This place is a great sounding board, and an invaluable place to quickly find alternative thoughts and ideas. So, I'm very interested in ideas on this topic.
I've heard the question 'Where did god come from?' It seemed an impossible question to answer and, frankly, pointless to ponder past the fun of it. I never realized it was more of a question of what did god come from, so I've never thought about it. I find this question a brick wall against the idea of theism.
Nothing cmoes from nothing. He coldn't have just appeared perfect. He could only have evolved to a state of our idea of perfection, or have been made in that state by something else.
I'm not concerned over whether anytning made the universe. The roadblock I have is that whatever the origin of the universe, if it is by some sentient hand, it can't be called god. We may not know the answers, but we have the capacity to learn them; so if there is something more it can't reasonably be labeled god. Wise and powerful maybe. Something worthy of respect and honor. Not something to worship.
I would love anyone's thoughts on this. I would appreciate unemotional ones.
I should probably lay down some ground rules:
Christians; yes, I know, heresy. The fires of hell await me for asking this. Do me a favor. Offer a reasonable rebuttal that I can think about.
Atheists; No Woohoo moments please. Another one hasn't yet bitten the dust. Try to rebut the rebuttals without an emothional element, please.
Sounds to me as though you are beginning to think logically, and are coming to the only rational conclusion.
As you correctly conclude - a god is logically impossible.
Not sure what you wish to discuss - the theists will claim that their god exists outside of logic and reason, so you cannot expect a "reasonable" rebuttal.
"Majik" is the answer you will receive.
But - good to see all that flailing around claiming unfathomable knowledge has ceased.
Welcome to the dark side, Obi Wan.
Saves you some time.
See, that's my problem. A little voice told me you'd be the first to respond. I wandered over to that thread you gave the link and checked it out.
No no no. Under no circumstances will I agree with pcunix. It's against everything I hold dear.
That goes for one or two other prominent nay sayers. You're special though. you recommend excellent reading material.
for those who cannot believe in magic or miracles it is quite irrational and contradicting to make people come to a conclusion that magic is the answer. This is just manipulation. Since there is no magic, magic cannot be the answer and they are stumped so they make one up and purport it to be true. Such as marks response.
The problem with people like mark is they are limited inside a little box they call reality. It is even a smaller box than the box we believers are said to be placed into.
For an entity who resides outside time and our physical plane but is not exempt from entering or indeed, living in our plane, invisibly and with power we need to humble ourselves (another atheist stumbling block). Here is where we need to accept the reality that other dimensions or another plane (as i like to phrase it) does exist. To say it doesnt is part of a very small limited thinking box called stupidity.
My answer is continued in another post by me in this thread
I like this idea. It makes sense. I like the humble yourself comment. I can see that, the worship I was having trouble with. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Are you capable of saying anything helpful? Or is ridicule all you can post?
I see your conclusions are the same as mine, about this person!
When nonsense, magic, insults and threats are all that comes from believers words, ridicule is the only thing that can be offered in light of logic or reason, which is well beyond a believers conceptual capacity to understand.
Everyone gets it.
Question is why persist with something that doesnt work?
now ridicule is offered in light of reason or logic.
sound of the buzzer again on this one.
ridicule is hardly a substitute for logic or reason unless the person offering this is infantile, bored or just out to destroy.
This is where you are in wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy over your head and so many times you are shown to be drowning in limited thought and repetitious jargon.
When christian questions are asked; the limited thinker, the person in the box of reality, the one who has no room for miracles; can only be silent, because to argue with only half the ammo or half the understanding or in other words to be totally unequipped to debate on the christian level is just insanity being insane. For instance i don't go into a thread about quantum physics and ridicule them, even though quantum physics, i think, is still an unproven theory, perhaps i am wrong, the point is, out of respect and i myself realizing i am unequipped to debate in this arena, i stay clear. This makes me a nice(r) person than those who constantly feel of higher moral (in an atheistic manner) to digress and interfere and impute functions of talky talk, where those rude people are both 'bound by duty to do so' and quite inept.
this is proven by the definition of insanity itself: something being done exactly the same way, repeatedly, over and over again, with hope for a different result.
welcome to your world beely
uhoh.. whats that ... the sound of a buzzer. Quick run to Disneyland
Ah - so let me get this straight. You understand something I cannot understand because I limit myself to reality. And you are "debating" at a level way beyond us limited "reality-based" thinkers and - you want us to shut up because we are so limited in our understanding?
And you think this is using logic and reason?
This is why your religion causes so many wars, cousin.
i never used the word shut up... i said be silent which could include reading and thinking before reacting.
and yes if we look at the situation in a realistic manner, i am not bound by physical reality, physical reality does not dictate the scope of my expectations and you are bound by realities borders. What part of that did you not grasp?
so logically if someone does not have the equipment to be able wrap their mind around what we are talking about, i think reason would then dictate that person shut up.
Looking at it this way, you are a two dimensional thinker and we are three dimensional thinkers.
Without seeming to offend, we would not even bother to talk to you except you force yourself on us with silly comments, 2 dimensional thoughts and often times insulting chitchat and comments about how stupid our beliefs are.
This is why you atheists cause so many wars, because your nose extends so very from your logic and reason.
And you are not my cousin, logic dictates that also and i find this too, to be reasonable.
Of course you are my cousin, cousin. All humanity are my cousins - and yours - along with all the other primates, mammals and other creatures - just more distantly related. If you read anything other than one majik book - you would understand this and not be so divisive and limited in your thinking. You most definitely are not my brother.
Yes - we are bound by physical reality. Your majikal realm does not exist.
And "be silent" means what again?
This is why your religion causes so many wars, cousin.
you seem very unchristian - christians apparently love ALL people, including those they don't know.
familiarity breeds contempt lol
i have been through this love 'pie in the sky' philosophy that many are quick to point out if a christian speaks words that are not all gooey and ooshey.
If you read the bible you will find out that my morals and christian standing are not damaged by the stern and frank words i speak. To those that are here just to destroy i offer love when there is a change of heart, until then, the sound of a buzzer or posting with the same avarice or pure rebuttle will have to do.
Theres a scripture about not throwing pearls to swine.
call me a good samaritan who helps his neighbor. And who is my neighbor? I'll give ya a clue, there isn't an atheist among them.
A favorite line of mine i like to say when the shoe fits is "when God throws the chaff into the lake of fire the last thing that soul will say is 'that wasn't very christian of God'."
Admitting to being infantile and out to destroy is at the very least a step in the right direction. Good for you.
Yes, I understand you believe it insane to not invoking magic into explanations.
Considering you have little understanding of the world around you, it wouldn't be prudent to ridicule one of most successful theories of all time. Yes, you are wrong, again.
I have found you to be unequipped to debate your own religion, too. Many of your errors have had to be corrected.
Here ya go:
Insanity: Relatively permanent disorder of the mind.
I like your blanket statements without any backup. (sarcasm)
if you would care to provide a proof about what errors of mine have been corrected. Theres such a long line of me correcting you that i would have to say you may be falling into your own definition of insanity.
i will just have to sound the buzzer again and say
thanks for the misinformation!
Believers invoke magic into their beliefs regardless of what anyone thinks.
That's what we keep trying to tell you but you continue to invoke it, anyways.
It is understandable that believers aren't interested in reality, that is why they continue to invoke magic.
Yes, you invoke magic.
Hilarious. You're claiming it's stupid to not believe in magic.
Notice you said "(as i like to phrase it)" - in other words, you're just making up magic as you go along. Priceless!
i think i hear the sound of a buzzer again
how much is priceless? by definition it should be without price. price unending. cant be priced.
how about eternal life... without end, cant have an end, unending.
seems we have a natural comparison for a spiritual situation.
magic does exist if this is what God does. Magic as man knows magic does not exist. It is not genuine. Yes we believe in (Gods) magic because we are not limited in our thoughts and because god sed
yep theres the sound of the buzzer.
My response was to mark (again you have to use the boldly typed THIS word to see who responded to what) You seemingly did not get or understand the portent of my post. So i will leave you with that and just give you another buzzer sound for sounding more obscure than usual.
Get some sleep buddy
see you're posting as your sockpuppet again. Rather dishonest
Yes, I understand you are unable to distinguish between them.
Embracing delusion is not limited in thought, but limited in thinking entirely.
I'm not even going to invoke the word "god" because it's not necessary - you should know my thoughts on "Him" by now anyway.
The basic answer is that we don't know what caused the universe to come into existence. We just know that it did; 13.7 billion years ago from a point of infinite mass.
You can use maths to present hypotheses as to what came before the big bang, but you can't really back these hypotheses with observations because all of the light - our messanger - came from the big bang.
Obviously theism fails to explain any of this because they didn't know it had happened when they wrote their central mantras. Interesting, the big bang inspired rather an upsurge in people pointing out that this must be god. I guess because scientists have used the dreaded words "we don't know" - a sentence into which god must automatically rushes!
I understand how the word god came into existence. My problem is our definition of the word. Like you said. We don't know the answers as to the ultimate origin. Maybe we'll find the knowledge to create universes. It won't make us gods. Not by my definition, anyway.
I think god is used by the modern world - and the ancient world for that matter - to describe the driving force behind something that we don't understand. It's human nature it would appear - it happens all over the world and has throughout history.
Where there is uncertainty, god rushes in!
Even very famous scientists (and atheists) invoke the term sometimes;
"If we do discover a theory of everything...it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason—for then we would truly know the mind of God" (Stephen Hawking)
Why you want to dress up another creationism? the big bang?
The early universe was nothing more than a hot ocean of radiation. When we break this down, we find it is little more than energy, which can be broken down further into two types; Potential (stored energy) and Kinetic (energy at work).
Energy is always conserved, however it can be borrowed from a source but not necessarily has to be returned to the source. It does still have to made accountable. With this simple example, we can formulate theories as to how the universe came about entirely on its own, without the need of a "sentient hand", so to speak.
Energy, borrowed from a source and not returned resulted in our universe.
Not an answer to the question, but hey; thanks for playing.
Yes, I understand that reading comprehension and critical thinking are weak while religious indoctrination is strong, hence you are unable to see an answer.
Obviously you woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. I went back and read your post again, in case I missed something. I didn't. You didn't read the question. Too bad. I was honestly interested in your opinion on it.
Oh. I see. You've probably got the same theory as Mark. Ok. Keep your magic. I'll stick with reality, thanks.
Who borrowed the energy that wasn't returned lol
sound of the buzzer again
if you had a nickle for every buzzer sound you'd be rich lol
No one. But, I do understand your penchant for invoking magical beings where none are required.
well come on now. if something isn't returned it must be for a reason? Where did it go. doesn't physics say that the laws that govern this sort of stuff never vary from their intended trajectory? I am certain that if jupiter were to vanish one day there would have to be reason for it? or would "it just wasn't returned suffice... "
finger on the buzzer......
Yes, there must have been a reason for the energy to not return to it's source, however we can find many examples of this phenomenon in nature and many reasons for there occurrence.
It was the energy that became the 'building blocks' of our universe.
Nope. I never heard of such a thing.
Strawman fallacy, and a very silly one at that.
which part was the strawman?
Very thoughtful OP. If we look at how things operate in the universe today. Haley's Comet, for example, comes around every 75 years or so. I am sure there are other Objects in space that have orbits that might only bring them through this area every few million years. With the planets of our system, why is it only one of them sustains life? Look at flower bulbs, once it becomes to cold they go dormant. When the weather warms, they produce flowers. There are many factors that allow life to exist on this planet and I don't want to bore you with a science lesson... Thinking logically, I can only determine that what we currently see, had to have been developed from material that has already existed. Once certian conditions were met, the sun and then the planets started forming. And of course the same goes for life on earth. Now man of course, being the inquisitive type has to know where things came from. And since they are somethings that just can't be explained, something was thought up to that would allow for those things to be explained. Of course we will never fully understand anything about our universe, how it came about or where it is going for a few different reasons. One is we just don't live long enough, Two only a few people are actually attempting to learn his information, three we don't not possess the technology to explore the whole universe in a timely effiecient manner as well as aot of other reasons. The only thing we can do at this point in time is to apply an openminded logic to what we actually think we know, continue to determine if what we know remains contant. Having faith is good for the "soul" but in the end god is what we make of him. Humans tend to be dependant on others...and being dependant on an all powerful god helps us to maintain the strength to handle certian situations in our lives. Does god actually help you? Who knows? But that faith (confidence in something) does allow for the person to be able to overcome the situation. Just the same as when you have someone cheering you on, you tend to give it that extra boost and push even harder to win that race. So I guess you can say that "god" has always been there for humans...
So, let me see if I got your point. You think, the belief of god is fuzzy and warm enough to prohibit questioning the concept? I know that sounds a little confrontational, but that's what I get from your post. I agree. Some people have no problem with that. I do. I never thought about this and there's no logical out, that I can find: save one.
By no means...I say question away... But the reason most people don't question is because of the warm and fuzzy. Logical thinking says that god can't exist...at least not as claimed...the only way god can exist is through the thoughts/feelings of humans...or we are gods ourselves. And since man created the being known as god. then, that god has been around as long as we have.
Edit: Seems like your thoughts have changed since I first seen you on HP.
Let me re-phrase. Seems like your thoughts have cleared since I first seen you on HP.
Questions lead to answers and Answers lead to personal truths.
This is also a major problem I have with theism. A common argument put forth against the Big Bang is that it could not have just started up out of nothing, yet I have the same problem with God: if the Big Bang cannot start out of nothing, then surely God cannot either? If we use that argument to accept that God exists, then we have to say that something must have created God and something must have created the something that created God and it starts to get ridiculous.
I tend to believe that the universe works on almost a sort of timer. Currently it is expanding. At some point it will cease to expand and blink out of existence (this is generally referred to as the Big Crunch). Then another Big Bang will appear, and the process shall begin again. Almost like the way a rubber band stretches out until it can stretch no more, then pings back to its original shape. It's the explanation that makes the most sense to me personally.
I think the most recent arguments would say that the big crunch wont happen and that the universe will continue to expand despite gravity. This what supernovae observations and CMB tend to tell us.
That said, because we don't have an observation of what dark energy is, we can't say that with any confidence either. And franky, who the hell cares because we'll have died out several hundred billion years before anyway!
We can do the maths for either, but it doesn't really make it workable as we don't have the observations to back it up.
God I love cosmology!
All well and good. But that doesn't explain the origin. Not that we could, but that's the crux of the argument between the camps. The how, or why.
There is a far simpler alternative.
Lets see if you can work it out for yourself.
I believe I have. I'm looking for rebuttal. Not condescension at this point. Thanks.
I was not being condescending. I genuinely thought you might be ready to step out of the little box your mind is in and was encouraging you. Oh well.
Please do not push me to make statements I'm not ready to make. Just because this seems logical doesn't mean I haven't finished exploring the angles. If the answer were simply black and white, we'd all be on the same page. I don't see the problem with reserving final judgement. Either way, it isn't as if I believe my soul hangs in the balance. It is simply yes or no to the question at hand.
No - it is not. There is a third alternative you do not seem to have considered.
Enlighten me as to what you consider that to be.
No - you will resist anything I suggest as a matter of principal. What is the most simple answer you can come up with? Dropping all your assumptions.
How in the world can I come up with a simple answers to the existence of the universe Mark? Things don't appear out of no where. You can't get something from nothing. I won't resist. I won't argue the point. Please just spit it out. Everything is speculation. You have as much a right to speculate as the next person. Why do you always dance around the topic?
You are making the standard assumption that all theists (and big bang creationists) make. I am not speculating - you are doing that.
The Universe is eternal. It has always been here.
Thanks for the input.
I'll add it to my list of avenues to explore.
This a fascinating statement. Truly!
Here we have an atheist (to the core) making a faith statement. He ascribes eternity to the universe made up of matter, and yet cannot concede that (a) God could be eternal, just as He claims to be.
Or did you want me to say, "we claim Him to be". (Also a faith statement.)
The problem has always been that we (humans) have too small an "image" or concept of Who God IS, and what He's like. We see Him a bit like me looking at a dot/pixel on my computer screen, and then saying there is no person typing on the keyboard.
Can you explain your keyboard analogy? I don't think I understand what you're trying to express.
We have a view of EVERYTHING that amounts to nothing more than one pixel on a computer screen. Because our knowledge of ALL things is so small, we think we can deduce more than we actually can. God is infinitely greater than what we can imagine. We ascribe all manner of characteristics to Him. Many don't even fit.
The truth is, unless God reveals Himself to us, we remain clueless.
Another analogy might be, you get a hold of one of my fingernails, and you go about re-constructing me. Trying to describe how I look, talk, feel etc. You won't get it right. Not in this lifetime!
Aww dj - sorry you didn't understand.
I can see the Universe. See how that is different to your invisible Super Being and the fight you need to have with anyone who thinks that is nonsense?
Once again - you are the one making the claim. The Universe is here. I think we can agree on that. You are the one claiming to know that there was a time when it was not here.
This is why your religion causes so many wars.
But there was a time when the universe didn't exist; it only came into being 13.7 billion years ago. Before that there was no universe!
This is MARK you are talking to!
He is right, and you are WRONG!
If he says it's eternal, then it is eternal.
Don't you get too excited; it doesn't mean that god exists!
Hey wags. You do realize that number is just an arbitrary number, thrown out assuming all of our assumptions are correct. A lot of assumptions to hinge a truth on.
Yes, but maths describes space and time - and this is what the universe is - perfectly using mathematical functions. This is probably what reality is too. A number is arbitary but ascribed to something to give a scalar measurement; this is required if we're going to make sense of things.
There are some problems with numbers such as infinity, for example, because these don't make sense - it just depends on where you stop counting!
So - you think there was a time when there was nothing then?
I don't know. There was a time when what we call the universe didn't exist - it came from a place which was both infinitely massive and infinitely small. It's difficult to explain in language just what this means, you could call it nothing I guess or you could call it everything - either way it doesn't describe what it is.
Utterly counter-intuitive. you said earlier that just curious could choose a more simplistic option than invoking a god. I'm not convinced!
No - this is an assumption based on observations that lead scientists to think that there was a time when the Universe was infinitely compacted - not that there was nothing, and not that the Universe did not exist.
The far simpler answer is that it has been here for ever. It is eternal.
The problem is - we have had it drummed into our collective psyche - first by religion, then the scientific version - that "everything has a beginning."
It's the current theory of how the universe was created, I wouldn't decribe it as an assumption - it's the same as any other scientific theory - it has thousands of observations to support it.
The answer is that we don't know what happended before the big bang because we have no way of observing it; all light and energy that we see today was created by it. Gneeral relativity breaks down at singularity.
I don't think it has anything to so with our collective psysche about the need to invoke "a beginning" - it is just a fact.
At this point it depends on semantics because you could claim that the massed point of origin already contained everything needed to create the universe - so why wouldn't you consider it at that point to be the "universe". But I've already said that we just can't know that it has been around eternally and I think most physicists would consider the big bang the "birth" of the universe.
It is an assumption. It assumes a beginning. Based on the observation that the Universe "appears" to be expanding. It assumes a compact state. It is a scientific version of creationism.
There are several alternatives based on this observation. Take away the assumption of a beginning and by far the simplest answer is that the Universe is eternal and infinite.
The Universe is here. That we know. The assumption is that - at some point - it was not.
When you put it that way, you have a valid point. But I would be extremely disappointed if science took that as fact and didn't try to find out a different solution to the question.
This is a circular argument, like the one about God.
No man can look, or go back and see it happen. It will forever be in the PAST.
All positions held will be ones of FAITH, and assumptions.
But according to the teaching of faith, past, present a future are all known to god and the scriptures say he has shown all of these to certain people. According to those writings, what you say is not true at all. It IS true that we can see the past, based on their being a god who can and has shown us—according to the scriptures of believers.
Don't think you can have it both ways.
Dear me dj. This went right over your head. The Universe is here. You are the one assuming there was a time when it was not. I have done nothing other than refute your assumption. And - by default the answer is - the Universe is eternal.
You are the one assumes there was a time when nothing existed - you dj. You are doing the assuming.
Dj, I'm not questioning the existence of some sentient being at the beginning of our existence. I'm questioning what could have been the nature of that being at the beginning of its existence, if it even does exist. Is it possible for something to come to being, from nothing, and be perfect at its inception. I can't see that as a possibility. I can't imagine how it could be. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
The guys who wrote the books the bible was stolen from knew the Universe was eternal and infinite.
It is the simplest answer by far. Anything else is assumption. Of course they are going to keep looking for the answer to the assumptive question. They have already decided everything has a beginning.
Yes it is an assumption based on thousands of peices of evidence collected over the past 100 years or so. It is yet to be refuted as far as I'm aware. A bit like the assumption of evolution, the assumption of electromagnetism and the assumption of gravity; famously assumed by Darwin, Faraday and Newton, respectively.
The big bang is about as distinct from creationism as evolution is. Just because it talks about the same concepts - one is a scientific theory, the other is a faith belief. This is what's known as a false syllogism.
The term "big bang" is actually derived from a criticism by Fred Hoyle, who endlessly argued for the steady state universe when the evidence started mounting for an expanding universe in the middle of the 20th century. The steady state was considered slightly archaic even then and pretty much put to bed with CMB.
We know that the universe is expanding for a number of reasons, we know also that it is not infinite. It's not eternal in the sense that you mean either, we know this too.
I mean if you're going to play that game, why are you so confident that the universe is here at all?
Just because something is the simplest answer to a particular question, it doesn't make it right. This is why we don't regularly invoke gods in science, but try to explain natural phenomena using observations.
No - we don't "know" that the Universe is not infinite. We have not observed infinity.
Can you count to infinity?
Yes, we do know that the universe is not infinite. We know that it is 13.7 billion light years across.
You could actually argue that nothing is infinite, it's just shorthand for "I've given up counting".
No - you just keep counting. Start counting to infinity - you will never stop - forwards or backwards.
We do not "know" that the Universe is 13.7 billion light years across. This is a guesstimate based on a flawed assumption.
Does infinity exist?! God almighty, we're getting complex here, but it's a more fundamental question than you'd expect. The largest number we know of is Graham's number. All we know about this number is that it ends in a 7. We can't write it down. Literally - if we could write each digit on a single atom, there wouldn't be enough atoms in the unvirse on which to write it. This still isn't the biggest number of course because whats graham x graham?! You see my point?
Which assumption is flawed? I think you're arguing from the wrong point of view here; for hundreds of years it was believed that the universe was in a steady state. It's only been the last 80 years or so that has shown it to be expanding. So the assumption was that it was steady, the revised opinion is that it is expanding.
SO what? I'm working from no assumptions - whether the Universe appears to be expanding or not is moot. It is here - anything more is an assumption.
Infinity keeps going - it is eternal. Start counting - keep going to infinity. You will never get there. Infinity - like all numbers - is a concept.
I know, but you refered to the big bang as "scientific creationism" and then continued on about the universe being eternal and infinite, which it clearly isn't.
You refered to a flawed assumption being responsible for the "belief" that the universe is expanding. I think it'd be wrong of me not to point out that that isn't true...
No - I referred to the flawed assumption that there needs to be a beginning. The Universe's apparent "expansion," is moot. Space or matter cannot be "created," whether god dunnit or a singularity dunnit.
Of course the Universe is eternal and infinite. You cannot say that it clearly isn't. It is the most simple, elegant explanation available. It requires no assumptions such as a beginning, time being linear and the "creation," of space and matter.
Why do you keep saying "of course the niverse is eternal and infinite" as though these are true?! Haven't you heard of the standard model?!
It does require a beginning because although new space and matter can;t be created, various elements can be and are. Without the linear progression of the universe we wouldn;t find the relative abundances of substances the way they are now and therefore we'd not exist. I'd say this is a fairly fundamental thing from our perspective!
It does not require a beginning. This is your assumption that you are then basing everything else on.
No beginning needed. Always been here. Space and matter cannot be created - we agree. Therefore they have always been here.
Look, we KNOW there was a beginning in terms of the big bang as a starting point. We therefore KNOW that the universe is not eternal. The universe IS expanding and therefore IS NOT infinite.
I don't wish to go over the same ground that we've already been over here; physics did the very same 80 years ago! I'm not sure why you aren't accepting something which has been been known for longer than your entire lifetime!
Nothing that I've said here is wrong from the point of view of mainstream physics. I'm afraid your opinion doesn't really weigh in with quite as much impact as the entirity of scientific opinion. Everybodys' opinions are not of equal merit.
No. We don't. We don't KNOW any such thing. You want to believe it based on your belief that there MUST BE a starting point. We agree that is is not possible to create matter or space. Therefore it has always been here.
I give up, I'm off to the pub. If you continually alter the very little information you give of your own "beliefs" then it makes it very difficult to respond in any meaningful way.
If you want to read more - the book that really sparked my passion for this a couple of years ago was Simon Singh's Big Bang which explains in a very succinct way what the current standpoint of modern physics is.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Big-Bang-Import … amp;sr=8-1
I'm not trying to sound patronising in any way here; I just think eeverybody should read this book.
I have read it. I know what modern physics says. Scientific creationism.
This way demons lie Mark; careful you end up no better than the people on here who continually argue a faith position where better explainations exist.
There is a limit to scepticism - and that is the argument against an established view point because of a personal belief or unfounded scepticism.
Join a "Skeptics in the Pub" meeting, you're from the UK right? That's where I'm off now. Beer and skepticism - a beautiful combination - and there'll be one somewhere near you...
I'm just sayin'...
This is exactly what religionists say about god. No beginning, no end, always been here.
Yeah. I know - Sorry you are too ignorant to tell the difference between Reality and a Invisible Super Being.
I'm just sayin................. LOLOLO
This is so cool Mark. I thought you were just difficult.when people you called believers disagreed with you. You're like this with everyone. I never noticed before.
I'm prolly ignernt of a lot of things, but not of the accused as you stated it. Don't need a super daddy to allow me suck air. But whatever you bleeve is hunky dory. You're stuck with it, not me.
Yup. I can see the Universe though. I can touch, smell, feel, eat, taste reality.
See the difference?
But - if you have some proof or reasonable explanation for how something came from nothing which is not "majik" please be my guest.
You are the one making the claim. The Universe is here. It is has been here since we were able to observe it.
You say there was a time when nothing existed.
Therefore you think the Universe came from nothing. You say matter and space was created at some point - from nothing.
I'm just sayin.
No actually, I have no idea what the universe is, only that it's here. I have no idea that it had an origin, or has existed eternally. I have no idea if there is a god or not. I don't know because there is no incontrovertible evidence of any of it. The only thing I can do is make guesses based on information that seems most relevant and a few of my own basic experiences, which I freely admit isn't much at all. Hence, the perpetual mystery to me. Bits and pieces, fragments and illusions and a few bits of reality. That's not much to form an educated opinion upon, and I admit it. However, it's interesting to note the "what ifs." I guess that's all I'm really doing, is exploring the "what ifs."
So Mark, I just don't know. I'm only guessing. The only reason I engage in little teapot debates like this is because I think it's interesting to note (in some cases) what others think. I get what you're saying. The only point I made was that your insight about an eternal universe is the same as believer's idea of an eternal god. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying I noted the parallel idea, and I'm NOT comparing you to believers, or attempting to discredit you. It's a notation.
You may not see me at all on a similar page as you, and that's fine. I'm not sure I am. I'm just observing. But I don't believe in a super daddy, and I don't know about the universe. I'm just exploring.
Hey Mark. I thought about this. I think the short answer is you're wrong. Cosmically, we're about as smart as aborigines. We just aren't hitting the question from the right angle yet. You're invoking magic to answer the question. You can't do that. It's just crazy.
What question is that? It's just crazy? Dear me - powerful Juju.
Little wonder your religion causes so many wars.
Saying the universe is eternal. Not possible. Unless you can explain how something came from nothing. I don't know. Sounds crazy to me. Sounds like you're taking something on faith. I'm saying we don't know. I'm taking it on lack of evidence. Call me crazy.
It didn't need to come from nothing. It has always been here. You are the one claiming there was nothing at some point.
But - if you have some reasonable argument that there was a time when it came from nothing majik juju god whatever. Be my guest.
Mark, your need to always be right, no matter the lack of evidence is truly maddening. I happen to be waiting for a scientific breakthrough. I suppose there is some remote chance that a supernatural being will appear and explain it all, but I don't bank on it. Since you aren't a supernatural being, don't hold it against me if I don't take your opinion on this on faith.
I don't want to argue the point. I started this thread for opinions on the question I had. You were doing so good for a while.
Aww - back to condescending and lack of interest in the answers given. Not really wanting any are ya?
This is why your religion causes so many wars.
Don't go away mad Mark. But then again, don't stay if you're just going to be mad. It's just my opinion. It doesn't make me right. You could very well be right, for all I know.
Oh dear. I have upset you again. How easy that is. All I need to do is offer a logical explanation for something.
This is why your religion causes so many wars.
I'm not mad Mark. I'm actually quite happy right now, with the exception of the fact that I've apparently upset you. By disagreeing. How odd. Listen, if it makes you feel any better, I think I'm an atheist. Bleech, that tasted odd. I'm still having trouble saying the word. I'm working on it. I tentatively ran it past my husband last night. We laughed. I swore it was a joke. I'll have to figure out another time to broach the subject.
No - you haven't upset me. I am pretty sure that you will follow the logical progression and reality I am right about this as well.
Sorry your husband is having trouble swallowing the idea that you are now an atheist. Perhaps he won't divorce you aver it?
Wouldn't really be my problem would it? Ask anyone that knows me. My philosophy is there's no seat belts in life. You should always be where you're happy. I could tell him I'm am alien. He'd figure a way to resolve it in time. It's his mother that will faint with horror.
An open mind is a wonderful thing isn't it?
If the universe continues to expand, then the implication is that it is infinite. It begs another question: is there such a thing as nothing, and is that what the universe is expanding into? In other words, what is beyond the definable edges of the universe that allows it to expand?
The universe doesn't really have "edges" or boundaries, hence it is thought to be boundless (without boundaries) as opposed to being infinite. The amount of matter and energy in the universe is finite.
Which seems to be pretty consistent with superwags point. I see what you're saying.
Infinite, then, is a theory or postulate that we actually do not see in the universe. Is that what you're saying?
It's a difficult answer because 'infinity' comes from the Latin, 'Unboundedness' hence the similarity. And although the term is used within the mathematics of physics, it's difficult to use within the terms of the observations.
In other words, mathematically, we can use infinity because we can understand how numbers can be infinite by the simple term, n+1, while we can't know for a fact the observations of the universes expansion is similar.
I can see it too.
The claim it is eternal, is a FAITH statement.
I have to go and fight a few wars, now.
dj - we agree the universe is here. The simplest answer is that it has always been here - you are the one claiming to know that there was a time when it was not here. This in order to support the ridiculous notion that your Invisible Super Being made it out of nothing using majik.
Well aka-dj, If you can differentiate between faith and reason, 'universe(matter and space) is eternal' is rational and NOT faith!!
No it's not!
The universe IS. We know it IS.
The claim that it is ETERNAL is the faith part.
They/we don't know. It's an hypothesis, theory, guess, or conviction.
We cannot go back in time and "prove" it. We cannot put it into a test tube and run experiments on it.
Hey dj. I wouldn't argue the eternal universe thing too much with the atheists..I've figured out why it's so important to them to believe it. They'll never budge on it.
They WILL NOT (an't emphasize it enough), concede that they too have put FAITH into action to claim most of what they "believe"!
The brick wall is hard, and my head is getting bruises.
Well, I'd have to agree (if you're talking about God); in that no one has proof enough to argue their side to a 100% end of argument. That's obvious enough. They do have one thing in their favor though. Everyone is empty handed when it comes to concrete evidence.
But the eternal universe thing. I just don't get that. It seems like such a cop out for an answer. I actually had one ask me why it matters how the universe was formed. It blew me away. I realize there are a million questions we want answers on, and that one may never be answered. But it's such a cool question. It seems a strange thing not to be interested in. It made me think of a girl I used to ride horses with. She never thought about anything outside of a twenty mile radius of our town. It was fascinating talking to her. People like that probably go to sleep as soon as their heads hit the pillow.
I will not concede this - no.
My lack of belief in your Invisible Super Being is not the same as your belief in it.
100% total lack of evidence. You believe in it - I do not.
I am totally prepared to believe in it if there is some evidence.
So - no - I do not believe in fairies, nor do I believe in your Invisible Super Being. It is nonsense and I understand where the concept came from, so I do not need to believe it is real. Any more than I need to believe fairies are real, or the Giant in Jack and the Bean stalk is real.
I can see this makes you very angry. So angry, you need to bang your head on a brick wall. At least you are only hurting yourself. Used to be, people like you would burn me at the stake for not believing nonsense.
I do not believe anything. Sorry you need to fight and argue and shout that I do.
This is why your religion causes so many conflicts.
Why? I do not believe the moon is made of cheese. Because you refuse to admit that my position is rational whereas yours is not - you are now going to argue that I have faith that the moon is not made of cheese, therefore I hold beliefs, therefore my position is no more rational than yours.
This is why your religion causes so many conflicts.
So, THAT's your definition??
Proves you don't READ!!!
Mark, copy and paste, Knowles!!!
I loved the broken record image!!!
That's u baby!!
No conflict, just hilarious entertainment.
I just read your post. Being an atheist precludes the belief in fairies? I don't know Mark. That one might be a deal breaker for me. I think the evidence falls strongly in the believer camp on that one. I know the population of the world, and the number of atheists has increased considerably over the years, but you can't lose faith. They're out there. Flying around with their little buckets collecting nectar. I just know it.
Ah - those are not fairies, they are Sprites - different thing altogether. I believe in them as well. If you don't they come and take your teeth out while you are asleep.
No Mark. A sprite is a different thing altogether. And I'm pretty sure they all drowned in the deluge I caused in the cave under the lake. Long story. Sorry to burst your bubble on that fantasy.
Oh - I still believe in them. You could show me the dead bodies or present any number of proofs that they are dead - that is not going to change what I believe. You don't get me that easy.
Sprites are real. Just because you are evil and twisted and selfish, there is no need to attack my beliefs.
It is not like I killed anyone for not believing.
Ok. As long as you passively resist the truth. Fine with me. But you make one move (I don't care how tiny) to write a book on this ridiculous notion or spread the word and I'll hound you to the ends of this site. So help me.
The book is in the works. Just need to edit an old one I found and change a few words around, then gather an army of Sprite Warriors to go door to door spreading the Good News. Probably means I will be persecuted and attacked for my innocent beliefs - but I don't care. What is important is getting the word out - no matter how much conflict comes from selfish, evil people resisting the Truth.
Don't blame me if all your teeth get taken out while you are asleep.
Oh yeh? That's your bad Mark. Never should have said anything before you were ready to start your quest for thought control. Good luck finding enough little people to pose as sprites.
I'll write a book too. Something about being an asprite. So everyone who knows the little people's wings are just clip ons won't feel uncomfortable pointing it out.
it's much more reasonable to conclude that matter has always existed that for an invisible being no-one can prove exists (let alone has always existed).
The big bang theory was originally formulated by creationists who believed everything had a beginning.
So far as the "why" goes, I don't believe there is one, nor do I think there needs to be. Lots of things happen without any particular reason.
And the "how"? I'm not scientific enough to explain it well, but men and women much smarter than me have explained how the Big Bang happened and worked in great detail.
I would have to disagree on the statement that the big bang has been explained satisfactorily. It's the best answer we have with the evidence at hand. Maybe. And I do agree with those that say it sounds suspiciously like the hand of god. it has always seemed a rather pat explanation to me.
maybe there was no big bang. Maybe matter was always in existence. Billions of years is far more than we can possibly comprehend anyway
As I told Mark and Beelzedad I'd prefer not invoke magic to explain life. It's a cop out answer. What you're saying, in essence, is we don't know and never can. We can't figure this out; so why try. Not my style. There are no limits to the knowledge we can attain if we simply keep knocking at it. Science isn't done explaining the mysteries of the universe yet.
I'm not suggesting magic, I'm saying this mystery hasn't been figured out yet, and does it really matter? Scientists have already figured out how life came about, which contradicts the bible.
Does it really matter? Are you serious? Why would it not matter? Are we cavemen? Oh my gosh. Never mind. Knowledge appears to mean little to you, as long as the Bible has been refuted. Ok. Gotcha.
Lawrence Krauss comes to mind. He has won awards for his lectures explaining what is known about this universe.
Sipping my first cut of coffee ... still half asleep
So here is a sleepy half thought.
Has anyone seen a fire cracker go off and the sound go only in one direction?
I think (Halfway) that when the big band went off, time was then creted. As does the sound of the fircracker travel in EVERY direction time also does.
Quantum physics will never find all the answers cause new questions continue to be creted in an ever changing universe.
IS is always standing between was and will be, but our vantage point will never be exactly the same again.
Yep I need more coffee, or something that I haven't been getting enough of. ha
Gotta go out in the world and do an impression of Manuel Labor
Hey jerami. Yeh, I think it's the general consensus that time, as we know it, began at that point. I've never had amy problem accepting that God could have been the catalyst. I'm just wondering about well before that point..I just can't wrap my head around God, always perfect, except within our understanding of time. Nothing appears from nowhere. The thought that perfection just'was' is more than I can process. If there is a God, what was God at his inception? It only seems logical to think he would have had to evolve to perfection. He could not have magically appeared. If he wasn't always perfect, he can't be classified fully as God. That I can figure out.
Perhaps, you may not want to use the word 'logical' when referring to your religious beliefs, 'magical' would be more appropriate. Notice how that well that fits, now?
You're actually making me fretted here. That's exactly what I'm saying. It's illogical. But hey, keep hating everyone enough not to be helpful. You're good at it.
Sorry, but I also disagree with this statement.
God's existence may be considered illogical by the rationalist, because such a one is limited to that which can be seen, felt, heard etc.
But any (non)genius can also deduce, by LOGIC, that IF there were a God, and is defined as all powerful, wise knowing etc. He COULD indeed create anything He wanted to, any way He chose to.
It would not be "magic".
That is just a derogatory term to ilicit emotional responses, nothing more.
Dj, I'm not arguing that such a being with the knowledge to create a universe could exist. I have no knowledge that it couldn't. I simply wonder about the fact of what might have been the beginning of such a being. It would have to have evolved to a state we reference as perfection. I know it sounds crazy but that, in itself, has me stumped.
as created beings we can think of nothing else. In this plane of physical reality we cannot think otherwise.
Ours is not the only existence and neither does it rule. Our plane of existence is not supreme, it may well be at the bottom.
We might even fit into an aquarium
or be on some tabletop
If we are created beings then obviously some other form of life exists in a plane of existence that is probably completely different. It is natural for us to ask where did god come from? and yet we suppose that our earth and all of space came from a big bang or as atheists think, nothingness.
What we consider holy, as being the state of entity that created us, is merely a bunch of correctness: morally and ethically; strung along in a row. Since the universe is created and wonderfully so, we have to assume that this holiness is a way to make our lives successful and our societies function properly, with minimal mess and fuss and for the benefit of all. Whats the point of making a world with people on it if you don't have a plan for its success? Whats the point of my having 10 turtles in a terrarium if i cannot guarantee their livelihood? If i want them to like me there has to be some relationship unless i just let them go and do their own thing, then i have merely given away part of my tabletop or aquarium as a useless space that i have no use for and i can work around it for all the years that it exists.
When will you be drowning them in a flood or sending plagues to kill them? Will you smite them and roast them if they don't love and worship you?
Why are you stumped? Clearly such a being - if it existed - would be the product of evolution. Therefore it would not be a god. Therefore a god cannot logically exist. Nothing crazy about it. It is very simple actually.
Unless you invoke "majik" which is what the theists do.
I know this. I'm looking for anyone that can refute it. I can't imagine finding a different conclusion, but who knows ? Maybe there's an angle you and I aren't aware of.
Just kidding Mark. But there are obviously aspects about your philosophy that make some people extremely unhappy. I can't imagine why something considered a truth would be so unpleasant.
Do a high percentage of atheists feel so horribly persecuted because others believe?
Aww - back to condescending? I don't know how you feel - as you are now a self professed atheist who is scared of telling their husband you no longer believe - you tell me. Will you be scared to admit you are an atheist when you apply for a job? Does it bother you that you are now barred from holding public office in your country? Will it bother you when you have to say -"No thanks" when some one asks you to bow your head in prayer to the Invisible Super Being at table? Will it bother you that the money in your pocket tells that you trust in the Invisible Super Being? Will it upset you when other peopel want the law changed to match what the Super Being wants? Will you consider this to be persecution? Pretty sure this fits the bill - but as you are simply reverting to trolling - I leave you to work it out.
I don't understand why it has to be so confrontational Mark. That's all. Why would I come to care what is printed on money? Why would the subject of religion come up in a job interview? I don't plan on running for office but wouldn't see an atheist as unqualified simply for lack of belief. No one is barred from office by law. I can sit quietly while others pray. Who cares? I'd probably clear my throat of they rambled on, but why in the world is this a bone of contention? We have so many beliefs in this country that I bend over every day to appease someone. How is atheism different?
I can honestly say (and I might be surprised) that no one in my family is going to give a hoot. With the exception of my father's wife, who's a backwards holier than thou mentality to start with. I'm a heathen already, so this is nothing new. I don't care what my husband's family thinks. They are like my father's wife, so I already blow them off too.
The only way this will affect my peace is if I go out of my way to let it. Right now, I am trying to figure out what it is about the philosophy that tends to make people do this.
I don't think you understand. I think I am little different than many people here. Religion is more a heritage than a way of life. It's like your queen. You don't need one. You don't listen to anything she says. The office is part of your history so you let her play with the corgis in Buckingham Palace and forget about her. That was religion to me. It's over. Who cares? It wasn't part of my life to begin with.
And so you know Mark, I already fight the fools that want religion to rule our law. I argue that point quite vehemently at every opportunity, as I have done all of my life.
I think you have it all figured pretty well!
God IS too big for our finite minds and knowledge to comprehend.
I don't see what His Eternal existence has to do with His beginning. This is a contradiction of terms.
We may not understand the dynamics of eternity, but the concept we (should) have is that it is without beginning, and end.
Anything referred to as being time related must have a beginning, and an ultimate end. You can't somehow blend the two.
it's not that god is big. It's that humans have explained away things they didn't understand as 'goddunit'
As opposed to the much more thoughtful response of, oh gollyy gee, the universe just is. Why would we think on that anymore? I'm just amazed that no one sees the hilarious foolishness of this belief.
Yet, invoking invisible super beings that wave their magic hands is not "hilarious foolishness"?
Indoctrination is strong in this one.
I have never invoked magic. I don't believe that the universe could have started in any way other than a way we will be able to determine. In time.
Bailey bear has explained the reasoning behind your belief that the universe has always been. What a cheesy way to look at things. It isn't magical, but it sure is lame. Just give up? That's your answer?
Yes, you always invoke magic and are not interested in any other explanations.
There is that reading comprehension issue coming to light again. That is not my "belief" - with science, we don't deal in terms of beliefs, but instead understanding. Huge difference.
I read write well. As do you. The difference between you and me is that I don't search for ways to ridicule. You do. Big difference in philosophy.
And I know why you want to shove this ridiculous theory around. I get it. Stop being so scared.
You don't search for anything but instead, invoke magic into your explanations and beliefs and are quite satisfied with it.
So what are you? Buddhist? I'm pretty sure I didn't wrong you in a prior life. Didn't you say happy trails two days ago? Why are you now trying to force me to circle the wagons?
We're on the same page on the subject in more ways than you accept. I think you are simply in the habit of posting nonsense and can't stop. I would say fine by me; but its not.
Still categorizing everyone in terms of a belief system?
Invoking more magic?
Look. I know this is fun and games for you. I hope it is anyway.
Soz ur husband dun beat u intef that innit//
Spesh lik eu sed u is afi est innit now.#
like u is welKum
I haven't the foggiest what you're rambling on about, but since it made me laugh I suppose I'm glad you did.
Bailey bear said, (and I quote) 'does it really matter'
For the love of knowledge Beelzedad, of course it does. What's the point of existence if we can't learn? Should we sit on our thumbs and question nothing?
You can't believe that.
No, you've got me all wrong. I question everything. But some things don't yet have answers, so don't stress out about it
This isn't something I stress over, but it is as.fascinating to me as anything I could imagine. I have found some atheists appear to be a little uncomfortable with this. I find that sad. It's one of the many questions the dreams of this generation are made of. It has less to do with god than it has to do with reaching out further and further with questions. You can't put limits on curiosity.
my mother was upset at my decision to go to uni to study science - guess she figured I would lose my faith. I've always been fascinated with science and the simplistic explanations from religion never satisfied me.
Yes..I never thought about it as a roadblock. I just assumed the answers had been given to simple minded people. I didn't think it meant they were the scientific answers, just things like you tell kids too young to understand a detailed explanation. I've actually got relatives on my husband's side that always say science thinks it's too smart for god. I have no idea why they can't see how hilarious that sounds. I used to bristle, but finally gave up. They're old, so it's excusable.
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep...etc
Formless and void,which I guess equates to nothing to man.
To God it was formless and void
Bit of a difference ,albeit a small one on the surface.
Hey Eaglekiwi. That's not my problem though. What's your take on the 'what' question. Not what he might have been at the beginning of our universe. What might god have been at the beginning of his existence? Not to sound like Mark, but he couldn't have just magically appeared. I never thought about it before. The answer isn't sounding good for belief.
But for god to exist requires self to invoke it.
No self doesnt invoke it.
But is up to self to accept it
Haha! Ok Eagle, I'll revise;
"If self finds themselves at a loss to explain something, invoke Him. If self can't be bothered to look at the fundamental reasons as to the cause of something in a measured and empirical way"
Believing in books and understanding books are two different things of which the latter I'm quite sure escapes you.
understanding hub pages forum posts is a task for some.
Understanding the bible comes from the Spirit of the one who wrote the book. GOD. This is why carnal, 2 dimensional, limited by reality, upright monkies can't make heads or tails of it.
This is why your religion causes so many wars. If you don't have anything to say - why bother with this drivel?
If there ever was a god, is now a god, it makes sense to me that god and the universe are one and the same. We have just miscategorized what god is, turned god into something we can understand--akin to a voodoo doll--so that we could wrap our wee brains around the concept. And in this scenario, which I freely admit could be fatally flawed, everything that is the universe, every particle in it, is god. Therefore, we are god and god is us. And so is everything around us.
It's a concept I've been thinking about, based on teachings from mystics, a little science, and a few of my own experiences.
It reduces god to everything the universe is. Not bigger than the universe, but actually THE universe. And since we are a part of the universe, we are included in that scenario.
Feel free to deconstruct, critique, point out flaws. I'm as curious as anyone about the subject. It's a speculation that's in progress with me. I don't think we have a lot of definitive answers, but there are those among us that seem pretty bright about the mechanics of the universe and associated theories.
It's a fair enough theory, but it seems a little... reductive. What I mean to say is, though it could certainly be true that the universe and god are one and the same, it doesn't answer many or perhaps even any of the questions ("Why are we here? Is there life after death? Is there some code by which we should live our lives?") religion sets out to answer.
Hence, the need to fabricate a religion to give us that information. If we are god and god is us, then the only reason behind why we are here is because we are. I AM. The only reason for life is whatever we make of it, not what someone else makes of it for us. If we are god and god is us, then we define those things for ourselves. No one else. And from my experience, the closer death comes, the more this reasoning stands. People, in many cases, decide for themselves who they are and what their life is. Fear is questioning the belief systems we were given and actually considering that they may not have been true at any time. Overcoming fear is accepting it, and finding one's own reasons.
But this is my experience, not necessarily everyone's.
@dingdondingdon quite right and that is why religion works ...it adds meaning to live of species called homo sapiens...it is this quest of living forever , quest of eternal life which makes human get inclined towards religion...never the less , religion does give answer but it doesnot necessarily mean that it gives right answers...
@just_curious from where did it all begin?...well this question has no answer...it becomes endless cycle ...religion tries to answer this by floating a concept called 'god' ...god which was always there , which is above time and nature , which is above entire system which operates universe ,created everything...it is logically flawed answer but since science has still not figured out many things about creation of universe , the answer works...
I know this. What struck me as odd though is the god thing. It couldn't have appeared from nothing. I had no problem with the concept until I got to thinking about that, past the point of our origin. It had never occurred to me. What of god's origin? Nothing appears, perfectly formed, out of no where. It can't be a God, as I define the term. If an intelligence exists, it had to have evolved from something, or been created by something. I'm stumped.
Instead of calling this Hub “Roadblock to Theism” why not call it Roadblock to Logic ?
Whenever subjects like this arise or such questions are asked there is an immediate division of assumptions. Mainly the two main groups are;
Those Hell bent on arguing the point that only God could have done it. Therefore to argue or debate with this group is a total waste of time and brainpower since nothing short of the second coming complete with an announcement that it wasn’t his old man what ‘dun it’ will ever get through to them. As a HubPage group they made my head hurt so badly I gave up on trying to convince them of anything, including which direction Up was, or the merest possibility that someone might just have been telling them Porkies for umpteen thousand years.
The second group is almost as hard to debate with they’re convinced it wasn’t a God what did it, (Maybe). But there again nothing comes from nothing and therefore they look at God and the Universe with the same logic. Again, there is really no point debating with this group since their logic circuits are frozen in a loop which returns them to ‘Nothing comes from nothing.’
I once tried very hard to submit the argument that what we are trying to debate and understand is so way beyond our comprehension even if there was a single person actually capable of explaining it to us.
Those smart enough to think they have a plausible answer usually start explaining and lose the vast majority of us about 30 seconds after they say “Good Evening... I have a theory...” While other experts attempt to dumb it down to a level where even the average moron might understand... assuming they were listening in the first place that is.
These are the major points that most everybody around here miss or misunderstand they are simple explanations for highly complex issues broken down into layman terms. Therefore if you are smarter than the average, more logical analytical or sceptical than most, chances are the explanation on offer will not satisfy you or appear over simplistic and leave a lot of questions.
We could start with the Bible theory of Creation, most reasonably sane people have already dismissed this as a myth, or as I explained above it is a simple explanation for a highly complex question. So allowing for the fact that both the questioner and the person who cobbled the answer together were wandering the Earth better than 4,000 years ago they arrived at the fact that it probably needed some sort of super being who just to prove he was super knocked the whole thing up in six days.
I know ...I know... There are still a few out there who cling to this version of creation as if their life depended upon it, don’t worry about it, other than been marginally delusional I have it on good authority that they are more or less considered harmless. I also happen to think the main reason they cling to this notion is that if they once accept our version of reality who knows what other parts of their belief will also fall apart. I know that scares them, so it is best for them not to question their faith too closely.
Move on, how about the Big Bang theory, accepted by most as a reasonable conclusion that the Universe, or as much of it as we can see at the moment, is hurtling away in all directions seemingly from a central point. Given that this is how a bomb burst fire work behaves moments after it explodes in the air this seem as reasonable explanation.
So, looking at the size of the universe, mind blowingly big, may up of all sorts of stellar bits and bobs where did all that stuff come from..... We have no idea !
Suffice to say the universe didn’t explode into reality in the shape it is... that took time.... a lot of time... Billions of years of time...and that is another mind blowingly big number.
Let’s pause for a moment and consider Black Holes for a while.... Yeah I know we can’t see them so how do we know they’re there ? We know they are there because we can see the effect they have on what we can see revolving around them.
Something else the universe has that we can’t see but we know it’s there is Gravity, and gravity is the power source of the entire universe. Once you can grasp and accept that simple fact most everything else shuffles into place.
OK... Back to the Big Bang... What went BANG ? Could it possibly have been the Mother of all Black Holes ?
We know that when some stars reach the end of their life they implode and become black holes, miniscule in terms of their origin size but with a gravitational pull so great that it pulls everything in...including light itself... nothing escapes !
Gravity keeps us anchored to the ground, rotates our planet and orbits us and the other planets of our solar system around our sun. Our piddling little solar system is in the far reaches of one arm of a vast spiral galaxy. How Vast....Let’s just say it’s another one of those mind blowingly big numbers and leave it at that. Just grasp that the Galaxy itself is also being rotated by gravity, possibly by an enormous black hole at its centre. Think of it as water going down a plug hole and you’ll get the gist of it.
Now imagine what will happen when Galaxy meets Galaxy and Black Hole meets Black Hole surely one can imagine that like having a Pike in a lake, sooner or later you will have no fish and just one big fat Pike.
How big is that one Singularity ? Who knows.... When compared to the current mass of the universe it will be as close to nothing as it is possible for a universe to be.... Then one day BANG !!!! And the whole thing starts again....
Who knows such an event may have happened time and time again and will in all mathematical probability happen many more times into a future without end.
Does this explain everything.... No ! Does it leave any questions unanswered... You Bet ?
But if we had all the answers to all the questions what would we worry about or talk about tomorrow ?
In answering just_curious' question, your point is....
Thanks. I was scratching my head on that too.
I would have thought the point was obvious, by simply asking the questions you ask you are just going around in an endless loop.
By attempting to explain the cration of the Universe to you I thought you might have been able to reach a conclusion of your own....
No it wasn't God ! Just a whole bunch of mind bogglingly large satistics, an enormous explosion, gravity and time...
Trying to understand it or explain it will drive most of us mad...
That's why they invented God... Let him worry about it so you don't have to !!! Simple really.
There will be a $1 fine everytime this quote appears and all proceeds to be sent to charity forthwith.
This is why your religion causes so many wars
I think that there may yet be a rational explanation, but only when the term 'god' is understood differently. People like myself use the word god with a very differnt meaning than fundamentals do. To me, god is the energy behind everything and within everything, not some man in the clouds that sends everyone he's mad at to hell. Under this definition, (energy) god didn't really begin at all because it exists beyond the restraints of time and space...at least as far as I currently believe This god didn't really 'make' the universe at all so much as it expresses itself through the universe and so there isn't really a beginning or an end but rather a continuous evolution of creativity. Does that make sense to anyone else?
JC your still here? I work online, that's my excuse, what's yours?
The small bladder of my puppy. And once he's up the coffee's on.
Poor little puppy! Is he empty now? I could use a coffee myself! Been a long day!
One never knows with a puppy, apparently. I'd offer you a cup, but I fear it would be cold by the time you got here to drink it.
As you can see, I took a minute and belted out a mock cappuccino using the microwave.
by just_curious5 years ago
Looking for help here people. Everyone went off topic on the last thread. The question of the OP is DO YOU THINK GOD EVOLVED FROM SOMETHING. Sheesh.We can't conclude how the universe was created. I would...
by The Truth4 years ago
After an internal debate between science and philosophy I am leaning towards an answer of yes. This is due to the fact that the scientific explanation for the existence of life is greatly flawed, which leaves only one...
by Slarty O'Brian5 years ago
I'm interested in your thoughts. Not how. I'm not interested in the idea that a god did it or not. I am interested in your thoughts on why there is something instead of nothing.
by Uplifterx3 years ago
What was before Big Bang? Scientists have the following idea-"According to their calculations, time and space had a finite beginning that corresponded to the origin of matter and energy."3 The singularity...
by Retrohawaii5 years ago
I believe in a God not necessarily in what the bible discusses
by Julie McFarland3 years ago
I wrote a hub on how faith is not required in order to be an atheist. Someone requested that I turn it into a forum thread as well. My position is that atheism, by definition, is the lack of a belief in a...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.