No-thing created everything

[dougeaton]

I did have some issues with Hawkins statement about how the universe came in being; being an agnostic gives me a litle freedom in how get my information. While this is made my what I consider extreme fundementlist, I think they may have a point.

doug

Edited September 27, 2010 by Tiggs

[Euphorbia]

I did have some issues with Hawkins statement about how the universe came in being; being an agnostic gives me a litle freedom in how get my information. While this is made my what I consider extreme fundementlist, I think they may have a point.

doug

Ray Comfort is an absolute moron!! Along with his co-moron Kirk Cameron, they give christianity an even worse name.

If everything had a creator, who created g_d? This is the same idiot who thought the banana was created by god because it fits perfectly in ones hand and has pull tabs.

[markdohle]

Ray Comfort is an absolute moron!! Along with his co-moron Kirk Cameron, they give christianity an even worse name.

If everything had a creator, who created g_d? This is the same idiot who thought the banana was created by god because it fits perfectly in ones hand and has pull tabs.

Actually, everything in the universe is contingent, the creator would not be, hence, eternal. So the question is mote, useless, though the question stills remains open if science is believed to have some kind of answer on the whole God issue thingy.

In spite of them being morons (in your opinion), it does not make their questions moronic; the atheist in the video came off as being confused when the question gets down to that level of reality.

Mark

[Euphorbia]

Actually, everything in the universe is contingent, the creator would not be, hence, eternal. So the question is mote, useless, though the question stills remains open if science is believed to have some kind of answer on the whole God issue thingy.

In spite of them being morons (in your opinion), it does not make their questions moronic; the atheist in the video came off as being confused when the question gets down to that level of reality.

Mark

Look, g_d will more than likely never be able to be proved or disproved by science. There's just nothing to test. Faith that a g_d created everything doesn't make it so. We may never no the true origin of everything, but g_d did it is not the answer.

Morons, yes that is my opinion. From what I have seen of these guys, I don't know whether to take them seriously or to think they're doing comedy sketches. Very laughable!!

[markdohle]

Look, g_d will more than likely never be able to be proved or disproved by science. There's just nothing to test. Faith that a g_d created everything doesn't make it so. We may never no the true origin of everything, but g_d did it is not the answer.

Morons, yes that is my opinion. From what I have seen of these guys, I don't know whether to take them seriously or to think they're doing comedy sketches. Very laughable!!

This is the problem. Atheism is not a more rational response reality than theism. Both stances are based on faith and cannot be proved by science; not its place. The problem is laymen who happen to be men of science who make fools of themselves when they make pronouncements about God based on ignorance. We believe, then we try to use logic to make sense of it. In dealing with the concept of God, it is true, the concept can seem absurd, yet to think the universe created itself out of nothing is even more absurd in my humble opinion. Perhaps we are not meant to get the answer......

Peace

mark

Edited September 26, 2010 by markdohle

[Euphorbia]

This is the problem. Atheism is not a more rational response reality than theism. Both stances are based on faith and cannot be proved by science; not its place. The problem is laymen who happen to be men of science who make fools of themselves when they make pronouncements about God based on ignorance. We believe, then we try to use logic to make sense of it. In dealing with the concept of God, it is true, the concept can seem absurd, yet to think the universe created itself out of nothing is even more absurd in my humble opinion. Perhaps we are not meant to get the answer......

Peace

mark

Atheism has nothing to do with faith, just like I don't have faith that leprechauns don't exist, they just don't. I will however concede the fact that there is a .000000000000000000001% chance of g_d being real.

Do you really not understand that the onus is on the faithful and not even remotely on the Atheist. We don't have to prove your g_d doesn't exist and in fact we don't even care in the slightest about g_d and religion except for the fact that the religious keep trying to force their beliefs on everyone.

The idea that a g_d created the universe just because we don't have a definitive answer is even more absurd. And it still doesn't explain the origin of g_d! If g_d could always of existed, why not the universe, in one form or another?

Science is not perfect, but it does deal with facts. Religion deals only with faith.

You are right, we may never have the answer, but the world is becoming more and more secular and religion will someday be in the minority. And then hopefully, disappear altogether.

[Murrangurk]

Don't know why I am replying to this. I avoid the whole xstian creation bull dust.

However -

Whether or not there is a god, and thus whether or not he/she/it made the universe is entirely irrelevant.

Ultimately it is we humans that must take responsibility for our own behaviour. There will be no divine intervention against evil nor miraculous saving. It is us that must combat the evil in ourselves, it is us that must learn tolerance, sharing, and all that hippy guff so as to make life more tolerable and improve existence.

Chuck god and jesus and all the rest in the bin and stop being being global **** holes.

PS Lower case was deliberate.

[Euphorbia]

Don't know why I am replying to this. I avoid the whole xstian creation bull dust.

Understood. Nobody's going to change anybodies minds in these forums on the existence of g_d!

However -

Whether or not there is a god, and thus whether or not he/she/it made the universe is entirely irrelevant.

Ultimately it is we humans that must take responsibility for our own behaviour. There will be no divine intervention against evil nor miraculous saving. It is us that must combat the evil in ourselves, it is us that must learn tolerance, sharing, and all that hippy guff so as to make life more tolerable and improve existence.

Rational response. I wholeheartedly agree.

Chuck god and jesus and all the rest in the bin and stop being being global **** holes.

PS Lower case was deliberate.

I wouldn't of quite put it that way but, yeah.

[Dr. D]

Don't know why I am replying to this. I avoid the whole xstian creation bull dust.

However -

Whether or not there is a god, and thus whether or not he/she/it made the universe is entirely irrelevant.

Ultimately it is we humans that must take responsibility for our own behaviour. There will be no divine intervention against evil nor miraculous saving. It is us that must combat the evil in ourselves, it is us that must learn tolerance, sharing, and all that hippy guff so as to make life more tolerable and improve existence.

Chuck god and jesus and all the rest in the bin and stop being being global **** holes.

PS Lower case was deliberate.

May I add that if there was a god, what possible use would he be to anyone? By all human standards (extensions of his own creation) he has failed to aid, rescue or give a damn about humanity.

[IamsSon]

May I add that if there was a god, what possible use would he be to anyone? By all human standards (extensions of his own creation) he has failed to aid, rescue or give a damn about humanity.

Based on my life and the lives of many people I would have to say you are misinformed. Edited September 27, 2010 by IamsSon

[Lion6969]

May I add that if there was a god, what possible use would he be to anyone? By all human standards (extensions of his own creation) he has failed to aid, rescue or give a damn about humanity.

Humanity damns itself, thus the opportunity arrises to rescue, guide and aid too, which is also how society redeems itself. God gives you the free will and power to damn yourself and redeem yourself!

[Euphorbia]

Based on my life and the lives of many people I would have to say you are misinformed.

How so? And do you have any proof of any intervention, or is this just your opinion? Remember belief is no more than opinion. It is not fact! How can one be misinformed on something that is just opinion?

[Euphorbia]

Humanity damns itself, thus the opportunity arrises to rescue, guide and aid too, which is also how society redeems itself. God gives you the free will and power to damn yourself and redeem yourself!

Proof please! Oh yeah, this is just your opinion! Feel free to believe what you want.

[Professor Buzzkill]

You either believe that some form of "god" created the universe or that the universe (or energy in it) has some god-like qualities (i.e always been there, created itself ect.)

Either way i don't think whatever created the universe (be it naturally god-like or god itself) would really care all that much if you prayed or not.

[IamsSon]

How so? And do you have any proof of any intervention, or is this just your opinion? Remember belief is no more than opinion. It is not fact! How can one be misinformed on something that is just opinion?

Yes, I have scientifically verifiable proof, that's why I won the Nobel Prize for Science, the Oscar, 3 Grammy's and employee of the Year at the local Dunkin' Donuts.

[Euphorbia]

You either believe that some form of "god" created the universe or that the universe (or energy in it) has some god-like qualities (i.e always been there, created itself ect.)

Either way i don't think whatever created the universe (be it naturally god-like or god itself) would really care all that much if you prayed or not.

G_d like qualities? For all we know the universe has always existed, but just in another form. No g_d needed.

Glad the universe doesn't care, as I've never prayed for anything in my life. No point to it really.

[Euphorbia]

Yes, I have scientifically verifiable proof, that's why I won the Nobel Prize for Science, the Oscar, 3 Grammy's and employee of the Year at the local Dunkin' Donuts.

You must be the only person on Earth with proof.

Quite the accomplishments. Fib much.

[IamsSon]

You must be the only person on Earth with proof.

Quite the accomplishments. Fib much.

You mean all of the sarcasm that was dripping from that post missed you?

[Euphorbia]

You mean all of the sarcasm that was dripping from that post missed you?

Not at all! Just tired of the religious making statements they can't back up.

You really think I'm that naive?

[IamsSon]

Not at all! Just tired of the religious making statements they can't back up.

You really think I'm that naive?

I don't know, you seemed to really believe I was claiming to have scientifically verifiable proof even after I also said I had won the Nobel Prize and the Oscar because of it.

[Professor Buzzkill]

G_d like qualities? For all we know the universe has always existed, but just in another form. No g_d needed.

Glad the universe doesn't care, as I've never prayed for anything in my life. No point to it really.

So therefore, the universe has god-like qualities. Energy cannot be created or destroyed. Yet, as you say, the universe MIGHT have always been there, just like god MIGHT have always been here. But if you say the latter people will ask "who created god?"

Edited September 27, 2010 by Professor Buzzkill

[Euphorbia]

I don't know, you seemed to really believe I was claiming to have scientifically verifiable proof even after I also said I had won the Nobel Prize and the Oscar because of it.

You seemed to believe that I believed you. I did not!

Were you expecting a different response to that post? A person with an I.Q. of 70 most likely wouldn't of believed you yet somehow you think I thought you were serious? Thanks for the vote of confidence in my ability to detect sarcasm.

By the way, you couldn't detect the sarcasm in the post I followed up yours with?

[Euphorbia]

So therefore, the universe has god-like qualities. Energy cannot be created or destroyed. Yet, as you say, the universe MIGHT have always been there, just like god MIGHT have always been here. But if you say the latter people will ask "who created god?"

To say the universe has g_d-like qualities is about the same as saying g_d exists. "G_d did it" just doesn't fly with an Atheist. It's not about what you believe but about what you can prove. Whilst science doesn't have all the answers, religion has none!

But the answer to who created g_d is......Man.....and only in his mind. Hopefully mankind will get over it.

[+Paranoid Android]

I wasn't a fan of the second set of questions Roy Comfort was asking. The logic that if we as intelligent human beings cannot create a cow then something more intelligent than us must be the cause is flawed logic. Stephen Hawking is more intelligent than I am (by a long, long way), yet I can competently compose/create a piece of music and I'm guessing he cannot (at least, not likely). Greater intelligence does not automatically equate to the ability to do things lesser intelligences cannot.

However, the first question is valid, in my opinion. Everything comes from something. Where does honey come from? The bee, but where does the bee come from, etc etc. The immediate atheist/non-religious answer is "well what created God then". But the rule that everything has a cause applies only to the empirical/physical world. The concept of a creator completely sidesteps this question by being a non-empirical construct. The question of who/what created God is thus meaningless in this sense.

We scientifically don't know how our world first came into being. Was it a supernatural creator, or completely naturalistic? At the least, then, what it shows is that the theory of a supernatural creator's existence is at least a plausible hypothesis as to how the universe began, as plausible as any other hypothesis given the circumstances. It doesn't prove any particular concept of God to be correct (eg, the Christian God, Islamic God, etc), there is an element of faith in accepting a particular version of God as the true version. But the hypothesis of a supernatural force being the "first cause" is not an implausible one considering what we know of how the world works.

Just a thought

~ Regards, PA

Edited September 27, 2010 by Paranoid Android

[preacherman76]

I wasn't a fan of the second set of questions Roy Comfort was asking. The logic that if we as intelligent human beings cannot create a cow then something more intelligent than us must be the cause is flawed logic. Stephen Hawking is more intelligent than I am (by a long, long way), yet I can competently compose/create a piece of music and I'm guessing he cannot (at least, not likely). Greater intelligence does not automatically equate to the ability to do things lesser intelligences cannot.

However, the first question is valid, in my opinion. Everything comes from something. Where does honey come from? The bee, but where does the bee come from, etc etc. The immediate atheist/non-religious answer is "well what created God then". But the rule that everything has a cause applies only to the empirical/physical world. The concept of a creator completely sidesteps this question by being a non-empirical construct. The question of who/what created God is thus meaningless in this sense.

We scientifically don't know how our world first came into being. Was it a supernatural creator, or completely naturalistic? At the least, then, what it shows is that the theory of a supernatural creator's existence is at least a plausible hypothesis as to how the universe began, as plausible as any other hypothesis given the circumstances. It doesn't prove any particular concept of God to be correct (eg, the Christian God, Islamic God, etc), there is an element of faith in accepting a particular version of God as the true version. But the hypothesis of a supernatural force being the "first cause" is not an implausible one considering what we know of how the world works.

Just a thought

~ Regards, PA

Good post PA. Personaly Id take it one step further and call the possible existance of a eternal being a ligit theory. Especialy after considering the obvious design in everything around us.