• NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    So first, asking religious questions on the Fediverse is a fool’s errand, but that aside: Why not? Hell, if anything it’d be the other way around: An all-powerful being without emotion wouldn’t create anything, because they wouldn’t gain anything from doing so. Any creation by an omnipotent being would have to be an emotional affair.

    • StoneyPicton@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      Maybe it was boredom. I mean, when effortlessly power everything sometimes you just need a break.

    • richieadler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      asking religious questions on the Fediverse is a fool’s errand

      Why? Because believers don’t like the answers?

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Because nobody actually answers the question. “Because it’s bullshit” is the least interesting, least informative answer you can give to a question like this, and it does nothing except make the commenter feel clever. It gets especially annoying when legitimate answers are buried under dozens of “because God doesn’t exist I’m so smart.” Now an answer could reject the premise that a creator exists and still be interesting, but it’d have to do better than the armchair anthropology everyone here seems so fond of.

        • richieadler@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Discussing about a being whose existence cannot be verified in reality is an exercise in futility.

          • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I hope you have the same opinion regarding philosophy, pure math and string theory, but also: Then don’t fucking answer the question. Clearly some people, including the OP, see value in discussing beings whose existence cannot be verified in reality.

            • richieadler@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              I hope you have the same opinion regarding philosophy,

              I don’t care a iota about philosophy, in fact.

              pure math

              Pure math is a self-contained system that only occasionally is useful in reality

              and string theory

              String theory has no full international scientific consensus, so for now is just a possible model of reality. Does it bother you?

              Then don’t fucking answer the question.

              You seem to think I recognize your authority to give me orders. I don’t.

              Clearly some people, including the OP, see value in discussing beings whose existence cannot be verified in reality.

              As long as they postulate it as fiction, I don’t have an issue with that. The moment they posit they ideas are real, they’re exposed to scrutiny to those among us who care about what’s real and what’s not.

              As a final note, your tantrum is somewhat amusing, but in a different sense is somewhat sad. Make of that what you want.

              • MolochAlter@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                21 hours ago

                You seem to think I recognize your authority to give me orders. I don’t.

                No, he’s giving you free advice on how not to be an insufferable dickhead in public; advice that you seem to desperately need, and this is coming from an atheist, before you think I am playing team sports.

                It’s a very simple concept: if all you’re contributing to a conversation is the equivalent of coming into the room and violently jerking yourself off while going “hurrrr look how big my dick is” you’re being actively detrimental to the conversation no matter if you’re right or wrong.

                You can engage with the conversation while disagreeing with the premise, that is not what you’re doing. You are just being a smug teenage dickhead who needs to butt into every conversation to, if nothing else, reinforce the idea that there should be harsher barriers to being on the internet in the mind of everyone looking at your “contributions.”