The beginning of nothing |
|
scream-of-consciousness; "If you're trying to change minds and influence people it's probably not a good idea to say that virtually all elected Democrats are liars, but what the hell."
The beginning of nothing |
|
"If the number of Islamic terror attacks continues at the current rate, candlelight vigils will soon be the number-one cause of global warming. " |
This will be the comment box |
Kirby J Hensley was against chewing gum?
Bishop Laurence, ULC (ret)
I would like to hire you to conduct my funeral. Ignore everything Mrs. Annoyed tells you and make it unforgettable. I'm thinking dancing girls and fireworks, while burning a few politicians in effigy. More details as I think of them.
AWM
With whom do I discuss payment in advance?
"Agnosticism - reserving judgment about divine purpose - remains as defensible as ever, but atheism - the confident denial of divine purpose - becomes trickier. If you admit that we can't peer behind a curtain, how can you be sure there's nothing there?" - Paul Davies -- the renowned British-born physicist, agnostic and professor of cosmology, quantum field theory and astrobiology -- once speaking against the certainty of atheism to Time magazine (in the column "Science, God, and Man")
GrinfilledCelt
I met Mr. Hensley back in the mid-seventies, at a conference I helped put together on religion for OSU's English Department. (Also got to meet and talk with MarJoe. Now, that guy was funny!)
Anywhoo, Mr. Hensley gave me and my advisor blank certificates and told us to fill them in in anyway we chose.
I'm a Pope.
And I am not pleased with your level of tithing.
.
Pope OregonGuy
I'm totally digging on that ULC thing. I can deduct lots of cool shit as a business expense, and beat my real estate taxes if my house can be the temple.
Does it get me out of Obamacare too, or do I have to get all Amish on their ass?
Mr atheist, here! What the hell is a literal "nothing" anyway? It's ~non existence~, right? Can existence come from non-existence? Hell, no. It's logically untenable. Here's my argument. Time is a property of the Universe, so it makes no sense to evoke a prior cause to its existence. There's no "before" or "prior to" the Universe. It is much more logical to say that in whatever state the Universe exists or existed it is self-sustaining. All the supernatural gobble-dee-gook is just stuff people make up to manufacture a cause. Any cause will do. Anything at all. But then when people do that, they are justifiably hit with the argument of infinite regress--what caused the cause, and what then caused the cause of the cause, and so on. Now, on to GrinfilledCelt's comment about agnosticism. Agnostics suffer from the perfect knowledge fallacy which often leads them down the path of subjectivism and moral relativism. Their argument goes like this: If we don't have perfect knowledge of everything, then we can't be certain of anything. Well, humans can't achieve the strawman certainty-of-god to be sure, but human certainly will do fine. It's good enough. I am ~certain~ people fare far better under a system of free-market capitalism than communism. I am ~certain~ freedom is better than slavery. I'm a certain that claims of virgin births, talking serpents, the existence of people with six limbs (namely, angels), and a man that can walk on water is a load of crap on stilts. I'm certain "God" did not talk to Charles Manson. This is in stark contrast to the agnostic who would level up any pile of poop to the status of "knowledge" even if it could not resolve back to the things we humans can experience. No, I don't think agnosticism is defensible.
Aren't god and the universe one and the same?
All powerful
Infinite
Eternal (pulsating eternally)
All embracing
Limitless
What is beyond the place where the stars thin out and finally there are none?
Is total, absolute empty space still the universe?.....Why yes...yes it is.
It has no end,either in time, or in form.
JMJ :)