• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Since gods do not exist, what do you believe is out there

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,900
Reaction score
57,844
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Ok, we beat the gods issue to death, and, IMO, the only reasonable conclusion from all that is that there are no gods. Gods are a figment of our imagination. But, that does not explain anything. Many big mysteries remain. Who or what created the universe? Are we alone and on our own in this vast universe? Is there a force we have yet to find? Could there be an energy field that unites us all in some as yet unknown way? Life after death? A bunch of stuff.

Let's hear some ideas, beliefs or just general philosophies about the great unknown.
 
Assuming for a moment that Quantum Science and Physics theories and models of infinite time have some degree of merit, then we have enough point to question any sense of "beginning" in the context of nothing existing before it. Or, questioning the idea of "creator" in the sense of deity. But with that point, comes the many splinters of discussions on dimension, time, energy, and where laws of the universe start and end.

Because of what we have discovered thus far about our universe, even in observation and including what theories it has given us, it makes sense to suggest we may not be alone in our universe. Even if what we define as life (or intelligent life) is too closed to our context to apply to the possibilities where we assume potential for life based on observed conditions.

Way too much seems to be unknown about our universe to get into something along the lines of inherent or binding force across the universe. If it were an energy field, or some relation of light and/or energy, we would have indication of it enough so to theorize more about it from those observations. Which is to say we do not have enough understanding just yet to know if a universal force of either light, or gravity, or some other factor influences the universe's movements or size or age. There are also too many anomalies out there that defy our context of universal laws. Does not necessarily mean we are on the wrong path of gaining understanding, it may be a simple as we have not seen enough yet to know which direction we should be headed in that exploration of what is around us.

Life after death has too much emotion involved to make something theoretical outside of systems of belief, but there are at least some elements of Quantum Sciences that suggest controls and movements of consciousness apart from how we define life. Perhaps just models and theories as well, but at least we can see potential to think in terms we have not before in answering these questions. Or at least starting to. With the host of possibilities and the more we discover, the more we can see what all consciousnesses can mean outside of our confines of how we define life.
 
Assuming for a moment that Quantum Science and Physics theories and models of infinite time have some degree of merit, then we have enough point to question any sense of "beginning" in the context of nothing existing before it. Or, questioning the idea of "creator" in the sense of deity. But with that point, comes the many splinters of discussions on dimension, time, energy, and where laws of the universe start and end.

Because of what we have discovered thus far about our universe, even in observation and including what theories it has given us, it makes sense to suggest we may not be alone in our universe. Even if what we define as life (or intelligent life) is too closed to our context to apply to the possibilities where we assume potential for life based on observed conditions.

Way too much seems to be unknown about our universe to get into something along the lines of inherent or binding force across the universe. If it were an energy field, or some relation of light and/or energy, we would have indication of it enough so to theorize more about it from those observations. Which is to say we do not have enough understanding just yet to know if a universal force of either light, or gravity, or some other factor influences the universe's movements or size or age. There are also too many anomalies out there that defy our context of universal laws. Does not necessarily mean we are on the wrong path of gaining understanding, it may be a simple as we have not seen enough yet to know which direction we should be headed in that exploration of what is around us.

Life after death has too much emotion involved to make something theoretical outside of systems of belief, but there are at least some elements of Quantum Sciences that suggest controls and movements of consciousness apart from how we define life. Perhaps just models and theories as well, but at least we can see potential to think in terms we have not before in answering these questions. Or at least starting to. With the host of possibilities and the more we discover, the more we can see what all consciousnesses can mean outside of our confines of how we define life.

Yeah it's pretty hairy, and we have only begun to scratch the surface. Einstein imagined what would happen if he could catch up to a light beam. I am still having trouble enough just grasping what it means exactly that everything we see in the sky is in the past. lol
 
If God(s) exist then who/what created him, her or them? If one can accept that God was (or gods were) created from and by nothing then why can't matter, space and time have come into being (from and by nothing) in the same way?
 
Assuming for a moment that Quantum Science and Physics theories and models of infinite time have some degree of merit, then we have enough point to question any sense of "beginning" in the context of nothing existing before it. Or, questioning the idea of "creator" in the sense of deity. But with that point, comes the many splinters of discussions on dimension, time, energy, and where laws of the universe start and end.

Because of what we have discovered thus far about our universe, even in observation and including what theories it has given us, it makes sense to suggest we may not be alone in our universe. Even if what we define as life (or intelligent life) is too closed to our context to apply to the possibilities where we assume potential for life based on observed conditions.

Way too much seems to be unknown about our universe to get into something along the lines of inherent or binding force across the universe. If it were an energy field, or some relation of light and/or energy, we would have indication of it enough so to theorize more about it from those observations. Which is to say we do not have enough understanding just yet to know if a universal force of either light, or gravity, or some other factor influences the universe's movements or size or age. There are also too many anomalies out there that defy our context of universal laws. Does not necessarily mean we are on the wrong path of gaining understanding, it may be a simple as we have not seen enough yet to know which direction we should be headed in that exploration of what is around us.

Life after death has too much emotion involved to make something theoretical outside of systems of belief, but there are at least some elements of Quantum Sciences that suggest controls and movements of consciousness apart from how we define life. Perhaps just models and theories as well, but at least we can see potential to think in terms we have not before in answering these questions. Or at least starting to. With the host of possibilities and the more we discover, the more we can see what all consciousnesses can mean outside of our confines of how we define life.

So basically, what you've taken four paragraphs to say is.....with all of our human intellect.....we still don't actually have any real answers as to how the universe kicked off? Interesting.
 
Yeah it's pretty hairy, and we have only begun to scratch the surface. Einstein imagined what would happen if he could catch up to a light beam. I am still having trouble enough just grasping what it means exactly that everything we see in the sky is in the past. lol

There are some tough theories to digest, but they can be a critical basis points to make discussion on.
 
So basically, what you've taken four paragraphs to say is.....with all of our human intellect.....we still don't actually have any real answers as to how the universe kicked off? Interesting.

No, there was more to it than that. Welcome to join the discussion but if beyond you...
 
No, there was more to it than that. Welcome to join the discussion but if beyond you...
Beyond me? How condescending. Speculation and hypothesis are only the predecessors to real science....not science. Good day.
 
If God(s) exist then who/what created him, her or them? If one can accept that God was (or gods were) created from and by nothing then why can't matter, space and time have come into being (from and by nothing) in the same way?

Yep. And, that's before even getting into the "what exactly are gods?" aspect of that whole discussion. If someone's idea of god created the universe, well then who created that god? And, if someone's idea of a god happens to be eternal. We can always say, why then can the universe itself not be eternal?
 
So basically, what you've taken four paragraphs to say is.....with all of our human intellect.....we still don't actually have any real answers as to how the universe kicked off? Interesting.

We do know though that it wasn't kicked off by some grouchy god who toys with people and hands them tablets and stuff.
 
We do know though that it wasn't kicked off by some grouchy god who toys with people and hands them tablets and stuff.
We do? So human intellect has now solved the unrestricted negative dilemma?
 
Yep. And, that's before even getting into the "what exactly are gods?" aspect of that whole discussion. If someone's idea of god created the universe, well then who created that god? And, if someone's idea of a god happens to be eternal. We can always say, why then can the universe itself not be eternal?

Because what God(s) created can also be destroyed by God(s). ;)
 
We do? So human intellect has now solved the unrestricted negative dilemma?
Sure. Reason and logic dictate the Bible, Koran and all the thousands of other stories and literature written about gods are all fiction. After all, you too probably dismiss at least 10,000 gods, if not more, that are out there and have equally long tall tales written or told about them. No? I just add one more to my list.
 
So let's assume you are a creationist. God(s) exists. God(s) created the universe. Who created god(s)? Titans like Gaia. Who created the Titans? Who created those that created the Titans? Etc.
God(s) is(/are) often accredited with the unknown. God(s) was(/were) utilized to justify all sorts of atrocity going back to the start of written word.
I am okay with people accrediting the unknown or unknowable to god as long as they don't use their belief against me.
I personally don't believe in the God(s) of most ancient myths. However, I can understand the belief in a higher power as the observable universe generally conforms to laws.
 
Sure. Reason and logic dictate the Bible, Koran and all the thousands of other stories and literature written about gods is fiction. After all, you too probably dismiss at least 10,000 gods, if not more, that are out there and have equally long tall tales written or told about them. No? I just add one more to my list.
Hmmm, okay. I made no claims, you did. You claimed that we "KNOW" something. Which would suggest that there is empirical evidence and/or hard science to support such claim. The claim you made is indeed an unrestricted negative......"we KNOW gods don't exist." You're going to use books written by humans to defend that claim? Very unscientific, don't you think? Beware the slippery slope my friend. :lol:
 
We do? So human intellect has now solved the unrestricted negative dilemma?
That's right, thousands of years of debate on this issue have finally been resolved now, here, on the Debate Politics forum.
 
So let's assume you are a creationist. God(s) exists. God(s) created the universe. Who created god(s)? Titans like Gaia. Who created the Titans? Who created those that created the Titans? Etc.
God(s) is(/are) often accredited with the unknown. God(s) was(/were) utilized to justify all sorts of atrocity going back to the start of written word.
I am okay with people accrediting the unknown or unknowable to god as long as they don't use their belief against me.
I personally don't believe in the God(s) of most ancient myths. However, I can understand the belief in a higher power as the observable universe generally conforms to laws.

A higher power is an interesting concept. If one exists out there, would it be reasonable to think it meddles in our affairs? Let me rephrase. Is it logical to think the higher power gave us the commandments, or is it more reasonable to believe they just came about by men who sat around and thought this stuff through?
 
That's right, thousands of years of debate on this issue have finally been resolved now, here, on the Debate Politics forum.

power of the internet
 
We do know though that it wasn't kicked off by some grouchy god who toys with people and hands them tablets and stuff.

No, we don't know that at all - we simply have other theories that have yet to be proven/disproven.

Learning the meaning of life presupposes that life has meaning. ;)
 
Beyond me? How condescending. Speculation and hypothesis are only the predecessors to real science....not science. Good day.

You offered very little, but took the first shot to reduce my input. Not my fault you decided to come into the conversation that way, only to be upset about my response.
 
Hmmm, okay. I made no claims, you did. You claimed that we "KNOW" something. Which would suggest that there is empirical evidence and/or hard science to support such claim. The claim you made is indeed an unrestricted negative......"we KNOW gods don't exist." You're going to use books written by humans to defend that claim? Very unscientific, don't you think? Beware the slippery slope my friend. :lol:

I believe that if we are honest with ourselves, we know that gods do not exist. They are a figment of our imagination. Yes. You don't believe the Bible, Koran, etc was actually written by a god. Right? They're stories written by people. Hence, those gods are fictional characters, nothing more.
 
That's right, thousands of years of debate on this issue have finally been resolved now, here, on the Debate Politics forum.

Yep. No brain, no headache. ;)
 
You offered very little, but took the first shot to reduce my input. Not my fault you decided to come into the conversation that way, only to be upset about my response.
That was my point as well; that in four paragraphs you offered very little substance, just rhetoric. Upset? Little ol' me? Hahaha.....you misconstrue my intent.
 
No, we don't know that at all - we simply have other theories that have yet to be proven/disproven.

Learning the meaning of life presupposes that life has meaning. ;)

The bible has enough error in it that we know it was not written by an all-knowing all-powerful being. That alone should be proof that it is just a work of fiction written by people with limited knowledge who lived in a far gone era. And, since it is a work of fiction, we can safely conclude that this "god" does not exist.
 
I believe that if we are honest with ourselves, we know that gods do not exist. They are a figment of our imagination. Yes. You don't believe the Bible, Koran, etc was actually written by a god. Right? They're stories written by people. Hence, those gods are fictional characters, nothing more.
And I believe that if we are honest, we'll stop labeling things as "science" and "evidence' which really don't fit the definition. :shrug:
 
Back
Top Bottom