God did not create the Universe

[DeistPrimate]

Wasn’t Lucifer the one that made Adam and Eve eat from the tree of knowledge? If so, he seems to have shown more sense than whoever kicked those two out of paradise.

The name "Lucifer" was derived from an erroneous translation of Isaiah 14:12.

 

[steveoh]

God did not create the universe ?

Neither scientists nor believers in God have any proof as to what caused the universe.

It may be there was a creator, and that he is different to Our God. ( You do not have to build a house to own control or live in it.)

Those who believe in God usually see him as the Creator... those with out faith are still looking for an explanation.

There is unlikely to be proof either way.

That what we call the universe exists, is not much in doubt.
I am happy to call watever caused it to be so ...God.

thats why religion is help, without it your mind is lost trying to figure out answers that we will never understand, but in reality just take a look round, nothing makes sense. damn for all we know our universe can be inside a raindrop.

 

[darkendless]

thats why religion is help, without it your mind is lost trying to figure out answers that we will never understand, but in reality just take a look round, nothing makes sense. damn for all we know our universe can be inside a raindrop.

Wouldn't it be better to say "we don't know" instead of making grand and often embarrassing assumptions that fundamentalists stick to even when shown they're absolutely wrong.
God and his bibles of all kinds give answers but the more we as a race progress the more comical those answers look.

 

[atanu]

A perspective

Whether God created the Universe or not is moot point. The Universe exists.

Reflective thinkers saw a principle that was causal for the sensed Universe and called it God. Mind is the causal factor. The reflective sages, with their minds conversed with the mind and recorded the conversations. Mind having the qualities of activity (rajas), wisdom (sattva), and inertia (tamas), the conversations do reflect these aspects in totality -- goodness and ugliness both. During all these there is another category-entity that acts as the mere witness. Meditative sages see the Mind, abiding as the witness-consciousness.

As per Hindus (Vedantists), the witness-consciousness, whose object of witnessing is the Mind and all its activities, is the true Lord that is unborn and untainted.

...

 

[Vansdad]

Modern physics leaves no place for God in the creation of the Universe, Stephen Hawking has concluded in his new book the grand design.

“Did the Universe need a creator?” The answer he gives is a resounding “no”.
http://prince.org/msg/105/343191

And did he create the universe?

 

[Primordial Annihilator]

There's a difference between needing a Creator and the existence of a Creator.

Hawking knows that he cannot disprove God, so he doesn't even really ask the question. He can show that belief in God is superfluous with respect to the natural world, and that God has made Himself inaccessible to his scientific inquiries.

A very excellent understanding you have there Angelleous, imo of course.

:bow:

 

[chinu]

Modern physics leaves no place for God in the creation of the Universe, Stephen Hawking has concluded in his new book the grand design.
“Did the Universe need a creator?” The answer he gives is a resounding “no”.

Poor creature, sitting slantly on one special chair day and night and looking towards "God" in the sky, like a donkey looking from the fog.

I remembred one quote on this: " Jin paya beath Qulander da, rah khojia apne andar da " - Hazrat baba Bulle shah.
English: " Who ever till now has discovered the mystry of Creator, have serched the way within them "

_/\_
Chinu

 

[waitasec]

thats why religion is help, without it your mind is lost trying to figure out answers that we will never understand, but in reality just take a look round, nothing makes sense. damn for all we know our universe can be inside a raindrop.

a man's got to know his limitations
-dirty harry


if we are humbled by our knowledge of how little we know then our limitation is limitless. it is when we throw our hands up in the air at the edge of our understanding and say, 'it must be god', is when we have limited ourselves because of our arrogance.

 

[outhouse]

if people opened their minds and get rid of ole magic man everytime they were stumped about a question they would learn so much more.

magic mans blocks the ability for a mind to advance. Its a primitive cop out nothing more.

the only people looking for REAL answers are those who question things, those reaching for magic man are finished with knowledge

whats funny is through time in the last few hundred years you can see religion moving the bar back for just when ole magic man stepped in and said "poof" there it is" soon enough I hope there will be no bar and no primitive belief in imagination.

 

[ashes_to_ashes]

Modern physics leaves no place for God in the creation of the Universe, Stephen Hawking has concluded in his new book the grand design.

There is one sliver of room in modern physics for creation of the universe. Quantum physics and quantum mechanics still allow the universe to create itself. So yes, Stephen Hawking has indeed concluded that the universe is "god."

 

[Skeptisch]

[youtube]-y5D7q1O1Uk[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-y5D7q1O1Uk&NR=1

 

[diosangpastol]

Should I believe in the theories of our great scientists or should I believe in the teachings of the Church (regardless of religion) that The Almighty God is the creator of all?

Scientist have provided us with several probable origin of the Universe. But are these reliable, accurate or at least nearing truthfulness?

On the otherhand, the holy book (the Bible) clearly states that God is behind all creations.

Though I have a doubt on my mind, I do believe in the teachings of the bible.
Faith is still dominant in me.

 

[outhouse]

Should I believe in the theories of our great scientists or should I believe in the teachings of the Church (regardless of religion) that The Almighty God is the creator of all?

the bible is chocked full of myths and is not historically accurate in any sense. much of it has been proven wrong from a literal standpoint.

so why not go with modern man and all he knows, which is night and day different from a ancient people who knew nothing and made up fictional myths to guide them.

to go with the bible as true history is to run with lies because you dont want to know the truth

 

[painted wolf]

the bible is chocked full of myths and is not historically accurate in any sense. much of it has been proven wrong from a literal standpoint.

so why not go with modern man and all he knows, which is night and day different from a ancient people who knew nothing and made up fictional myths to guide them.

to go with the bible as true history is to run with lies because you dont want to know the truth

just because a story may not be literally true does not mean it has no value.
myth is the most primal way humans have to define themselves, even today.

wa:do

 

[outhouse]

just because a story may not be literally true does not mean it has no value.
myth is the most primal way humans have to define themselves, even today.

wa:do

I understand that it is a good moral guide for those that need it.

its allegorical in nature and if read that way I have no issue.

 

[painted wolf]

I understand that it is a good moral guide for those that need it.

its allegorical in nature and if read that way I have no issue.

Perhaps then it's more useful to point out that the Bible and science are not contradictory. The Bible never gives a specific means that God used to create the universe and science says nothing about the existence or non-existence of God.

wa:do

 

[outhouse]

Perhaps then it's more useful to point out that the Bible and science are not contradictory. The Bible never gives a specific means that God used to create the universe and science says nothing about the existence or non-existence of God.

wa:do

what I said stands

they are very contradictory, one is based on myth and the other observable facts. NOT the lack of knowledge when observing something and making up fiction to cover what they did not know.

 

[painted wolf]

what I said stands

they are very contradictory, one is based on myth and the other observable facts. NOT the lack of knowledge when observing something and making up fiction to cover what they did not know.

Really?

wa:do

 

[outhouse]

Really?

wa:do

you dont think the bible is mythological???

Or you dont like the fiction part.????

You have admitted your semi-creationist, sorry I do not follow mythological patterns for solid science and find no need for a replacement view for what science does not know for sure.

 

[painted wolf]

you dont think the bible is mythological???

Or you dont like the fiction part.????

I don't agree with the bible and science being completely contradictory. They deal with very different things, or as Stephen J. Gould called it "non-overlapping magisteria".

You have admitted your semi-creationist, sorry I do not follow mythological patterns for solid science and find no need for a replacement view for what science does not know for sure.

And you admitted you believe in Bigfoot... we both choose our mythological patterns. I just don't claim mine are scientific.

wa:do