/lit/ - Literature

If anything exists, yes. There must be a higher power.

>>10951625
Is Phoebe do?

>>10951625
There's at least 1

>>10951625
Yes

>>10951625
Yes

>>10951625
Yes

>>10951653
Why?

if i answer will anything change? if i answer will anything you do change? if i answer will you change?

>>10951625
heh.. which god? zeus? heh, sure

>>10951780
provide an alternate explanation

Probably

>>10951813
Eventually the pressure of all the condensed matter in the universe created a massive explosion.

>>10951824
when did this infinite loop start? what caused us to be stuck in this supposed infinite loop?

>>10951625
Which god described in what work of literature?

>>10951824
>zero mass
>zero/infinite energy
>zero/infinite forces
>zero/all of space
>uhh the pressure caused an explosion but we don’t know, shut up normalfag get off /sci/ or we’ll post topology problems and make fun of you for not being able to rotate 4-D objects

>>10951625
Does thing exist?

>>10951625
There is absolutely no reason to think that God exists.

>>10951625
> On the day that I was born I manifested the world via my senses
> There was nothing before me
> Without thought, sensations and consciousness there is no world.
> Thus I created everything
> I myself did not exist until my senses conceived my existence
> Thus I birthed myself
> When I die there will be no world
> I am god

>>10951908
There's no reason to think reasonably

>>10951922
“The man who kills a man kills a man.
The man who kills himself kills all men.
As far as he is concerned, he wipes out the world.”
(Chesterton)

>>10951813
Argument from ignorance
inb4 edgy fedora meme
inb4 did daddy just teach you what logical fallacies are today, little boy?

>>10951926
That is brilliant I need to save that, thank you anon.

>>10951928
It's the simplest explanation you meme spouting faggot. Come up with something that has substance.

>>10951928
Which logic? The argument from ignorance is also known as the closed-world assumption.

>>10951963
Or there isn't a 100% overlap, but you'd probably call all uses of CWA "arguments from ignorance".

>>10951849
> implying mathsfags go near those thread

>>10951942
You could make a case for why your model is the best. All you said was you think there needs to be some form of higher power, but that could mean a lot of things.
Does a higher power imply:
A prime mover?
A creator of life?
A maximally powerful being?
The source of an after life?

>>10951984
A sentient being created our universe. The origin or motives of that being are probably beyond human comprehension.

>>10951984
Your use of the world "model" is a crime against literature. You won't fit the world down your rationalist bottleneck.

>>10951922
It's not just senses. Your senses themselves don't interpret and store sensory data as memory. Behind the senses is a perceiving thing which is the projection of experience (the reality you think you know as a assumed subject).

>>10951625
U no it jack

>>10951926
>as far as he is concerned
This line is the key to not misinterpreting this quote.

>>10952014
Yes, of course. He's trying to shut the world out, in a way. The world will still be there without him.

>>10951625

The Universe - which may be infinite, we aren't sure - certainly did not just create itself. The issue, however, is that like Wittgenstein said, our mortal brains cannot comprehend infinity and we can't form the proper questions that we need to ask about existence

>>10952007
Someone gets it
"Exist" is a term limited by our own 3-dimensional understanding of existence

>>10952007
Is this sentient being still present? Or is he dead or gone for whatever reason?

>>10952029
Present where? And "still" is making a lot of assumptions. I, and every other person I've met, are totally unqualified to make any statements on the subject.

>>10952035
You said the sentient being created our universe. Assuming he created our universe at a particular moment in time however many years ago, is this being still present in the moment we are experiencing right at this particular time?

>>10952044
My opinion is that whatever created the universe is probably not bound by our space or time, since it created them. Asking when it created the world or if it is still here is nonsensical.

>>10952060
What do you think space and time is? I think space and time are projections of our minds so If this being created something which led to us (we only know this being created the univserse, so we arrived where we are now of a will independent of this being) then I guess he indirectly created space and time as a consequence of his original creation. I agree that this being would probably not be bound by or projections of space time. Also, if asking when he created the universe is nonsensical then it would seem to me that the creation would also be nonsensical.

>>10952007
why does there need to be a being in the beginning (assuming there's a unique "beginning" at all), and a sentient one on top of that?

>>10952082
I really can't describe dimensions as anything other than a measuring stick to differentiate matter, to describe objects in relation to each other. Creation isn't necessarily nonsensical, it just can't be described in terms of anything we are familiar with. It's a totally unrelatable concept with no connections to other human ideas. How can you explain something without descriptors or anything to compare it to?

>>10952101
provide an alternate explanation

>>10952114
So is there a nonmaterial realm somewhere that isn't in this material world in which this being resides in since creation? I'm assuming you will say that it's unknowable as you have been.

>>10952123
We are in and a part of God right at this moment which has always existed as it exists now. Basically God as capital-N Nature where Nature always exists by definition.

>>10952123
provide an argument first

>>10952137
In my opinion, yes, it is unknowable. Consider also that this "place" is outside of our time and space, so calling it a place and saying it has existed "since" anything is probably nonsensical.
>>10952153
I do not have anything to say against this. It is possible that our universe is god and reality is akin to human thoughts. I do not believe that your post and mine are incompatible.
>>10952154
Existence exists. I cannot imagine a way for this to be possible without a higher power. If you disagree with this I cannot convince you of anything else.

>>10951830
Where did god come from lol

>>10952643
"Where" questions are meaningless outside of spacetime.

>>10951849
You're mocking something that I guarantee you don't understand.

Psalm 8 (ESV)

1 O Lord, our Lord,
how majestic is your name in all the earth!
You have set your glory above the heavens.
2 Out of the mouth of babies and infants,
you have established strength because of your foes,
to still the enemy and the avenger.
3 When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers,
the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,
4 what is man that you are mindful of him,
and the son of man that you care for him?
5 Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings[b]
and crowned him with glory and honor.
6 You have given him dominion over the works of your hands;
you have put all things under his feet,
7 all sheep and oxen,
and also the beasts of the field,
8 the birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea,
whatever passes along the paths of the seas.
9 O Lord, our Lord,
how majestic is your name in all the earth

>>10951830
>infinite loop
this has been proven not to be the case

>>10951849
absolutely seething

>>10951625
Is there a recognizable center force in the world? That's what God is. Some people feel it's in themselves, some in the earth, others in the sky, others outside the universe, others still perhaps in all of the above. The important thing to note in all of this is that you consider something to be the center, whatever that thing is, when you take action in the world.

>>10951813
>>10951942
>>10952007
>provide an alternate explanation
>It's the simplest explanation
>anon's """""explanation""""" is that something vague created the universe for reasons we can't comprehend but all we know is it's sentient
Uh, how about the universe was created by a non-sentient being? If you insist on the universe being "created" by a "being," that would seem to make more sense, since the only form of sentience we can observe came about through natural processes on Earth and certainly couldn't have created the universe.

>>10953160
>the only sentience is biological sentience
no wonder you couldn't see his point, your giant ego is in the way rofl

>>10953160
>a big steaming pile of Darwinian positivist nonsense

>>10951625
Our existence is just a coincidence... actually. fuck off. Believing in god or not won't change your life at all.

>>10953245
>t. pragmatist
Believing beyond any doubt that God not only watches you at all times, but loves you and everyone else beyond any doubt, it is beyond you in the sense that it is a whole different person that does this. They lead whole different lives from you. You still question his existence because He didn't change your life, but that's not how it works. That's not how free will works. You have so much offered to you, and you don't even realize it.

>>10952008
Which word would you use?

>>10953653
God is and has caused so much suffering in the last centuries. God was the main reason why humanity advancement stopped for an entire millennium.

There are so many reasons why the thought of an entity most powerful than us, a god, shouldn't be allowed in this modern times.

>>10951625
God is dead and we have killed him.

>>10953955
He never existed.

>>10953943
*tips*

>>10952643
Where did the universe come from lol

>>10953653
>That's not how free will works

What does free will have to do with facts about God's existence?

The sky is blue. I can't "choose" to believe that it is green. I can chant out loud the words "I believe the sky is green!" for a long time, but the information will still jump into my eye sockets and force itself into my mind.
So if a fact like the color of the sky (which is contingent on the circumstances) cannot be chosen, how can belief in God (which theist philosophers posit to be necessary in every conceivable reality) be chosen?

>>10953985
I believe in a higher power but that argument is really terrible

>>10953943
>God is and has caused
>it's God's fault humanity stops progressing
>God shouldn't be allowed; let's round up the Christians, Stalin
You assume you know so much, but I know you know that you don't know--at least I hope I know. Uncertainty is unrest, and it's hard man. I know it's hard. I'm not trying to convince you of God, at least not entirely, just don't give in to the wolfs in sheep's clothing. Don't be certain of anything not worth being certain about. That's where ignorance breeds, in those dark corners of idolation, those Wednsdays on 4chan rooting yourself in typed ideas. May God be with you my man, and if not, love yourself always and truely.

>>10954001
This was an unexpected change of ideas, thanks for entertaining my midnight.

I decided to live without god and it seems that you believe in him. Everything is fine as long as we behave as good human beings and don't physically/mentally hurt other people.

>>10953985
You have confused that sentence for a different meaning. To clarify, free will does not exist in order for God to snap his hand and change your life, and to denounce Him as false or pointless because you feel cheated is a complete misunderstanding of free will.

You can't choose the color you see, I can't choose to see God. You can choose to believe the sky is green, I can choose to believe in God. Observable reality is hardly indicative of anything existential or abstract. Have a good night man, love ya

>>10951625
Why haven't you read the latest book from the foremost Bible scholar of our age, /lit/?