Q to creationists

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by Little Wing, May 30, 2003.

  1. Here's a responce I always get.
    I start talking about the big bang theory, and someone always says where did matter come from? They then respond, god must have created the universe...

    Ok, let me spit this question back out at you. What created god?

    See... gridlocked...

    Another good one:
    If god is all powerful, can he create a stone he cannot lift? (think about it)
  2. the whole thing of god being omnipotent and everything is just idiotic, if there's some such force I don't see any point of it's existence, I mean if it's everything then why would it bother with humans at all? I mean were here OK? why would it care if we obey it or not? and if such thing had the power to create life from nothing then why wouldn't it had done it in more than one place? naaaah what do i care...........
  3. um. nothing created God... He's eternal... meaning no beginning... no end. He always was and always will be. may not be an answer you like, but it's an answer.

    and the one about the rock. i like that one. God can lift anything... so no matter how big the rock He creates He's always beable to lift it.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. so the question what came before god and what came before the big bang literally have the same answer (its just not put in such scientific terms when answering for god)..

    the big bang was the birth of spacetime in our universe. there was no before because time was yet to exist.
  5. the main question concerning the big bang is where did the original matter come from that exploded? matter just doesn't appear out of nowhere... it had to have been created or put there by something.
  6. and god just has been there all along... maybe god created the material where the big bang came from?.... yeah right.
  7. the big bang begain affter a terrably good night of borritos and tequila....

    and the matter ...well......

    life is shit
  8. well... ubik... i'm sure you're aware that it's fact that matter doesn't just appear out of nothing. c'mon, where'd it come from?

    lol, here's science's view: this huge ball of super condensed matter that just magically appears out of nowhere explodes and creates about a billion times the matter that was originally there and forms the entire universe and everything in it...

    now, my (and many others') view: God created the universe. there's no "where'd the matter come from?" because God's omnipotent. there's no "where'd God come from?" because God's eternal.

    now... what seems more believable? something that's impossible (matter forming itself out of nothing), or something that may be a bit "out there" according to some, but that is very much possible (there being a God, and God creating it).
  9. I don't get how people argue so hard about how impossible it is for the big bang, and then state that theres some magical dude up in the sky that knows everything and can do everything.

    Honestly, I think its more likely that the universe was formed by a banana then a omnipotent being.

  10. here here!

    there are many theories as to how the big bang came to be... most of them i think, make note of the realisation that a "uni"verse cannot be.

    thsu why i believe in the cyclic multiverse.
  11. ...and it didn't start with matter, it started with energy that later (we're talking mikro-seconds here) condensed into matter. we have observed similar enrgy to matter transformations in particle accelerators. no mystic powers there.

    and claiming that god have always been, thus not beeing created himself by something else defies your own logic in using god as a creator in the first place. on the one hand you claim causally that the universe *must* be created by someone. cause - effect right? on the other hand, when asked where does god come from, you *deny* causality!!

    it just doesn't make sense. if you deny causality, you really don't need a god either, you could just as well be honest and say "it just happened, one day it was just there. whops there it is. dunny why, don't care. things happen for no reason apparantly"... :)

  12. Here i sit
    Eating a steak
    Cows don't exist
    But Superman does
    I saw it on TV
    So it must be true
  13. correct me if I'm worng but there's something called anti-matter in space that because some reason implodes in itself and causes huge explosions that create stars and these stars also implode in themselves and create more stars and when theres enough of that activity close to each others they form planets. And yes I found it quite abstract that you Mr.cottons demand for some kind of 100% facts of the big bang and evolution while at the same time you claim there's this "god" who just creates everything and is everything because people say that it's there and this is how it is and there's lots of books telling so?
  14. Exactly Ubik. We try and explain how things happened using thousands of years of scientific knowledge. While creationists try and "debunk" all scientific theories and claim that we can't prove the big bang. They then tell us that obviously some omnipotent being created the universe. I mean... that's the only logical thing. Oh, and he was ALWAYS there so he didn't need to be created.

    Give me a break. Does it really make sense to you that there was ALWAYS a magical being that can do ANYTHING? Do you REALLY believe in what a book that was written thousands of years ago says?

    To me I'd rather go with what modern science suggests. Not with what people that had just invented the wheel suggest.
  15. ok... space isn't a particle accelerator. and also... God isn't a physical being. He didn't have to be created, because He's not made of matter (which the universe is).

    so let me get this straight... energy is accelerated to near light speed and magically forms matter, then it explodes and creates EVERYTHING in the universe? i think not.

    and as for my "proof" of God... i mentioned prophecies in another post that someone requested me to elaborate on. i'll be doing just that in a little while. i need time to get information and put it all together (plus i just got a new book on the subject, so be prepared for a very long post).

    anywayz... you'll get your proof soon enough... but you'll probably find some way to deny it which really makes these arguments a waste of time. but since there are a few people out there who are genuinely interested in what i have to say, i'll post anyway.

  16. ah, yes it is, and i'll deny it no matter what, hehe :)

    and just to make the point *very* clear. proof, in a scientific sense, does not mean "irrational but possible" or "based on religious text from back when".

    and just to throw another log onto the fire; there is *no* proof from secondary sources (ie non religious texts) that support the jesus myth. first i'll remind everybody that the romans were as happy to let the beurocracy grind on with their red tape as modern society is, and keep records of most everything. somehow they "forgot" about jesus and the stuff thats written in the new testament. let me take a few examples of this;

    no concensus when jesus was born. this kinda negates the entire birth myth of a boy in a manger in bethlehem. there was quite simply no heads-counting in palestine. not then. there is no record of this. none. and as mentioned, we have quite full records of roman rule in palestine.

    herod never prosecuted or governed ovr a trial involving jesus. all of herods govern in palestine are accounted for, his capital cases especially. no mention of jesus.

    next we have several jewish scholars and contemporaries of the alleged jesus that kept very precise criminal records from all the jewish courts. several. only one of these scholars mention jesus, and this in a by-sentence regarding some other case. not to mention that this source is regarded by modern theologicans and historians as doubtfull, due to the fact that early versions (year 20+) does not mention jesus, whilst later versions (year 400+) do. thereby indicating a later "addition" to his work...
  17. yes. it's interesting that all "proof" of the existence of jesus comes from religious sources....

    And by proof of god I don't mean miracles or prophecies, just some kind of logical proof that there's some force that isn't matter and has been somewhat there for as long as and longer than universe and has created everything.
  18. all the real proof is inside your hart dingbats where it belongs....

    you belive the universe was created?

    some how?

    creation is but a myth derived from the need to prove existance ...

    how many of you believe you esist ...yet claim to have no faith ....

    you cannot even believe you little life is real enuff to matter unless you have faith

    everything is based on fath

    some of you have chosen to put your faith in sciance..(or shall we say MAN?)
    why would you want to put your faith in other people who are no differant than yourself and then say you dont believe the bible becouse MAN wrote it?

    who came up with the scinintific therys?

    the same carbon based life forms

    so one thought with his head and one thought with his hart

    witch do you follow ...your hart or your head

    some dead scientits?

    or some dead philosiphers?

    or your own hart.....

    religin is not realy as complex or all punishing as most tend to think

    unless your catholic....

    then its worse than most people think

  19. i do. i think therefore i know i am. not to mention my own material manifestation, also known as my body. i can experience it. i can also experience other people, through both vision, tuch, taste and ear. some i hear to much from, but that's another story.

    so i know i'm real, and i know the rest of the world and universe is real. i know this since i think that i'm not that special, and thus if i know i'm real, then all the other gotta know they are real to. they think as well, and therefore they know they are. no faith involved there.

    simple, we know only the material world, it's opportunities and it's pitfalls. the only way for humans to describe the entire experience of it, is to work together. through this colloboration of man we get new insights to the universe. insights you do not find in age old scriptures. this is called science. it may not be infallable, since it is done by humans, but at least it's not as wildly wrong regarding the facts as religion is with all it's mysteries and miracles.

    in short, to survive and prosper as a species, humans can only trust ourselves, we cannot stoop to the ignorant and hope for some kind of unprecedented and totally irrational intervention from some fairytale entity. only humans can make conditions for present and future humans any better.
  20. im not trying to convince you of what i believe i just wanted to say it .....

    so what it all comes down to is what you believe realy ...

    i like my reality a little more majical.....and a little less structured ...

    i like reliying on fath to get me thru it always works for me every time

    and i dont think all sciance is bad......

    and i know most religin is bad....

    but spirituality.....and fath are very real

    fath manages

    without fath you have nothing......weather you see it or not

    the lost rarly realise they are lost

    this is why they are not being found ...they dont think they need to be found.....

    as for me ...

    i just do what my hart tells me to do ......

    and rely on fath....

Grasscity Deals Near You


Share This Page