Simulation Theory.

[AV1611VET]

well, how would it not be Godlike?

When it's science?

your God only created the universe and in turn, humanity to have someone to love and worship him.

And someone He can love in return.

some decendent species running simulations for their entertainment or data collection seems far more logical and far less of an ethical issue than a supreme being creating humans and flooding them when he dislikes what they do with free will. that itself sounds like a child on a iPad a universe up

Unlike your Simulation theory, God gave them a chance ... 120 years to be exact ... to repent.

Compare that to your Columbine.

How long did they have to prepare?

Who preached to them ahead of time?

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

So does the Bible ... and it's nothing like what your scientists think it is.

While I like the idea that our scientists are some kind of "advanced simulation" running under someone's sick perverted idea of what life is all about, I have to subordinate my thinking to what the Bible says.

And the Bible gives them much more credit than Simulation theory does.

We are not one.

We are three-in-one.

Body, soul, and spirit.

the bible hardly gives credit where such is due. it assumes that the creator is a supreme being and yet distills emotional flaws and egotistical nonsense on it. hard to call the creators of a simulation sick a twisted when you worship a being that created an eternal pit of suffering for those who disagree with him.

after all when there is a all-knowing creator you can not have free will. like playing a sims game with God mode. even if it appears that the sims are acting of there own accord they are acting on programming

as for "we are one"
I meant we are more likely the simulation than the real one

the soul is just the sentience a being has, a metaphorical representation of conscience caused by higher level's of thinking in the brain. "I think therefore I am" "therefore I have a soul" also soul and spirit are synonymous the proper quote would have been "we are body mind and soul" which body and mind are the same things.

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

When it's science?

And someone He can love in return.

Unlike your Simulation theory, God gave them a chance ... 120 years to be exact ... to repent.

Compare that to your Columbine.

How long did they have to prepare?

Who preached to them ahead of time?

you cant give someone a chance if the rules of the game are not crystal clear. trying playing a video game where the rules are not instilled at the beginning but you find them in a book of skeptical origin. halfway through with 3000 other books of the same rationale with different rules

furthermore, that logic is like again a sims game. where you give the sims free will and then get annoyed when they don't move or do what you want and so you flood them.

 

[AV1611VET]

the only issue with the theory is why would a being/beings far more advanced than us wish to run simulations on the past?

Because, as you said, they are scientists.

Scientists do things that aren't exactly kosher, don't they?

or around humans in general.

I would assume humans would give them the best feedback, since they are sentients with vocal cords.

it suffers the same illogical nature of Abrahamic faith. why would a being. so far above us. that we would look like germs in comparison. take so much interest in one pathetic species. when there is mathematically due to probability. billions of others.

It's simple:

There must not be "billions of others."

But then, only a scientist would think otherwise ... so I guess evil is in the eye of the programmer, isn't it?

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

When it's science?

And someone He can love in return.

Unlike your Simulation theory, God gave them a chance ... 120 years to be exact ... to repent.

Compare that to your Columbine.

How long did they have to prepare?

Who preached to them ahead of time?

unlike simulation theory. creation theory as the Abrahamic faith pushes is even more illogical. a being of supreme stature would lack emotions. especially if they are all knowing. an AI would be closer to such a being. as emotions are mechanisms for social order and self-survival. wrath grants a person the needed drive to kill their predator and survive. sorrow to distill sadness to those around you. love to keep a parental structure as our children require many years of attention and care before they can survive on their own. a being of singularity and might who is not even alive and is immortal would lack all these things. they would be unneeded and would affect its own process. now if your God is not all powerful and is just a being a universe up who is playing by a different set of rules it may be more logical and explain why he himself is flawed.

but when reading the bible I am not convinced of a supreme being's word but that of a child throwing a tantrum and the will of a flawed jealous wrathful person

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

Because, as you said, they are scientists.

Scientists do things that aren't exactly kosher, don't they?

I would assume humans would give them the best feedback, since they are sentients with vocal cords.

It's simple:

There must not be "billions of others."

But then, only a scientist would think otherwise ... so I guess evil is in the eye of the programmer, isn't it?

we would not need to give feedback. have you even ever run a diagnostic check or looked at a data sheet for a video game? granted a video game needs to be palatable for its players but not a simulation. they would simply read off the data sheet and if they are running a simulation like this they would not care if its people were happy or not. that's not there aim or care. again you are trying to use emotions here where emotions are meaningless. this is speaking entirely logical other than the fact I don't know why our descendants or other beings would want to run a simulation. but it only takes one species that does for there to mathematically be 1000s of simulations. no one runs only one simulation if they have the ability to run 1000s

 

[AV1611VET]

you cant give someone a chance if the rules of the game are not crystal clear.

Only the rules were quite clear, weren't they?

"Don't eat from this tree."

How much simpler do you want them?

trying playing a video game where the rules are not instilled at the beginning but you find them in a book of skeptical origin.

I usually don't play video games that require whole books to play.

I will admit that I was so enamored with DOOM at one time that I bought a thick book and read it through.

But that was a long time ago.

halfway through with 3000 other books of the same rationale with different rules

That would be what we call polytheism ... a "game" we don't subscribe to.

furthermore, that logic is like again a sims game. where you give the sims free will and then get annoyed when they don't move or do what you want and so you flood them.

If the sim has corrupted itself to the point that the game isn't playable, what would you do?

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

Only the rules were quite clear, weren't they?

"Don't eat from this tree."

How much simpler do you want them?

I usually don't play video games that require whole books to play.

I will admit that I was so enamored with DOOM at one time that I bought a thick book and read it through.

But that was a long time ago.

That would be what we call polytheism ... a "game" we don't subscribe to.

If the sim has corrupted itself to the point that the game isn't playable, what would you do?

yes, you don't subscribe to the other games because you were raised to believe your book the only manual. so again that's, not a good "opportunity to repent" when there are manuals 1000s of years older than yours and far more logical. try Buddhism


as for if a sim corrupted itself, it would be a flaw in the programming and in turn the programmer. perfect does not breed imperfection unless that itself is its goal.

Lucifer and in turn angelum specially Seraphim are stated to be Perfect Beings. then how did the second only to God become corrupted? if your God creates everything than something cant create itself can it? but Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things." makes far more sense. then if that was the creator's intention. then for you to speak of evil while worshiping the supposed source of Good and Evil. as the tree of knowledge that eve and Adam ate from was the knowledge of Good and Evil. a piece of Gods omniscience. than its a bit of a Hypocricy to call the runners of a simulation as vile

 

[durangodawood]

..."Don't eat from this tree."

How much simpler do you want them?...

Thats an old rule.

Do you deny the newer ones?

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

Only the rules were quite clear, weren't they?

"Don't eat from this tree."

How much simpler do you want them?

I usually don't play video games that require whole books to play.

I will admit that I was so enamored with DOOM at one time that I bought a thick book and read it through.

But that was a long time ago.

That would be what we call polytheism ... a "game" we don't subscribe to.

If the sim has corrupted itself to the point that the game isn't playable, what would you do?

also "don't eat from this tree" you can't blame someone who has no concept of right or wrong for doing something wrong. to blame eve she would already have to have the knowledge the apple gave to understand not to eat the apple. it's paradoxical. why place the tree there in the first place and create a tempter if your goal was not to have them eat it? an omniscient being does not run tests as he knows the outcome. your God is not omniscient

 

[AV1611VET]

yes, you don't subscribe to the other games because you were raised to believe your book the only manual.

Where's your manual?

so again that's, not a good "opportunity to repent" when there are manuals 1000s of years older than yours and far more logical.

Name me one.

try Buddhism

No, thanks.

Your scientists programmed into Guatama the desire to abandon his family and leave his child without a father.

Our "manuals" here in this Christian-founded nation would have him arrested.

But your scientists put this guy on a hit list, didn't they?

"If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him."

as for if a sim corrupted itself, it would be a flaw in the programming and in turn the programmer. perfect does not breed imperfection unless that itself is its goal.

How many more "flaws" are going to show up until the program is scrubbed?

Lucifer and in turn angelum specially Seraphim are stated to be Perfect Beings. then how did the second only to God become corrupted?

By freewill ... not by programming, and not by a program flaw.

if your God creates everything than something cant create itself can it?

That is correct.

but Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things." makes far more sense.

No argument there.

[technicality] "Lord" needs to be in all caps. It's an OT reference to Jesus Christ. [/technicality]

then if that was the creator's intention. then for you to speak of evil while worshiping the supposed source of Good and Evil. as the tree of knowledge that eve and Adam ate from was the knowledge of Good and Evil. a piece of Gods omniscience. than its a bit of a Hypocricy to call the runners of a simulation as vile

You don't understand though.

The evil that God is talking about here is war, famine, drought, pestilence, and other things.

Not moral evil.

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

Where's your manual?

Name me one.

No, thanks.

Your scientists programmed into Guatama the desire to abandon his family and leave his child without a father.

Our "manuals" here in this Christian-founded nation would have him arrested.

But your scientists put this guy on a hit list, didn't they?

"If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him."

How many more "flaws" are going to show up until the program is scrubbed?

By freewill ... not by programming, and not by a program flaw.

That is correct.

No argument there.

[technicality] "Lord" needs to be in all caps. It's an OT reference to Jesus Christ. [/technicality]

You don't understand though.

The evil that God is talking about here is war, famine, drought, pestilence, and other things.

Not moral evil.

he causes such things to quote the bible again other translations of that verse come out as I form light and create darkness, I make success and create disaster; I am the Lord, who does all these things.

he is shown many times causing famine and pestilence. the four horsemen which are released by breaking the seals. one of them is famine. furthermore, if he does not create it then who? Lucifer? Lucifer was created by God and only has as much power as God allows and in turn, is then just a part of God.

an omniscient and omnipotent being has full control over everything. nothing happens unless it allows it and if it allows it than it is thereby caused by it.

so you cant have a scapegoat if your deity is supreme.

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

Where's your manual?

Name me one.

No, thanks.

Your scientists programmed into Guatama the desire to abandon his family and leave his child without a father.

Our "manuals" here in this Christian-founded nation would have him arrested.

But your scientists put this guy on a hit list, didn't they?

"If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him."

How many more "flaws" are going to show up until the program is scrubbed?

By freewill ... not by programming, and not by a program flaw.

That is correct.

No argument there.

[technicality] "Lord" needs to be in all caps. It's an OT reference to Jesus Christ. [/technicality]

You don't understand though.

The evil that God is talking about here is war, famine, drought, pestilence, and other things.

Not moral evil.

or in an example. "if I create a video game. let's say an RPG. and I create an antagonist to face off against me. no matter what that antagonist does it can never beat me. I created it and am God over this video game. anything that, that antagonist does is thereby a cause of me. as I created and programmed it. nothing exists within the program that I do not allow. and if there is something there I did not cause or create it is a glitch. but I am omnipotent so there is nothing I cant fix. and omniscient so I would of know the glitch to happen before I even wrote the first word of code. so no matter what i do or what happens its all directed from me"

That is what you propose your God to be. omnipotent. omnipresent. if it is both those things than satan is nothing but a prosecutor working for God whether it knows it or not. which if it is the second most powerful being in existence and worked right under God. it knows more about God than you. in which case why would it rebel or resist knowing nothing it does will ever work as God knows what he is going to do before he does it?

such an illogical plot would be completely torn apart by movie critics. it lacks logic, sense, or evidence therefor I reject it.

 

[AV1611VET]

also "don't eat from this tree" you can't blame someone who has no concept of right or wrong for doing something wrong.

You can, if you created that person mature and ready for marriage and produce a family.

to blame eve she would already have to have the knowledge the apple gave to understand not to eat the apple.

Apple aside (I believe it was manna, myself), why would she have to have knowledge to understand not to eat it?

I don't understand LSD or mustard gas.

All I believe is that scientists created them for college students and Jews respectively.

But I know enough to stay away from it.

it's paradoxical.

Only if you think it's a paradox.

why place the tree there in the first place and create a tempter if your goal was not to have them eat it?

1. That tree was probably put there to feed angels coming to, and leaving, the earth. Lucifer was in charge of providing music during this dining period.

2. God didn't create a "tempter".

James 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

an omniscient being does not run tests as he knows the outcome.

I don't think your programmers ran enough tests ... do you?

your God is not omniscient

Actually ... yes He is.

 

[AV1611VET]

an omniscient and omnipotent being has full control over everything.

Yes, but He may not exercise that control for the purpose of allowing freewill to exist.

nothing happens unless it allows it and if it allows it than it is thereby caused by it.

So if your parents buy you a car, are they responsible if you get drunk and kill someone?

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

Where's your manual?

Name me one.

No, thanks.

Your scientists programmed into Guatama the desire to abandon his family and leave his child without a father.

Our "manuals" here in this Christian-founded nation would have him arrested.

But your scientists put this guy on a hit list, didn't they?

"If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him."

How many more "flaws" are going to show up until the program is scrubbed?

By freewill ... not by programming, and not by a program flaw.

That is correct.

No argument there.

[technicality] "Lord" needs to be in all caps. It's an OT reference to Jesus Christ. [/technicality]

You don't understand though.

The evil that God is talking about here is war, famine, drought, pestilence, and other things.

Not moral evil.

Now a more logical premise.

"I create a simulation granting it basic natural laws. simple laws. gravity. time. etc. and allow it to run and build upon itself in complexity. for whatever reason maybe im bored. through those natural law's and the movement, it creates life. bound by programming. starts out a single-celled organism made of a chemical compound soup and it takes energy from the sun and converts it to survive. than overtime it multiplies and evolves into double celled organisms and greater than that as it builds up more energy and connects to that of other cells and takes in different material and I get basic plant life. then simply repeat similar processes until I get something of high intelligence and complexity. however, i have not once interacted with this simulation, after all, i don't need to everything is building off the laws I set in motion."

sounds quite more rational to me. and has far more libraries of evidence as we already know enough about the laws of the universe to run basic simulations ourselves. you only need a few basic laws for them to create new ones and more complex ones.

furthermore, we already know evolution is true we can affect it ourselves in other animals with shorter lifespans and higher birth rate. like fruit flies. wolves themselves we caused to evolve into dogs which dogs are their own species.

so since life can naturally progress based on that it's more logical that a supreme being simply sets up laws like domino's and lets them progress and run on there own without having to use any magic to turn a rib into women or turn men from dirt. you simply put law's in place and a natural hierarchy and creature will come along that has higher cognitive thinking

furthermore, if this being had rules they wanted to instill in us it would be as simple as having them in the programming in the first place. the only rules we seem to have is to eat so we don't die. sleep. and reproduce. and try to stay alive as long as possible and keep our offspring and those who benefit us alive. that's about it. everything else is subjective and different to each person.

so logically the only objective law's that this creator would wish for us to follow is that which are programmed into us and bind the universe together. though the laws of physics and such are unbreakable so they are not really law's but parameters.

all of that seems far more likely and stable than that which your book proposes

 

[AV1611VET]

That is what you propose your God to be. omnipotent. omnipresent. if it is both those things than satan is nothing but a prosecutor working for God whether it knows it or not.

God did not create Satan; God created Lucifer.

If you get in trouble, it is not because your parents created you that way.

which if it is the second most powerful being in existence and worked right under God. it knows more about God than you. in which case why would it rebel or resist knowing nothing it does will ever work as God knows what he is going to do before he does it?

Because it [sic] believes that if it [sic] can get one little prophecy to fail, then God fails.

And we know that scientists and educatees today swear by the fact that some ... if not most ... if not all of God's prophecies have failed.

such an illogical plot would be completely torn apart by movie critics. it lacks logic, sense, or evidence therefor I reject it.

Then you don't know how scientists think, do you?

If that plot was torn apart by movie critics, scientists would step in and put it back together.

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

God did not create Satan; God created Lucifer.

If you get in trouble, it is not because your parents created you that way.

Because it [sic] believes that if it [sic] can get one little prophecy to fail, then God fails.

And we know that scientists and educatees today swear by the fact that some ... if not most ... if not all of God's prophecies have failed.

Then you don't know how scientists think, do you?

If that plot was torn apart by movie critics, scientists would step in and put it back together.

did satan create himself? does he bare the demiurge of creation? maybe satan is the one worth worshiping if he can do Gods work of creation? well besides the fact Satan is a title bearing many figures in the bible. Lucifer is normally connected and synonymous. so if in your word satan is Lucifer or satan was lucifer it's still made by God. unless other beings are powerful enough to create things from nothing too.

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

God did not create Satan; God created Lucifer.

If you get in trouble, it is not because your parents created you that way.

Because it [sic] believes that if it [sic] can get one little prophecy to fail, then God fails.

And we know that scientists and educatees today swear by the fact that some ... if not most ... if not all of God's prophecies have failed.

Then you don't know how scientists think, do you?

If that plot was torn apart by movie critics, scientists would step in and put it back together.

"Because it [sic] believes that if it [sic] can get one little prophecy to fail, then God fails.

And we know that scientists and educatees today swear by the fact that some ... if not most ... if not all of God's prophecies have failed"

Omnipotent beings, Omniscient beings. Omnipresent beings. Don't fail. if A prophecy of God can fail he either determined it to fail or he is not Omni anything.

simply logic

 

[Zed Aliz Zed]

God did not create Satan; God created Lucifer.

If you get in trouble, it is not because your parents created you that way.

Because it [sic] believes that if it [sic] can get one little prophecy to fail, then God fails.

And we know that scientists and educatees today swear by the fact that some ... if not most ... if not all of God's prophecies have failed.

Then you don't know how scientists think, do you?

If that plot was torn apart by movie critics, scientists would step in and put it back together.

"Then you don't know how scientists think, do you?

If that plot was torn apart by movie critics, scientists would step in and put it back together."

scientists don't proclaim the existence of God. they measure the evidence and make educated theories backed by pounds of evidence on which they stake a position. if new evidence comes along they forsake their position for a new one. such is the scientific process.

inherently I am no scientist I am a philosopher. but I do give scientists large credence and stake my own positions based on evidence and reason.