If God existed would there be proof?

[ppp]

Those who don't learn from history, etc etc...

I know. I am feeling old.
Nobody understand how bad things can get. And its not even that I completely disagree with Muhammad. He is correct about global warming. And the US (at least) is going consume itself with late stage capitalism. I am pretty sure that the next step is feudalism for us. But he has some bizarre blind spots with regard to economic structures and how viruses work.

 

[Wildswanderer]

"It's as good a guess as any" isn't exactly much to get people out of bed early on Sunday morning for church.

It's a better reason to get up any day, than everything came from nothing.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's a better reason to get up any day, than everything came from nothing.

But that's your position, isn't it?

The universe came from God who came from nothing... no?

Edit: but you do see my point, right? Why bother with a religion when you have no particular reason to follow it?

 

[Wildswanderer]

No particular reason? I have lots of reasons that go way beyond big bang theory.
God always was. So everything didn't come from nothing. It's all here for a purpose, not because of a cosmic accident.

But that's your position, isn't it?

The universe came from God who came from nothing... no?

Edit: but you do see my point, right? Why bother with a religion when you have no particular reason to follow it?

 

[SkepticThinker]

No particular reason? I have lots of reasons that go way beyond big bang theory.
God always was. So everything didn't come from nothing. It's all here for a purpose, not because of a cosmic accident.

So everything had to come from somewhere, except this God? Why?
What did this God supposedly create everything out of?

 

[Wildswanderer]

So everything had to come from somewhere, except this God? Why?
What did this God supposedly create everything out of?

Himself. Or at least he was the source of the energy involved.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Himself. Or at least he was the source of the energy involved.

So something can't come form nothing, EXCEPT for the God you believe in. That God has always existed and created the universe from him/itself.

Sounds like a special pleading fallacy to me.

If we can say that, then we can say that the universe has always existed in some form and created itself out of itself.

That's if we're just making stuff up.

 

[Wildswanderer]

So something can't come form nothing, EXCEPT for the God you believe in. That God has always existed and created the universe from him/itself.

Sounds like a special pleading fallacy to me.

If we can say that, then we can say that the universe has always existed in some form and created itself out of itself.

That's if we're just making stuff up.

You can say that if you like because we can't prove anything either way.
Of course then you are ascribing powers to the universe it doesn't seem to have currently. So you are way out of the bounds of science and into either magic or unknown territory.

 

[SkepticThinker]

You can say that if you like because we can't prove anything either way.
Of course then you are ascribing powers to the universe it doesn't seem to have currently. So you are way out of the bounds of science and into either magic or unknown territory.

I wouldn't say that.
But you would. You just replace "universe" with "God" and think you've got it all wrapped up.

 

[Wildswanderer]

I wouldn't say that.
But you would. You just replace "universe" with "God" and think you've got it all wrapped up.

You have no better explanation. Shrug.

 

[ppp]

You have no better explanation. Shrug.

His explanation is better because we can actually determine that a universe exists.

 

[Wildswanderer]

His explanation is better because we can actually determine that a universe exists.

He doesn't even have an explanation.

 

[SkepticThinker]

You have no better explanation. Shrug.

It sure beats making up a story that isn't itself an explanation for anything and just going with that.
If the evidence is inconclusive, then coming to any sort of conclusion is unwarranted. The most rational answer to such a thing is "I don't know."

 

[ppp]

He doesn't even have an explanation.

Ny virtue of there being a demonstrable universe, he is a far sight closer to an explanation that you are.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Ny virtue of there being a demonstrable universe, he is a far sight closer to an explanation that you are.

Not unless his universe is magic.

 

[Wildswanderer]

It sure beats making up a story that isn't itself an explanation for anything and just going with that.
If the evidence is inconclusive, then coming to any sort of conclusion is unwarranted. The most rational answer to such a thing is "I don't know."

Your vanilla ice cream explanation is noted and rejected as completely boring. Why have boring when you can have a banana split with all the toppings?
Besides it's more logical to have a creator then a universe that created itself.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Your vanilla ice cream explanation is noted and rejected as completely boring. Why have boring when you can have a banana split with all the toppings?

What?
That's the reality of the situation.

Besides it's more logical to have a creator then a universe that created itself.

Why? And which creator? How did you determine that it's more logical that a creator exists and created the universe than some naturalistic explanation that doesn't require such an assumption?

 

[metis]

So everything didn't come from nothing.

The BBT doesn't posit that.

 

[ppp]

Not unless his universe is magic.

Is that just a throwaway quip?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No particular reason? I have lots of reasons that go way beyond big bang theory.

You said something different like a page ago. When you decide on your position, let me know.

God always was. So everything didn't come from nothing. It's all here for a purpose, not because of a cosmic accident.

So "didn't come from anything" rather than "came from nothing." Do you find some sort of solace in this hair-splitting?