The universe expands ...

[attofishpi]

Atheism is not an incumbrance its a freedom from tyranny.

Although I'll give you its sight is relatively short as it views up to ones death and no further.

Theism comes in many forms. Intelligent theists are unhindered in their search for truth by any 'tyrannny' to the same extent as atheists.
An intelligent theist is always open to the possibility that there is no God, realising all they have is a 'belief'.

Atheists on the other hand and on the whole, reject that they even have a belief...(in no God), thus blinding themselves to possible considerations as to the true nature of reality. That is not freedom of thought, it is plain stubborn idiocy.

[Arising_uk]

Theism comes in many forms. Intelligent theists are unhindered in their search for truth by any 'tyrannny' to the same extent as atheists.
An intelligent theist is always open to the possibility that there is no God, realising all they have is a 'belief'.

So just a crutch then. No actual 'God'.

Atheists on the other hand and on the whole, reject that they even have a belief...(in no God), thus blinding themselves to possible considerations as to the true nature of reality. That is not freedom of thought, it is plain stubborn idiocy.

This may apply to those ex-theists who have lost their faith but for us atheists who were raised with no such belief to lose its not a belief as its not even a thought to negate.

[attofishpi]

Theism comes in many forms. Intelligent theists are unhindered in their search for truth by any 'tyrannny' to the same extent as atheists.
An intelligent theist is always open to the possibility that there is no God, realising all they have is a 'belief'.

So just a crutch then. No actual 'God'.

Not a crutch...an open-mind.

Atheists on the other hand and on the whole, reject that they even have a belief...(in no God), thus blinding themselves to possible considerations as to the true nature of reality. That is not freedom of thought, it is plain stubborn idiocy.

This may apply to those ex-theists who have lost their faith but for us atheists who were raised with no such belief to lose its not a belief as its not even a thought to negate.

Not even a thought to negate? So what are you doing right now? A man once suggested that there may be a God, and you atheists are so arrogant that you refuse to even consider it!
Which stance is the wiser?
Which is leaving the observer with less sight?

[Arising_uk]

Not a crutch...an open-mind.

So you are open to the idea that your 'God' does not exist and its just a belief in your mind. What would convince you that this is the case.

Ha ha ha!! Not even a thought to negate? So what are you doing right now? A man once suggested that there may be a God, and you atheists are so arrogant that you refuse to even consider it!
Which stance is the wiser? Which is leaving the observer with less sight?

What I'm doing right now is answering a thought you raised. In my actual life the thought never raises itself.

I heard this idea when I was young and thought that until someone shows me one I'll not bother thinking about it. Along with all the other 'gods' that men once said may exist. If I did decide to think about it then I'd say that if you believe in one then you must believe in many and if you don't then you are an atheist with respect to these others and you could understand the atheist position by considering your stance as applied to your 'god'.

[Godfree]

...
I think I make my point , if I wanted to try and attack Arisings belief system then I would have done so , ...

What belief system is it that you think I have?

...

NZ is supposed to be the most trusted and honest country in the world , Democratic , Secular ,
and parliament starts with a prayer , the government funds religion ,
and refuses to fund Atheism ,, paranoid , me ,, naahhhh ,,,,

Have you tried to start your 'atheist religion' and get funding from the govt?

Yes , and I have it in writing from the Companies office here in NZ ,,
"unlawfull",,some think it's just that Atheists don't know how to apply properly,
and that I would have been accepted if I understood the requirements better ,
one lawyer suggested he could get me accepted as a religion , I refused of course ,
I don't won't to start a religion , anymore than science is a religion ,
I want to replace religion , get rid of religion , religion is the madness that is destroying our world so why would I want to just create more of the crap ,
Atheism is not a religion , it is the acknowledgment that there is no god ,
without god in the picture , Atheists do not as the christians imagine then break down into chaos and madness ,
quite the opposite , sanity and reality can prevail when you replace the insanity of religion ,,

[Godfree]

Theism comes in many forms. Intelligent theists are ? So what are you doing right now? A man once suggested that there may be a God, and you atheists are so arrogant that you refuse to even consider it!
Which stance is the wiser?
Which is leaving the observer with less sight?

If you spend your time looking for things that don't exist , then your sight is wasted ,
I don't think there would be a adult alive today , who has not thought does god exist ,
What is it you are asking us to consider ,??? ,,does alah exist ,,??? is that the question ,
does Brain Tamaki's god exist , , to say god , is not a specific ,
there are so many versions and concepts of god , you will have to be a little more precise than that ,
I know your bible is against chasing false gods ,
well I'm the same against chasing false knowledge ,
why waste your time on a pointless activity that will bear no fruit ,
when you could be applying your mind to real things like science and medicine

[attofishpi]

What I'm doing right now is answering a thought you raised. In my actual life the thought never raises itself.

I heard this idea when I was young and thought that until someone shows me one I'll not bother thinking about it. Along with all the other 'gods' that men once said may exist. If I did decide to think about it then I'd say that if you believe in one then you must believe in many and if you don't then you are an atheist with respect to these others and you could understand the atheist position by considering your stance as applied to your 'god'.

If you spend your time looking for things that don't exist , then your sight is wasted ,
I don't think there would be a adult alive today , who has not thought does god exist ,
What is it you are asking us to consider ,??? ,,does alah exist ,,??? is that the question ,
does Brain Tamaki's god exist , , to say god , is not a specific ,
there are so many versions and concepts of god , you will have to be a little more precise than that ,
I know your bible is against chasing false gods ,
well I'm the same against chasing false knowledge ,
why waste your time on a pointless activity that will bear no fruit ,
when you could be applying your mind to real things like science and medicine

I know God exists 100% fact from personal experience. I am still attempting to acertain the TRUE nature of God. This makes the stance of atheism rather laughable to me.
What annoys me about atheists, apart from them being entirely wrong, is this continued pitch that they alone are looking at the nature of reality scientifically.
Bullshit. I dont believe there was some big man in the sky waving his hands and creating Earth at the whim of his voice. I have no argument with the theory of evolution...i go perhaps a step further in suggesting perhaps this God is a 'God', a man or other intelligent species made entity that we have evolved within to deal with the rather nasty side of entropy. A man's best friend (Dog) or his worst enemy (God)? Bible...buy bull? It's there for a reason, not to be taken literally.
These homophones are not natural coincidences and from my understanding thus far God is panentheistic in nature.

http://www.androcies.com

[Arising_uk]

... thus far God is panentheistic in nature.

Then 'it' will be 'God's'.

[Hjarloprillar]

Atheism is not an incumbrance its a freedom from tyranny.

Although I'll give you its sight is relatively short as it views up to ones death and no further.

Theism comes in many forms. Intelligent theists are unhindered in their search for truth by any 'tyrannny' to the same extent as atheists.
An intelligent theist is always open to the possibility that there is no God, realising all they have is a 'belief'.

Atheists on the other hand and on the whole, reject that they even have a belief...(in no God), thus blinding themselves to possible considerations as to the true nature of reality. That is not freedom of thought, it is plain stubborn idiocy.

UK
agree
You said it better than i could on an average day. lol

[SpheresOfBalance]

Some nonsense

Off Topic!

[SpheresOfBalance]

...
[
Sorry Godfree!

LMFAO! Talk about false platitudes as if you actually meant it then you'd have stopped out of respect before you pressed the submit button.

Sob lets imagine Arising is a religious fundamentalist , and his job here is the spoiler ,
to get you off subject , dragged down into a bitch slapping contest ,
so who's the winner there sob ,??
have you won by slapping back ,
or has Arising won by stopping you from making sense ,getting points across ,
challenging some of these common assumptions ,
those posts are no loner educational for the readers ,
dating sites and face book do that sort of shit , so please ,
regain your dignity and educate us some more ,
regardless of what Arising throws up as a distraction ,,!!!!!

I quit, what you talking about? My response to her last above I sent via PM.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Sob lets imagine Arising is a religious fundamentalist , and his job here is the spoiler ,
to get you off subject , dragged down into a bitch slapping contest ,
so who's the winner there sob ,??
have you won by slapping back ,
or has Arising won by stopping you from making sense ,getting points across ,
challenging some of these common assumptions ,
those posts are no loner educational for the readers ,
dating sites and face book do that sort of shit , so please ,
regain your dignity and educate us some more ,
regardless of what Arising throws up as a distraction ,,!!!!!

Imagining things is harmless enough, physicists imagine spacetime, theists imagine evil and Godfree imagines that everyone that doesn't reject the Big Bang theory outright is a religious fundamentalist. Not everyone is all that good at remembering that it is something they have imagined though, some start to believe that their imagination reflects reality. This can become self perpetuating with the believer imaging more and more things to support their narrative. The story becomes unfalsifiable, the effect being that the believers grip on reality loosens and in some cases becomes totally unhinged, as is the case with religious nutters, conspiracy theorists even some physicists; Newton believed quite a lot of stuff which was utter bollocks, for instance; Fredkins ideas are at least two steps removed from observation.
If you, Godfree, are going to insist on the truth of your imaginings, you risk losing your marbles, I suggest you get a grip.

I think that he was merely saying that one cannot know, in a round about way. At least it makes sense to me. You seem to think that getting a grip, means falling in line, to believe the most popular belief of the day, without fully understanding it. That's fine, you have that freedom, Obviously Godfree and myself see it otherwise, which is where our point of contention lies. The differences between us! We challenge, you assimilate. OK?

[SpheresOfBalance]

We will never agree on anything , if we can't speak the same language ,
please excuse my limited knowledge on how many versions of the bbt there are ,
but I thought one of the common accepted beliefs ,
was that before the bb , the expansion of the universe ,
all of the known universe was collected in a " point of singularity" ,
and the universe , time and space , did not exist yet ,
which I think is laughable , ...

Fair enough, I stand corrected.


I told you, I have no thoughts about how the universe stops, if I did I'd become an astrophysicist or cosmologist and try and prove them. But I do have a thought about what the current crop of physicists say and they say its not going to stop, just our part of it, i.e. matter, is going to end in a heat death.

my English tells me that no space , is a solid , if there are no gaps or empty bits,
it's a solid , so don't say there is universe and then nothing , thats a cop-out ,
meaningless dribble , ...

In English I pretty much guess it is but like I said, some physicists say they have a mathematical model of an infinite bounded space. I don't say there is a universe and then nothing, just that there is a universe.

I'll put it plainly and simply so theres no confusion ,
the reason you or anybody else doesn't have a rational explanation for how the universe stops ,
is because one doesn't exist , there is no rational/sane model of the universe that is so big ,
and then nothing , thats just not possible ,
thats why you or anybody else can't find a rational explanation of finite ,
because one doesn't exist ,,!!!!

But I see infinite as equally perplexing.

[SpheresOfBalance]

...
I'll put it plainly and simply so theres no confusion ,
the reason you or anybody else doesn't have a rational explanation for how the universe stops ,
is because one doesn't exist , there is no rational/sane model of the universe that is so big ,
and then nothing , thats just not possible ,
thats why you or anybody else can't find a rational explanation of finite ,
because one doesn't exist ,,!!!!

You can believe what you like and what you believe is pretty much not postulated by the physicists. They say you just can't talk about it, all you can talk about is what we can see thats there, but you appear to insist upon doing so. What they do say is they have at least one mathematical model that has an infinite bounded space, whether it applies to ours is something that won't be made true or false until they can think up an experiment to test the idea. To understand what they say would mean having to understand the language they use to describe such stuff, i.e. maths, and until then I think you just blowing hot air due to your own personal bug-bear with religion. Personally I think your thoughts are a waste of your time and effort if you think you're going to be getting anywhere with them, as has been shown by the fate of such metaphysics and epistemology in philosophy. But I accept one has to get there jollies where one can but think you ought to give up the puff and become an astrophysicist or cosmologist if you truly think what you say is true.

You make light, as if different. You just want it your way, to be expected, but you give no respect, huh loon?

Matters not what anyone says of the universe, Physicist or otherwise, as mathematical models can 'appear' to indicate anything one imagines, and yet say nothing of the truth of the matter.

[SpheresOfBalance]

...
I'll put it plainly and simply so theres no confusion ,
the reason you or anybody else doesn't have a rational explanation for how the universe stops ,
is because one doesn't exist , there is no rational/sane model of the universe that is so big ,
and then nothing , thats just not possible ,
thats why you or anybody else can't find a rational explanation of finite ,
because one doesn't exist ,,!!!!

You can believe what you like and what you believe is pretty much not postulated by the physicists. They say you just can't talk about it, all you can talk about is what we can see thats there, but you appear to insist upon doing so. What they do say is they have at least one mathematical model that has an infinite bounded space, whether it applies to ours is something that won't be made true or false until they can think up an experiment to test the idea. To understand what they say would mean having to understand the language they use to describe such stuff, i.e. maths, and until then I think you just blowing hot air due to your own personal bug-bear with religion. Personally I think your thoughts are a waste of your time and effort if you think you're going to be getting anywhere with them, as has been shown by the fate of such metaphysics and epistemology in philosophy. But I accept one has to get there jollies where one can but think you ought to give up the puff and become an astrophysicist or cosmologist if you truly think what you say is true.

Aside from the incumbrance that atheism is extremely short sighted and entirely wrong.

One cannot say such, in any universally meaningful way.