• balderdash@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    You’re assuming belief in the Abrahamic God to make your argument easier. But not all theists subscribe to such a position. And belief in a disinterested god who created the universe seems just as plausible as believing in a disinterested programmer who wrote a simulation.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I think their point is belief versus theory. One requires faith, the other thought.

      It’s why it’s simulation theory and not Simulationism. People acknowledge it, but don’t follow it, nor believe it, since belief requires clearing unknown gaps with leaps of faith to reach an unknown destination. Theory seeks answers of the unknown with “could be this, could not be this” whereas belief is “it be this”.

      This always points back to the paradox which all divinity falls into. The moment we know of a god to be real, it is old news and no longer divine. The next scientific step is “What made it so?” and moves right along to bigger things whether theists are on board or not.

      Of the few words ending with -ism and -ist in science or theory, none have belief or faith.

      Even the most apparent, such as the Big Bang Theory, are still marked a theory, after all. Believing in them—convinction without 100% knowledge—is foolish and closes doors of what may actually be truth.

    • jimbo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      What an amazing belief. We believe that a something we know nothing about maybe did something that we have no evidence for.

    • Zoolander@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’m not assuming anything. The image shown in the OP is an image of the god of Abraham and the initial premise is wrong. If there was a sizeable population of theists who believed in a disinterested god, we’d have somewhere to start a discussion.

      • balderdash@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I don’t know what you’d consider “sizable” but a lot of people these days are spiritual without being religious. Which is unsurprising. Atheism/agnosticism are on the rise, so it makes sense that people who believe in a god but don’t subscribe to a particular religion are also on the rise.

        • Zoolander@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          People who believe in a god but aren’t part of a religion would have to dictate the parameters for their god in order for it to be meaningful in any way. As stated before, the OP didn’t make the initial idea that nebulous. They were pretty specific.

    • cannache@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      God got bored lol. Yeah nah I’m spiritual, but I’m not much a of a theist.

      I just trust that many that don’t believe in a higher power also often believe that they’re very important and therefore “above”. Essentially most old school religion is like a dam that withholds personal narcissism from overtaking society.