God vs no God (disciple, philosophy, religion, Earth)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is true, we don't need a god, I am perfectly happy with finding other things in my life to make me happy that I don't need to live for god or worship a god in anyway.
And I as well am perfectly happy finding other things in my life to make me happy. My whole day, everyday does not revolve around me trying to please god, to be quite honest I hardly even think of the matter. I simply have a faith and belief that god does exist, and that there is something more to this world than just our flesh and blood. I do believe we will be judged, however I believe it is our hearts that will be judged instead of what religion we belong to, or if we even believe in god at all. I am also eternally grateful for all of the blessings in my life, but I live to be a good person because I want to, not because I live or worship god.
It really comes down to whether you believe that we are just walking physical beings and there is nothing else to this world than that, or if you believe there is more to it all. What happens to your soul when you die? Or do you even have one? Those are the questions that show where your beliefs lie.
Your objection would be more believable if you actually knew what the Big Bang Theory proposes. Here's a hint - your description isn't it. Feel free to try again after doing some research.
More side-stepping and diversion as usual. In case nobody ever hipped you to this...we laymen call growing the space between stuff that starts off at one point, all of a sudden, and at an incomprehensible rate--an "explosion". But it figures that you'd try to proclaim me ignorant rather than address my base point that "blowing stuff up" (oh, excuse me...expanding the space between super hot stuff reeeally fast) wouldn't necessarily serve to "organize" it as incredibly as it is.
And besides, from almost all that I remember about it back in the day as a young fella in college (studying "business & finance" of all filthy things) listening to the guys that were all into it debating the issue...you need to tweak your fundie theory of physics so you can meld the way you describe the very small stuff in "quantum mechanics", with the way you describe the very large stuff in "general relativity"...it seemed there was a lot of head butting there...I don't know the technical aspects of it but I remember watching/hearing some very heated arguments with the participants nearly coming to blows. Funny that the scientific community conflicts on their theories the same way the religious community does...well, on second thought, they don't get THAT wild about it...they never started wars over it (though they finished wars WITH it). Never-the-less, they do have very different ideas among them, so who knows the real deal.
Now add to that Einstein giving props to a Creative God and supportive of the person of Jesus Christ...and that Lemaitre most likely promoted his Theory to instill his religious concepts into physics (what with that contaminating R C Priest bias that a Monsignor would have, after all), and you guys really have a Big Bang of a mess to deal with.
Which is what cracks me up more than anything else...some of your most exalted scientists are/were Believers...even R C Priests! OOOOOOH NOOOOOO!!!
And I as well am perfectly happy finding other things in my life to make me happy. My whole day, everyday does not revolve around me trying to please god, to be quite honest I hardly even think of the matter. I simply have a faith and belief that god does exist, and that there is something more to this world than just our flesh and blood. I do believe we will be judged, however I believe it is our hearts that will be judged instead of what religion we belong to, or if we even believe in god at all. I am also eternally grateful for all of the blessings in my life, but I live to be a good person because I want to, not because I live or worship god.
It really comes down to whether you believe that we are just walking physical beings and there is nothing else to this world than that, or if you believe there is more to it all. What happens to your soul when you die? Or do you even have one? Those are the questions that show where your beliefs lie.
I believe that when I die I'll be dead for good, no afterlife. I think we have to make our own meanings to life and not rely on a mythical god to give us meaning. You have give your life a meaning and you only and the same goes for me. But the human consciousness can not survive physical death, the brain is the reason why we have a consciousness but once it dies our consciousness dies as well and there is nothing much like before we were born there was nothing.
More side-stepping and diversion as usual. In case nobody ever hipped you to this...we laymen call growing the space between stuff that starts off at one point, all of a sudden, and at an incomprehensible rate--an "explosion". But it figures that you'd try to proclaim me ignorant rather than address my base point that "blowing stuff up" (oh, excuse me...expanding the space between super hot stuff reeeally fast) wouldn't necessarily serve to "organize" it as incredibly as it is.
And besides, from almost all that I remember about it back in the day as a young fella in college (studying "business & finance" of all filthy things) listening to the guys that were all into it debating the issue...you need to tweak your fundie theory of physics so you can meld the way you describe the very small stuff in "quantum mechanics", with the way you describe the very large stuff in "general relativity"...it seemed there was a lot of head butting there...I don't know the technical aspects of it but I remember watching/hearing some very heated arguments with the participants nearly coming to blows. Funny that the scientific community conflicts on their theories the same way the religious community does...well, on second thought, they don't get THAT wild about it...they never started wars over it (though they finished wars WITH it). Never-the-less, they do have very different ideas among them, so who knows the real deal.
Now add to that Einstein giving props to a Creative God and supportive of the person of Jesus Christ...and that Lemaitre most likely promoted his Theory to instill his religious concepts into physics (what with that contaminating R C Priest bias that a Monsignor would have, after all), and you guys really have a Big Bang of a mess to deal with.
Which is what cracks me up more than anything else...some of your most exalted scientists are/were Believers...even R C Priests! OOOOOOH NOOOOOO!!!
i agree with you--if I told you there was an explosion in a junkyard and out poped- lets say -a fully finctioning titanic-(big junkyard lol)you'd say i was mad-and guess what this universe is way more complicated than boat.
.....and compare it with the best this apologist site could come up with of those who were/are.(7 in fact...and all bar two of them from the 16th-17th century) Scientists Who Believe in God
OOOOOOH NOOOOOO!!!
...and most likely, those on the "Biblequery" list probably believed in dragons too!!
.....and compare it with the best this apologist site could come up with of those who were/are.(7 in fact...and all bar two of them from the 16th-17th century) Scientists Who Believe in God
OOOOOOH NOOOOOO!!!
...and most likely, those on the "Biblequery" list probably believed in dragons too!!
In case you didn't notice...the focal was The Big Bang...making Einstein and Lemaitre the main guys to note.
I have come to a intuitive perception on the issue...God inspired his Belgian Roman Catholic Servant (Lemaitre) to understand what happened when He created the universe, so that we would know...similar to the way He inspired the Bible authors. Science using things like the WMAP confirm, and now even more fully understand, what God did. It would seem unlikely...even illogical...what happened during the Big Bang would result in a highly organized cosmos...but it was the Will of God...He can do anything He wants through His omnipotence.
What better proof of God than Him inspiring the mind of one of His faithful to understand one of His most significant acheivments?...the creation of the Universe...so that we could appreciate how He did it. Of course, even though we have a concept of what He did, we will probably never know how He did it. No matter...His miracles are for Him alone to perform...and for us to worship Him for.
Thanks and Praise to our Great and All Powerful God!!
All bow down before Him and the majesty of His creation!!
I have come to a intuitive perception on the issue...God inspired his Belgian Roman Catholic Servant (Lemaitre) to understand what happened when He created the universe, so that we would know...similar to the way He inspired the Bible authors.
Quote:
What better proof of God than Him inspiring the mind of one of His faithful to understand one of His most significant acheivments?...the creation of the Universe...so that we could appreciate how He did it.
One can only wonder why he didn't see fit to let the rest of us know.
Quote:
It would seem unlikely...even illogical...what happened during the Big Bang would result in a highly organized cosmos...
Tell me what you see as being "highly organised" in the universe.
Quote:
He can do anything He wants through His omnipotence.
Yet according to HalfNelson, he can't make us believe in him.
More side-stepping and diversion as usual. In case nobody ever hipped you to this...we laymen call growing the space between stuff that starts off at one point, all of a sudden, and at an incomprehensible rate--an "explosion".
And non-Christian laypeople call the Trinity polytheism. Are you happy with being characterized that way, or is correcting that misconception "side-stepping"?
Quote:
But it figures that you'd try to proclaim me ignorant rather than address my base point that "blowing stuff up" (oh, excuse me...expanding the space between super hot stuff reeeally fast) wouldn't necessarily serve to "organize" it as incredibly as it is.
Again, I have no idea what your objection is. What specific organization do you feel is impossible? Calling the universe "organized" means different things to different people. I don't think that the idea of gravity pulling matter together is all that controversial, but then again I'm not always up to date with the latest Christian creationist propaganda.
Quote:
And besides, from almost all that I remember about it back in the day as a young fella in college (studying "business & finance" of all filthy things) listening to the guys that were all into it debating the issue...you need to tweak your fundie theory of physics so you can meld the way you describe the very small stuff in "quantum mechanics", with the way you describe the very large stuff in "general relativity"
Yes, this is a well known problem in physics. Again, I don't get your point. Are you surprised that humans don't know everything?
Quote:
...it seemed there was a lot of head butting there...I don't know the technical aspects of it but I remember watching/hearing some very heated arguments with the participants nearly coming to blows. Funny that the scientific community conflicts on their theories the same way the religious community does...well, on second thought, they don't get THAT wild about it...they never started wars over it (though they finished wars WITH it). Never-the-less, they do have very different ideas among them, so who knows the real deal.
Aside from not killing other people for having the wrong beliefs, science also uses evidence to settle debates like this. That makes it very different that religion. Not sure why you're bringing this up other than to show that religion doesn't have an effective way to separate fact from personal opinion of guys wearing funny hats.
Quote:
Now add to that Einstein giving props to a Creative God and supportive of the person of Jesus Christ
This Einstein - "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."?
Quote:
...and that Lemaitre most likely promoted his Theory to instill his religious concepts into physics
Evidence?
Quote:
Which is what cracks me up more than anything else...some of your most exalted scientists are/were Believers...even R C Priests! OOOOOOH NOOOOOO!!!
If they're able to do science without letting their personal beliefs interfere, who cares? Most people in the field are reasonable enough to know the proper boundaries between science and personal religious beliefs.
I have come to a intuitive perception on the issue
Sounds like your "intuitive perception" that Columbus's detractors thought the world was flat. Never mind the evidence, you've got intuition that can't be faulted. No mere facts are going to change your mind when you have intuition to help you believe what you wish were true.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Praise God!!
