God, the thread

[ellik]

hmmmmm.... what if it was God that was the center of the universe, the collection of all matter and energy coelesced into one sphere in the center of all nothingness that went boom during the big bang, spreading bits and pieces of himself in every direction creating the growing something that we attempt to label the universe. which would mean that we are each solidified gobs of god goo as it spewed accross nothingness. so essentially, there is no god (anymore) except for what we find within ourselves.

[98v6]

Originally posted by Timbo1969:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 98v6:
]Aha! You have fallen into my trap. Just because you can say that we might not be able to comprehend this being, does that give me a logical reason to believe in him? No, it puts a tiny shadow of doubt into anyone's case who says it can be proven that he does not exist. I don't believe he exists, but i'm not gonna tell anybody else what to think.

Also, contemplate this: If religion is from God, then where did false religions come from? Man, trying to imitate the holy one? Doesn't make sense, becauseif there was one holy religion, everyone who got the idea for religion would follow that one. But, we have lots of different religions, so the best explanation is that it comes from man, and evolved in many different places.

I don't see where I have fallen into any trap. You are trying to apply scientific logic to something that isn't scientific. Religion of any sort is based on faith, not scientific study. The fact that science still has yet to disprove completely Creationism is fact enough to believe. I dare say science will never completely disprove it. It is in the nature of mankind to seek his/her creator. They attempt this in many ways, this is proven world wide. There is one fact that does linger though, we won't know the complete truth til we meet God. </font>[/QUOTE]Creationism has more holes than a block os swiss cheese man. For example, how do we know that the being we call God actually created the universe, if he does exist? How do we know that God isn't evil, and how do we know he is still around if he DID create the universe? How do you know it wasn't a multitude of creators, and how do you know if THEY are still around?

We won't know till we meet god, right, or until we fall into the deepest pits of hell for not being Muslim, or until we simply cease to exist when we die.

[ReodDai]

Originally posted by ellik:
hmmmmm.... what if it was God that was the center of the universe, the collection of all matter and energy coelesced into one sphere in the center of all nothingness that went boom during the big bang, spreading bits and pieces of himself in every direction creating the growing something that we attempt to label the universe. which would mean that we are each solidified gobs of god goo as it spewed accross nothingness. so essentially, there is no god (anymore) except for what we find within ourselves.

hehe I like this theory. I wanna be goo...

[ReodDai]

Originally posted by Timbo1969:
You are trying to apply scientific logic to something that isn't scientific. Religion of any sort is based on faith, not scientific study. The fact that science still has yet to disprove completely Creationism is fact enough to believe. I dare say science will never completely disprove it.

Religion was engineered in a way so that it cannot be proven or disproven. So just because science can't disprove something that you say exists outside of science only on the basis of faith, you feel that is fact enough to believe? Sorry the terms faith and fact cannot be used in that context together. Faith can never be based on fact and fact doesn't have room for faith. The concept of God cannot be disproven by science because the concept was created that way lol. The arguement is like trying to convince a schizophreniac that what they are perceiving as reality isn't real. Why? because what they see exists outside of common science. It doesn't exist yet they perceive it as real thus becoming their reality. Yet on the flip side they can't prove to us that what they see really exists because no one else perceives it that way. Sorry getting too far into psychology... back to your random babbling ;)

Oh and on a side note. You can't disprove something that doesn't exist. Before you take offense to this think about it this way. God created existance therefore he can't be a part of existance... [img]graemlins/stickpoke.gif[/img]

[Timbo1969]

Originally posted by ReodDai:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Timbo1969:
You are trying to apply scientific logic to something that isn't scientific. Religion of any sort is based on faith, not scientific study. The fact that science still has yet to disprove completely Creationism is fact enough to believe. I dare say science will never completely disprove it.

Religion was engineered in a way so that it cannot be proven or disproven. So just because science can't disprove something that you say exists outside of science only on the basis of faith, you feel that is fact enough to believe? Sorry the terms faith and fact cannot be used in that context together. Faith can never be based on fact and fact doesn't have room for faith. The concept of God cannot be disproven by science because the concept was created that way lol. The arguement is like trying to convince a schizophreniac that what they are perceiving as reality isn't real. Why? because what they see exists outside of common science. It doesn't exist yet they perceive it as real thus becoming their reality. Yet on the flip side they can't prove to us that what they see really exists because no one else perceives it that way. Sorry getting too far into psychology... back to your random babbling ;)

Oh and on a side note. You can't disprove something that doesn't exist. Before you take offense to this think about it this way. God created existance therefore he can't be a part of existance... [img]graemlins/stickpoke.gif[/img] </font>[/QUOTE]You also can't disprove something or someone that exists on a different plane of existence. I'm not randomly babbling thank you.. Just fueling the refutability or irrefutability of the existence of God or if you prefer G-d.

[Timbo1969]

Originally posted by 98v6:
Creationism has more holes than a block os swiss cheese man. For example, how do we know that the being we call God actually created the universe, if he does exist? How do we know that God isn't evil, and how do we know he is still around if he DID create the universe? How do you know it wasn't a multitude of creators, and how do you know if THEY are still around?

We won't know till we meet god, right, or until we fall into the deepest pits of hell for not being Muslim, or until we simply cease to exist when we die.

And Evolution doesn't have holes? I see you as one of those people that only believes what he can see, feel and touch. You continue to place finite values on the infinite, and that is something you can't do. As I see it God's existence is on a higher plane of existence than our own. Our limitations do not apply to him, you just can't apply our limitations to him. Think about it, Omnipotent, Omniscient, Omnipresent. How can you apply the laws of physics to that. You just can't do it, hence science will of course say He doesn't exist. You say you are Liberal, then open your mind to the possibility, instead of saying He doesn't exist.

[ReodDai]

I could be willing to acknowledge the existence of a higher power. However nothing that any religion believes in, and certainly not a "god" that created existence.

[98v6]

Originally posted by Timbo1969:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 98v6:
Creationism has more holes than a block os swiss cheese man. For example, how do we know that the being we call God actually created the universe, if he does exist? How do we know that God isn't evil, and how do we know he is still around if he DID create the universe? How do you know it wasn't a multitude of creators, and how do you know if THEY are still around?

We won't know till we meet god, right, or until we fall into the deepest pits of hell for not being Muslim, or until we simply cease to exist when we die.

And Evolution doesn't have holes? I see you as one of those people that only believes what he can see, feel and touch. You continue to place finite values on the infinite, and that is something you can't do. As I see it God's existence is on a higher plane of existence than our own. Our limitations do not apply to him, you just can't apply our limitations to him. Think about it, Omnipotent, Omniscient, Omnipresent. How can you apply the laws of physics to that. You just can't do it, hence science will of course say He doesn't exist. You say you are Liberal, then open your mind to the possibility, instead of saying He doesn't exist. </font>[/QUOTE]There is more logical evidence for evolution than for creationism. You give me a single, well founded, concrete reason to believe in God and I will. Atm, I see it as a mind control issue because that's what religion has been used as before. They've been trying to do this for hundreds of years, btw. St. Anselm's ontological argument, St. Thomas Aquinas' five ways, the cosmological is the one we were discussing. I'm pretty well versed in theology, as I have just this semester changed my view on it, and if you want to talk about it some time hit me up on AIM.

[RallyRed 98]

i think it was thomas aquinas (or akempis? can't remember which ) who ascribed the maximum quantities of earthly exisitence to "g-dliness" quite logically...

essentially he argued that the gradation of temperatures & c. suggested that there must be a maximum and minimum value to ascribe to. he imagined that the maximum and minimum would be where g-d lies.

as such, it implies a finite universe.

edit: also, since nate and brian made concessions in their profile for you, i think you owe them the same.

[98v6]

hehe, ok, i was just waiting for one comment [img]smile.gif[/img]

[3.4 [deployed]]

Why not merge Genisis & Darwin? Fill each others "holes" or is that asking too much?

[98v6]

Originally posted by RallyRed 98:
i think it was thomas aquinas (or akempis? can't remember which ) who ascribed the maximum quantities of earthly exisitence to "g-dliness" quite logically...

essentially he argued that the gradation of temperatures & c. suggested that there must be a maximum and minimum value to ascribe to. he imagined that the maximum and minimum would be where g-d lies.

as such, it implies a finite universe.

edit: also, since nate and brian made concessions in their profile for you, i think you owe them the same.

Right, so max and min. temperatures and values in a finite universe = maximally powerful 3o being who created everything? That's quite a jump to make.

[RallyRed 98]

you would think that the maximum and minimum values would be something very special. i don't know if i still believe it, but when i read it a few years ago i found it very compelling, and i still use it as a way to describe my faith.

[ReodDai]

Originally posted by 3.4 [deployed]:
Why not merge Genisis & Darwin? Fill each others "holes" or is that asking too much?

I'd respond but I'm too busy [img]graemlins/rofl.gif[/img] ing

[ReodDai]

Thread REBORN!! [img]graemlins/dj.gif[/img]