Question: For something to exist it has to be created, right?

Originally posted by Sounds_of_Silence
We were made to question? So why is it that people who always question something outside someone's religious views always gets shot down? Why should we follow the words of a book the words of some pedophile behind a pulpit or whatever the...you call it. More bad has come of religion than good, some people just can't see it because they just go about their god fearing lives turning a blind eye to women in africa having their breasts hacked off by religious fanatics just because they don't share the same views. So much for religious freedom...

edit on 31-3-2012 by Sounds_of_Silence because: (no reason given)

Well no wonder you asked this question then. This is barely coherent.

Originally posted by Sounds_of_Silence
I mean come on...who created the big bang...who created everything before the big bang even happened if it did in fact happen? we thought up nothingness would nothingness exist if we didn't? Does the world still go on as we knew it after we die or was it preprogrammed just to cater for us? Your thoughts.

edit on 31-3-2012 by Sounds_of_Silence because: (no reason given)

Why do you guys make it so hard?

Let's keep it simple.

Basically it boils down to this:

If the universe and everything in it were NOT created by Jehovah God then the alternative is nothing - that is nothing created everything.

If nothing created everything then we're just a product of chance events with no ultimate purpose.

On the other hand if life was the product of intelligent creation then there must be a purpose to life.

Logic and common sense say that an intelligent builder doesn't just build something without a purpose behind his creation. It's the same thing with God and his purpose is revealed in his written word - the holy scriptures.

And since Life can only come from life then it follows that the source of life is the always existing Creator.

tc.

reply to post by edmc^2

So, which intelligent builder created "Jehovah God"?

The exception is the absolute non-existence. The instant any consciousness considers it, it becomes an "it" thus violating the integrity of absolute non-existence resulting in the annihilation what doesn't exist. So now you see the dilemma the Infinite has when confronted with the requirement to be omnipresent.

Originally posted by edmc^2
If the universe and everything in it were NOT created by Jehovah God then the alternative is nothing - that is nothing created everything.

That's not true and you know it. There is an infinite list of alternatives if we allow magical beings..

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
reply to post by edmc^2

 

So, which intelligent builder created "Jehovah God"?

to quote rhinoceros:

things don't necessarily need creators.

In the case of Jehovah God - he always is and always was and always will be the uncreated - the ultimate source of life. The infinity.

do you believe that there's such a thing as infinity FOXMULDER147?

if so how did it came to be?

tc.

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by edmc^2
If the universe and everything in it were NOT created by Jehovah God then the alternative is nothing - that is nothing created everything.

That's not true and you know it. There is an infinite list of alternatives if we allow magical beings..

rhinoceros there are infinite list phenomenon in the universe that we don't even understand and can't fathom yet we believe they exist and have no problem accepting them but when it comes to an intelligent being, a Creator - your brain shuts down.

Why?

tc.

reply to post by edmc^2

If the universe and everything in it were NOT created by Jehovah God then the alternative is nothing - that is nothing created everything.

What a big, fat, steaming load of male bovine fecal matter this statement is! There are hundreds, if not thousands, of creation myths to choose from. Not to mention the option of some natural phenomenon that we don't know about yet. Why do creationists always try to push the false dichotomy fallacy?

"Oh, well, if [insert natural phenomenon] isn't completely and totally understood and all potential questions regarding aren't answered to my complete satisfaction right now, then the only possible answer is that the Abrahamic God must be responsible for it."

Or, "Tides come in. Tides go out. You can't explain that."

Seriously, how sad is it that they feel the need to marginalize their own Supreme Being into an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance?

Something never came from nothing. No field of science suggests that. The big bang was a dense singularity of energy and it spread in all directions. We don't know why, but we know that it happened based on the movement of the universe. There's no reason to assume that something has to be created to exist. If it does, then that includes a creator as well. If that god can be eternal, why can't the universe be eternal?

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by edmc^2

 

If the universe and everything in it were NOT created by Jehovah God then the alternative is nothing - that is nothing created everything.

What a big, fat, steaming load of male bovine fecal matter this statement is! There are hundreds, if not thousands, of creation myths to choose from. Not to mention the option of some natural phenomenon that we don't know about yet. Why do creationists always try to push the false dichotomy fallacy?

"Oh, well, if [insert natural phenomenon] isn't completely and totally understood and all potential questions regarding aren't answered to my complete satisfaction right now, then the only possible answer is that the Abrahamic God must be responsible for it."

Or, "Tides come in. Tides go out. You can't explain that."

Seriously, how sad is it that they feel the need to marginalize their own Supreme Being into an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance?

What a big, fat, steaming load of male bovine fecal matter this statement

my my what choices of words you got there my friend.

If the universe and everything in it were NOT created by Jehovah God then the alternative is nothing - that is nothing created everything.

Simple answer is logic and common sense which - sorry to say this - you're lacking.

Without these two important thinking ability you will never know the origins of life.

tc.

reply to post by edmc^2

Simple answer is logic and common sense which - sorry to say this - you're lacking.

Without these two important thinking ability you will never know the origins of life.

I'm not the one excluding hundreds or thousands or other possibilities. You're the one limiting it to a binary decision -- natural phenomenon or supernatural phenomenon -- while ignoring that each of those is just a category of possibilities. In your mind, no natural phenomenon, even one we don't even currently recognize, could possibly be the correct one. So you feel your answer that it must be the result of a supernatural phenomenon must be correct, but then you take it even further -- that your particular creation myth must be the correct one if all natural phenomena are somehow ruled out -- with no consideration that your creation myth is less than 1% of all of those in existence. And you've done nothing to rule the rest of them out, you've just assumed that yours must be the correct one.

If anything, you're even farther from knowing the origins of life than I am because you stopped looking for an answer.

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by edmc^2

 

Simple answer is logic and common sense which - sorry to say this - you're lacking.

Without these two important thinking ability you will never know the origins of life.

I'm not the one excluding hundreds or thousands or other possibilities. You're the one limiting it to a binary decision -- natural phenomenon or supernatural phenomenon -- while ignoring that each of those is just a category of possibilities. In your mind, no natural phenomenon, even one we don't even currently recognize, could possibly be the correct one. So you feel your answer that it must be the result of a supernatural phenomenon must be correct, but then you take it even further -- that your particular creation myth must be the correct one if all natural phenomena are somehow ruled out -- with no consideration that your creation myth is less than 1% of all of those in existence. And you've done nothing to rule the rest of them out, you've just assumed that yours must be the correct one.

If anything, you're even farther from knowing the origins of life than I am because you stopped looking for an answer.

All things considered - logic and common sense tells me that design requires a designer.

You on the other hand say that all things came to be by random accidental chance event.

Which one make sense?

tc.

load of male bovine fecal matter

thats one i will have to remember.

Originally posted by rhinoceros
reply to post by Sounds_of_Silence

 

Why is it that religious folk never extend this logic their precious God(s)? And no, things don't necessarily need creators. Particles and anti-particles spark into existence all the time, only to annihilate one another a brief moment later. I'm thinking with big bang something similar to this failed to happen properly, and thus Big Bang..

What you say here is totally wrong from a scientific point of view. The reason that it is written that particles spark into existence all the time, is because we haven't got the technology to observe the whole process.

reply to post by edmc^2


Why Jehovah-God? If I deprived someone of all the information in the world and then told him that I invented the wheel chances are they would believe me. Who named him Jehovah-God? Did he name himself that and if so who addressed him before we had even existed.

Originally posted by Sounds_of_Silence
reply to post by edmc^2

 

Why Jehovah-God? If I deprived someone of all the information in the world and then told him that I invented the wheel chances are they would believe me. Who named him Jehovah-God? Did he name himself that and if so who addressed him before we had even existed.

Not sure what you mean but as far as the Creator's name is concern - He gave that name to himself - YHWH.

Sadly the correct pronunciation of YHWH (JHVH) was lost long time ago but we now know him as Jehovah. Some prefer Yahweh and some prefer Yehowah. In any case any one of these names will do because they contain the tetragrammaton YHWH. But since the most recognized name is Jehovah (JHVH) thus this is what I/we use as the name of the Creator, the name of God.

As for who addressed him before we existed - powerful spirit beings that he also created who resides with him in the heavens. They address him by that name He gave to Himself.

Interesting thing about God's name is the meaning of it. It's all tied to him being the Creator of everything because it literally means - HE CAUSES TO BECOME. That is, whatever he wanted to become - he becomes that person. If he wanted to create - he becomes the Creator or a loving Father or a loving compassionate Mother, or a Savior or a Warrior or a Provider or a Friend etc.

That name also means that He IS the First CAUSE - hence He has no beginning nor end. He is the UNcreated ONE.

And like I said - this is the only one that makes sense - an Always Existing Entity that can create and impart life to others otherwise the alternative is to believe that there's no creator and that everything came to be by accident or chance event.

It's your choice which one to believe - of course it should be backed up by facts not just heresy or blind faith.

So what say you?

tc.

reply to post by edmc^2

All things considered - logic and common sense tells me that design requires a designer.

Only because of your personal definition for design and the way you apply it.

You on the other hand say that all things came to be by random accidental chance event.

Whenever you say the words "random", "blind chance", "accidental", or any combination of them with or without suffixes, prefixes, or other modifiers, I'm reminded of Inigo Montoya -- "I do not think that word means what you think it means."

Which one make sense?

If you're relying on common sense to explore and understand the Universe around you, you're going to quickly find yourself never leaving the couch to actually do any exploring and understanding. Common sense may be one of the most subjective things in the world and also one of the poorest indicators of which answer is the right one.

Originally posted by edmc^2
Not sure what you mean but as far as the Creator's name is concern - He gave that name to himself - YHWH.

You're totally misinformed on the matter. The Universe is but Brahma's dream. Thus, your precious YHWH is but a fragment of Brahma's imagination. Since Hindu scriptures are 1) much older and 2) much more correct in universal time scales than e.g. Jewish scriptures (billions of years vs. thousands), this is further evidence of Judaism and its offshoots being but fairy tales. Also, in reality aBRahaM is but another name for BRahMa, further proving that the Jewish scriptures are but late misinformed texts. Good luck proving me wrong

Infinity means, that something always existed and always will, though not necessarily in the same form.

Originally posted by edmc^2
All things considered - logic and common sense tells me that design requires a designer.

You on the other hand say that all things came to be by random accidental chance event.

Which one make sense?

tc.

We've been over this tons of times. You can't prove that DNA is a design. You posted the code which clearly looks like random generated numbers (it's actually pairs of atoms) rather than a computer code or any other type of "code" created by human intelligence. Find me another programmed code that looks like that. You need prove it is a design first, before saying that design requires designer. Do this scientifically and you'll have a chance. You are doing just what Cataclysm was doing and basing your entire argument on your personal interpretation of DNA code, not objective evidence. Then you limit it further by claiming its either Jehova or nothing. That's false. We don't know the answer. Claiming it's nothing is just as silly as claiming it's god. Why can't you admit we don't know the answer for sure, but your opinion is that it was created, instead of falsely claiming that it's proven.