God is the strangest conspiracy theory ever.
- Thread starter Benfica
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
I'm not sure what to do with this. This is usually asked by people who have never read a book, but I happen to know you're generally better informed than that. I can't answer without sounding like I'm busting out the Magna-Doodle, so forgive any unintended condescension in the tone.
It's possible to invent an infinite number of beings that may or may not exist. I will invent the Butt-Snogging Space-Flying Marble-Chewer as one example. Any similarity to phil is coincidental; I genuinely made up fictional characters.
From a purely statistical standpoint, it is unlikely that something I made up corresponds to something that exists in the real world. Therefore if someone asks me if there is a Butt-Snogging Space-Flying Marble-Chewer, the correct answer is to say that there is not one.
Now let's say the Butt-Snogging Space-Flying Marble-Chewer is supposed to have created the universe, talked to snakes, killed off hundreds of thousands of people, etc. The problem is compounded, so that not only is there no positive evidence for a Butt-Snogging Space-Flying Marble-Chewer, but there is evidence against his existence. In this case it is grossly irresponsible to say he (or she, or it, I haven't decided the Butt-Snogging Space-Flying Marble-Chewer's gender yet) exists.
I don't really think hal was making an argument other than that "saying something doesn't exist is just as meaningful as saying it does exist." To use your own example, if I posted a topic that, in essence, said "the Butt-Snogging Space-Flying Marble-Chewer does not exist" that is pretty much no more valid (or crazy) than you saying it does. Therefore, this thread is dumb.
Here's the problem with your argument... unlike your Butt-Snogging Space-Flying Marble-Chewer, there's not complete agreement on what "God" is, nor with our minuscule understanding of the universe (or even Earth or our bodies) are we in much of a position to determine such a thing.
If you want to portray God as a white dude in a robe hovering over the clouds, then yeah. I'm in total agreement - bogus.
What you have is an enormous (at least in the scale of human existence) historical record that profound, seemingly-inexplicable things have happened here on earth. Some of those things can be attributed to natural events and some cannot.
Is it mass hypnosis? A coincidental, near global power-play? An unseen force? Who knows? I don't and you don't.
I say that it's irresponsible to say a vaguely powerful, otherworldly force couldn't possibly exist, despite unexplained events throughout history; every much so as attributing them all to a single omnipotent, omnipresent being.
If you want to portray God as a white dude in a robe hovering over the clouds, then yeah. I'm in total agreement - bogus.
What you have is an enormous (at least in the scale of human existence) historical record that profound, seemingly-inexplicable things have happened here on earth. Some of those things can be attributed to natural events and some cannot.
Is it mass hypnosis? A coincidental, near global power-play? An unseen force? Who knows? I don't and you don't.
I say that it's irresponsible to say a vaguely powerful, otherworldly force couldn't possibly exist, despite unexplained events throughout history; every much so as attributing them all to a single omnipotent, omnipresent being.
It's not a song until someone sings it; the same way a book isn't a book until someone writes it.
True, so in order to have a competent discussion on the subject we must pick a definition. Otherwise we may as well ask if there is a thing we don't know about somewhere. There is.
Benfica referenced TWD's belief, so I think we're talking about a singular entity that created all things, talks to snakes, and sometimes kills people who do things he doesn't like (but sometimes doesn't, and never in a lab).
Screw that, I love where this thread is going
That's a bad argument really. You're probably aware of that.
It's obviously a lot more crazy to believe in unseen beings than to disregard them. I mean, that's diagnostic criteria these days.
I think it's really absurd to think that a being capable of creating an entire universe would choose to do so. I'd say if there was a "God" it would be a non-sentient force, which is just science.
Or Arceus.
This thread is dumb though because Benfica is a stew.
Nono. That's a sung. A song can be in your head. It's just a sequence of state changes being simulated by signal receiver, to compare against pitches. How else would you know a song, when someone is sunging it? If someone is "singing" a song, they're really sunging it, so it should be sunging, not singing, since there is no immediate temporal connection; there's always a delay.
Yeah, I agree. Poor choice of words.
Well, look. I don't profess to know everything TWD believes about so I won't defend it. The thread is horrible because it is clearly ambiguous and the intended play on his propensity to declare conspiracy theories was lost on me.
My agnostic tendencies were simply lashing out at what appeared to be yet another simplistic and predictable atheistic internet attack.
