Does God exist? (5 Viewers)

[Enteebee]

He didn't believe in any specific god you are right but he did believe the universe was created. That implies a godly force of some form does it not?

tbqh I don't think we even know enough about his beliefs to say what exactly he believed in, for the most part I think it was mainly just a nice allegory to him... He called religions childish superstitions.

 

[Lentern]

tbqh I don't think we even know enough about his beliefs to say what exactly he believed in, for the most part I think it was mainly just a nice allegory to him... He called religions childish superstitions.

He also replied in no nonsense terms "No" when asked if he was an athiest.

 

[Enteebee]

He also replied in no nonsense terms "No" when asked if he was an athiest.

source please.

 

[Slidey]

In Einstein's view, "neither the rule of human nor Divine Will exists as an independent cause of natural events. To be sure, the doctrine of a personal God interfering with natural events could never be refuted … by science, for [it] can always take refuge in those domains in which scientific knowledge has not yet been able to set foot." (Einstein 1940, pp. 605–607)

In a letter to Eric Gutkind in 1954 Einstein said: "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."[62]

Good job Lentern. Keep it up mate.

 

[Lentern]

Good job Lentern. Keep it up mate.

Well done. You proved he is not a christian. I suppose you think that makes the Ayatollah athiestic as well.

 

[Lentern]

source please.

I won't pretend I have one. Going on what I've been told.

 

[Enteebee]

"From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist. "

Next letter after being asked if what he means by that is that a jesuit priest would find a roman catholic to be an atheist etc...

"I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our being."

I won't pretend I have one. Going on what I've been told.

You were told wrong. Einstein would without a doubt be considered an atheist by most theists today but he also makes a point not to come out in favour entirely of saying there is no god at all because he does feel sympathetic towards baruch spinozas' idea of god and he wants to acknowledge what he perceives to be the limitations of our intelligent inquiries.

 

[Lentern]

"From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist. "

Next letter after being asked if what he means by that is that a jesuit priest would find a roman catholic to be an atheist etc...

"I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our being."

Most Jesuit Priests would consider someone whom does not condemn homosexuality to be an atheist. I think I have allread made myself clear when I say god I don't mean a deity but a force not bound the laws of science.

 

[Enteebee]

Most Jesuit Priests would consider someone whom does not condemn homosexuality to be an atheist. I think I have allread made myself clear when I say god I don't mean a deity but a force not bound the laws of science.

Ok sure then he's agnostic about something along those lines...

 

[Slidey]

Well done. You proved he is not a christian.

If you'd bothered to research the man, you'd see it's much more than that.

 

[Lentern]

If you'd bothered to research the man, you'd see it's much more than that.

Oh my I see. You have trouble accepting a figure which has been a inspiration to people like you for decades unlike you actually advocates for an open mind.

 

[Lentern]

i never knew that :S

i googled it, and he's right. thats really awesome, 3 of the most amazing scientists in our entire history all believed in some form of god

i think this is really good evidence for god (especially the christian god, as newton proved). atheists are so stupid, they think theyre smarter than einstein lol, theyre idiots. newton gave really good evidence for gods existence too:

[/size]

They are not stupid they are actually extremely intelligent. However for all their intellect they are also very folly, they sense becomes clouded by their arrogance which leads them to believe themselves great enough to encode the omnipotent.

 

[Lentern]

I don't see how accepting an abrahamic god == open mind? Ridiculous straw man.

It doesn't, accepting the possibility of it does.

 

[Lentern]

by the way, which church do you go to Lentern?

I am a catholic with a very strained relationship with the church. I certainly believe in the trinity and transubstantiation but I reject great portions of the bible and am criticial of many of the churches views in regards to things like homosexuality, stem cell research and euthanasia.

 

[Slidey]

It doesn't, accepting the possibility of it does.

Contrariwise, accepting the possibility that there exists no supernatural being(s) requires an open mind.

 

[Lentern]

Contrariwise, accepting the possibility that there exists no supernatural being(s) requires an open mind.

Depends on your definition of supernatural being. I make room for the possibility of their being no deity. It's not my inclination, but I'm not so arrogant as to rule it out.

 

[Lentern]

i dont get it... why use an argument you dont even believe? i mean, newton said the bible was entirely accurate both historically and literally, now youre saying youre smarter than newton? well i know who i rather believe.

Oh what a silly arguement. By your token Nietzsche being more intelligent than you makes you a goober to defy any of his teachigns. The church has moderated it's stance time and time again over the past eight hundred years and you are deluded if you think this time they've got it right and that in eighty years time it won't shift dramatically. This infallible word of the church went after Galileo for saying the world didn't revolve around the earth. Imagine if Galileo had not challenged church teachings.

 

[Slidey]

Depends on your definition of supernatural being. I make room for the possibility of their being no deity. It's not my inclination, but I'm not so arrogant as to rule it out.

No, you are arrogant. You come in here attacking us for considering the possibility that no supernatural beings exist (even though you'll find we are defending it as possibility, not fact) and then go on to say things like "the only logical conclusion is that a supernatural being started it all".

Hypocrite.

 

[Lentern]

Hahahahaha and you're not arrogant to claim you have complete world knowledge.

I would be if I did. I think rather I claimed that as great as intellectual pursuit is and I do encourage it eventually there's a stage where you must succomb to intuition.

 

[Slidey]

I would be if I did. I think rather I claimed that as great as intellectual pursuit is and I do encourage it eventually there's a stage where you must succomb to intuition.

You pretty much essentially said we were 'atheist zealots' for considering the possibility of no supernatural entity, based solely on your intuition (which, for the record, you were happy for a supernatural entity to violate).

We weren't claiming that no supernatural entity existed, rather that it's entirely feasible based on what we currently know for no supernatural being to exist. This was not acceptable to you, as you required absolute complicity with the notion that a supernatural being is at some level behind the universe.