Who made God? - Page 2

r0ar

Australia24 Posts

October 31 2007 09:27 GMT

#21

first of all
athesists DONT BELIEVE ok
that is what atheism is about
i suppose this is more directed to the guy u quote

Who made God?
i dont think u will ever get an answer
most christians never think about and wont go near a question like that
God was always there is probably the answer u will get
but of course then why bother invoking god to create things

TheFoReveRwaR

United States10657 Posts

October 31 2007 10:10 GMT

#22

On October 31 2007 13:49 JesusCruxRH wrote:

Show nested quote +

That's what I was saying in my OP - because we don't know, it's pointless to ask who made God. You're wrong in making the absolute statement that we will never know, however, as it assumes you are able to look into the future (and that there is an end) for you to be able to ascertain for sure.

Actually he can make an absolute statement if he believes we will never figure it out. And so far that seems like a pretty safe bet.

DwmC_Foefen

Belgium2186 Posts

October 31 2007 10:17 GMT

#23

I think we are connected to time. Seriously it's the only "constant" dimension and it has always been here, but we don't know how time works. (Do other people live in the middleages while we live now? Is the word destroyed in the far future while we still live here today? Is everything predestinated or can we decide our course of actions?) All these question have something to do with time and aslong as we can't figure this shit out we will never have an answer.

I think.... >.>

TesisMech

Peru688 Posts

October 31 2007 21:18 GMT

#24

The book its called angels and demons, yea and the scientists make matter from nothing , has to do with antimatter or something

JesusCruxRH

New Zealand159 Posts

October 31 2007 21:54 GMT

#25

On November 01 2007 06:18 TesisMech wrote:
The book its called angels and demons, yea and the scientists make matter from nothing , has to do with antimatter or something

Actually I just had a look on the internet... I'm pretty sure it's Deception Point, is that the one where some woman's father was looking at it but then he was murdered, despite the fact that he was a Christian just trying to make God more understandable?

You might be right I can't remember, been a while since I read his books (not that I'll probably read them again, but yeah), but wasn't Angels and Demons about killing the four different prominent religious people or something?

TesisMech

Peru688 Posts

October 31 2007 22:41 GMT

#26

yea but first the girl's father was killed by iluminatis or something for inventing this, his father wanted to prove scientifically that Genesis was possible and he made that. o_o

Luddite

United States2315 Posts

November 01 2007 04:40 GMT

#27

Yeah, I think this blg misses the point. We atheists don't really care about who made god, we're simply trying to make a point. When we say we're an atheist, the most common response is "oh yeah? Then who made the universe"? When we say no one did, the theist just scoffs. But when we ask, who made God, they have the same answer, "no one did, he is eternal". In other words, believing in God does not escape the problem of "first cause", because it poses the same philosophical dilemnas as the atheist position.

Meta

United States6228 Posts

November 01 2007 15:26 GMT

#28

bine

United States2352 Posts

November 01 2007 16:44 GMT

#29

brick head vs. wall GO

QuanticHawk

United States32158 Posts

November 01 2007 23:10 GMT

#30

OverTheUnder

United States2929 Posts

November 02 2007 03:00 GMT

#31

may we all be touched by his noodly appendage.

amen

Snet

United States3573 Posts

November 02 2007 07:05 GMT

#32

jesus did

lengzai

Vietnam54 Posts

November 02 2007 11:07 GMT

#33

god's mother and father made god

lugggy

450 Posts

November 02 2007 15:28 GMT

#34

If God had to have a maker, then his maker equally had to have a maker, ad infinitum. Therefore we can just stop at saying God has no maker, or even--reality/universe/etc. has no maker. Or even, this moment has no maker. Yet...

suresh0t

United States295 Posts

November 02 2007 20:18 GMT

#35

There is no god in the supernatural sense, just live with science as god and we'll all be better off. Christians, Jews, Muslims, and all other religions that are based off of some supernatural power should all just realize how ridiculus they are being. Sorry but I stopped believing in a supernatural god way before I stopped believing in Santa Claus. Honestly which one sounds more real to you...

A) This supernatural being that gave us a book to tell us how to live our life, who created the universe and everything in it, who sits up in "heaven" watching everyone at the same time, and answering our prayers

or

B) A chubby old man who delivers presents to all the kids in the world in one night with super reindeer and little elves. He also really likes cookies and milk.

I'd go with the fat man who brings presents...call me a realist.

Rev0lution

United States1805 Posts

November 12 2007 15:39 GMT

#36

i know the god argument has been beat on for the last 2000 years but let me chip in a little.

HOW TO OWN GOD.

1.bible has contradictions
2. darwin explains how life evolved
3.the big bang explains how the universe came to be
4. any atheist can be as good as a believer
5. a believer can do anything a non-believer can.
6. people kill in the name of god. I dont remember anyone killing in the name of atheism
7. Theology isn't even a subject ( let's all have a branch of philosophy for the flying spaghetti monster)
8. You can't disprove the FSM
9. Epicurus problems with evil goes as follow

1. God exists. (premise)
2. God is omnipotent and omniscient. (premise — or true by definition of the word "God")
3. God is all-benevolent. (premise — or true by definition)
4. All-benevolent beings are opposed to all evil. (premise — or true by definition)
5. All-benevolent beings who can eliminate evil will do so immediately when they become aware of it. (premise)
6. God is opposed to all evil. (conclusion from 3 and 4)
7. God can eliminate evil completely and immediately. (conclusion from 2)
1. Whatever the end result of suffering is, God can bring it about by ways that do not include suffering. (conclusion from 2)
2. God has no reason not to eliminate evil. (conclusion from 7.1)
3. God has no reason not to act immediately. (conclusion from 5)
8. God will eliminate evil completely and immediately. (conclusion from 6, 7.2 and 7.3)
9. Evil exists, has existed, and probably will always exist. (premise)
10. Items 8 and 9 are contradictory; therefore, one or more of the premises is false: either God does not exist, evil does not exist, or God is not simultaneously omnipotent, omniscient, and all-benevolent (i.e. God is omnipotent and omniscient but not all-benevolent, omnipotent and all-benevolent but not omniscient, or omniscient and all-benevolent but not omnipotent).

10. prayer doesn't work
11. there are as many stories of creation as there are gods. what makes Jehova's story any better?

micronesia

United States24799 Posts

November 12 2007 17:03 GMT

#37

Why are you all spending so much time arguing? Isn't it much easier to let your faith drive you to the immediate conclusion that the most powerful being in the universe is watching you specifically, loves you, and wants you to go to the best place in the universe? Hell, I'd be satisfied with a couple of pet dogs looking out for my well being, but I can have God!

MasterOfChaos

Germany2896 Posts

November 12 2007 21:18 GMT

#38

God as creator is a "theory" (scientifically it does not deserve the name theory) which hast not yet been disproofed. This might never happen or be even impossible at all.
But this theory offers no explanations to why or how the how the universe was created. But it poses the new questions which are at least as complicated as the original ones: how and why was god created/came into existance, or did he even exist forever?
All in all the creation theory explains the universe at maximum as good as scientific therories.
In situations where two theories explain a fact equally well, we should, according to occhams razor choose the "simpler" one.
Simple in this case means as few and small assumptions/axioms/postulats as possible. For the creation theory very many and large assumtions have to be made:
1. Gods existance/creation
2. Why he created the the world
3. Why he created the world like it is. This one has very many parameters which is one of the things which is something we want to avoid.
4. Why he created the world so it seems to be not created by a god.
On the other hand current scientific theories must assume the following:
1. The laws of nature. So scientists strieve to reduce their count and complexity. Evenso the resulting calculations might be difficult, the fundamental should be as simple as possible.
2. The natural constants. These are quite many for the current "standardmodel", but scientists are confident they can greatly reduce them with the next great theory such as a ToE or GUT.
3. The existence of a very simple, highly dense "object" which is the beginning of the universe. As the beginning is believed to have (close to) zero entropy (almost) no information is needed to describe this state, which makes this a small assumtion.

Comparing these two competing theories, the scientific approach is simply more elegant as it needs less information to describe the world. But of cause this does not rule out a creator, but I personally believe this is improbable.
I only discuss a creator in general here, not the existance of the christian got, which is quite a different matter.

Prev 1 2 All

Please or register to reply.

Who made God? - Page 2

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming