Tominator Posted June 18, 2005 Report Share Posted June 18, 2005 Geared mostly towards the aethists, because I'm pretty sure I know the Christians' answer. Who started all this? I'm talking about the Universe. Don't say "Big Bang", because somebody or something had to put that together. Where did it all come from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fisherguy Posted June 18, 2005 Report Share Posted June 18, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question THe answer is nobody knows. I look at it this way...pretty confident things are more than a couple thousand years old, and that one being did not do it all in six days. I am more of a person who bases things on logic, and probabilities...and none of that supports the biblical explanation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted June 18, 2005 Report Share Posted June 18, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question The same answer I gave in the other thread... [ QUOTE ] I don't claim to know the origins of the universe, but I don't see any greater odds for an all-powerful creator than I do for evolution. And if for every effect there must be a cause, then someone or something must've created god. Correct? Or is god the one thing that the rule doesn't apply? If the rule doesn't apply to god, who's to say that the rule doesn't apply for anything else? [/ QUOTE ] That's my opinion and any Christian that says 'god' is stating their opinion. Mine is just as valid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dg Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] THe answer is nobody knows. I look at it this way...pretty confident things are more than a couple thousand years old, and that one being did not do it all in six days. I am more of a person who bases things on logic, and probabilities...and none of that supports the biblical explanation. [/ QUOTE ] You mean proven facts? Now we'll have none of that! Verse so-and-so says written by some ? said. Again, an aircraft flys over our head in 2005, so what. But in 0000, I wonder what they would have said? Oh my god? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tominator Posted June 19, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] The same answer I gave in the other thread... [ QUOTE ] I don't claim to know the origins of the universe, but I don't see any greater odds for an all-powerful creator than I do for evolution. And if for every effect there must be a cause, then someone or something must've created god. Correct? Or is god the one thing that the rule doesn't apply? If the rule doesn't apply to god, who's to say that the rule doesn't apply for anything else? [/ QUOTE ] That's my opinion and any Christian that says 'god' is stating their opinion. Mine is just as valid. [/ QUOTE ] I never mentioned God, bible, number of years universe has been around, evolution or anything like that. I asked a simple question: Who or what put all "this" into motion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tominator Posted June 19, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] And if for every effect there must be a cause, then someone or something must've created god. Correct? [/ QUOTE ] Ok, correct. Now, who created that god? See, you've fallen into the "infinite regression" trap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichiganHuntr1 Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] And if for every effect there must be a cause, then someone or something must've created god. Correct? [/ QUOTE ] Ok, correct. Now, who created that god? See, you've fallen into the "infinite regression" trap. [/ QUOTE ] Yup, Which Came first, the Chicken or the Egg? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] And if for every effect there must be a cause, then someone or something must've created god. Correct? [/ QUOTE ] Ok, correct. Now, who created that god? See, you've fallen into the "infinite regression" trap. [/ QUOTE ] No, I didn't. I was pointing out how easy it is to, though. In the other thread, somebody, don't remember who, brought it up that every effect has a cause, but conveniently left out the idea that, if this were true, something would've had to create god. Myself, not believing in god, don't have any need to explain god. I also admit that I don't know the origin of the universe, or claim to have the answer. I don't think we will ever know the truth. Even christians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dg Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] And if for every effect there must be a cause, then someone or something must've created god. Correct? [/ QUOTE ] Ok, correct. Now, who created that god? See, you've fallen into the "infinite regression" trap. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, but at least he said he didn't know. It's alot different referencing a verse and claiming it as the ultimate truth from a man-written book that's unexplainable. If Jesus is true, and showed his face today, many more would follow his word. But we as human's have a brain to think with. Why doesn't he stop by and say hi "to his children"? He loves us. Again, unexplainable happenings by unknowledgeable folks. So if the aircraft flew over 2000 years ago, what would they say? Oh my god! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The same answer I gave in the other thread... [ QUOTE ] I don't claim to know the origins of the universe, but I don't see any greater odds for an all-powerful creator than I do for evolution. And if for every effect there must be a cause, then someone or something must've created god. Correct? Or is god the one thing that the rule doesn't apply? If the rule doesn't apply to god, who's to say that the rule doesn't apply for anything else? [/ QUOTE ] That's my opinion and any Christian that says 'god' is stating their opinion. Mine is just as valid. [/ QUOTE ] I never mentioned God, bible, number of years universe has been around, evolution or anything like that. I asked a simple question: Who or what put all "this" into motion? [/ QUOTE ] I never mentioned the bible or number of years the universe has been around either. Since the 2 prevailant ideas are creation and evolution. I simply compared the 2 without endorsing either. Since you apparently wanted me to answer a different question, it would help if you posted it. Also, having stated that you know what the christians would post and directing the question at atheists, sure you never said god, but it was implied. Or we can argue semantics all night, either way is fine with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dg Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] Geared mostly towards the aethists, because I'm pretty sure I know the Christians' answer. Who started all this? I'm talking about the Universe. Don't say "Big Bang", because somebody or something had to put that together. Where did it all come from? [/ QUOTE ] Why don't you tell me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyderpancake Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question God is the only possible explanation. He has always been around. Our human minds can't comprehend that. Explain to me when time began. It didn't. Our finite minds cannot fathom something that doesn't have a beginning and an end. Was there ever a point when there was nothing and then suddenly everything started appearing? I don't think so. I think an Eternal Supernatural God is the only way any of this could have started. You have to admit that at some point something started everything. Science proves that the universe is slowly running down. If that is true, it had to have started sometime. Like I have said, for anyone who really thinks about it with an open mind, creation is the only logical answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogdoc Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] I don't think we will ever know the truth [/ QUOTE ] I will--when I meet the Creator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] Like I have said, for anyone who really thinks about it with an open mind, creation is the only logical answer. [/ QUOTE ] And, an 'open mind' means, of course, 'from my point of view'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horst Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question I have no problem with the theory of evolution.Even now people and animals continue adapting to a ever changing world.Theres lots of dead planets out there, this one may have been just different enough to produce life, crazy things happen here all the time, ice ages, global warming, drought, floods, fire, etc...Whos to say any combination of these events couldnt have started the first lifeforms on this planet and they just continued to evolve as the planet did.Weve went from dinosaurs to modern life in a few thousand years, theres proof of that everywhere, so why couldnt things all living things have evolved in that fashion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fisherguy Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question Mmmm horst we came from dinosaurs to here in hundreds of millions of years(for those of us who choose to believe the scientific community). As far as the very first start of things...i have thought about that and like i said before i have no clue how that came. I just can't reconcile all the things in the bible that do not line up with what i consider to be basic science. Basically it comes down to this IMO, humans have a need to try to explain things. Some look to science, some to religion. To me, science seems to make more sense. That is my opinion, and may or may not be fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckee Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question Here's a couple of interesting links you might like to read through. If not, well that's your descission. http://www.rbc.org/ds/q0402/point3.html http://www.exchangedlife.com/Creation/evol-fact.htm http://www.souldevice.org/christian_science.html http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/dinos.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fisherguy Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question well i read the first(ok, the first webpage lol) and all it is is claims, with no evidenc other than bible quotes. The second lost my interest when it claims that evolution is wrong because if you took current population growth, and had two people billions of years ago, the worl pop would be some astronomical #. That is silly since nobody claims humans have been around for billions of years lol. I will read more tomorrow...but so far it has been the same old arguments, with no evidence other than "the bible says so". I have no doubt that some things in the bible are either true, or based on truth, but they are the ones such as famines, earthquakes etc., not someone rising from the dead. Perhaps the next two sites will have some better backing to their claims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fisherguy Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question Ok, i couldn't go to bed yet lol. # 3 has some more specific, yet at the same time very general points. All are dependant on if translations are accurate, and how you interpret them. More importantly i fail to see how that proves god exists, or the bible is all true. All it proves is that the bible includes things that seem to show a general understanding of some basic princliples such as evaporation. Now the last one really makes me laugh! I stopped reading at the point where it says the bible is all true because nobody has ever proven it contains any false information. So if i say i am an alien from mars it is true right? See i doubt any of you can prove it is not true anymore that someone can prove the world is more than 2000 to 6000 years old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question The first link. How better to prove the accuracy of the bible than by quoting other bible verses? I could write a book and quote that same book as proof that it's true? Proves nothing. Next. The second bored me to tears nearly. The third, I'm with fisherguy on this one. It doesn't prove much. It's all up to translation. The 4th link.. wow, what can be said about that? Dragons? Seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckee Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question Evolutionists have constructed the Geologic Column in order to illustrate the supposed progression of "primitive" life forms to "more complex" systems we observe today. Yet, "since only a small percentage of the earth's surface obeys even a … portion of the geologic column…the claim of their having taken place to form a continuum of rock/life/time…over the earth is therefore a fantastic and imaginative contrivance.1" "The lack of transitional series cannot be explained as being due to the scarcity of material. The deficiencies are real, they will never be filled."2 This supposed column is actually saturated with "polystrate fossils" (fossils extending from one geologic layer to another) that tie all the layers to one time-frame. "To the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation." Dr. Thomas Barnes, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Texas at El Paso, has published the definitive work in this field.4 Scientific observations since 1829 have shown that the earth's magnetic field has been measurably decaying at an exponential rate, demonstrating its half-life to be approximately 1,400 years. In practical application its strength 20,000 years ago would approximate that of a magnetic star. Under those conditions many of the atoms necessary for life processes could not form. These data demonstrate that earth's entire history is young, within a few thousand of years. The Biblical record clearly describes a global Flood during Noah's day. Additionally, there are hundreds of Flood traditions handed down through cultures all over the world. 5 M.E. Clark and Henry Voss have demonstrated the scientific validity of such a Flood providing the sedimentary layering we see on every continent. 6 Secular scholars report very rapid sedimentation and periods of great carbonate deposition in earth's sedimentary layers..7 It is now possible to prove the historical reality of the Biblical Flood.8 World population growth rate in recent times is about 2% per year. Practicable application of growth rate throughout human history would be about half that number. Wars, disease, famine, etc. have wiped out approximately one third of the population on average every 82 years. Starting with eight people, and applying these growth rates since the Flood of Noah's day (about 4500 years ago) would give a total human population at just under six billion people. However, application on an evolutionary time scale runs into major difficulties. Starting with one "couple" just 41,000 years ago would give us a total population of 2 x 1089. 9The universe does not have space to hold so many bodies. Physicist Robert Gentry has reported isolated radio halos of polonuim-214 in crystalline granite. The half-life of this element is 0.000164 seconds! To record the existence of this element in such short time span, the granite must be in crystalline state instantaneously.10 This runs counter to evolutionary estimates of 300 million years for granite to form. Man-made artifacts - such as the hammer in Cretaceous rock, a human sandal print with trilobite in Cambrian rock, human footprints and a handprint in Cretaceous rock – point to the fact that all the supposed geologic periods actually occurred at the same time in the recent past.11 Physicist Melvin Cook, Nobel Prize medalist found that helium-4 enters our atmosphere from solar wind and radioactive decay of uranium. At present rates our atmosphere would accumulate current helium-4 amounts in less than 10,000 years.12 Astronomical estimates of the distance to various galaxies gives conflicting data. 13The Biblical Record refers to the expansion of space by the Creator14. Astrophysicist Russell Humphries demonstrates that such space expansion would dilate time in distant space.15 This could explain a recent creation with great distances to the stars. A living cell is so awesomely complex that its interdependent components stagger the imagination and defy evolutionary explanations. A minimal cell contains over 60,000 proteins of 100 different configurations.16 The chance of this assemblage occurring by chance is 1 in 10 4,478,296 .17 The human brain is the most complicated structure in the known universe.18 It contains over 100 billion cells, each with over 50,000 neuron connections to other brain cells.19 This structure receives over 100 million separate signals from the total human body every second. If we learned something new every second of our lives, it would take three million years to exhaust the capacity of the human brain. 20 In addition to conscious thought, people can actually reason, anticipate consequences, and devise plans – all without knowing they are doing so.21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckee Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] The first link. How better to prove the accuracy of the bible than by quoting other bible verses? I could write a book and quote that same book as proof that it's true? Proves nothing. Next. [/ QUOTE ] You obviously weren't paying attention to what you were reading Racksie, if that's all you got from #1 link. It sounds to me like you have your mind made up and nothing will move it, not even sound reasoning. Prophecy man, Prophecy. The fulfilled prophecies, throughout the ages of time alone in the bible, proves it's accuracy and authenticity. Jesus fulfilled every single prophecy concerning the coming Messiah, bar none. It's Historical authenticity is being explored and authenticated in our day man. How can you just discard all that as myth and fantasy ? [ QUOTE ] The second bored me to tears nearly. [/ QUOTE ] Nothing wrong with a little dialog and reasoning now is there. [ QUOTE ] All it proves is that the bible includes things that seem to show a general understanding of some basic princliples such as evaporation. [/ QUOTE ] I think you guys left your thinking caps at home. Those so called basic principles, were not known to man by any scientific community way back then guys. That's the whole point here. We know them now, yes, but these things were revieled to men of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit, before a scientist ever even proved such things to be true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fisherguy Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question My issue with thsi whole thing is that you are accusing us of being closed minded and having our minds made up, when you yourself have your mind made up that the bible is true. And what makes your reasoning any more sound than ours? Opinion, and guess what, we all have our own opinions. And Of course Jesus fulfilled the prophecies...they were recorded after his death. Why record something that is wrong, or partially accurate, when you can choose to instead record waht agrees, or change what happened to agree. Do i know this is what happened? Of course not, but it is possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fisherguy Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] That's the whole point here. We know them now, yes, but these things were revieled to men of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit, before a scientist ever even proved such things to be true. [/ QUOTE ] And the inuit understood the phenomenon of snow blindness, or the insulating qualities of snow before scientists. Yet they do not believe in the one christian god(well some are converts now, but at that time they believed in many gods) so how did they learn this without the Holy Spirit inspiring them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tominator Posted June 19, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 Re: Philosophy Question [ QUOTE ] sure you never said god, but it was implied. [/ QUOTE ] Granted, implied only because I'm a Christian. I guess I was just trying to get you to think philosophically about how all this started. If you're not curious about it, that's cool. I tend to look up at the night sky and wonder why, and get boggled that the light I'm seeing from that star originated billions of year ago, and might not even exist anymore. This post isn't meant to anger anyone, like I said, I'm just trying to get y'all to think, and wonder. But it's cool if you don't want to. And BTW--Y'all are getting off track. Go back and read the original post. This has become an argument about evolution. Simple question, and I think only 2 or 3 have answered (one person even answered the way I think), How did all this matter get set into motion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.