Page 10 of 14 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 138
Thanks Tree49Thanks

Thread: Do you believe there is a hell?

  1. #91
    Veteran Member Isalexi's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    31,297
    Thanks
    19628

    From
    Maryland
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallie Knoetze View Post
    Ms. Benji.

    I believe that hell is not a physical nor metaphysical place, but rather, distance from God. The closer you are to God, the more you are in paradise. The farther you are, the more you are in hell.
    That's like what my kids believe. The closer you are to Santa the more toys you get , the further you are, the more coal you get in your stocking

  2. #92
    Established Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    6,557
    Thanks
    281

    From
    Irrelevant
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    What it "leaves room for" is meaningless. Something is, or it is not. The question is what the physical evidence is, and there is no physical evidence for a non-corporeal supreme being.
    When you posit that the universe came from a singularity, what physical evidence do you have that such a singularity could even exist? You talk of the scientific method when you don't even understand what it is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    Because many theists claim G-d's existence is provable fact - i.e., making a scientific assertion.
    Nonsense. Provable facts aren't necessarily scientific assertions.

    For instance: The product rule of natural logarithms ln(x.y)=ln(x)+ln(y)

    Where is the physical evidence for this fact, hmmmmm? Does the absence of physical evidence render the statement false?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    If that is so, then such evidence should be shown.
    Proof has already been provided many times. What starts to exist has a cause. The universe started to exist. Therefore, it must have a cause.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    The point of the question is a reductio ad absurdum to demonstrate that no such evidence exists. Asking the question does no more than that.
    Reductio ad absurdum is a way to prove or disprove a statement by showing that such a proposition leads to an absurd or impossible situation, not that no such evidence exists.

    For example:

    The law of inertia states that an object at rest or in uniform motion will remain at rest or in uniform motion unless a force acts upon it.

    The universe is expanding at an accelerating rate.

    Therefore a force acted on it and to say otherwise is an impossibility.

  3. #93
    Established Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    6,557
    Thanks
    281

    From
    Irrelevant
    Quote Originally Posted by GordonGecko View Post
    Or given your faith is unshakable, you'd take any evidence you receive and "make it fit" your world-view?
    Physics has provided me with a sufficiently rational world-view, thank you very much. Argument from motion, if you still don't get it.

  4. #94
    Established Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    6,557
    Thanks
    281

    From
    Irrelevant
    Quote Originally Posted by GordonGecko View Post
    If God is a "provable fact"?


    What's the point of "faith"?

    I don't have "faith" in the existance of the Sun or "faith" that if I drop a brick, it's going to fall down and not fly up against gravity?
    And what exactly is the difference between faith and an axiom or postulate, hmmmm? When your teacher stated that two parallel lines will never intersect, did she give you any proof of this or did you accept it on faith?

  5. #95
    Established Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    6,557
    Thanks
    281

    From
    Irrelevant
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    Now you are referring back to Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

    Of course, the problem is with those who claim they can prove G-d exists, rather than recognize that religion and science are two different things and should not be mixed.
    But you yourself do not recognize the difference. If you did recognize the difference, you wouldn't ask for physical evidence.

  6. #96
    Established Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    6,557
    Thanks
    281

    From
    Irrelevant
    Quote Originally Posted by Puzzling Evidence View Post
    Most of what you write is complete gibberish. Framing it into very impressive, pseudo-scientific stereo instructions, does nothing to hide that fact.
    What you do not comprehend is not necessarily gibberish.

  7. #97
    Established Member
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    6,557
    Thanks
    281

    From
    Irrelevant
    Quote Originally Posted by Havelock View Post
    The truth is, that is far from a consensus view among astrophysicists.

    Cheers.
    The most ambitious idea ever outlined by scientists has suffered a remarkable setback. It has been dismissed as a theoretical cul-de-sac that has wasted the academic lives of hundreds of the world's cleverest men and women.

    This startling accusation has been made by frustrated physicists, including several Nobel prize winners, who say that string theory - which seeks to outline the entire structure of the universe in a few brief equations - is an intellectual dead end....

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/...ighereducation

  8. #98
    New Member Benji's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    81
    Thanks
    26

    From
    Chicago
    I am sorry to have abandoned my thread, this place is very busy and I am having trouble keeping up.

  9. #99
    New Member Havelock's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    702
    Thanks
    906

    From
    U.S.A.
    Quote Originally Posted by kingrat View Post
    The most ambitious idea ever outlined by scientists has suffered a remarkable setback. It has been dismissed as a theoretical cul-de-sac that has wasted the academic lives of hundreds of the world's cleverest men and women.

    This startling accusation has been made by frustrated physicists, including several Nobel prize winners, who say that string theory - which seeks to outline the entire structure of the universe in a few brief equations - is an intellectual dead end....

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/...ighereducation
    The article you cited in your most recent reply is from 2006. The latest discoveries relative to gravitational waves -- which you implied disproved string theory categorically -- are from 2016. Here's a much more recent assessment:

    The BICEP2 results will also send some string theorists back to the drawing board, says Frank Wilczek, a theoretical physicist and Nobel laureate at MIT. String theory posits that elementary particles are made of tiny vibrating loops of energy. Efforts to combine string theory with cosmology have led to inflationary models that generate gravitational waves with energies much lower than the level detected by BICEP2, he says.

    Theoretical physicist Eva Silverstein of Stanford says she disagrees that string theory-based models of inflation are in any sort of trouble. “There is no sense in which we are forced to start over,” she says. She adds that in fact a separate class of theories that involve both axions and strings now look promising.

    Linde agrees. “There is no need to discard string theory, it is just a normal process of learning which versions of the theory are better,” he says. “All of us, not just string theorists, should go back to the drawing board, but not because we failed, but because we learned something very important and now we should use this knowledge to make further steps.”

    Link:Pattern of gravitational waves may reveal string theory's remnant strings.

    Is String Theory correct? Who knows? There have always been physicists who're willing to dismiss it as a "just so", untestable theory. It seems that the discovery of gravitational waves may in fact provide us some method of actually testing at least some elements of the theory. That would be significant, no? In any case, there are clearly still gaps in our knowledge when we're reduced to positing both dark matter and dark energy as unknown but necessary entities. Ciphers... But it's clear that the jury is still out on String Theory and implying otherwise based on the data we currently have is simply... incorrect.

    Cheers.
    Last edited by Havelock; 26th May 2017 at 05:58 PM.

  10. #100
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    32,414
    Thanks
    15805

    From
    Phoenix, AZ

    Do you believe there is a hell?

    Yes. it is a realm very much like Earth, except that Donald Trump is President.

    Oh. Wait...
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

Page 10 of 14 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 326
    Last Post: 28th April 2017, 02:25 PM
  2. 23 min in Hell
    By Terri321 in forum Philosophy and Religion
    Replies: 524
    Last Post: 26th August 2007, 08:43 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed