Prove God Exists - Version II!

[newfangle]

As you can assume that the universe is eternal, I can assume God is eternal. There is no solid proof of either view, but the belief in God makes more sense. For example, you say the universe is eternal, then what created what is in the universe? Where did the stuff that floats around in the universe (including Earth) come from?

If you say the canvas is eternal, that doesn't answer the question of where the paint came from. There needs to be an artist.

Don't use circular logic, or I will retort with, "what created the artist?"

 

[puglover]

Don't use circular logic, or I will retort with, "what created the artist?"

You say that the universe is eternal. I say it isn't. Instead I substitute universe with God, is that circular?

 

[HamaticBabylon]

Don't use circular logic, or I will retort with, "what created the artist?"

Keep bashing your head against that wall dude, that the only way atheist learn the art of logic with reason.

Okay here is some circular logic for you "who came first the chicken or the egg?"

Easy the chicken came first because with out the DNA from the chicken the egg cannot exist! There needs to be a starting point from which things can begin.

 

[the mormegil]

EDIT: Nevermind.

The DNA for the chicken came from a chicken like creature which mutated.

 

[HamaticBabylon]

Yes the chicken came first. The DNA for the chicken came from a chicken like creature which mutated.

But do you see by the egg coming first, means that the DNA must of come from other sources, over a period of time. Once these Molecules come close together they magical form a chicken. This is evolution for you, a bunch of DNA from other external sources magically come together to form a complex life from over a period of years!

Crazy logic if you ask me!

 

[the mormegil]

They don't "magically come together", they gradually change slightly over extremely long periods of time.

 

[Smidlee]

EDIT: Nevermind.

The DNA for the chicken came from a chicken like creature which mutated.

this is still circular logic. What came first the chicken or the egg? your answer is chicken-like creature which was hatched from a chicken-like egg which came from a "chicken-like"-like creature which hatched from a "chicken-like"-like egg, etc.

 

[Halcyon]

You'd have difficulty finding a definable moment when a non-chicken gave birth to a chicken. Evolution moves one step at a time, one generation at a time. If you walk one step, you could be forgiven for thinking you'd gotten nowhere. But after a few thousand, or hundred thousand, you'd have no such confusion. So it is with chickens. Speciation is merely what happens when two divergent lines of descendants are no longer similar enough to successfully interbreed.

But do you see by the egg coming first, means that the DNA must of come from other sources, over a period of time. Once these Molecules come close together they magical form a chicken. This is evolution for you, a bunch of DNA from other external sources magically come together to form a complex life from over a period of years!

The real answer to "what came first, the chicken or the egg" is: Define a chicken. They're descended from dinosaurs, you know. Or we think we know, as it seems highly probable given the available data. Some little therapod lays an egg, and another therapod is born. That therapod lays an egg, and another therapod is born. Every time, though, it's a little different. The offspring is always the same species as its parents. The first in a arbitrarily decided line isn't necessarily the same species as the last, though. Sooner or later, the little shuffling steps taken by each generation add up to a serious travel distance.

As you can assume that the universe is eternal, I can assume God is eternal. There is no solid proof of either view, but the belief in God makes more sense. For example, you say the universe is eternal, then what created what is in the universe? Where did the stuff that floats around in the universe (including Earth) come from?

If you say the canvas is eternal, that doesn't answer the question of where the paint came from. There needs to be an artist.

There doesn't really need to be an origin. Humans cannot comprehend infinity. It's too big. They look for a cause and an effect, when infinity posesses neither.

Regardless, neither assumption is more than an assumption. Assuming that reality has always existed seems a more reasonable assumption than absolute totality appearing out of absolute nothingness. Perhaps reality has ceased to exist many times, but some underlying absolute insists that if this happens, existence starts existing again. It's difficult to concieve of it doing otherwise.

 

[newfangle]

Keep bashing your head against that wall dude, that the only way atheist learn the art of logic with reason.

Okay here is some circular logic for you "who came first the chicken or the egg?"

Easy the chicken came first because with out the DNA from the chicken the egg cannot exist! There needs to be a starting point from which things can begin.

Two comments:

1) You're constant trolling makes you *sound* like an ignoramus/moron.

2) In one post you managed to have an argument all by yourself. Now THAT takes skill. Do you learn such things in Sunday school?

 

[HamaticBabylon]

Two comments:

1) You're constant trolling makes you *sound* like an ignoramus/moron.

2) In one post you managed to have an argument all by yourself. Now THAT takes skill. Do you learn such things in Sunday school?

I did not have two arguments in one post, you got it wrong dude, I was merely answer the question in advance.

I don't go to sunday school, you will find me in a Library and laboratory.

 

[Birdjaguar]

There doesn't really need to be an origin. Humans cannot comprehend infinity. It's too big. They look for a cause and an effect, when infinity posesses neither.

Regardless, neither assumption is more than an assumption. Assuming that reality has always existed seems a more reasonable assumption than absolute totality appearing out of absolute nothingness. Perhaps reality has ceased to exist many times, but some underlying absolute insists that if this happens, existence starts existing again. It's difficult to concieve of it doing otherwise.

In your model, at the most fundamental level, Reality must be all encompassing, uniform and eternal. Anything else would be a temporary reality subject to change over time (even if a very long time). From the perspective of Reality, reality would not be real.

 

[newfangle]

I don't go to sunday school, you will find me in a Library and laboratory.

You obviously aren't using those two valuable things to aid your debating skills. You remind me of a very angry child, or possibly a drunk struggling to maintain his grip on reality. Cheers!
{mod]warned, flaming[/mod]

 

[HamaticBabylon]

You obviously aren't using those two valuable things to aid your debating skills. You remind me of a very angry child, or possibly a drunk struggling to maintain his grip on reality. Cheers!

I have only begun to scratch the surfaces of science, and I will get stronger as the years go by.

You remained me of a rich kid, who’s had everything put on the table for him. Were you born with a silver spoon!

Cheers

 

[ainwood]

Moderator Action: The flaming stops now.

Newfangle and HamaticBabylon warned.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Birdjaguar]

There doesn't really need to be an origin. Humans cannot comprehend infinity. It's too big. They look for a cause and an effect, when infinity posesses neither.

It's a good bet that our universe had an origin, even if the Reality you mentioned does not. It stands to reason that our time started with that beginning, since Reality would be beyond time. So how can we explain that beginning?

 

[polymath]

Trouble is, our universe may well have had an origin, but we cannot tell if it existed before the Big Bang. It may have been going for a trillion years before the Big Bang, who knows?
The only real reason for postulating an absolute beginning to the universe is a failure of imagination. The universe doesn't work in an easily understood way, if it can be ultimately understood at all. Just because we like things to have beginnings and ends, doesn't make the universe work that way.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Trouble is, our universe may well have had an origin, but we cannot tell if it existed before the Big Bang. It may have been going for a trillion years before the Big Bang, who knows?
The only real reason for postulating an absolute beginning to the universe is a failure of imagination. The universe doesn't work in an easily understood way, if it can be ultimately understood at all. Just because we like things to have beginnings and ends, doesn't make the universe work that way.

If our universe emerged from the Big Bang, could it have existed prior to that event? I would think it would have had to be another universe if something existed prior to our Big Bang. Unless you believe in a cyclical time scheme like some Hindus.

 

[polymath]

If our universe emerged from the Big Bang, could it have existed prior to that event? I would think it would have had to be another universe if something existed prior to our Big Bang. Unless you believe in a cyclical time scheme like some Hindus.

I don't know, is the simple answer

It all breaks down at that point. I find it all rather scary to contemplate...the scale...the time involved...the forces involved.

Actually, what I find most is this:
If we think about the idea that the universe can eventually produce intelligent life such as you or I, then as we contemplate the universe we admit that contained within it's starting condition (the Big Bang) is the certainty that the universe will at some point, in some way, be self aware. The Universe has the power to know itself.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I don't know, is the simple answer

It all breaks down at that point. I find it all rather scary to contemplate...the scale...the time involved...the forces involved.

Actually, what I find most is this:
If we think about the idea that the universe can eventually produce intelligent life such as you or I, then as we contemplate the universe we admit that contained within it's starting condition (the Big Bang) is the certainty that the universe will at some point, in some way, be self aware. The Universe has the power to know itself.

When you say "Universe", do you mean post big bang physical world? Or do you mean that Reality becomes conscious of itself?

 

[FredLC]

Trouble is, our universe may well have had an origin, but we cannot tell if it existed before the Big Bang. It may have been going for a trillion years before the Big Bang, who knows?
The only real reason for postulating an absolute beginning to the universe is a failure of imagination. The universe doesn't work in an easily understood way, if it can be ultimately understood at all. Just because we like things to have beginnings and ends, doesn't make the universe work that way.

Yeah, pretty much. I use to say that people like to oversimplify stuff, like if the universe was a toster that "has to be made". It's just not that simple.

Regards .