Did a God or Gods create the universe? EDITED
-
@unknownuser said:
The Laws of Physics were synonymous with The Laws of nature or The Laws of God. The word Law itself (which has its origins in the old Norse word meaning that which is layed down...as in layer) presupposes that there is something or someone doing the lawmaking.
i may used the "law" or "order" words here, because we're trying to speak the same language. that is english. if i am speaking in my native language, i don't even have to mention "law" or "order". not even once. i think whether the "law" was derived from Norse word or else, doesn't count into my thought. we might have very distinctive differences on terms of meaning, root or definition of words. english doesn't mean "everything" to me. even though i was an anglophile or sort of a little.
in my culture, especially language we probably adapt "wise", "path" or "way". like wise itself. clockwise, certain order of path, etc.
and finally,
since now i am back to my last conclusion (once again). that we're talking everything with different Operating System (that's why i didn't pay much attention to this thread for a while), i'll let you do the discussion the way your Operating System told you to do.have a good time with your beloved ones in your holidays.
cheers,
-
@unknownuser said:
... the tao which is basically what all other religions are built upon..
how did you come with that conclusion? all other religions?
about those things. living or not. they do or response to their surrounding. with certain kind of laws or orders. i agree on that since the beginning. until today, i've never heard anything like a bee pursuing a degree in architecture or PhD in physics. even if they've been doing that "hives building" since thousands or millions of years ago, they're going nowhere else with that. so they just got some kind of that "blueprints" implanted in their being. they just do what they've "told" to do.
and the main difference between us human and those other things is most probably our high "free will" and "mental" capabilities combined.
then, yes it seems we've come onto some sort of agreement there.
that there is "something" beyond all of these. you may call it mother nature, father nature, the jedi knight's force, tao, or whatever that is.
since i don't know and don't have any proof of what gender that "thing" would be, i might stick to know "it" by god.@unknownuser said:
Say: He is Allah, the One! (1) Allah, the eternally Besought of all! (2) He begetteth not nor was begotten. (3) And there is none comparable unto Him. (4)
@unknownuser said:
one of the problems with religion, as i see it, is that it's an attempt to describe what isn't know to us..
i don't know about electricity, nuclear things either. let alone cosmology. but that doesn't make me not to believe that electricity or nuclear things do exist.
@unknownuser said:
.. and i think the reason why everyone locks onto god so hard is that it explains what happens after death.. death being the single greatest fear humans experience..
i might have different opinion or feeling towards that matter. since every living thing will eventually die. but falling from a cliff i might fear of. because there should be options before every possibilities to choose.
@unknownuser said:
but just look at our history.. there used to be a god for all sorts of stuff that was unexplainable at the time..
thunder? oh, that's a god
rain? a god
fire? yep.. a god too
plus all sorts of other gods to explain our emotions and various other elements of nature..i have a little thing about that. you might consider it as just fairy tales, myths, etc. or you can give it a little thought.
@unknownuser said:
Thus did We show Abraham the kingdom of the heavens and the earth that he might be of those possessing certainty: (75) When the night grew dark upon him he beheld a star. He said: This is my Lord. But when it set, he said: I love not things that set. (76) And when he saw the moon uprising, he exclaimed: This is my Lord. But when it set, he said: Unless my Lord guide me, I surely shall become one of the folk who are astray. (77) And when he saw the sun uprising, he cried: This is my Lord! This is greater! And when it set he exclaimed: O my people! Lo! I am free from all that ye associate (with Him). (78) Lo! I have turned my face toward Him Who created the heavens and the earth, as one by nature upright, and I am not of the idolaters. (79) His people argued with him. He said: Dispute ye with me concerning Allah when He hath guided me? I fear not at all that which ye set up beside Him unless my Lord willeth aught. My Lord includeth all things in His knowledge. Will ye not then remember? (80) How should I fear that which ye set up beside Him, when ye fear not to set up beside Allah that for which He hath revealed unto you no warrant? Which of the two factions hath more right to safety? (Answer me that) if ye have knowledge. (81)
@unknownuser said:
and you'll sit on your death bed feeling all comfy (but in reality, you're still going to be scared shitless as the doubt creeps in), then you'll die, then — well, i don't know what happens then.. no one does and believe it or not, it's ok for you to admit that.
yes, i know that too. as a matter of fact, i don't think i need more complicated explanation for that. since i have a bunch of notes on that matter. here are a few of them.
@unknownuser said:
Every soul will taste of death. Then unto Us ye will be returned. (57)
@unknownuser said:
Say (unto them): Lo! the death from which ye shrink will surely meet you, and afterward ye will be returned unto the Knower of the Invisible and the Visible, and He will tell you what ye used to do. (8)
@unknownuser said:
Say: Flight will not avail you if ye flee from death or killing, and then ye dwell in comfort but a little while. (16)
-
It doesn't matter what language you speak. It doesn't matter whether you use law or way or path or wise; it's the language itself that is at fault...because the only 'language' that the universe understands is that of mathematics.
Any other language is loaded with pre-supposed meanings:-
A law requires a lawgiver
A path or way that is followed requires someone or something to originally create it.
Wisdom requires an intelligence.On the other hand, 2+2 doesn't require anything to equal 4, it just does. It doesn't matter what base you use...binary, decimal, duodecimal etc. 4 might be expressed in a different form, but the concept of 4 remains the same. Similarly, the universe doesn't require anything other than the fact that it is.
-
@alan fraser said:
... the universe doesn't require anything other than the fact that it is.
i agree
-
@unknownuser said:
that's a pretty weak argument.. it's like saying everything in the universe was created at one moment, by god, then hasn't changed since..
but surely you believe that the universe is still changing.. that parts of it are being influenced by certain other elements within the universe.. even here on earth, the landscape is constantly changing... some rivers are still getting deeper as they're being carved out of the ground by flowing water..Well, from the perspective of higher dimension (the one of God) the time, beginning and end are all now.
@unknownuser said:
(or wait.. he's a god right? and we just personify him as a man? hmm.. this is more confusing than 10 dimensions!)
It's not. Just like in Flatland, A Square perceives sphere as perfect circle.
I saw the movie Flatland (2007). In a mathematical way it is interesting, but in human way it is scary to me. The society without God is so primitive, and dead despite all the science and technology. It lacks Love and Empathy, the attributes which make us humans instead of just 3d objects. The main problem here is the character which is so simplified and without a chance of finding answers within himself instead outside of his material world. There is no link between dimensions only when you look in materialistic way...
As for science:
An orthodox priest once asked Nikola Tesla if he had ever seen electricity. Tesla said No. And how do you know it exists? asked priest. Tesla said: The same way you know God exists. So there is no much difference in major question. -
@srx said:
In a mathematical way it is interesting, but in human way it is scary to me. The society without God is so primitive, and dead despite all the science and technology. It lacks Love and Empathy, the attributes which make us humans instead of just 3d objects
That is manifestly not true. What empathy did the Inquisition show for its victims? What empathy does any religious fanatic show for the 'infidel' on the other side of the religious divide? These are the people that are dead inside, not humanists (or more moderate theists).
Love and empathy are not the sole preserve of the religious any more than an appreciation of the beauties of nature are. The religious just like to pretend they are, because it makes them feel superior. -
@unknownuser said:
An orthodox priest once asked Nikola Tesla if he had ever seen electricity. Tesla said No. And how do you know it exists? asked priest. Tesla said: The same way you know God exists. So there is no much difference in major question.
All that tells us is that intelligent people can say dumb things.
-
@alan fraser said:
@srx said:
In a mathematical way it is interesting, but in human way it is scary to me. The society without God is so primitive, and dead despite all the science and technology. It lacks Love and Empathy, the attributes which make us humans instead of just 3d objects
That is manifestly not true. What empathy did the Inquisition show for its victims? What empathy does any religious fanatic show for the 'infidel' on the other side of the religious divide? These are the people that are dead inside, not humanists (or more moderate theists).
Love and empathy are not the sole preserve of the religious any more than an appreciation of the beauties of nature are. The religious just like to pretend they are, because it makes them feel superior.You are making mistake. Wolf in sheep's skin is not the represent of sheep. No wonder people are becoming atheist with examples like this.
Inquisition.
It is not Christianity, but the opposite. One of the most famous Dostoyevsky writings "The Grand Inquisitor" explains this: http://www.online-literature.com/dostoevsky/2884/Religious fanatic
Once again it comes from wrong source. You know about Christianity only from pope, and that is the wrong source, cause he is the opposite of the Christ.
"Ever since Catholicism was brought to power, those in authority have sought to expand and control the church, often through the fanatical use of force. Grant Shafer says, "Jesus of Nazareth is best known as a preacher of nonviolence. [6] The start of Christian fanatic rule came with the Roman Emperor Constantine I as Catholicism. Ellens says, "When Christianity came to power in the empire of Constantine, it proceeded almost to viciously repress all non-Christians and all Christians who did not line up with official Orthodox ideology, policy, and practice".[7] An example of Christians who didn't line up with Orthodox ideology is the Donatists, who "refused to accept repentant clergy who had formerly given way to apostasy when persecuted".[8] Fanatic Christian activity, as Catholicism, continued into the Middle Ages with the Crusades. These wars were attempts by the Catholics, sanctioned by the Pope, to reclaim the Holy Land from the Muslims."In short, when Rome saw the treat in Christianity it swallowed it and made it part of it's state's weapon which is still active. Like "Merciful angel", which was the name for NATO bombing of civilians in Serbia. I think that religions of the World are peaceful and creative in its nature.
-
@hieru said:
@unknownuser said:
An orthodox priest once asked Nikola Tesla if he had ever seen electricity. Tesla said No. And how do you know it exists? asked priest. Tesla said: The same way you know God exists. So there is no much difference in major question.
All that tells us is that intelligent people can say dumb things.
Hieru, If it is dumb, than you surely know the nature of the electricity?
-
Hi,
Whether there is a God or not. The fact is that we humans are responsible for the states on earth. The people starve or die in wars, that is our so-called free will. These people do not die by the will of God but by us.
How much terrorism and other atrocities have been executed in the name of God. We salve our consciences so that, we say this is God's will. We then push the responsibility to do our best, to a different instance because we can not at all act differently because God is omnipotent.If a god created the universe then he also knows how it works and how it will change. He also knows that the energy of our sun in five billion years will be consumed. The earth will become uninhabitable, and mankind will disappear forever. Why should he make the effort to punish us before.
Charly
-
That doesn't advance your argument one bit. I'm not really concerned whether the Inquisition or fundamentalist christians represent the true face of christianity. Your original point was that non-christians are dead inside...that they have no love or empathy. That is total nonsense.
In fact atheists are generally more empathetic than anyone else...because they are fully aware that the here and now is all we have got...both for themselves and anyone else; so you need to get it right first time around.You are telling me I only know about christianity from the Pope. How do you presume to know what I know about christianity? I was born Anglican, attended Methodist chapel and Sunday School, taught for nearly 20 years in a faith school, married a practising Catholic and have attended mass more times than I could possibly count. I bet I know rather more about christianity than you do. People don't tend towards atheism out of ignorance...quite the reverse.
And BTW quoting Tesla is pointless. Not seeing electricity is not remotely the same as not seeing God. Typical priestly deviousness. You can see electricity in action. It's results are entirely predictable and its mechanism perfectly understood. To say the same about God you'd have to be able to pray for a new car and get one, or pray for the recovery of a sick loved one and see them get better...every time...Poof! just like that...cause and effect.
-
-
I love this quote from Men in Black:
@unknownuser said:
Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.
1970: Eggs are good for you.
1980: Eggs are bad for you.
1990: Eggs are not bad for you ... new research supports this.
2000: Eggs are bad for you ... current technology has given us new tools to research this.
2010: Eggs might be good, or bad, we're not sure based on our current level of knowledge and technology.
2020: ...So, for 40 years I've read and listened to "men of science" tell me about eggs ...
While one verse from John:
@unknownuser said:
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Hasn't changed in 2000+ years ...
Cheers.
-
@idahoj said:
Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.
That's not entirely accurate. It was more like 2000-years ago people, at least some, knew the Earth was round and 500 years ago they still believed that it was the center of the Universe and the Sun revolved around the Earth.
Both of those were accurate to observations made with the then available instruments and known mathematical calculations. Science is not afraid of admitting it was wrong and revising its views unlike religion which can only change if that change is shoved down its throat.
Plus unlike your egg example Science never changed its mind and said the earth is flat or the Sun revolves around the earth again.
The thing about food is that there are many factors involved, firstly biological and chemical secondly social and industrial. the quantity in which it is ingested etc. From that respect, food is both good and bad for you, all food any food.
-
@unknownuser said:
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
OK.
What about the other dead, the no christian souls that walk in these caves-rocky galleries around the river Styx, all these chinese, indians, muslims, buddhists, etc etc, having the company of dead dogs, cats, monkeys, lions ... they cannot pass the river? Because they never heard about Jesus or any son of god?This isn't the meaning of course. Perhaps is that others saw and listened the Word of god otherwise... they may not perish then. God has many ways. Or men have many ways to find god. To find a purpose in the creation. To find love. To accept death. To make space for new births.
They won't, the huge majority of men.
So, a community will always be a field of war.
Here another long living truth. War.
I can't say that a merciful god made another miracle, the only I know for sure.
How to convert war to peace.
It may be the miracle of men after all. It is called pure democracy and IMO is the only thing that changed the world of men. It made us individuals.
These days, many among us believe that it was an utopia. The "creator" of free minded men, it's an utopia...BTW This egg story is funny. Around 1970-1980 there were 'scientists' that tried to convince mediterranean people like greeks that olive oil was full of cholesterol and terrible for our health. Some business on corn oil imports.
These all aren't scientists. They are doctors. Have you tried to have a nice conversation with one of them, ever? Like the one we have here.
-
@unknownuser said:
Both of those were accurate to observations made with the then available instruments and known mathematical calculations.
Absolutely true. Hence the point of my quoting Men in Black (actual historical precision lacking as it may) and the egg "timeline". "Fact" as it may be, is predicated on the current knowledge and level of technology available at the time. As we advance our knowledge, and our means of observing and measuring "real things", our views, hypotheses, theories and facts change. So, what may be construed as accurate and "factual" today, may be revised at any time in the future.
@unknownuser said:
Science is not afraid of admitting it was wrong and revising its views unlike religion which can only change if that change is shoved down its throat.
Sorry boss, but "religion" and "faith" are two different things in my book. I don't have to be "religious" to have faith ... I certainly believe in the existence of God, but I don't belong to a "religion".
Cheers.
-
@alan fraser said:
That doesn't advance your argument one bit. I'm not really concerned whether the Inquisition or fundamentalist christians represent the true face of christianity.
You should be concerned about the topic if you bring an important opinion based on it.
@alan fraser said:
Your original point was that non-christians are dead inside...
It was not my point. That was not my words. I said: "The society without God is so primitive, and dead despite all the science and technology." talking about the Flatland. It is the way to The brave New World http://www.huxley.net/bnw/.
Maybe you misunderstood me because of my bad English for which I'm sorry. I personal don't think that God sees atheist different from theists, they both have Love in them, and no one has more.@alan fraser said:
You are telling me I only know about christianity from the Pope. How do you presume to know what I know about christianity?
From the examples you used for it.
@alan fraser said:
And BTW quoting Tesla is pointless. Not seeing electricity is not remotely the same as not seeing God. Typical priestly deviousness. You can see electricity in action. It's results are entirely predictable and its mechanism perfectly understood.
The point here is that man's science can describe with some mathematical model some laws of nature, and use it inside the borders of this model, but can not explain the very essence of it, the root. And that's the meeting point.
@alan fraser said:
To say the same about God you'd have to be able to pray for a new car and get one, or pray for the recovery of a sick loved one and see them get better...every time...Poof! just like that...cause and effect.
It's not how it works. I see why are you an atheist. ) Joke. 
-
As I said, around page#1...
'God' would have to exist... if we hadn't invented him... -
“If someone proved to me that Christ
is outside the truth, and that in reality the truth were outside of Christ, then I should prefer to remain with Christ rather than with the truth.”
― Fyodor Dostoyevsky -
srx,
The Tesla anecdote was concerned with evidence for the existence of electricity. Most scientists would have responded by explaining the scientific method and the means by which we can establish the existence of electricity and measure it's influence etc. etc.
Failing to point that out, or equating evidence for the existence of electricity with that of God, was very 'dumb' in my opinion. I imagine that his comments had more to do with his spiritual beliefs than his understanding of science (otherwise it could have been irony).
If evidence for the existence of God (or God's creation of the universe) were as strong as that for the existence of electricity, we wouldn't be having this discussion
Advertisement