McBell
Admiral Obvious
Yet you present nothing that fits your own definition of 'evidence'...To me evidence is an objective fact that is used to prove something.
Why is that?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Yet you present nothing that fits your own definition of 'evidence'...To me evidence is an objective fact that is used to prove something.
Lets use yours from the OP, some kind of intelligence that creates and sustains the universe, would that be a fair assessment of God?Define "God" from your point of view.
This was uncalled for, but whatever. I know you're going to say because of the big bang etc. etc. But the big bang couldn't have happened by itself. And yes I've read about all of this before so no need to accuse me of being ignorant. I'm just trying to have a civil debate.
Please note the huge pink fonted portion of your own post.
Lets use yours from the OP, some kind of intelligence that creates and sustains the universe, would that be a fair assessment of God?
All I'm asking is why is one God multi-tasking more likely than many Gods being responsible for their own little bit?
Hi DS,
Please check out this link that explains the argument from ignorance
Argument from ignorance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So he wasn't calling you ignorant.
I disagree that your point is an argument from ignorance (it should be pointed out that your argument here is in NO WAY new to this forum)
It could be:
False dilemma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
or perhaps
God of the gaps - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
-Q
So? Why's that a problem?Because saying that there are multiple Gods implies that one God is not powerful enough to run the universe all by himself.
So? Why's that a problem?
Why would the universe need to be created by one God with infinite power as opposed to millions of smaller, but still very powerful beings?That would just be a more powerful being than we are. Saying that there are multiple Gods for different tasks insinuates that each of those "Gods" has limited power enough to do his task only. A God has infinite power (omnipotent), while a being which has limited power is just that: A powerful being. Going by your logic then we're like Gods to smaller creatures since we have far more power than them.
Since you brought that up, why do you automatically assume that a God doesn't exist because in your point of view there hasn't been enough evidence to prove his existence? As said just because one of two opposites hasn't been proven doesn't automatically make the other right. Explain agnostics then?
This is a prominent question that is yet to be answered convincingly by atheists. I mean the world can't have come from nothing, can it?
Why would the universe need to be created by one God with infinite power as opposed to millions of smaller, but still very powerful beings?
I actually was a believer for the first 20 odd years of my life.
My view that a god does not exist is based mainly on the argument that people will create gods to explain that which they do not understand (re read god of the gaps theory) you might want to look the argument from inconsistent revelation as well.
I don't automatically assume god does not exist, it is a stance i came upon because i care that what i believe is correct (i refuse to use the word truth because truth is subjective).
This stance is also backed up by my studies in psychology.
I also make certain that my beliefs and viewpoints are free of emotional influence, whilst i accept the importance of emotion in day to day life i do not allow them to influence my actions or thinking (well sometimes i fail if i'm really tired).
Does that make sense?
-Q
The world came from the Big Bang. As to the Big Bang, it could have come from nowhere. Type in Dr. Lawrence Krauss in youtube and play the first or second video. I highly recommend you watch that video.
A perfectly reasonable answer for this question is "I don't know".
We don't know yet where the universe came from, but I am willing to bet on science rather than religion to answer this question for me.
Also, even if a creator created the universe, my next three questions are:
1) Where did the creator come from?
2) Why is the creator worth worshiping?
3) Why should I believe this creator has my best interests at heart?
Also, why is your curiosity limited only up to the Big Bang? Why are you content to state that "We don't know what created the creator because it is beyond our intelligence", but are not content to state "We don't know where the universe came from"?
This shows a double standard on your part.
I don't know. Nobody knows.This is a prominent question that is yet to be answered convincingly by atheists. I mean the world can't have come from nothing, can it?
I am not convinced a 100% either. But it is a pretty good argument. I tend to trust scientific experts to know what they are talking about. His argument is backed up by data, and simulation of matter popping in and out of existence in the empty space in a proton, which won Per Olof Hulth the Nobel Prize in 2002 I think.I have already saw that video by Lawrence Krauss, but I'm not convinced by the fact that he says that the universe just came from a "quantum inflation".
Because Science has a consistent and a proven track record of answering the big questions. If we had never trusted science We would still be answering every question with " God made it so" and never progressed to the extent that we have now.And why are you betting more on science to answer that question for you? That's purely subjective.
Then what differentiates your god from a non-existent one?1) There's no possible way to know. Something like this is out of our realm of reality and also bigger than our cognitive and perceptive abilities
But why do you limit yourself only up to the Big Bang? Why not ask the same question about god? How do you know god is unknowable if you don't even try?and the reason I don't say this about the origin of the universe is that the notion that there's no God implies that each and every part of knowledge is obtainable through science at one point or another, so why would it be above our perceptive abilities? If it's so then who else would be able to understand it since there's no God? And how would the most intelligent beings in the universe not be able to understand something?
I did not ask the question you gave an answer to.2) That's our purpose in life. Why did he create us then? Just so we can play and have fun and do nothing to worship him?
I did not ask if your god is malevolent or not. I asked how am I to believe that this god has my best interest at heart and not just using me for his own purposes? Also, what about kids born with terrible diseases? Does that mean god is malevolent only to certain people? Why them and not me? By the same token, what makes you think that your god is benevolent?3) If God is malevolent why would he make anyone happy? He would've just kept torturing everyone if that's why he created us. And what makes you think that God isn't benevolent?
Not if every God had their own sphere of influence as I suggested. The fire God wouldn't encroach on the domain of the flea God and the tree God wouldn't have any control over the snow God's affairs. Each would have total control over their own field of creation.Every time you add one more "God", you take away from the power of the others. For example; say there are three Gods that run the universe. If you add one more, you automatically reduce the power of the other three since they would have to do less work.
They would only be all-powerful with regard to their own domain. So, if you wanted rain you would pray to the rain God, if you wanted happiness you would pray to the happiness God and so on.Why would there be three "Gods" if they were all-powerful? And which God would you pray to in that case since not even one of them would be omnipotent (therefore not able to answer your prayers)?
OK, now we get down to it. If all phenomena are connected, God doesn't really need to micromanage the universe does He? If everything is connected He can just set the world in motion according to a pre-designed plan and watch as everything unfolds. Wouldn't you agree?Besides, relying on beings which are just a bit more powerful than us to run the universe doesn't sound very plausible considering the fact that all physical phenomena are connected therefore one God for everything is more logical and rational than a God for each natural phenomena which just seems implausible.
I am not convinced a 100% either. But it is a pretty good argument. I tend to trust scientific experts to know what they are talking about. His argument is backed up by data, and simulation of matter popping in and out of existence in the empty space in a proton, which won Per Olof Hulth the Nobel Prize in 2002 I think.
Because Science has a consistent and a proven track record of answering the big questions. If we had never trusted science We would still be answering every question with " God made it so" and never progressed to the extent that we have now.
Then what differentiates your god from a non-existent one?
But why do you limit yourself only up to the Big Bang? Why not ask the same question about god? How do you know god is unknowable if you don't even try?
Yes, everything would be obtainable by science at one point or another. Science doesn't claim to have all the answers yet. We are still evolving to the point where we might find out more about the universe we live in.
I did not ask the question you gave an answer to.
I asked why is your god WORTH WORSHIP? What about your god inherently makes him worthy of my worship?
I did not ask if your god is malevolent or not. I asked how am I to believe that this god has my best interest at heart and not just using me for his own purposes? Also, what about kids born with terrible diseases? Does that mean god is malevolent only to certain people? Why them and not me? By the same token, what makes you think that your god is benevolent?
Nothing makes me think that god isn't benevolent because I do not believe a higher power exists, and therefore thinking about its attributes are an exercise in futility.
Why them and not me?
OK, now we get down to it. If all phenomena are connected, God doesn't really need to micromanage the universe does He? If everything is connected He can just set the world in motion according to a pre-designed plan and watch as everything unfolds. Wouldn't you agree?
This is a prominent question that is yet to be answered convincingly by atheists. I mean the world can't have come from nothing, can it?
Well, in that case all we really disagree on is whether the cause of the universe had intelligence or not, right?I agree, which is also why we say that each and every one of us has a certain destiny.
Well, in that case all we really disagree on is whether the cause of the universe had intelligence or not, right?
No, that's not the same question at all. God could mean a polytheism as I described. It could mean some kind of pantheism where God is one and the same as nature, impersonal. But the God you describe is an intelligence that existed prior to the universe and created it of it's own will.Yes. A.K.A. is there a God or not?