Do you believe in God and why

[KonaRain]

The big  bang has been replaced with the Webb's view of the  Universe expanding, instead of speeding away from everything leading to a dark  death of the universe..The above video, I have bandwidth issues in Hawaiian rainforest and can't see the thumbnail, then I'll delete this.. AlohaZ 

 

[KonaRain]

From the above video from James Webb..

[KonaRain]

James Webb proves possible big bang debunked, maybe just Eternity 

https://youtu.be/9ax8hU2zW54

Edited September 19, 2022 by KonaRain
not sure if posted..sorry

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, KonaRain said:

https://youtu.be/9ax8hU2zW54

.. and your point is ?

[KonaRain]

Thanks for being there..

[KonaRain]

Aloha

[Woof999]

 

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I do not ascribe human values or emotions to a being that can create universes, but nor do I think God "cares" about us as individuals. IMO God created life the universe and everything and left the universe to get on with it.

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Why do you assume that God has any human emotions, eg love?

I don't. If I don't believe in a god as written by others then I don't believe he has any traits at all. My replies were to another poster who believes that god is all about love.

 

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I do not know if they were from another planet, but that's possible.

Certainly more plausible than a god I would say, but I've not had your Damascus moment.

 

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

For all I know, God has made millions of universes, trying to get it right. IMO,

Like a child with Lego blocks? Just throw them together enough times and something that appears designed might come out of them? That doesn't describe an entity that is all powerful. It's more akin to the monkeys writing a collection of words enough times until they produce the works of Shakespeare.

 

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The evidence is there if one chooses to look, but we can't make you see it.

There's that answer again.

 

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Some of us believe because we looked around and saw a world that came into being because the creator provided the material to do so many billions of years ago.

I understand. I just think that "we can't explain it with our current knowledge so we'll say it must have been created by a supernatural power" is a lazy answer and misses a huge opportunity to gain new knowledge.

 

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Some people are born deformed because something went wrong, not because a being ordained that they should be born so.

Which would discount others' beliefs that their god is all powerful and all knowing. He makes mistakes and potentially doesn't care about them.

 

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The story of Adam and Eve explains that. God looked after them and they never had a problem, never got sick, never hungry etc. Then they were kicked out of Eden and left to get on with it as best they could. Can't have it both ways.

So is the bible based on fact then? How can you use the story of Adam and Eve to explain something when it is taken from a story book that has undertones of love (interspersed with plenty of hate). If this story were true then god again made a flawed product, didn't admit to his own failings and just cast that product aside.

 

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If one does not believe in God, explain where the material to form the universe came from. Did it just magically appear out of nowhere? That wouldn't be very scientific, would it?

About as scientific as the god also appearing out of nowhere. Others have stated that god has existed for eternity in which case I'll steal that answer and say the energy / material of the universe has existed for eternity and didn't need a creator.

[mauGR1]

8 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

Others have stated that god has existed for eternity in which case I'll steal that answer and say the energy / material of the universe has existed for eternity and didn't need a creator.

Creation, preservation and destruction are 3 main forces which keep things going,  so to speak.

One can observe those forces at work in everything, including his own thoughts. 

A solar system is a giant atom, an atom is a tiny solar system. 

Big or small, it's just a subjective opinion of the observer.

[ivor bigun]

wow boys your still going ,it is man that rules ,the church always wants more money ,they are some of the largest landowners in Britain ,why , when i was young i believed ,then i grew up ..

[mauGR1]

4 minutes ago, ivor bigun said:

wow boys your still going ,it is man that rules ,the church always wants more money ,they are some of the largest landowners in Britain ,why , when i was young i believed ,then i grew up ..

Always thinking about money eh.. it must be God's fault ????

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Lol.

What removed that "insanity"  from me is just my age..

At some point i just got tired????

I wish that happened to me. Even a radical prostatectomy didn't save me from the insanity.

I think I'll be dreaming of having it with attractive Thai girls on my death bed.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, Woof999 said:

About as scientific as the god also appearing out of nowhere. Others have stated that god has existed for eternity in which case I'll steal that answer and say the energy / material of the universe has existed for eternity and didn't need a creator.

If I could get a pile of rocks and leave it in a vacuum for 50 billion years, it would still be a pile of rocks.

Takes a creator/ force/ whatever you like to describe it as, to make that pile of rocks become life.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, ivor bigun said:

wow boys your still going ,it is man that rules ,the church always wants more money ,they are some of the largest landowners in Britain ,why , when i was young i believed ,then i grew up ..

You are still confusing religion with faith.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, Woof999 said:

So is the bible based on fact then? How can you use the story of Adam and Eve to explain something when it is taken from a story book that has undertones of love (interspersed with plenty of hate). If this story were true then god again made a flawed product, didn't admit to his own failings and just cast that product aside.

I've already said what I think the Bible is and I'm not going to keep repeating myself for those that don't read all the posts.

 

The story of Adam and Eve is a fable explaining why humans ( unlike lower animals ) have freedom of choice.

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, KonaRain said:

James Webb proves possible big bang debunked, maybe just Eternity 

https://youtu.be/9ax8hU2zW54

Who among us really knows, but if the Big Bang isn't repeated eventually the suns will run out of fuel and die, leaving a universe of dead suns and planets.

Perhaps one day in a few million years whatever intelligent species is inhabiting planet Earth will know what happens the other side of a black hole.

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, KonaRain said:

The big  bang has been replaced with the Webb's view of the  Universe expanding, instead of speeding away from everything leading to a dark  death of the universe..The above video, I have bandwidth issues in Hawaiian rainforest and can't see the thumbnail, then I'll delete this.. AlohaZ 

 

Doesn't matter if it's expanding or speeding away. Once the suns run out of fuel they will die.

[mauGR1]

32 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You are still confusing religion with faith.

At this time i would be surprised if he has an idea of what we're talking about ????

[Sunmaster]

17 hours ago, Elad said:

Blimey whats happened to this thread. It used to be quite interesting, but now, just reading some of these posts is like pulling teeth.

It seems we have religious fundamentalists in here, and you cannot debate a fundamentalist. Why? because evidence means absolutely nothing to them, no matter how much you put on the table.

An example would be the American young Earth creationist Kurt Wise who has a PhD in Geology from Harvard university. Kurt Wise said:

 

" I am a young age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate."  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Wise

 

You can't do anything with a mind like that, and a mind like that is a disgrace to the human race.

Same here. They come sometimes, bang on the bible for a while, then leave again. 

Be patient 

[Tippaporn]

7 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

3 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

1) Where does consciousness fit into the theory of evolution?  What role does consciousness play?

I would suggest that self awareness, coupled with intelligence would allow you to make better choices. Better choices = more chance of reproducing and more chance of longevity.

From Wiki:

Consciousness, at its simplest, is sentience or awareness of internal and external existence.  Despite millennia of analyses, definitions, explanations and debates by philosophers and scientists, consciousness remains puzzling and controversial, being "at once the most familiar and [also the] most mysterious aspect of our lives."  Perhaps the only widely agreed notion about the topic is the intuition that consciousness exists.

 

That last statement says a lot about what science understands of consciousness.  And it's not a whole lot.  Consciousness is much more than self awareness.  It is what we are and all which that entails.  Consciousness is life itself.  Given that definition rather than yours, which appears to be the simplest form - sentience or awareness, then what's our role in evolution?  Or to rephrase, do we play any role?  Or does natural selection dictate strictly on it's own what direction is taken for us?  We have no say in the matter of our own evolutionary condition or experience?

What does choice or intelligence have to do with the theory of evolution?  Evolution is defined as the inheritance of characteristics which over generations produce genetic variations.  Natural selection and genetic drift then act on this variation.  Personal choice and intelligence has squat to do with evolution according to the theory.  Which is pretty much what my question was getting at.  So your answer is nada.  No role whatsoever.  And you believe this to be plausible?  In no way does that conclusion disturb your common sense?

 

The bottom line is that if science has no clue as to what consciousness is, what we are, or what life is, then how can science be so cocksure that consciousness plays no role?  Or are they making a grave, and erroneous, assumption due to their lack of knowledge and understanding?  You might want to think about the following and the implications that statement has on the theory of evolution.

"Chemicals themselves will not give rise to consciousness or life. Your scientists will have to face the fact that consciousness comes first and evolves its own form."
—The Seth Material, Chapter Ten

 

[Woof999]

42 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

That last statement says a lot about what science understands of consciousness.  And it's not a whole lot.

.... and science has the self awareness to at least admit that. The "believers" just say - "you can't explain it, so it must be god", which is hardly convincing.

 

43 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

What does choice or intelligence have to do with the theory of evolution?

If your lack of intelligence leads you to make decisions that shorten your lifespan then you're hardly likely to contribute to evolution.

 

48 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

The bottom line is that if science has no clue as to what consciousness is, what we are, or what life is, then how can science be so cocksure that consciousness plays no role?

Where does science say it is sure let alone cocksure?

 

43 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

—The Seth Material, Chapter Ten

and what makes you so cocksure that Jane Roberts was right?

 

You mock science yet without it you might well be chipping away your answers from a block of stone on Mount Ararat rather than on a modern forum that would never exist without it.

[Tippaporn]

 

1 hour ago, Woof999 said:

5 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

2) Where does the free will of consciousness fit into the theory?

Quantum theory might be leading us down the path to believe that there is no such thing as free will. The jury's out on that one at the moment.

I've gotten wind of this "new" and utterly ridiculous scientific theory.  It's based on pure naturalism; the idea or belief that only natural laws and forces operate in the universe.  And that obviously does not include us at all.  This theory may as well state that subjective reality has been declared dead.  We've been parsed down to being nothing more than biological, mechanised robots.  If you're willing to believe this idea, despite all of your lived evidence to the contrary, then I'm convinced that you've given your mind over, along with your common sense, completely to science.  Once that happens then there's no thought whatsoever required on your part to think about anything.  As long as science proclaims a "truth," no matter how ludicrous, you seem to willingly and blindly follow.

If you decide of your own free will to walk across the room, and you do so, then it wasn't your free will which made that choice and caused you to take that action?  And what of your desire and intention to do so?  Are you going to say desire and intention doesn't exist either?  It just doesn't get more ludicrous, more absurd than a belief that free will is nonexistent.  The only scientific theory which comes close to reaching that level of inanity is the idea that biology does not determine gender.  Pretty soon you'll be denying your own existence.

Science is making the disastrous mistake of putting the cart before the horse.  Science observes the effects of consciousness on the body and then turns it all upside down by mistaking the effects as the cause which then effects consciousness.  An example of this in-reverse thinking can be seen in science's belief that the chemicals in the brain cause human emotion.  Instead, emotions affect the chemicals in the brain.  Science has it completely backwards.

Without free will making choices would be an impossibility.

In any case, I conclude that free will does not enter into science's theory of evolution equation.  And you're good with that.

[Tippaporn]

 

3 hours ago, Woof999 said:

6 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

3) What is Natural Selection?  Define it in a functional way, a working model which shows the relationship with consciousness and it's own force?

I think your definition of a force is different than mine, but natural selection is very well defined. Even if you don't agree with it, I'm be pretty sure you know how it is defined.

According to science:

 

Natural selection is the differential survival and reproduction of individuals due to differences in phenotype.  Natural selection acts on the phenotype.

When anything acts on something else then force is implied.  Therefore natural selection is a force as defined above.  In physics, a force is an influence that can change the motion of an object.  Do you have a different definition of force?

Natural selection is also defined as the dynamic evolutionary process that fits organisms to their environment.  Therefore, no free will, no choice, and the organism plays no part whatsoever in it's own direction or fulfillment.

[Tippaporn]

On 9/14/2022 at 1:44 PM, Woof999 said:

On 9/14/2022 at 10:15 AM, Tippaporn said:

4) If the existence of God cannot be proven has the existence of Natural Selection been proven?

The existence of natural selection can be shown to be factual regardless of the existence of your god.

Show it, then.  Put up your "facts" which prove it's existence.  Since you're so adamant that natural selection exists then it can't be that difficult for you to produce the concrete evidence.

BTW, I'm not religious.  I do believe in a source but I don't use the term "God."  For one, the label has too many preconceived notions attached to it and for another my concept is not at all as Christians personify the idea of God.

 

[Tippaporn]

On 9/14/2022 at 1:44 PM, Woof999 said:

On 9/14/2022 at 10:15 AM, Tippaporn said:

5) If Natural Selection exists as a determinative force then explain what created this force and where it exists?  Can it be quantified in any way?  Can you list it's properties?

Probably more so than anyone can quantify or list the properties of their god. Again, why are you using the term force?

Probably?  What a minute . . .

 

On 9/14/2022 at 1:44 PM, Woof999 said:

The existence of natural selection can be shown to be factual regardless of the existence of your god.

First you claim it's existence is "factual."  Which, if true, you should be able to answer some of my questions in detail.  Then you qualify any answers as being probable.  How well do you understand this subject matter?  Seems to me you're just repeating what you've been told by someone.

[Tippaporn]

On 9/14/2022 at 1:44 PM, Woof999 said:

On 9/14/2022 at 10:15 AM, Tippaporn said:

6) Provide a timeline of evolution from the origin of life to each and every new life form.  A rough timeline will suffice.

A rough timeline? Somewhat over 14 billion years, less a few hundred million years when things were still a little warm and sticky.

You get zero debating points for giving a worthless answer.  Specificity.  Do you have any?  When the original life form made it's first jump what was it to?  And what was it's next jump?  And so on.  If you can't  get that specific then how about a jump from one species to the creation of an entirely new species?  Since there's no fossil records to show this definitive transmutation could you at least illustrate the metamorphosis?

Links to someone who has, perhaps?  Or links to the scientific data that claims this?  If the theory of evolution is proven then it shouldn't be hard to produce this type of material.

 

[Tippaporn]

On 9/14/2022 at 1:44 PM, Woof999 said:

On 9/14/2022 at 10:15 AM, Tippaporn said:

7) Given the trillions of life forms in existence today how long would it take to produce all of these lifeforms?

See the answer to question 6. Are you perhaps a young earth creationist whereby your timeline wavers from mine by many orders?

Again, no specificity.  14 billion years, give or take, depending on who you talk to.

Physicists at least understand the simultaneous nature of time.  Everything is happening at once.  Certainly not according to our neurological experience.  If time is simultaneous and everything is happening at once then there are no beginnings or endings.  Granted, that's a tough concept to wrap one's head around when the only thing we're aware of is an existence in consecutive time . . . moment by moment by moment.  An understanding of that requires more than the use of one's intellect.

 

[Woof999]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

Show it, then.  Put up your "facts" which prove it's existence.

On a lighthearted note, this would be a good starting point: Darwin Awards

 

You've also asked for facts or evidence on the evolution of species. Look up "speciation". Perhaps start here: Speciation

 

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

BTW, I'm not religious.  I do believe in a source but I don't use the term "God."

Out of interest, what term do you use?

 

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

Seems to me you're just repeating what you've been told by someone.

On many points yes. It came from my education. What are your beliefs based on? What you see all around and others don't because they don't want to? I'm just a layman and don't claim to be anything else. What are your credentials that would lead me or anyone else to lend more weight to your arguments above scientists who have studied the subjects for decades?

 

54 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

You get zero debating points for giving a worthless answer.

There are points? What's the current score and who is awarding the points?

 

54 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Specificity.  Do you have any?

For which specific points in evolution? It is believed that primitive life began on Earth within a few hundred million years of its formation. That would have been about 4 billion years ago. (I misquoted 14 billion and am happy to admit it). Homo Sapiens likely arrived around 300,000 years ago, quite probably evolving from Homo Heidelbergensis, from which Neanderthals also likely evolved. The timescales are extended, if you insist that I be more specific, I'd take a stab at quarter past three in the afternoon of 3rd April 298,176 BC (even though the Gregorian calendar, nor any other, existed back then).

 

You continue to demand facts and specificity without providing any of your own. When do you believe Homo Sapiens inhabited Earth? Did they evolve from an earlier species or did they appear out of nowhere as the product of a creator as written in the bible?

Edited September 19, 2022 by Woof999
Edited a minor spelling mistake.

[Mark1066]

On 4/15/2019 at 4:43 PM, luckyluke said:

A fact is, that not committing a murder is only marked at the 6th place in the 10 Commandments. The previous 5 seems to be more important. 

 

The Ten Commandments

1. You shall have no other Gods but me.
2. You shall not make for yourself any idol, nor bow down to it or worship it.
3. You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God.
4. You shall remember and keep the Sabbath day holy.
5. Respect your father and mother.
6. You must not commit murder.
7. You must not commit adultery.
8. You must not steal.
9. You must not give false evidence against your neighbour.
10. You must not be envious of your neighbour's goods. You shall not be envious of his house nor his wife, nor anything that belongs to your neighbour.

If you’d ever actually read the Bible you would know that, according to the Gospels, Jesus said the most important commandments were: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind…the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, Woof999 said:

You continue to demand facts and specificity without providing any of your own. When do you believe Homo Sapiens inhabited Earth? Did they evolve from an earlier species or did they appear out of nowhere as the product of a creator as written in the bible?

I fail to see what relevance any of that has to the existence of God. Species come and go; all part of life in this planet- what they are is of no importance in a cosmic sense.

 

As for "appear out of nowhere as the product of a creator as written in the bible?" where do scientists claim all the material to create the universe came from? I doubt they have a credible answer.

 

8 hours ago, Woof999 said:

Out of interest, what term do you use?

I use the word God, as it keeps it simple, but I suspect his and my opinion of the creator is similar, but not identical by far.

[thaibeachlovers]

19 hours ago, Woof999 said:

Like a child with Lego blocks? Just throw them together enough times and something that appears designed might come out of them? That doesn't describe an entity that is all powerful. It's more akin to the monkeys writing a collection of words enough times until they produce the works of Shakespeare.

Yes, something like that. Scientists often have to try many times to get the desired result, so imagine God as a scientist creating universes till the right result happens. After all, God has infinity to work in.