We may use cookies to help customize your experience, including performing
analytics and serving ads.
Learn More
Forums → WEPR → Gods existance
| 164 | 20610 |
I have a question and it would be nice If somebody could answer it.
How is it possible that somebody believes in God although there doesn't exist any proof or at least an evidence for Gods existance besides some old books?
In my opinion God's an explanation for everything unknown.
- 164 Replies
Maverick you're wrong, because my giant flying unicorn made everything? What, you don't agree? Alright, disprove that he doesn't exist, I dare you.
Those are Newton's Laws. I was talking about Newtonian Causality, or Cause-and-Effect.
I can't find any place that states "Newtonian Causality", so I assumed that you where talking about the most famous of Newton's works.
Yes, but if my Creator is an Omnipotent Being, than he would have created everything in the Universe, including Physics. He would be outside the realm of Physics, and as as the Creator of Physics, he would not be subject to them.
So why can't it be something else that is not effected by physics, like what Mage? said? If the big bang created physics, it would not be subjected to them according to you.
So could you please state what your insane "Cause and effect" hypothesis is in detail, or point to a unbiased sight that states what it is? Because another rule of physics, mass can not be created or destroyed, goes against mass being created... Or destroyed, so it would not have an end either.
Yes, but if my Creator is an Omnipotent Being, than he would have created everything in the Universe, including Physics. He would be outside the realm of Physics, and as as the Creator of Physics, he would not be subject to them.
That's sounds both overly complicated and ridiculous to me. It would be much easier to say that in the natural chaos of the universe. "Our" universe with it's defined constants that might be specific to only it, it developed it's own physical laws.
Yes, but if my Creator is an Omnipotent Being, than he would have created everything in the Universe, including Physics. He would be outside the realm of Physics, and as as the Creator of Physics, he would not be subject to them.
My understanding of the Big Bang is that the Universe was an extremely Hot Point that began to expand. So what put all the matter there?
You seem to be acknowledging what I said but still insisting on a cause and effect relationship outside of spacetime.
Of course; it existed at some point, and at a point before that, it did not exist. Ergo, it had a beginning.
What if there was no before? Is it a needed assumption to say it did not exist at some point? We don't know, it's just our time-impregnated logic that tells us it had to not exist at a time.
Yes, but if my Creator is an Omnipotent Being, than he would have created everything in the Universe, including Physics. He would be outside the realm of Physics, and as as the Creator of Physics, he would not be subject to them.
Again.. I know that you were answering a question about your creator, but it does not need an intelligent being, a will, behind the creation of physics. A stochastic event could have been enough to trigger the big bang and thus create spacetime and physics out of the pre-bigbang state.
What if there was no before? Is it a needed assumption to say it did not exist at some point? We don't know, it's just our time-impregnated logic that tells us it had to not exist at a time.
What? If there was no before there wouldn't be an after. In other words if there isn't a start there isn't a finish. The universe wasn't always present, I mean, even if you believe in God the story is that he created all from nothingness, and the same goes with science: it all came from nothing. Nothing is a something for if you do not have anything you have nothing and "to have" shows ownership of a thing. And if there was a "thing" before, then there was some-thing (something) before -- making a before! =P
Again.. I know that you were answering a question about your creator, but it does not need an intelligent being, a will, behind the creation of physics. A stochastic event could have been enough to trigger the big bang and thus create spacetime and physics out of the pre-bigbang state.
Your logic still precedes mine. The creation of physics wouldn't be possible if it weren't behind a mind. The idea of physics as a realm is a law man (a mind) has created. But everything in physics are forces that exist and not formed. And besides, what is your theory behind the "stochastic event" that triggered the big bang? This will help me understand your whole view on the "before".
What? If there was no before there wouldn't be an after.
How does that work?
In other words if there isn't a start there isn't a finish.
How does that work?
The universe wasn't always present
What makes you think this?
I mean, even if you believe in God the story is that he created all from nothingness, and the same goes with science: it all came from nothing.
Actually science states that it came from a singularity... Look it up.
The creation of physics wouldn't be possible if it weren't behind a mind. The idea of physics as a realm is a law man (a mind) has created.
Lolwut? So you say someone needs to say "You know, every object in the universe should attract each other. That would be really neat!" For gravity to be made? What examples of this do you have?
The rest seems to be directed mostly at Leet
Also i like
Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
I prefer buddhism.
[quote]How does that work?
Well, if you haven't started something, how can you finish it?
What makes you think this?
Change.
Actually science states that it came from a singularity... Look it up.
And what came before the singularity?
Lolwut? So you say someone needs to say "You know, every object in the universe should attract each other. That would be really neat!" For gravity to be made? What examples of this do you have?[/quote]
No, what I say is that without someone to say that objects attracting each other is gravity and gravity is a force, which is under physics then physics doesn't exist but the forces still do.
The rest seems to be directed mostly at Leet
It was all directed at leet, that's why it's called a reply.
Well, if you haven't started something, how can you finish it?
What if that something doesn't need to start? It already started?
Change.
How does change make you think this?
And what came before the singularity?
Why would something need to come before it?
No, what I say is that without someone to say that objects attracting each other is gravity and gravity is a force, which is under physics then physics doesn't exist but the forces still do.
So your saying that physics is only physics because humans label it so? So, by that logic, rocks don't exist because "rock" is just a word that means rock. I think, unless I misunderstood you. Rock still exists, but it isn't a rock?
It was all directed at leet, that's why it's called a reply.
Sure, but the rest is real general things that anyone can really answer.
I prefer buddhism.
More like certain pieces of Buddhism.
Why would something need to come before it?
Well by the laws of physics the singularity didn't just appear you can't create energy from nothing.
Actually science states that it came from a singularity
A singularity is not nothing, it's something.
And what came before the singularity?
With the universe being in such a state there was no spacetime, thus there was no such thing as beofore.
No, what I say is that without someone to say that objects attracting each other is gravity and gravity is a force, which is under physics then physics doesn't exist but the forces still do.
No, all it would mean is that non of it would be labeled. The forces you say would still exist are a part of physics. So physics would exists regardless of whether we were around to label it or not.
A singularity is not nothing, it's something.
I think that's what he was getting at.
What? If there was no before there wouldn't be an after. In other words if there isn't a start there isn't a finish.
Lolwut? You missed my whole point. I will quote what I wrote before already:
Consider this: to beginn and end, something must vary during a certain period of time, agree? Some say before the universe time didn't exist. Does it need a beginning then if there is no time?
The universe wasn't always present,
Sure. Doesn't mean there was nothing before.
even if you believe in God the story is that he created all from nothingness,
Matter can't be destroyed or created, so that's stupid anyway.
and the same goes with science: it all came from nothing.
Um.... are you sure about that?..
Nothing is a something for if you do not have anything you have nothing and "to have" shows ownership of a thing. And if there was a "thing" before, then there was some-thing (something) before -- making a before! =P
Wait, my sinuses have a hard time unwinding this... ah I get it! You're basically saying: because there is a before, there has to be a before. Very neat!
Anyway you're just playing with words here..
Your logic still precedes mine.
I know, it will always have a headstart over yours
jk
The creation of physics wouldn't be possible if it weren't behind a mind.
You mean if there wasn't a mind behind it. Please express yourself correctly.
And, no. What makes you so sure about that?
The idea of physics as a realm is a law man (a mind) has created.
When you have masses and stuff like in our universe, you automatically have physics. Take away those things, and you take away physics.
But everything in physics are forces that exist and not formed.
Physics started to work and exist as soon as after the bing bagn, at least the physics we know of today. There probably were different physics before the big bang.
And besides, what is your theory behind the "stochastic event" that triggered the big bang? This will help me understand your whole view on the "before".
I don't have a theory, I don't have a clue about what it could be. I just say it is more probable than there being a will (coming from where anyway?) that triggered it all.
To explain my thought, I would have said that it could have been triggered by a certain chain of certain fluctuations of whatever there was before the universe; but since I think there was no time, how can there be fluctuations? I don't know, and I guess we will have to wait until someone finds out something helpful..
Matter can't be destroyed or created, so that's stupid anyway.
Same goes for energy btw. Sorry for doubleposting.
This was a topic on Gods existance.
CHRISTIANITY FTW is the thread name, this came into a "Gods existance" thread. I just feel this one is unnecessary and I can't really post on topic because I have already done so multiple times on linked thread. :P
- H
Thread is locked!