Why has religion retained its appeal?

[Robin-H]

No. The "Edit:" is the only alteration,or, addition, if you like, that I made to that post, which is my post incidentally so Cyclones posts haven't been altered.

 

Anyhow. Could you explain why the paradox still stands please?

 

Then what were you referring to when you said 'Its been corrected now'?

 

The paradox still stands because you said 'I also believe that it isn't possible for anything to have existed forever and things miraculously springing into existence from out of nowhere is impossible too'.

 

If you believe both those things, how do you think the first 'thing' came into existence.

[SnailyBoy]

Then what were you referring to when you said 'Its been corrected now'?

 

The paradox still stands because you said 'I also believe that it isn't possible for anything to have existed forever and things miraculously springing into existence from out of nowhere is impossible too'.

 

If you believe both those things, how do you think the first 'thing' came into existence.

 

Here we have a use of language problem.

 

'Isn't possible' is not the same as impossible.

 

However, I don't think that particular difference in language was intentional.

[danot]

Then what were you referring to when you said 'Its been corrected now'?

The reason for the paradox.

 

The paradox still stands because you said 'I also believe that it isn't possible for anything to have existed forever and things miraculously springing into existence from out of nowhere is impossible too'.

 

If you believe both those things, how do you think the first 'thing' came into existence.

Both are wrong. They have to be if such things aren't possible. Haven't I already stated that I believe it's far more likely that there's a flaw within our logical reasoning rather than such occurrences being possible?

[SnailyBoy]

The reason for the paradox.

 

Both are wrong. They have to be if such things aren't possible. Haven't I already stated that I believe it's far more likely that there's a flaw within our logical reasoning rather than such occurrences being possible?

 

I think it's obvious there's a flaw in your reasoning.

 

What does that even mean?

[Robin-H]

The reason for the paradox.

 

Both are wrong. They have to be if such things aren't possible. Haven't I already stated that I believe it's far more likely that there's a flaw within our logical reasoning rather than such occurrences being possible?

 

So what's the third option you believe in then, beyond there being a 'flaw in our logical reasoning'. Where did the first 'thing' come from?

 

Also, just because you think both those things are impossible, it doesn't mean that they are. That also solves the paradox.

[danot]

I think it's obvious there's a flaw in your reasoning.

 

What does that even mean?

 

Put it this way. If such things are possible, then anything is possible, which pees all over scientific theories.

 

---------- Post added 02-08-2018 at 18:50 ----------

 

Put it this way. If such things are possible, then anything is possible, which pees all over scientific theories.

 

So what's the third option you believe in then, beyond there being a 'flaw in our logical reasoning'. Where did the first 'thing' come from?

 

Also, just because you think both those things are impossible, it doesn't mean that they are. That also solves the paradox.

See above post.

[Robin-H]

Put it this way. If such things are possible, then anything is possible, which pees all over scientific theories.

 

---------- Post added 02-08-2018 at 18:50 ----------

 

 

 

See above post.

 

Why do you think that?

 

That doesn't answer the question. What do you think the third option is.

[SnailyBoy]

Put it this way. If such things are possible, then anything is possible, which pees all over scientific theories.

 

Show your thinking for that one.

[danot]

The fact of the matter is nobody's certain why we have consciousness or what it is or where it comes from. Nobody knows why there's something instead of nothing. Nobody knows whether the universe has always existed or miraculously spring into existence from out of nowhere or whether there's another, more rational reason that doesn't scramble our brains thinking about which we've yet to discover, or whether our minds are even developed enough to comprehend the true nature of existence.

 

 

 

Why do you think that?

 

That doesn't answer the question. What do you think the third option is.

 

See above post.

 

---------- Post added 02-08-2018 at 19:01 ----------

 

Show your thinking for that one.

 

If such things are possible, anything is possible. Included a creator. Which I do not believe In might I add. Again.

[SnailyBoy]

If such things are possible, anything is possible. Included a creator. Which I do not believe In might I add. Again.

 

All you've done is repeat your claim.

 

Demonstrate why you think that claim is true.