Jump to content


God


  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#31 Treasure

Treasure

    CEO

  • Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4012 posts

Posted 11 August 2010 - 03:33 PM

View Posttonglebeak, on 11 August 2010 - 12:42 PM, said:

View PostTreasure, on 11 August 2010 - 08:04 AM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 10 August 2010 - 08:36 PM, said:

The problem, with any theory/religion, is "who created God?" If you were to say "God just exists, and didn't need to be created," then how could that not apply to matter?

Yes your logic is accurate.  So, lets say that there is an equal chance that God existed at the beginning of "time" and that a big ball of dust existed at the beginning of time.

Now, having established that one is just as likely as the other... which of those two options is more likely to have created the entire universe?  Therefore, simple math dictates that God is a much higher probability.

Actually, neither would be more likely. It's common knowledge that, any given atom, can form a bond with any other compatible atom, until stability is reached. It is not at all unreasonable, to assume that atoms rearranged themselves (it happens in front of your eyes all the time). Don't forget about gravity: gravity is that attraction, that all matter has. The matter basically goes into a snowball effect, which would form planets, stars, entire galaxies, etc.

Also, the universe is extremely old: most of us would not comprehend, just how much time matter had, to rearrange itself into what we see today (and of course, rearranging would mean forming chemical bonds, gravitational attractions, etc). It's roughly 13.75 billion years old. Just try to fathom how long that is: If an 80 year old man repeated his life cycle, throughout the lifespan of the universe, then he would have lived 171,875,000 times!

Right but lets say its "possible" for the atoms to rearrange themselves, maybe a 1% chance... if we're being generous.  It is 100% possible that an all powerful God (assuming He exists) created the universe.

Therefore if the odds of there being a God or there being Mass at the beginning of time are equal, then God is more likely as being the source for the creation of the universe!

#32 Guest_tonglebeak_*

Guest_tonglebeak_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 August 2010 - 04:02 PM

View PostTreasure, on 11 August 2010 - 03:33 PM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 11 August 2010 - 12:42 PM, said:

View PostTreasure, on 11 August 2010 - 08:04 AM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 10 August 2010 - 08:36 PM, said:

The problem, with any theory/religion, is "who created God?" If you were to say "God just exists, and didn't need to be created," then how could that not apply to matter?

Yes your logic is accurate.  So, lets say that there is an equal chance that God existed at the beginning of "time" and that a big ball of dust existed at the beginning of time.

Now, having established that one is just as likely as the other... which of those two options is more likely to have created the entire universe?  Therefore, simple math dictates that God is a much higher probability.

Actually, neither would be more likely. It's common knowledge that, any given atom, can form a bond with any other compatible atom, until stability is reached. It is not at all unreasonable, to assume that atoms rearranged themselves (it happens in front of your eyes all the time). Don't forget about gravity: gravity is that attraction, that all matter has. The matter basically goes into a snowball effect, which would form planets, stars, entire galaxies, etc.

Also, the universe is extremely old: most of us would not comprehend, just how much time matter had, to rearrange itself into what we see today (and of course, rearranging would mean forming chemical bonds, gravitational attractions, etc). It's roughly 13.75 billion years old. Just try to fathom how long that is: If an 80 year old man repeated his life cycle, throughout the lifespan of the universe, then he would have lived 171,875,000 times!

Right but lets say its "possible" for the atoms to rearrange themselves, maybe a 1% chance... if we're being generous.  It is 100% possible that an all powerful God (assuming He exists) created the universe.

Therefore if the odds of there being a God or there being Mass at the beginning of time are equal, then God is more likely as being the source for the creation of the universe!

Out of curiosity, why do you think that atoms, rearranging themselves over billions of years, is less likely to produce life, than a creator? You can't put arbitrary numbers on something that cannot be proven or disproven. Like I said earlier, I'm open to both ideas until one can be proved/disproved, but putting baseless odds on any scenario, to make your argument seem better, is not the right way to go.

I want a million dollars. If I work my entire life, there is a 1% chance that I will earn a million dollars. If I rub a lamp though, there is a 100% chance that a genie _may_ appear and grant me a million dollars.

...See the flaw in your argument Treasure? No disrespect of course.

Edited by tonglebeak, 11 August 2010 - 04:04 PM.


#33 dragon626325

dragon626325

    SuperTrooper

  • VIP Club Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1863 posts

Posted 11 August 2010 - 05:31 PM

View Posttonglebeak, on 11 August 2010 - 12:42 PM, said:

View PostTreasure, on 11 August 2010 - 08:04 AM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 10 August 2010 - 08:36 PM, said:

The problem, with any theory/religion, is "who created God?" If you were to say "God just exists, and didn't need to be created," then how could that not apply to matter?

Yes your logic is accurate.  So, lets say that there is an equal chance that God existed at the beginning of "time" and that a big ball of dust existed at the beginning of time.

Now, having established that one is just as likely as the other... which of those two options is more likely to have created the entire universe?  Therefore, simple math dictates that God is a much higher probability.

Actually, neither would be more likely. It's common knowledge that, any given atom, can form a bond with any other compatible atom, until stability is reached. It is not at all unreasonable, to assume that atoms rearranged themselves (it happens in front of your eyes all the time). Don't forget about gravity: gravity is that attraction, that all matter has. The matter basically goes into a snowball effect, which would form planets, stars, entire galaxies, etc.

Also, the universe is extremely old: most of us would not comprehend, just how much time matter had, to rearrange itself into what we see today (and of course, rearranging would mean forming chemical bonds, gravitational attractions, etc). It's roughly 13.75 billion years old. Just try to fathom how long that is: If an 80 year old man repeated his life cycle, throughout the lifespan of the universe, then he would have lived 171,875,000 times!

IMO, I believe the universe is only about 6000+ years old. The Bible does not specifically say the age of the universe/earth, but adding up the genealogies and the 2000 yrs is about over 6000. There is no way to prove/disprove God existence as it all boils down to faith. But like Treasure said in a previous post, it is much easier to believe that an all mighty creator created us instead of us existing after the Big Bang.
Posted Image

Posted Image

#34 Guest_tonglebeak_*

Guest_tonglebeak_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 August 2010 - 05:37 PM

View Postdragon626325, on 11 August 2010 - 05:31 PM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 11 August 2010 - 12:42 PM, said:

View PostTreasure, on 11 August 2010 - 08:04 AM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 10 August 2010 - 08:36 PM, said:

The problem, with any theory/religion, is "who created God?" If you were to say "God just exists, and didn't need to be created," then how could that not apply to matter?

Yes your logic is accurate.  So, lets say that there is an equal chance that God existed at the beginning of "time" and that a big ball of dust existed at the beginning of time.

Now, having established that one is just as likely as the other... which of those two options is more likely to have created the entire universe?  Therefore, simple math dictates that God is a much higher probability.

Actually, neither would be more likely. It's common knowledge that, any given atom, can form a bond with any other compatible atom, until stability is reached. It is not at all unreasonable, to assume that atoms rearranged themselves (it happens in front of your eyes all the time). Don't forget about gravity: gravity is that attraction, that all matter has. The matter basically goes into a snowball effect, which would form planets, stars, entire galaxies, etc.

Also, the universe is extremely old: most of us would not comprehend, just how much time matter had, to rearrange itself into what we see today (and of course, rearranging would mean forming chemical bonds, gravitational attractions, etc). It's roughly 13.75 billion years old. Just try to fathom how long that is: If an 80 year old man repeated his life cycle, throughout the lifespan of the universe, then he would have lived 171,875,000 times!

IMO, I believe the universe is only about 6000+ years old. The Bible does not specifically say the age of the universe/earth, but adding up the genealogies and the 2000 yrs is about over 6000. There is no way to prove/disprove God existence as it all boils down to faith. But like Treasure said in a previous post, it is much easier to believe that an all mighty creator created us instead of us existing after the Big Bang.

Just because it's easier to believe in something, does not necessarily make it right. It's easy for children to believe in Santa Claus, etc.

Also, it is foolish to believe the universe is only 6000 years old, when there is obvious proof that it is _BILLIONS_ of years old.

#35 DTarockoff

DTarockoff

    Beginner

  • Regular Trooper
  • 27 posts

Posted 11 August 2010 - 05:48 PM

View Postdragon626325, on 11 August 2010 - 05:31 PM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 11 August 2010 - 12:42 PM, said:

View PostTreasure, on 11 August 2010 - 08:04 AM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 10 August 2010 - 08:36 PM, said:

The problem, with any theory/religion, is "who created God?" If you were to say "God just exists, and didn't need to be created," then how could that not apply to matter?

Yes your logic is accurate.  So, lets say that there is an equal chance that God existed at the beginning of "time" and that a big ball of dust existed at the beginning of time.

Now, having established that one is just as likely as the other... which of those two options is more likely to have created the entire universe?  Therefore, simple math dictates that God is a much higher probability.

Actually, neither would be more likely. It's common knowledge that, any given atom, can form a bond with any other compatible atom, until stability is reached. It is not at all unreasonable, to assume that atoms rearranged themselves (it happens in front of your eyes all the time). Don't forget about gravity: gravity is that attraction, that all matter has. The matter basically goes into a snowball effect, which would form planets, stars, entire galaxies, etc.

Also, the universe is extremely old: most of us would not comprehend, just how much time matter had, to rearrange itself into what we see today (and of course, rearranging would mean forming chemical bonds, gravitational attractions, etc). It's roughly 13.75 billion years old. Just try to fathom how long that is: If an 80 year old man repeated his life cycle, throughout the lifespan of the universe, then he would have lived 171,875,000 times!

IMO, I believe the universe is only about 6000+ years old. The Bible does not specifically say the age of the universe/earth, but adding up the genealogies and the 2000 yrs is about over 6000. There is no way to prove/disprove God existence as it all boils down to faith. But like Treasure said in a previous post, it is much easier to believe that an all mighty creator created us instead of us existing after the Big Bang.

hahahah...sorry buddy, thats just not possible. whether theres a god or not the universe is billions of years old, there is solid proof of that.

@tonglebeak; nice analogy with the genie in the lamp haha..so true

i gotta say im kinda suprised by a lot of the "points" people are making or theyre idea of why God is real, but hey everyone can have their own opinion. I'm pretty sure in the future however (idk if its gonna be 100 years or a million) there will be no more belieif in any "higher powers"...hopefully by then well have figured out a true explanation
Posted Image

#36 Guest_tonglebeak_*

Guest_tonglebeak_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 August 2010 - 05:52 PM

View PostDTarockoff, on 11 August 2010 - 05:48 PM, said:

View Postdragon626325, on 11 August 2010 - 05:31 PM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 11 August 2010 - 12:42 PM, said:

View PostTreasure, on 11 August 2010 - 08:04 AM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 10 August 2010 - 08:36 PM, said:

The problem, with any theory/religion, is "who created God?" If you were to say "God just exists, and didn't need to be created," then how could that not apply to matter?

Yes your logic is accurate.  So, lets say that there is an equal chance that God existed at the beginning of "time" and that a big ball of dust existed at the beginning of time.

Now, having established that one is just as likely as the other... which of those two options is more likely to have created the entire universe?  Therefore, simple math dictates that God is a much higher probability.

Actually, neither would be more likely. It's common knowledge that, any given atom, can form a bond with any other compatible atom, until stability is reached. It is not at all unreasonable, to assume that atoms rearranged themselves (it happens in front of your eyes all the time). Don't forget about gravity: gravity is that attraction, that all matter has. The matter basically goes into a snowball effect, which would form planets, stars, entire galaxies, etc.

Also, the universe is extremely old: most of us would not comprehend, just how much time matter had, to rearrange itself into what we see today (and of course, rearranging would mean forming chemical bonds, gravitational attractions, etc). It's roughly 13.75 billion years old. Just try to fathom how long that is: If an 80 year old man repeated his life cycle, throughout the lifespan of the universe, then he would have lived 171,875,000 times!

IMO, I believe the universe is only about 6000+ years old. The Bible does not specifically say the age of the universe/earth, but adding up the genealogies and the 2000 yrs is about over 6000. There is no way to prove/disprove God existence as it all boils down to faith. But like Treasure said in a previous post, it is much easier to believe that an all mighty creator created us instead of us existing after the Big Bang.

hahahah...sorry buddy, thats just not possible. whether theres a god or not the universe is billions of years old, there is solid proof of that.

@tonglebeak; nice analogy with the genie in the lamp haha..so true

i gotta say im kinda suprised by a lot of the "points" people are making or theyre idea of why God is real, but hey everyone can have their own opinion. I'm pretty sure in the future however (idk if its gonna be 100 years or a million) there will be no more belieif in any "higher powers"...hopefully by then well have figured out a true explanation

Yup, to each their own. Please note that the "genie in the lamp" was not to make a mockery of anyone, but it was to point out a flaw in the argument itself (NOT the poster :)). Hopefully in the future, there will be solid evidence as to whether or not there are higher powers. Time will tell.

#37 dragon626325

dragon626325

    SuperTrooper

  • VIP Club Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1863 posts

Posted 11 August 2010 - 06:19 PM

View Posttonglebeak, on 11 August 2010 - 05:37 PM, said:

View Postdragon626325, on 11 August 2010 - 05:31 PM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 11 August 2010 - 12:42 PM, said:

View PostTreasure, on 11 August 2010 - 08:04 AM, said:

View Posttonglebeak, on 10 August 2010 - 08:36 PM, said:

The problem, with any theory/religion, is "who created God?" If you were to say "God just exists, and didn't need to be created," then how could that not apply to matter?

Yes your logic is accurate.  So, lets say that there is an equal chance that God existed at the beginning of "time" and that a big ball of dust existed at the beginning of time.

Now, having established that one is just as likely as the other... which of those two options is more likely to have created the entire universe?  Therefore, simple math dictates that God is a much higher probability.

Actually, neither would be more likely. It's common knowledge that, any given atom, can form a bond with any other compatible atom, until stability is reached. It is not at all unreasonable, to assume that atoms rearranged themselves (it happens in front of your eyes all the time). Don't forget about gravity: gravity is that attraction, that all matter has. The matter basically goes into a snowball effect, which would form planets, stars, entire galaxies, etc.

Also, the universe is extremely old: most of us would not comprehend, just how much time matter had, to rearrange itself into what we see today (and of course, rearranging would mean forming chemical bonds, gravitational attractions, etc). It's roughly 13.75 billion years old. Just try to fathom how long that is: If an 80 year old man repeated his life cycle, throughout the lifespan of the universe, then he would have lived 171,875,000 times!

IMO, I believe the universe is only about 6000+ years old. The Bible does not specifically say the age of the universe/earth, but adding up the genealogies and the 2000 yrs is about over 6000. There is no way to prove/disprove God existence as it all boils down to faith. But like Treasure said in a previous post, it is much easier to believe that an all mighty creator created us instead of us existing after the Big Bang.

Just because it's easier to believe in something, does not necessarily make it right. It's easy for children to believe in Santa Claus, etc.

Also, it is foolish to believe the universe is only 6000 years old, when there is obvious proof that it is _BILLIONS_ of years old.


Is it really foolish to believe the universe is only 6000+ years old? I believe the Bible is the most accurate history book. If you guys can prove the facts in the Bible is 100% false, I will believe in the "obvious proof" of the universe being billions of years old.
Posted Image

Posted Image

#38 Guest_tonglebeak_*

Guest_tonglebeak_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 August 2010 - 06:29 PM

dragon626325 , I respect your opinions, but I will no longer debate with you regarding this subject, for reasons that are quite clear.

Edited by tonglebeak, 11 August 2010 - 06:29 PM.


#39 mattre98

mattre98

    Grave Robber

  • VIP Club Member
  • Pip
  • 99 posts

Posted 11 August 2010 - 07:46 PM

There is actually only theory of the earth being billions of years old. This is why Carbon dating has been proven recently as inaccurate and now they are trying a new measure called radiometric dating. This of course is still in the beginning phases of trying to prove if it is accurate. One interesting fact they are finding in regards to the fossils is why were most of them found in thier standing or living state. The possible conclusion is there had to be something of a catostaphic occurance, something like springs of the earth exploding and mass amounts of floods, sounds like a event already listed in the Bible. If this event which more and more proof is pointing toward occured then there would be another hole in the dating process, because all the trees and everthing would of had to start over. Kind of like the quick growing grass as winter kills it all here in the North, but yet within weeks of spring we see the grass green and the trees blooming.

God knew what he was doing when He created life in plants to be able to rebound so quickly from the -54F degree temps of winter.
Posted Image

#40 Guest_tonglebeak_*

Guest_tonglebeak_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 August 2010 - 08:29 PM

View Postmattre98, on 11 August 2010 - 07:46 PM, said:

There is actually only theory of the earth being billions of years old. This is why Carbon dating has been proven recently as inaccurate and now they are trying a new measure called radiometric dating. This of course is still in the beginning phases of trying to prove if it is accurate. One interesting fact they are finding in regards to the fossils is why were most of them found in thier standing or living state. The possible conclusion is there had to be something of a catostaphic occurance, something like springs of the earth exploding and mass amounts of floods, sounds like a event already listed in the Bible. If this event which more and more proof is pointing toward occured then there would be another hole in the dating process, because all the trees and everthing would of had to start over. Kind of like the quick growing grass as winter kills it all here in the North, but yet within weeks of spring we see the grass green and the trees blooming.

God knew what he was doing when He created life in plants to be able to rebound so quickly from the -54F degree temps of winter.

Or, perhaps, the generally accepted scenario, which was a massive asteroid crashing into the earth. Perhaps even a very quick-setting ice-age, but a flood would not leave anything standing. Sorry.

That was over 65,000,000 years ago btw.

Edited by tonglebeak, 11 August 2010 - 08:30 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users