Why Believe in a god?

[6days]

What we see is the re-arranging of that which has been there for all of time (matter and energy) and the beginnings are simply when it changes arrangements or appears as a recognizable arrangement.

Science and logic suggest that anything which begins to exist has a cause.*
Are you arguing that something uncaused existed throughout eternity?*
Are you suggesting that there was nothing, and suddenly 'time' began...and 'In the beginning' matter and energy began creating?

I have a suggestion that is more scientific and logical. *In the beginning, an uncaused Intelligence created.*

When we do see something beginning it is uncaused, specifically random quantum fluctuations in the form of*virtual particles.

False. Everything that begins to exist also has a cause. Quantum fluctuations that begin also have a cause (energy).*

Is it my imagination....you *seem willing to make poor arguments...use poor logic...believe in many hypotheticals....anything, but consider an uncaused omnipotent omnipotent Cause?

No doubt!

Multiverse is no more unscientific than your pet idea.

That's not true. Multiverse is a belief... not a shred of evidence. Multiverse is simply wishful thinking of atheists.

My 'pet idea' is based on science...on logic...on evidence...and on the eye witness testimony of One who was there at the beginning. Evidence suggests an eternally existing uncaused Cause. Science shows us there is evidence of design and fine tuning. The written testimony provides evidence of divine inspiration and inerrant truth.*

I think your head is still hurting.*

Most of those ideas I have already mentioned and don't contradict the big bang theory but instead add some details to it. Particularly the big bounce if you actually read about it is basically the big bang repeating itself, though current observations make that option unlikely unless there is a reversal in the build up of phantom energy within the universe (which given how little we know about it who knows really - the ultimate fate of the universe is a hotly contested topic which is both fascinating and to a degree depressing).

The big bounce explanation.... it's sort of like believing in turtles all the way down.*

I think the BBC comment was accurate..."(The various beliefs/ ideas)would be easier to dismiss as the half-baked musings of the lunatic fringe were it not for the fact that some of the very people who constructed the everything-from-nothing big bang model are themselves starting to dismantle it. "

Yet again you refuse to follow the evidence where it points, instead you just dismiss what you don't understand/like as zany etc.

I have already said, that you are the one who is unwilling to follow the evidence where it leads. You CHOOSE to believe in a hypothetical construct rather than experimental science showing design.*

The multiverse belief is nothing more than half baked beliefs. I think you would have to believe in uncountable number of universes where anything and everything is possible. Would you believe a universe exists where there is a planet where Little Green Men get around in flying saucers? Would you believe in a universe where an omniscient and omnipotent Creator exists who was crucified on the cross to save the people that He created?

 

[Tyrathca]

Science and logic suggest that anything which begins to exist has a cause.*
Are you arguing that something uncaused existed throughout eternity?*
Are you suggesting that there was nothing, and suddenly 'time' began...and 'In the beginning' matter and energy began creating?

I am suggesting that we don't know the answer but these are all explanations which are not impossible.

I have a suggestion that is more scientific and logical. *In the beginning, an uncaused Intelligence created.*

That is neither logical or scientific to assume as the answer. It is an explanation which is not impossible and is no better than any of the other explanations given we have little evidence to decide between them. Given there are so many non-God potential options not to mention God options which don't resemble your God in the slightest it seems illogical to assume a god or any intelligence.

False. Everything that begins to exist also has a cause. Quantum fluctuations that begin also have a cause (energy).*

It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. If you're going to talk about quantum mechanics perhaps you should actual know something about the topic (like the quantum fluctuations ARE the energy and happen irrespective of the energy in their environment, it is only what happens after the fluctuation comes into existence that is then affect by the environment).

Apart from that you didn't address what I said at all. We have never seen matter, energy, space or time begin let alone begin with a cause. All we have ever seen begin with a cause is a rearrangement of said matter and energy. Ergo you can't say with confidence that your conclusions about one will be relevant tot he other (they might be relevant but you don't know they are)

That's not true. Multiverse is a belief... not a shred of evidence. Multiverse is simply wishful thinking of atheists.

I am not a proponent of the multiverse, however I cannot say with confidence that it is false or impossible. Ergo it remains as a potential explanation along with all the others, with very little evidence (including your pet belief)

My 'pet idea' is based on science...on logic...on evidence...and on the eye witness testimony of One who was there at the beginning.

No it is a belief supported by poor arguments, poor logic and you will consider any explanation that shoehorns your god int the picture. The bible is no more eye witness testimony than the Vedas and Puranas (Hindu)

I think your head is still hurting.*

And yours isn't hurting enough.

The big bounce explanation.... it's sort of like believing in turtles all the way down.*

Which isn't a reason to consider it impossible, the universe is weird so we should not expect it's origin to be any less weird.

I have already said, that you are the one who is unwilling to follow the evidence where it leads. You CHOOSE to believe in a hypothetical construct rather than experimental science showing design.*

No I choose to say I don't know when there isn't sufficient evidence to say anything with confidence. Your conclusion is little more than a pre-ordained guess where you haven't followed the evidence but instead started with your conclusion. The reality is I don't think anyone knows and those that think they do are either deluding themselves or using very faulty reasoning so far as I have seen.

There are so many different possibilities the odds of any one being right by chance is infinitesimal. The arguments given thus far for God being necessary for the creation of the universe have thus far relied on nothing more than it supposedly being the only possible answer based on "logic' without providing any other supporting evidence, I believe I have shown that it is not the only possible answer and therefore we can not say that god is necessary for the universe to exist unless we have some further data.

The multiverse belief is nothing more than half baked beliefs. I think you would have to believe in uncountable number of universes where anything and everything is possible. Would you believe a universe exists where there is a planet where Little Green Men get around in flying saucers? Would you believe in a universe where an omniscient and omnipotent Creator exists who was crucified on the cross to save the people that He created?

If I were to believe wholeheartedly in the multiverse that might be the case although it would then matter what type of infinite we are talking about.

Strange but true: Infintity comes in different sizes

As I have said though I am not a proponent of multiverse theory, it is just an example of an alternative to your god which is not impossible. I don't know if multiverse theory is right or not, intuitively I want to discount it because of how weird it seems but logically I cannot.

 

[6days]

I think your head is still hurting.

And yours isn't hurting enough.

Haha... Thanks for the smile. I will try respond to ur other points tomorrow.

 

[popsthebuilder]

I am suggesting that we don't know the answer but these are all explanations which are not impossible.
That is neither logical or scientific to assume as the answer. It is an explanation which is not impossible and is no better than any of the other explanations given we have little evidence to decide between them. Given there are so many non-God potential options not to mention God options which don't resemble your God in the slightest it seems illogical to assume a god or any intelligence.
It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. If you're going to talk about quantum mechanics perhaps you should actual know something about the topic (like the quantum fluctuations ARE the energy and happen irrespective of the energy in their environment, it is only what happens after the fluctuation comes into existence that is then affect by the environment).

Apart from that you didn't address what I said at all. We have never seen matter, energy, space or time begin let alone begin with a cause. All we have ever seen begin with a cause is a rearrangement of said matter and energy. Ergo you can't say with confidence that your conclusions about one will be relevant tot he other (they might be relevant but you don't know they are)

I am not a proponent of the multiverse, however I cannot say with confidence that it is false or impossible. Ergo it remains as a potential explanation along with all the others, with very little evidence (including your pet belief)
No it is a belief supported by poor arguments, poor logic and you will consider any explanation that shoehorns your god int the picture. The bible is no more eye witness testimony than the Vedas and Puranas (Hindu)
And yours isn't hurting enough.
Which isn't a reason to consider it impossible, the universe is weird so we should not expect it's origin to be any less weird.
No I choose to say I don't know when there isn't sufficient evidence to say anything with confidence. Your conclusion is little more than a pre-ordained guess where you haven't followed the evidence but instead started with your conclusion. The reality is I don't think anyone knows and those that think they do are either deluding themselves or using very faulty reasoning so far as I have seen.

There are so many different possibilities the odds of any one being right by chance is infinitesimal. The arguments given thus far for God being necessary for the creation of the universe have thus far relied on nothing more than it supposedly being the only possible answer based on "logic' without providing any other supporting evidence, I believe I have shown that it is not the only possible answer and therefore we can not say that god is necessary for the universe to exist unless we have some further data.
If I were to believe wholeheartedly in the multiverse that might be the case although it would then matter what type of infinite we are talking about.

Strange but true: Infintity comes in different sizes

As I have said though I am not a proponent of multiverse theory, it is just an example of an alternative to your god which is not impossible. I don't know if multiverse theory is right or not, intuitively I want to discount it because of how weird it seems but logically I cannot.

Just curious; what god options that in no way resemble GOD?

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[Tyrathca]

Just curious; what god options that in no way resemble GOD?

A barely thinking one, the closest analogue being what we call an idiot savant who can make universes, or a deist one who doesn't care about his little living creations one bit, or a deeply malicious one who enjoys its creations torment, or a largely powerless one who can't affect its own creation much even if it wanted to, or a dead one that ceased to exist when the universe was born.... I could try dreaming up ideas limited only by my own imagination. I'm sure there are several fantasy and sci-fi novels which have some neat ideas too.

Of course the answer really depends on what you consider God, I have a fair idea of what 6days believes (a benevolent hyperinvolved superintelligence which is for some reason really really obsessed with one of its more intelligent creation's sexual habits) but less of an idea what you believe.

 

[Ben Masada]

Salvation is of the Jew.

As in the pious, patiently persevering will be saved.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

Jesus did not say "of the Jew" or "from one among the Jews." Jesus said "salvation if from the Jews" period! (John 4:22) His reference was to universal salvation from universal catastrophes of the size of the Flood. The other kind of salvation aka personal salvation is between man and his decision to obey the Law as Jesus himself mentioned that to achieve personal salvation, one must listen to "Moses" aka the Law. (Luke 16:29-31)

 

[marhig]

Jesus did not say "of the Jew" or "from one among the Jews." Jesus said "salvation if from the Jews" period! (John 4:22) His reference was to universal salvation from universal catastrophes of the size of the Flood. The other kind of salvation aka personal salvation is between man and his decision to obey the Law as Jesus himself mentioned that to achieve personal salvation, one must listen to "Moses" aka the Law. (Luke 16:29-31)

And what was Moses law for? What was the purpose of God giving laws to his people?

 

[Ben Masada]

Big Bang... Let there be light....

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

Well, "Let there be light" according to Genesis 1:3 could be, metaphorically, a reference to a big bang though not the one of Physics but a reference to the rising of Israel in the future from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The metaphorical Genesis account of Creation could not be related to the big bang of Physics because of the contradictions in the formation of the universe although without the Primal Cause, the universe could not have been caused to exist. The "let there be light" as a reference to the rise of Israel was understood so by Isaiah 42:6 and Jesus himself in Mat. 5:14 when he declared that the Jews were the light of the world.

 

[Ben Masada]

And what was Moses law for? What was the purpose of God giving laws to his people?

To save man from all troubles. According to Jesus' parable of the Richman & Lazarus, to escape from hell-fire.(Luke 16:29-31)If you read the whole chapter 119 of Psalms you will never forget the purpose of God at giving His People the Law. Try it one day. It is the longest chapter in the Tanach but it is worthy. BTW, the Law of the Decalogue applies to all of us, not only Jews but Gentiles too. Don't believe Paul when he said that we have been released from the Law. (Romans 7:1-7)

 

[marhig]

To save man from all troubles. According to Jesus' parable of the Richman & Lazarus, to escape from hell-fire.(Luke 16:29-31)If you read the whole chapter 119 of Psalms you will never forget the purpose of God at giving His People the Law. Try it one day. It is the longest chapter in the Tanach but it is worthy. BTW, the Law of the Decalogue applies to all of us, not only Jews but Gentiles too. Don't believe Paul when he said that we have been released from the Law. (Romans 7:1-7)

Ben I don't believe Paul meant that the laws were annulled. He says that without the law he would never have known sin.

The laws were given by Moses to teach us to turn from sin. Just teaching them didn't work, because man could manipulate them to suit himself. So Jesus came and lived it out in the flesh obeying Gods laws and bringing the Jews and everyone else the truth. The true ways of God. And he left us a perfect example to follow. He showed and taught us to love, forgive, have compassion, share and obey God. He taught us to love God with all our heart, mind, soul and strength, and our neighbour as ourselves. He said if we do these two things then we are abiding by the laws, because in his wisdom which came from God he knows that if we truly love God and our neighbour we'll abide by Gods laws through love. Love covers so much, if we truly loved our neighbour as ourselves, then we wouldn't steel, or bare false witness, we wouldn't kill, we wouldn't covet or want to take anything off them we wouldn't commit adultery in the flesh or within our hearts towards God and we wouldn't idolise anything, because we would love God more than anything else and we would love those who we meet with that love of God that is inside us.

Jesus showed us that even though we are hated we should show love and compassion back. And this is possible once we are born of God and walk not after the flesh but after the spirit and then Gods laws are put within our hearts and minds and we are taught to turn from sin every day.

I know this is true Ben, because I am being taught always to deny myself and turn away from sinning, I have freewill and a choice, do I obey God or not, if i don't, I know I will suffer the consequences. I know that God is no fool and that he won't be mocked and now that I know him, I know that I am to obey him and live by his will. And Jesus showed me the way to do this and he is helping me to overcome through the spirit.

And in Paul's defence, he didn't say that we abolish the laws of God, he said that we should establish the laws of God, And those who truly do this are those who worship the father in spirit and in truth and who follow not after the flesh but live by the will of God.

 

[popsthebuilder]

A barely thinking one, the closest analogue being what we call an idiot savant who can make universes, or a deist one who doesn't care about his little living creations one bit, or a deeply malicious one who enjoys its creations torment, or a largely powerless one who can't affect its own creation much even if it wanted to, or a dead one that ceased to exist when the universe was born.... I could try dreaming up ideas limited only by my own imagination. I'm sure there are several fantasy and sci-fi novels which have some neat ideas too.

Of course the answer really depends on what you consider God, I have a fair idea of what 6days believes (a benevolent hyperinvolved superintelligence which is for some reason really really obsessed with one of its more intelligent creation's sexual habits) but less of an idea what you believe.

No, I was referencing your post from earlier. I guess I miss read it, but it seemed to me that you were insinuating that GOD in each separate core religious text or belief system is actually a separate god, as opposed to actually all referencing the same One Creator GOD.

So I was thinking you might actually give real examples based on different religions. But you didn't bite.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[popsthebuilder]

Jesus did not say "of the Jew" or "from one among the Jews." Jesus said "salvation if from the Jews" period! (John 4:22) His reference was to universal salvation from universal catastrophes of the size of the Flood. The other kind of salvation aka personal salvation is between man and his decision to obey the Law as Jesus himself mentioned that to achieve personal salvation, one must listen to "Moses" aka the Law. (Luke 16:29-31)

John: 4. 22. Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. - Bible Offline

No, it says of the Jew.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[6days]

(An Intelligent Designer) is neither logical or scientific to assume as the answer. It is an explanation which is not impossible and is no better than any of the other explanations given we have little evidence to decide between them.

Of course an Intelligent Designer is logical and scientific.
Yesterday i found a book in my attic that says 'Encyclopedia' on the cover. It is both logical and scientific to believe there was an *intelligent designer of this book. . It would be illogical and unscientific to believe a quantum fluctuation created the encyclopedia, placing it in a dusty box in my attic.

...quantum fluctuations ARE the energy

Ok... thanks for the clarification. So, there may be an energy force which existed from the beginning, that created everything?

We have never seen matter, energy, space or time begin let alone begin with a cause. All we have ever seen begin with a cause is a rearrangement of said matter and energy.

Redefining the words seems to leave you in the same place. My house is a rearrangement of energy and matter. What caused the energy and matter in the beginning? An uncaused cause?

Multiverse is a belief... not a shred of evidence. Multiverse is simply wishful thinking of atheists.

I am not a proponent of the multiverse, however I cannot say with confidence that it is false or impossible. Ergo it remains as a potential explanation along with all the others, with very little evidence

*
Thanks... I will take that as an agreement on multiverse ( or, as close as you will admit). However, there is a more logical and scientific explanation. In the beginning, an uncaused cause, caused everything, and caused it in such a way that there is the appearance of design.

The bible is no more eye witness testimony than the Vedas and Puranas (Hindu)

We disagree... and we won't agree. But, if you want to start a thread on 'evidence against divine inspiration'; it would perhaps make for interesting discussion.

The big bounce explanation.... it's sort of like believing in turtles all the way down.

Which isn't a reason to consider it impossible, the universe is weird so we should not expect it's origin to be any less weird.[/quote]
Haha.... no disrespect, but your answer made me laugh. Hmmmmm I just thought of someone who I disagreed with often, but still respected...BJdavis. He hasn't been here in several months.

No I choose to say I don't know*when there isn't sufficient evidence to say anything with confidence. Your conclusion is little more than a pre-ordained guess where you haven't followed the evidence but instead started with your conclusion. The reality is I don't think anyone knows and those that think they do are either deluding themselves or using very faulty reasoning so far as I have seen.

I would guess that Richard Dawkins and other promoters of atheism are some of your prime examples of deluded people who start with the conclusion?

I believe I have shown that it is not the only possible answer and therefore we can not say that god is necessary for the universe to exist unless we have some further data.

Hmmmmm.....You allude to the OP. You have said that although you don't believe God created the universe, you concede it is a possibility. I'm not sure if you consider yourself an atheist, but I commend you for honestly considering that God created, is a possibility.

... Would you believe a universe exists where there is a planet where Little Green Men get around in flying saucers? Would you believe in a universe where an omniscient and omnipotent Creator exists who was crucified on the cross to save the people that He created?

If I were to believe wholeheartedly in the multiverse that might be the case although it would then matter what type of infinite we are talking about.
《LINK》

There is evidence for one of those universes. I'm glad you have not shut the door on evidence for the Creator God of the Bible.

 

[6days]

The "let there be light" as a reference to the rise of Israel was understood so by Isaiah 42:6 and Jesus himself in Mat. 5:14 when he declared that the Jews were the light of the world.

Gen. 1:3*And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4*God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5*God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

 

[truthjourney]

The question is unanswerable by science, that's the problem. To me, the closest, most tantalizing, but as-yet unprovable proof of a soul is the idea of a near-death experience. If there was a way to prove movement of the mind/soul to a vantage point in another dimension, NDEs seem to offer the most promise.

My husband had a NDE. He didn't believe that was possible till it happened to him. It had a major effect on him.

 

[Tyrathca]

Of course an Intelligent Designer is logical and scientific.
Yesterday i found a book in my attic that says 'Encyclopedia' on the cover. It is both logical and scientific to believe there was an *intelligent designer of this book. . It would be illogical and unscientific to believe a quantum fluctuation created the encyclopedia, placing it in a dusty box in my attic.

Correct, the odds of a quantum fluctuation making such a thing would take far longer than the heat death of the universe (already a very very very long time) and without certain conditions it's existence would be fleeting at best. We know it is intelligently designed because it follows the patterns of human design and there are no processes in nature that produce such things.

However the appearance of design by itself is not enough to claim evidence of a designer. We know processes in nature can mimic design, crystal formations (like snowflakes) look designed, bacteria evolving new functions (which had been observed in the lab under controlled conditions) looks like someone reaching in and designing something new for them. Yet each ate natural and occur under understandable principles which don't require a designer.

Ok... thanks for the clarification. So, there may be an energy force which existed from the beginning, that created everything?

:shrug: No one knows. They're may be nothing which created everything, or it may have creased to exist at everything's creation or it continues to exist. All are possible explanations. Whether it would resemble anything wed call energy is a further mystery.

Redefining the words seems to leave you in the same place. My house is a rearrangement of energy and matter. What caused the energy and matter in the beginning? An uncaused cause?

I'm not so much redefining it as narrowing it to fit the very specific circumstances we are discussing. We have never observed energy/matter to come into existence with a cause so we can't assume it then has a cause. Matter/energy coming into existence is a very different thing to its rearrangement so extrapolation from one can not with confidence be applied to the other. There might be a cause, you can even guess and say probably a cause (but it is a guess), but you can't say must have a cause. At least with the reasoning you have given thus far.

Thanks... I will take that as an agreement on multiverse ( or, as close as you will admit). However, there is a more logical and scientific explanation. In the beginning, an uncaused cause, caused everything, and caused it in such a way that there is the appearance of design.

That is a potential explanation even probably a likely one. However the range of thing which could fit that description is wide even before considering gods.

We disagree... and we won't agree. But, if you want to start a thread on 'evidence against divine inspiration'; it would perhaps make for interesting discussion.

Perhaps another time. I'm not sure I have the time to invest in that debate at the moment.

Haha.... no disrespect, but your answer made me laugh. Hmmmmm I just thought of someone who I disagreed with often, but still respected...BJdavis. He hasn't been here in several months.

No offense taken, I'll take it as a compliment.

I would guess that Richard Dawkins and other promoters of atheism are some of your prime examples of deluded people who start with the conclusion?

I'm not sure I'd put Richard Dawkins in that group (though I haven't read our listened to anything from him in years). But they're is no doubt that there are atheists who are just as bad in this regard as theists.

Hmmmmm.....You allude to the OP. You have said that although you don't believe God created the universe, you concede it is a possibility. I'm not sure if you consider yourself an atheist, but I commend you for honestly considering that God created, is a possibility.

I consider myself an agnostic atheist. Some versions of god are impossible to disprove and while I find the concept improbable it remains possible so long as details are left vague.


There is evidence for one of those universes. I'm glad you have not shut the door on evidence for the Creator God of the Bible.[/QUOTE]





Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Ben Masada]

Gen. 1:3*And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4*God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5*God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

That day was the first day for the life of Israel as a people in the world. And the Lord separated the light from the darkness. The Essenes used to refer to Israel as the children of light and the Gentiles as the children of darkness. Then the Lord assigned Israel as light to the Gentiles. (Isaiah 42:6) And Jesus in his Sermon of the Mount to a crowd of Jews, said: "You are the light of the world." (Mat. 5:14)

 

[6days]

That day was the first day for the life of Israel as a people in the world. And the Lord separated the light from the darkness. The Essenes used to refer to Israel as the children of light and the Gentiles as the children of darkness. Then the Lord assigned Israel as light to the Gentiles. (Isaiah 42:6) And Jesus in his Sermon of the Mount to a crowd of Jews, said: "You are the light of the world." (Mat. 5:14)

Sorry Ben, but that is not consistent with other scripture that refers to the creation and flood account as true history. Other scripture refers to a supernatural creation....and, geneaologies that go back to the beginning of creation. Also, the plain reading of Genesis 1 is talking about creation, and not some obscure concept. God tells us that He speaks plainly. In Numbers 12 God says " I speak with him (Moses)face to face, even plainly, and not in dark sayings".

If you wish to take verses from the N.T. we could also look at Jesus saying " I am the light of the world: he that follows me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life" John 8:12

 

[Lilstu]

I don't equate the universe as a proof that a God exists. There may be an explanation for the universe that we just don't know about yet. Just because we don't have all the answers doesn't mean we can assume God did it.
IMO a real proof of God is a fulfillment of prophecy. When Messiah sits on the throne of David in Jerusalem and we have worldwide peace, justice, righteousness, and a resurrection of the dead then there will be no doubt that God exists.

 

[Angel4Truth]

I don't equate the universe as a proof that a God exists. There may be an explanation for the universe that we just don't know about yet. Just because we don't have all the answers doesn't mean we can assume God did it.
IMO a real proof of God is a fulfillment of prophecy. When Messiah sits on the throne of David in Jerusalem and we have worldwide peace, justice, righteousness, and a resurrection of the dead then there will be no doubt that God exists.

Romans 1:19 For what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse.…

Do you believe this?