I think of 'God' as the Singularity of Consciousness, that runs through ALL. Because, every molecular vibration, all 'things' are conscious, just not all are intelligent.
you're not really the matter you think you are. the reason "matter" doesn't generally pass through matter is that the atomic binding energies are strong. the atoms that make our bodies up are mostly empty space with tiny points of energy with even more space in between when you look at the sub atomic level. that's a form of energy that pervades everything that can and can't be seen in the universe. gravity is a form of energy as is heat and light. kinetics is a mass based form of energy. there are all kinds of energies around us constantly like the cosmic rays that pass through us from all directions we can see or feel. radio, TV, cellphone etc. waves. life is the coolest form of energy. energy with a purpose. too bad that purpose ends up being self destructive once hunting technologies take off until they become war technologies. there's another example of energy. all that oil.
I don't think that's exactly the physics definition for energy. Statements of observation are never arrogant. Special pleading. Get real. If you can't demonstrate that there is a god, why make that assumption? Criticism is not negativity.
You don't think it's close? I don't think I'd consider it far enough away not to take his comments legitimately and with an open mind. The driving force for life etc. is a change in energy, not energy itself (even though this change is usually referred to an an energy). What is your "physics definition" of energy and can you explain why that definition causes you to take issue with the ideas in the thread?
I don't think it's close at all. Energy is a scalar physical quantity measuring the capacity to produce change within a system. The SI unit for it is Joules, although Electron Volts are also frequently used. It's also incorrect to consider energy as a "force." Energy and force are related concepts, but they are very different. As for why it causes me to take issues with the thread, I think I elaborated it earlier here. People often treat energy as some weird non-physical mystical thing, which in my humble opinion, is pure crap. Energy is a specific quantity of physics. It's real, it's physical. It certainly is not some mystical mumbo jumbo as people often allude to it as.
All people are "mystically" referring to energy as is the potential for change, and that's just what you said with your "all mighty" physics definiton. Where is the difference other than the obvious?
Alot of people want someone else to give them God, they want someone else's book to read to give them God. They just depend on someone else but themselves to show them that God exist. But that's not necessary. He's been within yourself forever. Just open yourself up and let him in. Instead of looking out to find him somewhere. The evidence is only going to be within yourself. Another thing, when someone says 'God' an immediate label comes to the persons mind, USUALLY being a man, white robe, beard, up in heaven, judging all to enter. I myself think if your still searching for your "God" try and broaden your labels
This may seem strange but that in a sense is what brought me to atheism, I'm being completely serious, nice post though I completely agree with it, we definitely need to broaden all of our labels even peoples "god" label.
it depends what you mean by God? do you mean that this God was the creator of everything? i cannot and will never believe that, it just seems too absurd to me. i mean no offence but i tried to believe, i read the bible, talked with religious people (even dated one) but it just wasn't for me. i could never grasp the concept and make sense of it. to me science is everywhere and it makes the idea of a creator such as that more and more unlikely. but i do think that perhaps death is a whole new beginning. or maybe we die and that's that. i believe in karma though strangely and try to treat everyone i meet with kindness and respect. i hope you can forgive me
Really curious why my personal experience was almost worth attacking but then not worth it, what is sooo wrong with what I said
i think you misunderstood.. what i said was in response to this thread.. not you. my bad for making that unclear by not quoting
Not everything can be described in words. Like the Buddha taught, some things can only be learned through direct experience such as satori. Just because we cannot describe or make sense of a god (yet) through the scientific process does not mean one does not exist. You assume a god does not exist because you can not prove it with logic but that doesnt make it so - it may be rational in your eyes because you rely only on science and words to make sense of the world - but that does not make it the truth. Countless monks, hermits, etc. have found "god" through practiced meditation and have repeated that it cannot be described in words but only experienced.
i dont think anybodys trying to rob people of their personal experience with god. the problem arises when someone who believes they have proof of god assumes that it should serve as proof to others too. or that if it doesn't, it's merely because they're rejecting the proof out of stubbornness.
Yea I def agree Im just debating stonedpsysicists idea that because science cant prove a god that theres no reason to believe in one. You still making tracks ? you should get a free website goin or something with all your shit on it. soundclick or something like that you got talent.
The reason people feel science discounts god is because it does, god used to be and do everything, now we know better and everyone is redefining their god. There is absolutely no valid reason to believe in god, not a single one! On the contrary their are mountains of evidence that point away from all the standard notions of god men have created over centuries.
nothing can disprove that a "god" exists. It's more ignorant to believe that than it would be to except that its a possibility. This is because if "god" existed, "god" wouldn't be bound by the laws of our universe. Why would "god" create something to prove or disprove "gods" existence? I will agree that mainstream religions are probably far from the truth, but it doesn't mean that a "god" can't exist.
I think most people just don't really think about what/how/who their God is. They just follow the rituals and go with the flow of nonsense.