>medieval: the motion of celestial objects is caused by god's mental activity

>medieval: the motion of celestial objects is caused by god's mental activity
>newtonian: wait no actually its a force called gravity but god causes the force
>oh wait actually gravity is caused by matter warping spacetime oops
Lol theism.

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

  1. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    It doesn’t change anything, it just pushes the fundamental force further down the turtle stack. Science can’t explain the root of why things are.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Don't waste your time, OP's just an underage fedora spammer.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Theism can’t explain the root of why things are.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        "God" is label not a model. "Gravity" is also a label, Newtonian gravity models some parts of the phenomena but not what it fundamentally is. It doesn't even predict the motion of the planets completely. Adding relativity predicts motion better but doesn't model what the phenomena is either, it just describes its effects in more detail.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          So what?

          I'll add to this. Theism can't explain anything.
          Because a God can do everything. It will never tell you things are one way, instead of another way. Because God could do both ways, and do them for no reason external to himself.

          Only by supposing a God, with a specific desire to cause the data we are trying to explain, can Theism explain stuff. The explanation being entirely ad hoc.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            There's no conceivable explanation for some things. All the tools you assume as fundamental have clear limits. The totality of what's beyond logic is unknowable, unreachable by physical creatures and contains all potential. While attacking the word "God" because some morons annoyed you you're throwing out basics of logic with it and thus becoming a dogmatic zealot yourself.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >logic is based on god
            uh, okay

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            It leads to some version of classical monotheism. morons like you frame it in some different way where you can avoid saying the word "God" and think it's brilliant because you don't really think, you just work from conditioned associations.

            You said that when molecules were discovered, and then when atoms were discovered, and then when quarks were discovered. Why not just give up on defending Judaism and just admit that you don't know everything?

            What insane hollywood fantasy are you referencing? If you understood what I said then acting as if it's false means you're claiming logic will one day explain where the logic you're using to explain itself comes from. Logically and mathematically that's provably impossible. Biblically it's the idea of the complete system which ushers in the antichrist, complete accounting on all three planes, 6-6-6.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            How does God explain it?

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            "God" is label not a model.
            How does logic explain logic? How does Newton explain gravity? Your mind is mush and you don't understand anything, theology is not an exception.

            See [...].

            >don't think just swallow the dumbest propaganda ever made

            >Science can't explain the root of why things are
            >But it's totally some guy who knows everything but has strong opinions on what you put up your butt and will torture you forever if you don't believe in him

            Reducing anything that challenges your preconceptions to nonsense doesn't help you or anyone. You're just a dishonest moron undermining your own ability to think and communicate.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            What explain why there is a created universe, instead of no universe?

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's logically impossible to account for what accounts for logic so you can't account for a real causal beginning using any methods, because it's in the universe the method is a product of the thing you're trying to explain instead of the other way around. When something is fundamental it means we can only point at it and name it, we have no account for it.
            God is the most basic fundamental, it emerges out of the most basic logic which you rely on in all other fields as if it's obvious in those cases. You only reject it when it doesn't suit your brainwashing.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >bla, bla, bla
            Wrong.
            God explains why there is a created universe.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            What's the explanation? There's no reproducible logic. The monotheistic concept of God is a way to frame the idea of universal law and that the laws we have access to are derived from higher laws that are not accessible.

            >Reducing anything that challenges your preconceptions to nonsense doesn't help you or anyone. You're just a dishonest moron undermining your own ability to think and communicate.
            The point is that you're a hypocrite

            Why? What specifically are you referencing? That time I denied the existence of molecules in your fantasy?
            Everything you say is based on conditioned associations instead of building on what I actually say. You don't grasp the concept of structured thought.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Can you tell me, what you think an explanation is in philosophy?

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            There are degrees. An explanation accounts for a thing. We can say God accounts for the universe but that statement doesn't describe or explain anything about God, how that happened or why.
            Similarly gravity accounts for a ball falling but that statement doesn't model anything further. If we don't go further into it we're describing the event and labelling some apparent elements but not explaining anything beyond what's apparent. What I established so far are only the labels for the apparent elements like "God", not how they work or what they do beyond what's apparent. Trying to approach the will of God, to model the inner working of the phenomena to some degree is theology, like Job attempts in a flawed way and according to the Bible God approves of even with the flaws.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Because of our limits theology can't work like science. We can't know the mind of God or test hypothesis about God except in terms of effects on the world. Theology can still be reasonable.
            It's reasonable to say God values life or that life is part of the will of God. It's not something we can prove but it's apparent that the source of everything produced a world where life emerges.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It's reasonable to say God values life or that life is part of the will of God.
            Why?
            Because it explains the data we observe? (God can explain any data, because he can do anything)
            sounds ad hoc

            Don't you think there's a problem that God would explain both a world with life in it, and a world without life in it
            If there is life, this can be explained by a God with a desire to cause a world with life in it
            If there isn't life, this can be explained by a God with a desire to cause a world without life in it

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            It doesn't explain anything, it just labels the things happening. Because the phenomena by definition is beyond logic the only thing we know with relative certainty about God is that we can't know anything about God with any real certainty, thus faith.
            You wake up with no memory in a line of people hauling buckets to put out a fire. Do you stop the line because you don't know what to do? It's reasonable to continue despite not having any knowledge about what's happening.
            >since I don't know technically I could benefit from the fire burning the town
            It's unreasonable for an organism to work from that assumption.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You wake up with no memory in a line of people hauling buckets to put out a fire. Do you stop the line because you don't know what to do?
            No, of course not. That's why we're not going to suddenly drop everything and start consulting the Talmud for how old the Earth is or what's below a quark. We're just going to continue what we've been doing.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            What we used to do until recently to get things done is what Newton did. That includes being reasonably critical but also respectful of ancient ideas like the classical monotheistic premise of universal law. It's the fundamental premise behind his law of gravity and science in general, based on ancient ideas, even astrology contributed.
            What you do here is reject structured thought and any concept of a structured history. You don't understand how anything connects to anything, there's no mind there, just the dumbest propaganda memes in history. Every single time anything about the subject is said to you you just automatically start repeating cute lines you heard from reddit comedians.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You don't understand how anything connects to anything
            What makes you so sure Newton understood the God-stuff?

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            The idea with the line is the line of life. Is the work good and in alignment with the entirety? Is life good? Should we be doing all this waterbearing? Why? Basically you eventually have to appeal to faith in the source, whatever placed you in the line carrying buckets.

            >You don't understand how anything connects to anything
            What makes you so sure Newton understood the God-stuff?

            He wrote more about theology more than any subject. The historical elements that aligned in the Royal College include lots of wild stuff like masons, astrology, alchemy, magical treasure hunting and demonology. If you figure out how these balls roll down a plank you can map that information to the motion of the planets, that it occurs to him shows he fully embraces the idea of universal law in a way most others don't.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            wow, he sounds really smart
            Did this Newton guy recommend any particular brand of Theism?

            Or do I just go with the non-descript 'Theism' - universe had a cause with a mind, we can know this
            That wouldn't really change much in my daily life.

            I just worry, that this is setting me up for a bunch of false beliefs.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            He was a Christian. I would suggest starting by not undermining your own understanding of history by mindlessly swallowing propaganda memes. From a secular perspective the Bible is still very relevant to how many of the western ideas you take for granted formed. That means your mind is at least partly "Christian".

            No decree from God that life is good. Then life don't TRUELY ACTUALLY have REAL and TRUE meaning?
            It just have made-up fake meaning ;(

            It would be dependent meaning, like live to do x, life is good for x. But then why is x good? Dependencies are a limitation of causal processes so you have to go outside logical causality to find non-dependent meaning.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Newton, therfor desert demon - Got it

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're doing the brainwashed moron thing again. Just consider the history of ideas instead of undermining your own understanding of things you've decided to politically align against.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Christianity just really sounds like what I would expect people to make up

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're just a brainwashed moron that can't think. Stop being cancer and start thinking. It's that simple.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Your example is a red herring. Science deals with natural and more proximate causes, it does not deal with the ultimate cause. Most western atheists tend to assume materialism is true, which lays at the basis of most of their argumentation. Is the world necessary? Why do things change? Does a necessary being exist? Why does anything exist at all? This is what we want to know. Theology seeks to answer these questions by both faith and reason. For example there seems to exist a sense of moral agency between people. Now you can explain the emergence of morality in the natural world through something like natural selection and evolution under a given model, as the anon you are arguing with said. But that doesn't give us much insight into what is truly right and truly wrong, or what is objectively moral and what is not. Now you have to make an argument for nihilism. After all, if there is no objective morality then there is no real objective worth in a person. We should be able to kill anyone and not have to answer before actual justice. Why even temporal justice? If I have no moral agency, if morality was just naturally selected for because it helped the survival of our species, if everything I do is determined by physical interactions in my brain or by random information, then what accountability do we have? Should we no longer even send people to prison or give other forms of punishment?

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Now you have to make an argument for nihilism. After all, if there is no objective morality then there is no real objective worth in a person
            Do you seriously think nihilism follows from atheism? This is so childish
            At least look up what people that disagree with you would have to say to this. Then you wouldn't say stupid stuff.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >actual
            >real
            >really
            >truly
            Which is to say that it doesn't count without a God, right?

            If you can conceive of things having meaning or value without a God. Stay a theist, you'd go nuts on atheism.
            Still I don't get how a God existing magically gives stuff meaning, how does that work?

            >We should be able to kill anyone and not have to answer before actual justice.
            "actual" justice, so not like the police or a judge or something? something more ~actual~-
            If you mean a God, just say so.
            God-justice, lol

            Look, I think this perfectly describes what happens in reality. There's no God-justice. Just made up people-justice, humans don't even agree with each other
            People do "bad" stuff (bad being a word humans made up for stuff they don't like), and people don't have to answer to a God for it.
            They may not even have to answer to a "non-actual" justice, like the police, they sometimes get away scoff free.
            I know this sounds very unfair, but it's not like I'm gonna invent a God to feel better about it.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Life is objectively good. Not because of a reason or mechanism, it's a fundamental decreed by God.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            No decree from God that life is good. Then life don't TRUELY ACTUALLY have REAL and TRUE meaning?
            It just have made-up fake meaning ;(

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Reducing anything that challenges your preconceptions to nonsense doesn't help you or anyone.
            Correct. As

            You said that when molecules were discovered, and then when atoms were discovered, and then when quarks were discovered. Why not just give up on defending Judaism and just admit that you don't know everything?

            pointed out the Rabbis have been wrong several times, about this very topic, so why should we just throw our hands up in the air and trust them now?

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Reducing anything that challenges your preconceptions to nonsense doesn't help you or anyone. You're just a dishonest moron undermining your own ability to think and communicate.
            The point is that you're a hypocrite

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Schizobabble

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            See

            You said that when molecules were discovered, and then when atoms were discovered, and then when quarks were discovered. Why not just give up on defending Judaism and just admit that you don't know everything?

            .

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            You said that when molecules were discovered, and then when atoms were discovered, and then when quarks were discovered. Why not just give up on defending Judaism and just admit that you don't know everything?

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Theists employ God of the gaps for everything.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Atheists employ an evolution of the gaps. But they're too busy with their schizo internet rants to understand this.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          actually it was a god that did it

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Actually, you will never be a real woman, satan.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Science can't explain the root of why things are
      >But it's totally some guy who knows everything but has strong opinions on what you put up your butt and will torture you forever if you don't believe in him

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      You're absolutely right, and the only explanation for this gap in knowledge could be His divine grace.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      It never ends does it?

  2. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why is the speed of light exactly this number?
    Why is strong force inversely exponential?
    Why is the mass of an electron this?
    How do all of these constants perfectly interact to allow all of this? What if they didn't?

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >What if they didn't?
      The answer to this is painfully obvious. If you change anything in the universe by an iota, it would all breakdown.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Why is the speed of light exactly this number?
      >Why is strong force inversely exponential?
      >Why is the mass of an electron this?
      >How do all of these constants perfectly interact to allow all of this?
      No reason

      >What if they didn't?
      You wouldn't be here to ask this

  3. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Matter warping spacetime is caused by God farting

  4. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, and God ordained matter to wrap spacetime, I see no problem there.

  5. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    So we got the data, ye
    - Newton was a Christian

    Now what best explains this?
    People making stuff up 2000 years ago + contingent historical facts
    or
    This universe's cause rising from the dead 2000 years ago + contingent historical facts

    I just think people making stuff up, is that much more common that this universe's cause rising from the dead.
    It's just a probability thing, I'm going with it being made-up

    NOT a naturalist, btw. I believe in ghosts, I've had serval spooky encounters

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Same braindead memes as ever but this time presented especially incoherently. You homosexuals are all completely fricked in the head.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        How do you explain Newton being a Christian?

        If we take away some historical facts, like the Roman Empire, do you think Newton still would have been a Christian?

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          There's something seriously wrong with you. You absorb nothing said and then repeat the same tired memes over and over and over. Everything said has now apparently been forgotten, nothing has been thought about at all and we're back to regurgitating a ricky gervais bit from 2007.

  6. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yep. God of the Gaps.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *