We may use cookies to help customize your experience, including performing
analytics and serving ads.
Learn More
Forums → WEPR → Who created God?
| 160 | 21397 |
- 160 Replies
God has always existed. It is physically impossible for any human to comprehend the vast and infinite power of god.
God has always existed. It is physically impossible for any human to comprehend the vast and infinite power of god.
And we are just suppose to take your word for this or who evers word for this?
Leaving aside for the moment that some things are taken on faith, I assume that you have a better explanation WITH INCONTROVERTIBLE PROOF?
Why should I assume that there's a God? There's no proof for his existence. But we have some proof for the Big Bang theory.
Beliving that God has always existed is no diffrent then beliving the world began with a bang
Do you know what the Big Bang theory really says?
Questionoes beliving the earth began with a bang take any less faith?NO!it does not.
I can say it again: We have evidence that indicates the big bang theory is (at least in principle) right.
But do you really want to spend 90 years living, to only know that in the end your going to die, and thats the end you can no longer think or anything.
Reality isn't about what you want. I want to be able to fly, does this change reality?
God has always existed. It is physically impossible for any human to comprehend the vast and infinite power of god.
Proof?
Try the Big Bang. It's not incontrovertible but it's getting there.
I'm familiar with the notion. Low-density, volatile elements collide in space, and spontaneously detonate into a hyper-massive fireball that causes those elements to fuse into denser elements, which then begin to coalesce into gradually increasing masses that eventually become planets, where more elements spawn as a result of what amounts to the fallout from the original blast.
To me, this is ludicrous on a number of levels. Allow me to explain:
1. Explosions are violent, uncontrolled, destructive things. They cannot create anything except a crater, much less create increasingly complex elements out of thin space (no air yet). If this were possible, then dropping a bomb would result in a flowerpot full of posies.
2. Even if it did somehow trigger a form of fusion, the result depending on the force of the blast would either be simple destruction on the sub-atomic level or the creation of a singularity, or black hole, which would commence to vacuum up anything that was there to begin with. A more relative demonstration is the fact that the atom bomb works on fusion, and it does not create mass, elements, or anything besides a smoking wasteland.
3. How were those original, supposedly explosive elements formed if the big bang made everything? They would have either been formed supernaturally (God) or just willed themselves into being, which would be quite a feat for something that doesn't yet exist and is not self-aware anyway.
4. Where did the fabric of space and time, the stage that this is all supposed to be played out, come from? (See above answer).
5. A blast powerful enough to create the universe would be so powerful that it would wreck the fabric of space/time anyway.
6. Isn't it impossible that so many factors would roll the dice in "our" favor every single time without fail throughout the multiplied eons this would take to occur?
7. So who lit the fuse anyway?
That said, you'll have to excuse me if I see the Big Bang as a Big Thud. Hope that this provokes some thought.
Would you like to hear the hindu story of who created god
Yes I would.
I'm familiar with the notion. Low-density, volatile elements collide in space, and spontaneously detonate into a hyper-massive fireball that causes those elements to fuse into denser elements, which then begin to coalesce into gradually increasing masses that eventually become planets, where more elements spawn as a result of what amounts to the fallout from the original blast.
That's formations of stars and planets, not the Big Bang.
1. Explosions are violent, uncontrolled, destructive things. They cannot create anything except a crater, much less create increasingly complex elements out of thin space (no air yet). If this were possible, then dropping a bomb would result in a flowerpot full of posies.
The Big Bang wasn't an explosion, but an expansion of the universe. With star formation the more complex materials are the result of fusion of these simple elements. This is possible because when you get down to it, it's all the same stuff, there is just more of it stuck together. As for the explosion or supernova, this too has a creative force in the form of fusion as well allowing heavier elements above iron to from.
Even if the Big Bang was an explosion the assertion that an explosion just produces a crater is wrong.
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/47562777.jpg
What your looking at in that picture is radioactive glass created by a nuclear explosion when we first tested a nuclear bomb in 1945.
2. Even if it did somehow trigger a form of fusion, the result depending on the force of the blast would either be simple destruction on the sub-atomic level or the creation of a singularity, or black hole, which would commence to vacuum up anything that was there to begin with. A more relative demonstration is the fact that the atom bomb works on fusion, and it does not create mass, elements, or anything besides a smoking wasteland.
Nuclear bombs are based on nuclear fission (the splitting of atoms) not nuclear fusion (the fusing of atomic nuclei). Star formation is based on fusion not fission. Also not all supernova result in black holes, they can also leave neutron stars.
3. How were those original, supposedly explosive elements formed if the big bang made everything? They would have either been formed supernaturally (God) or just willed themselves into being, which would be quite a feat for something that doesn't yet exist and is not self-aware anyway.
The Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny got together one night and the Easter Bunny got the Tooth Fairy really drunk and dropped a few roofies in her last one, and you know how rabbits can get resulting in a "Big Bang" which magically created everything.
(back to reality) The original elements form of hydrogen and helium (atomic numbers 1 and 2) formed as the universe cooled. While this cooling (clumping together of energy) was enough to form simple elements, further fusion was needed to form heavier elements.
4. Where did the fabric of space and time, the stage that this is all supposed to be played out, come from? (See above answer).
The expansion not explosion of the singularity.
6. Isn't it impossible that so many factors would roll the dice in "our" favor every single time without fail throughout the multiplied eons this would take to occur?
No
7. So who lit the fuse anyway?
No one, your question here is fallacious as it presumes there was a who. The most likely cause that we know of so far was has it as the result of quantum fluctuations triggering the expansion.
That said, you'll have to excuse me if I see the Big Bang as a Big Thud. Hope that this provokes some thought.
With that said the only thought I had was that you have no idea what your talking about.
Would you like to hear the hindu story of who created god
Yes, I'd like to (although I won't consider it as the truth unless you provide some evidence)
That said, you'll have to excuse me if I see the Big Bang as a Big Thud. Hope that this provokes some thought.
It only provokes me to tell you that you don't really know what the big bang theory is...
The Big Bang wasn't an explosion, but an expansion of the universe.
First, the base theory says it was an explosion, second, so where did the universe come from originally?
Even if the Big Bang was an explosion the assertion that an explosion just produces a crater is wrong.
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/orig ⦠562777.jpg
What your looking at in that picture is radioactive glass created by a nuclear explosion when we first tested a nuclear bomb in 1945.
A similar effect is sometimes caused by lightning strikes. That glass is sand particles fused together from the immense heat. The sand was there beforehand; the blast did not create it. And yes, I saw the picture.
Nuclear bombs are based on nuclear fission (the splitting of atoms) not nuclear fusion (the fusing of atomic nuclei). Star formation is based on fusion not fission.
They are both. Of the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan, one was fission, the other fusion. The modern hydrogen bomb is a fusion type; the first test of the type sank an entire island.
Also not all supernova result in black holes, they can also leave neutron stars.
Who said anything about supernovas? We're talking about creating stars etc. not blowing them up.
The Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny got together one night and the Easter Bunny got the Tooth Fairy really drunk and dropped a few roofies in her last one, and you know how rabbits can get resulting in a "Big Bang" which magically created everything.
So, you have no answer.
The original elements form of hydrogen and helium (atomic numbers 1 and 2) formed as the universe cooled. While this cooling (clumping together of energy) was enough to form simple elements, further fusion was needed to form heavier elements.
Helium is a stable element, so it doesn't like to bond with other elements (including other helium). Also, if this were true, why aren't molecules randomly fusing together and dropping little planets all over the place?
The expansion not explosion of the singularity.
1. What singularity?
2. Where did it come from to begin with? Sooner or later, you will encounter a level where it just can't be formed; it had to have been there before, so Who/what made it?
Isn't it impossible that so many factors would roll the dice in "our" favor every single time without fail throughout the multiplied eons this would take to occur?
No
So why isn't gambling with dice a sure bet? Same laws of probability apply.
So who lit the fuse anyway?
No one, your question here is fallacious as it presumes there was a who. The most likely cause that we know of so far was has it as the result of quantum fluctuations triggering the expansion.
The question has merit. Hydrogen and Helium are not imminently reactive, so there had to be someone/thing that set it all off. Quantum fluctuations? While there is the recently discovered phenomenon of "frame dragging," where a planets mass and gravity actually cause drag on the fabric of space-time and distort time by fractions of a second, that is passive if anything and not volatile in any manner. As frame-dragging is the only known possible quantum fluctuation and there were no planets yet to cause it, how would it occur? And where did space-time and the fluctuation come from in the first place?
For info on Frame-dragging, look up the Gravity Probe A and B satellites and experiments . It was pretty recent.
With that said the only thought I had was that you have no idea what your talking about.
It only provokes me to tell you that you don't really know what the big bang theory is...
Cheap shots are a tactic for the unthinking man. I have studied this theory. I do read quite a bit, and on top of that my father worked for NASA (no bull) and had access to info not commonly available to the public, which he and I would often discuss at length.
May I suggest (somewhat respectfully, somewhat not) that you take a break from the official party line and read some literature from the other side of the argument (specifically, the Creationist side).
For what it's worth, I am enjoying this little mental joust.
First, the base theory says it was an explosion, second, so where did the universe come from originally?
The person who first proposed the concept did refer to it as an explosion leading later to a mockery and the coined name "Big Bang" The theory actually doesn't state that it was an explosion.
"The Big Bang Model is a broadly accepted theory for the origin and evolution of our universe. It postulates that 12 to 14 billion years ago, the portion of the universe we can see today was only a few millimeters across. It has since expanded from this hot dense state into the vast and much cooler cosmos we currently inhabit. We can see remnants of this hot dense matter as the now very cold cosmic microwave background radiation which still pervades the universe and is visible to microwave detectors as a uniform glow across the entire sky."
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/bb_theory.html
And that's where the universe came from. Now we are still working on exactly where this singularity that eventually became the universe came from, but we have several hypotheses non of which require magic.
A similar effect is sometimes caused by lightning strikes. That glass is sand particles fused together from the immense heat. The sand was there beforehand; the blast did not create it. And yes, I saw the picture.
When you think of something being created it's not out of nothing but out of pre-existing materials. So in this sense yes it did create that glass. This is exactly how stars create the heavier elements, by taking pre-existing material and rearranging it into a new form. It's just doing it at an atomic level. Those base elements that formed the first stars also were just the rearrangement of pre-existing material in the form of energy into matter.
They are both. Of the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan, one was fission, the other fusion. The modern hydrogen bomb is a fusion type; the first test of the type sank an entire island.
Actually in H-bombs most of the destructive power comes from fission no the fusion of the hydrogen. The hydrogen fusion is just used as a trigger for the uranium fission that does the actual damage.
Who said anything about supernovas? We're talking about creating stars etc. not blowing them up.
To get heavier elements to from things like planets as you mentioned they first have to be expelled from the stars in supernova. In fact it's believed this is how we get elements heavier than iron.
So, you have no answer.
Way to ignore what I said.
Helium is a stable element, so it doesn't like to bond with other elements (including other helium). Also, if this were true, why aren't molecules randomly fusing together and dropping little planets all over the place?
As I explained to get heavier elements beyond hydrogen and AND helium requires the fusion in stars. The way you stating it is not how it works.
1. What singularity?
2. Where did it come from to begin with? Sooner or later, you will encounter a level where it just can't be formed; it had to have been there before, so Who/what made it?
1. The singularity (the hot dense state "rior" to the Big bang) that expanded into the universe.
2. We don't know yet, but as I said we have a number of hypotheses, one could even conclude that it was also ways there given we aren't dealing with time as we know it.
So why isn't gambling with dice a sure bet? Same laws of probability apply.
In the case of the universe your placing your bet after the dice have already been thrown. So what your doing is a misuse of probability.
The question has merit. Hydrogen and Helium are not imminently reactive, so there had to be someone/thing that set it all off. Quantum fluctuations?
No the idea of quantum fluctuations is what's believe to have been the trigger for the Big Bang. The Big Bang did not create stars and planets. Those formed later after the universe began to cool. As it further cooled gravity was able to take hold of this matter allowing it to clump together. Eventually it became dense enough to enter into a state of fusion, thus a star was formed.
Cheap shots are a tactic for the unthinking man. I have studied this theory. I do read quite a bit, and on top of that my father worked for NASA (no bull) and had access to info not commonly available to the public, which he and I would often discuss at length.
I think your full of crap now.
Actually in H-bombs most of the destructive power comes from fission no the fusion of the hydrogen. The hydrogen fusion is just used as a trigger for the uranium fission that does the actual damage.
Not since 1961. Russia's 50MT Tsar Bomba received 97% of its energy from fusion alone. It was designed as a 100MT, using two stages of Fission. One stage of Fusion was half the output to begin with.
Also, about the big bang. Isn't the idea that in quantum mechanics, some things randomly happen?
The idea that there wasn't any time before the Big Bang for anything to happen sounds a little ridiculous, we can't even comprehend what timelessness/a singularity even is.
Not that this isn't fascinating, but this discussion has circled around to the original question.
If God created the universe, where did God come from?
Likewise, if the origins of the universe are predated by a singularity, and triggered by quantum fluctuations, where did this singularity come from?
On both sides, you have the same question. How can something, be it some sort of universal architect, or a singularity, exist outside of time?
We are the result of billions and billions of years of evolution. The concept of God was created by early man in order to explain the reasons for the unknown, nothing more, nothing less.
Also to all Bible fanatics, what makes your God better than Vishnu?
Hojoko, I am? I believe I am in the right thread if we are discussing...or more specifically I believe, debating who created God.
When it was in fact, humanity that created God
However, the question of this thread is if God created everything, who created him, if you assume that the origin of the universe was God.
Basically, returning to my above question:
How can something, be it some sort of universal architect, or a singularity, exist outside of time?
Any opinions?
You must be logged in to post a reply!