a good question

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
you cant prove the existence of God what makes you think he can prove that?

I know he can't prove it. I'm just pointing out that his statement is opinion, and not fact.

Originally posted by vistesd
Interesting. Let me ask you this: you speak about God creating himself. Does that mean there was a "time" when God was not?

im not sure, any way you look at it, it is "impossible" for a universe to create itself, it is "impossible" for anyone to create a universe; i guess since there IS a universe, and what we believe is impossible is actually possible, how do we know what is possible or impossible? if you ask me anything is possible.

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
you cant prove the existence of God what makes you think he can prove that?

Exactly the point, E.Venom; There is just no way to prove the existence of God. Some people are convinced of God's existence on the strength of the bible which was written by humans some few hundred years after Christ. Now as far as I am concerned, even those writings, which are questionable, have flaws. For example, I have problems to accept that story about thousands of people fed with few loaves of bread and fish and yet had 12 baskets left-over. So that is not my starting point for the truth. But of course, these people will say, "God can do anything!"

My argument on God's (possible) existence is that it seems too far-fetched (to me) that everything around us happened randomly or by accident. I supposed a scientist can argue that under the right temperature, right pressure, right atmospheric conditions, some atoms might merge to create molecules; which then merge to become amino acids; and then merge to become polypeptide chains; and those chains eventually weave together to become proteins; becoming the so many types of enzymes etc.... and such a long, long process to become specialised organs of a living creature like us. On top of that, it's also unclear at which point did 'life' come in... the unique ability to think, plan etc. We ask ourselves, just what is the probability that all this actually happened by accident or randomly? In my opinion, as I said earlier, it is very far-fetched.

On the other hand, 'probability' is a very strange word. In fact, I think it is a 'relative' word. If, for example, we buy a lotto ticket, what's the probability that we would strike the jackpot? Probably one in 100 millions, say? And yet, people still strike, don't they? The probability is so small, and yet the possibility is there.

Now what is the probability that our existence actually happened through the interactions of forces around us? I think very, very small. But let's not forget that we're talking about billions of years. Maybe it won't happen in 100 million years. But billions of years? Well, it might just happen that way! Why must our existence be designed by someone?

One thing is for sure; I don't buy the idea of God creating all of us and then purportedly gave us the freedom of making our own choices; and yet would punish us if we disobeyed him. That would make him such a conceited being wanting so much to be worshiped.

Originally posted by vistesd
I agree that it rules out metaphysical* searching (I can’t say anything about science). Why is that a problem? If people want to indulge in metaphysical speculation, I have no more problem with that than I have with mythology—G-d knows I’ve done enough of both, and maybe will do more—as long as we own up to what we’re doing: myth and speculation.

So, “ ...[text shortened]... lanation of the “weak force” is not the same as a metaphysical explanation of “why” we are here.

I really fail to see how making an observation based on certain facts about the universe is "mere speculation" to be dismissed because of some nebulous "principle".

Originally posted by ckoh1965
That would make him such a conceited being wanting so much to be worshiped.

we were created in his image; he feels jealousy just as we do. look at it from his point of view, he gave us life, if we were ungreatful enough to worship another god then we are betraying the one who created us, thats pretty outrageous. its like if you have a kid and he called somebody else dad instead of you, you would get extremely jealous.
Edit: the bible calls us God's children, and again this statement only applys if you believe in God.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
You really ARE going nuts Marauder. My assertion was not "meaningless", and you know it. Simply stating that a universal constant does not imply proof of a creator is not the same as stating science to the futile. I have never heard anything more absurd! Science searches for answers to real questions. You are making an assertion based on insufficient data. There may not even be a question.

You sound nuts. What "universal constant"? The "anthropic principle" is a dodge, not anything scientific. And I didn't realize that a discussion centering on what the universe ultimately is isn't a "REAL" question! Your smugness is truly breathtaking.

Originally posted by no1marauder
You sound nuts. What "universal constant"? The "anthropic principle" is a dodge, not anything scientific. And I didn't realize that a discussion centering on what the universe ultimately is isn't a "REAL" question! Your smugness is truly breathtaking.

good point

Originally posted by whodey
The real question you are asking is can we exist beyond the material universe and the answer is yes. After all, time is merely a property of the material universe. Does it not say that God is a spirit? Does it not also say that our human bodies contain our spiritual being? Once our material bodies die it is our spiritual being that continues whether our s ...[text shortened]... istence that we can exist beyond the physical universe and is why being born again is paramount.

Whodey—I’m just teasing around the edges of this, but I think his question goes deeper than that.

The older I get the more I don’t understand concepts that I once thought I understood, and could be pretty glib about using. What is “eternity?” A very long duration of time? An infinite duration of time (which is what the Biblical phrases really mean*)? Or absence of time—timelessness? If the latter, I’m not sure its a concept that’s really coherent, unless one is talking about “psychological time”—just as I’m not sure that it’s coherent to speak of a being “outside” of time.

* In Rev. 10:6, for example, the phrase translated as “forever and ever” is aionas ton aionon, literally ages to ages. Another Greek phrase is eis tous aionas, which means “to the ages” (sometimes it is singular, “to the age” ).

Similarly, one Hebrew phrase is l’olam, which literally means “to time” or “to the world” (olam means “world” in the sense of the whole space-time continuum), and is conventionally translated as “forever” or “everlasting.” The other Hebrew phrase is l’olam va’ed, which means “to world/time and continuing (in perpetuity).”

The phrase in Rev. 10:6 that in the KJV is translated as “time no longer” is chronos ouketi estai, “time not remains”—both NRS and NIV translate this idiomatically as “there shall be no delay,” and the New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) as “the time of waiting is over.”

Originally posted by vistesd
Or absence of time—timelessness?

what is life if it is timeless?

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
we were created in his image; he feels jealousy just as we do. look at it from his point of view, he gave us life, if we were ungreatful enough to worship another god then we are betraying the one who created us, thats pretty outrageous. its like if you have a kid and he called somebody else dad instead of you, you would get extremely jealous.
Edit: the bible calls us God's children, and again this statement only applys if you believe in God.

Well, it is clear to me that you have chosen to believe in the existence of God. Fine. So God created the world and everything in it. And although your idea of God being a jealous person is new to me, I can live with it.

Let us assume for a moment that God really did create everything. Is that reason enough for us to obey him unconditionally? Why make it so difficult for us? Why can't he appear for us to see with our very own eyes? That way, there will be no more doubts. There will be no worshiping other false God. And hence he won't have to feel jealous no more. Surely it's the simplest thing to do on his part? He has done much greater things in the past, I'm sure appearing in person in say once a year should be easy enough.

UNLESS! There is no God, then it is easily explained. If there is no God, it follows that no God can appear in person. It can only appear in people's imagination. It remains an idea, you see.

The other explanation is also possible, namely, that God did create all of us. And then he got old and died ages ago. And that's why he can't make himself appear NOW. We, being the fools that we are, still continue worshiping a God that is no longer around? In fact, that would explain why some foetuses would die while still in the wombs. Surely God would want to save those babies that he loves so much, wouldn't he? Unless, he's not around to save them.

I know all this are so silly. A whole bunch of empty ideas. But if you think of it, we can come up with so many strange ideas, and at the end of it all, they are just ideas, not facts.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I really fail to see how making an observation based on certain facts about the universe is "mere speculation" to be dismissed because of some nebulous "principle".

Okay, you’re addressing Scott’s mention of the anthropic principle. I was just addressing the question of metaphysical questions. I’ve been hung up on this question of meaning and purpose lately, and I’m jumping too many threads. What I think the universe discloses are facts or phenomena, which we observe and interpret. I think when we ask metaphysical questions about “meaning” and “purpose” we move into the realm of speculation and creativity (“mere” is not a word I would apply).

Maybe I’m being picky, but I wouldn’t say that the universe discloses evidence of “purposeful creation,” but that we are free to make that (creative and speculative) interpretation of what facts and phenomena are disclosed, and on aesthetic grounds might be justified in doing so. At what point the evidence would justify that interpretation on other grounds, I don’t know—but I’m not there yet (or perhaps I should say that I’m no longer there).

I’m satisfied to start with “we’re here because we’re here”—and the basic ground of pre-conceptual awareness where there are no such questions, because there is just being aware of “is as is,” which I think is irreducible (Zen)—and take up the challenge of composing meaning from there.

Originally posted by ckoh1965
Well, it is clear to me that you have chosen to believe in the existence of God. Fine. So God created the world and everything in it. And although your idea of God being a jealous person is new to me, I can live with it.

Let us assume for a moment that God really did create everything. Is that reason enough for us to obey him unconditionally? Why make it so difficult for us? Why can't he appear for us to see with our very own eyes? That way, there will be no more doubts. There will be no worshiping other false God. And hence he won't have to feel jealous no more. Surely it's the simplest thing to do on his part? He has done much greater things in the past, I'm sure appearing in person in say once a year should be easy enough.

we are his children, and he guides us just like we guide our children, if we are good parents. isnt it necessary for children to obey their parents most of the time?

[b]The other explanation is also possible, namely, that God did create all of us. And then he got old and died ages ago. And that's why he can't make himself appear NOW. We, being the fools that we are, still continue worshiping a God that is no longer around? In fact, that would explain why some foetuses would die while still in the wombs. Surely God would want to save those babies that he loves so much, wouldn't he? Unless, he's not around to save them.

he CAN appear to us, he says he will in the second coming.

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
what is life if it is timeless?

I don't know, which is why I posed your question to Whodey again.

Originally posted by vistesd
I don't know, which is why I posed your question to Whodey again.

my guess is, "timeless life" would be "true death" mentioned in this thread:
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=54550
or
ive heard that some psychics say they seen hell, and it is just emptiness; if that is true, it sounds like "timeless life" which sounds like hell, since an eternity of emptiness, no moveing,speaking, probably just thinking would be a terrible punishment and drive anyone insane. sounds much worse than a firey hell.

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
Originally posted by ckoh1965
[b]we are his children, and he guides us just like we guide our children, if we are good parents. isnt it necessary for children to obey their parents most of the time?

[b][b/]

he CAN appear to us, he says he will in the second coming.

That is a very interesting question. I have often wondered myself what is the general answer to that question. Well, let me try to answer it, but this is only my personal opinion!

When I was about 6 years old, my parents divorced. My dad remarried and hardly spent any time with us kids. So we had to live with our grandparents. Oh well, we did get to see dad about once a year for about a week or so. Now of course we are all grown up and dad somehow gets to see us more frequently. The funny thing is that he expects us all to obey him and respect him. Let me tell you that I respect him not one bit! Why should I respect a person who was never around when we needed him?

What has God given me all these years of suffering? Nothing! I am where I am today because I put in efforts and sacrifices. And God was never there, just like my dad was never there for me! Thank you for nothing!

As for God's promise that he'll come again the second time, I'd say he better make that coming much sooner. It's been a couple of thousand years now, and people are quickly losing faith in his coming back. Unless again, if he's no longer around...