Creation

[Morality Games]

Quote by: Winter wind well, I think you said it earlier. Deus Ex Machina... Again, the Christian argument is that God came before laws.

Not really an argument. Just a swift expression of belief.

God can't come before laws (I'll switch the term to 'conditions'). If he exists, he must exist in some way, and that way is the condition of his nature.

The reason worms can't speak, for example, is because it is not in the condition of their nature.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: Morality Games God can't come before laws (I'll switch the term to 'conditions'). If he exists, he must exist in some way, and that way is the condition of his nature.

?
Maybe that's why it's hard to understand him. He's "existence" was before laws. He's beyond our current comprehension.

But this really can't be argued from this point, mostly because without a basis in logic, it's hard to postulate the existence of God.

[Kakumei]

Quote by: Winter wind My argument is that God made the rules, ergo he can break them. It's religion, not science.

I always thought that God would also be the ultimate scientist, and from that he understands the laws. I just know how to use them better than we do. If though the power of God, people are healed, then how does he have the knowlage to heal them? To think that God is nothing more than a magical being and not also an extremely intelligent one, and therefore works with the laws and theories in the universe.

Energy is endless, isnt also space? I think the universe is full of things that are endless, we just dont realize that.

[Kakumei]

Quote by: Winter wind Again, the Christian argument is that God came before laws.

I think thats just how we interrpret things. Remember the things in the Bible were also understood by the people writing it. That doen not necessarily me will will understand it the same now.

[Winter wind]

Well, something has to be endless. Even if it is emptiness itself.

[Kakumei]

Quote by: Winter wind Well, something has to be endless. Even if it is emptiness itself.

But as well as endless, things must not be bound by that endlessness. Otherwise, energy in this case, would cease to exist if it was bound, therefore its only a temperary bond. Where does that energy go...? A place beyond our own comprehension?

[Winter wind]

It's certainly beyond mine...who knows. Ah well, one step at a time.

[Kakumei]

Quote by: Winter wind It's certainly beyond mine...who knows. Ah well, one step at a time.

You read the Bible, "Line upon line, precept upon precept, lo a little here and a little there." Lol, I feel the same as you.

[Dr_Acula]

Quote by: Winter wind See, because his answer makes zero logical sense. The Big Bang didn't just happen. Energy was not always in existence. The natural state of everything is zero. The most stable state is non-existence. Logically, nothing should exist, yet things do. Why? Why should any law of science or anything else exist. It would make the most sense that nothing existed. So why does it? My theory is that something disturbed the nothingness. And anything that can accomplish that is beyond our comprehension.

Don't adapt reality to your ideas, adapt your ideas to reality. If so many things exists, then clearly their most natural state is existence. So then it is only logical that they exist, and a god would only be necessary to destroy them.

Is the problem that such a state goes against common sense, intuition? Understandable. Yet scientific progress has clearly and irrefutably shown us that reality has little to do with our common, initial and basic view of it.
A god helps becasue only such a tremendous force could make the world one sees differ from the world one thinks should be. God can makes us right even when everything in sight points us wrong.

For example, the sole idea of lightspeed being constant and time being variable is completely insane and senseless, yet it is one of the most prooven scientific postulates so far. Would it be correct to say that only a god can make such an unlikely notion be real? Just accept that our philosophy may not be most sutiable one, as much sense as it may make, rather that deciding a god is making the world work upside down.

Quote by: Winter wind ? Maybe that's why it's hard to understand him. He's "existence" was before laws. He's beyond our current comprehension. But this really can't be argued from this point, mostly because without a basis in logic, it's hard to postulate the existence of God.

Then it is impossible that you can comprehend "him" enough to say such a thing. If you know that, then you are beyond human.

Ps: if something can't be argued, it can neither be supproted.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: dr. Acula Don't adapt reality to your ideas, adapt your ideas to reality. If so many things exists, then clearly their most natural state is existence.

Logically this isn't so. If the natural state is existence, then everything would exist in every space, and it would be unusual for there to be even one of the infinite things to not be in existence in a single space.

Also, most mathematical equations balance at zero and not at something else.

Is the problem that such a state goes against common sense, intuition? Understandable. Yet scientific progress has clearly and irrefutably shown us that reality has little to do with our common, initial and basic view of it.

ah quantum physics. Actually that might explain it. The neutral state and how all possibilities must be exacted and so on.

Then it is impossible that you can comprehend "him" enough to say such a thing. If you know that, then you are beyond human. Ps: if something can't be argued, it can neither be supproted.

Fair enough. I'm just playing with the idea...oh well.

it was just for fun..

A god helps becasue only such a tremendous force could make the world one sees differ from the world one thinks should be. God can makes us right even when everything in sight points us wrong.

Not really, well He shouldn't, but people make it out to be like that...

For example, the sole idea of lightspeed being constant and time being variable is completely insane and senseless, yet it is one of the most prooven scientific postulates so far. Would it be correct to say that only a god can make such an unlikely notion be real? Just accept that our philosophy may not be most sutiable one, as much sense as it may make, rather that deciding a god is making the world work upside down.

No I'm all with Einstein and quantum physics, I just think that the natural state is zero. Just look at supersymmetry.

Quote by: kakumei You read the Bible, "Line upon line, precept upon precept, lo a little here and a little there." Lol, I feel the same as you.

I'm ok with not knowing everything.

[stardust]

...wisdom comes through experience?
Isn't that logic specified for living beings? I don't think anyone can defy the existence/non-existence of god without possessing a mindset that actually understands the nature of god. And if god is unique, omni-potent, master, infinite, eternal and uncomparable then how can we understand him? OP, your argument by its very nature is refutable. We are the creation and not the creators. The laws that we understand cannot be applied to god..if so then whats the difference between a living being and god?
I think intuition through whatever means is the way to spirtually link yourself to god. Also, once you have staunch faith, you don't need more evidence than this universe has to offer.

[Simonius]

If the Panthiests are correct the universe is God, God is the universe. He therefore came into being with the big bang, was the big bang. Scientists feel no need to explain how that started, so a panthiest can happily dodge the question!

[Winter wind]

Quote by: simonius a panthiest can happily dodge the question!

panthiest?

That a new word for me? I'm flattered o^_^o

[gallo]

Quote by: Winter wind panthiest? That a new word for me? I'm flattered o^_^o

Actually, that should be pantheist. If you're going to learn new words, it is always better to learn them spelled correctly.

[Winter wind]

With all due respect...bite me.

(hehe, I'm on such a sugar high right now)

But I'm a "pantheist" because it seems the most logical and likely course God would take. Though, I do admit that I could be wrong. I'm not a prophet after all...

[Simonius]

Well pardon me for making an error Mr Pedant!

[gallo]

Quote by: Simonius Well pardon me for making an error Mr Pedant!

Do you mean that I should pardon you for being only semiliterate?

[Simonius]

Quote by: gallo Do you mean that I should pardon you for being only semiliterate?

No because I deserve no pardon for that which I am not Mr Proto-human.

[Jack]

Back on topic, please. Personal snipes don't contribute to the debate.

DO NOT RESPOND IN THIS THREAD TO THE PRECEDING MESSAGE. Please contact a member of the staff privately if you have any questions.

[Simonius]

The preceding message did not contain a snipe but a joke related to the persons profile, it was in response to a personal snipe that was ignored!