well if any of u r familiar with the law of conservation and mass, then u know that it states that matter cannot be created from nothing, or completely destroyed. so evolutionists say this, then turn around and say the big bang created the universe as we know it. WTF!!?!?!?!the universe went from non existent to existent in a fraction of a nanosecond! and where did the bigbang come from? nothing? nope, because if the law of conservation and mass is true, then the bigbang isnt. simple...
I know, I mean why does a higher being with no 'start' or 'end' need to abide by our own principles of science? I think I disucussed this with you elsewhere, Alt, more of a question for others, but feel free to respond as well.
I never said it had to. Besides, it is a scientific principle that the scientific principles of time wouldn't apply, so there :P also, because there is evidence for the Big Bang, whereas the same cannot be said of a higher power, so the best way to prove or disprove would be through science and logic.
I never said it had to.quote] Oh yeah, I know, it was more for others to discuss, like I said. I think in that other thread about the Premieval Atom we discussed that, but I can't even find that one anymore, so I wanted to let other people see what I thought about it. Anyways, the real question was "What harm is there in believing in a higher power?" For you, you believe there could be one, so maybe not really a question aimed at you. [quote]also, because there is evidence for the Big Bang, whereas the same cannot be said of a higher power, so the best way to prove or disprove would be through science and logic.
As the Big Bang doesn't necessarily contradict the Bible (except maybe to literalists), its evidence doesn't make a higher powre less likely. But I'm sure you knew that since you said you were agnostic, just throwing it there for the readers. Anyway, I'll probably be gone the rest of the night, so later
Bigp08 your right Matter cannot created it self but thinking an invisible entitiy can. seems like not much of a difference to me. I think religion has sent out false hopes and exagerated claims. but to be safe here anything is possible but to make one theory higher then the other is pointless.
Let me ask a question for atheists. Do you believe that a higher being is impossible, or just too improbable to put faith in? From the sound of it, the Big Bang seems like a very unlikely event, and its principles couldn't have followed our logic (matter cannot create itself).
This is where we start getting into territory that's really challenging to talk about. You ask if atheists believe in the possibility of "a higher being" but I honestly don't know what that phrase means. If you mean a god-like sentient omnipotent creator, then I do not think it's possible. If you mean to say something more powerful than me, well... there are plenty of things more powerful than me, like ostriches. Even if I didn't understand the big bang theory, I wouldn't want to replace it with a creator which still has the same problems of origin in addition to lots of other inherent problems. Your point that matter cannot create itself is valid, but as I have pointed out numerous times on other threads (including this one) - matter did not create itself at the beginning of the big bang.
Let me ask a question for atheists. Do you believe that a higher being is impossible, or just too improbable to put faith in? From the sound of it, the Big Bang seems like a very unlikely event, and its principles couldn't have followed our logic (matter cannot create itself).
I'm of the view that as there is no scientific evidence indicating the existance of a God, then there is no reason whatsoever to believe in one.
I recall God supposedly made us in his image, but what why did he make humans so weak? we needed to rely heavily on material things to be able to procure food and shelter. The cheetah is faster than a human in running. An ostrich has more power in its kick than an average human. So that means God is weak, because we are made in his image?
God made us suffer because of Adam and Eve eating the fruit, correct?
I think being weak is part of that whole punishment. Seems pretty unfair to punish every single human. He should have just taken down Adam and Eve and started over.
I recall God supposedly made us in his image, but what why did he make humans so weak? we needed to rely heavily on material things to be able to procure food and shelter. The cheetah is faster than a human in running. An ostrich has more power in its kick than an average human. So that means God is weak, because we are made in his image?
We are made IN his image, we are not gods. We had no need to rely on material things until Adam and eve ate the fruit, like Firefly said. And as for being weak, maybe we could look at it that way, but by the simple ability to communicate, to invent and evolve our lifestyles, I'd say that compares much better than raw power.
Seems pretty unfair to punish every single human. He should have just taken down Adam and Eve and started over.
Adam and Eve, while disobedient, were probably just like any other humans that would be born under those conditions. Since this is the Tree of Knowledge, it probably contained the knowledge that disobeying God was a sin. I'll bet any one of us could've easily done the same without seeing it as wrong before it was too late.
Adam and Eve, while disobedient, were probably just like any other humans that would be born under those conditions. Since this is the Tree of Knowledge, it probably contained the knowledge that disobeying God was a sin. I'll bet any one of us could've easily done the same without seeing it as wrong before it was too late.
For one thing, that's not for certain. Some people just love taking orders (ie half the population of Germany) and so wouldn't have disobeyed God. For another thing, the actions of 2 people should not have ramifications for people who have not been born yet. A just, merciful God would not act in this way.
For one thing, that's not for certain. Some people just love taking orders (ie half the population of Germany) and so wouldn't have disobeyed God. For another thing, the actions of 2 people should not have ramifications for people who have not been born yet. A just, merciful God would not act in this way.
Oh no, not for certain. I'm just saying that under the conditions of not having knowledge, we might not be certain we could turn from sin. The people in Germany were motivated to take orders because they lived in a terrible economy. The only motivation for us, had nobody sinned, would be to simply continue living a good life without knowing what the other life was. We have a tendency to want to know the unknown, you know? A just, merciful God gives us a chance for redemption for our own sins, but the act in the garden just proved humanity's imperfectness. If Adam and Eve could sin, who's to say we couldn't sin if they had not sinned? Instead of letting us live in sin, he lets us get redemption, then when we die, we can live with him in heaven. But I do agree that at face value this does seem very unjust. I used to ponder that question all the time, hopefully this kind of makes sense.
If you mean a god-like sentient omnipotent creator, then I do not think it's possible.
Yes, that was my question. Okay, so you believe there's absolutely no possibility of a god, then that explains it.
I'm of the view that as there is no scientific evidence indicating the existance of a God, then there is no reason whatsoever to believe in one.
I'm of the view that as there is no way to disprove the existance of a god, then there is no harm in believing in one while you search for answers (as long as you aren't going on missionary journies or something).
The people in Germany were motivated to take orders because they lived in a terrible economy.
Nah, trust me. It's a cultural thing. I was in Germany recently. Especially the folk in Munich. They're not happy unless they're in uniform.
I'm sticking with my 'if only Adam and Eve were German' idea. Then we'd all be livin' it up in a nice garden running around naked.
then there is no harm in believing in one while you search for answers
I don't think there's any harm in it either, but I don't think it's very logical to jump from we don't know everything, therefore there must be a higher power.
I don't think there's any harm in it either, but I don't think it's very logical to jump from we don't know everything, therefore there must be a higher power.
I understand. I didn't think your opinion would change, you've obviously done your research, but I hope you understand what I mean. I just see a lot of people saying Christians are stupid for believing in what we can't see, but as there's no harm in it, it'd mostly be a waste of one hour every Sunday and a few minutes for prayer. Not too much to lose, in my opinion. Anyway, I probably won't respond again, so see you later, I guess
