Asklemmy

43889 readers

775 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

What scientific discoveries greatly weakened religion and the case of God ? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 4 months ago by bullshitter@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

122 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] theilleist@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If we had the technological power, would humans run simulations of universes with Planck length precision? Obviously yes. So extrapolating from our one and only example of intelligent life (us), it seems like intelligent life enjoys stimulating universes. If our reality were the result of that kind of project, and the engineers lived outside the laws of physics, I would call them higher beings. And they could be as hands-off or as interventionist as they pleased.

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Sure that's a valid defintion, albeit a super specific one and it directly exclude all (or almost all) known forms of religion on Earth.

[–] theilleist@lemmy.ml -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Run command: "Fiat Lux"

Warning: it will take 7 days to complete operation. Continue?

"This had better be good."

"Fuck it, I'm tired of waiting, I'll come back on the 8th day."

"Oh, this IS good."

"What are these stupid apes doing? Fine, I'll educate them myself."

Instantiate avatar: "Jesus_Nazareth"

Which part is directly excluded?

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The one where there is not only zero proof of anything of it being real, but also zero (or nearly zero) religious people actually beliving that.

[–] theilleist@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago

And if we were talking about whether it were real, or whether people believed it in those specific terms, you'd have a point. But since we're talking about your assertion that major earth religions are "directly excluded" by that definition of "higher beings," i still fail to see the exclusion.