CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Just to get you rolling. You do not know what truth is, what the definition is. Neither seem you to know what life is, what being alive means and is. As to illusions... the only relevant illusion right here is your sanity.
Wow, there you go. Is that an argument or just your expression for, "Wow dude, that is a really cool idea and I cannot think of anything to say that would dispute it so I will just attack you.
.
I know the "definition" of truth, as it is defined in a dictionary. I know what "life" means as defined in a dictionary plus my own ideas of it. What being alive means. . . . I'm open on that one. Please, teach me.
.
My sanity was never in dispute, nor have I ever claimed to be sane, nor do I now. Sanity is for normal people, without imagination.
.
My list of actual claims:
---- Truth Happens
---- Everyone is exactly where God would be, if God were in their shoes.
---- Before God said, "Light there be Light," it was dark.
---- I am closer to truth with my admission of ignorance then you will ever be with your claim to know.
I didn't attack you, simply viewed the crap over and responded.
What being alive means. . . . I'm open on that one. Please, teach me.
Life is, basically, instinctive reproduction and through that survival. Or conscious survival, as we do not really need instincts anymore, not that much anyway. Also, if you care to consider the knowledge we have about life on Earth you might notice life also tends to change and advance, and still for survival. Life like has a need to keep existing, by whatever means. Don't take the "need" of life as a god.
Oh... you seem to be confusing intelligent consciousness and being alive. Well, here on Earth you cannot have one without the other, life came first and in that sprung intelligence.
My sanity was never in dispute, nor have I ever claimed to be sane, nor do I now.
It is now. If you claimed to be sane and kept your idiotic opinions then you'd be lying.
Being sane means one is well within the mind... when it comes to perception of reality. Your perception of reality seems to be very flawed and just wrong.
Sanity is for normal people, without imagination.
Exactly something a not sane person would say. Just because someone is not "normal" does not necessarily mean the person is insane, might actually mean that the person is far more sane (objective thinking and thinking overall on a higher level, enough to make a noticeable difference) than the "normal" people. "Normal" people do have imagination, most of them simply haven't used it much and so is on a lower level, in fact they haven't used much of their minds at all, they just live their lives and that's it.
Truth Happens
Truth doesn't happen... shit happens.
Everyone is exactly where God would be, if God were in their shoes.
God does not exist.
Before God said, "Light there be Light," it was dark.
Actually it's because of Albus Dumbledore, as he said “Happiness can be found in the darkest of times, if one only remembers to turn on the light.” Just so you knew...
God has never existed, does not exist, and never will exist.
If you think you are right then you should be able to prove it. That's right, where's your proof?
I am closer to truth with my admission of ignorance then you will ever be with your claim to know.
Wow. You are quite delusional.
Being ignorant is not a good thing. Only a person with a messed up mind would think it was.
You cannot be closer to anything without knowing anything, moron. So in that sense I am closer to "truth" (by the way... there is no truth... just so you knew...) since I do know more than you. If you knew more than I you wouldn't be spewing such nonsense.
Of course it's in my head. That is where I sort of keep my perspective of reality, obviously this is a shameful idea for you. Where do you keep your perspectives and ideas, up your ass?
.
He will be unable and unwilling to understand why he's wrong because of his religious indoctrination and any underlying conditions.
.
This is completely unfounded. I am very willing to understand . . . . but your really haven't provide any logic, what-so-ever, about why I am wrong. Why I am wrong?
Why are you wrong is the reason you can't prove you're right.
Why should I believe you?
This isn't an opinion site, it's a debate site. That means I expect you to have a logical argument, one that can convince others.
What you think doesn't matter to me unless it's correct or wise.
You have not shown yourself to be correct or wise. You act like you think you're wise, but you clearly are missing something.
That something is logic and evidence. You say things, but they don't have logic to them or evidence. There is no reason to believe you because nearly everything you say sounds completely made up. I am simply not gullible as you, so I am able to detect why you are wrong, simply from what you say and how you say it.
You speak of working for the/a devil. There is no proof of a devil.
If you change the definition of devil to mean something else, that is not the devil, then you are NOT working for the devil, thus you have said something incorrect, and because you spoke it as if you believed it, you are not sane either.
You are simply misguided and completely and utterly wrong. You need to have a reality check because what you are saying does not make sense. Think about it and make sure that what you are saying is accurate and correct.
Right now, what you are saying makes no sense. It is insane rambling.
(by the way... there is no truth... just so you knew...) since I do know more than you.
.
No truth? Hmm.
.
If you think you are right then you should be able to prove it. That's right, where's your proof?
.
Proof is overrated. Answers never provide understanding, unless there is a question. The you have done so far is question my sanity and pointed out that was a waste of time. Smart people always look crazy to stupid people.
.
Being ignorant is not a good thing. Only a person with a messed up mind would think it was.
.
Is is not good to be ignorant, but it is good to admit your ignorance. Without the admission of ignorance, one can never see past what they think they know. A wise man knows nothing, not for sake of stupidity, but rather for humility and that to learn, one does not assume that they already know.
.
Truth doesn't happen... shit happens.
.
Some people see it that way. But nothing happens that doesn't follow the laws of truth.
.
Your perception of reality seems to be very flawed and just wrong.
.
This just sounds funny, coming from you.
.
God has never existed, does not exist, and never will exist.
.
Can you provide any logic for this idea? I don't need proof, just some logic.
Why is any explanation easily replaced with ideas of evolution or biology?
Why is there life at all? Is a god life?
If a god is life, then is life god?
If life is god, and all people are god, then why call it god, and not just people, like we already do?
If life is not a god, then is there a god?
If there is, is it alive? Why? What is life?
What made god? Why?
There is no answer to that because we do not even know if a god exists, and even if we did know, like some religions believe, how can we know that they know what god really is?
And if we think they don't know, but we DO think a god is real, how can we worship or believe in something that we cannot comprehend?
Why does it even matter that we think it's real when there is no proof either way?
In fact, there IS proof that god does not exist.
It is the fact that you cannot EVER show that a god exists.
However, there are books about it. Just like there is Harry Potter.
What is real and what isn't real? What is real should be something that you can know is real.
If you are unable to detect or measure something, nor see or sense it, then what are you calling real?.
There is no god.
There is no "The Truth".
There are certainly things people call a god.
And things people call truth.
But in reality, what does that really mean?
There is no "The Truth".
There is no "God".
There are people and planets and galaxies and strange things in deep space that we will likely never visit.
Not gods.
No great truths.
Just the musings of artists, scientists, poets and philosophers.
What you say is misleading and wrong, however. It is based upon an unproven, and thus worthless premise.
You cannot prove god, so anything you say after that is based on the idea that the fundamental reason for reality is a god.
If that is untrue, then everything you do in life is based on that fundamental reason of existence, and if wrong, will make you biased towards an incorrect point.
That is why you make no sense.
You have accepted a god as being true, when it is not. That makes you insane.
You cannot make sense if you base your thoughts upon what is utterly bullshit.
That's why you are called insane by not just me, but other people on here as well.
You do not make sense because you are simply wrong.
We gone over this. Truth. Mathematically Truth. Truth exists, even if there is nothing to act up. Somehow, the highest form of maths creates consciousness and intelligence, even without particles to act up.
.
Why does it exist?
Because truth exists. It always has, it always will. It can never NOT exist.
.
Why are we not gods?
We are. At least gods in childhood. Thus we are called the "Children of God." The Christ story is OUR story. By following the path of Christ and understanding it, we approach our heritage. Consciousness based upon respect, love, and gratitude because the "Rock of our Salvation." Other forms of consciousness, such as consciousness based on ownership, selfishness, and justified in angry.
.
Why do we exist?
Because of love. When you want something, you seek it. Even if that thing doesn't exist, your seeking will eventually create it. I.e. our techie didn't exist naturally, we created them from our desires. God desired the universe as an expression of truth. Without the universe, there is nothing for the laws of truth to work upon. A natural product of consciousness is to express its self. Humans are a creation desires to express higher truths, such what we are doing. Nature can do some super cool stuff, but where are playing with the powers of creation.
.
Why is there pain?
Pain is a product of dysfunction. One of the most common forms of pain is the pain of loss. Higher Truth creates higher function and lesson pain. Lower Truth: creates dysfunction. Because we have a concept of ownership, we loss a lot. If we have a concept of "gratitude" for what we have, and not ownership, we would be filled with love and happiness. Otherwise, we constantly suffer the pain of lost. If you looked at everything as a gift, the spirit of gratitude will fill you with some happiness you will want to pee. Everything is a creation of higher consciousness and truth.
.
Why is any explanation easily replaced with ideas of evolution or biology?
First, I don't consider it easily replace. Next, people get addicted to the "prophet" and reject anything that doesn't come from the "Fountain Head." Every effort to update God concepts is met with ceremonial "Stake Burnings." I'm just one person. I can paint a logic picture of God. But I'm a rebel. If I walked into church, I would be kicked out.
.
Why is there life at all? Is a god life?
God is "beyond life." God is "Living Truth" however, God can exist in the void. Life requires "energy" which requires "potential different" which requires some form of "high and low." God exists without the "high and low." However, when God created the universe, the "light and dark" created the "high and low" needed to create energy. Higher of truth, took form within the energy. For example: the rainbow (called the bow of God) is a pattern consist without existence. There a 7 main colors and 5 minor colors. Just the like the keys on a piano, the pattern exists everywhere. And it exists in electron magnetic wave form and mechanic wave form. And if there are types of waves, it would exist there too. All things in the universe were created by the "White Light." The White Light is split into the 7 and 5, which from can create billions of colors, just in the octave. People having "experiences" have claimed the Light was alive and filled with Love. I believe that certain "tones" have certain influences, and that it "higher dimensions" can actually be "alive" and be "archangels." Archangels are not "god" but might have "god like" powers and qualities.
.
If a god is life, then is life god?
No, life is an expression of God. There could other expression of truth that we don't know about. Truth is infinite. To limit Truth to "life" doesn't seem right.
.
If life is god, and all people are god, then why call it god, and not just people, like we already do?
We are "Children of God." To say that we ARE God would have to include the "big picture." We call children "people" but when you talk about "people" we often don't mean children. i.e. "People are such tards." God is "within us." Which means, the "Truth is IN us. Just like children who grow to heroes, we grow into Gods.
.
If life is not a god, then is there a god?
Life is a God, in the sense that people being Christ is a God. The "Light is a Product of Truth" but is not the whole truth. The Light that Created the whole universe is a live, and by follows laws of truth, instantly began the process of creating life. Even if the process took billions of years, because of the nature of Truth, the Truth still manifested.
.
If there is, is it alive? Why? What is life?
Nature is alive. If we stop and consider the magic, that allows a "consciousness" being to stop and change directions at will, it would trip us up. And particle flying though space will continue going in the same direction until something hits it, or gravity pulls on it. In a sense, we are star dust, that taken has control our destiny. Imagine what a piece of dust, floating in a nebula, would have to go through, to have that ability. For consciousness to change the direction of a matter, it would have come from a level so deep, we cannot even imagine. Live is an "expression\" of truth. Everything that happens must follow the law. But as I said, there are many different octaves and types of "waves." Right now, we know about electromagnetic and mechanical waves. But what if there are spiritual waves, or "consciousness" waves that we really cannot see. Electromagnetic waves were invisible until just recently. They've always been there, but until maybe the couple of hundred years, we had not concept of them. But spirit has influence. For example: Spirit of Hope, Spirit of Adventure, etc. If you can mix up some Spirit of Adventure, please let me know.
.
What made god? Why?
God is the Living Truth. Truth has always existed. Why? Because it can't be any other way. You cannot make truth not exist. It just always been, will always be. I have seen this consciousness. It is eternally patient, filled with the deepest love, and just plain awesome.
.
There is no answer to that because we do not even know if a god exists, and even if we did know, like some religions believe, how can we know that they know what god really is?
Someone claimed that truth doesn't exist. How they can think that, I don't know. Everything follows the rules. Nothing is exempt. Just because we don't know doesn't make it not exist. What you had this attitude 200 years ago? How many things have blown our minds since. I have seen God, but even so, I don't KNOW anything. However, anyone that claims to KNOW anything is just full of shit. We don't know what God is, because we don't understand what truth is. To me, the knowing of god is more of seeing that everything follows a path. What religions call God, I don't really believe in. I believe in the Living Truth. My search for God is a search for Truth.
.
And if we think they don't know, but we DO think a god is real, how can we worship or believe in something that we cannot comprehend?
Because of the limitations of a our "3 dimensional thinking" we assume that God is a person. Most the "prophets" that have seen God say that God is Spirit. People just don't quite get that. I worship God, not as a "deity" but as a concept. Living Truth is functional. It is power. It is happiness. To worships "objects" such as houses, cars, and such, can deteriorate a person desire to be a better person. It doesn't have to, but it can. If one seeks first God, the other thing will follow, but I think the search for betterment should be first. When I first confronted Satanist, I was confused why anyone will would worship confusion and pain. Turns out, they don't. But to me, the worship of God has always meant better function. However, I don't understand your point. Many people think that following God means following the Bible, or Jesus, or such. But to me, the Worship of God has meant seeking "higher truth" and "better functionality."
.
Why does it even matter that we think it's real when there is no proof either way?
This is a very good question. My therapist says that I should stop wasting my trying to convince people.
.
In fact, there IS proof that god does not exist.
If you have this proof. . . . I would hang around long to see it.
.
It is the fact that you cannot EVER show that a god exists
This isn't truth. There are many things that we know about that we cannot see. We can observe the effects, but we cannot see it. Like electromagnetic wave. Things happen all the time that blows our mind. We just ignore it. Miracles are always happening and doctors are confused, but they just assume it's something they don't understand. And they don't. All miracles follow the laws of truth, but that makes me wonder about the truth. I can never show you, because you will not look. And god has to sought. It's always been that way.
.
However, there are books about it. Just like there is Harry Potter.
Reality follows fiction.
.
What is real and what isn't real? What is real should be something that you can know is real.
Reality is a perspective. What is real, is what YOU think is real. I cannot define REAL for you. Many people can agree on what is REAL, but again, that is just a perspective. Americans see the world differently then Egyptians. Who is right? The earth looks like a solid mass, but a neutrino can shoot through the earth with room to spare. The only thing that is real is the RELATION between objects. And that relationship is based on truth. A sun isn't just a collection of gas, its a collection of gas with relationships between the particles. It is the relationships that make things things what they are. The magic of consciousness, it can influence the relationships. I'm a dad, because I have a daughter. Without that relation, I couldn't be a dad. Whether we are a victim or proactive is an adjustment in the relationship, not a changing of the objects. We have an awesome power, we can change what we are, but changing our relationships with the external world.
.
If you are unable to detect or measure something, nor see or sense it, then what are you calling real?.
As I said, by observing influence. For example: Courage. We cannot it, but we can observe its in influence. We cannot see math. For example: 1+1 can be "expressed with symbols, but you cannot see the actually power or form of it. Humans are working of "truth" in the higher math world that is awesome. It already exists, but we have not been able to express in symbols yet. We are "looking" for the truth of those equations. We know it is there, but we don't have it yet. If there is a object in motion, there are "laws" that constantly influence and control that object. Even if the object changes, the "laws" adjust with it. If a balloon floating in the sky, we could calculate a lot things about, and we could call it fact. But there facts about the purity of the helium, or the coldness and density of the air, the effects of the sun and wind, and moisture collecting of the balloon. Truth adjusts automatically and also takes into account thousands of other influences that we cannot even imagine.
.
There is no god.
Yes there is.
.
There is no "The Truth".
Yes there is
.
There are certainly things people call a god.
Like science, if perhaps a little slows, God evolves with the people.
.
There are certainly things people call a god.
Truth enough. The desire to be right seems natural.
.
But in reality, what does that really mean?
It means that people observe influences that they don't understand. They want to give it a name. You want to deny that it is there.
.
There are people and planets and galaxies and strange things in deep space that we will likely never visit.
Whats your point? God is Truth made conscious. Truth doesn't change just because it is on a strange world. Truth is infinite, but consistent. However, truth allows for desire. "All Things Are Possible (ATAP) in the Lord." And All Things Are Relative (ATAR) in the science.
.
Not gods.
The Highest form of Truth is "ALL KNOWING." Deep within our subconscious some version of that. As we closer to it, we become more like God. People or creatures that have, might be considered Gods.
.
No great truths.
That's easy. Not truth.
.
Just the musings of artists, scientists, poets and philosophers.
Such visionaries are the spice of life.
.
What you say is misleading and wrong, however. It is based upon an unproven, and thus worthless premise.
Leading in a different then you, doesn't equate misleading. Believing differently then you, isn't wrong. If you dream it, you can achieve. Silly little rule we artcy-fartcy types live by. And Genesis love the unproven.
.
You cannot prove god, so anything you say after that is based on the idea that the fundamental reason for reality is a god.
Huh?
.
If that is untrue, then everything you do in life is based on that fundamental reason of existence, and if wrong, will make you biased towards an incorrect point.
There is correct point to life? Do tell?
.
That is why you make no sense.
I make sense to me. Do I need you to approve to make sense?
.
You have accepted a god as being true, when it is not. That makes you insane.
You must live in a world with a lot insanity? Wow, you must be so wise.
.
You cannot make sense if you base your thoughts upon what is utterly bullshit.
Genesis' are often crazy by stupid people.
.
That's why you are called insane by not just me, but other people on here as well.
Ummm, see comment above.
.
You do not make sense because you are simply wrong.
All you have proven here is, "if you don't see, it's not real." To me, that is wrong.
A true idea is one that can be verified, and even then, it is difficult to know if it is true.
It is true that me and you are different people, for instance. To say otherwise would defy ever tenet of Occam's Razor, and it would defy all evidence that points out that we are two different people.
It can be safely considered true that me and you are not the same people.
You are confusing "actual" with "verifiable." According to this model, the only truth is verified truth, right? Because as you said, even if verified, we are not sure if it true.
.
Yet, you and I both know that there is "truth" that we have not verified. For example: of the 200+ billion galaxies in the universe, (that we can guess at) it's pretty safe to assume, that somewhere out there, there is are other life forms. But, as we both know, it hasn't be verified, even if an alien did crash in New Mexico. It's unverified because neither you or I have verified it.
.
You are also confusing "knowing" with truth. When I say "truth," I can talking the "concept" of truth, not what I know to be truth. I don't KNOW anything to be truth. I'm on the fence about whether or not I even exist. However, there IS a truth about my existence, because I am aware. But I don't know how. No one has really even come close to understanding what consciousness is. I speak of truth as a "concept" and not as information I have verified.
.
When I say "Truth Happens" I means that Concept of Truth Happens. Nothing, absolute nothing happens that doesn't follow some sort of law.
.
It is true that me and you are different people, for instance. To say otherwise would defy ever tenet of Occam's Razor, and it would defy all evidence that points out that we are two different people.
See, here you are just tempting me. While I understand what you mean by "different" people, in reality, we are not. There is a tree, called the Aspen. While they look like separate trees, they all share the same root system. If you poisoned one tree, you would kill them all.
.
Occam's Razor is a Probably, not a law. I can defy it all I want. I don't go about judging the correct answer to be the simplest one. Sometimes that simplest answer is the hardest one to find anyway. Anyway, people are sort of like the Aspen Tree. We have different bodies, but we share a lot of the same coding and subconscious information. While yes, we are different "people" we are more the same then you might think.
.
My argument has largely be based upon "perspective." We are not 100% the same, but if you compared our DNA, would we would 99.99999% the same. That's pretty close to be the same. The "difference" between us would be considered statically insignificant.
.
My point is: Just because we don't know it, or haven't verified it, don't mean that a truth doesn't exist. In 1900, they considered closing the Patient Office, because they thought that everything that would be invented, had been invented. How much had we verified by then?
Answers never provide understanding, unless there is a question.
You can form a question about anything. Knowledge does not need questions first and knowledge can, can not will, provide understanding.
The you have done so far is question my sanity and pointed out that was a waste of time.
A waste of time? Not to me. It was fun for me pointing out your insanity.
Smart people always look crazy to stupid people.
This is not something a smart person would say.
Is is not good to be ignorant, but it is good to admit your ignorance.
It is not good to be ignorant and the first step to correcting that little flaw, at least slightly, is admitting oneself's ignorance.
What you have done is perhaps admit ignorance but you have a delusion that you don't have to do anything further to make yourself actually smarter. That is dumb not smart.
Without the admission of ignorance, one can never see past what they think they know.
True, yet you admit ignorance but cling to your delusions either way. Admitting it is one thing but actually understanding it, getting it, and then doing something about it is something entirely different and something you still have to do.
A wise man knows nothing, not for sake of stupidity, but rather for humility and that to learn, one does not assume that they already know.
Only an idiot would say something like this. A wise man has an inherent ability to understand a lot of things the first time he hears about them, an ability to easily see what is wrong and what is right without putting much thought into it. You are not wise because you are completely wrong.
Humility is pointless, just know what is right and wrong, also know yourself, and try keep others in mind. You do not know what is right and wrong and you definitely do not know yourself since you are claiming to have properties you do not possess.
You actually assume to know, yet in reality do not, and you have already stated clearly enough you do not want to learn.
Just try to look at yourself objectively, there's a lot to correct.
But nothing happens that doesn't follow the laws of truth.
Truth has no laws. Universally, there are no laws, no actual rules of any kind. Rules are created by us, by observing how things work and by giving worded definition to them.
This just sounds funny, coming from you.
Funny? Because it comes from me? Hey! I'm not the delusional one here, I actually view everything objectively and do not claim to know something I don't or cannot.
You on the other hand have given nothing but ridiculous bullshit based on delusions.
Can you provide any logic for this idea? I don't need proof, just some logic.
Me logic to you while you have such illogical and irrational opinions while you actually believe you are right? Are you fucking kidding me?
Truth supports illusion. There can truth in illusion, such a lesson, fable, or parable used to convey an idea. Illusion can work with the truth. Even though I am largely an illusion, my can still work with principles of truth.
.
But even with objects. For example: A Car. Even though we know what one is and how to drive one, is a car a "real cosmic object" or is it just a chunk of metal and rubber? What constitutes what is "actual?" It is actually a car, or it actually atoms, or it electrons and protons? What are electrons and protons? We humans call it a "car" but are we "authorized" to define what is actually is? If we are, then I call God by the Name of Living Truth as what is actual.
.
The point I was trying to make: Nothing can happen that isn't truth. Now, I know I am being stupid, immature, retarded, idiotic, and stuff, but I have a logic here.
.
If you build a rocket, how do you know if it will work? Because you have tested, measured, and retested things so many times that you can almost predict exactly what is going to happen when you light the engines. The reason that is it predictable is because everything follows the laws of truth, and you understand them enough to launch a rocket with them.
.
Even though man didn't have rockets 15,000 years ago, the laws of truth that allows a rocket to launch were still true, and will be true even billions of years after humans have destroyed themselves.
.
Hopefully, someday, we will travel between solar systems, maybe even between galaxies. If it is possible, those laws already exist. They have always existed and always will. Even if there is a galaxy to travel too, that laws that (might allow it) already exist.
.
However, what is a rocket? It's made of all sort of high stuff, probably nothing in its natural form. If you take off the fuel tank? Is it still a rocket? What if you take out the engines? Is it still a rocket? Everything that seems "actual" is temporary. Nothing is permanent. Granted, a Sharpie claims to be permanent marker, but is it? Even if a Sharpies takes 20,000 years to decompose, it's still not permanent.
.
We call things "actual" because of our "perspective." Just because a Sharpie might last longer then us, doesn't make it permanent. Even the Sun and Earth will eventually pass away. Yet, the laws that create and allow creation will never change.
.
If you break down a rocket into it's components, you can have "parts of a rocket." If you melt the parts down into scrap, you have strange alloys. You could, with patience, separate the alloys into pure element. If we had the tech, we could break apart the molecules, and then for the final kick, split the atom. But is an atom "actual" or is it made up of smaller particles and truth? Sure enough, it is. Electrons, Protons, and Neutrons make atoms, following very specific rules, but atoms are a creation and not what "actually" is. And are protons and electrons the base units, or are things that make those items.
.
My point is: Nothing is what it seems. What makes a thing what is seems, is the laws of truth follows to make it what is it.
Nice fallacy, how do you know that atoms a a creation ?
Because you can apply a+b=c to it. If you can separate parts out of it, then parts had to be put together to create it. For example: Iron is created when a star dies. But it is created. Many electrons and protons are compressed with unimaginable pressure, forcing protons through the co-valence of already existing atoms, creating denser and heavier atoms. Heavier atoms are created with each generation of the star system.
.
How do I know. I don't know anything. But I do have a color TV and those dudes on the science channel said it was and it makes sense to me. Aside from that. . . . I don't know shit.
Dudes on science channels are not lying but they are often oversimplifying information which may and does often lead to misunderstandings.
Think about star as a chef who cooks a soup, he does not create soup from nowhere, what he does is mixing different ingredients that he already has, so he is just mixing things not actually creating something... if he has no enough ingredients or not the right one he simply cannot cook...
Matter = Energy, they are just different form of same stuff you cannot create or destroy any of that, you may change matter to energy and so.
a+b=c might seem simple, but it's probably one of the main tools of creation. I just said, "A dying sun creates Iron and such." I didn't say the ingredients come from nowhere, at least not yet. Come on, do I really seem that simple? The cook/star is using "a+b=c" if on a somewhat massive scale. The sun takes two atoms and slams them together so hard it causes the two atoms to become one.
.
a+b=c
.
It seems simple, but pretty powerful. It can be applied to the pressure. I have not idea what kind of pressure is created by a collapsing star, but for grins and giggles, let's say 1 trillion psi. Let's say that before the star collapsed, the pressure was half that, but doubled in the collapse. Still, a+b=c. It can be be applied to almost every aspect of the process. Sure, other equations can be applied too, but a+b=c would still be used in most them anyway. Whether determining temperature, size, pressure, mass, density, etc.
.
There is one point that I think you have not considered here. Where did the ingredients come from? Sure, the cook didn't necessarily create them all. Maybe some were created in other generations of the dying star.
.
The universe consists mostly of matter and energy, as we understand them. Now, we know that matter and energy were split out of something else. For every particle of matter or wave of energy, somewhere out there is an "anti-matter" universe with it's evil twin, (metaphorically speaking.)
.
Let us consider a+b=c
c existed. but what it was, we have no idea. But it was there.
Something causes c to split. Now we have c-b=a
Let's assume that a is our universe and b is the anti-universe. Right now, they are in a & b form. But for the equation to be true, a+b=c
We know that if matter and anti-matter collide, they destroy each other. To what degree, I don't know. In theory, there is anti-time, anti-energy, anti-light, and anti-matter in this other universe.
.
Now, we can sort of imagine what our universe is, and what the anti-matter universe might be, but what the hell was c? What the hell could be split into both matter and anti-matter? Because, as we believe, to add them back toward equals nothing, or doesn't it?
.
Please, I beg thee, give me a good explanation of what c might have been. I have my belief, and it makes sense to me. What is your belief?
How you can believe that some sort of "compound" just "existed." There is only "ONE THING" that "EXISTED" forever and always. That is TRUTH. Everything else can be broken down so a smaller element until the element cease to exist in the physical world and become spiritual, such as Living Truth.
something that doesn't exist, has no real evidence of existing, is imaginary and does not even attempt to derive itself from scientific, natural or physical law cannot represent any truth. it simply derives its self from nothing more than the thought processes of people thousands of years ago.
If God "equals" truth, you have to throw out whatever definition of it you used to arrive at the conclusion that it "doesn't exist, has no real evidence of existing, is imaginary and does not even attempt to derive itself from scientific, natural or physical law." You can make arguments that for truth to be anything other than truth is incoherent or unnecessary, but you're kind of missing the point here.
seriously, i was thinking about clarifying your dispute argument up above, but you will have to clarify it, because your sentences are a bit sloppy and annoying to read and some parts of what you typed don't even make much sense. please fix this and then i can answer you with an appropriate response. this paragraph is not a counter argument mind you, i really want you to clarify exactly what you mean so i can figure it out and write a response in a most comprehensive and meaningful way.
after some thinking about what you typed, if i understand what you mean, i so far don't see anything that's really refuting any of the things i stated. all your countering me on is that you think i'm missing the point here. the point of the debate? because i perfectly understood everything the user wrote in his debate description and title, and i gave a response that doesn't contradict or get off track of what the debate is about in any way. and PLUS everything in the description were merely points to consider, not objectives to answer for the debate :).
No, I'm not missing the point. I'm struggling ignorance. Not to put you down, for I am ignorant as anyone.
.
Several times people have said, "There is no truth." This just confuses me.
a+b=c is true.
c-b=a
c-a=b
This kind of truth is real in thousands of different situations. It can apply to people, electrons, planets, atoms, numbers, electromagnet waves, mechanical waves, or what ever. You really cannot see this truth. It has no color, no taste, no smell, no shape, no sound, no mass, no nothing. Yet is real. It influences almost every object in existence. This simple equation allows every object in the universe to be broken down into a smaller object, leaving nothing as it seems. Everything thing in material, and things that are not, are product of this "truth." And even though it's just a concept to us, it is a "law" of perception. If we could see a hydrogen atom, it would be, a+b=c. 1 proton + 1 electron = 1 hydrogen atom. (That is the extent of my atomic knowledge.)
.
My point: If I haven't beat it to death. Just because we can't see it, doesn't mean it isn't real. We can easily observer a+b=c in our life. But there are many places that we don't see it. Everything that happens is a product of the math.
A man once said, "Imagination is more important then knowledge." I finally understand his point. Imagination is the power to create, while knowledge creates a "follower." People who know, follow. People who imagine, lead." However, not all imagining are created equal. Some imaginations how change the world, while others only soil the bathroom. However, imagining are real. They have real influence. Laws of truth must be met, but almost anything can be created. But sometimes, creation leaves toxic side effects. Least toxic side effects are just a product of truth. Some side effects can be lived with, others can't.
.
Science begins with nothing, too. Only the truth existed before the Big Bang. But my explanation covers that, your's doesn't.
what i mean by imagination is by thought processes, particularly thought processes that don't involve any evidence of any sort, not from scientific, physical or natural law. you are very correct in suggesting that imagination is not created equal, some people come up with the most ludicrous or ridiculous and or illogical ideas from their imagination and or incorrect thought processes. however, i will make a paraphrase from another argument down below from myself, in the unlikely case that something alive did create the universe, then it would most likely be aliens who managed to harness enough power, which would be a HUGE amount of power, but not impossible for an advanced civilization to gather, and use it at a single point to create a rip in space to produce a dividing line and section off that space into what we know as the universe. in that explanation it would be easy to assume that all of the excess energy would be the stuff we know as matter, and dark matter, and of course matter would use a process known as accretion to create stars, galaxies and planets, and all other natural phenomena in the known universe.
if you want to see more of what i typed previously just look at my other argument down below
or how about this i will make a giant self quote just so that it can be included into this particular argument, if you read the other one don't mind this:
"the possibility of different people randomly creating religions is the most probable cause of why there are religions today, the least likely cause of religions existing is that they saw supernatural things happen, and even assuming that they did see weird things happen back in the day i could further suggest/argue that there could be something external happening such as aliens making people see things or other technological enhancements to the situation.
it is illogical to quickly jump to the idea that something living created the universe without any actual investigation or evidence. and even IF something living created the universe, for all we know it could be an extremely advanced culture of aliens that harnessed enough power to isolate a large corner of space to literally divide space up to create what we know as the universe.
the people(s) that created the idea of monotheism used no basis to argue that what they thought up is true and absolute. they used nothing from their surroundings, and certainly nothing that was discovered from their surroundings, thus natural, scientific and physical law. of course things from their surroundings might have influenced the idea to them that something external and all powerful must have created it, but that is called jumping to conclusions and uses no actual basis to support that particular conclusion."
"the possibility of different people randomly creating religions is the most probable cause of why there are religions today, the least likely cause of religions existing is that they saw supernatural things happen, and even assuming that they did see weird things happen back in the day i could further suggest/argue that there could be something external happening such as aliens making people see things or other technological enhancements to the situation.
.
First, a etiquette reminder. Our language has something called a "Capital" used to indicate the beginning of a sentence. It makes things easier to read. Please use it.
.
Random is an interesting concept. Some mathematics groups have invested years into trying to create a "random generator." They have a couple of "adequate" models, but they are not truly random. Religion is sort like a work of art. Does an artist just randomly paint a picture? Maybe, but most have a reason. Even if just a simple line, it represents something about the artist.
.
Religions represents things about the people.
.
When I say, "Truth Happens" it applies to the imagination. If I take a 1" temper steal rod and try make it into a pretzel, I wouldn't be strong enough. The steal is much stronger then I am. However, if I take some pretzel dough and try to make a pretzel, I could, even if it looked bad.
.
Imagination is real, just much softer material. I can do things with the imagination that I cannot do in the physical world. So, something created in the imagination cannot be manifested. That doesn't make them wrong, just not plausible. Some ideas enter the realm of possibility and then can be chosen from to decide how the final product will look. You use your imagination to decide the color, height, shape, etc. There might be a billion plausible combinations, but you will chose one to manifest. That doesn't make the others "wrong" just undesired.
.
Just because it isn't manifested today, doesn't mean an imagining isn't real. Some people are paid a lot of money for their "un-manifested ideas."
.
So to me, just because it is imaginary, doesn't make it unreal. In fact, as far as I am concerned, most of the humans live largely in their imagination. 99% of fear is imaginary, so is value, and worth, and ownership, identity, etc.
First, about your concern over my capital use. While i do like to structure my sentences very carefully, when on the internet i often type fast because while i'm typing more ideas roll through my head when i type, your suggestion isn't bad, but its a shame that this website will not always correct capitals, and some other sentence errors that i have noticed. Typing without capitals has often been a preference of typing on the internet for me, but for this site i will probably adopt the use of capitals more since most discussions are usually serious and often heated.
About randomness, i know exactly what you mean, i have made a program to generate random numbers, but of course there is nothing truly random about it, in fact its very difficult to create a true random model, because most random models usually involve a type of "Pool" of some sort, whether it be a pool of information/data on a computer, a "Bag" of finite colored marbles, or the limited amount of information in someones head.
Don't get me wrong, i think that imagination is great, when discerning between what is true and not true you use a logical thought processes, if you want to create a piece of art logic isn't necessary, but you instead use imagination, unless you want to create a precise and more mathematical piece of art then that will take more thinking while requiring imagination.
Because the human brain is an analog device, while it can interpret information, particularly unstructured information is easily distorted and can be morphed out of its boundaries inside the brain, if the brain was digital, everything would stay on the exact same spot precisely, it would be impossible for the brain to morph or change the information into something else, although external damage could potentially corrupt it, and we likely wouldn't have the ability to imagine anything. Personally if people had a brain that was a hybrid between analog and digital, we would have the best of both, an imagination, and a brain that would be fully capable fo perfectly preserving any information we get externally precisely how it was when we first smelled it, tasted it, saw it, heard it, or felt it.
Your right that simply imagining something isn't wrong, but if you choose to imagine something and deliberately say that its fact, even when its based upon nothing, then you are wrong, if you try to logically discern fact and fiction, and then relay what you believe to be discoveries to other individuals, you may be onto something, just as long as the logic used by the individual was fairly rigorous and thought out.
It is indeed so that our minds, being an analog device had greatly bloated every single emotion, and boundary. which of course can be fear, value, worth, ownership, identity and of course everything else.
I would say that since the idea of God is understood by every culture in the world and science cannot explain the reason or cause for the Universe, it is pretty logical to think that something created it and us.
Does not even attempt to derive itself from scientific, natural, or physical law?
The idea that God created the universe is reflective of the most fundamental law in the Universe; cause and effect. There wouldn't even be scientific or physical law without cause and effect.
the possibility of different people randomly creating religions is the most probable cause of why there are religions today, the least likely cause of religions existing is that they saw supernatural things happen, and even assuming that they did see weird things happen back in the day i could further suggest/argue that there could be something external happening such as aliens making people see things or other technological enhancements to the situation.
it is illogical to quickly jump to the idea that something living created the universe without any actual investigation or evidence. and even IF something living created the universe, for all we know it could be an extremely advanced culture of aliens that harnessed enough power to isolate a large corner of space to literally divide space up to create what we know as the universe.
the people(s) that created the idea of monotheism used no basis to argue that what they thought up is true and absolute. they used nothing from their surroundings, and certainly nothing that was discovered from their surroundings, thus natural, scientific and physical law. of course things from their surroundings might have influenced the idea to them that something external and all powerful must have created it, but that is called jumping to conclusions and uses no actual basis to support that particular conclusion.
God isn't purely the product of religion. The theory of God deserves attention, because it logically follows the most fundamental law in the universe, cause and effect. Just because there are religions today doesnt mean that the idea of God directly stems from them. The idea of God is a logical way to understand the ushering in of existence. You are making it seem as though observation of natural phenomena is the only thing that could motivate people to believe in God. Also, why are you so quick to believe in aliens and immediately dismiss God?
I never said that something living created the universe. God could be the essence of energy itself, it could be anything. How could mere mortals understand the nature of the supreme being?
You have valid arguments against religion, but the theory of creationism isnt purely religious. We are arguing different ideas. Maybe look up some creationist theory instead of thinking of God in such a limited way. No offense.
Yes it is, religion is a absolute devotion to a set of supernatural ideas, that have no scientific, natural or physical evidence to them, and faith is to put full trust in a religion, so if god isn't purely a product of religion, then why does it have no scientific, natural or physical evidence to support it in the slightest? Why put your "full trust" in it?
"The theory of God deserves attention, because it logically follows the most fundamental law in the universe, cause and effect. "
Real theories actually derive themselves from scientific, natural and physical law and evidence, where does the theory of god derive its evidence from? nothing. While cause and effect is a law, if your going to state a theory of why cause and effect occurs provide actual evidence, other wise the theory has no basis.
"Just because there are religions today doesn't mean that the idea of God directly stems from them."
Yes is does, see above to the first one ^
"The idea of God is a logical way to understand the ushering in of existence. "
How is it logical if it has no basis what so ever and uses absolutely no evidence to explain itself? There is no logical meaning to it if it has absolutely no evidence behind it.
"You are making it seem as though observation of natural phenomena is the only thing that could motivate people to believe in God. "
Yes with very good reason i suggest that this is how the first religious thinkers created religion, it is quite literally all they had to go off of to create religion. Without using any reasoning whatsoever they jumped to the first idea in their head that a supernatural force/higher being created everything. of course later on, after certain religions were established, people used motives such as war or domination to believe in god, other people have emotional motives, but it doesn't make it any more true, especially when the first motive in the first place was to quickly explain how the earth was created without using any evidence at all.
"Also, why are you so quick to believe in aliens and immediately dismiss God?"
Because there is a process materials use to create life in the right conditions, even in an area in which no life existed before. have you ever taken a look at titan? did you know that right now as we speak titan is using base components from non living matter to create living matter? The fact that such a process exist and shows itself to take place in other areas would make it very reasonable for me to assume that this process has taken place in many places across the universe making life elsewhere and then eventually evolve into bacteria, then multi-cellular organism's and then eventually evolving into an intelligent, sentient and self aware life form.
"I never said that something living created the universe."
Not as far as i can tell in the arguments.
"God could be the essence of energy itself, it could be anything. How could mere mortals understand the nature of the supreme being?"
Hmm, if hes not alive how can he be a supreme being? Assuming that energy is alive then it would just be another life form. My body represents energy after all, since its made out of matter. so with that are you concluding that people make up a part of god?
"You have valid arguments against religion, but the theory of creationism isn't purely religious."
Religion is to put faith in a set of supernatural ideas that have no evidence to them. since creationism puts faith in an idea that has no evidence to it, it is religion. Something either derives itself from faith or doesn't derive itself from faith. You cant call science faith because in science it is based entirely off of evidence from our actual surroundings, and our actual surroundings are proven things, real things. So with this i conclude that creationism is purely religious, as it bases its ideas purely off of faith, it does not derive itself from out actual surrounding nor scientific, natural or physical law, which has been derived from our actual surroundings.
"We are arguing different ideas."
Indeed
"Maybe look up some creationist theory instead of thinking of God in such a limited way. No offense."
Me looking up creationist theories wont tell me what i already know about them. I'm not being limited in my thinking i am being in fact extremely logical in my thinking rigorously sorting out fact from fiction, in what way is that limiting? Are you trying to suggest that i be purely open minded and disregard all logic and past knowledge? There is no way i will give up my logic for something that has absolutely no basis.
The things we currently do not fully understand about our universe or reality we should not come to the hasty and irrational conclusion that supernatural phenomena or supreme beings is the cause of it all. 300 years ago, before our current understanding of physics, nobody knew how the earth could have possibly formed, it was considered unfathomable and that god could have only created it. However as more evidence was obtained, and more ideas were thoroughly and rigorously studied, the attraction of objects to each other become apparent. Accretion of particles due to gravity became the ultimate of conclusion to how planets are created, all based on evidence, and the things that could be proven as fact with the evidence presented. The most notable thing that a religious person might resort to is the idea that god created the universe and the most common counter is the question of what created god before the universe was created. By all means i could argue that aliens created the universe, in a space larger than the universe by harnessing enough energy and then creating a cosmic rip in space to separate our universe from the bigger universe. As more evidence is gained and more things are proven in the absolute, it would appear that religious beliefs are a very large pot of scientific and/or rational ignorance that slowly recedes as more things begin to get discovered.
Seriously, are you high. You are rambling a lot of incoheriant combinations of philosophical cliches from pop-culture. You can't just string together words and expect them to hold a deeper meaning.