tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-668652011781121325.post2561049215874653627..comments2024-02-13T14:24:33.758+05:30Comments on Blissful Life: Do You Think Everything Happened By Chance?Akshay S Dineshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13477111115934396454noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-668652011781121325.post-43790307083289071382010-09-10T23:35:18.664+05:302010-09-10T23:35:18.664+05:30humans have a habit of fearing the unknown and wor...humans have a habit of fearing the unknown and worshipping it.<br />god is one such thing.<br />the unknown will be feared and worshipped untill one day som1 finally explains it.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16648392902956603388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-668652011781121325.post-1978802155499155402010-09-10T23:30:07.986+05:302010-09-10T23:30:07.986+05:30I believe everything happened by chance and i don ...I believe everything happened by chance and i don believe in god.<br />Humans created the concept of god and not the other way round.<br />I believe tat the concept of god was created move ppl to lead a better life. i mean if they think tat som1 is watching over every sin they are doin, they'll do lesser sins.<br />Do atheists use the word OMG???Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16648392902956603388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-668652011781121325.post-49997378015075911202009-09-16T09:28:20.214+05:302009-09-16T09:28:20.214+05:30Perhaps I'm not fully understanding your query...Perhaps I'm not fully understanding your query, but I believe the theist would consider the question a logical fallacy in itself.<br />To ask who 'created' an omnipotent noncontingent being is like asking "who might walk out of that empty room?"-- it is a necessarily illogical statement in that by the definition of such a "God" there can be no one to create God but himself. Additionally, due to the nature of omnipotence, there can only be one such being, and self-existence (or noncontingency) does not arise, but must be inherent to a thing's nature because it requires existing without cause, therefore making such a thing eternal as well.<br /><br />To sum up, what do you mean by asking who created a causeless eternal omnipotent being, when there's no logical definition of anything that can create that?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-668652011781121325.post-71212422885460438212009-08-06T16:34:58.926+05:302009-08-06T16:34:58.926+05:30for all you atheists out there..here's a quest...for all you atheists out there..here's a question who is the one beating in your heart...can you stop your heart beat..how come it goes on incessantly?<br /><br />keep bloggingToon Indianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07675962505129911588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-668652011781121325.post-29628903567866618932009-08-06T06:28:32.942+05:302009-08-06T06:28:32.942+05:30"who created god"? or "who created ..."who created god"? or "who created us"?<br />which is the better question.<br />i think if we find answer for one the other wil be undrstoodNipunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04433743630135250291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-668652011781121325.post-73247679462406718312009-08-06T02:39:12.979+05:302009-08-06T02:39:12.979+05:30Thought experiment:
God exists. God is a personal...Thought experiment:<br /><br />God exists. God is a personal, powerful entity.<br /><br />Certain things are true "anterior to", or "independently of" God.<br />1) Existence<br />2) Logic<br />3) Personality<br />4) Etc.<br />Because they exist in God and it didn't create them.<br /><br />God cannot do just anything. God can only do that which is metaphysically possible.<br /><br />Therefore, Metaphysical Modality exists independently of or anterior to God!<br /><br />Every possible world exists independently of the volition of any entity!<br /><br />It is therefore false that the First Cause of any universe is personal.VeridicusXhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06142066725668197305noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-668652011781121325.post-56006353781361597412009-08-05T22:20:48.213+05:302009-08-05T22:20:48.213+05:30It is most recomended that u should read myths to ...It is most recomended that u should read myths to understand yourselves about the evolution of God.We the thiests are able to satisfy with the answer provided in those myths,let it be of any religion.<br />Myths rather than describing the legendary stories,desribe the evolutionary history of GOD.<br />But u can question me by asking how without any supportive factors God evolved.<br />But if He does not possess extraordinary powers,can He be called as God.Aswin.K.Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16718644123346506198noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-668652011781121325.post-52305113910452425132009-08-05T21:42:09.904+05:302009-08-05T21:42:09.904+05:30Are you wondering whether the laws that govern our...Are you wondering whether the laws that govern our universe came about by chance? There is a school of thought that deals with just that idea, and it is as wonderfully simple as it is obvious.<br /><br />The answer is, yes, everything happened by chance. But had the laws that govern our universe been any different, we wouldn't be here to discuss the topic. In order for a universe to be known or witnessed it would, of necessity, have to exist in just such a way as to support it's witnesses.<br /><br />The universe may very well have been through countless iterations already. Or, countless iterations exist concurrently.<br /><br />We are confronted by the unlikeliness of our existence every day, yet here we are talking about it.<br /><br />Maybe it's just not that unlikely.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10191562166247804327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-668652011781121325.post-24528858748504767062009-08-05T19:46:35.895+05:302009-08-05T19:46:35.895+05:30Not chance, symmetry. for something to be true it ...Not chance, symmetry. for something to be true it has consequences. If 1 + 1 = 2, then that necessitates 2 + (-1) = 1. I could redefine the idea of 1, 2, +, and equal but that would break the definitions of these symbols.<br /><br />Then we can look at what chance is, if given a number of possible outcomes, then how often will one set of them happen? What is odd, is that we can add these values as we add 1 to itself. <br /><br />Even the idea of chance, your see, hides the same symmetries which underlay quantum and relativistic physics. <br /><br />So even putting the universe in terms of "chance" gives them properties that must be true. You might ask how these properties arise, and that can be discovered in knot theory (of all places) within topology. <br /><br />Simply put, if you have a finite number of things, in any order, then you will find symmetry within that order. You ask a good question, please keep digging.cl-beerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15131008286303003978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-668652011781121325.post-49316647121608229302009-08-05T18:34:45.871+05:302009-08-05T18:34:45.871+05:30You're flirting with the "God is in the g...You're flirting with the "God is in the gaps" fallacy. Even if the brain is complex and not understood, that doesn't mean a magical sky fairy designed it. The number of things that were once thought magical that are now understood to be completely comprehensible through the lens of the scientific method is vast. We have yet to find some incredibly amazing natural phenomenon that has turned out to be divine in cause.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com