God's Fingerprint On Creation Found!

If there is a beginning then it was created.

If it has always been, then it hasn't been created.

I don't think that something could be created from nothing so I am going to assume that there is something that has always existed (whether intelligent or not).

Science shows that the universe did have a beginning (big bang). Therefore it was created, but by what? intelligence or just natural random events?

If you follow this logic then you might want to ask yourself which is most likely..

That the infinite existence that has always been is 'dead' and life is an inevitable anomoly within this existence due to infinite possiblity and random occurences.

Or

That the infinite existence that has always been is 'alive' and intellegently creates and spawns new existences of reality and life.

For me a 'dead' prime existence that somehow produces something as intangible as conciousness seems unlikely. I find it more probable that it is just conciousness that has always existed and everything is a creation of this prime conciousness.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33

Back to topic
I think the problem why people deny a creator is they get creation mixed up with religion.
They can and should be separate topics.
1) Learn to accept a creator exists. (Very hard for some people)
2) Then learn what he wants from you. (A challenge with so many idea's & philosophies)

Not so fast. You run into the same age-old problem religions have always had and try to deny it. According to you, god needs to exist first before anything else can exist. Otherwise, nothing can exist. So a god creating things is a religious belief (and a basis for and a very basic tenent of most religions at that).

Why do we need a creator? If physics works in an orderly fashion, we can accept that the Universe developed on its own with some sort of primal spark without the aid of an overlord. And if physics works, than math works as an explanation for how physics works. So obviously, you don't need someone making the rules of the game.

Looking for god, a master, as does most of the human race, is a sure-fire way to handover our individual sovereignties to the first suitable advanced ET race that comes along. To my mind, that is worse than their being found to be flesheaters.

[edit on 16-5-2010 by Aliensun]

Originally posted by dragonsmusic

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Support your claim once and for all.

You did, and I've explained exactly why and how you did. Please realize that you haven't heard a word that I said. Prime mover means designer in this case, but you know that actually. You sound like a child at this point pretending not to understand what I'm talking about: "whatever that means" hurp durp.
Once again you have missed my point.
Funny how you think I'm using distraction tricks. Very funny actually.
Even though you haven't heard a word I've said I would like to leave you with just one more:


XTERRA

Great. You cannot support your claims in any way even after being asked multiple times. Have a fantastic evening.

Originally posted by novastrike81
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

The Bible isn't wrong about anything. It's man who interprets the text and then says it has to be so. Man is wrong about a lot of things; some just aren't willing to admit they are wrong. The Bible proved science wrong when it said the universe was expanding and will die due to a heat death. What was man's scientific theory at the time? The Steady State Theory which Hubble proved wrong.

wow.. ahh.. excuse me.. do you realize what you just said?

NEWS FLASH : MAN WROTE THE BIBLE!!

there are no faxes from heaven.

[edit on 16-5-2010 by reeferman]

Originally posted by Aliensun

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33

Back to topic
I think the problem why people deny a creator is they get creation mixed up with religion.
They can and should be separate topics.
1) Learn to accept a creator exists. (Very hard for some people)
2) Then learn what he wants from you. (A challenge with so many idea's & philosophies)

Not so fast. You run into the same age-old problem religions have always had and try to deny it. According to you, god needs to exist first before anything else can exist. Otherwise, nothing can exist. So a god creating things is a religious belief (and a basis for and a very basic tenent of most religions at that).

Why do we need a creator? If physics works in an orderly fashion, we can accept that the Universe developed on its own with some sort of primal spark without the aid of an overloard. And if physics works than math works as an explanation for how physics works. So you can't have it both ways, and obviously, you don't need someone making the rules.

Looking for god, a master, as does most of the human race, is a sure-fire way to handover our individual sovereignties to the first suitable advanced ET race that comes along. To my mind, that is worse than their being found to be flesheaters.

Very valid points... What if the creator was the creation? A matter of consciousness put in motion? More sides than one to this issue.

Originally posted by Americanist

You won't find me walking into this trap.

Which trap? Do you mean the one where I ask how the universe's adherence to mathematical formulas implies a design or designer? I'm still waiting on a logical, supported case for this claim.

reply to post by reeferman


What's your point? It's a letter inspired by God written down by 40 divine authors from all walks of life that spans 1,500 years. Yet every book in the Bible is consistent in its message. These 66 books talk about history, prophecy, poetry, and theology. Despite their complexity, differences in writing styles and vast time periods, the books of the Bible agree miraculously well in theme, facts and cross-referencing. You can deny this and say "IT WAS WRITTEN BY MAN!!!!!" all you want but it doesn't change the fact it's consistent and true in all regards.

Originally posted by sliceNodice
These Albert Einstein quotes are for you atheists,

On whether he considered himself an atheist"I'm not an atheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what that is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the most intelligent human toward God."

On how he regards atheists: "The fanatical atheists...are creatures who cannot hear the music of the spheres. I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist. What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos."

He damned near summed it up with poetry:


Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for insects as well as for the stars. Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper.” -Albert Einstein

"A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty." -Albert Einstein


To which I give him credit.

Originally posted by nenothtu
Further, you require others to support their extraordinary claims with proof, while at the same time maintaining that you do not have to do so, vis-a-vis YOUR extraordinary claims of existence without cause.

Correct, I require others to support their extraordinary claims with proof.

I do not have to present any evidence because I have made no claims. The topic is not about existence without cause or any of the other things you assumed were implied.

This is about someone providing some evidence to prove that the universe's observance of physical laws and mathematical sequences implies design or a designer.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


It sounds like the only proof you're willing to accept is if we placed God at your feet.

Originally posted by novastrike81
You can deny this and say "IT WAS WRITTEN BY MAN!!!!!" all you want but it doesn't change the fact it's consistent and true in all regards.

The bible claims demons cause disease. This is not true and invalidates your claim.

This is just one example of falsehoods in the bible. There are tons of other examples of lies and inconsistencies.

Originally posted by novastrike81
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

It sounds like the only proof you're willing to accept is if we placed God at your feet.

Do so if you can.
Nobody else can seem to provide any evidence to support any of their claims.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by novastrike81
You can deny this and say "IT WAS WRITTEN BY MAN!!!!!" all you want but it doesn't change the fact it's consistent and true in all regards.

The bible claims demons cause disease. This is not true and invalidates your claim.

This is just one example of falsehoods in the bible. There are tons of other examples of lies and inconsistencies.

Show me this claim please, otherwise we can say you are just making assumptions with no proof to back your claims.

reply to post by Kandinsky


This has a lot that should be under physics or cosmology, but it's all trying to answer the same questions so here it goes.

People need a creator/god/grand pubah, etc. because our ego has a hard time dealing with things we don't understand. We have a high opinion of ourselves and are not comfortable if were not "special ordered", but are just "off the rack". (It felt good saying that)

That said, since you use mathamatics as "proof" of God, what does it "prove" to you? Beauty? Grace? The feelings one has about a painting or song, may be because you intuitively sense an understanding you can't put into words, other than; "I like it." Or do you recognize a pattern, like you do when a math equation bursts into your awareness, that suddenly fits like a lock and key. Thats when you get that, ah ha! moment, but all you can say is; "I get it". Moments of religous extasy can be induced by exposing the brain to magnetic fields, or drugs. It doesn't cheapen it, unless you want to. It just shows a physical cause and effect. But this idea is more then a reflex.

We all have an inate need to see patterns, and convince ourselves "it all means something". My view of the Creator or God is the same as my favorite color; it's just my opinion. First, I don't view nature and it's creation (God if you will) as being as much an entity, as a process. To start with, IMO what we call reallity is a shadow or hologram of the information that creates it. You can't have information unless it is made up of different states in motion. I really doubt it's digital any more then "God" has "IBM" monogramed on his shorts. Our reallity may just be one artifact (side effect) of this process. Our reallity and us, may not be the the goal of this process. For one thing a goal implies intent, but thats another area. We may be like parts of a cow they trim before putting the beef in a package; gristle, fat, by products. Sorry...

But it makes sense to me that an organized system will move in the direction of accomplishing more with less energy.
In concept the more efficiant the more complex. People might think greater complexity means more things can break. But were not talking about a lawn mower. As information becomes more complex, there is no down side. The information is not the product of a machine, it's the other way around. Look at it this way. Say you want a machine that makes donuts, machines don't just pop into a room (I think in the future they will, but thats another subject) You start with an idea of why, then you think how. Plans, process. Starting with an idea the process is all information. The machine, even getting fat from eating the donuts, is how that information manifests and becomes what we call reality. But it's only the product of a process.

It's interesting that Hinduism states our reality is an illusion. A manifistation of Gods mind... Many accept the concept of a creator but not a foreman, or God. It seems if the universe has no potential to be more then a slave to an omnipitent power, whats the whole point? Only a pathetic god trying to find new ways to amuse itself would be like that. That kind of negative information woulden't consume itself, it's existance would be a logical impossibility. Why is it when we learn something, experience a revelation, build something, we feel satisfaction? Because it just doesn't affect us, it changes us. What I call divine is a process with no ego. No need or agenda. But capable of experiencing other energy states as the reality they experience. This is not filtered through a personality, but experienced as that person for example, in that reality does. In this case something is reversed. Where as the information source creates the hologram were in, the information source experiences our hologram as its own. But since it's the source of our hologram it does not view it as reality, just one of perhaps an infinate number of possibilities. So in a mathamatical or information perspective, the term God is us, is true.

Feelings like joy, love etc. may not seem to fit with a sterile information system. But sterile means inert. Information is anything but inert. It's change that causes other change. These are just different expressions of a process in action. People always ask (I have to) if there is a God, why does evil and disasters happen.? Why is it if I say s*** happens, people get it, like they get you don't always win when you bet. But if Hitler goose steps into their living room or a volcano blows up people think; "I thought God was on retainer?" Remenber I said part or all of reality could be side effects of another process? Looking at this process as information moving towerd greater complexity, a side effect of this process might be to experience events we call good and bad. This does not mean this process is just a glorified calculator. As mentioned it can experience us as we do, and vi-sa-versa to a point, perhaps in a simulation. We may experience this as synchronicity, "a weird feeling" Therefore when we feel love, joy, peace, we like it and we want more. It does to. Being us and having no ego as a starting point, when were in the picture, which is always, it does not know how to know us any other way. The same applies when ghastly things happen. To say it feels our pain is not a political slogan.

Thought's, action's, that lead to what we call good or bad things are infectious, they spread. I think what we call evil has at it's root, fear. Fear was the topic of another post, but worth mentioning here. It's the opposite of order, direction and growth. The less someone's sense and comfort with who they they are, the greater fear rules there personality. Fear is like an explosion, the blast has to go some where. One way is hate. Hate is disorder with a ravonous personality. As another post has said, you'll live longer the less it controls you. But whats important to me, you'll want to. So does this mean this process feels nothing? No, because we do. Because things we consider joyfull, good, move in the direction of more finite order and greater complexity, because when we feel good the universe does, and the other way around, its a self re-enforcing arrangement. It's a way of saying I think over linear time things get better as far as we think, because it's natual that they do. But at any specific time that may not be the case.

Last, were told by philsophers there is no present, only past and future, because the present exits for an unmeasurable short period of time. But since our perception of linear time is a manifistaion of this universe, and it seems vey hard to break the rules, we have concepts as infinity. The best we can say is its"really big and really long" When I hear infinity, I think of being mind-numbingly board. Perhaps the information that generates our reality is just the opposite. Being constantly in motion there would never be any down time. It would understand our concept of infinity through us, at least as much as we do. (most likely it'll get a headache) But it's perspective would not have past and future, only NOW. One constantly morphing, changing yet focused thought. We see time as an assembly line. It views time as a tapastry, directing it's attention accross a landscape, each piece unique, but part of the whole experiencing it at one moment. Where as we stay the same but percieve things from the perspective of different moments. It see's time as only through those in a universe where it has effect. To us, being self aware means we can seperate our personalities/ego from everything else. But not constrained by our concept of ego there no assumptions, expectations, hence each "moment" is a new creation and reality. It's been said reality is a thought of God realized. Sounds good to me.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by Americanist

You won't find me walking into this trap.

Which trap? Do you mean the one where I ask how the universe's adherence to mathematical formulas implies a design or designer? I'm still waiting on a logical, supported case for this claim.

You present your one-side case lodged somewhere between a catch 22 and the infallible ego.


I detailed the adherence to math with the sum of all things zero. Whether the design and the designer are one in the same is yet to be seen.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


'Evidence' which you consistently have ignored, rejected out of hand, or tried to twist into things not represented.

You have predetermined your course, and will not allow pesky little things that may oppose that course to enter your world view. Your single-mindedness is admirable, but at the expense of not expanding your horizons because of your steadfast refusal to entertain ideas that may upset the apple cart for you. That's understandable.

Be well, for as long as you can keep your individual entropy consistent by your own efforts.

Edit to add: I'm truly glad that you can somehow see making a counter-claim as making no claim at all. It shows the extent of your logical capabilities.


[edit on 2010/5/16 by nenothtu]

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by Americanist

You won't find me walking into this trap.

Which trap? Do you mean the one where I ask how the universe's adherence to mathematical formulas implies a design or designer? I'm still waiting on a logical, supported case for this claim.

You present your one-side case lodged somewhere between a catch 22 and the infallible ego.


I detailed the adherence to math with the sum of all things zero. Whether the design and the designer are one in the same is yet to be seen.

I'm not presenting a case. Others are and I simply request some evidence supporting it.

What is this about "sum of all things zero"? Can you, or someone, please provide the evidence that repeating mathematical sequences implies a design or designer?

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


Demons caused certain things to happen to people which resembled these medical conditions. When the demons were cast out the symptoms ceased. If the symptoms were caused by an underlying medical condition then the symptoms would have continued and Jesus would have been regarded as a fake. These simple facts escape those who wish to make the Bible say something it doesn't. Those who do not believe in demons will of course discount this and attribute it all to mental illness.

Just because you choose not to believe in such things doesn't mean they aren't real. Maybe you should read the story of the The Devil and Karen Kingston

[edit on 16-5-2010 by novastrike81]

reply to post by reeferman


No. I found out about them about 2 years ago actually, but I saw this video and decided to post it.
For atheists I figured it would be interesting.
And for agnostics it would make them meditate on what they believe.
Finally for the believers of a creator it would just strengthen their belief.

As for your video, a felt compelled to watch it, and I found this.

It's greatest point of strength is it's greatest weakness.

Why are biological tests done on monkeys? Because of what is mentioned, such close DNA. It then makes sense that the human body and the ape body would respond in a very similar or even identical manner when it fights disease.
In fact it is POSSIBLE that our immune systems fought those same diseases identically.
Interesting video.
Thanks for posting it.

[edit on 16-5-2010 by Blue_Jay33]