freethinker44
Well-Known Member
Why not just say simplify it and say the universe exists and we live in it. I just don't like metaphor I guess, I would rather just call something what it is than romanticize about it.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-religious-debates/83843-mathematical-proof-god.html
^ All you need to know about where Kurt is coming from.
Also, you have yet to define random for me thief.
What does this have to this topic?Here's where I'm coming from, I don't think you have a clue what the difference between statistical randomness and algorithmic randomness is, and what they mean.
I asked thief what the definition of random was. The reason I did so is because thief appears to have bought into a specific concept of random that involves his/her particular theology. When a person thinks that randomness is an argument against an observable proposition this is usually the case. By asking thief the question I wanted to get him/her to consider the concept and hopefully realise the mistake he/she is making.You asked for a defintion of randomness. Try to focus.
I wasnt interested in a specific definition so much as trying to get thief to consider the concept. As I said, I suspect him/her has a concept that involves his/her theology.Well, other than what I said here, and is in the definition of the word, what's the difference?
I dont consider any aspect of evolution to be due to randomness. Natural selection isnt random, and the chemistry behind genetic mutations isnt random. The term random as used in the phrase random mutation is referring more to our inability to predict them rather than possessing an inherent randomness.I mean, you asked for a definition or randomness, and those are the two fundamental kinds.
Youd have to define what metric you are using to measure complexity. These questions need a rigorous foundation before they can be answered.For instance, what is more complex, human beings, or the soup of chemicals a human is made of?
Has anyone read post#138?
It describes the demo I saw on the tv science documentary.
It seemed simple and straight forward.
Can't see why anyone would have difficulty grasping the concept.
As per request....
Webster's defines 'random' at length.
For this topic line....a haphazard course....chance progress.
Nature repeats...lacking regularity.
DNA splices repeatedly (conception)...lacking precise replication.
DNA, and the environment operate under repeated actions.
The action repeats...at random.
Random events do not 'disprove' God.
I give God credit for having set such things into motion
His immediate presence...or 'hands on' efforts are not required.
I didnt see any attempt by richard, i only saw one by freethinker44 which I do not find to be very conclusive. It is based on several assumptions and (as he himself states) at least one "belief"Edit: The kicker to this, though, is if you define a God as being subject to the laws of logic, THEN you can disprove it by ruling out how it logically is not possible. That's what Richard is doing. Richard has essentially defined a God that IS subject to the laws of logic when a lot of theists subscribe to a God that supposedly can transgress the laws of logic. It's in a sense one giant strawman.
I didnt see any attempt by richard, i only saw one by freethinker44 which I do not find to be very conclusive. It is based on several assumptions and (as he himself states) at least one "belief"
post 82Was it freethinker? That's what I get for not reading all the posts. My apologies.
Writing all my posts in poetry form makes me seem smarter..........Thief here...okay....I can drag you along.
All of your senses feed info into your brain.
Life has no mystery. You are here to learn all that you can before you die.
When dead............
Stand up. Separate from your flesh.
If you fail to do so, you will follow your body into the box, and the box into the ground.
Eternal darkness is physically real.
No form of light follows a man into the grave.
No sunlight, moonlight, starlight,...or philosophical light.
It really is dark down there.
If you succeed in standing up..............
Anyone who went before you could be there to receive you.
Therefore, do unto others as you would have them do unto you.........
Because They will do so.
As for God...........................
He set this all up. This is not my handiwork.
And you don't get to plead ignorance.
You've read this.