The funny thing is that there is nothing in the entire universe that can be considered as unnatural. Not a single action, word or thought can be deemed unnatural. Nothing.
Buy on AliExpress.com
What is your god like? (8 Viewers)
- Thread starter Martin
- Start date
- Status
Buy on AliExpress.com
From what I can tell he's being unbiased in his presentation of historical models. Whether it's true what he says I don't know because I'm not familiar with all this.
So I'm not the person to seek an answer from. However, if you do want an answer in cosmological terms to explain why god isn't necessary you'll be thrilled to know that there was a book written for this very purpose.
Victor Stenger - God the failed hypothesis (how science shows that god does not exist)
I haven't read it because I'm not that interested in cosmology, but it's easy enough to find on the internets.
So I'm not the person to seek an answer from. However, if you do want an answer in cosmological terms to explain why god isn't necessary you'll be thrilled to know that there was a book written for this very purpose.
Victor Stenger - God the failed hypothesis (how science shows that god does not exist)
I haven't read it because I'm not that interested in cosmology, but it's easy enough to find on the internets.
I wasn't really asking you about the validity of the cosmological explanations he gives but rather the final part when he comes to the conclusion for the existence of God.
1. Whatever exists has a reason for its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or in an external ground.
2. Whatever begins to exist is not necessary in its existence.
3. If the universe has an external ground of its existence, then there exists a Personal Creator of the universe, who, sans the universe, is timeless, spaceless, beginningless, changeless, necessary, uncaused, and enormously powerful.
4. The universe began to exist.
From (2) and (4) it follows that
5. Therefore, the universe is not necessary in its existence.
From (1) and (5) it follows further that
6. Therefore, the universe has an external ground of its existence.
From (3) and (6) it we can conclude that
7. Therefore, there exists a Personal Creator of the universe, who, sans the universe, is timeless, spaceless, beginningless, changeless, necessary, uncaused, and enormously powerful.
I think his initial premises are all valid, and his final conclusion was exremely logical. What did you think?
1. Whatever exists has a reason for its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or in an external ground.
2. Whatever begins to exist is not necessary in its existence.
3. If the universe has an external ground of its existence, then there exists a Personal Creator of the universe, who, sans the universe, is timeless, spaceless, beginningless, changeless, necessary, uncaused, and enormously powerful.
4. The universe began to exist.
From (2) and (4) it follows that
5. Therefore, the universe is not necessary in its existence.
From (1) and (5) it follows further that
6. Therefore, the universe has an external ground of its existence.
From (3) and (6) it we can conclude that
7. Therefore, there exists a Personal Creator of the universe, who, sans the universe, is timeless, spaceless, beginningless, changeless, necessary, uncaused, and enormously powerful.
I think his initial premises are all valid, and his final conclusion was exremely logical. What did you think?
One of the most interesting -- and tragic -- things I find about HIV and AIDS is that the disease is almost socially engineered to propagate on the rails of social and religious hang-ups. And by propagate, I mean children, heterosexual women, etc., as well as gays.
Uganda's successful dealing with the AIDS crisis proved that social policy and religious attitudes are at the root of spreading the disease, as they were able to demonstrate an amazing amount of progress and success by circumventing those forces through discussion, education, bringing things out in the open, etc.
It's in the cultures where religion and society force the disease to sublimate among the population is where HIV/AIDS has festered most and caused the most preventable death. In essence, HIV/AIDS used social mores and religious conservatism as fuel to propagate itself. You can almost make an argument that AIDS is more of a disease of religious and social intolerance than it is a "gay person's" disease.
Because I believe a lot of social thinking and religious attitudes towards AIDS fully deserve to be held accountable for the deaths they contributed by their attitudes and policies. The epidemiological evidence all over Africa proves it.
Uganda's successful dealing with the AIDS crisis proved that social policy and religious attitudes are at the root of spreading the disease, as they were able to demonstrate an amazing amount of progress and success by circumventing those forces through discussion, education, bringing things out in the open, etc.
It's in the cultures where religion and society force the disease to sublimate among the population is where HIV/AIDS has festered most and caused the most preventable death. In essence, HIV/AIDS used social mores and religious conservatism as fuel to propagate itself. You can almost make an argument that AIDS is more of a disease of religious and social intolerance than it is a "gay person's" disease.
Because I believe a lot of social thinking and religious attitudes towards AIDS fully deserve to be held accountable for the deaths they contributed by their attitudes and policies. The epidemiological evidence all over Africa proves it.
- Status