4004 BC

[Ashua]

its sonic the hedge hog.

is Man able to create something from nothing yet?

I think shadow is a lesser addition to the series.

CERN claims to be able to create matter from nothing, or perhaps a "new kind" of matter, but I am skeptical. I think the article if you read it closely says they still had quarks or something to work with.. protons I think actually. Its been a while.

Anyways, all this proves is "creation" if they are "creating" things with only the most expensive piece of equipment in the history of science, the supercollider.

 

[Ashua]

You are basically making the argument for the matrix. Under your position, I could likewise say that God might just be a human being hooked to an experience-machine tricked into believing she is the creator of Heaven and Earth. I prefer not to make such unfalsifiable claims. It is a cop out, and means nothing in reasoned debate. Maybe Shadow the Hedgehog is God. :yes

How in the world could you read that and come to this kind of response????

What did I say that prompted this out of you? Matrix? What?? Did you read it all? Did you skim?

Did you read the last third where I cross referenced the earth, and man's pre-set condition? That is certainly not a cop out. It is in every way consistent with the Genesis account, as well as common sense. (No developed earth = impossible platform for human creation)

Did you not read where I cited "let there be light" predating the physical sun? This is certainly not a cop out.

 

[jasoncran]

yup. because they are making it via that machine. and that cant be the case as nothing was there, and "poof" there is now.

ironic isnt it, an intellegent being trying to say nothing did this!

 

[Ashua]

yup. because they are making it via that machine. and that cant be the case as nothing was there, and "poof" there is now.

ironic isnt it, an intellegent being trying to say nothing did this!

In the beginning there was the large hadron supercollider. And then like, it powered itself on. Then it started making a bunch of stuff. And the supercollider saw that it was good.
Yeah, lets talk about the matrix.

lulz.

Also, a matrix-like scenario still fails to address the creation of all which preceded the "matrix" itself.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

For there to be life and existence, there had to be a 1st Cause that is not subject to the times and the laws of our existence, THERE IS NO OTHER PLAUSIBLE EXPLAINATION! The question and the challenge is to find out what we can (if anything) about this "1st Cause" and its relationship to our reality if there is one beyond it putting this reality into motion.

<O:p</O:pHow Did God Originate?<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
I believe that the concept of a beginning has a lot if not everything to do with time and space, so if you eliminate those elements (time and space), you just have existence without a beginning going forth infinitely. This existence, which will be assumed to possess intelligence, would then be God, the mighty spirit which is the unseen force of existence. <O:p</O:p
Now, I will say that I believe it to be IMPOSSIBLE to give an honest and accurate answer on God’s origin, but if we use logic, we can come to some reasonable conclusions. So, if indeed the 1st Source (God, the unseen force of existence) is beyond our dimension which consists of space and time, then defining or attempting to explain the 1st source by using our knowledge which is limited by space and time may indeed be futile. Therefore, it makes since to believe that the creator of our universe (reality) must exist outside of and mutually exclusive to it, or else the creator would have had to create Himself as He created time and space.

 

[Ashua]

For there to be life and existence, there had to be a 1st Cause that is not subject to the times and the laws of our existence, THERE IS NO OTHER PLAUSIBLE EXPLAINATION! The question and the challenge is to find out what we can (if anything) about this "1st Cause" and its relationship to our reality if there is one beyond it putting this reality into motion.

<O:p</O:pHow Did God Originate?<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
I believe that the concept of a beginning has a lot if not everything to do with time and space, so if you eliminate those elements (time and space), you just have existence without a beginning going forth infinitely. This existence, which will be assumed to possess intelligence, would then be God, the mighty spirit which is the unseen force of existence. <O:p</O:p
Now, I will say that I believe it to be IMPOSSIBLE to give an honest and accurate answer on God’s origin, but if we use logic, we can come to some reasonable conclusions. So, if indeed the 1st Source (God, the unseen force of existence) is beyond our dimension which consists of space and time, then defining or attempting to explain the 1st source by using our knowledge which is limited by space and time may indeed be futile. Therefore, it makes since to believe that the creator of our universe (reality) must exist outside of and mutually exclusive to it, or else the creator would have had to create Himself as He created time and space.

This is precisely what I argue when atheists ask "well, what made God?"

God is a spirit. Not subject to the physical realm.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

its sonic the hedge hog.

is Man able to create something from nothing yet?

Shadow the Hedgehog is much cooler than Sonic. Shadow is such a bad boy.

How in the world could you read that and come to this kind of response????

What did I say that prompted this out of you? Matrix? What?? Did you read it all? Did you skim?

Did you read the last third where I cross referenced the earth, and man's pre-set condition? That is certainly not a cop out. It is in every way consistent with the Genesis account, as well as common sense. (No developed earth = impossible platform for human creation)

Did you not read where I cited "let there be light" predating the physical sun? This is certainly not a cop out.

It is a cop out since the Universe is precisely designed to deceive persons into believing it is billions of years old. The reason we don't believe in the matrix, is because there is no indication that the matrix exists. You could say, "well, we have the Bible,"; however, I could also say that we have the film "The Matrix" and that the idea has been around for long enough, so that is evidence we are all trapped within the Matrix.

There is a Shadow the Hedgehog song that says, "I am, I am everyone, everywhere, anyhow, anyway, anywill, any day!" Only true believers can discern that this is proof that Shadow is God. Prove me wrong.

 

[jasoncran]

so unless we become infinite in knowlegde ourselves as a whole then we cant asume that a intellegence did this till we evlove to that point?

interesting.

faith must be falsefiable.

scientism is your thing as well?

 

[caseagainstfaith]

This is precisely what I argue when atheists ask "well, what made God?"

God is a spirit. Not subject to the physical realm.

It's "question begging", or assumes the conclusion. You create a "rule" that there must be causes to things, and immediately conclude there must be an exception to that rule. And of course that exception to the rule is exactly what you want it to be, your God.

God is claimed to be exempt from the rules, by being "outside of space and time", but, to "create" something is to act temporally. To create something, there must be a time before the creation. But if you speak of an entity that is outside of time, then to speak of this entity as acting temporally is nonsensical.

The only way the argument makes any sense is if you go into it assuming God exists. It is question begging.

 

[Ashua]

Shadow the Hedgehog is much cooler than Sonic. Shadow is such a bad boy.



It is a cop out since the Universe is precisely designed to deceive persons into believing it is billions of years old. The reason we don't believe in the matrix, is because there is no indication that the matrix exists. You could say, "well, we have the Bible,"; however, I could also say that we have the film "The Matrix" and that the idea has been around for long enough, so that is evidence we are all trapped within the Matrix.

There is a Shadow the Hedgehog song that says, "I am, I am everyone, everywhere, anyhow, anyway, anywill, any day!" Only true believers can discern that this is proof that Shadow is God. Prove me wrong.

So, because in the 19th century man would think himself clever enough to take on evidence as if some 8 year old was asked to interpret organs on the operating table and because he assumed wrong when he decided that features X Y and Z indicate an ancient world, God is a "deceiver"? Hardly.

Why should God create a "big bang" complete with the currently believed mechanics of the theory and natures laws altered to work in such a way to allow for it (one small careless alteration in an html code throws everything out of whack) and just wait around for billions of years so the world would be ready for life to sustain and so the stars' light had time to arrive in order to serve as glorified night lights when he could just set it all in motion instantaneously, just to humor the latest fashion of humanity's attempt to explain everything? Yeah, if I was God, I wouldn't sit around and delay my plan so some scientist could feel good about himself and not "deceived" (himself).

 

[Deavonreye]

Hard to believe this hasn't been placed in the Science section.

Genduo has a good point. The universe gives us plenty of reasons to see it as billions of years old. To say that "it all started in 4004 BCE", . . . uh, no! There are some things that a person can point to in the bible and say, "yeah, . . . that probably did happen". The earth/universe beginning at the date shown in the title? Hardly.

 

[Ashua]

Is there an hole in my original explanation?

 

[Deavonreye]

Can you point us towards the post number you are refering to, please?

 

[Gendou Ikari]

so unless we become infinite in knowlegde ourselves as a whole then we cant asume that a intellegence did this till we evlove to that point?

interesting.

faith must be falsefiable.

scientism is your thing as well?

My argument is not an argument against the existence of God or against intelligent design. I can respect intelligent design theorists/philosophers. What I cannot respect is people who just make stuff up to defend their positions. For instance, I could adamantly argue that the Earth is really flat and that an invisible forcefield bends the light, so that a flat-earth looks round. And on top of that, I could argue my theory is not wrong, because a wormhole links all the ends of earth creating an illusion.

So, because in the 19th century man would think himself clever enough to take on evidence as if some 8 year old was asked to interpret organs on the operating table and because he assumed wrong when he decided that features X Y and Z indicate an ancient world, God is a "deceiver"? Hardly.

Why should God create a "big bang" complete with the currently believed mechanics of the theory and natures laws altered to work in such a way to allow for it (one small careless alteration in an html code throws everything out of whack) and just wait around for billions of years so the world would be ready for life to sustain and so the stars' light had time to arrive in order to serve as glorified night lights when he could just set it all in motion instantaneously, just to humor the latest fashion of humanity's attempt to explain everything? Yeah, if I was God, I wouldn't sit around and delay my plan so some scientist could feel good about himself and not "deceived" (himself).

Since time is meaningless to God, He would not have to wait around for anything. Your notion simply applies human limitations to God.

 

[Ashua]

My argument is not an argument against the existence of God or against intelligent design. I can respect intelligent design theorists/philosophers. What I cannot respect is people who just make stuff up to defend their positions. For instance, I could adamantly argue that the Earth is really flat and that an invisible forcefield bends the light, so that a flat-earth looks round. And on top of that, I could argue my theory is not wrong, because a wormhole links all the ends of earth creating an illusion.



Since time is meaningless to God, He would not have to wait around for anything. Your notion simply applies human limitations to God.

"The LORD works in mysterious ways." :O

Your assertion that he would opt to allow it to naturally take place "because he can" is unfounded. You presume to know how he would choose to advance? You are putting human limitations on his volition.

 

[TaemJ]

"The LORD works in mysterious ways." :O

Your assertion that he would opt to allow it to naturally take place "because he can" is unfounded. You presume to know how he would choose to advance? You are putting human limitations on his volition.

You guys will never agree with each other. :D

 

[Gendou Ikari]

You guys will never agree with each other. :D

It's the problem of disregarding the empirical evidence we have right in front of us. With that logic, you can believe anything. "What are you going to believe? Our perfect theory or your own lying eyes?" It's phenomenology.

 

[Deavonreye]

It's the problem of disregarding the empirical evidence we have right in front of us. With that logic, you can believe anything. "What are you going to believe? Our perfect theory or your own lying eyes?" It's phenomenology.

This is essentially correct. It isn't as though you, Gendou, have come up with the thoughts you have been giving, nor me, for that matter. We agree with the results of scientists who have tested, retested, and tested again and again various fields of study, . . . and thus we would be foolish to disregard them. But this [disregarding evidence] happens a lot because the contrary appears to be dangerous to a belief system. So, that's why we still have people who insist upon a roughly 6,000 year old earth.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

This is essentially correct. It isn't as though you, Gendou, have come up with the thoughts you have been giving, nor me, for that matter. We agree with the results of scientists who have tested, retested, and tested again and again various fields of study, . . . and thus we would be foolish to disregard them. But this [disregarding evidence] happens a lot because the contrary appears to be dangerous to a belief system. So, that's why we still have people who insist upon a roughly 6,000 year old earth.

I don't even see the need for Christians to defend the 6,000 year-old Creationist position. Christians no longer defend the idea of a flat-earth, do not defend polygamy (which the Tanach/OT advocates) and generally do not believe that women are less valuable and subservient to the commands of men. I wonder why it is so hard for some Christians to accept modern science. I know many Christians who believe in evolution.

 

[Ashua]

It's the problem of disregarding the empirical evidence we have right in front of us. With that logic, you can believe anything. "What are you going to believe? Our perfect theory or your own lying eyes?" It's phenomenology.

Its the problem of misinterpreting the empirical evidence we have right in front of us. With that logic, you can believe anything. "How are you going to approach? With true scientific consideration for all possibilities, or only after the interpretations which encourage the lusts your own flesh?" It's phenomenology.

"perfect theory" lmao. Oh man.