[NT] NTs and God

[Mycroft]

So. What I'm thinking?

What if what the scientists discover is actually what everybody has been calling "God?" Because it is, you know. Whatever it is that makes everything run.

I suppose if you were inclined to refer to physics and quantum mechanics as "God", you could certainly do so, but people would think you had a few bats in the belfry.

 

[Samurai Drifter]

So. What I'm thinking?

What if what the scientists discover is actually what everybody has been calling "God?" Because it is, you know. Whatever it is that makes everything run.

So, I suppose you worship kinetic and potential energy, then.

 

[Anja]

Nope, Jack. I'm saying that something, which is at present mysterious, but which we hope someday to know what, is fueling the Universe and everything in it. When we find out what that is We will kn9ow what simple men have been calling "God" for millenia.

You get stuck on your stereotype of what an INFP can be and is and that's why you can't understand what I'm saying. It's not about magic at all. That's a silly notion you have about all Idealist types that fogs your thinking. It's about what science maybe/maybe not will be able to prove. Just like you "scientists" aver.

 

[Samurai Drifter]

Nope, Jack. I'm saying that something, which is at present mysterious, but which we hope someday to know what, is fueling the Universe and everything in it. When we find out what that is We will kn9ow what simple men have been calling "God" for millenia.

Where's your evidence of this mysterious and elusive "thing"?

I suppose if you were inclined to refer to physics and quantum mechanics as "God", you could certainly do so, but people would think you had a few bats in the belfry.

Hey, if there were one thing I were going to worship, it would be quantum mechanics.

 

[Anja]

I suppose if you were inclined to refer to physics and quantum mechanics as "God", you could certainly do so, but people would think you had a few bats in the belfry.

Mycroft, you're missing the point. What is the origin of the laws of physics? What caused the Universe? What great force set it in motion? That is what Scientists will declare the ultimate authority if they can discover it.

 

[Jack Flak]

Nope, Jack. I'm saying that something, which is at present mysterious, but which we hope someday to know what, is fueling the Universe and everything in it. When we find out what that is We will kn9ow what simple men have been calling "God" for millenia.

But that's exactly what I'm talking about. There is no fundamental mystery. There is that which we don't know, which is less and less every day because of science.

You get stuck on your stereotype of what an INFP can be and is and that's why you can't understand what I'm saying. It's not about magic at all. That's a silly notion you have about all Idealist types that fogs your thinking. It's about what science maybe/maybe not will be able to prove. Just like you "scientists" aver.

Hey, this isn't about INFPs, it's about you saying consciousness is ethereal and mysterious when it's explained by rational phenomena.

 

[Anja]

Ack. I forget that you guys can't get your mind around something that exists outside of your conception. Same as Christians. . .

 

[Anja]

But that's exactly what I'm talking about. There is no fundamental mystery. There is that which we don't know, which is less and less every day because of science.


Hey, this isn't about INFPs, it's about you saying consciousness is ethereal and mysterious when it's explained by rational phenomena.

Where is it? What does it weigh? How do you know you are using it in the same way that I am?

 

[Anja]

I'm not trying to win anything here. Just offering a different way to look at things besides right/wrong way.

 

[Samurai Drifter]

Ack. I forget that you guys can't get your mind around something that exists outside of your conception. Same as Christians. . .

Actually, Christians base their entire belief around something which is untestable. Or is that not what you were talking about?

Now I'm confused...

 

[Mycroft]

I'm not trying to win anything here. Just offering a different way to look at things besides right/wrong way.

Good point.

Let's conclude that God 50% exists and 50% doesn't exist and all just get along.

 

[Anja]

Naw. That's no fun.

I'll scoot over and let you guys have at it. It's a fun read.

 

[Jack Flak]

Ack. I forget that you guys can't get your mind around something that exists outside of your conception. Same as Christians. . .

That's not insulting at all.

Where is it? What does it weigh? How do you know you are using it in the same way that I am?

It's in my head, it weighs a pound or two I think, and I'm pretty sure I'm not.

 

[Costrin]

Well, seeing as how we both remain superficially unconvinced, I suppose now we should both examine the data. You can flip through the Biology textbooks and journals of the National Academy of Sciences while I grab a Bible.

Even easier, Talk.Origins is a great resource.

 

[Kangirl]

This thread is now 37 pages long, and it still boils down to this:

One side has some hard evidence.

The other side has none.

And people can drift in and out talking about 'other ways of thinking' until the cows come home. Are there other ways of thinking? Yes. Do I prefer to believe things that have evidence, rather than those that don't? Yes. If you do not prefer to have/look for hard evidence for what you think or believe, that's your prerogative. Admit it and go start a 'speculation about every thing, ever, reason not necessary' thread.

But those who believe in god still have. no. evidence.

 

[Mycroft]

Costrin, thank you for linking that excellent resource!

 

[Moiety]

One side has some hard evidence.

Hard evidence of what exactly?

 

[Headstrong]

The other side has none.

I disagree that there is none, but I am not saying there is "hard evidence." There is no use discussing this, really.

Hard evidence of what exactly?

Exactly what I was wondering.

Kangirl- You say these things with such certainty. Each side has their own (supposed) supporting evidence. It is all debatable because we have no solid proof either way. If we could prove the existence of God, there would be no use for faith. Likewise if we could disprove God.

 

[Mycroft]

Kangirl- You say these things with such certainty. Each side has their own (supposed) supporting evidence.

Please link to the evidence in favor of the existence of God.

It is all debatable because we have no solid proof either way.

You are correct. There is no 100% infallible proof that God doesn't exist, nor will there ever be.

I'm surprised by how deeply ingrained this basic logical error is in the thinking of supposed "rationals" on this message board.

 

[Headstrong]

Please link to the evidence in favor of the existence of God.

My version of evidence is based on supernatural experiences of both those around me and myself. See my previous posts, if you wish.