shropshire 0 #26 June 7, 2007 Clearly it was created by some mythical creature that suddenly leapt into existence... makes perfect sense. QuoteOnce you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HeadCone 0 #27 June 7, 2007 QuoteClearly it was created by some mythical creature that suddenly leapt into existence... makes perfect sense. As opposed to leaping into existence for no particular reason? Is it or is it not possible for something to either have always existed or come into existence out of nothing?-- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,500 #28 June 7, 2007 QuoteIs the origin of God any less defensible that the origin of the Universe or the Big Bang? Yes. For a start, as of yet we have no evidence that there even is a god, so discussion of its origin seems a little premature.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
trigger 0 #29 June 7, 2007 I'm agnostic......i believe in god in a spiritual sense not material. Open your mind and allow yourself to see..CHOP WOOD COLLECT WATER. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
willard 0 #30 June 7, 2007 QuoteQuoteIs the origin of God any less defensible that the origin of the Universe or the Big Bang? This is a point that's a problem for both theists and atheists. Is it or is it not possible for something to either have always existed or come into existence out of nothing? --Head If it is possible for God to have always been, then why not the stuff that makes up the universe? If it is possible for God to have suddenly popped up from nothing, then why not the stuff that makes up the universe? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HeadCone 0 #31 June 7, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteIs the origin of God any less defensible that the origin of the Universe or the Big Bang? This is a point that's a problem for both theists and atheists. Is it or is it not possible for something to either have always existed or come into existence out of nothing? --Head If it is possible for God to have always been, then why not the stuff that makes up the universe? If it is possible for God to have suddenly popped up from nothing, then why not the stuff that makes up the universe? Those are great questions for theists. Since the topic of discuss is the origin of God, these are great questions for atheists: If it is possible for the stuff that makes up the universe to have always been, then why not God? If it is possible for the stuff that makes up the universe to have suddenly popped up from nothing, then why not God? --Head-- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #32 June 7, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote Is the origin of God any less defensible that the origin of the Universe or the Big Bang? This is a point that's a problem for both theists and atheists. Is it or is it not possible for something to either have always existed or come into existence out of nothing? --Head If it is possible for God to have always been, then why not the stuff that makes up the universe? If it is possible for God to have suddenly popped up from nothing, then why not the stuff that makes up the universe? Those are great questions for theists. Since the topic of discuss is the origin of God, these are great questions for atheists: If it is possible for the stuff that makes up the universe to have always been, then why not God? If it is possible for the stuff that makes up the universe to have suddenly popped up from nothing, then why not God? --Head A conundrum indeed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
n23x 0 #33 June 7, 2007 Quote Quote quite a bit, I'd say. .jim how so? As limited as it may be (or perceived to be ), good quantitative and qualitative data exists which leads us to concepts about the origin of the universe. There isn't much (or any, as far as I'm concerned) real data which says "god exists". If the agency I do research for (or a client I consult for) asks me why I made a specific selection, they want realistic, reliable, repeatable data to justify that choice. Not an "I think so, just because". Back to the Norse v. Science cartoon I posted near the top. What is the real difference between that and christian creationism? What makes one "more right" than the other? Why are there so many widely varying concepts of religious creationism, and yet a relatively consistant concept from the world of science? Just a couple of thoughts. .jim"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 5 #34 June 7, 2007 From a box of Crackerjacks?Quantum evolutionists/theorists have some interesting ideas on the subject of god, and allows for "divinity" in the process. Man invented god, even if god happens to be actual/real. I'm no scientist by any stretch, but reading books such as "Quantum Evolution" by Johnjoe McFadden is incredibly enlightening. Truly gives meaning to the word "Enthus" or "God within." The concept of the evolution of consciousness leads one to a possible conclusion that "we are god." If nothing else, it's the most logical presentation I've read. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,500 #35 June 7, 2007 QuoteThose are great questions for theists. Since the topic of discuss is the origin of God, these are great questions for atheists: If it is possible for the stuff that makes up the universe to have always been, then why not God? If it is possible for the stuff that makes up the universe to have suddenly popped up from nothing, then why not God? Again, we know that matter and energy exist. They must either have always been in existence, or at some point came into existence. We have no evidence that god exists, so right there all theories of how he came to exist become a lot less likely. Secondly, the theist argument is that the universe is too complex for it to have come into existence (or always existed) from nothing. An intelligent god capable of creating the universe is surely more sophisticated than the universe itself. Therefore, from the theist point of view, it is less likely to have come into existence itself.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #36 June 7, 2007 Quote A conundrum indeed. I certainly appreciate it as one, but how people can claim that the situation becomes more likely or in any way simpler with the addition of an intermediate step involving something as nebulous as a god between eternity and existence is equally as puzzling to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
willard 0 #37 June 7, 2007 QuoteQuoteThose are great questions for theists. Since the topic of discuss is the origin of God, these are great questions for atheists: If it is possible for the stuff that makes up the universe to have always been, then why not God? If it is possible for the stuff that makes up the universe to have suddenly popped up from nothing, then why not God? Again, we know that matter and energy exist. They must either have always been in existence, or at some point came into existence. We have no evidence that god exists, so right there all theories of how he came to exist become a lot less likely. Secondly, the theist argument is that the universe is too complex for it to have come into existence (or always existed) from nothing. An intelligent god capable of creating the universe is surely more sophisticated than the universe itself. Therefore, from the theist point of view, it is less likely to have come into existence itself. That's kind of what I think. Of the two...an intelligent being capable of creating other intelligent beings (God) or a scattered jumble of stuff...which is most likely to spontaneously arrive? We have proof that one of them exists, but not the other (unless one takes a gathering of stories as solid evidence). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #38 June 7, 2007 <> Is it possible for a complex Inteligent, life-creating thing to have existed for ever or be created from nothing - Nope. Is it possible for stuff (The elements) to seemingly come into existance from nothing (i.e the Big Bang) - then the Cone Heads in physics labs theorise that it is (I'm no where near smart enough to discount them but I'm also no where near dumb enough to believe in mystic spontaneously existing beasties, wot created everything). One theory is way more believable (to me) than the other. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #39 June 7, 2007 Quote<> Is it possible for a complex Inteligent, life-creating thing to have existed for ever or be created from nothing - Nope. Is it possible for stuff (The elements) to seemingly come into existance from nothing (i.e the Big Bang) - then the Cone Heads in physics labs theorise that it is (I'm no where near smart enough to discount them but I'm also no where near dumb enough to believe in mystic spontaneously existing beasties, wot created everything). One theory is way more believable (to me) than the other. Not only is it possible, it is required by quantum mechanics that stuff comes into existence from nothing. Perhaps Wernher Heisenberg is God.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HeadCone 0 #40 June 7, 2007 QuoteAgain, we know that matter and energy exist. They must either have always been in existence, or at some point came into existence. We have no evidence that god exists, so right there all theories of how he came to exist become a lot less likely. Ok, so it’s a matter of likelihood. I believe I understand where you’re coming from. That makes sense to me. However, I’m not sure that’s really the case or how much that even matters, but I’ll have to ponder it awhile before giving a better reply. QuoteSecondly, the theist argument is that the universe is too complex for it to have come into existence (or always existed) from nothing. An intelligent god capable of creating the universe is surely more sophisticated than the universe itself. Therefore, from the theist point of view, it is less likely to have come into existence itself. This would be the next conundrum. If a complex/sophisticated ordering of matter can have spontaneous or eternal existence, why not God and vice versa. The reason I entered into this thread is three-fold. One was to point out the problem of saying that one thing can have spontaneous/eternal existence while another can’t. Another is that it had potential to give me a better understanding as to why some atheists adamantly state “there is no god”. It has done that and I appreciate the civil replies. Thank you. The third is to make the comment that it’s not silly or crazy to believe that God exists. It’s just a different way of looking at things. I know there are theists out there that push their religion hard and end up being offensive and insulting, but it works both ways. Some, certainly not all, atheists make comments like “magic man in the sky” (and they get worse) which are also offensive and insulting. --Head-- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,500 #41 June 7, 2007 QuoteThis would be the next conundrum. If a complex/sophisticated ordering of matter can have spontaneous or eternal existence, why not God and vice versa. The reason I entered into this thread is three-fold. One was to point out the problem of saying that one thing can have spontaneous/eternal existence while another can’t. The question how did the universe come to exist is often used by theists as one of the strongest evidences of God's existence. Pointing out that the spontaneous existence of god is even more problematic than the spontaneous existence of the universe removes a very large prop from under theist arguments.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #42 June 7, 2007 What a crock....just because we cannot explain the 'unexplained' does not justify the existence of a God, - as they said in Men in Black - 500 years ago, EVERYONE knew the earth was flat..... Well we explained that away. And the fact that we cannot comprehend 'infinity' and the 'end of the universe' also does not mean that some God somewhere exists. The Bible says that time will be replaced by eternity? They are not even the same thing. Time exists WITHIN eternity. This we already know. QuoteBecause we live in the dimension of time, logic and reason demand that everything must have a beginning and an end. Bullshit. I do not, for one, 'demand' that everything has a beginning and end. Quite frankly I am totally willing to accept that the universe never had a beginning or an end, it will just continually change form. I know for a fact that I will have a beginning and an end, but not that everything else will.... 'faith' - you said it. it is all about faith,. but just because you believe it does not make it so. I will stick with physics, math and biology, and someday, not far from now, we will know a lot more about everything around us. Will we explain it all? Never. Does that mean that some 'magic' created it? not a chance.... Have your faith if you like - I will stick to good old common sense based on what is actually going on around me. (and backing it up with solid and proven science. TK Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #43 June 7, 2007 "If God is so almighty powerful, can He make a rock so big that he himself cannot lift it?" - George Carlin TK Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 5 #44 June 8, 2007 QuoteQuote<> Is it possible for a complex Inteligent, life-creating thing to have existed for ever or be created from nothing - Nope. Is it possible for stuff (The elements) to seemingly come into existance from nothing (i.e the Big Bang) - then the Cone Heads in physics labs theorise that it is (I'm no where near smart enough to discount them but I'm also no where near dumb enough to believe in mystic spontaneously existing beasties, wot created everything). One theory is way more believable (to me) than the other. Not only is it possible, it is required by quantum mechanics that stuff comes into existence from nothing. Perhaps Wernher Heisenberg is God. Umm...wouldn't it more be that Heisenberg discovered god? I'm uncertain. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #45 June 8, 2007 God is not a prerequisite of quantum mechanics. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #46 June 8, 2007 Everyone knows that God is an Englishman!When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #47 June 8, 2007 Everyone knows that God is an EnglishWoman! My wife just fixed it for ya (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #48 June 8, 2007 QuotePointing out that the spontaneous existence of god is even more problematic than the spontaneous existence of the universe removes a very large prop from under theist arguments. The complexity and long odds of either makes it difficult to use your preferred belief to offset the other. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #49 June 8, 2007 QuoteQuotePointing out that the spontaneous existence of god is even more problematic than the spontaneous existence of the universe removes a very large prop from under theist arguments. The complexity and long odds of either makes it difficult to use your preferred belief to offset the other. Not at all, we just choose the simplest scenario. The Universe exists, the complexity within it did not exist at the outset but rather it emerged through known physical processes. So we can choose to explain the universe as a spontaneous emergence of space, time, energy and matter and the rest followed through known and measurable physical processes (and in fact such spontaneous random occurrences are explained to a degree by one interpretation of quantum physics). Or you can attempt to explain a VASTLY less probable existence of an omnipotent being in a robe and a big white beard who has unlimited physical abilities that confound mere physical explanation (sweeping the scores of other inexplicable deities under the carpet for now), who did it all and still pops round to meddle in his unfinished business. Go ahead, take your pick. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 5 #50 June 8, 2007 QuoteGod is not a prerequisite of quantum mechanics. Did I suggest god was a prerequisit of quantum mechanics? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
