Scientific experiments prove God exists
- Tutareture
- Posts: 212
- Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:08 am
Scientific experiments prove God exists
אַל-תְּהִי צַדִּיק הַרְבֵּה, וְאַל-תִּתְחַכַּם יוֹתֵר: לָמָּה, תִּשּׁוֹמֵם. Be not righteous overmuch; neither make thyself overwise; why shouldest thou destroy thyself? -Ecclesiastes 7:16
- Tutareture
- Posts: 212
- Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:08 am
Re: Scientific experiments prove God exists
אַל-תְּהִי צַדִּיק הַרְבֵּה, וְאַל-תִּתְחַכַּם יוֹתֵר: לָמָּה, תִּשּׁוֹמֵם. Be not righteous overmuch; neither make thyself overwise; why shouldest thou destroy thyself? -Ecclesiastes 7:16
- Tutareture
- Posts: 212
- Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:08 am
Re: Scientific experiments prove God exists
אַל-תְּהִי צַדִּיק הַרְבֵּה, וְאַל-תִּתְחַכַּם יוֹתֵר: לָמָּה, תִּשּׁוֹמֵם. Be not righteous overmuch; neither make thyself overwise; why shouldest thou destroy thyself? -Ecclesiastes 7:16
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6492
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: Scientific experiments prove God exists
When linking to videos please include a precis of their contents. And would you also please state what connection this thread has with the Theravada. (If there isn't one then it doesn't belong on Dhamma Wheel. Try the Dharma Paths forum instead). Thank you.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Scientific experiments prove God exists
Greetings,
If the above is not done, the topic will be closed and we'll refer the OP on to the Dharma Paths forum, where this content will be relevant.
Metta,
Paul.
Indeed. Thank you bhante.Dhammanando wrote: ↑Sat Apr 24, 2021 8:51 am
When linking to videos please include a precis of their contents. And would you also please state what connection this thread has with the Theravada. Thank you.
If the above is not done, the topic will be closed and we'll refer the OP on to the Dharma Paths forum, where this content will be relevant.
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: Scientific experiments prove God exists
It's interesting how felt self ['I am'] struggles for acknowledgement of unsubstantiated beliefs. It is obvious that science will never be able to prove sheer metaphysical claims because metaphysical thought blatantly contradicts scientific approach. Nevertheless since the advent of scientific age metaphysical believers have been trying, are trying at present and will be trying in the future to use the label "science" or "scientific" in their struggle against rationality.
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
-
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2021 9:20 pm
Re: Scientific experiments prove God exists
1. It is interesting and noteworthy, Tutareture, that rather than responding to my refutations of your earlier arguments against the claim that an uncreated creator god exists, you are posting youtube video presenting other peoples' arguments. This could be interpreted by people as evidence that you are incapable of refuting my refutations of your earlier arguments against the claim that an uncreated creator god exists, in turn meaning that your earlier arguments against the claim that an uncreated creator god exists are refuted.
2. Buddhists who accept the Pali Canon and many non-Buddhists accept that God (that is, a very powerful divine being claiming to be the uncreated creator god) exists. In this context, your topic's thesis is not controversial. Buddhists who accept the Pali Canon, however, assert that God is mistaken about being the uncreated creator god. In this context, your topic's thesis does not refute Buddhism at all.
3. The video advancing the thesis "quantum physics refutes materialism" is advancing a thesis that to Buddhists is not controversial, because Buddhism dismisses materialism as wrong view. The video advancing the thesis "quantum physics refutes materialism" is not refuting Buddhism at all.
4. It is ironic that you are wiling to accept quantum physics in its alleged refutation of a Buddhist doctrine (that materialism is incorrect) but are not willing to accept quantum physics when it explicitly supports what you claim is a necessary consequence of the Buddhist doctrine of kshanabhangavada: the possible existence of atoms in two places simultaneously. After all, quantum physics has proven that subatomc particles, and atoms can exist in two places simultaneously: https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... xperiment/. So, the question arises of why you are rejecting parts of quantum physics but not other parts - especially because both the accepted and rejected parts of quantum physics that you deal with support Buddhist doctrines.
2. Buddhists who accept the Pali Canon and many non-Buddhists accept that God (that is, a very powerful divine being claiming to be the uncreated creator god) exists. In this context, your topic's thesis is not controversial. Buddhists who accept the Pali Canon, however, assert that God is mistaken about being the uncreated creator god. In this context, your topic's thesis does not refute Buddhism at all.
3. The video advancing the thesis "quantum physics refutes materialism" is advancing a thesis that to Buddhists is not controversial, because Buddhism dismisses materialism as wrong view. The video advancing the thesis "quantum physics refutes materialism" is not refuting Buddhism at all.
4. It is ironic that you are wiling to accept quantum physics in its alleged refutation of a Buddhist doctrine (that materialism is incorrect) but are not willing to accept quantum physics when it explicitly supports what you claim is a necessary consequence of the Buddhist doctrine of kshanabhangavada: the possible existence of atoms in two places simultaneously. After all, quantum physics has proven that subatomc particles, and atoms can exist in two places simultaneously: https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... xperiment/. So, the question arises of why you are rejecting parts of quantum physics but not other parts - especially because both the accepted and rejected parts of quantum physics that you deal with support Buddhist doctrines.
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12879
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2021 9:20 pm
Re: Scientific experiments prove God exists
True enough, even though we come to this conclusion for different reasons.
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Scientific experiments prove God exists
Greetings,
This topic will be closed. The OP is welcome to PM me with additional information (per ven. Dhammanando's note) if they wish it to be reopened.
Metta,
Paul.
This topic will be closed. The OP is welcome to PM me with additional information (per ven. Dhammanando's note) if they wish it to be reopened.
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."