My basic view of the world is as follows...

I believe there is a God. I Believe that he created everything.

I believe atheists believe that the universe created itself.

I also believe that agnostics are to lazy and/or mentally unequipped to believe in anything no matter what. I therefore have no interest in dealing with agnostics.

Quantum mechanics allow for a universe to spontaneously create itself. It also requires that that everything can be measured. However, the universe is still referred to as infinite. Why? Because we just haven't figured out how.
If the universe was created by an explosion of some object, and everything was created by that object, then that object would be everywhere and still exist.
One of the first things people from religious families learn as children is "God is everywhere".
If god created the universe, and god is everywhere... And Something exploded and created the universe, and its everywhere... Whats the difference?
God cannot be measured, just as the universe cannot be measured... And for the same reason.

On to creationism. I am NOT a creationist. A creationist by definition does not believe in evolution. Only an idiot would not believe in something so logical and probable... almost proven even.
On the other hand, I also am not an evolutionist. An evolutionist by definition does not beleive in creation.

I believe in both. Here's why...
The story of creation says that god created the world in 7 days. That has been proven wrong.
It has also been all but proven that the stages of the creation of universe happened in the same order as they did in the story of creation.
So scrap the word "day" and change it for "stage". Guess what... Its accurate according to science.

On Adam and Eve... Been proven wrong, right? No.... It hasn't. Hasn't even been proven as improbable.
In the story of creation, God created man and woman on the sixth day. "Man and Women he created THEM" it says.
Then he rested on the seventh.
Then... Chapter two... He creates Adam and eve.
Notice, other than the gospels, which are 4 peoples separate accounts of one mans life, the bible does not repeat itself. It does not tell the same stories twice, it does not restate the laws more than once, ect. So why does it repeat itself here? The only logical conclusion is that these are two separate incidents.
Next piece of biblical evidence... After Adam and Eve were banished, they and their sons went to a place called Nod... Where Cain took a wife. Did he marry his sister? No... He married one of the woman or decedents of the first creation of man and woman. That section of the bible is not real clear on specific timelines....

Now... How exactly did it happen that before modern science, anyone was able to accurately portray the order of events in the creation of the universe? Either they were damn good at guessing, or someone told them.
God? I believe so...
Aliens? Maybe...
Was there a completely modern and civilized society somewhere else that then moved to Earth and created this wonderful story for control? Maybe...
I really don't know... I wasn't there... I believe its god...

Why Do I believe its god?
Think about the life of an agnostic. Never really believing in anything. "Could be one thing... Could be another... and until there is proof... I'm gonna ride the fence" They live in this piss-hole of a world and believe that it is everything there is. Who the hell wants THIS to be it?

Now the Atheists. They have thought about it. They have picked a side. they believe something without tangible evidence... Just like Religious people. However, they also believe this is it... Same goes... Honestly... This is all you hope for?

Then there is religious people.... Most of us have thought about it. The ones who haven't count in my mind as much as agnostics. We have decided that there is a God of some sort or anther. We believe that there is an afterlife. We believe that if we behave, believe, and show our faith by our acts, we will be eternally rewarded with never ending happiness. If we don’t... well... The opposite.

To close... I could be wrong. There could be no after life. this crap-hole could be it. I could be wasting me time. The Atheists could be right.... And y'all know what? You can be pleased for eternity while the worms eat your face.

I could also very well be right. At which point.... Sucks to be you bru...

There is also another possibility... I could be right, but have chosen the wrong religion... At which point, guess I'll see you in hell.

The point to all of this is simple. No mans belief's are anymore open for ridicule and being called myth and fantasy until SOMEONE proves beyond ALL (not reasonable, But all) doubt that they are right and everyone else is wrong. Excepting of course people that still follow religions that science has already proved beyond all doubt that they are wrong... I cant think of any.

Can anyone actually commune the the dead so that we know?

Views: 701

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Im curious is your Doctorate in sanitation?

the universe is still referred to as infinite

No it isn't. I don't think I have ever heard that coming from any reputable source.

 

If the universe was created by an explosion of some object, and everything was created by that object, then that object would be everywhere and still exist.

I don't think I understand you here... If you detonate a hand grenade, the hand grenade is not "everywhere". Also, we are not sure if there was an explosion or not. The big bang theory is rather poorly named in that it currently only indicates a rapid expansion after a certain length of time... before that time, no one is claiming to know what happened.

 

An evolutionist by definition does not beleive in creation.

Actually, evolution says nothing about the creation of life from non-life(either by natural or supernatural means). So no, your definition of evolutionist is wrong. Evolution only explains how changes can lead to speciation.

 

It has also been all but proven that the stages of the creation of universe happened in the same order as they did in the story of creation.

I'm sorry, I'm not so sure about that... lets take a look at the order of creation in the bible:

Earth and "heavens", light, the firmament(?), plants, sun and moon and stars, living beings(animal), people(not Adam and Eve). 

I'm sorry but that is not the "proven" order of how the universe was created. I'll point out the first point and let other people do the rest. Age of the universe: 13.5 to 14.5 billion years. Age of the Earth: 4 to 4.5 billion years. In order for the earth to be composed of more than just hydrogen, stars MUST of been present before the earth formed in order to build these other molecules using fusion. Therefore: stars and light were created before the Earth. Bible does not accurately depict the beginnings of the universe.

 

On Adam and Eve... Been proven wrong, right?

It also hasn't been proven right. If I say there is a teapot orbiting the sun, midway between the earth and mars, you would reject that because there is no evidence of it. Similarly, I reject your implicit assertion that Adam and Eve existed because they have not been proven to not exist.

 

How exactly did it happen that before modern science, anyone was able to accurately portray the order of events in the creation of the universe?

As shown above, they didn't accurately portray the order of events in the creation of the universe...they got it totally wrong.

 

God? I believe so... 
Aliens? Maybe...

Aliens are more probably than God. Why? Life has started at least once in our observation(us and the rest of life on earth) so it is not unreasonable to assume it might happen elsewhere also. On the other hand, there is no evidence of any gods existing, so it is reasonable to assume that none exist.

 

This is all you hope for?

Hope has nothing to do with it. If I got what I hoped for then Heaven would be full of consequence free pleasures like drugs, sex, and high speed internet. But alas, hope has nothing to do with what exists. I believe what I believe because the evidence has lead me to that belief.

 

There is also another possibility...

I hope you are not saying that each possibility has an equal chance of being correct? I think you are more sensible than that so I won't even comment on it. However, I still don't understand why you have chosen Christianity rather than some other religion. Is it because you read the bible and found it to describe the universe better than other religious texts? I have heard the Quran contains no contradictions, wouldn't that mean it makes more sense than the bible? Also, why do you feel the need to just accept one of the existing answers. What is wrong with saying "I don't know"? you have already done it for some things.

 

No mans belief's are anymore open for ridicule and being called myth and fantasy until SOMEONE proves beyond ALL (not reasonable, But all) doubt that they are right and everyone else is wrong.

I have two things to say here. First, I disagree, I think reasonable doubt is cause enough to dismiss something as fantasy, at least until it is no longer reasonably doubted. Second, if you believe in the Christian God, does that mean a Muslim's beliefs are not valid? Why? If they are valid because you do not KNOW beyond ALL doubt that your god is real, then you are infact an agnostic theist.

 

I am afraid we may have different definitions of Atheists and Agnostics. I won't go over it again here as it appears that Stephen may of already discussed this.

I have always found the notion of heaven to be quite contradictory, the thought that when one dies, we are given what we want. What if we wanted heaven to cease to exist, should we reach such a place, would it simply stop existing because that is what my ideal heaven would constitute? A heaven free afterlife!?

What if Hitler went to heaven and wanted all the non-Aryan people to go to hell? Quite contradictory indeed, although if God is indeed all-powerful, he could make it work.

Liam got a hefty dose of atheist attitude the other day on another thread, we promised we would behave when he came back.

It has also been all but proven that the stages of the creation of universe happened in the same order as they did in the story of creation.
So scrap the word "day" and change it for "stage". Guess what... Its accurate according to science.

I need to see some sort of reference for this.  In all my years of studying science, I have never heard science agreeing/supporting the sequence of creation given in the Bible.  [1. Create Universe (mainly just the Earth and empty space) and creating light; 2. ??? 3. Suddenly: land... suddenly vegetation; 4. The Sun, the moon, and all other stars+planets in the universe; 5. Birds and sea critters; 6. animals+human overlords.]

 

Before I get to what science actually deems accurate,  I want to address the glaring logical impossibilities.  Light was created before the sources that emit the photons for light were created (stars/"the Sun").  Light could not be present without something to emit the photons, thus this cannot be accurate simply by logic alone. Another, problem is day/"stage" 2.  I do not even know what the Bible is saying here:

 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

 

I know the water below is talking about the oceans, lakes, etc, but what is the "water above [the vault]"?  {vault==sky}  I have heard nothing about any water "above the sky"; perhaps the tribesmen wrote that to explain the blue color of the sky. 

 

That brings me to What science really says about creation.and the origins of life.

 

None of that even faintly resembles the story of creation.  So, I would definitely like to see your source that tells you the creation is "accurate according to science."

 

What bible are you reading?

Skeptics Annotated bible calls it a "Firmament"

Just for interest's sake: the LOLcat bible calls it a ceiling (http://www.lolcatbible.com/index.php?title=Genesis_1)
I really liked what you had to say but Stephen hawking has explained with great detail that there was no object for a big bang there was simply nothing. Simply think of the nothing as a black whole the black whole that we know today is a star imploding in itself causing a gravitational pull that not even light can escape. Nothing is faster than the speed of light. When entered into a black whole it will actually stop time. Also think of a man wanting to build a hill out of flat land he must take out of the land to make the hill the universe is the same way there are both an equally large amount of positive and negative particles in space therefore space is equal to zero which means that it all equals out to nothing also think of a coffee u can't really have a cup of coffee made already for u u have to make it yourself first with the coffee beans then water and maybe even some milk and sugar but if u was to travel to the atomic level and down to to the sub atomic level you enter a world where things are popping into existence out of nothing. So with all that in mind back to the begining where we have a black whole if u have no time before the big bang then how can u have time to create a whole universe in 7 days? Also with the coffee thing and the hill if there was nothing in existence and things can be made out of nothing then the possibility of there being a god creating the universe is not a reliable answer which also means there would be no heaven or afterlife either. It makes me want to appreciate my life that I have now a little more.
Im simply talking about m theory
Yeah but u do have to agree that Stephen hawking does make a pretty valid point.

Well, Stephen, Matt and Nelson has pretty much covered most of what I wanted to say, so I won’t fill this thread up with repeating loops, but I did want to add my 2 cents on a couple of matters:

1-I wholeheartedly disagree with your view of Agnostics and Atheists (the three above explained it ever so well).

2-The bible and science proving the same story notion… again, not sure how you came to this conclusion.

3- I too am having difficulty understanding how you cannot be a creationist.  As I understand it (please correct me if I’m wrong) you just don’t seem to believe in the Intelligent Design Theory to explain how life got to the point of where it is today.  You can still be a creationist and believe in evolution, The Who and the How argument, God created everything and Evolution was the tool he used to accomplish it.  But then that also rips holes in the bible’s story, but people have tried to make modern understanding and ancient text coincide with each other (which I also don’t buy, but that’s a whole other debate).  Ultimately you still believe a god created everything, not on the same wavelength of ID followers, but still in a creator none the less.

4- The last comment I wanted to make was a reply to this statement:

Why Do I believe its god?
Think about the life of an agnostic. … They live in this piss-hole of a world and believe that it is everything there is. Who the hell wants THIS to be it?

Now the Atheists. … they also believe this is it... Same goes... Honestly... This is all you hope for?”

It has nothing to do with wanting or hoping this to be our only life, it has to do with accepting the facts as they are and coping with them.  The fact that you used the word “want” as if you have a choice in how things would be, tells me that part of you (perhaps even subconsciously) is still trying to cope with the possibility that yes, this is it, we get at an average of 70ish years if we’re lucky and then the worms eat our faces.   The whole point of religion is to want a better existence after this one ends.  Our strongest instinct is for survival, so is it so strange to assume that base primal instinct also governs our thoughts?  That the fear of death and/or the need to survive is so strong that we trick ourselves into buying into a story that would grant us eternal happiness (which Christian heaven also sucks ass, check out my blog to hear my opinion on that matter)?  Atheists simply accept the reality that this is it, after we die that’s all, because there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.  Sure we would all want to believe that there is a Happy Land in the sky and know that we will be happy forever… but there is no evidence to support the fact.  And continuing with this line of thinking, we would much rather live the life that we are certain we will experience to the fullest, rather than limit and restrict ourselves from enjoying and living a life that a holy text deems wrong, when it makes no sense to abstain from them (as long as your actions hurt no one). 

Liam, I understand you created this post because of the discussion that was had over the diagram. I just have one question for you. I am sincerely interested and not just being a dick. Why do you consider yourself to be Catholic?

RSS

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service