Why is it only reasonable to subject ourselves to the one who created the inanimate forces and objects in the universe, and will our denying the creator`s existence free us from subjection to the other`s and dependence upon someone!
2007-07-18 06:17:34 · 6 answers · asked by roberth m 5 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
I think the answer to this depends on the intended meaning of the word "True" attached to freedom in your question. If it's refering to the laws of nature as a basis of truth, then the answer is...that's simply from where the view is taken as a basis for freedom.
But perhaps more lies beneath? If so, then to deny it (Him) as the ultimate truth will not free or spare one from subjection to the final judgement.
2007-07-22 17:37:58 · answer #1 · answered by M O R P H E U S 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Unfathomable question--"why"--yes. But let us say, that "change" is the only thing that really last. From the very beginning, the physical laws divided the four forces: (1 weak atomic force, (2 strong atomic force,(3 force due to gravity (4 electro-magnetic radiation force. These were as one about 13.7 billion years ago then BIG BANG(Planck Time=10 to the minus 43 seconds ago). Since then, everything within perceivable Hubble, Red Shift, curved space proved by Einstein when he calculated the Perihelion of planet Mercury and the rest is moving entropy out land, the extent to which the stars we see in telescopes could have burned out thousands of years ago they are so far away. But that is the existence which frees us, and the only Rub that tickles.
2007-07-25 20:07:21 · answer #2 · answered by Ke Xu Long 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is unreasonable to concern yourself with things beyond your power to change except insofar as to determine that such things are, in fact, beyond your power to change.
I have seen many people deny many and even all gods. I have likewise seen many people claim that acknowledging one or another god would have a supernatural effect. But I have yet to see someone actually rebuke the laws of nature except within the bounds of their own minds. Nor have any of my efforts in this regard proven any more successful.
It seems reasonable, therefore, to conclude that belief or disbelief alone is not enough to effect a change in the external world. If you think you can do better, I'd like to see it.
2007-07-19 16:30:12 · answer #3 · answered by Doctor Why 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
it has to exist as something,if it doesnt be something,then it will be another thing which means there MUST be a thing ,it is just the question of How and What.So sometimes there is a reason for it and sometimes there is not. because Anything could be possible in a INFINITE universe.
2007-07-26 11:11:58 · answer #4 · answered by Adam K 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's only reasonable as a logical proposition if you lift yourself out of the abysmal ignorance of the subject matter you've submerged yourself in, educated yourself on the matter, and feel ashamed for having so blatantly confessed your profound dearth of knowledge in the form of a question.
Once that's done something reasonable might be formulated as a penance.
2007-07-18 14:13:33 · answer #5 · answered by Jack P 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
all I know is that I got wings
2007-07-25 01:37:26 · answer #6 · answered by @NGEL B@BY 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋