The concept that matter is composed of discrete units and cannot be divided into arbitrarily tiny quantities has been around for millennia, but these ideas were founded in abstract, philosophical reasoning rather than experimentation and empirical observation. The nature of atoms in philosophy varied considerably over time and between cultures and schools, and often had spiritual elements. Nevertheless, the basic idea of the atom was adopted by scientists thousands of years later because it elegantly explained new discoveries in the field of chemistry The earliest references to the concept of atoms date back to ancient India in the 6th century BCE.
The fact remains that his mind was OPEN to the possibility that there is a higher power. One can be dogmatic towards religion and still be OPEN to the possibility of a higher power.
You've offered not one piece of rational information or counter evidence to alter the obvious mistake you've made, after cutting & pasting Max Planckâs words. You have no clue, or would have realized ,it backfired in your face. By what you showed Planck said himself, he would not entertain anything that "demands for unquestioning belief." You know ..like religion does but science never. So all you can come up with is angry insult and derails. You are clearly very bitter and sound very unhappy about it all. Blind adherence to religion can choke that way. Max Planck certainly new a thing or two about that. You've shown you don't. Good luck with it.
I can post my test. You've demonstrated perfectly well that you can't grasp any understanding of what it is. You really will need to do that first off.
Exactly. That's why only the strongest of atheist assert that there is no god. The rest conclude that so far, all the asserted gods do not exist given the lack of evidence for their existence. And the newly asserted gods or higher powers so far lack evidence of their existence also other than coincidental or improper correlation. Hey, the concept of a higher power that you subscribe to might actually exist. But you yourself haven't defined it nor how it interacts in the material world. So as far as anyone is concerned (besides yourself) it doesn't exist. All the other religions will either assume that you are referring to their god or that you're referring to something else but are wrong about your assumption. Like I said before, you are arguing on two fronts: againist atheism and established theism.
However, as I stated before, the ideas came from first observing the material world, not the other way around. EVERYTHING is first born of observation. Concept of Gods? In all probability came first from observing phenomena and nature but being unable to define it and its cause. It wasn't the other way around in which you are trying to posit. It didn't simply start "in the mind." Something has to prompt the thought to begin with. There are things which don't even cross our minds today that are sure to cross our minds in the future. But those thoughts will come from first observing something we hadn't observed before. We don't conjure things up out of thin air lest they be undefinable even to ourselves. Is it any wonder why all gods to date are anthropomorphic of ourselves or things in nature?
The very idea that love is wanting of something it cannot be is what gives rise to this world as a fantasy in the Son's mind. Thanks to this fantasy, the Son now has the impossible: unlimited love AND...drumroll please...limited love! The invariable predicament is internal mental conflict. Both cannot be true, so the attempt to have both is untrue...resulting in the experience of only the untrue. This leaves us with Gilbert...on the other hand. Gilbert's world is logical indeed. And so are the son's of Gilbert. But they are not exactly sane sons. Jesus