How an obscure cult grew to become the dominant religion of the Western world

Re:How an obscure cult grew to become the dominant religion ... by hoke_t on Monday February 06, 2017 @10:28PM (#13586744)

How is this "surely" the simplest answer? And if it is, since when is the simplest answer the true one?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How an obscure cult grew to become the dominant religion ... by flukus on Monday February 06, 2017 @10:54PM (#13586871)

> How is this "surely" the simplest answer? And if it is, since when is the simplest answer the true one?

Because it doesn't involve the assumption that an all powerful being exists.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How an obscure cult grew to become the dominant religion ... by DougN7 on Monday February 06, 2017 @11:13PM (#13586950)

So you surely believe the idea we're living in a simulation of some sort is complete bunk?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How an obscure cult grew to become the dominant religion ... by flukus on Monday February 06, 2017 @11:18PM (#13586972)

For now, yes. Neither theory explains anything and both involve the invention of a higher order and have the same prime mover problem.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How an obscure cult grew to become the dominant religion ... by learc83 on Tuesday February 07, 2017 @12:31AM (#13587320)

Any attempt to explain the existence of the universe has a prime mover problem. Either way causality has either been violated, or causality is meaningless outside the confines of the universe.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How an obscure cult grew to become the dominant religion ... by redial on Tuesday February 07, 2017 @02:23AM (#13587753)

And none have been proven, so why force it?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How an obscure cult grew to become the dominant religion ... by learc83 on Tuesday February 07, 2017 @01:26PM (#13591387)

None will ever be proven. Any attempts to describe what happened before the first moments of the universe are inherently religion or philosophy not science.

[ Parent | on HN ]