Prove theism is accurate and correct

can you prove that the

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Capture
• 20111029

[GodKillerAtheist]

@cosmosmonger oh man I was so going to agree with you because you were defining every christian and muslim on the planet to a T. I guess I should have realized the proof for your cult is to demonize all those kind people you've failed to convince logically. Ill add your comment to my list of theist failures to prove their lies

[eleutheromaniac]

@ReverendWyrm matter, energy and space...in other words objects and movements. lol. you just like to be disagreeable, methinks.

"Damage the brain and you can irreparably alter consciousness."

Damage the brain and you irreparably alter *perception*. Damage the eyes, the nose any of the senses and you will do the same.

If you damage a TV antena, you will lose the signal; the signal itself does not cease to exist; yet someone who did not know better may think the antena is the source.

[ReverendWyrm]

@eleutheromaniac "...do you define the universe as stars? As galaxies? As objects and movements?" No. I use the common definition: "the aggregate of all existing matter, energy, and space", i.e. everything that actually exists. Which of course would include any kind of god(s) should something like that be shown to actually exist.

"The universe...is consciousness itself." Consciousness as we know it is dependent on the physical. Damage the brain and you can irreparably alter consciousness.

[ReverendWyrm]

@eleutheromaniac "The documentary "The Secret Life of Plants" for example, though unfortunately those results have yet to duplicated." Does that deal with the idea of plants possessing consciousness? I've read similar studies, it's even gone so far as to be the subject of an episode of Mythbusters, lol. They're results, while obviously not explicitly conclusive, echoed the results of similar research. That is to say no measurable indication that plants are aware.

[eleutheromaniac]

@ReverendWyrm "Just to clarify are you presenting the idea that the Universe did not in fact begin, that is to say it has always existed?"

Yes. But do you define the universe as stars? As galaxies? As objects and movements? Those things have definite beginnings and endings. The universe is something greater than the sum of its parts: It is consciousness itself. What Buddha called "consciousness without end", ie Nirvana

But "consciousness without end" is also an apt description of God

[eleutheromaniac]

@ReverendWyrm There has been some scientific study into the non-locality of consciousness. The documentary "The Secret Life of Plants" for example, though unfortunately those results have yet to duplicated.

I believe the field of study is usually refered to as parapsychology.

But in my opinion, the very nature of consciousness makes it impossible to be an objective field of study: although we can make observations about consciousness, any conclusions will be subjective in nature.

[ReverendWyrm]

@eleutheromaniac "there is no 'prior' to the universe." Ah I see, there's the disconnect. Just to clarify are you presenting the idea that the Universe did not in fact begin, that is to say it has always existed?

"God is the universe itself and everything in it..," Then there is no evidence that it has any kind of "mind" or consciousness.

"when it comes to God, it is the Mind and the Will of God..." If god is the Universe there's no reason to assume it has mind or will.

[eleutheromaniac]

@ReverendWyrm "prior to the Universe"

there is no 'prior' to the universe.

"If "God" is an actual entity it belongs in the realm of science "

God is the universe itself and everything in it, and so yes, observation of the universe will grant greater understanding of the exact nature of God.

But when it comes to God, it is the Mind and the Will of God which is most pertinent to Man, and that is the realm of philosophy, as are all questions of consciousness.

[ReverendWyrm]

@eleutheromaniac "uneffected First Cause" Semantics. You claim that god did not exist prior to the Universe so obviously there could be nothing to "effect" said being. You're still contradicting yourself. If god did not exist prior to the Universe he is thus affected by the existence of the Universe and cannot be unaffected and immutable. He is in your position "caused" by whatever "caused" the Universe. Claiming the one caused the other and vice versa is illogical.