God is not an element both in religious fanaticism and atheism alike

by exWTslave 80 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  LoveUniHateExams

  Kalos - trees don't produce fruit to do good for its own sake. It may seem that way but it is actually a seed-dispersal strategy.

  Other plants encase their seeds in burrs that attach to animals and are dispersed that way. Other plants employ dispersal by wind.

  Lower plants such as mosses and liverworts have motile sperm! It's about methods of reproduction - the passing on of genetic material.

  If you choose to see 'God' in all this, fine. But expect your opinions to be challenged on a public forum.
• 

  Viviane

  cofty, yes I did , if one could travel at the speed of light,[after acceleration], one would arrive at the moment one left. With dire consequences also to one's girth and mass during the impossible acceleration.

  Wrong. For reference, read up on spacetime and frames of reference. Please stop peddling your pseudo science woo.

  Increase in speed through space decreases speed through time. With c as the upper speed limit through space and zero travel through time.

  Spacetime, not space and time. And again, frames of reference.

  that does not mean that time has vanished, but there is time, it was a pre-condiyion to the beginning of our universe, and there is various speeds of travel through it. In my view of thse 'givens

  Spacetime.

  Your view is pretending to know things that cannot possibly be know. Please stop peddling your pseudo scientific woo nonsense.
• 

  Kalos

  Coded Logic

  Your logic will evaporate when applied to yourself. Suppose you partook in a Marathon and came first and all others were far behind. When award was about to be given to you, someone raises a question—who came FIRST before you came FIRST?

  How would you feel about logic behind that question?
• 

  Simon

  Kalos. Who is giving the award? Who organised the race?

  Is there any point to your inane questions that actually support the illogical thing you're attempting pitifully to prove?
• 

  Kalos

  Simon

  We understand better when we are in the receiving end of the logic someone uses. When we ask: ‘Who created the Creator?’ we are not personally involved. When you earn something, and when someone tries to rob it—then we are involved in that situation and will understand it clearly. I am only involving Coded Logic in the situation of the Creator and see the situation from that angle.
• 

  Viviane

  How would you feel about logic behind that question?

  That the person asking, like you, doesn't understand logic.

  We understand better when we are in the receiving end of the logic someone uses.

  Your questions in no way use any logic that suggest there is a an uncaused First Cause. That's like saying there is a not-A A.
• 

  exWTslave

  Viviane

  Leave poor Kalos.

  There is an easy way—go to New York Times office, and tell them you wish to see their first issue published on September 18, 1851. You are taken to the archive department and shown that first issue kept in glassed frame. Now ask them: What is the issue preceding to this? And experience FIRST-HAND the heat of real logic being practiced in the world.
• 

  Viviane

  There is an easy way—go to New York Times office, and tell them you wish to see their first issue published on September 18, 1851. You are taken to the archive department and shown that first issue kept in glassed frame. Now ask them: What is the issue preceding to this? And experience FIRST-HAND the heat of real logic being practiced in the world.

  You're attempting to use some that has a known cause to support the idea that there is an uncaused cause, a not-A A.

  It's just as dumb of an example usingbad logic and incorrect analogies.
• 

  LoveUniHateExams

  Kalos (or indeed any theist) - please read my two previous posts on this thread and respond.

  Thank you.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Best comment of the entire thread:

  The best explanation is that, somewhere along the way, there is a being that is not contingent

  That is the least useful or logical explanation.

  You actually began with an illogical and superstitous belief in a sky-daddy and then made up your pseudo-logic to try to make it sound less silly.

  ---

  Your logic will evaporate when applied to yourself. Suppose you partook in a Marathon and came first and all others were far behind. When award was about to be given to you, someone raises a question—who came FIRST before you came FIRST?

  How would you feel about logic behind that question?

  Watch those sexual double entendres

  ---

  Answers here still boil down to the claim that "God did it and we can't understand God." No matter how you dress it up to sound deep and metaphoric, it is still such a non answer.