Do you believe in God and why

[ThaiBunny]

22 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

How could Mohammed visit another planet? He was a man that claimed God spoke to him, not an interplanetary traveller.

Interestingly enough there's one argument that says the man Mohammed never existed - the word Mohammed actually means "the Messenger" and that's a title bestowed on Jesus. The Mohammed biography was simply made up. Islam is just an offshoot of the Christian heresy known as Nestorianism, an anti-Trinitarian faith. Think about it - Nestorianism believed in one God, not the three of the Trinity. Islam's catch-cry is "There is one God and the Messenger is his prophet". Do a Google search on "The hidden origins of Islam"

[fusion58]

19 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

So, from whence did quantum mechanics originate?

 

From experimentation, observation and evidence.

 

If life was created by an intelligent source, that intelligent source would be "God".

 

You would still need to prove such a source was the "God" you conceive.

 

Until then, you're simply substituting the premise for the conclusion.

 

[fusion58]

16 hours ago, CMNightRider said:

We have already talked about how God created the beginning   This is what the Bible says about the end.  If I were an atheist, I would pay particular attention to this.  

 

The event usually referred to as “the end of the world” (eschaton) is described in 2 Peter 3:10:  “The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare.”  This is the culmination of a series of events called “the day of the Lord,” the time when God will intervene in human history for the purpose of judgment.  At that time, all that God has created, “the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1), He will destroy. 

The timing of this event, according to most Bible scholars, is at the end of the 1000-year period called the millennium.  During these 1000 years, Christ will reign on earth as King in Jerusalem, sitting on the throne of David (Luke 1:32-33) and ruling in peace but with a “rod of iron” (Revelation 19:15).  At the end of the 1000 years, Satan will be released, defeated again, and then cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:7-10).  Then, after a final judgment by God, the end of the world described in 2 Peter 3:10 occurs.  The Bible tells us several things about this event. 

First, it will be cataclysmic in scope.  The “heavens” refers to the physical universe – the stars, planets, and galaxies—which will be consumed by some kind of tremendous explosion, possibly a nuclear or atomic reaction that will consume and obliterate all matter as we know it.  All the elements that make up the universe will be melted in the “fervent heat” (2 Peter 3:12).  This will also be a noisy event, described in different Bible versions as a “roar” (NIV), a “great noise” (KJV), a “loud noise” (CEV), and a “thunderous crash” (AMP).  There will be no doubt as to what is happening.  Everyone will see and hear it because we are also told that “the earth and everything in it will be laid bare.” 

Then God will create a “new heaven and a new earth” (Revelation 21:1), which will include the “New Jerusalem” (v. 2), the capital city of heaven, a place of perfect holiness, which will come down from heaven to the new earth.  This is the city where the saints—those whose names were written in the “Lamb’s book of life” (Revelation 13:8)—will live forever. Peter refers to this new creation as “the home of righteousness” (2 Peter 3:13). 

Perhaps the most important part of Peter’s description of that day is his question in verses 11-12:  “Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be?  You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming.”  Christians know what is going to happen, and we should live in a way that reflects that understanding. This life is passing away, and our focus should be on the new heavens and earth to come.  Our “holy and godly” lives should be a testimony to those who do not know the Savior, and we should tell others about Him so they can escape the terrible fate that awaits those who reject Him.  We wait in eager anticipation for God’s “Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come” (1 Thessalonians 1:10).
 

 

^

 

This dissertation is a prime example of a "true because so-and-so says so" argument.

 

No supporting evidence or logical proof to be found. Simply an appeal to authority.

[fusion58]

19 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Of course there is a beginning- the big bang, and an end, when all the suns die for lack of fuel and everything is sucked into black holes.

The question of whether the big bang that happened ~13B years ago was the ONLY such "bang" that has ever occurred is far from settled.

[thaibeachlovers]

21 hours ago, notmyself said:

 

Claim mate. 

 

 

No idea what that means.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, fusion58 said:

The question of whether the big bang that happened ~13B years ago was the ONLY such "bang" that has ever occurred is far from settled.

True, but they can't even explain how ours happened, so I doubt humans will ever answer that.

IMO, after the start, whenever that was, there is a big bang, universe forms from the gas, universe expands, suns runs out of fuel and universe dies, universe sucked into black holes and becomes gas, big bang occurs again, repeat forever.

[thaibeachlovers]

16 hours ago, ThaiBunny said:

Interestingly enough there's one argument that says the man Mohammed never existed - the word Mohammed actually means "the Messenger" and that's a title bestowed on Jesus. The Mohammed biography was simply made up. Islam is just an offshoot of the Christian heresy known as Nestorianism, an anti-Trinitarian faith. Think about it - Nestorianism believed in one God, not the three of the Trinity. Islam's catch-cry is "There is one God and the Messenger is his prophet". Do a Google search on "The hidden origins of Islam"

Perhaps, but it's more likely that he existed and claimed to have been spoken to by God. I have no idea if he was spoken to or just made it up. If he lived now, he'd probably be committed.

Whatever, other men used his sayings to become powerful, which is what the men in funny hats have done throughout history. Interestingly, the worst ( IMO ) parts of Islam were not spoken by Mohammed, but added by other men.

[notmyself]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No idea what that means.

 

Faith isn't a battle- it's an acceptance that there

is something greater than us.

 

.. is is a claim. Putting the ambiguity of 'greater' as a given it can only be said to be highly likely. 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, notmyself said:

 

 

 

 

.. is is a claim. Putting the ambiguity of 'greater' as a given it can only be said to be highly likely. 

I can only assume you are baiting. If a force created life the universe and everything it is obvious that that force would be greater that humanity. We can't even live in peace, or cure cancer.

There is no ambiguity about it.

 

Perhaps you think humanity is actually "great" when it's just an insignificant blip in the cosmos and will be extinct in a cosmic second, probably because we polluted ourselves to annihilation.

[notmyself]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I can only assume you are baiting. If a force created life the universe and everything it is obvious that that force would be greater that humanity. We can't even live in peace, or cure cancer.

There is no ambiguity about it.

 

Perhaps you think humanity is actually "great" when it's just an insignificant blip in the cosmos and will be extinct in a cosmic second, probably because we polluted ourselves to annihilation.

 

Not baiting at all mate.

 

It's an 'if' then 'is' argument which is fine when 'if' can be shown to be true or at the very least reasonable. Your admitted position is that everything HAS to be true until proven otherwise. I would consider 'what is the colour of 7' or 'what does the number 2 taste like' to be meaningless questions.

 

 

 

[ThaiBunny]

2 minutes ago, notmyself said:

I would consider 'what is the colour of 7' or 'what does the number 2 taste like' to be meaningless questions.

Not to someone who has synesthesia

[VincentRJ]

On 6/28/2019 at 8:33 PM, CMNightRider said:

Just stop and think about it.  It’s impossible for something to come from nothing.  To say nothingness caused nothing and created everything is absurd!  Nothing will always remain nothing.

 

Okay! Let's think about it. This is a good point for some philosophical thought. What do we mean by 'nothing'. In common language, the word is often used imprecisely. If we enter a room which has no furniture, or carpets, or devices such a refrigerator, we might say, 'The room is empty', or 'There's nothing in the room'.
Such statements can be understood within their context. However, from a scientific perspective, the statements are clearly false. The room will be full of air, electromagnetic radiation, and possibly Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

 

If we were able to see Dark Matter, you would probably find that you are sitting in a pool of it right now. ????

 

If it is true that Dark Matter and Dark Energy comprise about 95% of all the matter and energy in the universe, which is the current hypothesis, then that puts into perspective how little we really know about the universe, its origins and its future.

 

A more precise definition of 'nothing' is, 'that which we cannot currently detect by any means at our disposal'. Therefore, the statement 'Nothing will always remain nothing', could only be true if we literally, and in reality, could know or detect every 'thing' in the entire universe, which would mean reaching a stage of there being nothing more to learn or understand.

[ThaiBunny]

58 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Let's think about it. This is a good point for some philosophical thought. What do we mean by 'nothing'.

Since we are constrained by the limits of human language it seems somewhat pointless to attempt a discussion about something that is outside human constraints

Edited June 30, 2019 by ThaiBunny

[VincentRJ]

16 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

Since we are constrained by the limits of human language it seems somewhat pointless to attempt a discussion about something that is outside human constraints

Gautama Buddha would have agreed, but he didn't have access to the Hubble telescope. ????

 

To expand on my previous point about 'nothingness', I find it interesting to speculate on the possible implications of the recent discovery that the expansion of the universe is accelerating, rather than 'slowing down', as was thought to be the case a few decades ago, even by Stephen Hawking.

 

The most distant galaxy so far detected by the Hubble telescope is more than 13 billion light years away. That means that we are observing something as it would have appeared in the very distant past, about 13 billion years ago. The light has taken 13 billion years to reach us.
https://earthsky.org/space/scientists-measure-most-distant-galaxy-yet

 

"The team discovered an exceptionally luminous galaxy – called EGS-zs8-1 – more than 13 billion years in the past......Galaxy EGS-zs8-1 is one of the brightest and most massive objects in the early universe and was originally identified based on its particular colors in images from NASA’s Hubble and Spitzer Space Telescopes."

 

The interesting question is, 'what is that galaxy called EGS-zs8-1 doing right now'? We know approximately what it looked like 13 billion years ago, but the expansion of the universe is apparently accelerating, not slowing down, so that galaxy, EGS-zs8-1, is presumably now travelling away from us at greater than the speed of light, which means that we'll never be able to observe it once it has exceeded the speed of light. It will no longer exist, from our perspective.

 

It's reasonable to presume that there could be many, many galaxies that are currently receding from us at a faster rate than the speed of light, which means we will never know anything about them since we, as humans, are limited by the speed of light in all our activities and observations. The following article addresses the issue. 
 

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/104-the-universe/cosmology-and-the-big-bang/expansion-of-the-universe/616-is-the-universe-expanding-faster-than-the-speed-of-light-intermediate

[Skeptic7]

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html

 

[Elad]

On 6/29/2019 at 3:48 AM, CMNightRider said:

We have already talked about how God created the beginning   This is what the Bible says about the end.  If I were an atheist, I would pay particular attention to this.

We don't know how or why the universe came into existence, but we do know that an event (the big bang) happened ~13.7 billion years ago, and the universe has been expanding ever since.

Current models on the expansion predict that the universe will expand forever, and become a very cold, dark and lifeless place in about another 100 billion years from now.

 

We do know however, that our solar system formed about 4.6 billion years ago from a large cloud of gas and dust that coalesced by gravity to form the sun and its system of planets. We also know how the solar system will end. All stars like our sun shine by converting hydrogen into helium, and when the star has used all the hydrogen within its core, then the star will die along with all its planets and any life there.

 

By knowing some values of the properties our sun, we can estimate its lifetime.

 

The sun's power output is 4 x 10²⁶ W (Watts)  where 1 W = 1 J s^-1 (Joules per second)

From this we know that the sun converts 6.3 x 10¹¹ kg of hydrogen into helium every second.

 

Also, the amount of hydrogen within the sun's core that will be converted into helium during its lifetime is: 2.3 x 10²⁹ kg.

 

So the lifetime is approximately:

 

1 year = 3.16 x 10⁷ s (seconds)

 

so then:

 

 

 

Solar scientists use more rigorous methods and they calculate the lifetime of the sun to be very close to 10 billion years.

So that means we have a little over 5 billion years to go before we're toast. I  very much doubt any humans will still be here to witness the sun swell into a red giant at the end of its life.

 

ps. sorry about some of my wording, my English is poor and my physics is even worse!! Also, i don't think the forum supports latex format for maths. I did some of those calculations using a latex editor and pasted them, it looks a little better that way, hopefully.

[fusion58]

18 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You messed up the quote somehow.

 

 

I'm having no trouble viewing, but I'll copy and paste here...

 

So, from whence did quantum mechanics originate?

 

From experimentation, observation and evidence.

 

If life was created by an intelligent source, that intelligent source would be "God".

 

You would still need to prove such a source was the "God" you conceive.

 

Until then, you're simply substituting the premise for the conclusion.

[fusion58]

18 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

True, but they can't even explain how ours happened, so I doubt humans will ever answer that.

IMO, after the start, whenever that was, there is a big bang, universe forms from the gas, universe expands, suns runs out of fuel and universe dies, universe sucked into black holes and becomes gas, big bang occurs again, repeat forever.

 

I won't take exception to the supposition that there may be some phenomena science might never be able to explain (particularly when you think about what it really means to "explain" something.)

 

That said, history is also replete with doomed efforts to fill in the gaps in our scientific knowledge with appeals to supernatural agencies, so I don't want to go there either.

 

Re: the big bang and alternative theories, this guy Paul Steinhardt from Princeton (one of the original proponents of the theory of cosmic inflation) has some really interesting ideas...

 

 

 

[notmyself]

5 hours ago, Elad said:

 

ps. sorry about some of my wording, my English is poor and my physics is even worse!! Also, i don't think the forum supports latex format for maths. I did some of those calculations using a latex editor and pasted them, it looks a little better that way, hopefully.

 

Looks fine on my laptop.

 

Good roundup on the evolution of stars for other members... All very interesting more than a burning bush or cursing a fig tree for not bearing fruit out of season.....

 

 

The gold we lust after was almost certainly forged in a star other than our own. Pretty cool.

 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎6‎/‎30‎/‎2019 at 1:00 PM, VincentRJ said:

Okay! Let's think about it. This is a good point for some philosophical thought. What do we mean by 'nothing'. In common language, the word is often used imprecisely. If we enter a room which has no furniture, or carpets, or devices such a refrigerator, we might say, 'The room is empty', or 'There's nothing in the room'.
Such statements can be understood within their context. However, from a scientific perspective, the statements are clearly false. The room will be full of air, electromagnetic radiation, and possibly Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

 

If we were able to see Dark Matter, you would probably find that you are sitting in a pool of it right now. ????

 

If it is true that Dark Matter and Dark Energy comprise about 95% of all the matter and energy in the universe, which is the current hypothesis, then that puts into perspective how little we really know about the universe, its origins and its future.

 

A more precise definition of 'nothing' is, 'that which we cannot currently detect by any means at our disposal'. Therefore, the statement 'Nothing will always remain nothing', could only be true if we literally, and in reality, could know or detect every 'thing' in the entire universe, which would mean reaching a stage of there being nothing more to learn or understand.

When I say "nothing" I mean absolute nothing ie absence of any matter or force of any sort whatsoever.

If the universe is made up on matter, which it is, from whence did that matter originate?

Atheists can't say that matter just happened all by itself, as that would be illogical, to quote Spock.

However matter came into being, where before there was an absence of everything, some force created it, and that force is what I refer to as "God" the creator of life, the universe and everything.

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, fusion58 said:

I'm having no trouble viewing, but I'll copy and paste here...

 

So, from whence did quantum mechanics originate?

 

From experimentation, observation and evidence.

 

If life was created by an intelligent source, that intelligent source would be "God".

 

You would still need to prove such a source was the "God" you conceive.

 

Until then, you're simply substituting the premise for the conclusion.

You, and no one else has answered the fundamental question of what started it all. Are you saying it always was, because that is illogical. Everything begins and ends.

 

From experimentation, observation and evidence.

That is only of what exists. You don't explain how there was anything to exist in the first place.

 

You would still need to prove such a source was the "God" you conceive.

"Proving" that which is based on faith is impossible. Faith is a belief in the unprovable.

Till science can explain how matter came into existence, which it can't, I'll have faith in a higher power. No human can explain how matter came into being from absolute nothing.

 

Until then, you're simply substituting the premise for the conclusion.

I believe what I believe because there is no proof that I'm wrong, and it is the best explanation I have.

To believe that life the universe and everything just "happened" all by itself, is illogical, IMO.

Edited July 1, 2019 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, Elad said:

Current models on the expansion predict that the universe will expand forever, and become a very cold, dark and lifeless place in about another 100 billion years from now.

What about black holes?

[ThaiBunny]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

What about black holes?

Can we change the title of this thread to that? It certainly behaves like a black hole

[thaibeachlovers]

16 hours ago, Skeptic7 said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html

 

Where, for starters, are the laws of quantum mechanics themselves supposed to have come from? Krauss is more or less upfront, as it turns out, about not having a clue about that.

 

To repeat about not having a clue about that.

 

x the number of years the universe has left before it dies.

 

 

 

[Mike Teavee]

21 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You, and no one else has answered the fundamental question of what started it all. Are you saying it always was, because that is illogical. Everything begins and ends.

 

From experimentation, observation and evidence.

That is only of what exists. You don't explain how there was anything to exist in the first place.

 

You would still need to prove such a source was the "God" you conceive.

"Proving" that which is based on faith is impossible. Faith is a belief in the unprovable.

Till science can explain how matter came into existence, which it can't, I'll have faith in a higher power. No human can explain how matter came into being from absolute nothing.

 

Until then, you're simply substituting the premise for the conclusion.

I believe what I believe because there is no proof that I'm wrong, and it is the best explanation I have.

To believe that life the universe and everything just "happened" all by itself, is illogical, IMO.

So if God created the Universe, who created God? Or has he/she/it just always existed... (as you say, that would be illogical because everything begins & ends) 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

21 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

So if God created the Universe, who created God? Or has he/she/it just always existed... (as you say, that would be illogical because everything begins & ends) 

 

 

Ah, the real question!

Perhaps the matrix exists and we are all just batteries with dreams. Given everything is electricity, anything is possible.

 

BUT, lets say that our universe was created by some force that I refer to as "God". What's to say that "God" isn't a scientist in another universe that was in turn created by a scientist in another universe, ad infinitum. We could just be a twinkle in Orion's Belt on a dog's neck ( did you see Men in Black? )

Anything is possible, but in any event, I only think as far as the being/ force that created our universe, as thinking too much of endless possibilities makes my head hurt.

Edited July 1, 2019 by thaibeachlovers

[sweatalot]

On 6/29/2019 at 3:13 AM, fusion58 said:

Sorry fusion, not a reply to your post just a software bug making you appear in this post

What about  if in the beginning there was only one thing existing. We can call it energy or God or consciousness. Let's call it thing 1. And this thing 1 has the ability to transform itself or parts of itself into arbitrary things. In matter, suns, planets, living beings. But the primary substance, thing 1, always remains whole. Like consciousness seeing, hearing, ...,thinking dreaming  many things always remains one concsiousness

So all these things ultimately consist of one single substance, only in a different manifestation. So to speak only in the consciousness of Thing 1. So all things have more or less consciousness. Some more, some less. Of the things we know, humans have relatively much consciousness, stones much less (I was tried to mention  a particular nationality here, but I could resist).

These things with consciousness, in the first place perhaps humans (Genesis 1:27 So God created man in His own image)  now try to find their origin, their cause. Thinking, using trial and error, they come up with  many wrong ways, and who knows if the right way has already been found.

 

Some of those erroneous ways we can find here in this threat 

Edited July 1, 2019 by sweatalot

[ThaiBunny]

2 minutes ago, sweatalot said:

What about  if in the beginning there was only one thing existed. We can call it energy or God or consciousness. Let's call it thing 1. And this thing 1 has the ability to transform itself or parts of itself into arbitrary things. In matter, suns, planets, living beings.

But all these things ultimately consist of one single substance, only in a different manifestation. So to speak only in the consciousness of Thing 1. So all things have more or less consciousness. Some more, some less, of the things we know, humans have relatively much consciousness, stones much less.

Pantheism 101

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, sweatalot said:

What about  if in the beginning there was only one thing existing. We can call it energy or God or consciousness. Let's call it thing 1. And this thing 1 has the ability to transform itself or parts of itself into arbitrary things. In matter, suns, planets, living beings. But the primary substance, thing 1, always remains whole. Like consciousness seeing, hearing, ...,thinking dreaming  many things always remains one concsiousness

So all these things ultimately consist of one single substance, only in a different manifestation. So to speak only in the consciousness of Thing 1. So all things have more or less consciousness. Some more, some less. Of the things we know, humans have relatively much consciousness, stones much less (I was tried to mention  a particular nationality here, but I could resist).

These things with consciousness, in the first place perhaps humans (Genesis 1:27 So God created man in His own image)  now try to find their origin, their cause. Thinking, using trial and error, they come up with  many wrong ways, and who knows if the right way has already been found.

 

Some of those erroneous ways we can find here in this threat 

You said what I should have said way back in the beginning of this thread.

Well done.

 

I have long believed that all consciousness derives from a single source. It gives the biological machines we use to carry "us" around consciousness, and when our biological transport machine dies, our consciousness goes back to the source, and may later enter another body, which explains reincarnation. While we don't remember the other side, some traces may give us the feeling of having lived before.

 

It also explains Gaia, as the planet on which we live also derives from that source.

 

Edited July 1, 2019 by thaibeachlovers

[sweatalot]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I have long believed that all consciousness derives from a single source.

 

not only consciousness but everything derives from consciousness.

Everything is consciousness and created by consciousness.

Everything is an impermanent manifestation of permanent consciousness.

 

Nothing is eternal but consciousness.

Edited July 1, 2019 by sweatalot