RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism

RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

switch2please -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 5:37:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity What if the universe and everything in it is god. quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead It's quite possible to imagine a universe without a God, but you couldn't have a God without a universe. Probably not relevant, but I just thought I'd mention that. If there is a god, and he is everywhere and everything, then I'm definitely going to hell for not believing in him. Then again, if god is everywhere and everything - and everyone - then I am god. Gee, I feel special.

switch2please -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 5:38:32 PM)
disappears into nonexistence with a POOF of circular logic for not believing in herself

Kirata -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 5:42:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: switch2please disappears into nonexistence with a POOF of circular logic for not believing in herself Take a few deep breaths, you'll be fine [:D] K.

Kirata -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 5:58:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML I would have to expand my cosmology to imagine the unimaginable entity/force greater than all mass/energy/time existence... Why? See, this is what troubles me about some of the positions that are taken in these threads. The people taking them appear to have a very clear idea of what "God" is, or must necessarily be, which, equally clearly, they reject. But to reject your own notion of God, or one that you heard from somebody else, is to address only that limited specific notion, not all the possibilities for there being something else, something that mankind has completely obscured through his attempts to grasp and characterize what is ultimately only accessible to experience. Just a wandering thought. K.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 6:08:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: switch2please disappears into nonexistence with a POOF of circular logic for not believing in herself Come back - I believe in you!

vincentML -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 7:30:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML I would have to expand my cosmology to imagine the unimaginable entity/force greater than all mass/energy/time existence... Why? See, this is what troubles me about some of the positions that are taken in these threads. The people taking them appear to have a very clear idea of what "God" is, or must necessarily be, which, equally clearly, they reject. But to reject your own notion of God, or one that you heard from somebody else, is to address only that limited specific notion, not all the possibilities for there being something else, something that mankind has completely obscured through his attempts to grasp and characterize what is ultimately only accessible to experience. Just a wandering thought. K. Your wandering thought leads me to conclude you are indulging in wishful thinking. We seek not only through experience but through reasoning. From what I can understand of your comments you are suggesting there might be god we have not yet thought of or imagined. Do I have that right? If it is beyond my experience or reasoning of what utility is it for me to ponder upon it? Vincent

vincentML -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 7:43:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Assuming for the moment that god was the creator, just humor me here, I have often wondered what he did during all the preceding eternity. Did he have conversations with himself, play games with himself, maybe even naughty games? What exactly does a god do in nothingness? Or does he fill up the nothingness with himself and so completely occupy himself with himself? And then to create a Universe does he have to move over, get himself out of the way, make a little room for the expanding matter and energy? He must have had to think it through carefully, don't you agree? Could have been a dilema - to create or not create; that is the question. Whether it is nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of a bunch of idiots saying nasty things on message boards, or just forget the whole thing. A crucial decision. Know what I mean? Much as you may enjoy finding opportunities to indulge in some gratuitous ridicule, there's no need to go out of your way to create them. In this case the proposition was, "you couldn't have a God without a universe." Know what I mean? K. Let me have a little fun, K. That's what we are here for. It is what I am here for, at least. And if I learn a little all the better. Implicit in my poking around is my rejection of the original premise. Sorry I didn't spell it out for you. My Catholic upbringing (well, exposure at best) taught me that there was God before Universe. And I still wonder what he (the Abrahamic god) did with his time, if time even existed for him. Maybe he played solitare. Or maybe he just was. Don't you ever wonder of such things? I suspect you do. Vincent

vincentML -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 7:46:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: switch2please quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity What if the universe and everything in it is god. quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead It's quite possible to imagine a universe without a God, but you couldn't have a God without a universe. Probably not relevant, but I just thought I'd mention that. If there is a god, and he is everywhere and everything, then I'm definitely going to hell for not believing in him. Then again, if god is everywhere and everything - and everyone - then I am god. Gee, I feel special. On the other hand if god is everywhere and everything there can be no hell because he is omnibenevolent (the abrahamic god) You are safe, switch, safe I tell you!!!! Vincent

MzMia -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 7:49:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Assuming for the moment that god was the creator, just humor me here, I have often wondered what he did during all the preceding eternity. Did he have conversations with himself, play games with himself, maybe even naughty games? What exactly does a god do in nothingness? Or does he fill up the nothingness with himself and so completely occupy himself with himself? And then to create a Universe does he have to move over, get himself out of the way, make a little room for the expanding matter and energy? He must have had to think it through carefully, don't you agree? Could have been a dilema - to create or not create; that is the question. Whether it is nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of a bunch of idiots saying nasty things on message boards, or just forget the whole thing. A crucial decision. Know what I mean? Much as you may enjoy finding opportunities to indulge in some gratuitous ridicule, there's no need to go out of your way to create them. In this case the proposition was, "you couldn't have a God without a universe." Know what I mean? K. Let me have a little fun, K. That's what we are here for. It is what I am here for, at least. And if I learn a little all the better. Implicit in my poking around is my rejection of the original premise. Sorry I didn't spell it out for you. My Catholic upbringing (well, exposure at best) taught me that there was God before Universe. And I still wonder what he (the Abrahamic god) did with his time, if time even existed for him. Maybe he played solitare. Or maybe he just was. Don't you ever wonder of such things? I suspect you do. Vincent It's so funny that most of us that DO believe, don't spend our days trying to figure out what GOD does or has ever done with his time. Man always tries to figure out and make everything fit into a little box in his little mind. I would never presume or even attempt to think that I could figure out what is in the mind of my CREATOR. I have enough sense to know that many concepts are beyond any mere mortal's realm of capability. For most Believer's our belief's are enough to sustain us, it is the lot of most unBeliever's to spend their days trying to defend why they believe GOD does not exist. That is why I only post on "these types of threads", maybe once or twice a year. Then I move on. I might post on another one of these types of threads in the summer. Peace, Love and Joy to all [;)]

vincentML -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 7:49:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: switch2please I did use 'theology' incorrectly. I was typing quickly and should have used another word [:)] I meant that neither evolutionism or creationism can be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, so neither can be construed as right or wrong. It's a matter of choice, and I choose evolution. I don't demand proof, that's just my point - it's a matter of belief. okey doakey vincent

vincentML -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 8:04:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: switch2please God is always referred to in the context of power - benevolent or not, omniscient or not, he is a 'creator', 'lord', 'savior', whatever. Without a universe, god has power over nothing because there is nothing. Without a universe, god is out of context. You can have a universe and god, or a universe. You can't have just god. You make a clever argument, switch. I agree according to your definition (not that you thought of it first - my aunt sally did in 1943, june 3rd to be exact) god without a universe is like an automobile without four wheels and an engine - going nowhere, doing nothing. But here's the rub. Not my aunt sally but some tribal priests who proposed the definition. Suppose for the sake of argument the definition is wrong. Suppose we do not know the correct definition. I think that's what Kirata was getting at. My guess, K. In which case, all bets are off. Unfortunately it leaves us in a very non-utilitarian place. What the hell do we do with an undefined god? vincent

willbeurdaddy -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 8:05:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: switch2please God is always referred to in the context of power - benevolent or not, omniscient or not, he is a 'creator', 'lord', 'savior', whatever. Without a universe, god has power over nothing because there is nothing. Without a universe, god is out of context. You can have a universe and god, or a universe. You can't have just god. You make a clever argument, switch. I agree according to your definition (not that you thought of it first - my aunt sally did in 1943, june 3rd to be exact) god without a universe is like an automobile without four wheels and an engine - going nowhere, doing nothing. But here's the rub. Not my aunt sally but some tribal priests who proposed the definition. Suppose for the sake of argument the definition is wrong. Suppose we do not know the correct definition. I think that's what Kirata was getting at. My guess, K. In which case, all bets are off. Unfortunately it leaves us in a very non-utilitarian place. What the hell do we do with an undefined god? vincent Tithe 20% of your income, just in case thats what he/she/it really wants?

vincentML -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 8:11:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MzMia quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Assuming for the moment that god was the creator, just humor me here, I have often wondered what he did during all the preceding eternity. Did he have conversations with himself, play games with himself, maybe even naughty games? What exactly does a god do in nothingness? Or does he fill up the nothingness with himself and so completely occupy himself with himself? And then to create a Universe does he have to move over, get himself out of the way, make a little room for the expanding matter and energy? He must have had to think it through carefully, don't you agree? Could have been a dilema - to create or not create; that is the question. Whether it is nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of a bunch of idiots saying nasty things on message boards, or just forget the whole thing. A crucial decision. Know what I mean? Much as you may enjoy finding opportunities to indulge in some gratuitous ridicule, there's no need to go out of your way to create them. In this case the proposition was, "you couldn't have a God without a universe." Know what I mean? K. Let me have a little fun, K. That's what we are here for. It is what I am here for, at least. And if I learn a little all the better. Implicit in my poking around is my rejection of the original premise. Sorry I didn't spell it out for you. My Catholic upbringing (well, exposure at best) taught me that there was God before Universe. And I still wonder what he (the Abrahamic god) did with his time, if time even existed for him. Maybe he played solitare. Or maybe he just was. Don't you ever wonder of such things? I suspect you do. Vincent It's so funny that most of us that DO believe, don't spend our days trying to figure out what GOD does or has ever done with his time. Man always tries to figure out and make everything fit into a little box in his little mind. I would never presume or even attempt to think that I could figure out what is in the mind of my CREATOR. I have enough sense to know that many concepts are beyond any mere mortal's realm of capability. For most Believer's our belief's are enough to sustain us, it is the lot of most unBeliever's to spend their days trying to defend why they believe GOD does not exist. That is why I only post on "these types of threads", maybe once or twice a year. Then I move on. I might post on another one of these types of threads in the summer. Peace, Love and Joy to all [;)] OMG, hit and run. That's err cowardly maybe? No, I do not wish to be unkind. Certainly unfair. If you happen to peek back in my answer would be that assuming your god does exist, he gave you a brain and an intellect to use, to question, to examine the wonder of the existence he created. You choose only to exercise that gift twice a year. You might honor his marvelous gift more by using it more often than that. vincent

vincentML -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 8:14:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail well if the universe aint forever according to god, they are going to have to be doing some tinkering on that the earth will be made anew lie they been telling.........maybe they are having some trouble with the contractors, seeing as they are all certainly in hell. Satan If they would come to work sober once in awhile they might have a better fate. vincent

vincentML -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 8:19:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: switch2please God is always referred to in the context of power - benevolent or not, omniscient or not, he is a 'creator', 'lord', 'savior', whatever. Without a universe, god has power over nothing because there is nothing. Without a universe, god is out of context. You can have a universe and god, or a universe. You can't have just god. You make a clever argument, switch. I agree according to your definition (not that you thought of it first - my aunt sally did in 1943, june 3rd to be exact) god without a universe is like an automobile without four wheels and an engine - going nowhere, doing nothing. But here's the rub. Not my aunt sally but some tribal priests who proposed the definition. Suppose for the sake of argument the definition is wrong. Suppose we do not know the correct definition. I think that's what Kirata was getting at. My guess, K. In which case, all bets are off. Unfortunately it leaves us in a very non-utilitarian place. What the hell do we do with an undefined god? vincent Tithe 20% of your income, just in case thats what he/she/it really wants? Damn inflation, Will. Use to be only 10% If only we could convince the Chinese to let their currency float. vincent

vincentML -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 8:20:56 PM)
Good night all. You have been excellent correspondents. Thank you. Gotta go. getting late on the east coast. vincent

cpK69 -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 8:34:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: switch2please Without a universe, god has power over nothing because there is nothing. Without a universe, god is out of context. You can have a universe and god, or a universe. You can't have just god. Perhaps before God created a universe/'womb for his seed', he was busy working out details; at which point he was barer of seed, and Master of self. Kim

MzMia -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 8:39:25 PM)
I choose NOT to spend endless hours debating or attempting to justify my GOD's existence to non-Believers, because I don't have the motivation, energy, or the time. I did not say I don't READ these threads "now and then", I just rarely bother to comment. Carry on! [;)]

Kirata -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (11/30/2009 8:39:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata something that mankind has completely obscured through his attempts to grasp and characterize what is ultimately only accessible to experience. Your wandering thought leads me to conclude you are indulging in wishful thinking. We seek not only through experience but through reasoning. Responding to things nobody said seems to be second-nature for you. I have nowhere in my post excluded the use of reason. quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML From what I can understand of your comments you are suggesting there might be god we have not yet thought of or imagined... If it is beyond my experience or reasoning of what utility is it for me to ponder upon it? You get to "if it is beyond my experience" from my suggestion that something may be only "accessible to experience"? Whew, that takes talent. Okay, restraining my diagnostic impulse and sticking with the simple observation that you seem to be having trouble with this concept, let me give you an example of something that cannot be adequately grasped through words, not even millennia of them rhymed and otherwise, something that is only accessible to experience: Love. And, I will add, it is a proper and necessary function of our reason to recognize that some things are like that. K.

Brain -> RE: The puzzle of life - science versus creationism (12/1/2009 3:56:29 AM)
This complete explanation here of the birth of the universe helps me believe there is no God. Why didn’t they mention God? Things are not smooth out in our universe, with clumps of matter we call stars and galaxies drifting through space. Scientists talk through their theories on how the parallel universe theory might help to plot the history of time to even before the Big Bang. Brilliant video from BBC science show, 'Parallel Universes'. YouTube - Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crQvu4NygAc&feature=channel

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875