Some say God is a God of vengeance like the biblical old testament. Some say that he is a God of love.

Blame it on holy ghost... The confusionist

Then, there is the philosophical problem of creation. Who created the creator? Where does God come from? Did he create himself or he just always existed? If he always existed, what was he doing with himself all those billions of years it took our galaxy to be formed?

Lol... Let's just make them look stupid

Cheers01:
The Christians, the muslims and Jews always tell me that there is one God and that he is powerful. In fact, he is omnipotent and can do anything. He cares for us human beings and all we need to do is follow his commandments. This God also created our universe. He is perfect, he is the almighty creator.

However, I just cannot believe in this God. This God sounds like a fairytale super-alien.

How can a God be so powerful and yet so invisible? How is it that there is no physical or scientific evidence that can prove this God's existence? We cannot hear him but he supposedly answers prayers. We cannot see him but he heals the sick and cares for us. The only other invisible smooth operator is Santa claus. That fat bastard that delivers presents to children all over the world. Yet, we all accept that Santa is a fairy tale.

How can a God be omnipotent? Omnipotence is a ridiculous concept. An absurdity in principle. Being omnipotent means being all powerful without limits. Let's look at how ridiculous the concept is; if God can do anything, then he should be able to create a second God that is stronger than himself.

The funniest thing about this God is that most of the people preaching about him are not even sensible. If I were a powerful god, I would have sensible people representing me. Jesus and Muhammad were both illiterates by their own societal standards. Moses was literate but not a trained priest.

Going further about people who represent God, every believer is divided on who or what this God is. Some say that God is Male. Some say that God is gender neutral. Some represent him as an old white man in the sky. Some say God is a God of vengeance like the biblical old testament. Some say that he is a God of love.

Then, there is the philosophical problem of creation. Who created the creator? Where does God come from? Did he create himself or he just always existed? If he always existed, what was he doing with himself all those billions of years it took our galaxy to be formed?

Be careful of what you say dear. That you've not seen something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You think the world just came out from no where ? No, there is an origin, and the origin is the Almighty God.

so much headache for what does not exist?
the evidence for God's existence is hitting you hard so that every day you try to dismiss it all to no avail.

God is alive and Jesus is saviour

Brownhypo:
Be careful of what you say dear. That you've not seen something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You think the world just came out from no where ? No, there is an origin, and the origin is the Almighty God.

How do you know that God is the origin

Cheers01:
The Christians, the muslims and Jews always tell me that there is one God and that he is powerful. In fact, he is omnipotent and can do anything. He cares for us human beings and all we need to do is follow his commandments. This God also created our universe. He is perfect, he is the almighty creator.

However, I just cannot believe in this God. This God sounds like a fairytale super-alien.

How can a God be so powerful and yet so invisible? How is it that there is no physical or scientific evidence that can prove this God's existence? We cannot hear him but he supposedly answers prayers. We cannot see him but he heals the sick and cares for us. The only other invisible smooth operator is Santa claus. That fat bastard that delivers presents to children all over the world. Yet, we all accept that Santa is a fairy tale.

How can a God be omnipotent? Omnipotence is a ridiculous concept. An absurdity in principle. Being omnipotent means being all powerful without limits. Let's look at how ridiculous the concept is; if God can do anything, then he should be able to create a second God that is stronger than himself.

The funniest thing about this God is that most of the people preaching about him are not even sensible. If I were a powerful god, I would have sensible people representing me. Jesus and Muhammad were both illiterates by their own societal standards. Moses was literate but not a trained priest.

Going further about people who represent God, every believer is divided on who or what this God is. Some say that God is Male. Some say that God is gender neutral. Some represent him as an old white man in the sky. Some say God is a God of vengeance like the biblical old testament. Some say that he is a God of love.

Then, there is the philosophical problem of creation. Who created the creator? Where does God come from? Did he create himself or he just always existed? If he always existed, what was he doing with himself all those billions of years it took our galaxy to be formed?

Replace Energy with God in your post. Now reflect on it. Does it make sense?

We can start from there.

See ya tomorrow. Goodnight

FOLYKAZE:


Replace Energy with God in your post. Now reflect on it. Does it make sense?

We can start from there.

See ya tomorrow. Goodnight

Not OP but my answer to the bolded is NO. All i see is yet another attempt to obtain permission to use the name God by twisting the meaning such that it loses relevance.

The general opinion, that is, what most people understand as God is some all-powerful entity who has interest in humans, wants to have a personal relationship with them, and has the power to directly affect human lives and afterlives. Because of this, that entity needs to be obeyed, reverenced and worshipped. Be it due to fear, gratitude or obligation.

But because of God, we have to take some particular actions and decisions in our lives. Any entity whose existence does not inspire or motivate us to do something different from that which we would normally do is not, by most people’s view and understanding, God.

Ultimately, you are in no way wiser because someone has given a tag to something that makes no difference at the end of the day.

TheArranger:

Not OP but my answer to the bolded is NO. All i see is yet another attempt to obtain permission to use the name God by twisting the meaning such that it loses relevance.

You won't see the picture esp when you are looking toward the wrong direction.

TheArranger:

The general opinion, that is, what most people understand as God is some all-powerful entity who has interest in humans, wants to have a personal relationship with them, and has the power to directly affect human lives and afterlives. Because of this, that entity needs to be obeyed, reverenced and worshipped. Be it due to fear, gratitude or obligation.

Do you know what Anthropomorphism is?

On a literal sense, do you know what personification is?

Have you heard about Impersonal God/forces once?

Only a kid will picture God as a white beaded man sitting on throne on throne in the sky

TheArranger:

But because of God, we have to take some particular actions and decisions in our lives. Any entity whose existence does not inspire or motivate us to do something different from that which we would normally do is not, by most people’s view and understanding, God.

Where did you get this from?

TheArranger:

Ultimately, you are in no way wiser because someone has given a tag to something that makes no difference at the end of the day.

To you, it does not make a difference. To some people, it does make a difference.

You need to look into the reason why people keep money in high esteem and not extend same value to old newspaper.

Spot the difference sir.

FOLYKAZE:


You won't see the picture esp when you are looking toward the wrong direction.

What will it take to convince you that YOU are looking toward the wrong direction?

Do you know what Anthropomorphism is?

On a literal sense, do you know what personification is?

Have you heard about Impersonal God/forces once?

As a matter of fact yes. Unfortunately, i find them all irrelevant. Sorry.

Only a kid will picture God as a white beaded man sitting on throne on throne in the sky

Strawman fallacy. Also, it will interest you to know that majority of people view God as a personal force. Proof is the countless theistic religions we have all of the world. Clearly you're not in the majority.

Where did you get this from?

Why do people go to church?

What is your explanation for religious extremism?

To you, it does not make a difference. To some people, it does make a difference.

Exactly. To some. Not all

You need to look into the reason why people keep money in high esteem and not extend same value to old newspaper.

Money is a lot of things. Omni-potent isn't one of them.

Spot the difference sir.

sigh... I couldn't be bothered less honestly. I can view reality as it is without ever needing extraordinary claims and everything i've ever witnessed or experienced can and has been explained via science. I've never felt the need for "God". Maybe you do, but i don't.

Good night, sir.

TheArranger:

What will it take to convince you that YOU are looking toward the wrong direction?

Maybe when you can provide a logical and acceptable argument that shows Energy does not fit into the nature of God.

TheArranger:
As a matter of fact yes. Unfortunately, i find them all irrelevant. Sorry.

If you knew what anthropomorphism and personification is, you would understand spiritual people were trying to explain or express their understanding about nature and the universe by giving it a human attribute. This effort, however, does not in anyway changes the true nature of the natural forces.

TheArranger:
Strawman fallacy. Also, it will interest you to know that majority of people view God as a personal force. Proof is the countless theistic religions we have all of the world. Clearly you're not in the majority.

And you made headcount huh?

Personal God is a personification of impersonal forces. They are still the same thing. The only difference here is worldview and expression, but same nature.

When people tends to personify energy, it will have human attributions and become Shakti.

And in a situation where Energy is not personified, we end up with Impersonal forces like The Ultimate, Infinite, The one, and other tags. Impersonal forces are found in many non theistic religion, deism and new spiritual system.

TheArranger:
Why do people go to church?

What is your explanation for religious extremism?

How does the irrelevant question above address my question?

You made an assertion, that "Any entity whose existence does not inspire or motivate us to do something different from that which we would normally do is not, by most people’s view and understanding, God."

The fallacious claim above implies that God is the only thing that inspire and motivate people. Isn't that what you mean?

Can you justify your claim? Who are these people?

Please quit jumping around

TheArranger:
Exactly. To some. Not all

Perception. Driving by value and worth.

TheArranger:
Money is a lot of things. Omni-potent isn't one of them.

You are not denying people hold money in high esteem. Thank heavens!!

Let me break it down..

Do you know money is a God? Christians and Muslims agree on this. It is also a God in different cultures.

In your sense, God attribution is omnipotency.

Yoruba people says, oun owo se ti, ile ni gbe. That statement mean money is all powerful. By it value, everything can be done with the right quantity.

On a literal sense, everything has a cost. And anything that has a cost can be gotten with money.

Omnipotency checked!!

Work on omnipresence.

TheArranger:
sigh... I couldn't be bothered less honestly. I can view reality as it is without ever needing extraordinary claims and everything i've ever witnessed or experienced can and has been explained via science. I've never felt the need for "God". Maybe you do, but i don't.

Good night, sir.

This is not the aim of this discussion, you are making all ruse which doesn't make sense.

Allow me to digress to your game...

The religious people held that God is alpha and omega. You held Energy has no beginning or end.

They held that God was not created and immortal. You held that energy cannot be created nor destroyed.

They held that God is omnipresent. You held that everything is made up of energy.

They held that God is omnipotent. You held that Energy is powerful.

I asked OP to replace God with energy in his post and see if it make sense.

When he was asking who created God, have you or him asked who created energy?
Do you ask where the energy from the cosmo bang is from?

You see, hold unto your bullshiit. Let others hold unto theirs. It is the same piece of shiit with different wrap.

The whole world embark on a mission of knowing the truth. The path with which we seek truth is the difference, truth is constant. When you keep ascribing to science, some other people ascribe to spirituality. Findings made us understand spirituality in all honesty birthed modern science. Live with your path.


Goodnight friendAny entity whose existence does not inspire or motivate us to do something different from that which we would normally do is not, by most people

FOLYKAZE:


Replace Energy with God in your post. Now reflect on it. Does it make sense?

We can start from there.

See ya tomorrow. Goodnight

My problem with you is that you know very well that he is NOT talking about energy but the concept of religious God/ Gods. Why you keep bringing this your energy as God is what I don't understand. If he was talking about energy he will state it, energy exist and we know somethings about it. He is talking about religious Gods and all the assumptions and claims that are made about them by religious people. He is not talking about energy and when he substitutes energy as God it still don't make sense because energy for example does not speak to people, it doesn't not care about people, it isn't merciful, it does not want to be worshipped, it does not want to be praised, it does not want a personal relationship with people or want people to be it's loyal slaves, and above all it won't burn people when they die in a hot furnace for not believing in it. . Your energy concept has nothing to do with the God concept he is talking about or the one religious people are talking about either. He is talking about religious Gods while you are talking about something totally different. Your energy God is NOT the same with the God concept he's talking about do why bring it up in the first place? If energy is God to you fine, but that I'd NOT what religious people talk about, a Muslim or Christian does NOT think of energy when he thinks of Jesus or Allah so stop this your nonsense.

solite3:
so much headache for what does not exist?
the evidence for God's existence is hitting you hard so that every day you try to dismiss it all to no avail.

God is alive and Jesus is saviour

I am just explaining why I cant believe in your God. No headache.

You are free to challenge any of my arguments if you have the guts.

dalaman:


My problem with you is that you know very well that he is NOT talking about energy but the concept of religious God/ Gods. Why you keep bringing this your energy as God is what I don't understand. If he was talking about energy he will state it, energy exist and we know somethings about it. He is talking about religious Gods and all the assumptions and claims that are made about them by religious people. He is not talking about energy and when he substitutes energy as God it still don't make sense because energy for example does not speak to people, it doesn't not care about people, it isn't merciful, it does not want to be worshipped, it does not want to be praised, it does not want a personal relationship with people or want people to be it's loyal slaves, and above all it won't burn people when they die in a hot furnace for not believing in it. . Your energy concept has nothing to do with the God concept he is talking about or the one religious people are talking about either. He is talking about religious Gods while you are talking about something totally different. Your energy God is NOT the same with the God concept he's talking about do why bring it up in the first place? If energy is God to you fine, but that I'd NOT what religious people talk about, a Muslim or Christian does NOT think of energy when he thinks of Jesus or Allah so stop this your nonsense.

That guy is so ridiculous its actually unbelievable.

FOLYKAZE:

Maybe when you can provide a logical and acceptable argument that shows Energy does not fit into the nature of God.

I already did lol. You just want to act like i didn't. One can't help but wonder what ulterior motives you have at play here.

If you knew what anthropomorphism and personification is, you would understand spiritual people were trying to explain or express their understanding about nature and the universe by giving it a human attribute. This effort, however, does not in anyway changes the true nature of the natural forces.

Exactly! So what has been achieved now?

And you made headcount huh?

Are you seriously doubting this? Perhaps, you and your people have your weird fetishes and beliefs, but don't think for a second that you're in the majority. I even gave, as proof, the fact that there are countless theistic religions the world over.

Personal God is a personification of impersonal forces. They are still the same thing. The only difference here is worldview and expression, but same nature.

If they are still the same thing, i see no reason for personification or redefinition.

When people tends to personify energy, it will have human attributions and become Shakti.

Again. What's the point?!

And in a situation where Energy is not personified, we end up with Impersonal forces like The Ultimate, Infinite, The one, and other tags.

These impersonal forces are unfalsifiable. Thus, irrelevant.

How does the irrelevant question above address my question?

You made an assertion, that "Any entity whose existence does not inspire or motivate us to do something different from that which we would normally do is not, by most people’s view and understanding, God."

The fallacious claim above implies that God is the only thing that inspire and motivate people. Isn't that what you mean?

No. That is your usual strawman mining at work here because i specified that this was true for a subset of people. As i later discovered, you seem not to be one of them. Get on page.

Please quit jumping around

Rotflmao... I should be telling YOU this!

Perception. Driving by value and worth.

Yawn!!!

You are not denying people hold money in high esteem. Thank heavens!!

Let me break it down..

Do you know money is a God? Christians and Muslims agree on this. It is also a God in different cultures.

In your sense, God attribution is omnipotency.

Yoruba people says, oun owo se ti, ile ni gbe. That statement mean money is all powerful. By it value, everything can be done with the right quantity.

On a literal sense, everything has a cost. And anything that has a cost can be gotten with money.

You are already limiting the power of money with the bolded statement. For if money is a God, it should acquire ANY and EVERY thing.

Can money give you talent? Can money cure diseases like Tay-Sachs? Can money raise back the dead?

Please say YES if you have the guts

Omnipotency checked!!

No. Not really

Work on omnipresence

I think i can search out a lot of things that are more "omnipresent" than money. E.g Water

This is not the aim of this discussion, you are making all ruse which doesn't make sense.

Allow me to digress to your game...

The religious people held that God is alpha and omega. You held Energy has no beginning or end.

Ehh... Hold up a minute.

We know that energy can be created from mass; that's how the sun and atom bombs work. (And we can do the opposite, on a much smaller scale, inside particle accelerators.)

And finally, the current hypothesis is that the total energy of the universe is zero, so we know where the energy to create all the stuff in the universe came from: it turns out that space contributes negative energy, leading to a total (space + the stuff in the space) of zero.

Goodnight friendAny entity whose existence does not inspire or motivate us to do something different from that which we would normally do is not, by most people

Lol. Yeah. Sure thing, mate.

Been while Dude. Hope you are fine?

dalaman:


My problem with you is that you know very well that he is NOT talking about energy but the concept of religious God/ Gods. Why you keep bringing this your energy as God is what I don't understand. If he was talking about energy he will state it, energy exist and we know somethings about it.

The problem was primarily from the OP. If he was talking about Christian or Muslim God, he should have streamline his points to a particular God by mentioning it name. I wouldn't have purged if he had said or use Yahweh or Allah.

Energy fits into the nature of God. It is the reality in different religion, spirituality and conception of God. So don't make it appear I am nailing the OP. He created the problem from inception and should deal with it.


On another round, you agreed energy exist. We know that Shakti, a deity, is a personification of energy. Would you accept that deity exist in this case?

dalaman:

He is talking about religious Gods and all the assumptions and claims that are made about them by religious people. He is not talking about energy and when he substitutes energy as God it still don't make sense because energy for example does not speak to people, it doesn't not care about people, it isn't merciful, it does not want to be worshipped, it does not want to be praised, it does not want a personal relationship with people or want people to be it's loyal slaves, and above all it won't burn people when they die in a hot furnace for not believing in it. . Your energy concept has nothing to do with the God concept he is talking about or the one religious people are talking about either. He is talking about religious Gods while you are talking about something totally different.

Those human attributes are as a result of personification and anthropomorphism. You know this. It doesn't mean they actually talk or care about your existence.

Even in the bible, Judges are referred to as God. Human were called God. Money (marmoni) was referred to as God. If money could be recognized as God in Christianity, does this mean money talks, merciful, lives in the sky and literally have the attribute of God?

Money is just a commodity of exchange... It does not talk or care about your wellbeing. But in Christianity, it is a God.

So unless you are playing games, you should understand that personification is just a mere of expression.

dalaman:

Your energy God is NOT the same with the God concept he's talking about do why bring it up in the first place? If energy is God to you fine, but that I'd NOT what religious people talk about, a Muslim or Christian does NOT think of energy when he thinks of Jesus or Allah so stop this your nonsense.

He should mention Yahweh and Allah in his OP then.

The very moment he starts talking about God without been specific, he will be faced with tons of conceptions.

TheArranger:

I already did lol. You just want to act like i didn't. One can't help but wonder what ulterior motives you have at play here.

Where and when did you show Energy doesn't fit into the nature of God?

TheArranger:

Exactly! So what has been achieved now?

Proven that since Energy exist, God does exist too

TheArranger:

Are you seriously doubting this? Perhaps, you and your people have your weird fetishes and beliefs, but don't think for a second that you're in the majority. I even gave, as proof, the fact that there are countless theistic religions the world over.

Another baseless tantrum.

TheArranger:

If they are still the same thing, i see no reason for personification or redefinition.

You wouldn't see it but would see reason in given organism binomial name in he science world. Talk of hypocrisy.

TheArranger:

Again. What's the point?!

Better understanding.

TheArranger:

These impersonal forces are unfalsifiable. Thus, irrelevant.

You are in all directions. The discussion is not if impersonal forces are refutable or relevant, it is if they exist.

TheArranger:

No. That is your usual strawman mining at work here because i specified that this was true for a subset of people. As i later discovered, you seem not to be one of them. Get on page.

The fancy word wouldn't make you smart. Who are these people?

TheArranger:

Rotflmao... I should be telling YOU this!


Yawn!!!


You are already limiting the power of money with the bolded statement. For if money is a God, it should acquire ANY and EVERY thing.

That is the view of many cultures nd religion. They view money as God. If you have problem with that, go deal with it

TheArranger:

Can money give you talent? Can money cure diseases like Tay-Sachs? Can money raise back the dead?

Please say YES if you have the guts

Yes

TheArranger:

No. Not really


I think i can search out a lot of things that are more "omnipresent" than money. E.g Water

How old are you? You were thinking money is just currency. How dull...

People worship water as a deity, I don't have problem if water is omnipresent.

TheArranger:

Ehh... Hold up a minute.

We know that energy can be created from mass; how the sun and atom bombs work. (And we can do the opposite, on a much smaller scale, inside particle accelerators.)

And finally, the current hypothesis is that the total energy of the universe is zero, so we know where the energy to create all the stuff in the universe came from: it turns out that space contributes negative energy, leading to a total (space + the stuff in the space) of zero.


Lol. Yeah. Sure thing, mate.

Another one in khaleed voice.
Energy can be created....tell me another thing.


Cc.. Dalaman... Your comrade says energy can be created. He could have done this in his lab. Shouldn't we learn from him?

Cc.. Muttleylatff .. I hve found a genius who can create energy.

FOLYKAZE:
Been while Dude. Hope you are fine?


The problem was primarily from the OP. If he was talking about Christian or Muslim God, he should have streamline his points to a particular God by mentioning it name. I wouldn't have purged if he had said or use Yahweh or Allah.

Energy fits into the nature of God. It is the reality in different religion, spirituality and conception of God. So don't make it appear I am nailing the OP. He created the problem from inception and should deal with it.


On another round, you agreed energy exist. We know that Shakti, a deity, is a personification of energy. Would you accept that deity exist in this case?


Those human attributes are as a result of personification and anthropomorphism. You know this. It doesn't mean they actually talk or care about your existence.

Even in the bible, Judges are referred to as God. Human were called God. Money (marmoni) was referred to as God. If money could be recognized as God in Christianity, does this mean money talks, merciful, lives in the sky and literally have the attribute of God?

Money is just a commodity of exchange... It does not talk or care about your wellbeing. But in Christianity, it is a God.

So unless you are playing games, you should understand that personification is just a mere of expression.


He should mention Yahweh and Allah in his OP then.

The very moment he starts talking about God without been specific, he will be faced with tons of conceptions.

OK Roger. . I'm good, thanks for asking, it's been a while, hope you are good?

Brownhypo:
Be careful of what you say dear. That you've not seen something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You think the world just came out from no where ? No, there is an origin, and the origin is the Almighty God.

Where did God come from, what's the origin of God? Or God came from no where?

You may want to read this. https://www.nairaland.com/5220276/muslims-hypocrisy-absurdity-contradictory-argument

FOLYKAZE:


Replace Energy with God in your post. Now reflect on it. Does it make sense?

We can start from there.

See ya tomorrow. Goodnight

Is energy a concious entity and anthropomorphic?

Does energy exist outside the universe?

And why do you think energy should be worship or care about it?

FOLYKAZE:


Maybe when you can provide a logical and acceptable argument that shows Energy does not fit into the nature of God.


If you knew what anthropomorphism and personification is, you would understand spiritual people were trying to explain or express their understanding about nature and the universe by giving it a human attribute. This effort, however, does not in anyway changes the true nature of the natural forces.




And you made headcount huh?

Personal God is a personification of impersonal forces. They are still the same thing. The only difference here is worldview and expression, but same nature.

When people tends to personify energy, it will have human attributions and become Shakti.

And in a situation where Energy is not personified, we end up with Impersonal forces like The Ultimate, Infinite, The one, and other tags. Impersonal forces are found in many non theistic religion, deism and new spiritual system.

Before you personify something, you need to see if it fit in the nature, making a personal God/s as energy is absurd in many ways!

Your argument here are just your assumptions.

FOLYKAZE:


Where and when did you show Energy doesn't fit into the nature of God?



Proven that since Energy exist, God does exist too



Another baseless tantrum.




You wouldn't see it but would see reason in given organism binomial name in he science world. Talk of hypocrisy.



Better understanding.


You are in all directions. The discussion is not if impersonal forces are refutable or relevant, it is if they exist.



The fancy word wouldn't make you smart. Who are these people?




That is the view of many cultures nd religion. They view money as God. If you have problem with that, go deal with it



Yes



How old are you? You were thinking money is just currency. How dull...

People worship water as a deity, I don't have problem if water is omnipresent.




Another one in khaleed voice.
Energy can be created....tell me another thing.


Cc.. Dalaman... Your comrade says energy can be created. He could have done this in his lab. Shouldn't we learn from him?

Cc.. Muttleylatff .. I hve found a genius who can create energy.

Don't bother. YOU ARE RIGHT!

Dalaman

MuttleyLaff

TheArranger:

I already did lol. You just want to act like i didn't. One can't help but wonder what ulterior motives you have at play here.


Exactly! So what has been achieved now?


Are you seriously doubting this? Perhaps, you and your people have your weird fetishes and beliefs, but don't think for a second that you're in the majority. I even gave, as proof, the fact that there are countless theistic religions the world over.


If they are still the same thing, i see no reason for personification or redefinition.


Again. What's the point?!


These impersonal forces are unfalsifiable. Thus, irrelevant.


No. That is your usual strawman mining at work here because i specified that this was true for a subset of people. As i later discovered, you seem not to be one of them. Get on page.


Rotflmao... I should be telling YOU this!


Yawn!!!


You are already limiting the power of money with the bolded statement. For if money is a God, it should acquire ANY and EVERY thing.

Can money give you talent? Can money cure diseases like Tay-Sachs? Can money raise back the dead?

Please say YES if you have the guts


No. Not really


I think i can search out a lot of things that are more "omnipresent" than money. E.g Water


Ehh... Hold up a minute.

We know that energy can be created from mass; that's how the sun and atom bombs work. (And we can do the opposite, on a much smaller scale, inside particle accelerators.)

And finally, the current hypothesis is that the total energy of the universe is zero, so we know where the energy to create all the stuff in the universe came from: it turns out that space contributes negative energy, leading to a total (space + the stuff in the space) of zero.


Lol. Yeah. Sure thing, mate.

I don't think energy can be created per se, it can be transferred or transformed.

But energy is bound/limited to this universe.

tintingz:


I don't think energy can be created per se, it can be transferred or transformed.

But energy is bound/limited to this universe.

Like i said, It's a current hypothesis that the total energy of the universe is precisely zero, with the positive energy of matter exactly balanced by the negative energy of gravity. This view is supported by observations of the total curvature of the universe.

There were three possible geometries for the universe: open, closed, or flat. In an open universe, there's more energy in matter than in gravity, causing the expansion of the universe to speed up over time. In a closed universe, gravity has more energy than matter, causing the expansion to slow, stop, and reverse. In a flat universe (without dark energy), the two are balanced, and the expansion will slow down but never quite stop. By analyzing the apparent size of anisotropies in the cosmic microwave background radiation, we can distinguish between the three.

And the universe is flat.

Which means that the universe has zero total energy. And a universe with zero total energy could have come from nothing without violating any conservation laws.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZiXC8Yh4T0

TheArranger:
Like i said, It's a current hypothesis that the total energy of the universe is precisely zero, with the positive energy of matter exactly balanced by the negative energy of gravity. This view is supported by observations of the total curvature of the universe.

There were three possible geometries for the universe: open, closed, or flat. In an open universe, there's more energy in matter than in gravity, causing the expansion of the universe to speed up over time. In a closed universe, gravity has more energy than matter, causing the expansion to slow, stop, and reverse. In a flat universe (without dark energy), the two are balanced, and the expansion will slow down but never quite stop. By analyzing the apparent size of anisotropies in the cosmic microwave background radiation, we can distinguish between the three.

And the universe is flat.

Which means that the universe has zero total energy. And a universe with zero total energy could have come from nothing without violating any conservation laws.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZiXC8Yh4T0

I'm just not comfortable when you use "energy can be created", people like theists may assume you're talking about creating like their God did. It's better to use "transfer or transform" that's more appropriate.

The universe could have come from nothing? Is that what you meant?

tintingz:


I'm just not comfortable when you use "energy can created", people like theists may assume you're talking about creating like their God did. It's better to use "transfer or transform" that's more appropriate.

Aiit. I get what you're saying.

The universe could have come from nothing? Is that what you meant?

Who knows? It's just one of many possibilities. Like i've said, a hypothesis.

TheArranger:

Aiit. I get what you're saying.


Who knows? It's just one of many possibilities. Like i've said, a hypothesis.

Okay

tintingz:
Before you personify something, you need to see if it fit in the nature, making a personal God/s as energy is absurd in many ways!

Your argument here are just your assumptions.

My argument is centred on the fact that person God/s are personification of impersonal forces. Which mean, people give a personality, human attributes to natural forces and entities. This effort, doesn't in anyway changes the original nature of the forces but rather help people understand it better.

Energy is not essentially Jehovah. That is not my argument. My argument is that, in many religion across the world, it is recognised as God. Shakti is an example. And also, the nature of God of some spirituality is the same with energy and consciousness. Since it is found that what people (some religion) call God is a natural entity, force of nature or nature itself.

tintingz:
Is energy a concious entity and anthropomorphic?

This question can only drive us into another subject. But I will answer.

Yes.. But it depends on how you define consciousness.

If the ancient people could worship Sol (our star called Sun), does that mean Sun is conscious?

Yes it is... Maybe when you define consciousness as awareness and reaction (not sentience)

tintingz:
Does energy exist outside the universe?

And who said God must live outside universe before it can be God?

tintingz:
And why do you think energy should be worship or care about it?

Worship mean acknowledging worth of something. If people finds it worthy, they should go ahead and worship it.