Why I believe in God.

Wildo7 said:

Well let's see, irreducable complexity for one has been repeatedly shot down every single time a fundamentalist whackjob has tried to come up with an example. We have the entire fossil record, observable evolution of microorganisms, DNA continuity, ancestral maps etc. etc.

Click to expand...

I never said evolution is not a very high probability.
In fact, I do believe it occurred for our own existence and we'll
continue evolving...into what... I don't know but I suspect machines is our future.
But that does not address the question of what made this all happen.
Is it "just is"? Or is there a creator?

363839 said:

I never said evolution is not a very high probability.
In fact, I do believe it occurred for our own existence and we'll
continue evolving...into what... I don't know but I suspect machines is our future.
But that does not address the question of what made this all happen.
Is it "just is"? Or is there a creator?

Click to expand...

The fact that you phrase the question in terms of "creator" v. "just is" being the only two options reveals a certain level of indoctrination. Throughout history as our consciousness expands, we are forced to redefine questions such as these when often the answer is not in line with what we asked. For example, before we understood evolution the question was "were we created or is it just random?" We now know that the actual answer is neither of those things.

We don't even yet know how to ask the question of existence and some portend to have the answer based solely on mythology and the shortcomings of human consciousness. To posit that there is a God in the manner that religions designate him is not only shortsighted but contradictory to an objective view of the random, chaotic, hostile and impersonal nature of life and the universe. God has literally never been the correct answer to questions of science, and I expect this trend to continue.

Wildo7 said:

Throughout history as our consciousness expands, we are forced to redefine questions such as these when often the answer is not in line with what we asked. For example, before we understood evolution the question was "were we created or is it just random?" We now know that the actual answer is neither of those things.

Click to expand...

Not to nitpick here but the theory of evolution was thought of before Darwin came along. 520 BC, in fact.
AboutDarwin.com - Evolution before Darwin
So what exactly is the random theory, anyway?

Wildo7 said:

We don't even yet know how to ask the question of existence and some portend to have the answer based solely on mythology and the shortcomings of human consciousness. To posit that there is a God in the manner that religions designate him is not only shortsighted but contradictory to an objective view of the random, chaotic, hostile and impersonal nature of life and the universe. God has literally never been the correct answer to questions of science, and I expect this trend to continue.

Click to expand...

Atheists have mocked the idea of a superior being or creator as far back as the ancient Greek philosophers. Yet now, science have put forth the idea of the cosmic egg. You know, the one where they say the big bang was initiated by a particle smaller than an atom that held all the energy of the universe and just exploded, creating what we now call our universe. All the energy in the universe. That means all the energy that created all the matter...all the suns and solar systems and all the galaxies and whatever else we haven't discovered were condensed into a particle smaller than an atom...Furthermore there may be other cosmic eggs creating other universes serially connected or taking up the same space as our own universe but on different carrier wavelengths. Some of these universes may not even follow the same laws of physics as our own universe does.
I'm sure you'll say why not. Right!?
I'd even agree with you.
So what is so absurd about the idea of a creator just because we haven't figured it out yet?

Cause we have to believe in something

crazzycat said:

Cause we have to believe in something

Click to expand...

godef said:

If God does exist, where did HE come from?

Click to expand...

God is eternal.

Mista Kool said:

God is eternal.

Click to expand...

The whole point of having a God as the "explanation" is to explain where all the matter came from. A lot of the "God" advocates believe that all of the matter in the universe had to come from somewhere, it had to be "created", that it couldn't just exist because it can't be made or destroyed, etc. So their solution is to say God made it. Well WOW. You just made a great argument. That is SO much easier.

So you have to explanations:
1. All the matter in the universe existed as a single, infinitely dense singularity with near infinite potential energy. No complexity, no creation, just a single spec of matter.

2. God, an extremely complex being, created all the matter. So you essential still have explanation 1 here, but you have added an extremely complex creator "being".

#2 is supposed to be the better, simpler answer? Really?

Wildo7 said:

Well let's see, irreducable complexity for one has been repeatedly shot down every single time a fundamentalist whackjob has tried to come up with an example. We have the entire fossil record, observable evolution of microorganisms, DNA continuity, ancestral maps etc. etc.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, seems to me you've sufficiently explained away the Christian young-earth garbage (an easy task), but you haven't actually disproved intelligent design. Nor can it be proven with observable facts. The problem with diagnosing intelligent design using scientific method is that one discards a hypothesis by disproving it, not by using facts to support it. So while an atheist or a "god-fearer" might be compelled to compile evidence to support their assertion, that really doesn't mean a whole lot. I cannot think of one thing that would disprove intelligent design, nor can I conjure up an idea of what kind of evidence would support it.

So people can take it on faith or not. Pretty easy.

Nikolai said:

Hmmm, seems to me you've sufficiently explained away the Christian young-earth garbage (an easy task), but you haven't actually disproved intelligent design. Nor can it be proven with observable facts. The problem with diagnosing intelligent design using scientific method is that one discards a hypothesis by disproving it, not by using facts to support it. So while an atheist or a "god-fearer" might be compelled to compile evidence to support their assertion, that really doesn't mean a whole lot. I cannot think of one thing that would disprove intelligent design, nor can I conjure up an idea of what kind of evidence would support it.

So people can take it on faith or not. Pretty easy.

Click to expand...

Its impossible to prove something doesn't exist. Theres as much proof for, or against, ID, as there is for, or against, Unicorns.


Intelligent Design isn't a theory because it can't be tested. Its wishcasting.

Synovia said:

Its impossible to prove something doesn't exist. Theres as much proof for, or against, ID, as there is for, or against, Unicorns.

Click to expand...

It appears you're very keen on making this comparison, but I've already demonstrated the fallacy of that assertion. A more accurate example would be a chimera.

Besides ID isn't something that might exist, it is something that might have occurred.

It also appears you also missed the point of my post, which was that ID cannot be proven or disproved.

I also never called it a theory, though the fact that it cannot be proven or disproved with existing evidence does not necessarily negate it as such. To make that assumption demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of how theory works.

I would say you should really try to reread my post again.

Mrs.PatsFanInVa said:

Better than doing so in your pants.

Click to expand...

Or the bed.

Nikolai said:

It appears you're very keen on making this comparison, but I've already demonstrated the fallacy of that assertion. A more accurate example would be a chimera.

Besides ID isn't something that might exist, it is something that might have occurred.

It also appears you also missed the point of my post, which was that ID cannot be proven or disproved.

I also never called it a theory, though the fact that it cannot be proven or disproved with existing evidence does not necessarily negate it as such. To make that assumption demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of how theory works.

I would say you should really try to reread my post again.

Click to expand...

There's no reason to reread it. You state that you can't disprove intelligent design. I state, you can't disprove unicorns.

There's no evidence of either, so neither has any place in science. Its as simple as that.

If you want to design an experiment, then we can talk about it in a scientific context. As of right now, its nothing more than wishcasting.

Joh 4:7 There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink.
Joh 4:8 (For his disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.)
Joh 4:9 Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.
Joh 4:10 Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.
Joh 4:11 The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water?
Joh 4:12 Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle?
Joh 4:13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:
Joh 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

DisgruntledTunaFan said:

Joh 4:7 There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink.
Joh 4:8 (For his disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.)
Joh 4:9 Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.
Joh 4:10 Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.
Joh 4:11 The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water?
Joh 4:12 Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle?
Joh 4:13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:
Joh 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

Click to expand...

Reminds me of:

Rex 3:13 Whosoever drinketh of the koolaid I shall give them more koolaid to drinketh and to which we shall winneth all bowls of superness for all eternity.

But I don't believe in the Jets either...

Use the Bible to show why you believe in God? Must. Try. Harder.

So who invented God ... :confused2: