If 1 then the cosmos is just another word for God! - What is wrong with such ludicrous identification? This is what is wrong: - The true meaning of a word "God" is: A being which cannot not to be!!! Such Being can't be created since God has no need to have been created, He exists outside time, but the cosmos HAS NEED TO HAVE BEEN CREATED and IS submitted to the second law of thermodynamics!
No. It isn't just another word for God.
"God" is a name given to a particular sentient entity capable of defying the laws of nature.
If the cosmos isn't sentient, then it isn't a god and thus not God.
Your definition is just a pathetic attempt at defining God into existence.
Saying God doesn't need a creator but the cosmos does is merely special pleading. Your god needs it just as much as the cosmos.
Saying your god exists outside of time means it is unable to do anything.
Of course, there is one necessary "exception"
And any exception will disprove the rule. As such, things can come into existence out of nothing.
As such, the universe can come into existence out of nothing and there is no need for your imaginary fiend.
Trying to say your god can violate it but nothing else can is merely special pleading.
Ultimately, there is either an infinite series of causes (or things) extending into the past and thus your god is not needed.
Or things can exist without cause and thus your god is not needed.
So if we are going to have a necessary exception (the only option if we exclude an infinite series of past events), why not leave it at the universe, rather than resorting to primitive childish nonsense?
Which is more likely to exist without cause:
A simple singularity,
or a massively complex, thinking, sentient entity?
- In the philosophy
- In "the book of nature" (creation)
- In the Bible (in history)
Philosophy indicates God is a useless, needless, complication.
There is no honest indication nature is a creation.
The Bible is a work of mythology, not history.
God even became one of us, and took our sins away! It is hard to understand such a great love, but it is possible for us to believe that such a perfect love can exist! Creation itself is a token of God's perfect love towards us!
That is because it isn't love.
God, by virtue of being omnipotent and the judge of everyone, could merely forgive us and not send us to hell.
Instead he created a being (which was himself) for the primary purpose of having it tormented and killed.
That isn't love.
Additionally, this being was only dead for a few days before coming back more powerful.
How is that a sacrifice?
The whole story of Jesus is pure nonsense.
It only makes sense if God was not omnipotent and thus needed to sacrifice to something greater than itself, Jesus was working against God (such as by being or working with Satan), or as propaganda (and that is ignoring the more obvious option of it is all a load of shit).
The Biblical God is a horribly abusive, corrupt evil tyrant that no decent human being would ever worship.
He set up Adam and Eve to fail.
He turned a woman into a pillar of salt just for looking back.
He commanded someone to kill their son.
He tormented the Egyptians to show off.
He commanded or carried out countless acts of genocide.
And then rather than forgive people, he instead decides to demand a blood sacrifice.
Do you know what loving is?
You appear to be suffering from battered wife syndrome.
I will go so far as to contend that religion goes astray the moment it relinquishes its just rights in the so-called natural domain nowadays occupied by science.
Religion has no right in the domain occupied by science. Science seeks the truth. Religion seeks indoctrination into pure bullshit which it claims as truth.
I believe that the contemporary crisis of faith and the ongoing de-Christianization of Western society have much to do with the fact that for centuries the material world has been left to the mercy of the scientists. This has of course been said many times before (YET NOT NEARLY OFTEN ENOUGH!)
Yes, and in doing so we discovered the Bible is complete nonsense which contradicts reality.
We also have answers to previously unknown questions which people previously resorted to religion to find answers, and are living much better lives and thus have less need for the false hope of religion.
The primary cause of the de-Christianisation of western society is because Christianity is baseless bullshit.
It was not by any accident that the greatest thinkers of all ages were deeply religious souls. - Max Planck
Read more : http://todayinsci.com/P/Planck_Max/PlanckMax-Quotations.htm
Except they weren't.
The ones of the past typically were or at least presented themselves as such. That is because they lived in a time with lots of religious persecution where people would be treated appallingly if they weren't religious, being dismissed as insane or stupid, or tortured or killed.
In modern times, most of the greatest thinkers are atheists.
And it doesn't really matter what those people say.
The simple fact is that belief in god is one of the most unscientific things one can do.
God is a necessary existence!
No. There is nothing necessary about God. That is just a pathetic attempt at defining God into existence
Some philosophers have argued that it is impossible, or at least improbable, for a deity to exhibit such a property alongside omniscience and omnipotence, as a result of the problem of evil.
And so far, no one has been able to find a solution for it.
Let's see what prominent philosopher William Lane Craig has to say on this problem :
Really? A blatant conman with no integrity at all, happy to blatantly lie and misrepresent things just to push his own views.
He also has a much simpler solution for the problem of evil, and that is to effectively render omnibenevolent (or any term containing "good") into a meaningless tautology when it comes to God by declaring good to be whatever God commands.
So if God commands you to murder, rape and pillage, then that must be good.
The real issue with that is the bullshit claim that this is somehow an objective moral standard.
So, since i can't find any logical flaw in the reasoning above, i would very gladly accept the claim that the earth is spherically shaped if someone managed to convince me (scientifically) that this is really the truth and not just a theory.
But until then, you outright reject reality because it contradicts your fantasy?
There is also a rather simple way around it.
Accept your god is an evil tyrant that lies to mankind.
Because the Bible is FLATLY FLAT EARTH book, so if the earth is not flat then the Bible is wrong, and if the Bible is wrong then stupid (according to my reasoning) story about man's fall is wrong also, and if stupid story about man's fall is wrong then christianity is also wrong, and if christianity is wrong then we are fucked up...
I at least like your honesty with this.
The same also applies to other things, like evolution (contradicting Adam and Eve), archaeology (contradicting the flood), homosexuality being acceptable (rather than an abomination punishable by death), slavery being bad (rather than something that was fine, even beating a slave to within an inch of death was fine).
But so many Christians these days ignore all that "interpreting" (by which they really mean perverting/manipulating) the Bible to suit themselves.
If when Christians first realised the Bible was wrong they discarded it, the world would have been a much better place (and it would deal a significant blow to this FE nonsense)
But unlike you, rather than reject a round Earth, which was backed up by plenty of evidence, I rejected the Bible, which was backed up by indoctrination. (no, not even the Bible containing some historical things is proof. Harry Potter contains London. Avatar contains Earth. Lots of works of fiction contain real places. And if you are trying to sell it as the truth, you would want that to make it more convincing)
I am afraid that you are frightened to face the truth that the Bible is FLATLY FLAT EARTH book, since you are christian, aren't you RABINOZ?
Since you believe in spherical shape of the earth, you are frightened to death to face the truth that the Bible is FLATLY FLAT EARTH book, aren't you RABINOZ?
Because like so many Christians they suffer from cognitive dissonance.
They are confronted by 2 conflicting views.
One is their religion which they hold deeply and are heavily indoctrinated into and do not want to let go of.
The other is all the evidence and modern science indicating Earth is round.
People naturally dislike believing 2 contradictory things, so they try and find a way to solve this.
For the most (and often also the least) rational, that is to discard one.
For some people, things like this is the moment they discard their religion or start to have serious doubts about it.
For others, it is the part where they begin to reject reality because they want their religion to be true.
But for some of the most dishonest they come up with other crap, like "interpreting" their holy text to mean something else, like it doesn't say circle it says sphere, it doesn't say flat it says egg-shaped.
Or alternatively, they accept that it is wrong, but come up with other excuses, like it is just a metaphor, or it is a tale with a moral and not meant to be taken literally, or it no longer applies.