Did a God or Gods create the universe? EDITED
-
@ ‘Alan F’. Your puppy does not love you, but he only appreciates you, for food and shelter ...
Definition of true love I gave you before ... True human love can not be found in animals...@ ‘irwanwr’. “Gospel of Barnabas” is not a book inspired by the Spirit of God, so, your interpretation is your responsibility...
-
@unknownuser said:
@ ‘irwanwr’. “Gospel of Barnabas” is not a book inspired by the Spirit of God, so, your interpretation is your responsibility...
well, i see. i accept that as your opinion. as much as you might see Veda, Tripitaka, Quran, etc. with your point of view.
other people might have a different point of view in the other way.
such as, they might consider any of those "trinitarian" sponsored by Constantine and his Council of Nicaea are the false ones. since that trinity wasn't there before. and assuming Constantine were just trying to find a way to adapt his belief in pagan gods into the new religion. -
@unknownuser said:
@ ‘Alan F’. Your puppy does not love you, but he only appreciates you, for food and shelter ...
Definition of true love I gave you before ... True human love can not be found in animals.Yes he does; and yes it can...and you blithely stating different doesn't alter that one iota.
There have been numerous cases of dogs risking or giving their lives to protect their owners...that goes way beyond 'appreciation'. "Greater love hath no man....etc." ...and don't be so predictable as to point out that it doesn't mention dogs; it doesn't mention women either.I'm changing the grade to a flat F.
-
And now for something completely different.
Did the Universe create god?
If yes, why? How was the Universe before god, was it lonely?
Was god created with a bang or a wimper? Is there any radiation eminating from his black hole that can tell us more about his nature. Is he mild mannered or a jerk?
These are just a few question that the great minds of today are trying to answer.And now.... do carry on.
-
@alan fraser said:
I'm changing the grade to a flat F.
-
Evolutionists assumes that any theory can be true, but not the biblical revelation...!
In reality, only the Bible provides the preconditions for the intelligibility of man’s experience and reasoning. If the Bible were not true, it would be impossible to prove anything.
Evolutionists have the impression that they can know the truth, without divine revelation, but they are completely wrong!See for example the DVD “The ULTIMATE PROOF of Creation – resolving the Origins Debate”, by Dr. Jason Lisle, and you will be elucidated!
For detailed information on creation, evolution and the book of Genesis, go for example to:
Answersingenesis.org -
I despair...
Did not [your] God give you a brain to use ?
To at least understand the world and it's complexities [as well as striving to understand God too] ?A book written by men purporting it to be the 'Word of God' is NO proof of anything.
Scientists don't automatically preclude anything from their purview.However, since the Bible is internally inconsistent, self-referencing and does not reflect the observed world with any reasonable accuracy... and there are other 'models' that work better therefore these form the basis of current scientific theories. These theories are not perfect... and good scientists continually strive to improve [even disprove!] theories to get a clearer understanding of how the world works. A scientist who sticks to an ideas when observations contradict it, simply because 'it seems right to him', is no better than a bigot saying that their version of things is correct - 'because they say so' [or even worse, because someone tells them it's so [in a 'book' or a 'sermon'], so they fail to use even one of the brain cells their [supposed] creator endowed them with...]...
-
It seems that some people cannot accept answers or ideas except as absolute values, with no variables. They need to have the ultimate final answer. There can be no shades of grey. And what they cannot answer with absolutes becomes a mystery. I predict these present discussions will not arrive at a solution. The issue may be shelved for awhile as the passion(pathology?)to impose/express one's opinions dies off. A new batch of folks probably will take this issue up sometime in the future-- one's who may not even be aware of this discussion in this forum.
-
“I despair...” for those who criticize the Bible, but have not read it all, have not studied it carefully...!
-
Cornel, what makes you think that others might NOT have read the Bible carefully, and if they have done so they might not have understood it as well as you have ???
I take exception to your presumption!Might I suggest that it is you who might have not read it sufficiently carefully, and thereby not understood it at all properly.
Perhaps there are many others who understand it better than you do
I beseech you in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken... to quote Cromwell...
Good scientists [and theologians] never think they have 'absolute truth' - but rather, the best approximation of it that is currently available to them. They always look to improve their understanding, or sometimes change it completely when things don't fit as expected...You seem to think that you are right, no matter what others might think, believe or know - and more worryingly, in the face of clear and contrary indications you refuse to reconsider one iota of your ill-founded dogma...
Many of us are less set in out ways...
-
@unknownuser said:
“I despair...” for those who criticize the Bible, but have not read it all, have not studied it carefully...!
I despair that in this day and age we still need to keep such a book in high regard and be forced to have extensive knowledge of its foul contents.
-
@solo said:
@unknownuser said:
Please do not take this as an offense if you are not a believer ,this is just my point of view and was not intended to harm anyone in any way.
No offense at all.
I guess life is easier to just believe in a higher power, pretty much go through life without asking, thinking, questioning.
Hehe there is no place here for the "just" word ,that is for very simple things like eat,sleep,walk ..believing is not that simple. It is easier to believe(which is not that easy as you think or at least as you want to say ) and to put your faith into somebody who is willing to do the best for you.
But you are being a bit ironic here with the "without asking,thinking,questioning",or at least that is how I feel this phrase,because the thinking,the asking and the questioning are still there .It's just that I/we know that someday we will have the answer of all our questions.
If you want a parallel,think of your father when he teach,coach,fed,punished you because he wanted something better for you. Didn't you had then lot of asking,questioning,thinking? Yet the responses weren't there. Only when you got mature enough you got few of your answers because your mind was ready to take it . -
@ Marian
Your country, Romania, is a ‘Christian country’, where most are Orthodox, having knowledge of “Bible foul contents”, as you said.
Who is confused, you or the Romanian people?! -
Arguments, Cornel, not sophistry.
-
@ TomDC. Marian denies the Bible used by his ancestors, but it is obvious that he didn’t study it!
-
@unknownuser said:
@alan fraser said:
Factors such as 'love' are not evidence for the existence of God...and certainly not a precise Abrahamic one. My dog loves me...in a totally unreserved way; and by any definition of the word. Does that make him christian and bound for glory? Evidence is that which is normally understood as such...the kind of thing that would satisfy a forensic lab.
That is the only thing that does vaguely annoy me...when dyed-in-the-wool theists attempt to draw some kind of spurious equivalence between the proof for God and the proof for some scientific theory or another. There is no such equivalence and it's a totally bogus and dishonest practice to maintain that there is. Faith is faith; it's not subject to scientific probity; get over it. But that does not mean that science is a 'faith' or 'belief' or 'religion'.
Scientific theory entails:-
a) An understood process (maybe not always fully inderstood, as yet, but at least in a general sense.
b) A process which is predictable.
c) A process which is repeatable.
There is not one aspect of God that meets even one of these criteria; that's why belief is called Faith. He moves in mysterious ways...the very antithesis of scientific process.There's nothing remotely 'subjective' about scientific theory. If there was, the electrons rushing through the CPU of the machine I'm typing this on could just as easily deliver me a burger and fries as the contents of this forum page. The quantum mechanics that precisely determine the function of that CPU are exactly the same quantum mechanics that point beyond any doubt to the fact of the Big Bang and the processes that followed in its wake.
I think this is the best post I've read here yet, Thanks
@alan fraser said:
The people I really feel sorry for are those that are so materially deadened that they can spend a small fortune on illuminating their house, apparently leaving them so broke can't even spare a single penny for a charitable cause; or so worn out that they can't even drag their fat arse of the sofa as far as the front door. There might be some unknown mitigating circumstances of course, but if not, those are the true spiritually dead...whether they call themselves religious, agnostic or atheist. But that's a whole other topic.
Second best!
I concur. Alan, I sincerely hope my kid runs into a few teachers (you mentioned you taught, somewhere) of your stature throughout his schooling. I have, and I remember them fondly, still.
Otherwise, it'd be all down to me, and that'd be bad.
-
the holy bible seems to be your stick, can't you stand up by yourself?
-
@ Bravo ‘TomDC’, for that “the best post you've read there yet”:
“Factors such as 'love' are not evidence for the existence of God”...Of course love is the result of some chemicals or stray electrical bio-circuits...
Congratulations! -
Why doesn't anyone quote these verses?
@unknownuser said:
Ezekiel 23:19-20
Common English Bible (CEB)
19 But she added to her promiscuities, bringing to mind her youthful days when she was a prostitute in the land of Egypt. 20 She lusted after their male consorts, whose sexual organs were like those of donkeys, and whose ejaculation was like that of horses. -
You're right, ‘Gilles’ (and 'Solo'), the Holy Bible is a solid “stick”, a solid rock for me!
“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
Advertisement