Did a God or Gods create the universe? EDITED
-
@solo
Pete, santa an atheist?
The story of santa is interesting.
It's St Nicholas but became more complicated in the north countries
Became complicated in mediterranean countries too.
More complicated in US, in 30s even more as cocacola used this kind figure.
Now, from the fun sculptris forum challenge "holly cow, santa was an alien" I present you my vision - entry. Have fun, not a nightmare.
Merry christmas earth people...
-
Merry Christmas all.
-
Is this an allusion to pastafarian? with meatballs?
-
Ah! His Noodly Appendageness. Merry Christmas to you and all others on the forum, Eric.
That reminds me of this blast from the past (I was in the States at the time)(Note to self: Don't forget the Xmas Alka Seltzer.)
[flash=640,390:3fttrukp]http://www.youtube.com/v/48TewJlc6BA?version=3[/flash:3fttrukp] -
After you've overloaded, where do you find room for an additional 4-8 oz. of liquid of any sort? With fizz, even.
-
A Merry Christmas to everyone ...
No matter why or how you celebrate, may you find happiness and success in the New Year!
Earthrise. Taken by William Anders on the Apollo 8 mission, Christmas Eve, December 24th, 1968.
Cheers!
-
^ nice
-
...“Great and marvelous are Your works,
O Lord God, the Almighty;
Righteous and true are Your ways"... (Revelation 15:3) -
@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!
-
Alan Fraser wrote:
“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?”Alan's dog is cheating us, because “Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.” (1 Corintians 13:4-7)
-
If you have to stoop to accusing a five month old puppy of cheating, Cornel, I'd say you've lost the argument.
In any case, how does the biblical description of love mean that my dog is cheating? Your statement makes as much sense as "Alan's dog is cheating us because bananas are yellow."I wrote "My dog loves me...in a totally unreserved way; and by any definition of the word." That includes the one you posted. My dog fits all those conditions at least as well as most humans, therefore your comment is both illogical and pointless.
You've been told umpteen times; copy/pasting quotes from the Bible is not a substitute for reasoned argument...especially when they are complete non sequiturs.D- Must try harder
-
Ahhhh Alan ..... you are being very hard with that 'D'
-
i agree with Alan about his dog.
since it's their nature.
and it was written in the Gospel of Barnabas;@unknownuser said:
Jesus answered: 'If ye consider, O foolish ones, what the dog doth, that hath no reason, for the service of his master, ye will find my saying to be true. Tell me, doth the dog guard the house of his master, and expose his life against the robber? Yea, assuredly. But what receiveth he? Many blows and injuries with little bread, and he always showeth to his master a joyful countenance. Is this true?'
'True it is, O master,' answered the disciples.
-
@ ‘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...]...
Advertisement