Thread: God is the null hypothesis

I'll try make this as simple as possible.

In order to assume God isn't real you have to disprove these facts

1) Infinity exists
2) Possibility is real
3) Therefore infinite possibility is real
4) Therefore with infinite probability of anything as real the idea of an intelligent designer as creator is certain

Now lets take what we know, to verify this

If you start with nothing, can you end up with something? No.

Can anything create itself? No
Therefore something created the universe it didn't just fall into place on it's own.

If something created the Universe, then that something is god because no other thing could create it unless it is defined as god.
An infinitely powerful being is the only explanation that could cause something other than nothing to exist at the beginning.

Done.

In order to assume God isn't real you have to disprove these facts

No I don't.

Originally Posted by Zoth

No I don't.

Try reading and understanding the post to understand why you DO need to refute what I said before you can assume god isn't real.

I'll try make this as simple as possible.

In order to assume the Flying Spaghetti Monster isn't real you have to disprove these facts

1) Infinity exists
2) Possibility is real
3) Therefore infinite possibility is real
4) Therefore with infinite probability of anything as real the idea of an intelligent designer as creator is certain

Now lets take what we know, to verify this

If you start with nothing, can you end up with something? No.

Can anything create itself? No
Therefore something created the universe it didn't just fall into place on it's own.

If something created the Universe, then that something is god because no other thing could create it unless it is defined as god.
An infinitely powerful being is the only explanation that could cause something other than nothing to exist at the beginning.


Flying exists, and spaghetti exists. Therefore, flying spaghetti exists.

Flying exists, and spaghetti exists. Therefore, flying spaghetti exists

So what?

According to multiple worlds theory you are correct. The probability is always certain when you have infinity as your variable. But I don't really care about flying spaghetti. Do you?

Scientific principles don't manifest on their own. Any scientific principle has always needed someone. And before the earth gravity didn't exist on earth. But you may say that gravity worked in other places, but that's besides the point because if the other things were not there to accommodate gravity it wouldn't actually be there. Scientific principles need something in order to exist. But god being an infinitely powerful being can overcome anything.

So lets see, you have nothingness, in which to start your theory of evolution. And I have an infinitely powerful being in which to base my theory on.

You have a way more limited premise to go on. You have nothing to work with. And I have infinite power and potential to work with.

You are going to lose.

Originally Posted by knight31

Therefore something created the universe it didn't just fall into place on it's own.

Nothing in your words makes this statement true.

Originally Posted by knight31

If something created the Universe, then that something is god because no other thing could create it unless it is defined as god.
An infinitely powerful being is the only explanation that could cause something other than nothing to exist at the beginning.

Done.

I get that you believe this....and certainly many people do...but that still doesn't prove it.

Because we can't even yet comprehend existence and the reasons for it is not proof that an infinitely powerful being exists to create everything.

Creation is mystifying and incredible but nowhere is there evidence of some all-powerful being overseeing the creation of the universe.

Originally Posted by knight31

According to multiple worlds theory you are correct. The probability is always certain when you have infinity as your variable.

You mistake probability for factual existence. There is a probability that I am currently running around naked in the street while typing this but the probability is so extremely low that it can be discounted.

Even with infinite possibilities and alternate worlds theories, the fact that a low probability exists for something to occur does not mean it is actually happening, or that an all-powerful being exists.

We can imagine all the flying-spaghetti monsters and mystical beings we want but no amount of infinite probabilities can guarantee certainty of existence beyond our ability to imagine them.

Originally Posted by knight31

Scientific principles don't manifest on their own. Any scientific principle has always needed someone. And before the earth gravity didn't exist on earth. But you may say that gravity worked in other places, but that's besides the point because if the other things were not there to accommodate gravity it wouldn't actually be there. Scientific principles need something in order to exist. But god being an infinitely powerful being can overcome anything.

So lets see, you have nothingness, in which to start your theory of evolution. And I have an infinitely powerful being in which to base my theory on.

You have a way more limited premise to go on. You have nothing to work with. And I have infinite power and potential to work with.

You are going to lose.

You claim Universal Mind has nothing to work with but you have no more to work with yourself. There is no sign saying, "This way to the Infinitely Powerful Being."

Your analogy of gravity not existing unless something is there to cause it to exist doesn't even apply to the discussion and still provides no evidence to support your claims and beliefs.


There is nothing wrong with your beliefs. You're allowed to have them, we all are...but supporting your argument with the premise of infinite probability isn't evidence of anything other than a willingness to believe in something no one has ever seen and which no evidence exists to prove or disprove the idea.

I think this would be a great discussion if you provided something more substantial than pointing your finger at people and saying, "You're wrong!"

There is a probability that I am currently running around naked in the street while typing this but the probability is so extremely low that it can be discounted.

Incorrect in a parallel Universe that is identical to this, the only thing different is that you are running around the street naked right now. That is 100% certain.

no amount of infinite probabilities

You don't seem to understand the concept of infinity here. Endless potential of something happening means that sooner of later any probability will happen. In other words infinite possibility. Which includes God as the intelligent designer. In fact that is the only sensible explanation for how things exist.

the premise of infinite probability isn't evidence of anything other than a willingness to believe in something no one has ever seen and which no evidence exists to prove or disprove the idea.

No it's a basic mathematical certainty that we can be sure of. Infinite equals certainty of 1. That's the probability of anything happening under infinity. We know it exists because we have mathematics.

And every time you mention the word "evidence" the burden is on you to be specific about what type of evidence you require, else what you are referring to cannot be known unless you clarify your conditions for the 'evidence' which is your job and not mine.

How did God overcome nothingness if he was not there in the first place? Are you saying he did something when he didn't exist?

You have not disproven the Flying Spaghetti Monster. He is infinitely powerful.

Scientific principles that exist outside of time and space do concern things, such as formats of universes.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

How did God overcome nothingness if he was not there in the first place? Are you saying he did something when he didn't exist?

You have not disproven the Flying Spaghetti Monster. He is infinitely powerful.

Scientific principles that exist outside of time and space do concern things, such as formats of universes.

God is the alpha and omega, so god was there.

The flying spaghetti monster could only be as powerful as god decided. I don't have to disprove it exists. You are the one that has to explain how something came from nothing. Not me. It doesn't matter how many outrageous creatures you think of, My idea still trumps it all without a need to disprove your ideas.

In the face of nothingness, not even any principles could exist cause then that would be something.

Explain to me again how something evolves from nothing?

Originally Posted by knight31

God is the alpha and omega, so god was there.

The flying spaghetti monster could only be as powerful as god decided. I don't have to disprove it exists. You are the one that has to explain how something came from nothing. Not me. It doesn't matter how many outrageous creatures you think of, My idea still trumps it all without a need to disprove your ideas.

In the face of nothingness, not even any principles could exist cause then that would be something.

Explain to me again how something evolves from nothing?

You said God overcame nothing. Doesn't that mean God came from nothing? You are the one promoting that hypothesis.

There was never nothing. There was always the Flying Spaghetti Monster. If there is no Flying Spaghetti Monster, then there were always scientific principles. However, you have yet to disprove the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Your own argument can be used to argue for his existence.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

There was never nothing.

If you admit there was never nothing, then you are pretty screwed, cause you have no chance but to accept what "was never nothing" and the nature of that "never nothing" You would inevitably have to conclude it was something with the potential to create infinite possibility of what we have. The only thing that fits into that category is an infinitely powerful being that we would call god.

There is no getting out of this.

Originally Posted by knight31

If You would inevitably have to conclude it was something with the potential to create infinite possibility of what we have. The only thing that fits into that category is an infinitely powerful being that we would call god.

How do you figure that? I say it's the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Prove me wrong.

I think my symbolic logic professor would have a heart attack if he saw this thread.

Originally Posted by knight31

1) Infinity exists
2) Possibility is real
3) Therefore infinite possibility is real

1) Nonsense exists.
2) OP is real.
3) Therefore nonsensical OP is real.

Done.

Originally Posted by Xei

1) Nonsense exists.
2) OP is real.
3) Therefore nonsensical OP is real.

Done.

congrats, you gave us the first song of this thread.

Originally Posted by knight31

God is the alpha and omega, so god was there.

My idea still trumps it all without a need to disprove your ideas.

Notice the key words here: "My idea"

I have some ideas but believing in them won't make them exist.

Originally Posted by knight31

In the face of nothingness, not even any principles could exist cause then that would be something.

Explain to me again how something evolves from nothing?

You pulled this IDEA from nothing...why don't you explain it to us?

Originally Posted by knight31

Incorrect in a parallel Universe that is identical to this, the only thing different is that you are running around the street naked right now. That is 100% certain.

What makes this certain?

Originally Posted by knight31

You don't seem to understand the concept of infinity here. Endless potential of something happening means that sooner of later any probability will happen. In other words infinite possibility. Which includes God as the intelligent designer. In fact that is the only sensible explanation for how things exist.

My mind has infinite possibility to imagine things but that won't make them be true. You confuse probability and possibility with what actually occurs.

Originally Posted by knight31

No it's a basic mathematical certainty that we can be sure of. Infinite equals certainty of 1. That's the probability of anything happening under infinity. We know it exists because we have mathematics.

Again, nothing more than a possibility of a probability, not evidence to show it exists.

Originally Posted by knight31

And every time you mention the word "evidence" the burden is on you to be specific about what type of evidence you require, else what you are referring to cannot be known unless you clarify your conditions for the 'evidence' which is your job and not mine.

I ask for evidence that is "evident" and "understandable" to all people. I ask for something observable that all people could agree and simply understand. A road-sign or picture of the flying spaghetti monster would be nice.

What evidence do you have, other than some words written long ago by several human beings?


A magical gold-plated chicken-nugget shat out by the infinitely-powerful being (or flying spaghetti monster) would be more than enough evidence for me.

Originally Posted by melanieb

Notice the key words here: "My idea"

I have some ideas but believing in them won't make them exist.

That's a good idea for you to have, and just as well that you have that idea I think.

You pulled this IDEA from nothing...why don't you explain it to us?

Why don't you explain your entire existence that came from nothing.

My mind has infinite possibility to imagine things but that won't make them be true. You confuse probability and possibility with what actually occurs.

They don't come true because god does not will it to become true. If god agreed to accept whatever request you had. God would grant said request. But since you don't believe in god you have no chance of that happening. So you are correct. That's the way the cookie crumbles.

Again, nothing more than a possibility of a probability, not evidence to show it exists.

In probability theory 100% means it will happen. That's as much as certain as you can be. If something has full chance (infinite chance) of happening. It will, is, does, and can, has, and will to come. And there is nothing you can do about it.

I ask for evidence that is "evident" and "understandable" to all people. I ask for something observable that all people could agree and simply understand. A road-sign or picture of the flying spaghetti monster would be nice.

How about the Universe? That's observable if you open your eyes. How much more understandable can you get? It's up to you to understand something. I can't make you understand.

If you want a picture of a spaghetti monster. Here is one.

tumblr_mebtk1ovED1rle5hho1_1280.jpg

See if you are specific enough, you can get it.

What evidence do you have, other than some words written long ago by several human beings?

The existence of the Universe instead of nothingness, is evidence of it.

A magical gold-plated chicken-nugget shat out by the infinitely-powerful being (or flying spaghetti monster) would be more than enough evidence for me.

In another parallel Universe it already happened though. If you want a gold nugget ask for one, but oh wait you can't ask for one from god because you don't believe in god to ask for it. I guess you are not going to get evidence, other than what I have told you and if you don't understand it you will never find god. You will refuse to believe and then be condemned. Don't think that god will sit around waiting for you to believe, he will simply condemn you. If on the day of your death the decision is condemnation, that judgement will be with you for eternity. So in all eternity god will ignore you forever. That's your preference? Once you are judged you cannot be unjudged again. This is in regards to your eternal soul. So think about it carefully.

Originally Posted by knight31

In another parallel Universe it already happened though. If you want a gold nugget ask for one, but oh wait you can't ask for one from god because you don't believe in god to ask for it. I guess you are not going to get evidence, other than what I have told you and if you don't understand it you will never find god. You will refuse to believe and then be condemned. Don't think that god will sit around waiting for you to believe, he will simply condemn you. If on the day of your death the decision is condemnation, that judgement will be with you for eternity. So in all eternity god will ignore you forever. That's your preference? Once you are judged you cannot be unjudged again. This is in regards to your eternal soul. So think about it carefully.

I never said I didn't believe in God...not once.

I think my concept of God differs from yours. Mine isn't so judgmental. In fact, your God reminds me of you.

Originally Posted by melanieb

I never said I didn't believe in God...not once.

I think my concept of God differs from yours. Mine isn't so judgmental. In fact, your God reminds me of you.

There is only one god to judge both of us. It doesn't matter what you or I think. It only matters what the holy spirit says through me.

Which brings us to the second clip. It's all planned you see by god.

So many philosophers have tried to use logic to either prove or disprove the existence of God beyond doubt, and they have all failed. That is because belief in God requires a leap of faith and is not based on logic alone, and if one is not willing to make that leap of faith, there is room for doubt, because this is not a question to be solved or dismissed by logic alone.

Originally Posted by JoannaB

belief in God requires a leap of faith and is not based on logic alone, and if one is not willing to make that leap of faith, there is room for doubt, because this is not a question to be solved or dismissed by logic alone.

This argument fundamentally flawed.

Before we can ever make a leap of faith shouldn't we have a justification that the position to which we are jumping will guarantee us a profitable outcome?. Anyone who has not yet made the leap of faith does not have the sufficient knowledge to truly understand god, and thus cannot make a judgement outside of logic, in turn that said person must use logic to decide in which religion to place his "leap of faith".

What if it turned out that the Islam was right and that Catholicism was wrong and you placed your leap of faith in the wrong one.

Basically your argument states that to reach an alleviated state of knowledge without the need for logic, you first have to logically assume that the leap of faith in your chosen religion is the right one, but you cannot say for certain because you have no idea if said religion exists because you are confined to logic.

Originally Posted by dutchraptor

This argument fundamentally flawed.

Before we can ever make a leap of faith shouldn't we have a justification that the position to which we are jumping will guarantee us a profitable outcome?. Anyone who has not yet made the leap of faith does not have the sufficient knowledge to truly understand god, and thus cannot make a judgement outside of logic, in turn that said person must use logic to decide in which religion to place his "leap of faith".

What if it turned out that the Islam was right and that Catholicism was wrong and you placed your leap of faith in the wrong one.

Basically your argument states that to reach an alleviated state of knowledge without the need for logic, you first have to logically assume that the leap of faith in your chosen religion is the right one, but you cannot say for certain because you have no idea if said religion exists because you are confined to logic.

Not necessarily. Your argument presupposes that one religion is right and that this means that all others are wrong. I believe that there is more than one path to salvation, and that every religion has some truth in it and some things that are wrong because all religion are flawed because they are human interpretations based on human bias and political and cultural misinterpretations, but that does not mean that they do not have some truth in them as well. Personally I am Christian, and I believe/hope that Christianity has enough right to lead to salvation, although I do believe that I can and should try to learn from other faiths as well and be open minded in my spirituality. I also do not believe that if you are an Atheist that necessarily means that you are doomed to hell, and I understand your reluctance to make the leap of faith. Personally I think that any spiritual faith is preferable to none at all, but even someone who has no faith can be a good person, and I believe in a loving God, who through his infinite grace will forgive mistakes and misunderstandings, as long as a person made the best effort to be the best they can be and to seek out knowledge and improve their understanding to become a better person. I believe that it is our responsibility to question and to seek out truth. Now my understanding of truth is not based on logic alone, but logic is one of the tools available to us.

Edit: To clarify, when I say that personally I believe that any faith is better than none, I do not mean that I am better than you if you are an atheist. I am not trying to convert you. What I mean by it is that I believe that faith is valuable in all kinds of religious flavors, and I believe that people who do not have any faith in any spirituality may have a harder time grasping the truth which I believe will be revealed to all when God is ready for that. I believe that having the willingness to have faith is a virtue in and of itself, and while of course it does matter what one believes but I think that many beliefs that we believe to be contradictory may not actually be - there may be more false dichotomies in religions than believers are willing to admit in closed minded biased belief.

Edit2: I also do believe that I am likely wrong in some of my beliefs. In fact I am sure I am wrong in some of them. I try to improve them, and try to figure out what is true, and I hope and believe that over time I am moving in the right direction in my spirituality, which has and continues to evolve.

Originally Posted by JoannaB

Not necessarily. Your argument presupposes that one religion is right and that this means that all others are wrong. I believe that there is more than one path to salvation, and that every religion has some truth in it and some things that are wrong because all religion are flawed because they are human interpretations based on human bias and political and cultural misinterpretations, but that does not mean that they do not have some truth in them as well. Personally I am Christian, and I believe/hope that Christianity has enough right to lead to salvation, although I do believe that I can and should try to learn from other faiths as well and be open minded in my spirituality. I also do not believe that if you are an Atheist that necessarily means that you are doomed to hell, and I understand your reluctance to make the leap of faith. Personally I think that any spiritual faith is preferable to none at all, but even someone who has no faith can be a good person, and I believe in a loving God, who through his infinite grace will forgive mistakes and misunderstandings, as long as a person made the best effort to be the best they can be and to seek out knowledge and improve their understanding to become a better person. I believe that it is our responsibility to question and to seek out truth. Now my understanding of truth is not based on logic alone, but logic is one of the tools available to us.

Edit: To clarify, when I say that personally I believe that any faith is better than none, I do not mean that I am better than you if you are an atheist. I am not trying to convert you. What I mean by it is that I believe that faith is valuable in all kinds of religious flavors, and I believe that people who do not have any faith in any spirituality may have a harder time grasping the truth which I believe will be revealed to all when God is ready for that. I believe that having the willingness to have faith is a virtue in and of itself, and while of course it does matter what one believes but I think that many beliefs that we believe to be contradictory may not actually be - there may be more false dichotomies in religions than believers are willing to admit in closed minded biased belief.

Edit2: I also do believe that I am likely wrong in some of my beliefs. In fact I am sure I am wrong in some of them. I try to improve them, and try to figure out what is true, and I hope and believe that over time I am moving in the right direction in my spirituality, which has and continues to evolve.

Thank you for the long reply.
I don't intend on going in on an argument because I do think that you are to an extent right, and the last edit you made is certainly an admirable point of view and I respect that

Strange, strange thread.