I have yet to meet an individual that can prove the existence of this unseen entity that is known universally as god. My core beliefs stem from the fact that this world came to be by mere chance and probability. That is why I would to like call out to any one that can prove to me (once and for all) the existence of this so called god ( or maybe gods ……ha-ha).
P.S please try to use references to prove your points that are based on solid scientific facts
Now to be snarkily honest, the first thing that popped into my head as I read this was "If you value going straight to the God himself, why do you use a holy book?". Wouldn't it make more sense for God to speak directly to you and tell you what you need to know, rather than relying on text passed through a messenger? Following this trend, shouldn't introspection trump dogma?
what would be the point if G-D spoke directly to me?....... guess I can become the leader of the free world? but that is about the only perk... the only second classification is schizophrenia....
there is "no magical type thinking in religion"....... there is nothing schizoid or schizotypal about religion or G-D....... if things were incredibly apparent there would be no need for people like you or people like me... we'd all be faithful..... seems very anti-climactic to me......... like a "table from heaven so to speak"... . it would spoil the surprise at the end... whatever that may be
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
Does God exist? Is there proof of God? The following offers candid, straight-forward reasons to believe in the existence of God...
1. Does God exist? The complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe, but sustains it today.
Many examples showing God's design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few: The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.3 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life. The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day. And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.4
Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life: It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 98.6 degrees. Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that thousands of chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.5 Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body. Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees. Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter. Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.6 2. Does God exist? The human brain's complexity shows a higher intelligence behind it.
The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands. The human brain processes more than a million messages a second.7 Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. A brain that deals with more than a million pieces of information every second, while evaluating its importance and allowing you to act on the most pertinent information... did it come about just by chance? Was it merely biological causes, perfectly forming the right tissue, blood flow, neurons, structure? The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people. How does one explain the human brain? 3. Does God exist? "Chance" or "natural causes" are insufficient explanations.
The alternative to God existing is that all that exists around us came about by natural cause and random chance. It someone is rolling dice, the odds of rolling a pair of sixes is one thing. But the odds of spots appearing on blank dice is something else. What Pasteur attempted to prove centuries ago, science confirms, that life cannot arise from non-life. Where did human, animal, plant life come from? Also, natural causes are an inadequate explanation for the amount of precise information contained in human DNA. A person who discounts God is left with the conclusion that all of this came about without cause, without design, and is merely good fortune. It is intellectually wanting to observe intricate design and attribute it to luck. 4. Does God exist? To state with certainty that there is no God, a person has to ignore the passion of an enormously vast number of people who are convinced that there is a God.
This is not to say that if enough people believe something it is therefore true. Science, for example, have discovered new truths about the universe which overruled previous conclusions. But as science has progressed, no scientific discovery has countered the numerical likelihood of an intelligent mind being behind it all. In fact, the more science discovers about human life and the universe, the more complex and precisely designed we realize these to be. Rather than pointing away from God, evidence mounts further toward an intelligent source. But objective evidence is not all. There is a much larger issue. Throughout history, billions of people in the world have attested to their firm, core convictions about God's existence--arrived at from their subjective, personal relationship with God. Millions today could give detailed account of their experience with God. They would point to answered prayer and specific, amazing ways God has met their needs, and guided them through important personal decisions. They would offer, not only a description of their beliefs, but detailed reports of God's actions in their lives. Many are sure that a loving God exists and has shown himself to be faithful to them. If you are a skeptic, can you say with certainty: "I am absolutely right and they all are wrong about God"? 5. Does God exist? We know God exists because he pursues us. He is constantly initiating and seeking for us to come to him.
I was an atheist at one time. And like most atheists, the issue of people believing in God bothered me greatly. What is it about atheists that we would spend so much time, attention, and energy refuting something that we don't believe even exists?! What causes us to do that? When I was an atheist, I attributed my intentions as caring for those poor, disillusioned people...to help them realize their hope was completely ill-founded. To be honest, I also had another motive. As I challenged those who believed in God, I was deeply curious to see if they could convince me otherwise. Part of my quest was to become free from the question of God. If I could conclusively prove to believers that they were wrong, then the issue is off the table, and I would be free to go about my life. I didn't realize that the reason the topic of God weighed so heavily on my mind, was because God was pressing the issue. I have come to find out that God wants to be known. He created us with the intention that we would know him. He has surrounded us with evidence of himself and he keeps the question of his existence squarely before us. It was as if I couldn't escape thinking about the possibility of God. In fact, the day I chose to acknowledge God's existence, my prayer began with, "Ok, you win..." It might be that the underlying reason atheists are bothered by people believing in God is because God is actively pursuing them. I am not the only one who has experienced this. Malcolm Muggeridge, socialist and philosophical author, wrote, "I had a notion that somehow, besides questing, I was being pursued." C.S. Lewis said he remembered, "...night after night, feeling whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all of England." Lewis went on to write a book titled, "Surprised by Joy" as a result of knowing God. I too had no expectations other than rightfully admitting God's existence. Yet over the following several months, I became amazed by his love for me.
if things were incredibly apparent there would be no need for people like you or people like me... we'd all be faithful..... seems very anti-climactic to me......... like a "table from heaven so to speak"... . it would spoil the surprise at the end... whatever that may be
lol! I like it. God is indirect (some would say cryptic) and allows for all of the confusion over religion, with millions of views all in conflict because its more fun that way!
Laylat Al-Isra wa Al-Miraj("the night journey and ascension") commemorates the journey of the Prophet Muhammad from Makkah to Jerusalem, his ascension into the seven heavens, and his return in the same night. These events acknowledge that all the Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) have one and the same God as their source.On this night, Muslims believe, the Prophet was instructed to establish the five daily prayers in their current form. On this night, Muslims believe, Muhammad prayed together with Abraham, Moses and Jesus in the area of the Al-Aqsa mosque. The rock from which he is believed to have ascended to heaven to speak with God is the one seen inside the Dome of the Rock. Isra wa Al-Miraj as it is sometimes called is celebrated on the twenty-seventh of Rajab of the Islamic calendar.
lol! I like it. God is indirect (some would say cryptic) and allows for all of the confusion over religion, with millions of views all in conflict because its more fun that way!
like an Indiana Jones adventure ......... lots of paths lead to demise but only one to freedom. ..........Anyhow personally, I don't think G-D is cryptic at all.... .......... he has sent lots of trains to the station.. hop on the last train or be left behind................
peace!
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
Prophets are men specially elected by God to be his messengers. Prophethood is indivisible, and the Qur'an requires recognition of all prophets as such without discrimination. Yet they are not all equal, some of them being particularly outstanding in qualities of steadfastness and patience under trial. Abraham, Noah, Moses, and Jesus were such great prophets. As vindication of the truth of their mission, God often vests them with miracles: Abraham was saved from fire, Noah from the deluge, and Moses from the Pharaoh. Not only was Jesus born from the Virgin Mary, but God also saved him from crucifixion at the hands of the Jews. The conviction that God's messengers are ultimately vindicated and saved is an integral part of the Qur'anic doctrine. All prophets are human and never part of divinity: they are simply recipients of revelation from God. God never speaks directly to a human: he either sends an angel messenger to him or makes him hear a voice or inspires him. Muhammad is accepted as the last prophet in this series and its greatest member, for in him all the messages of earlier prophets were consummated. The angel Gabriel brought the Qur'an down to the Prophet's "heart." Gabriel is represented by the Qur'an as a spirit, but the Prophet could sometimes see and hear him. According to early traditions, the Prophet's revelations occurred in a state of trance when his normal consciousness was in abeyance. This state was accompanied by heavy sweating. The Qur'an itself makes it clear that the revelations brought with them a sense of extraordinary weight: "If we were to send this Qur'an down on a mountain, you would see it split asunder out of fear of God." This phenomenon at the same time was accompanied by an unshakable conviction that the message was from God, and the Qur'an describes itself as the transcript of a heavenly "Mother Book" written on a "Preserved Tablet." The conviction was of such an intensity that the Qur'an categorically denies that it is from any earthly source, for in that case it would be liable to "manifold doubts and oscillations."
Distinction noted. Yet still to a non-believer, there IS nobody down there to trust in to catch you. So it isn't that the non-believer has refused or declined to trust in God, the non-believer sees no God to trust in.
Yeah, I get that. If you don't believe in God, then you don't believe in God. I might like to, but I doubt if I could change your mind in a internet forum post or two. I just wanted to be sure that you didn't confuse what Christians mean by faith with how that word is sometimes used by others.
Of course, there is also this consideration. We are born with 5 sense that are uniquely designed to help us observe phenomena in this world. Unless we were blessed with some other sort of sensing ability, how could we ever hope to even see those outside our world that are prepared to catch us? They might be there, but without the right "spiritual" or "divine" senses we can't observe them. I think that this is much more likely of a problem than not. But I also think that if there is a God (and I do believe in one) who created the world, that he might from time to time break into it to awaken people to an awareness of his presence that they didn't previously have. Some people see these people as prophets. If they are reliable, they can point us toward God. On the other hand, if you think they aren't, you might consider them crazy people for encouraging you to jump with no one to catch you. I also tend to think that God does try to awaken within us spiritual senses that we were each created with, but that lay dormant and atrophied because many of us have been living lives so far removed from God that we don't realize that all the beauty we do see in the world is a gift from him and a sign of his presence. (What then of the ugliness we also see? That's another thread, or at least I'll wait till you phrase the question for your self and your own purposes.)
That is a very nice belief system. I like it. It isn't offensive at all to those who are excluded. We're not being threatened and told that we are lesser beings, as per what we've gotten accustomed too. Yet I really don't think it is mainstream Christianity or mainstream Islam.
I'm glad didn't find it offensive. But honestly, I didn't try to word it so as to make it more palatable. Sometimes religious language or imagery becomes so ladened with concepts drawn not from scripture but the works of 14th century artists that we miss what is really being said for all the baggage that it carries. I was just trying to state the same thing that Christianity has always been about in terms that didn't carry that baggage and might give you a fresh way to look at it.
What faith do you practice? What denomination of Christianity is that? I like it.
I happen to be United Methodist, about as mainstream as you can get. If you watch American TV, we're the ones with the "Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors" commercial.
Many examples showing God's design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few: [/FONT][/COLOR] The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.3 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.
And that is why human life came to be on earth. To world isn't tailored to human life, human life is tailored to the world. That includes water, the size of the earth and everything else listed in the first part of this article. Other conditions may have produced different forms of life, though most of them produced no life at all.
There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people. How does one explain the human brain?
This feeds directly into the question we had posted oh so long ago in this thread If the human maind is so complex that it must require a creator, then surely something complex enough to create the human mind must be even MORE complex and require a creator even more so (by the same logic). This would go on infinitely.
The alternative to God existing is that all that exists around us came about by natural cause and random chance.
Well that would be the alternative to intelligent design, yes. Itelligent design doesn't necesitate a God. Aliens are just as likely.
What Pasteur attempted to prove centuries ago, science confirms, that life cannot arise from non-life.
This is an empty claim and the article cites no reference. Science hasn't proved any such thing and really isn't capable of doing so. Just because something hasn't been observed yet doesn't mean it is not possible.
Where did human, animal, plant life come from?
I don't know really. The creationist and darwnist both think they know, but they don't At best they are guessing.
It is intellectually wanting to observe intricate design and attribute it to luck.
Same issue here. God is even more intricate and complex, so God must doubly need a creator by this logic, god's creator must need a creator even more, and on and on to infinity. That is the natural extrapolation of the logic and it is absurd, so it shows that the logic is absurd as well.
To state with certainty that there is no God, a person has to ignore the passion of an enormously vast number of people who are convinced that there is a God.
Truth is not determined by popular vote. Lots of people believe lots of untrue things.
There is a powerful flaw in a man who claims to 'state with certainty that there is no God' though, and that is the same flaw as in the man who states with certainty that there is one. Neither of them truly have any means of knowing for sure. They both require faith.
Throughout history, billions of people in the world have attested to their firm, core convictions about God's existence--arrived at from their subjective, personal relationship with God.
They would point to answered prayer and specific, amazing ways God has met their needs,
Yet rarely do they speak of the times that their prayers were NOT answered and their needs were NOT met. In this case they instead say that God works in mysterious ways and it was not meant to be. Amazingly God's record for helping or not is the same as if there was no God involved.
guided them through important personal decisions.
When they say this they are either speaking of a holy text or writing, in which case they are relying on the wisdom of generations past deified and put into scripture, or they are speaking about their subconcious (and concious) mind working it out and then attributing it to God.
If God directly speaks to them in a booming voice from the clouds, the vast majority of them would suspect that they have gone insane, same as nonbelievers would.
If you are a skeptic, can you say with certainty: "I am absolutely right and they all are wrong about God"?
No intelligent skeptic would ever say that, no. The skeptic may say that it is so unlikely that it is not worth worrying about, but he or she wouldn't dismiss it as altogether impossible.
That being said, most athiests find it so unlikely that it doesn't bother them in the slightest.
And most of them have heard Pascal's wager too. Pascal's wager goes something like "I gain lose nothing by not believing in God, but I gain everything by believing, so I shall believe".
First of all, it assumes that somebody can choose what to believe based on a rewards system. I'm not sure you can choose what you believe. Could you convince yourself that there were invisible aliens standing next to you? If so, how honest and strong would that belief be?
Secondly, it assumes a false dichotomy. It isn't God vs No God. It is God A vs God B vs God C vs God ...... to infinity.... vs No God. Even if you do fall for Pascal's logic how do you know you are praying to the RIGHT god? And if you think you can believe in all of them to cover your bases, think again. Many of them require that you believe they are the ONLY God. And many of them demand polar opposites in action and beliefs.
Thirdly, who is to say that God would prefer you to worship a FALSE God, other than himself instead of No God at all. Seems to make sense to me that he'd prefer the No God at all. And your chances of picking a False God are incredibly high given all of the Gods imaginable.
I was an atheist at one time.
As was everybody else on earth. People are not born believing in Gods, especially not any specific God you may claim as your own. That has to be taught to them at some point, usually early childhood.
What is it about atheists that we would spend so much time, attention, and energy refuting something that we don't believe even exists?!
That is a commonly misunderstood question that runs through the minds of theists.
I'm sure that there do exist some few so-called atheists who are actually closet theists looking to be brought out (as the author of the article appears to have been) or rebelling and looking to turn away from God.
But real atheists are not like that. The few of us who get interested in religion (and it is a minority, not a majority that do) do it from an atheistic, not a theistic perspective.
We may be interested in the psychology of belief. I for one am fascinated with what drives a person to believe so strongly in a God, even to the point that some will sacrifice their own lives, kill, and do other things they'd never do without their god belief. It is powerful stuff. And fascinating. And to better it understand it could unlock some of the mysteries of how the human mind operates.
Others atheists may simply be concerned for their own well being. Since the idea of Gods first came into the minds of humans atheists have been persecuted. The list of attrocities done in the name of, beause of or justified by religion is practically endless, starting with ancient peoples and ritual human sacrifice.
Still today religion interferes with the lives of non-believers. Sometimes in extreme ways such as terrorist attacks, kool aid mass suicides, child abuse such as stopping a blood tranfusion , the genital mutilation of childrenn (who have no say in the matter), etc, but more often in less extreme ways, such as not allowing atheists to vote or give testimony in court or hold public office, and sometimes in nuisance ways, such as forcing stores to close on Sundays.
The point is that there are MANY reasons for an atheist to care about religion, and none of them have to do with a secret belief in God or a demonic need to disprove God and take away somebody's faith just to be evil.
Wow. I didn't mean this post to be so long. I went on rant mode there. *slaps hand*
Last edited by Pygoscelis; 11-21-2006 at 12:05 AM.
I have respect for what you believe and don't want to challenge your understanding of faith as you feel fit to practice..... However the definition of shirk in Islam is to take anyone, anyone at all even if it were praying "through" and not "to" as an association of partners with G-D.... I went to catholic schools for the greater part of my life... the types of prayers used in mass are the very defintion of shirk from an Islamic perspective... just to use the term "through Jesus our lord" Amen is considered shirk......... lots of Muslims who don't understand Islam do the same when they say "ya Ali" instead of Oh G-D........
my two cents
peace!
peace!
Thank-you for the further explanation. If you attended Catholic school (I didn't) I will have to take your word for it that they are the very definition of shirk. I can also see why you might not like the use of the term "through Jesus our Lord". Have to admit I use that from time to time. Yet, I still submit to you that I don't understand myself as praying to a "partner" or "associate" of G-D. When I pray TO Jesus, I understand that I am praying directly to the one and only true G-D of the universe, not some association of partners with G-D. For me what you see as associations of partners, I see as synonymns.
But I have learned that when praying with my Muslims brothers, I don't use those synonymns, for I would not want them to misunderstand and desire to create no impediment to their worship. Thus I pray TO God (or Allah) and don't use any other terms at all. It is no problem for me, and not a denial of my Christian faith at all, for I perceive them to be one in the same thing, and that there is no other.
It was very easy to comprehend. I answered every paragraph that, IMHO, was worth answering. If there was something else you think needed a reply, please point it out.
Pedantic and, frankly, tedious. In this sort of discussion it simply isn't possible to refer to every point by every poster if you have any sort of life, so you pick those most relevant.
Heya Trumble,
lol sorry for the hassles n stuff caused... problem is picking out what is msot relevent is a subjective thing. I dont mind you grouping paragraphs that deal with the same point and providing a reply that covers them all... incase you understood me literally when i said 'paragraph by paragraph', although it's my style to reply to everything in as much detail as possible.
neawys.. on to the topic:
So if i told you i poured a bag of marbles and it spelt that phrase, you would believe me? no?
No. But as usual, you miss the point. In a situation where I could only exist if that is what had occurred I would have to believe you. It must have occured.
So why are you willing to convicne yourself that this universe could have come out of pure chaos
Same reason. If the universe wasn't the way it was there would be no me trying to convince myself of anything. It doesn't matter in slightest how improbable it getting that way was, or how many failed attempts there had been I could never know about.
-Regarding the first point, If such thing did occur, it would be a miracle. I don't expect you to have read my reply to Pygo regarding that.. but in short, even if you repeat an event infinitely... you could get infinitely many different arrangements, each arrangement however doesn't defy standard principles of physics. That is, the sentence you gave... such pattern could be formed if it was possible from a kinematics point of view. But it isn't.
Perhaps you're misunderstanding where i'm coming from, no one here (i think) is disputing whether this universe exists in the form it is, what is being questioned is, whether this universe came into being from non being without a supernatural cause, is even possible by any form of rationalism. Especially when you consider that quantum cosmology (Q-C) principles literally states that the singularity " is not the effect of prior physical events" [Quinten Smith, p.48 1998]
So it's actually nothing to do with 'cosmological dice being thrown infinity times' because you're assuming some natural process caused it. (It also makes this multiple universe theory pointless, let alone the fact it's purely speculative metaphysics). Nor has it to do with the existance of anything before the universe, bcause quite literally the instanton describes the appearance of the universe from literally nothing.
Regarding the marble example, I'm very sure that such a pattern is impossible since assuming you're carrying the event out from a skyscraper, for marbles to settle in such a position simply doesn't satisfy the necessary conditions for equillibrium.
So it's more than just believing if you witnessed it, the piont is you'll never witness it, it's impossible analytically, let alone physically.
- Considering that this universe came into being from non being, and the fact it's occurrance was unpredictable, and considering the premise 'Whatever begins to exist has a cause' supports the proposition that this creation was a free willed act of Allah (God) becomes highly plausible. Since by definition his actions are unpredictable (since he has full free will) and by definition he is the creator (that is, able to create being from non being), and also, by definition, he is independent of spacetime (hence it doesn't come as a surprise that spacetime originated with the big bang).
Neither you nor I have the faintest idea what the probability density function is regarding my purely hypothetical example, or any other of the examples given to date. For a zero limit you need a discrete number of possible results (such as flipping a coin or throwing a die).. there is no known limit in any of the examples, and nothing to support that suggestion. Sure, I will acknowledge that practically in the case of the marble example some results may be more likely than others, but that is a result purely of the assorted physical factors involved in the real world - none of which are relevant to the point at hand. There will be similar factors relating to both the origin of the universe and the origin of life, but again neither of us (or anyone else) have the first idea what they all may have been. An equal disribution is therefore as good a guess as any, and would certainly apply (more or less) to a virtual infinity of possibilities even if there was a decline in probability along the curve.
I don't think its worth getting into the math behind this, it's not relevent to the topic, but probability density functions for dynamics problems are actually very commonly used... NASA for example uses these in almost every mission when it comes to figuring the most probable position their rover will land in for example. that's one of many examples.
Furthermore, on a cosmological scale, there's entire models out there that are literally to do with probability amplitudes of even time existing before the universe (e.g. the Hawking-Hartle model).
As for the origin of the universe, as far as what we know from Q-C, it began from nothing, literally nothing.
Entropy "tells us" that in the case of a limited range of dynamic physical systems that is what occurs. It has no universal application. For example, in a cosmological context gravity will always act to "bring order from chaos" by drawing elements of matter together into larger physical bodies. Once that occured, the rest is a natural progression or at least a progression as probable as any other. Yet again, as we are here discussing it, it happened - there is no 'coincidence'.
Not at all, in fact its the contrary, gravity sucking in matter infact doesn't change entropy (in line with 2nd law of thermo) simply because you're forgetting that when the particles clump together the temperatrue is rising and the velocity increases, i honestly don't wanna turn this into a thermo lecture.. but in short, an increase in entropy means an increase in disorder overall, so really in the case that the amoutn of energy becomes ordered is less than the 'disordered' energy, it doesnt matter how much order you have in a closed system because the overall entropy would still be greater.
Also, entropy does have very important applications on the cosmic scale... for exampe the 'heat death state of the universe', to not go off topic, feel free 2 read this, http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/as...s/990210a.html
in short, entropy itself is what predicts the heat death state of the universe.
But anyway i hope that clears it up.
Back to topic:
Actually it isn't a simple IQ (by which I assume you mean intellectual) exercise by any stretch of the imagination; its a question that, ultimately, I believe any human mind (and most certainly yours) can ever really get a handle on. My argument is, however, graspable (I do not expect you to agree with it) if you tax your intellect just a little further than you have done so far.
It might be a tad hard to figure when you don't have any source of guidance i guess, but really it's very simple considering that we have Allah himself telling us directly in the quran that it was him who created this universe (in the full sense of the meaning of the word 'create' (i.e. creating being from non being). And it sure does go in line with what we know from Q-C principles.
Athiests who accuse us of purely speculative behaviour themselves are guilty of what htey accuse us, this whole speculation of parallel and multiple universe is totally baseless.
It doesn't matter if they do or not (it's not), as that isn't the question.
Firstly, as I keep having to repeat, it happened. It is nonsense to talk about probabilities (we have no way of quantifying anyway) as we would not be talking about anything had it not happened.
Secondly, we have absolutely no idea how many times the cosmic dice were thrown, and are still being thrown. Over a period of time anything and (if sufficiently long) everything, will happen.
Thirdly, the thread was originally about an atheist's perspective. They simply believe that the existence of a God is far more improbable than the alternative. It's understandable as even conjouring up a God still leaves exactly the same question open that you started with; the one that Pygoscelis quite rightly keeps saying is never answered. Where did God come from, and what created Him. The only things resembling an answer are no more than waffle, essentially stating that He is somehow immune, unlike everything else, from needing to be created. No 'explanation' of why is ever given other than just stating that because his properties are different he didn't need to be created. Very handy, but with no logical foundation whatsoever. The whole concept is based purely on faith, and any 'logic' arising from that assumption similarly has independent existence apart from that faith.
Ok I hope i've cleared up the first 3 or so lines.... there is no such thing as cosmic dice being thrown because as i mentioned above... singularity isn't even a result of any former physical event. Really it's a figment of the imagination (its more logical to believe in super intelligetn design than it is to believe in being coming from non-being due to chance and no intelligence).
also an analytical rebuttle to this 'given infinite time anything will happen', i gave below the analogy that the probability of two parallel lines intersecting is zero given infinite time, and that's by mathematicians consensus. for example, the limit as x approaches infinity of y = 1 is one , that is, given infinite time the lines y=1 and y= 0.9 will not intersect as you traverse the x axis from zero to infinity. To suggest otherwise is rebelling against the obvious.
As for your question from the above:
Where did God come from, and what created Him. The only things resembling an answer are no more than waffle, essentially stating that He is somehow immune, unlike everything else, from needing to be created
God is something that's beyond our imagination, for something limited to attempt to comprehend something unlimited is impossible. It's not to do with immunity, it's simple definition, The Creator is by definition something that can create being from non being (our universe for example), to suggest that 'The Creator' was created is itself a contradictory statement. On top of that, God is time independent, so to ask how he began isn't a valid question to start with. Especially since we know that spacetime originated with the big bang.
That's really as simple as it is. The problem i think, is that you keep thinking that god is akin to us, or an infinite version of a human being or something of that sort....
So i hope that sums it up, as for the rest..
Where do hadiths come into this?!
I thought you to be referring to authenticity of hadiths and quran when you where suggesting that it could have come from some other than divine sources.
Fascinating, but totally irrelevant. As I said (again) neither of us have the faintest idea what the relevant probabilities are/were in any of the cases discussed.
Then perhaps i'm guilty of equating pygo's beliefs to yours, pygo seemed to indicate that given infinite time anything could happen.. so i used that example to prove analytically that's not the case (e.g. the probability of two parallel lines intersecting is zero given infinite time, and that can be proven mathematically by taking the limit as x approaches infinity for the line y=1).
Further more the probability for any event given infinite time can be treated as a series, that is.. the probability of two parallel lines traversing the x axis at this instant is zero, for them to intersect in the next instant is zero times zero, and so forth... teh sum of such infinite series would be zero and not one. Same goes for forming a car from a metal junkyard or any other bazar situation.
(edit: i just realised you may believe what he does after i re-read and added this analogy a bit further above... correct me if i'm wrong though).
take care all the best.
Last edited by lolwatever; 11-21-2006 at 09:21 AM.
Seeing you’re seriously not interested in a proper debate, I think I’ll stick to discussing the issue with Trumble since he seems to have a better understanding of science and reality than yourself.
lol really for someone like you to say something like:
It really shows you have no idea about science, it’s elementary knowledge that matter and energy are conserved quantities, lol you seem to have the ice-age beliefs that you can make matter out of nothing. Baking cakes isn’t creating anything, it’s merely converting matter from one form to another… I’ll leave that to you to get a personal tutor to help you understand that concept….
Besidses the fact you ignored every single physical explanation and derivation I gave you for my ideas. I think you really do give a bad image to atheists, looks like you pick and choose which principles of physics you want to believe in, you don’t’ really believe in kinematics do you?
And regarding your coin example… perhaps if you read my reasoning you’d understand that it would be possible for a coin to land on an angle if the equilibrium requirements for that particular position could be met. I challenged you to prove to me that marbles could form that particular arrangement given infinite time, and you totally ignored that.
You really are living in the realms of metaphysics to think that given infinite time flipping a coin would yield some weird figure. Each single event can be treated independently, that is, if you tossed a coin, the result could have been deemed possible even before the coin was tossed, simply because you could treat the tossing of a coin as a dynamics problem and simulate the possible outcomes yourself.
Tossing the coin infinitely does not mean that the rules of dynamics break down given infinite time. If you thin it does, you need to provide us some analytical proof.
Anyway.. till you decide to be a bit more logical and make thorough and proper analytical replies… I don’t think you’re worth the hassle, simply because you really aren’t interested in debating.
If you learn’t a little about the concept of cosmological singularity you’d realize that the big bang isn’t even a result of any former physical event, (this whole multi universe theory is truly a figment of the imagination), it’s 100% unpredictable. If you read into it.. you’d also realize that spacetime originiated with the big bang… so the whole time you where laughing at the idea of time independent beings, really shows your lack of understanding of astrophysics… and your accusation of me having flawed understanding of probability is pretty lame when you consider the Hartle-Hawking wave function which is precisely related to probability of time existing prior to the beginning of the universe!
I'll get back to trumble hopefully soon been heldup a bit! sorry for delay! In meanwhile Pygo can try get his head around mass/energy conservation principles
then i got this:
As to lolwhatever, well here in this post for the first time we have a post consisting exclusively of verbal diareah. There's been a lot of it in his posts before, but in this one there is nothing at all to respond to. No actual points made. So um, instead of sinking to his level and calling him names and such I'll just move along.
so i helped explain what the first post achieved:
format_quote Originally Posted by lolwatever
what a way to flee from a debate.
i'll summarise what my post achieved:
a. i proved that given infinite time, you don't get events happenign taht defy the laws of physics.
(on a side note... even athiests like Q.Smith declare that the beginning of the universe was uncaused and unpredictable, using quantum cosmology principles, whether it was 'uncaused' as he defines the term is debatable, but it sure is far off from the arguments pygo been dragging along with him).
b. i showed his analogy of cake baking to be low and hollow. (read above for more info)
c. pointed out that he ignroed every single analytical example i gave to support my ideas.
and in return, none of the analysis was even thought of, and i got this:
format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
Dude, stop trying to claim victory and stop spitting out nasty goo. It only makes you look childish.
You haven't proved anything to the satisfaction of anybody who isn't a muslim here, not before I entered the discussion, not after I did. NOt to the numersous non-muslims and even muslims who said these things can't be proved, not to anybody but your own self important mind.
You don't know what is possible regarding the formation of the universe and physica laws that may have governed it (as I pointed out science has already disproved numerous 'laws' formerly thought unasailable), yet you claim you do. And then you claim that this somehow magically proves a God.
It doesn't. Get over yourself.
Shows who's avoiding everything by all means innit
i guess the only semi-point i see he made (which was answered in my posts had he read them).
You don't know what is possible regarding the formation of the universe and physica laws that may have governed it (as I pointed out science has already disproved numerous 'laws' formerly thought unasailable), yet you claim you do. And then you claim that this somehow magically proves a God.
The point of this thread was to 'prove' gods existance using scientific facts, if you don't believe in science, what are you doing here? And by your logic, it shows that you're falling over your own principles when you laughed at the idea of muslims judging science with the Quran and not visa versa.
Furthermore, to attempt to discuss this issue with the basis that 'anything and everything could have been possible', including the usage of this mutilpe universe argument, is speculative metaphysics.
"The atheist should realise that hypothesising multiple universe is metaphysics and not science. It is not a scientific theory because it cannot be experimentally verified or falsified and neither can it be considered superior just because it is naturalistic. Once we move into metaphysics the naturalistic assumption of science must be done away with as it is no longer either justifiable or useful. Indeed it is a metaphysical statement itself--as it lies behind science, it cannot be examined scientifically." James Hannam, 2001.
just to remind ourselves what the original question was:
I have yet to meet an individual that can prove the existence of this unseen entity that is known universally as god. My core beliefs stem from the fact that this world came to be by mere chance and probability. That is why I would to like call out to any one that can prove to me (once and for all) the existence of this so called god ( or maybe gods ……ha-ha).
P.S please try to use references to prove your points that are based on solid scientific facts
multiple universes and aliens are not solid scientific facts. And the 'fact that thsi world came into being by chance and probability' is irrational when we consider the Q-C concept which literally states that the universe came into being from literall nothing. I don't know who wants to try proving that it is probable for things to come into being from non being without supernatural ability or causes...
You yourself couldn't comprehend anything independent of time (and as i explained science does agree that time independecne is something very possible), yet you want to believe that it's possible to defy all conservation laws and principles and create things out of nothing?
Having reminded ourselves of the point of this thread and the requiements, If you prefer to stick to imagination, i'm afraid this is the wrong therad to be in. :thankyou:
Last edited by lolwatever; 11-21-2006 at 09:11 AM.
We speak of the one true God. We're not looking at a picture or a statue and saying that is our God.
Zaria, what you write is identical with me and my practice as well.
i agree with Zaria n grace seeker on that point as well.
on a further note, apart from the analytical points posted above... it also comes down to:
"Which takes greater faith: to believe it created itself from nothing by nothing or that a Creator was involved?"
Athiests seem to switch off their minds and think 'don't know don't care'.
I really agree with the point of this quote (must say the first half of the sentence is somewhat blasphemous, in islam it's not respectful to use that sorta phrase),
“Suffice it to say that, if we could play God, and select values for these quantities at whim by twiddling a set of knobs,we would find that
almost all knob settings would render the universe uninhabitable. In some cases it seems as if the different knobs have to be fine-tuned to enormous precision if the universe is to be such that life will flourish”
(Paul Davies (Prof of Mathematical Physics at Uni of Adelaide), The Mind of God: The Scientific Basis for a Rational World, 1992, pp. 199-200).
It takes less than requiring a masters in Quantum cosmology to contemplate these things.
take care all the best
Last edited by lolwatever; 11-21-2006 at 03:31 AM.
This discussion reminds me of a verse from the Qur'an...
And those who belied our signs are deaf and dumb in
utter darkness. Allah sends those astray whom He wills
and places on the straight path whom He wills.
6:39
"It is not that religion dominates the life of a believer, but that religion, in this comprehensive sence is his life.Religion is experiencing,its not mere profession."
If a man has no centre, then he has no enduring identity.
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “Faith wears out in your heart as clothes wear out, so ask Allaah to renew the faith in your hearts.
These are the days
For the children of faith
To stand up and be counted
Now is the time
For the light in us to shine
On whoever's around it One life can be the proof
Of the hope that is You I'm gonna live what I believe
I'm gonna walk that line
If it costs me everything
I'm gonna stand for what is right
So that everyone can see
It's the Holy Qur’an and Sunnah that they need
I'm gonna live what I believe The world will see God's grace
When we work and we pray
And then love like we mean it
if there's ever been a day
To give ourselves away
Well, I think we're in it There's a passion deep inside
For my life to testify Lord, let me be used
As a witness for You
With faith and conviction
You've called me by Your name
And I will not be ashamed Gonna walk that line
I'm gonna stand for what is right
Hey, it's the Holy Qur’an and Sunnah that they need.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Array
Truth= god does not exist? (OP)
Thank you! I learned something today!
..........Anyhow personally, I don't think G-D is cryptic at all.... .......... he has sent lots of trains to the station.. hop on the last train or be left behind................
what a way to flee from a debate.
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks