this is the kind of thing that you just smoke a bowl and lay on the hood of your car on a nice night, listening to the eagles and try to wrap your head around.
The uncreated creator created everything, including time and space. God even created the concept of nothing. When you speak of creation it is important to recognise it completeness. As the the Creator of time, nothing can come "before" as there was no "before".
St. Athanasius, and St. Thomas Aqyuinas both advocated "Created Evolution" stating (and this is ancient dogma folks) that God planted the seeds of life and life developed from that point with some influence here and there. That idea is about 1600 years old and still is the best fit to belief and science.
About the delivery of life via asteroid. That would be the mechanism, and not the creation point. Regardless of how it happened, if we want to find the origin of life, we must find the origen of matter, time and space.
God wrote the book, Science turns the pages and we must read with a discerning attitude. Science has never found why, only how. That is the nature of Scientific study. Science cannot remove God, only dicover the clues left for us. Science is indeed on the steady march towards God, but will never get there.
Simultanius Causation is an interesting topic. It must be understood or you'll never escape the "created creator" endless loop.
PAX
PS: This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated
- Mitch Hedberg (RIP)
SPITfire wrote:
Quote:
and it isnt for the life after death part either...tell me there is nothing past when we die and thats fine
interesting... but don't you fear death then? All the knowledge, relationships in your life will be meaningless... you won't see your dead relatives. It just seems like a bleak outlook and takes away any meaning to life.
why fear death? its inevitable. if nothing exists afterwards, then nothing exists. i'm not so sure that i believe we should live past this life because....i mean.....why should we? are we really that special? i happen to believe that there IS something past this physical world....but i'm just saying that if there isn't then thats cool too. but really life IS essentially meaningless. not the usual response from a Christian, but i believe its pretty much true.
life? love? the pursuit of happiness? do these things really mean anything? maybe, but probably not. what we do truly does echo in eternity, so i think you should live your life by that mantra and try to leave the biggest, most positive ripple possible. if we turn to dust after we die and there is no afterlife, then the only way to "eternal life" is through the memories we leave behind in other people. so i say you should be as nice as possible to people who deserve it, and stick up for them when needed, and fight for your friends. dont give in and dont give up. live and die for your family and friends....then when you finally pass, you will still remain.
Quote:
Quote:
i think the idea that everything in our world and our universe is just a random chance from a big bang....well that just doesnt work out well at all as a theory IMO.
well, something like the Big Bang occurred since the Universe is expanding away from a central point. What else can that mean? God would not have created a formed Universe like this unless he was a deceiver. And the timescale of the Universe is so long that anything is possible by chance. You have millions of years for a species to form, plenty of time for a species to gradually evolve. And you aren't building from scratch every time, the mutations are small additive/deletions/replacements that modify an existing genome.
ok perhaps i meant that the big bang doesn't make sense without a catalyst. for me the idea of creative evolution covers that catalyst...God made it happen. but don't ask me WHY because i can't even begin to fathom that part
Quote:
Quote:
and that is my one real problem with science (yeah i can almost hear you science nuts groaning and rolling your eyes right now lol). basically, science is....
that's the beauty of science actually. The first part of that (Earth flat, alchemy, bleeding diseases) is all Middle Age and ancient belief. Keep in mind that we didn't know much on medicine, surgery, or anatomy back then. The beauty of science IS that is keeps changing. It is able to change to fit new discoveries. If it didn't, it wouldn't be science (maybe creation!). And yes, in 1000 years we may know alot more, but most of science's core beliefs will still be there. We will just add to it all. Keep in mind that science has given us everything we take for granted. All of our math, engineering, technology, physics, biology (all the ologies), genetics, ecology, archaeology, paleantology, medicine/surgery, etc. It all is rooted in science. I'd have to say that science is the most important thing for human advancement!
but you must also cede that what we consider to be unmovable FACT may be proven completely wrong tomorrow--by science itself. and if that happens, then everything based off of those old notions will also need to be reconsidered. basically, science is nothing more than measurements by humans. we as humans are flawed and limited, therefore our thinking is flawed and limited, therefore what we base our measurements and data on--the core foundations of science--have just as much of a chance of being flawed and limited by our own perceptions.
paul eccles wrote:now i do believe in god so i should be careful with what i say.... however when i think about religion, for me catholic religion, i cant help but wonder if it was just created with the itention to control people. think about it. shall not kill, shall not steal, shall not... etc. it seems like it is imaginable that way back after people starting having some sort of society it was needed for there to be some sort of control. maybe people wouldnt obey laws, maybe laws didnt exist yet but now bob found a book and in it the being who created us all wanted us to obey these rules. and luck be it these rules also benefit society as well.
i just cant help but in the back of my mind think what if the bible is just a man made book designed to control what people do as much as possible because way back laws, or just saying dont do something, wasnt enough without "well god said you cant in this book".
not saying thats the answer but interesting when you think about it!
not at all. most real religions (i.e. not cults) start with honest intentions. the problem with ANY religion (certain aspects of Christianity especially? maybe because im around it the most?) is that once it is organized it becomes a human institution and humans, as i just mentioned, are flawed. we are corrupt and greedy and self centered and all it takes are a few of those types in charge to ruin the core tenets of the religion. or at least skewer them enough to screw the rest of the people who listen to them.
swag wrote:This is going to make someone really mad, but it wasnt God or the bible that was made to control people, it was most forms of organized religion. Anytime human being are thrown in the mix, things take a turn for the worse. For instance with catholics, Christ's sacrifice wasnt enough, you must still pay money to the church, say "enough" hail marys, and beat thyself on the head a certain number of times. Now of course I believe in the giving to the church, but in no way can money be used for remission of sins.
youre right on the organized religion part. and im not going to go into it on here, but my dad and his whole side of the family are catholic and my mom and her side are protestant, so i was able to grow up seeing both sides and while both sides are right and wrong, i think the catholic side is a lot more skewered than the protestant side. but a tithe for almost all Christians is a gift and not actually required, although certainly encouraged.
The problem with quanta science is that all we have to go onb with that is really just observing the effecxts of said particles--not the particles themselves. As such, it's more than possible that those same particles just aren't producing a observable effect--thus looking like that are either coming from nowhere, and going nowhere.
Plus, when you look at "something" and "nothing", it could be 2 totaly different phases of "existance" or "nonexistance" as it were. If matter and antimatter collide, you get energy--something created something. It's also possible in quantum physic theory that energy can create matter by the reverse effect--something creating something. The only thing to wrop your mind around is what consititutes "something" and what constitutes "nothing".
Goodbye Callisto & Skaği, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Quote:
but you must also cede that what we consider to be unmovable FACT may be proven completely wrong tomorrow--by science itself. and if that happens, then everything based off of those old notions will also need to be reconsidered. basically, science is nothing more than measurements by humans. we as humans are flawed and limited, therefore our thinking is flawed and limited, therefore what we base our measurements and data on--the core foundations of science--have just as much of a chance of being flawed and limited by our own perceptions.
the fact that there's so much we can't comprehend isn't bad for science. The "fact" that the Earth revolved around the Sun was argued by scientists for hundreds of years. A flaw in science, yes, but we couldn't observe our revolution around the Sun until we had telescopes and other instruments to measure motion. The same today... we have theories all over the place in science and physics but we have them because it is based on the best of our knowledge. If we discover something that disproves a theory, however long-standing, that is NOT a failure in science, it is showing how science is supposed to work. Just think for a second on what we knew in the middle Ages compared to what we know now. There are a whole lot more facts and a lot less theories. We are slowly advancing to the point of knowing more, but we will never know it all. Only God knows it all.
God simply "knows" it all now because we don't know it all now. Whenever we as humans fall short of understanding, we simply insert the notion that "God musta dun it." A couple hundred years ago people used to think that it was the devils work whenever lightning struck a church (which it did often), people would go out and burn an innocent woman to death who was obviously a witch and a devil worshipper. This went on for a long time until Mr. Benjamin Franklin started realizing that lightning wasn't striking churches because the devil or god or whatever was causing it to, it was because it was the tallest building in town, and frequently had a large metal lightning rod at the tip top of its steeple (a cross). Instantly, because we understood, it was simply a natural occurance, and not some kind of supernatural, god like entity causing it. Thankfully, the religious fanatics stopped burning innnocent people at the stake, and we discovered one less thing that God was causing......
^^at the same time, we're discovering the plausibility of life that is very different than that which we know it.
On one hand, it's more than possible that there is a God.
On the other hand, it's more than possible that all of this happened per chance.
Our perception is so limited that likely we'll never know. Moreover the fact that there is an "estabshment" (being science or religion) that one must adhere their views to to be taken seriously, lest they be labeled a "crackpot" isn't helping matters further.
Add that to the "relative absolute universe" problem, it could be that everything is both true and false, since nothing can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt since we all have limited perceptions that don't wholly overlap.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaği, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
I would argue that all of nature is "super-natural" as all "super-natural" things are simply natural things that we have yet to explain. There I think we all agree. The problem is that people then go ahead and remove God. Why? Now we know that lightning hit the tallest structure ant the the church was a target not because it was evil but because it was tall. OK, so what? God was still responsible in that he put in place the mechanisms that make lightning more attracted to the easiest path to ground. The lightning itself has not changed and neither has God's role surrounding it. All that changed was our level of understanding.
To put this into terms the secular can grasp a little easier.
When it is reported that the price of Gold has gone up what really happened? Did the gold change? No, the value of the dollar relative to the gold changed. In fact if the price of gold went up then what really happened was the purchasing power of the dollar went down. See now how this level of logic applies.
When we began to understand gravity, did gravity change? no. When we began to understand weather, did the weather systems change (beyond their constant state of flux)? No, our perception changed.
It is the quest that makes us human, as we discover the veils on God are lifted. The more we understand the more we unveil God and the more we deny him. God created all, known, unknown all of it. Just because we have limited understanding is no excuse to sqeeze out God once we do understand. He gave us the gift and we use it to destroy him.. Real nice.
As my friend the priest says, as we explain things we "Edge God Out"
PAX
PS: This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated
- Mitch Hedberg (RIP)
That is, of course, assuming God exists:
If i take this along the two perspectives on this:
If God exists, all it means is that he moves from the lower-order phenomena to the higher-order phenomena. Thus, like you've explained in the E vs C thread, God isn't the the direct cause of all the species of line on the planet, but just planted the seeds. In other words, God isn't edged out, God's role is just redefined. To me, it shouldn't matter to the faithful whether God created Heaven and Earth in 6 days, or of he just had a really good extra stuffed burrito the night before and asked Gabriel to pull his finger (hence, the big bang). God would have his place since every discovery poses a new question, and until we're sure that it wasn't something esle, the answer to that quesation will be God. Thus, God is a noumenon, and by our intrinsic nature, we can only percieve phenomina--noumena escape us.
If God doesn't exist, then God is simply an allegory for that which cannot be explained. It is the concept of what is beyond our understanding--and we just try to personify it.
Either way, to me, it shouldn't matter, and it's not something we should be raping, pillaging, plundering, killing, maiming, extorting, or selling.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaği, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
You make a good point.. But it seems you glossed over the reason for the red letters.. EGO.. It is man's doing not God's. God is omnipresent, man either sees that or his EGO blinds him to it.
Yes, assuming God exists.. we had the existance argument 30 pages ago, it near killed me then, I don't really want to do it again.
PAX
PS: This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated
- Mitch Hedberg (RIP)
I glossed over it because the converse arument is that humans make up a deity when they can't explain something, and that something mneeds to be explained. Basically, one could say it's a foolish way to say, "I don't know."
Both conditions, Ego or my case, i gloss over because we really don't know.
And yes, the existance bit has been done. I'm just trying to bull both perspectives in. I know to you there is no question; God exists. To me--God in thge über-deity mode does not. Thus, i do tend to get a bit argumentative when a point in a debate that looks like a fact--as opposed to an opinion, take a non-provable concept and presents itself as an absolute fact, rather than a relative truth...and yes, i'm guilty of the same thing
--so i'm not bashing you. Just trying to keep it all even-handed
.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaği, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
