Atheists....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobinHood3000

It'd be even sadder if it was decaf. :p

---

Right - it's the Sad Cafe - not the Catastrophic Cafe.

Hmmm...perhaps you and I ought to get on to some sort of debating...but I'm tired (cold coffee doesn't have much "zip" in it - caffinated or not).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wintermute

Hi Lector,

What about a spontaneous divine creator? At some point, say a gazillion years ago, wouldn't the divine creator need to ... come into existance? I guess I dont see a difference.

---

I guess the differance would be that it seems to be impossible within the natural order of things for there to be an infinite regress of causality, there had to be something that had no cause to get tha ball rolling as it were. However, since the natural order of the universe we inhabit does not allow for something to happen without any cause than isn't it rational, at this point, to look at the possibily of something (or someone) opperating outside of the natural order of things? An infinite God

But a question I often hear after a statement like this is "who created God?" and although this seems to be a valid question, it is, in fatc, catagorically invalid. God is infinte, to ask for His beggining assumes that He had a beggining which is false; it is like asking how much red weighs. A color has no weight as much as an infinite being has no begining.

The Buddhists don't believe in a creator god. Hindus believe all is god.

Does anyone here accuse either or both of these traditions of being "illogical"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lector

But a question I often hear after a statement like this is "who created God?" and although this seems to be a valid question, it is, in fatc, catagorically invalid. God is infinte, to ask for His beggining assumes that He had a beggining which is false; it is like asking how much red weighs. A color has no weight as much as an infinite being has no begining.

---

Then, of course, you run into the question of, "If something can be infinite and therefore requires no beginning, what's wrong with making the universe infinite?"

Rather thorny, no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobinHood3000

Then, of course, you run into the question of, "If something can be infinite and therefore requires no beginning, what's wrong with making the universe infinite?"

Rather thorny, no?

---

Right...because the universe is infinitely expanding outwards, but from an origin point, well atleast a theory.

A very difficult question.

You also run into the even more 'thorny' question, in my opinion, of what was it doing for infinity? The current estimate for the age of the universe is around 13 billion years as I recall. That's not even a drop in an ocean compared to infinity. Was it just 'sitting' there in a void for infinity, then about 13 billion years ago had the idea to create a universe? It seems like the previous infinity would have been terribly boring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wintermute

You also run into the even more 'thorny' question, in my opinion, of what was it doing for infinity? The current estimate for the age of the universe is around 13 billion years as I recall. That's not even a drop in an ocean compared to infinity. Was it just 'sitting' there in a void for infinity, then about 13 billion years ago had the idea to create a universe? It seems like the previous infinity would have been terribly boring.

---

One theory I've heard about what the Universe wa doing previously was that it's cyclical. By that I mean, the Universe will continue to expand until it collapses on itself into a singular point. After a time, a Big Bang and the process begins anew. However, that still doesn;t answer the question of infinity. God or no God, the whole concept is baffling. You think, there must have been a starting point, but if there was a starting point, what was before the staring point? This, in my opinion applies to both God and the Universe and neither atheists nor the pious have the market on this quandry cornered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wintermute

You also run into the even more 'thorny' question, in my opinion, of what was it doing for infinity? The current estimate for the age of the universe is around 13 billion years as I recall. That's not even a drop in an ocean compared to infinity. Was it just 'sitting' there in a void for infinity, then about 13 billion years ago had the idea to create a universe? It seems like the previous infinity would have been terribly boring.

---

Well Infinity cannot be measured, so once something has ended, it can only be infint untill a definite start point has been determined.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by metal134

One theory I've heard about what the Universe wa doing previously was that it's cyclical. By that I mean, the Universe will continue to expand until it collapses on itself into a singular point. After a time, a Big Bang and the process begins anew. However, that still doesn;t answer the question of infinity. God or no God, the whole concept is baffling. You think, there must have been a starting point, but if there was a starting point, what was before the staring point? This, in my opinion applies to both God and the Universe and neither atheists nor the pious have the market on this quandry cornered.

---

kind of budhist for the circular. Have you checked it out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobinHood3000

Then, of course, you run into the question of, "If something can be infinite and therefore requires no beginning, what's wrong with making the universe infinite?"

Rather thorny, no?

---

I suppose my (ridiculously simple) answer to this would be that the universe contains matter, and matter (at least in our experience) does not have infinite existence. I mean, the universe is a combination of matter and energy, and we know that both of those decay/entropy as time passes, right?

I can't resist.

Ok Matter and energy are inter-changable, yes? E=mC2. Time according to Einstein is also variable... dependent on proximity to C.. I can't remember exactly where Berkley came out on this, perception of time.... anyway.. I think .. and have always thought that you are arguing about two different things. Assuming that God is in fact not SUPERnatural but is in fact all that is natural (I am in he and he is in me) then you are in fact arguing about the mechanics of the problem..... does the car work this way or that way etc. To the extent that whatever you would refer to as the initiating or sustaining force is still inherent within the system. (cold and un-poetic scientific reference) If God is SUPERnatural and therefore outside the system then the natural world as we know it is then a system within a system and the complexity of that notion is well.... difficult. So far there is no F(x) in that domain. You choose and be happy! P.S. you will not find this in Genesis. You may however find it in Psalms. P.S.S. if you understood this would you please explain it to me!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Orionsbelt

I can't resist.

Ok Matter and energy are inter-changable, yes? E=mC2. Time according to Einstein is also variable... dependent on proximity to C.. I can't remember exactly where Berkley came out on this, perception of time.... anyway.. I think .. and have always thought that you are arguing about two different things. Assuming that God is in fact not SUPERnatural but is in fact all that is natural (I am in he and he is in me) then you are in fact arguing about the mechanics of the problem..... does the car work this way or that way etc. To the extent that whatever you would refer to as the initiating or sustaining force is still inherent within the system. (cold and un-poetic scientific reference) If God is SUPERnatural and therefore outside the system then the natural world as we know it is then a system within a system and the complexity of that notion is well.... difficult. So far there is no F(x) in that domain. You choose and be happy! P.S. you will not find this in Genesis. You may however find it in Psalms. P.S.S. if you understood this would you please explain it to me!

---

Holy cow - I don't think I could even begin to try.

I think the Bible contradicts pantheism (God is everything). I do agree though that nature is a system-within-a-system - and that miracles are the invasion of our system from the "outside" by God.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redzeppelin

Holy cow - I don't think I could even begin to try.

I think the Bible contradicts pantheism (God is everything). I do agree though that nature is a system-within-a-system - and that miracles are the invasion of our system from the "outside" by God.

---

The one issue with that is that God is not supposed to be distant but omnipresent, yet not pantheistic...its a bit of a contradiction, but that is my understanding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stanislaw

The one issue with that is that God is not supposed to be distant but omnipresent, yet not pantheistic...its a bit of a contradiction, but that is my understanding.

---

Right. But I think "present everywhere" can be discriminated from "present in everything." Creation is flawed; it decays, it dies, it is damaged and imperfect. God is none of these things.

Athiests dislike me, we don't get along, they run from our conversations about religion, politics and philosophy and not only because i may be "Tenacious" or an avid christain. When they hear anything remotely close to the truth they shut their eyes and crawl under their bed. They hate anything that deals with creationism but tend to believe science is the answer for all the troubles in the world despite people that believe in science calling people with faith stupid while they blindly fill in science where they can't find the truth. Take the big bang theory for instance, a person can blow up a building an infinate amount of times but its never going to create something, there is too much order in things for there not to be a creator.

For my own peace of mind ive decided to accept Yeshuah and Christianity because ive researched it and found it to be the truth and ive since learned that hot topics like the meaning of hell and denomination debates have their purpose... anyone on here know what the word hell translates to in the hebrew language? It literaly means "seperation from god", that's right, hell isn't the burning lake of fire with countless souls being tortured for eternity, it's a boundary between someone and god, this someone was judged to be w/o faith and repentence.

I know all the questions disbelievers have; Why doesnt god just appear and all evil would end? What makes other religions wrong and christianity correct? How and at which point does ones soul become infused with the body? Why do things i do feel good to me but the bible says there wrong? People like murderers and criminals seem to have their conscience burned away and are unable to distinguish between right and wrong, how can they be held accountable for their crimes? How can a loving god create something like hell? I know there are valid answers to these questions but the simple answer is people need to trust in the character of god and come to realize he knows whats good for us and what isnt, i highly doubt god will judge people unjustly and if people dont truly see his message in the bible those people will be judged by their acts in life.

Athiesm is just a method of contradiction to disprove something that people think is used as a crutch to deal with the worlds and ones own problems. In todays world so many people truly waste their minds because they dont think, they just blindly go along with what the world tells them, they look at politics and religion and say "well i cant do anything about world events and religion so why bother thinking about it?" and they decieve themselves by thinking this, the majority of people that think this way are people living in poverty, they dont vote and they seem not to care so the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. This is a cycle that needs to be broken otherwise society as it is now will not work. I know this sounds like communism and equality, and i know what the nay sayers say, that communism is a good idea but just doesnt work based on their theory that people by default are not equal.

what a mess, i can see why people turn to satanism in a world where hypocrisy is made paramount and paranoia the law, the next 50 years will be interesting, i think it'll be a show down, with the truth or contradiction of religion the prize.

Read a book called:

God
The Failed Hypothesis

it destorys every single on of your arguements. of course every signle person who believes in science cant explain away all your arguements. every single person who believes in science doesnt understand particle physics, or any other kind of physics. they dont have the knowledge to attack your points. but read the book i named to you.