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

TextWhy 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..

reply to post by rhinoceros


You say that things don't necessarily need creators. Can I ask you a question? Do these things, that you say are things, need a prior existence to spark themselves into existence? Forget the word creator. Do you have to have preexistence in order for something else to come forth and also exist? Now work backwards and tell me if there is a beginning to any of this existence which brings forth other existence. If you say it brought itself into existence then there had to be other existence from which it came. Once something does exist, then many other forms can come from that existence. I will buy into that but where did the original pattern come from and how did it get here?

reply to post by Seede


And there you go.... You've just outlined one of the BIG nagging questions mankind has pondered since becoming self aware.

Don't get hung up on the notion of time. Don't be fooled into thinking time really works the way it seems to -- progressing from a past through the present into the future. That's just the way our little monkey minds perceive it because it helps us survive that way.

Time really isn't like that at all, and is really more like a color or temperature.

So no, something doesn't have to be created to exist. It's not a matter of cause and effect. In order for something to exist, it's more important for it to be perceived.

reply to post by edmc^2


I was interested in this conversation until you ruined it with juvenile niave blabber. Please stick to religious threads with your nonsense.