The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Ever since the dawn of time, or as long as we can remember, scientists and religious people have searched for the existence, or non-existence of God. The Big Bang theory was one of the many theories that clashed and delayed the truth. Without a time machine or anyone alive at the time to tell us, the whole thing remains a mystery. But suppose for a moment a clever person did find out the truth. The question is:
Would we want to know?
Just suppose that somebody worked out and gave evidence that God didn't exist, say, with a time machine or evidence from the Big Bang. Firstly, religious people would argue to the ends of the earth, wasting time searching for truth. Eventually, if theyw ere forced ot believe, these people would consider themselves gulliable, and the world would split into two types of people- the right people and the wrong people. The right people would be those that believed in the Scientific creation ideas, and would consider themselves smarter than everyone else. The people that were wrong may feel a loss of something, and become less confident, even laughed at. The agnostic (undecided) people may lie to prove themselves right, causing more chaos.
Suppose it was the other way around, and it was proven that God existed. Science itself would become messed up big time, as the Big Bang theory was wrong, could other things, like gravity and chemistry be wrong? Religious people would start to think about other fantasy beings and stories being true, and everyone would become confused. Those that are agnostic would have an even harder time, deciding upon believing fantastical things, or trying to figure out the problem with science.
What if both theories were true? Would there be a 'peace on earth' situation, with everyone being right?
Thank you if you can work out what I'm rambling on about. Hopefully, this has given everyone something to think about.
Would we want to know?
Just suppose that somebody worked out and gave evidence that God didn't exist, say, with a time machine or evidence from the Big Bang. Firstly, religious people would argue to the ends of the earth, wasting time searching for truth. Eventually, if theyw ere forced ot believe, these people would consider themselves gulliable, and the world would split into two types of people- the right people and the wrong people. The right people would be those that believed in the Scientific creation ideas, and would consider themselves smarter than everyone else. The people that were wrong may feel a loss of something, and become less confident, even laughed at. The agnostic (undecided) people may lie to prove themselves right, causing more chaos.
Suppose it was the other way around, and it was proven that God existed. Science itself would become messed up big time, as the Big Bang theory was wrong, could other things, like gravity and chemistry be wrong? Religious people would start to think about other fantasy beings and stories being true, and everyone would become confused. Those that are agnostic would have an even harder time, deciding upon believing fantastical things, or trying to figure out the problem with science.
What if both theories were true? Would there be a 'peace on earth' situation, with everyone being right?
Thank you if you can work out what I'm rambling on about. Hopefully, this has given everyone something to think about.
Page:
Well, before you actually won it it was pure faith, to believe that you would win.
After you won it, do you need faith to believe that you won Gameday?
I know that some people can't believe their luck but that takes the biscuit! :-P
Does anyone have 100% belief in everything?
I like Descartes' "I think, therefore I am" being the only thing he could ever be 100% certain of, and everything else he could only be so certain about and therefore open to the fact that it could possibly be false.
For instance, I'd be 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999% sure that the next step I'd take would be fine, and that I'd touch solid ground with good balance ready to take the next step, so sure that I'd take it for granted and not even consider that I might not.
But because there's always that slight chance of me slipping or tripping, when it actually happens, although I never saw it coming, I always knew it COULD so it's not something that breaks everything I believe in.
I guess that's the way I'm seeing God at the minute.
Whether it's him I'm talking to or, in the case that he doesn't exist, just my inner consience, it doesn't really matter because they're both asking the same thing.
So if I'm trying to please the part of me what judges best for me in this life, or some greater being who'll be responsible for my after life, it's all working for me. :-)
After you won it, do you need faith to believe that you won Gameday?
I know that some people can't believe their luck but that takes the biscuit! :-P
Does anyone have 100% belief in everything?
I like Descartes' "I think, therefore I am" being the only thing he could ever be 100% certain of, and everything else he could only be so certain about and therefore open to the fact that it could possibly be false.
For instance, I'd be 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999% sure that the next step I'd take would be fine, and that I'd touch solid ground with good balance ready to take the next step, so sure that I'd take it for granted and not even consider that I might not.
But because there's always that slight chance of me slipping or tripping, when it actually happens, although I never saw it coming, I always knew it COULD so it's not something that breaks everything I believe in.
I guess that's the way I'm seeing God at the minute.
Whether it's him I'm talking to or, in the case that he doesn't exist, just my inner consience, it doesn't really matter because they're both asking the same thing.
So if I'm trying to please the part of me what judges best for me in this life, or some greater being who'll be responsible for my after life, it's all working for me. :-)
But you could be 100% certain about winning gameaday, yet you might not.
I'm with Strafio on this; the existence of God doesn't negate science, and vice versa. It's only fundamentalist christians/scientists who insist their version of events must be correct, and frankly both sides in that particular debate make me long for the return of random human sacrifice.
Anyway, the nature of God is that He exists because of faith. One cannot have faith in something we 100% know for a fact exists; it would be like having faith in a chair. If His existence was proved, would He then cease to be God? All these questions and more are raised by that great and solemn tome, The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy...
Anyway, the nature of God is that He exists because of faith. One cannot have faith in something we 100% know for a fact exists; it would be like having faith in a chair. If His existence was proved, would He then cease to be God? All these questions and more are raised by that great and solemn tome, The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy...
Long ago, before the dawn of history...
cweek2000 wrote:
> Well, I guess that would be true, but the confusion might cause more
> trouble than can be expected.
Perhaps. We probably wouldn't be ready for it.
But nothing to worry about, I mean there's going to be no revolution of knowledge in the near future atleast. :-)
> Well, I guess that would be true, but the confusion might cause more
> trouble than can be expected.
Perhaps. We probably wouldn't be ready for it.
But nothing to worry about, I mean there's going to be no revolution of knowledge in the near future atleast. :-)
cweek2000 wrote:
> Well, I guess that would be true, but the confusion might cause more
> trouble than can be expected.
Perhaps. We probably wouldn't be ready for it.
But nothing to worry about, I mean there's going to be no revolution of knowledge in the near future atleast. :-)
> Well, I guess that would be true, but the confusion might cause more
> trouble than can be expected.
Perhaps. We probably wouldn't be ready for it.
But nothing to worry about, I mean there's going to be no revolution of knowledge in the near future atleast. :-)
So frogs and cats are more important than us? I don't think so...
My dear freind brought up something rather intresting on the subject...
I said - God created frogs, God created cats, but he didn't create humans... and there reply was yep humans have this dirty way of reproducing themselfs.
Well my freinds called God and so I guess he's a bit biased, but anyway, I have some work to do in the far east so-long as you don't bomb them they won't bomb you!!
I said - God created frogs, God created cats, but he didn't create humans... and there reply was yep humans have this dirty way of reproducing themselfs.
Well my freinds called God and so I guess he's a bit biased, but anyway, I have some work to do in the far east so-long as you don't bomb them they won't bomb you!!
Well, I guess that would be true, but the confusion might cause more trouble than can be expected.
cweek2000 wrote:
> Just one thing, Gallelio simply discovered about something
> to benefit science. This is basically how everything came into being.
> It's not really on the same level.
It WOULD benefit science though...
Basically, science is the study of what is.
There was science before that, Aristotle based, and Gallileo pretty much destroyed half of that and it gradually got replaced with a new science.
So basically, if we have got it wrong right now then there might be a little confusion at first but we'd be wiser in the long run, and new possibilities that we never imagined possible would come about.
> Just one thing, Gallelio simply discovered about something
> to benefit science. This is basically how everything came into being.
> It's not really on the same level.
It WOULD benefit science though...
Basically, science is the study of what is.
There was science before that, Aristotle based, and Gallileo pretty much destroyed half of that and it gradually got replaced with a new science.
So basically, if we have got it wrong right now then there might be a little confusion at first but we'd be wiser in the long run, and new possibilities that we never imagined possible would come about.
Page: