The universe itself is God

[x15]

Besides your argument from ignorance, what made God?

argument from ignorance? please no need to insult.

what is more plausible regarding the beginning of this universe?
1. the universe just happened out of nothing? this would be magic not science nor logic.
2. the universe was created by a higher being more powerful & independent of the universe?

"what made God"

by definition God is a necessary being, by definition it is impossible that he fail to exist, this is the definition of God. unless im mistaken & youre talking about something else.

 

[ttystikk]

argument from ignorance? please no need to insult.

what is more plausible regarding the beginning of this universe?
1. the universe just happened out of nothing? this would be magic not science nor logic.
2. the universe was created by a higher being more powerful & independent of the universe?

"what made God"

by definition God is a necessary being, by definition it is impossible that he fail to exist, this is the definition of God. unless im mistaken & youre talking about something else.

Provide evidence for assertion #1, or you're just guessing.

Provide evidence for assertion #2, or I'll treat your whole argument like a #2 and flush it down the toilet.

 

[PhuckDaPoeLease]

Provide evidence for assertion #1, or you're just guessing.

Provide evidence for assertion #2, or I'll treat your whole argument like a #2 and flush it down the toilet.

Great comment lol

 

[x15]

Provide evidence for assertion #1, or you're just guessing.

Provide evidence for assertion #2, or I'll treat your whole argument like a #2 and flush it down the toilet.

i dont need to provide evidence. i made statements. statements as to what you think is more plausible. you can make up youre own mind & find your own evidence to support your beliefs




but, to reiterate with a little evidence,

1. scientifically speaking, im saying the universe had a beginning. did it appear from nothing? nothing just appears from nothing.
nothing + nothing = nothing

here's what steven hawking says,
"All the evidence seems to indicate, that the universe has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning, about 15 billion years ago. This is probably the most remarkable discovery of modern cosmology."

alexander vilenkin,
"The volume of the universe increases with time. Inflation cannot be eternal and must have some sort of a beginning."
http://inference-review.com/article/the-beginning-of-the-universe

this is what nasa says about the beginning of the universe,
"...the evolution of the universe over 13.77 billion years. The far left depicts the earliest moment we can now probe, when a period of "inflation" produced a burst of exponential growth in the universe."
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/media/060915/index.html

again, what's more plausible, that the beginning just happened or that it has a cause?

i say it had a cause


2. the law of causality,
what is more plausible, our life supporting planet happened by accident or it is precisely designed to support life, human life?
or, it all happened by random chance & we are so so lucky?

cause & effect is the evidence, the law of causality. the cause must be more powerful than nasa's link to the beginning of space, time & matter ... the cause must be beyond the range or limits of the effect — hence God — spaceless, timeless, immaterial & enormously powerful

do you meticulously grow your own weed with care or leave it up to chance? same thing with the universe, it is obvious meticulous loving care was taken to design & create it, otherwise, what chance creates chance destroys.


i say it has an awesome designer — the God of the bible



peace

 

[GrowUrOwnDank]

I will save the rest of this thread for me to read tomorrow in my office. Because it makes me.

Good stuff tho. Peace and love always.

 

[ttystikk]

i dont need to provide evidence. i made statements. statements as to what you think is more plausible. you can make up youre own mind & find your own evidence to support your beliefs




but, to reiterate with a little evidence,

1. scientifically speaking, im saying the universe had a beginning. did it appear from nothing? nothing just appears from nothing.
nothing + nothing = nothing

here's what steven hawking says,
"All the evidence seems to indicate, that the universe has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning, about 15 billion years ago. This is probably the most remarkable discovery of modern cosmology."

alexander vilenkin,
"The volume of the universe increases with time. Inflation cannot be eternal and must have some sort of a beginning."
http://inference-review.com/article/the-beginning-of-the-universe

this is what nasa says about the beginning of the universe,
"...the evolution of the universe over 13.77 billion years. The far left depicts the earliest moment we can now probe, when a period of "inflation" produced a burst of exponential growth in the universe."
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/media/060915/index.html

again, what's more plausible, that the beginning just happened or that it has a cause?

i say it had a cause


2. the law of causality,
what is more plausible, our life supporting planet happened by accident or it is precisely designed to support life, human life?
or, it all happened by random chance & we are so so lucky?

cause & effect is the evidence, the law of causality. the cause must be more powerful than nasa's link to the beginning of space, time & matter ... the cause must be beyond the range or limits of the effect — hence God — spaceless, timeless, immaterial & enormously powerful

do you meticulously grow your own weed with care or leave it up to chance? same thing with the universe, it is obvious meticulous loving care was taken to design & create it, otherwise, what chance creates chance destroys.


i say it has an awesome designer — the God of the bible



peace

TL;DR is the Internet's way of saying you failed Occam's Razor test.

 

[Dalek Supreme]

argument from ignorance? please no need to insult.

what is more plausible regarding the beginning of this universe?
1. the universe just happened out of nothing? this would be magic not science nor logic.
2. the universe was created by a higher being more powerful & independent of the universe?

"what made God"

by definition God is a necessary being, by definition it is impossible that he fail to exist, this is the definition of God. unless im mistaken & youre talking about something else.

Now you're playing God of the Gaps. You are inserting God in the dips in our current knowledge.

The universe as we know it today started 14 billion years ago. It's possible the universe always existed, and we might be in a multiverse?

Here's a debate between Physics professor Sean Carroll & Theologian William Lane Craig.

Get some popcorn...

 

[kmog33]

Somebody found some acid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[x15]

TL;DR is the Internet's way of saying you failed Occam's Razor test.

?

ockham's razor states only one cause is required to explain the effect, no infinite regressions. not sure how youre using this.

peace

 

[ttystikk]

?

ockham's razor states only one cause is required to explain the effect, no infinite regressions. not sure how youre using this.

peace

'The simplest explanation is most likely correct'

 

[Olive Drab Green]

I've said this. God is the flux of life, experiencing every possibility that exists through us, in every possible dimension. God is essentially the collective unconscious. The soul is just part of that vast constellation of energy.

 

[ttystikk]

I've said this. God is the flux of life, experiencing every possibility that exists through us, in every possible dimension. God is essentially the collective unconscious. The soul is just part of that vast constellation of energy.

Not one shred of evidence in support of the idea that we or anything else has a soul. When we die, it's just like a computer shutting down. Only we don't get to reboot.

 

[Olive Drab Green]

Not one shred of evidence in support of the idea that we or anything else has a soul. When we die, it's just like a computer shutting down. Only we don't get to reboot.

I feel differently, but to each their own.

 

[ttystikk]

I feel differently, but to each their own.

I fervently HOPE I'm wrong, but again- where's the evidence?

 

[Olive Drab Green]

I fervently HOPE I'm wrong, but again- where's the evidence?

I dunno, I was agnostic and a cynic before the Ayahuasca. I saw a lot of things that made a lot of other things make more sense. I definitely will say that Ayahuasca is much different than most other psychedelics. Spiritual, not recreational. I think what I've felt since then is pretty solid, and I've never really had faith in anything before.

 

[ttystikk]

I dunno, I was agnostic and a cynic before the Ayahuasca. I saw a lot of things that made a lot of other things make more sense. I definitely will say that Ayahuasca is much different than most other psychedelics. Spiritual, not recreational. I think what I've felt since then is pretty solid, and I've never really had faith in anything before.

Only one way to find out. You first...

 

[Olive Drab Green]

Only one way to find out. You first...

I'll take my time. But I think once we die, our soul/spiritual identity is torn apart/disintegrated, and eventually your energy is reconfigured when you are reborn. It's difficult to explain.

 

[x15]

Now you're playing God of the Gaps. You are inserting God in the dips in our current knowledge.

i see your point, but, i would like to say it would be 'God of the gaps' if we did not have prior knowledge of creation from the bible (God's revelation of Himself) which so exquisitely & perfectly spells out exactly how the universe as we know it was created, written many thousands of years ago prior to what science is just now confirming to be true.
moses to scientists, 'youre welcome'.


for example,
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. 3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.

what science now confirms,
1. the universe did indeed have a beginning
2. darkness has been/is predominant in the universe since the beginning
3. light did separate from darkness — energy first then light
4. earth was a water planet at one time then land masses
5. time had a beginning — energy first then time
6. mass had a beginning — energy first then mass
7. the universe was made first then the earth — correct order
8. the earth was indeed formless at one time
9. the five 'ultimate scientific ideas' from herbert spencer (darwin's contemporary): time, force, action, space, & matter (in the beginning, God, created, heavens, earth)

the genesis account is even in the correct order of creation as science now confirms it. scientists did not believe these things just 50 years ago but now it is the consensus backed up by research, see above links from nasa, alexander vilenkin from a previous post.

the God of the bible revealed these things at a time when humankind could in not prove these things to be true, hence, revelation from the creator or a remarkable coincidence.

here's my favorite who got it right first, bible vs science quotes from almost 2000 years ago:
bible, ''...what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.' hebrew's 11.3 (esv)
science "molecules, atoms, energy,..."
pretty profound i'd say or what a coincidence


& by the way, if youre going to use 'God of the gaps' the same is true for atheists, 'atheist of the gaps' anybody but God by inserting anything other than God or non-materialistic regardless as to whether it makes sense or not.

 

[x15]

The universe as we know it today started 14 billion years ago. It's possible the universe always existed, and we might be in a multiverse?

Here's a debate between Physics professor Sean Carroll & Theologian William Lane Craig.

Get some popcorn...

multiverse? well, regardless how many universes it would have to begin somewhere with the first one


thank you for the link!

peace.

 

[Olive Drab Green]

i see your point, but, i would like to say it would be 'God of the gaps' if we did not have prior knowledge of creation from the bible (God's revelation of Himself) which so exquisitely & perfectly spells out exactly how the universe as we know it was created, written many thousands of years ago prior to what science is just now confirming to be true.
moses to scientists, 'youre welcome'.


for example,
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. 3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.

what science now confirms,
1. the universe did indeed have a beginning
2. darkness has been/is predominant in the universe since the beginning
3. light did separate from darkness — energy first then light
4. earth was a water planet at one time then land masses
5. time had a beginning — energy first then time
6. mass had a beginning — energy first then mass
7. the universe was made first then the earth — correct order
8. the earth was indeed formless at one time
9. the five 'ultimate scientific ideas' from herbert spencer (darwin's contemporary): time, force, action, space, & matter (in the beginning, God, created, heavens, earth)

the genesis account is even in the correct order of creation as science now confirms it. scientists did not believe these things just 50 years ago but now it is the consensus backed up by research, see above links from nasa, alexander vilenkin from a previous post.

the God of the bible revealed these things at a time when humankind could in not prove these things to be true, hence, revelation from the creator or a remarkable coincidence.

here's my favorite who got it right first, bible vs science quotes from almost 2000 years ago:
bible, ''...what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.' hebrew's 11.3 (esv)
science "molecules, atoms, energy,..."
pretty profound i'd say or what a coincidence


& by the way, if youre going to use 'God of the gaps' the same is true for atheists, 'atheist of the gaps' anybody but God by inserting anything other than God or non-materialistic regardless as to whether it makes sense or not.

See, the thing is, the Bible doesn't account for dinosaurs, so when is God releasing the prequel? Not trying to be a dick. I just got this guy in my Bio class that's a total Bible Banger and he was talking about how Satanists kill people all the time. I asked him when was the last time he remekbered, and he couldn't tell me. Then I reminded him that more people have been killed by Christians during the Crusades than by Satanists throughout history. He said "That's Old Testament." I said "Old Testament? It was hundreds of years AD when the Crusades occurred, and the Crusaders were Christian, not Jewish." I hate trying to reason with people who twist shit to put their beliefs in a better light.