184 réponses à ce sujet

[HoonDing]

Lord_Valandil wrote...

And the fourth...that's the ender of Hope. The one who feds on our tears and uses our grief to power his coffee machine. The true Maker, so to speak.

[Eternal Phoenix]

DarthCaine wrote...

I doubt he even exists. Just like every religion, the Chantry has zero proof

Moses PWNS you even in death:

http://www.telegraph...e-happened.html


Sorry mate but that just had to be said. Religion can and does sometimes have much proof just like in DA, the Chantry has proof of Andrasta or whatever her name is. After all, you found her urn and the immortal guardian that guarded it. You are permitted to hate at this. I just posted this to correct you. If anything has zero proof, that would be Atheism. 

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 07 octobre 2010 - 03:55 .

[Lord_Valandil]

Elton John is dead wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

I doubt he even exists. Just like every religion, the Chantry has zero proof

Moses PWNS you even in death:

http://www.telegraph...e-happened.html


Sorry mate but that just had to be said. You are permitted to hate at this. 

Wow. That was kind of unexpected.

[Dileos]

Elton John is dead wrote...


Moses PWNS you even in death:

http://www.telegraph...e-happened.html


Sorry mate but that just had to be said. Religion can and does sometimes have much proof just like in DA, the Chantry has proof of Andrasta or whatever her name is. After all, you found her urn and the immortal guardian that guarded it. You are permitted to hate at this. I just posted this to correct you. If anything has zero proof, that would be Atheism. 

Theory = proof now?  And as the article says...you would need 60-70mph winds blowing in the same direction for 12 hours straight.

...have you ever been outside during a tropical storm or a hurricane?

Anyway, the Chantry(like the church) has ZERO proof of anything. Take Ohgren with you next time you do the quest. Lyrium content in the walls is high as hell for some reason and is causing anomalies inside the Urns Chamber. Its all magical, not divine.

Modifié par Dileos, 07 octobre 2010 - 04:07 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

Actually, that was a reply from someone saying that religions (chantry in DA included) have zero proof. That is some proof. Scientists say that it could have indeed happened.



"you would need 60-70mph winds blowing in the same direction for 12 hours straight."



Of course. What are you trying to say? Who is to say that God didn't send it? Strangely, The Bible says God sent wind to part the water and now scientists are saying that wind can part water like that as well. Are you denying science?

[Dileos]

Elton John is dead wrote...

Actually, that was a reply from someone saying that religions (chantry in DA included) have zero proof. That is some proof. Scientists say that it could have indeed happened.

"you would need 60-70mph winds blowing in the same direction for 12 hours straight."

Of course. What are you trying to say? Who is to say that God didn't send it? Strangely, The Bible says God sent wind to part the water and now scientists are saying that wind can part water like that as well. Are you denying science?

Wind is something that occurs naturally. Nothing about wind is divine.

They said it was theoretically possible, not that it happened for sure 100%.

Its theoretical, just like God, Evolution, Creation, Aliens, and FTL travel.

[Eternal Phoenix]

 I never said it was divine but you are entitled to your opinion. 

[Sigma Tauri]

Elton John is dead wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

I doubt he even exists. Just like every religion, the Chantry has zero proof

Moses PWNS you even in death:

http://www.telegraph...e-happened.html


Sorry mate but that just had to be said. Religion can and does sometimes have much proof just like in DA, the Chantry has proof of Andrasta or whatever her name is. After all, you found her urn and the immortal guardian that guarded it. You are permitted to hate at this. I just posted this to correct you. If anything has zero proof, that would be Atheism. 

Those scientists are so silly. Why bother investigating an event that was supposed to be a miracle?

[AlexXIV]

monkeycamoran wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

I doubt he even exists. Just like every religion, the Chantry has zero proof

Moses PWNS you even in death:

http://www.telegraph...e-happened.html


Sorry mate but that just had to be said. Religion can and does sometimes have much proof just like in DA, the Chantry has proof of Andrasta or whatever her name is. After all, you found her urn and the immortal guardian that guarded it. You are permitted to hate at this. I just posted this to correct you. If anything has zero proof, that would be Atheism. 

Those scientists are so silly. Why bother investigating an event that was supposed to be a miracle?

They just proved that Moses was an Air Bender.

[Eternal Phoenix]

http://www.facebook....er/212781949952

[AlexXIV]

Elton John is dead wrote...

http://www.facebook....er/212781949952

Well scientists proved it was air that parted the water. So he is an air bender.

[Sigma Tauri]

AlexXIV wrote...
They just proved that Moses was an Air Bender.

Meh. I never cared for that show.

[AlexXIV]

monkeycamoran wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
They just proved that Moses was an Air Bender.

Meh. I never cared for that show.

Your loss. I watched it with my niece and found it be suited not only for kids.

[Sigma Tauri]

AlexXIV wrote...

monkeycamoran wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
They just proved that Moses was an Air Bender.

Meh. I never cared for that show.

Your loss. I watched it with my niece and found it be suited not only for kids.

I can live with the loss. I think I've seen enough cartoons "suited not only for kids" to say I'm probably not missing much.

[Eternal Phoenix]

AlexXIV wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

http://www.facebook....er/212781949952

Well scientists proved it was air that parted the water. So he is an air bender.

No, that would make God the bender of air to be precise. On topic though, we will probably never know how The Maker looks like and if we did one day see Him in the game, I bet He would be like a pure energy. 

monkeycamoran wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

I doubt he even exists. Just like every religion, the Chantry has zero proof

Moses PWNS you even in death:

http://www.telegraph...e-happened.html


Sorry mate but that just had to be said. Religion can and does sometimes have much proof just like in DA, the Chantry has proof of Andrasta or whatever her name is. After all, you found her urn and the immortal guardian that guarded it. You are permitted to hate at this. I just posted this to correct you. If anything has zero proof, that would be Atheism. 

Those scientists are so silly. Why bother investigating an event that was supposed to be a miracle?

They wanted to see if it was possible or not. Turns out that it is possible. 

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 07 octobre 2010 - 06:26 .

[Dileos]

Elton John is dead wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

http://www.facebook....er/212781949952

Well scientists proved it was air that parted the water. So he is an air bender.

No, that would make God the bender of air to be precise. On topic though, we will probably never know how The Maker looks like and if we did one day see Him in the game, I bet He would be like a pure energy. 

A blinding white light would fit the bill perfectly.

But I could see the maker making taking the form of something humble... like a begger. Kind of like the thing where Indiana Jones found the holy grail, a simple carpenters cup.

[Sigma Tauri]

Elton John is dead wrote...

No, that would make God the bender of air to be precise. On topic though, we will probably never know how The Maker looks like and if we did one day see Him in the game, I bet He would be like a pure energy. 

You mean a fuzzy glowing ball of light? No more different than the Maker being the ineffable light.

Elton John is dead wrote...

They wanted to see if it was possible or not. Turns out that it is possible. 

Who cares if science says it's possible? The definition of miracle is that something that's not possible is made possible.

[Eternal Phoenix]

Dileos wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

http://www.facebook....er/212781949952

Well scientists proved it was air that parted the water. So he is an air bender.

No, that would make God the bender of air to be precise. On topic though, we will probably never know how The Maker looks like and if we did one day see Him in the game, I bet He would be like a pure energy. 

A blinding white light would fit the bill perfectly.

But I could see the maker making taking the form of something humble... like a begger. Kind of like the thing where Indiana Jones found the holy grail, a simple carpenters cup. 

That would be a way to have The Maker in the game. An old man predicts your future and does other miraculous stuff. Yet it is not implied he is The Maker just like it is up for debate whether The Maker is like Justice or not for example.

monkeycamoran wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

No, that would make God the bender of air to be precise. On topic though, we will probably never know how The Maker looks like and if we did one day see Him in the game, I bet He would be like a pure energy. 

You mean a fuzzy glowing ball of light? No more different than the Maker being the ineffable light.

Elton John is dead wrote...

They wanted to see if it was possible or not. Turns out that it is possible. 

Who cares if science says it's possible? The definition of miracle is that something that's not possible is made possible.

I care? [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wondering.png[/smilie] And so do the people who read the story. It was something that was up for debate for many years. 


P.S

Wow, my topic gained 163 replies in 5 hours. Someone became obsessed! 

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 07 octobre 2010 - 06:35 .

[Sigma Tauri]

Elton John is dead wrote...

I care? [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wondering.png[/smilie] And so do the people who read the story. It was something that was up for debate for many years. 

Debate among whom? Biblical historians?

Why do people need to use science to investigate the plausibility of miracles? The endeavor's absolutely profane. Are the religious that insecure in their beliefs that they would nit-pick potential evidence just to assure themselves their worldview is true?

Modifié par monkeycamoran, 07 octobre 2010 - 06:46 .

[Lotto]

god looks like me

[Eternal Phoenix]

 No monkeycamoran. Those that believe in God (theists, not Christians) may want evidence that The Bible is true. You do know that you can believe in God and not The Bible? I care about the article because I wished more people saw it. People like you say that everything that has happened in The Bible is impossible, that proves otherwise. 

"In the past thirty five years, scientists have been stunned to discover that the universe is finely tuned to an incomprehensible precision to support life. For many scientist, this points in a very compelling way toward the existence of an Intelligent Designer. Here are some of the data gathered by scientists, both Christians and non-Christians, that point toward complexity and orderedness at the beginning of the universe: Stephen Hawkins has calculated that if the rate of the universe's expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have collapsed into a fireball. British physicist P.C.W. Davies has concluded that the odds against the initial conditions being suitable for the formation of stars, which are necessary for planets and thus life, is a one followed by at least a thousand billion billion zeros. Davies also estimated that if the strength of gravity were changed by only one part in 10^100, life could never have developed. For comparison, there are only 10^80 atoms in the entire known universe. There are about fifty constants and quantities. For example, the amount of usable energy in the universe, the difference in mass between protons and neutrons, the proportion of matter to antimatter. That must be balanced to a mathematically infinitesimal degree for any life to be possible. For organic life to exist, the fundamental regularities and constants of physics must all have values that together fall into an extremely narrow range.

The probability of this perfect calibration happening by chance is so tiny as to be statistically negligible. Collins puts it well: "When you look from the perspective of a scientist at the universe, it looks as if it knew we were coming. There are fifteen constants...that have precise values. If any of those constants was off by even one part in a million, or in some cases, by one part in a million million, the universe could not have been able to coalesce, there would have been no galaxy, stars, planets or people." Some have said that it is as if there were a large number of dials that all had to be tuned to within extremely narrow limits, and they were. It seem extremely unlikely that this would happen by chance. Stephen Hawkins concludes: "The odds against the Big Bang are enormous. I think there are clearly religious implications." Elsewhere he says, "It would be very difficult to explain why the universe would have begun in just this way except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."

Astronomers are discovering a whole new dimension of evidence that suggests this astounding world was created, in part, so we could have the adventure of exploring it. As astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez and science philosopher Jay Wesley Richards, who wrote the book "The Privileged Planet," elaborates. Total eclipse of the sun, which yield a treasure trove of scientific data, can only be viewed from one place in the solar system where there are intelligent beings to view them. Also, earth's location away from galaxy's center and in the flat plane of the disk provides a particularly privileged vantage point for observing both nearby and distant stars. Another example, earth provides an excellent position to detect the cosmic background radiation, which is critically important because it contains invaluable information about the properties of the universe when it was very young. Because our moon is the right size and distance to stabilize Earth's tilt, it helps preserve the deep snow deposits in our polar regions, from which scientist can determine the history of snowfall, temperatures, winds, and the amount of volcanic dust, methane, and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The findings of scientists that our world appears to be designed for discovery have added a compelling new dimension to the evidence for a Creator. And, frankly, their analysis makes sense. The finely tuned universe can compel only one reasonable conclusion, a supernatural agent must be responsible for it.

Every time I've come across written communication, whether it's a painting on a cave wall or a novel from Amazon.com or the words "I love you" inscribed in the sand on the beach, there has always been someone who did the writing. Even if I can't see the couple who wrote "I love you," you don't assume that the words randomly appeared by chance of the the movement of the waves. Someone of intelligence made that written communication. And what is encoded on the DNA inside every cell of every living creature is purely and simply written information. I'm not saying this because I'm a writer; scientist will tell you this. We use a twenty-six-letter chemical alphabet, whose letters combine in various sequences to form all the instructions needed to guide the functioning of the cell. Each cell in the human body contains more information than in all thirty volumes of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. For me, that's reason enough to believe this isn't the random product of unguided nature, but it's the unmistakable sign of an Intelligent Designer. In 2004, the atheist world was shocked when famed British atheist Antony Flew suddenly announced that he believed in the existence of God. For decades he had heralded the cause of atheism. It was the incredible complexity of DNA that opened his eyes: In a recent interview, Flew stated, "It now seems to me that the findings of more that fifty years of DNA research have provided the materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design."

http://www.associate...hat.html?cat=34

Nearly every scientist agrees that the universe had a beginning. The most widely accepted explanation is the Big Bang theory or some variation of it. The question is: What made the bang? If you hear a noise you look for the cause for a little bang, then doesn't it also make sense that there would be a cause for the big bang? Stephen Hawking states, "Almost everyone now believes that the universe, and time itself, had a beginning at the Big Bang." The philosopher Kai Nielson says, "Suppose you suddenly hear a loud bang... and you ask me, 'What made that bang?' and I reply, 'Nothing, it just happened.' You would not accept that."

Maybe you've heard Christians denying the evidence for the Big Bang theory because they believe it contradicts the Bible's revelation that God created the world. But well-meaning, Bible-believeing Christians have different views on the issue. For example, William Lane Craig believes that the Big Bang is one of the most plausible arguments for God's existence. Adds astrophysicist C.J. Isham: "Perhaps the best argument... that the Big Bang supports theism [belief in God] is the obvious unease with which it is greeted by some atheist physicists." Agnostic astronomer Robert Jastrow admitted that, although details may differ, "the essential element in the astronomical and biblical accounts of Genesis is the same; the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply, at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy." Stephen Hawkins has calculated that if the rate of the universe's expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have collapsed into a fireball. You may have seen the bumper sticker that reads, "The Big Bang Theory: God spoke, and Bang! It happened." It's a little simplistic, but maybe it's not so far off.

"In the beginning there was an explosion," explained Noble Prize-winning physicists Steven Weinberg in his book The First Three Minutes, "which occurred simultaneously everywhere, filling all space from the beginning with every particle of matter rushing part from every other particle." The matter rushing apart, he said, consisted of elementary particles, neutrinos and the other subatomic particles that make up the world. Among those particles were photons, which make up light. "The universe," he said, "was filled with light." Interesting, that's what the Bible says too.

Obstacles to the formation of life on primitive earth would have been extremely challenging. Even a simple protein molecule is so rich in information that the entire history of the universe since the Big Bang wouldn't give you the time you would need to generate that molecule by chance. Even if the first molecule had been much simpler than those today, there's a minimum structure that protein has to have for it to function. You don't get that structure in a protein unless you have at least seventy-five amino acids or so. First, you need the right bonds between the amino acids. Second, amino acids come in right-handed and left-handed versions, and you have to get the left-handed ones. Third, the amino acids must link up in a specified sequence, like letters in a sentence. Run the odds of these things falling into place on their own and you find out that the probabilities in forming a rather short functional protein at random would be one chance in a hundred trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion. That is a ten with one-hundred and twenty-five zeros after it. And that would only be one protein molecule, a fairly simple cell would need between three-hundred and five-hundred protein molecules. When you look at those odds and evidence, you can see why, since the 1960's, scientist have abandoned the idea that chance played any significant role in the origin of DNA or proteins.

There is something about nature that is much more striking and inexplicable than its design. All scientific, inductive reasoning is based on the assumption of the regularity, the laws, of nature, that water will boil tomorrow under the identical conditions of today. The method of induction requires generalizing from observed cases of the same kind. Without inductive reasoning we couldn't learn from experiences, we couldn't use language, we couldn't rely on our memories. Most people find that normal and untroubling. But not philosophers! David and Bertrand Russel, as good secular men, were troubled by the fact that we haven't got the slightest idea of why nature-regularity is happening now, and moreover we haven't the slightest rational justification for assuming it will continue tomorrow. If someone would say, "Well the future has always been like the past," Hume and Russell reply that you are assuming the very thing you are trying to establish. To put it another way, science cannot prove the continued regularity of nature, it can only take it by faith. There have been many scholars in that last decades who argued that modern science arose in its most sustained form out of Christian civilization because of its belief in a all-powerful, personal God who created and sustains an orderly universe. As a proof for the existence of God, the regularity of nature is escapable. I can always say, "We don't know why things are as they are." As a clue for God, however, it is helpful. I can surely say, "We don't know why nature is regular, it just is. That doesn't prove God." If I don't believe in God, not only is this profoundly inexplicable, but I have no basis for believing that nature will go on regularly, but I continue to use inductive reasoning and language. Of course this clue actually doesn't prove God. It is rationally avoidable. However, the cumulative effect is, I think, provocative and potent. The theory that there is a God who made the world accounts for the evidence we see better than the theory that there is no God."

But again, we are losing track of the original subject. We can carry this discussion on via PM. I just must correct people when they say there is zero evidence for God. 

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 07 octobre 2010 - 08:46 .

[Hollingdale]

I personally dont know how the maker looks like, what should I know?

[Sigma Tauri]

Elton John is dead wrote...

 No monkeycamoran. Those that believe in God (theists, not Christians) may want evidence that The Bible is true. You do know that you can believe in God and not The Bible? I care about the article because I wished more people saw it. People like you say that everything that has happened in The Bible is impossible, that proves otherwise. 

-snip-

You misunderstand me, dude. I didn't say what had happened in the Bible is impossible, but the definition of miracle means that what is thought as impossible is made possible. Miracles are usually divine by nature, and usually theistic religion views it as a sign of grace as well as dominance over the natural world. Miracles are thus supernatural and often mythic events, not really made to be subjected to scientific rigor. The very fact that that article is attempting to explain what Moses did was possible is boxing God's power into natural phenomena, contradictory to his omnipotence he displayed in and beyond Exodus.

Even then, I'm not insecure about my beliefs so that God has to proven to be true by science. My belief is different from my understanding of science, and I can keep that separate. I don't have a need to reconcile them. I don't need the idea that the world was made almost perfect because it is inherently nigh impossible (which frankly, while the idea is poetic, not really a rigorous idea and that I find it suspect). I can live with contradiction.

Anyway, if Bioware isn't going to depict the Maker, you might as well see him through a cultural lens. However, there could be an iconoclastic culture in Thedas, or that they believe any depiction of the Maker limits his actual nature. Whatever...

[Eternal Phoenix]

monkeycamoran wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

 No monkeycamoran. Those that believe in God (theists, not Christians) may want evidence that The Bible is true. You do know that you can believe in God and not The Bible? I care about the article because I wished more people saw it. People like you say that everything that has happened in The Bible is impossible, that proves otherwise. 

-snip-

You misunderstand me, dude. I didn't say what had happened in the Bible is impossible, but the definition of miracle means that what is thought as impossible is made possible. Miracles are usually divine by nature, and usually theistic religion views it as a sign of grace as well as dominance over the natural world. Miracles are thus supernatural and often mythic events, not really made to be subjected to scientific rigor. The very fact that that article is attempting to explain what Moses did was possible is boxing God's power into natural phenomena, contradictory to his omnipotence he displayed in and beyond Exodus.

Even then, I'm not insecure about my beliefs so that God has to proven to be true by science. My belief is different from my understanding of science, and I can keep that separate. I don't have a need to reconcile them. I don't need the idea that the world was made almost perfect because it is inherently nigh impossible (which frankly, while the idea is poetic, not really a rigorous idea and that I find it suspect). I can live with contradiction.

Anyway, if Bioware isn't going to depict the Maker, you might as well see him through a cultural lens. However, there could be an iconoclastic culture in Thedas, or that they believe any depiction of the Maker limits his actual nature. Whatever...

They are saying that wind could part the sea. They aren't saying that nature itself without the help of a divine being would ever have the power to blow a straight path through the sea. Regardless, I don't think we will ever get to see the Maker or even hear him for that matter but I have no doubts that there will be more on him in DAII and I would like that. I would also like to know more about The Black City and since The Maker is not there, one day get to explore it later in the DA universe. It's got to happen. 

[Darkshore]

Love the David Gaider as the Maker picture.

Modifié par Darkshore, 07 octobre 2010 - 11:38 .