God.

[fido123]

Re: God.

Time is a human invention. All time is is light passing between two points.

Time is not light passing between two points. Your thinking that if you went faster then the speed of light you would see into the past. Light is just photons which move extremely quickly and there is a theory that light is the fastest speed anything can move at.

Also I belive ther was some sort of greater power that created the universe and I also belive stuff like He made life adaptable to our surroundings (evolution).

Also it is okay to belive things that aren't proven Master of the Faster.

[All_That_Chaz]

Re: God.

Time is not light passing between two points. Your thinking that if you went faster then the speed of light you would see into the past. Light is just photons which move extremely quickly and there is a theory that light is the fastest speed anything can move at.

Also I belive ther was some sort of greater power that created the universe and I also belive stuff like He made life adaptable to our surroundings (evolution).

Also it is okay to belive things that aren't proven Master of the Faster.

perhaps i wasn't clear enough. time measures distance traveled by light. That's why when we use a powerful telescope, we look into the past because that light hasn't reached us yet. if you want to stay mundane, measuring day and night has no cosmic meaning. it just creates order that humanity wants for some reason.

believe what you want. i don't know how that speck of matter that was there before the big bang got there. science hasn't proven everything yet, not by a long shot. by i tend to be skeptical of things that aren't proven, and very skeptical of things that are wrong.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: God.

"Also it is okay to belive things that aren't proven Master of the Faster". I will agree to that, however when life, liberty, and property is at hand, I will never let assumptions get the best of me or others.

[Lvytn]

Re: God.

Time has been in existence since man gave it existence. Nothing else keeps time but man. God was also created by man. Lol. If we are the birds, and god the bird keeper...where is the cat?

[devonin]

Re: God.

Shouldn't we just not allow threads that only discuss the topic of faith?

In CT? I'd say yes, since faith is necessarily a state of belief without proof, and the point of CT is to discuss and debate the proof being presented for various stances.

I believe in one, many, none, or any other possibilities that may surprise us.

So actually you don't believe in any of them, you instead accept the possibility that absolutely every option is equally likely to be true, including ones, it seems, that you haven't even thought of yet. Refusing to pick isn't the same thing as choosing all of them.

Until then, I will never listen to a human being again on religion even if they are right!

Religion is a man-made construct, a shell inside of which they formulate their world-view. Humans are the -only- people to listen to about religion, because nothing else has invented it.

Time is not light passing between two points.

It's a man-made tool of measure.

That's the important line out of Chaz's post. Don't quibble over his particular definition of light. God did not invent time, humans invented a measurement of duration. in fact, we change the reality of time twice a year for those of you who practice daylight savings. As Douglas Adams said: Time is an illusion, lunchtime doubly so.

Also I belive ther was some sort of greater power that created the universe

Care to provide some evidence for the belief, or is it simply something you accept because

it is okay to belive things that aren't proven

Don't get me wrong, Descartes et al would agree with you that it is incredibly difficult if not impossible to prove much of anything with 100% certainty, but at the same time, that isn't carte blanche to demand that every single theory about everything be given -equal- consideration as possible.

I accept as possible that I am the only truly existing thing and that everything else is mere illusion created by my mind...it is -phenomenally- improbable to the point where not one single action I take in my life is based upon that theory, it being instead far more likley that all observable evidence that other people and things do in fact exist and have existance outside my own is correct evidence.

But yes, for any given opinion, there is a non-zero chance that the opinion is correct.

[fido123]

Re: God.

Time has been in existence since man gave it existence. Nothing else keeps time but man. God was also created by man. Lol. If we are the birds, and god the bird keeper...where is the cat?

Thats a metaphor and Time is not an invention of man at all. If there as no time before man how was the sun and the earth created? There is definate proof that there was time before man as we know how the earth and sun were created...before man obiously. Also the chances that we were made by luck is astronomical. Our body and mind is somthing not even us can comprehend or recreate so how did this happen by chance? Its hardly possible. We don't understand the universe and probably never will but personally I think there is some form of higher power that guides the universe.

[devonin]

Re: God.

There is definate proof that there was time before man as we know how the earth and sun were created

Saying that time existed before man as a means of refutation is like saying that man didn't invent the metric system because there were distances before man.

Things existed, call them what you like, and we -invented- names, terms, and definitions for those terms to identify what they were. "The passage of instants from one to the next" being "time" is a human definition, it did not pre-exist humans. The phenomenon that we -call- time presumably preexisted us (Though we can't especially prove that with 100% certainty) but that isn't really the same thing.

You are allowed to think that a higher power guides the universe all you like, but you need to provide -actual- evidence to say such a thing in CT and have it be taken seriously.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: God.

"So actually you don't believe in any of them, you instead accept the possibility that absolutely every option is equally likely to be true, including ones, it seems, that you haven't even thought of yet. Refusing to pick isn't the same thing as choosing all of them"
Yeah... I used to think that I would just pray to every possibility, but then I also valued that they could also be equally wrong which is why I don't really try to pray as much anymore. Plus these religions are so self absorbed and I don't feel like praying to one religion that has sins against others. I would say that I am somewhere inbetween refusing to pick and choosing all of them.

[fido123]

Re: God.

Saying that time existed before man as a means of refutation is like saying that man didn't invent the metric system because there were distances before man.

Things existed, call them what you like, and we -invented- names, terms, and definitions for those terms to identify what they were. "The passage of instants from one to the next" being "time" is a human definition, it did not pre-exist humans. The phenomenon that we -call- time presumably preexisted us (Though we can't especially prove that with 100% certainty) but that isn't really the same thing.
You are allowed to think that a higher power guides the universe all you like, but you need to provide -actual- evidence to say such a thing in CT and have it be taken seriously.

Thats what I ment. Also I'm just saying theres no proof of God but it's highly likley.

I also agree with you MotF

[devonin]

Re: God.

Also I'm just saying theres no proof of God but it's highly likley.

You haven't even demonstrated any evidence for its liklihood, to say nothing for proof. I mean...there are dozens of perfectly typical pieces of logic to imply the necessity of a creator that you could be copy/pasting from wikipedia to at least have -something- for us to directly address other than "I think there could be, and I bet there's a good chance"

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: God.

"Religion is a man-made construct, a shell inside of which they formulate their world-view. Humans are the -only- people to listen to about religion, because nothing else has invented it."
I understand that this is a good point and that humans made these religions themselves (NOT A GOD[unless it is proven that a god made the humans that made religion]), but I mean why is this a response to what I said earlier? are you against what I say or value it at all? Or were you just providing more information?

[devonin]

Re: God.

When you say "I'm never going to listen to a -human- about religion ever again" you very strongly imply of not explicitly state that you -would- consider listening to something -else- about religion, and I was pointing out that there are -no- other authorities on religion you can access, religion being a human-made and human-followed construction.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: God.

Also, when hayatewillown's cousin said "we are all little birds in a big cage and the cage represents our mind," doesn't this imply that god is some type of tyrant. I mean we go to churches and temples and do Everything that they say. There is a reason why church and state seperated and that was the assumption that god is some type of tyrant. We couldn't have our government support a tyrant even if it is a god. The worst part is I feel as though religion makes a god looks so authoritarian and undemocratic. Doesn't god get a say in all of this if he/she truely exists?

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: God.

Oh i see, thanks for pointing that out devonin.

[Relambrien]

Re: God.

Also, when hayatewillown's cousin said "we are all little birds in a big cage and the cage represents our mind," doesn't this imply that god is some type of tyrant. I mean we go to churches and temples and do Everything that they say. There is a reason why church and state seperated and that was the assumption that god is some type of tyrant. We couldn't have our government support a tyrant even if it is a god. The worst part is I feel as though religion makes a god looks so authoritarian and undemocratic. Doesn't god get a say in all of this if he/she truely exists?

The reason the United States wanted to limit the connection between government and religion was because the people wanted religious freedom. If a state-supported religion was established, it could very well lead to legal discrimination against people not of that religion. This is what the Founding Fathers wanted to prevent, so they made sure a state-supported religion would never be established. Not because they assumed God was a tyrant, but because they wanted to make sure people could practice whatever religion they wanted.

Edit: This is called the Edit button. You can find it at the bottom-right corner of your posts. Please use it; do not double post. Especially not in one of the most strictly-moderated forums on the site.