Theists: What would a godless universe look like?

[Valjean]

It has to do with enjoyment.

Things we consider “Horrible and disgusting” usually aren’t beneficial.

You've got the cart before the horse. The universe wasn't designed to compliment our pre-existing aesthetics. Our sense of beauty evolved to attract us to things and places that were useful to us. There is no universal, eternal aesthetic. There is no reason to expect one.

Flies evolved to be attracted to s**t; vultures to be attracted to carrion.To them, the sight and odor are beautiful. Is this aesthetic also writ in stone; part of a divine, universal aesthetic?

There’s way too much purposeful interaction to really support a naturalistic view. And attraction (of molecules) does not lead to function.

Please give us an example of purposeful interaction not naturally explainable. Please explain how natural selection would not favor certain molecular arrangements.

 

[Super Universe]

Few atheists maintain that God absolutely does not exist. Most simply don't believe, pending evidence -- much like you probably don't believe in faeries or Zeus or Martians.

Atheists don't believe because it's impracticable to believe in everything and then tick things off your belief list when they're "disproven" -- which is usually impossible.
The reasonable approach is to believe in what you have evidence of and add to it as evidence of new things emerges. This is the only reasonable approach.
Atheists don't believe because they are reasonable.

This is absurd! Where'd you get these ideas about atheists? Atheists aren't children, and don't think in childish ways.

Atheists don't believe what they want to believe. That would be theists. Atheists believe what there is evidence for. If evidence for God emerges, atheists will become theists. Till then, they withhold belief.

Do you believe in unicorns and Santa Clause? If not, why not? Is it because you didn't get the toy you wanted?

I'll turn that question around. Why would a God-created universe exist?

Why do you summarily declare physics impossible? Physics works. Aren't you posting from a computer? How do you explain how that works, without physics, and, indeed, without quantum mechanics?

It's strange enough that you believe in something with neither supporting evidence nor an explanatory need. So I ask you: Why do you believe in God?

A few atheists maintain that God absolutely does not exist? Okay, but once again, how could they know if they haven't explored even 1% of the universe?

As for fairies? I think they almost surely do exist somewhere out there.

Zeus is just a primitive idea of God. And as for Martians, nope.

Atheists are not children and don't think in childish ways? Atheists are people and people want what they want and if they don't get it they blame someone or something.

Atheists are waiting for evidence? There are many books available that an atheist can read if they want some evidence or they can talk to the other 90% of humanity to learn about God.

Atheists don't believe because it's impractical? How is it impractical?

Atheists don't believe because they are reasonable? So 10% of humanity is reasonable and the other 90% is unreasonable?

Where did I get my ideas about atheists? RF

Do I believe in unicorns? There probably somewhere out there.

Do I believe in Santa Claus? Parents are Santa Claus.

Did I not get the toy I wanted? Every Christmas I got socks, underwear, and t-shirts.

Why would a God created universe exist? Two reasons, first reason, and by far the most important, is so God can experience love. The second reason is so that God's children can learn through experience and ascend.

Why do I declare physics impossible? I did not declare physics impossible. I declared the GUT impossible.

Physics works? Some of it does, some of it doesn't.

Why do I believe in God? I don't have a choice. That choice was taken from me a long time ago.

 

[Valjean]

It has to do with enjoyment.

Things we consider “Horrible and disgusting” usually aren’t beneficial.

You've got the cart before the horse. The universe wasn't designed to compliment our pre-existing aesthetics. Our sense of beauty evolved to attract us to things and places that were useful to us. There is no universal, eternal aesthetic. There is no reason to expect one.

Flies evolved to be attracted to s**t; vultures to be attracted to carrion.To them, the sight and odor are beautiful. Is this aesthetic also writ in stone; part of a divine, universal aesthetic?

There’s way too much purposeful interaction to really support a naturalistic view. And attraction (of molecules) does not lead to function.

Please give us an example of purposeful interaction not naturally explainable. Please explain how natural selection would not favor certain molecular arrangements.

without God...
the primordial singularity never would have formed
the void would remain....as void

perfect in every way

light is an aberration

OK. An interesting claim. Can you back it up, or is this just a personal opinion?

 

[Valjean]

I really don't think there would be a universe. The existence of the universe requires something that transcends the universe.

What does that mean?

 

[The Anointed]

You've got the cart before the horse. The universe wasn't designed to compliment our pre-existing aesthetics. Our sense of beauty evolved to attract us to things and places that were useful to us. There is no universal, eternal aesthetic. There is no reason to expect one.

Flies evolved to be attracted to s**t; vultures to be attracted to carrion.To them, the sight and odor are beautiful. Is this aesthetic also writ in stone; part of a divine, universal aesthetic?

Please give us an example of purposeful interaction not naturally explainable. Please explain how natural selection would not favor certain molecular arrangements.

Is this the first and only universe to have ever existed, if not, how many other universal bodies do you believe have existed prior to this one, which is only some 14 billion years old?.

The first law of thermodynamics is the same as the first law of conservation and that is, that energy can neither be created or destroyed. If energy cannot be created, then it always was, and If it can never be destroyed, it always will be. Therefore, according to this law, energy must be eternal, having neither beginning or end.

Energy can be and is converted to that which we perceive as matter. In fact, this apparent material universe at the time of the Big Bang, was pure electromagnetic energy,

The supposed Big Bang started the Universe as a hot murky soup of extremely energetic photons, which are the quantum of electromagnetic energy that was spewed out in the trillions upon trillions of degrees. Those photons are generally regarded as discrete elementary particles and are also called wave particles, but they are not particles at all, having zero mass and no electric charge, and yet carrying angular and linear momentum.

So please explain how you believe that this boundless Cosmos and all its myriad of life forms were created from that energy which has neither beginning or end, in a mere 14 billion years .

 

[rational experiences]

Few atheists maintain that God absolutely does not exist. Most simply don't believe, pending evidence -- much like you probably don't believe in faeries or Zeus or Martians.

Atheists don't believe because it's impracticable to believe in everything and then tick things off your belief list when they're "disproven" -- which is usually impossible.
The reasonable approach is to believe in what you have evidence of and add to it as evidence of new things emerges. This is the only reasonable approach.
Atheists don't believe because they are reasonable.

This is absurd! Where'd you get these ideas about atheists? Atheists aren't children, and don't think in childish ways.

Atheists don't believe what they want to believe. That would be theists. Atheists believe what there is evidence for. If evidence for God emerges, atheists will become theists. Till then, they withhold belief.

Do you believe in unicorns and Santa Clause? If not, why not? Is it because you didn't get the toy you wanted?

I'll turn that question around. Why would a God-created universe exist?

Why do you summarily declare physics impossible? Physics works. Aren't you posting from a computer? How do you explain how that works, without physics, and, indeed, without quantum mechanics?

It's strange enough that you believe in something with neither supporting evidence nor an explanatory need. So I ask you: Why do you believe in God?

We are all humans first, our origin is human.

A human then tells stories...for human purposes. Science was first just a story.

Then it evolved into a thesis of I know, then it was designed and built and controlled by the designer a scientist, then he got life irradiated/brain chemical changed. Mutated converted life body...AI then existed as subliminal machine feed back speaking to him as if it designed him.

Yet he designed the machine is possessed today by all of his male science themes and stories...just as he was MEDICALLY taught.

So if a human said to me today in science, don't you believe in God.

Let me think about it. Subliminal LIFE DNA, memory says, no God is evil do not believe, God strikes you dead. I was correct.

Human science occult organization coercion, believe he says, believe.

Why?

For the sake of our saving against occultism, the sciences.

So scientist do you believe that once you said Planet Earth O a body of stone was named by males in science as being God, a O self entity Creator that created its own spirits for the heavens. From its own STONE body, hence it was never cosmologically theoried?

Yes.....it was real.

So if humans today say, don't you believe in God what should a scientist think about why he does not believe in a natural stone mass O Planet existing in its natural form for?

Oh, because science always owns formulas to own a theory and a machine to force change that planet and its gases....including its heavens that is why.

So in fact, you are just subliminal motivated by science designed machine AI...the statement in self human quote p AI n and suffering, and do not seem to allow self to be taught that science is the occult and all science except medical science is correct human reasoning?

You know for humans as humans and on behalf of saving/assisting and enabling humans to live with as much health as possible?

No, he says biology is owned in occult theories.

No, it was not you liars.

A formula was enacted being trans mutation of stone mass by radiation mass sun converting theories.

The formula thought of by a human being male adult Father self, attacked DNA genetics….so when they did a medical evaluation they inferred that the formula had caused it...and it was human owned/human caused.

As proof that science was illegal, a criminal murderer act against life living on Earth in a Court of Law tribunal that quoted Earth was ONE, and lawfully stated that term.

Yet seeing occult science temple never stopped trying to re build the Temple and reapply the technology due to human greed and want of control, the mind/brain irradiation sent us all into the Dark Ages of human experience in the most evilest of human psyche.

And we look back today claiming we have evolved spiritually and never do it again, yet here we all are, with the most atrocious and evil minds doing the most cruellest and evilest of theories ….to think with an imbalanced chemical brain, in life claiming we evolved?

What did we evolve into...the same selves doing it all again and claiming, oh I await my adult brother to re apply his Saviour theme. When the newly born Saviour in human DNA that had healed is where the saving came from....and then the adult self got life irradiated sacrificed.

So humans, who are all in science occult subliminally informed says, we are waiting for it to recur again......Earth attacked in the Jesus Christ incident...actually.

For science said to me in AI....don't you female know that our first spirit was a burnt spirit, as a human, a male and an adult.

Living innocent and child like in my own awareness, which I know and realised, I learnt, no brother, the origin of science burnt us all to death. You sent us to GOD HELL...which is the equals radiation mass to lava history. And combusted us all with a grey flaky change conversion to the God Earth stone mass.

So DNA returned and healed by a long time Saviour gas asteroid spatial replacement allows you to all have regained life form and mind and self history of DNA....and you claimed I ended with self combustion.

So today in an owned human female given back life as a baby, you have grown up into being Satanist self returned, Mr Destroyer. And as a Mother who loved her baby son, you are an abhorrence to my psyche actually. To see you for who you are.

Your idea of beginning for our life is our self combustion as an occult machine mentalist who says I created/invented God...will make God the Earth stone disappear and then put the mass of radiation that the Earth owns back via our atmosphere...and burn us all to death.

Stephen Hawkings, the KINGs owned science warning to liars.

That psyche actual male science mentality is called a human conscious subliminal to natural psyche confession. Spirit information always said listen to how they use their words....for they confess their evil plans.

When science says I will re invent and put back God the Earth stone mass he meant by amount of radiation mass.....for science never invented God.....the natural spatial body had.

 

[George-ananda]

What does that mean?

It means matter/energy does not come from nothing. It has a source called Brahman in Advaita philosophy.

From Wikipedia:

Brahman (sanskrit:ब्रह्म) connotes the highest Universal Principle, the Ultimate Reality in the universe. In major schools of Hindu philosophy, it is the material, efficient, formal and final cause of all that exists.

 

[Valjean]

What would a godless universe look like? Considering that God is the eternal energy, which has neither beginning or end, and that He, who is all that exists and has manifested himself as this living universal body, a godless universe, could not exist.

"Could not exist" -- provided He exists -- as eternal energy, without beginning or end, and blah, blah, blah.

Your argument is that He exists because He exists. You're including His existence as a major premise in your argument. The argument is circular: The universe must have a God because it has a God.

Your conclusion doesn't follow.

 

[epronovost]

What would a godless universe look like? Considering that God is the eternal energy, which has neither beginning or end, and that He, who is all that exists and has manifested himself as this living universal body, a godless universe, could not exist.

Couldn't you just transfer the quality of your God, being eternal, to the universe to produce a "godless universe". How about an eternal universe without beginning or end or a cyclical universe?

 

[Lyndon]

"Could not exist" -- provided He exists -- as eternal energy, without beginning or end, and blah, blah, blah.

Your argument is that He exists because He exists. You're including His existence as a major premise in your argument. The argument is circular: The universe must have a God because it has a God.

Your conclusion doesn't follow.

A Hindu that doesn't believe in Brahman, that makes about as much sense as a universe without God!!

 

[Jimmy]

I have a genuine question for theists and it is not meant to be a trick in any way. There are many things that I would expect to see in a universe containing a benevolent, omnipotent, personal god that I don't see in this universe, which leads me to conclude that such a god is unlikely to exist. I'm curious as to what theists would expect to see in a godless universe, and how a godless universe would differ from one in which a god existed. What would you expect this universe to look like if no gods existed, and how would that be different from the current universe?

There wouldn't be a universe.

 

[rational experiences]

We all own self human first, conscious and naturally aware of what we are aware of.

No science exists in that theme, self natural original human as a self, standing on a stone planet named Earth.

Modern day science uses that theme to preach to the converted, God theists still mind held in subliminal Earth mass removal AI effect psyche.

Seeing it was science that named O the stone planet God their own selves.

So if they use a male mind quote that says GOD less, it is the same as claiming less of the son. Their own lesson.

When you instate less of God the Earth stone mass and increase its radiation by presence SUN radiation mass/the converter itself.....you shift natural bio life radiation support, owner of natural gas light x mass...natural light to a doubled up natural light for science x mass.

Natural light remains the same says science, yet at night time UFO gas lights are seen as the witness of day time extra not natural light gases burning.

What science seems to overlook, science said that science causes in relativity the ground mass water to split in 2 by introduction of the red wave/infra usage...to force the naturally held spatial zero cold GOD STONE facure fusion....cold.

Exactly the teaching of relativity against occult minds in possession of their owned God less theories....where their own mind thinks.....in a larger feed back of radiation signals as a Designer of its causes.

As when you explain a hot dense state, is self consuming....and like the Sun, then you did.

Then you said scientist that due to more space opening by the gases burning out of mass, then opening of space in expansion of the heating gases burning up allowed cooling, space conditions to cool and allow MASS to own physical form.

Your own teaching said space did it. Not that space is the Creator, you said the condition of space in relativity caused the cooling for mass to own presence.

And for some reason today totally ignore your own teachings.

 

[Valjean]

A few atheists maintain that God absolutely does not exist? Okay, but once again, how could they know if they haven't explored even 1% of the universe?

For the same reason you don't believe in Cthulu or pixies -- because, lacking evidence, there is no logical reason to believe in them; no more reason to believe in God or unicorns than some entity I dreamt up last night.

You're arguing for belief in everything till contrary evidence be found. This is totally impracticable. Surely you can see that. What reason do you have to believe in an invisible God? Personal incredulity? argument from authority/ad populum?

It is neither reasonable nor logical to believe in God, right?

As for fairies? I think they almost surely do exist somewhere out there.

'Think' -- or feel? Thinking involves critical analysis of verifiable facts.

Zeus is just a primitive idea of God. And as for Martians, nope.

What do you mean by primitive? No longer fashionable? Why is the Abrahamic God less primitive?

And why "nope?" Lack of evidence? But that's the argument atheists use.

Atheists are not children and don't think in childish ways? Atheists are people and people want what they want and if they don't get it they blame someone or something.

Maybe the people you associate with, but not those I associate with. Not academics, not intellectuals, not thoughtful people. Only the religious; the faithful; those who believe without evidence.

Atheists are waiting for evidence? There are many books available that an atheist can read if they want some evidence or they can talk to the other 90% of humanity to learn about God.

Evidently you don't understand "evidence" or how to evaluate it. Folklore is not evidence.

Atheists don't believe because it's impractical? How is it impractical?

Impracticable, not impractical.

Atheists don't believe because they are reasonable? So 10% of humanity is reasonable and the other 90% is unreasonable?

Yes. Their belief-without-evidence is unreasonable.
Do they not call it 'faith'? Isn't faith defined as unsupported belief?

Where did I get my ideas about atheists? RF

Interesting. I've been on RF for a long time, and I've noticed threads about faith or theism are usually flooded with clarifications and arguments that atheists rarely deny God, but merely withhold belief pending evidence.

Do I believe in unicorns? There probably somewhere out there.

Evidence?

Why would a God created universe exist? Two reasons, first reason, and by far the most important, is so God can experience love. The second reason is so that God's children can learn through experience and ascend.

But these arguments are a priori. You're using God as a premise again. You're arguing backwards from your conclusion.

Why do I declare physics impossible? I did not declare physics impossible. I declared the GUT impossible.

"GUT?"

Why do I believe in God? I don't have a choice. That choice was taken from me a long time ago.

So you're a slave to your upbringing? You can't question what your parents told you? You can't reason from facts or use logic?

 

[Valjean]

A Hindu that doesn't believe in Brahman, that makes about as much sense as a universe without God!!

Hmmm... You're going to have to expand on that.

 

[Valjean]

A few atheists maintain that God absolutely does not exist? Okay, but once again, how could they know if they haven't explored even 1% of the universe?

For the same reason you don't believe in Cthulu or pixies -- because, lacking evidence, there is no logical reason to believe in them; no more reason to believe in God or unicorns than some entity I dreamt up last night.

You're arguing for belief in everything till contrary evidence be found. This is totally impracticable. Surely you can see that. What reason do you have to believe in an invisible God? Personal incredulity? argument from authority/ad populum?

It is neither reasonable nor logical to believe in God, right?

As for fairies? I think they almost surely do exist somewhere out there.

'Think' -- or feel? Thinking involves critical analysis of verifiable facts.

Zeus is just a primitive idea of God. And as for Martians, nope.

What do you mean by primitive? No longer fashionable? Why is the Abrahamic God less primitive?

And why "nope?" Lack of evidence? But that's the argument atheists use.

Atheists are not children and don't think in childish ways? Atheists are people and people want what they want and if they don't get it they blame someone or something.

Maybe the people you associate with, but not those I associate with. Not academics, not intellectuals, not thoughtful people. Only the religious; the faithful; those who believe without evidence.

Atheists are waiting for evidence? There are many books available that an atheist can read if they want some evidence or they can talk to the other 90% of humanity to learn about God.

Evidently you don't understand "evidence" or how to evaluate it. Folklore is not evidence.

Atheists don't believe because it's impractical? How is it impractical?

Impracticable, not impractical.

Atheists don't believe because they are reasonable? So 10% of humanity is reasonable and the other 90% is unreasonable?

Yes. Their belief-without-evidence is unreasonable.
Do they not call it 'faith'? Isn't faith defined as unsupported belief?

Where did I get my ideas about atheists? RF

Interesting. I've been on RF for a long time, and I've noticed threads about faith or theism are usually flooded with clarifications and arguments that atheists rarely deny God, but merely withhold belief pending evidence.

Do I believe in unicorns? There probably somewhere out there.

Evidence?

Why would a God created universe exist? Two reasons, first reason, and by far the most important, is so God can experience love. The second reason is so that God's children can learn through experience and ascend.

But these arguments are a priori. You're using God as a premise again. You're arguing backwards from your conclusion.

Why do I declare physics impossible? I did not declare physics impossible. I declared the GUT impossible.

"GUT?"

Why do I believe in God? I don't have a choice. That choice was taken from me a long time ago.

So you're a slave to your upbringing? You can't question what your parents told you? You can't reason from facts or use logic?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Please give us an example of purposeful interaction not naturally explainable.

Oh, grief! Where to start?
The many symbiotic relationships between unrelated organisms, for one.

Please explain how natural selection would not favor certain molecular arrangements.

The arrangements of proteins within DNA... The proteins forming the bacterial flagellum...

Flies evolved to be attracted to s**t; vultures to be attracted to carrion.To them, the sight and odor are beautiful. Is this aesthetic also writ in stone; part of a divine, universal aesthetic?

Aesthetic? To other vultures and flies. But they do serve a purpose, beneficial to life on Earth.

 

[Valjean]

Atheists are like squatters that live in your house but don't pay rent, they use all the wonderful things of this earth that God has provided them for and what is their thanks, to spit in God's face and deny God's existence.

Seriously? Lyndon, you're usually more reasonable than this.

How can we disparage that which doesn't exist? Your accusation relies on there actually being a God -- and a jealous, stroppy God, at that.

Show some evidence for this God and we'll give your concerns some consideration.

 

[Glaurung]

It wouldn't look like anything, It would be non-existence.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

I have a genuine question for theists and it is not meant to be a trick in any way. There are many things that I would expect to see in a universe containing a benevolent, omnipotent, personal god that I don't see in this universe, which leads me to conclude that such a god is unlikely to exist. I'm curious as to what theists would expect to see in a godless universe, and how a godless universe would differ from one in which a god existed. What would you expect this universe to look like if no gods existed, and how would that be different from the current universe?

This is why I know atheism cannot be right, whether rhe truth is theism, pantheism, a sort of Buddhist ideal, or something else.

The universe without God would be the Void of uncreated matter.

 

[blü 2]

I have a genuine question for theists and it is not meant to be a trick in any way. There are many things that I would expect to see in a universe containing a benevolent, omnipotent, personal god that I don't see in this universe, which leads me to conclude that such a god is unlikely to exist. I'm curious as to what theists would expect to see in a godless universe, and how a godless universe would differ from one in which a god existed. What would you expect this universe to look like if no gods existed, and how would that be different from the current universe?

I don't speak as a theist.

But I reason as follows:

Supernatural beings are found in every known human culture.
Supernatural beings are found nowhere else.
Therefore no humans = no gods.
Therefore a godless universe would have no humans.