by Philadelphia Ponos 97 Replies latest jw friends
I like the way most creationists claim that god is infinite, but can't extend that same concept to the universe.
Just because we are born, live and die, doesn't mean everything is restricted by our limitations.
If you look up at the night sky and thank some god for putting all the pretty stars there for you to enjoy is the epitome of ignorance.
2Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.
3There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.
4Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,
5Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
6His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
The wonder that attest to intellegent design. It's in every aspect of life. Thanks 1975.
I pity people who can't see the beauty in creation. They can't see what their missing out on. Let them sulk and be miserable.
A dog will puke, then eat it because he doesn't understand what he is doing. To a dog, he has just been blessed by a beautiful new meal.
You may look at us and pity, we see you eating your own vomit and trust me, we are far from sulking and miserable that we can't join you.
Anonymous, et al.
Creating the Universe from The Source is not to create something from nothing but is to create something from Something; the "Something" is The Source.
Also, laws and principles of physics apply to created matter. The Source is not created and thus the principles of His essence can not be explained through physics and its laws ... uncreated "matter" - that being the Source which is God whose essence can not be confined to science.
There is nothing incompatible between science and the bible.
Prophecor & Ixthis right on! I pity those who cannot see that there is a CREATOR. I marvel of what man has invented and we get to enjoy these inventions, buildings, bridges, highways, TV's computers, radio, etc, etc, etc. All this came about by sheer chance? Yes, I pity those who don't believe in a CREATOR.
1975
from first page:
I think the point of the bible is that EVERYTHING came from SOMETHING - That something IS God.
And the Big Bang states that EVERYTHING came from EVERYTHING just re-arranged. The Bible states that God created everything out of nothing.
Why must beauty automatically indicate design? Is not nature capable of beauty on its own? If not, prove why not. Even if you believe nature originates with God, can you at least give
nature itself some credit for producing beautiful things? Must EVERYTHING beautiful be created by a sentient being? Or can some things be naturally beautiful? And what, exactly, does
"beautiful" mean, anyway? That's in the eye of the beholder, and therefore subjective. "Beauty" isn't something which can be measured quantitatively. Having said that, it's impossible to
distinguish between something created by God and something that came about naturally. How can anyone say God creates things with MORE beauty than nature alone can, if beauty is not
a quantity but a perception? And, again, why must beauty indicate an intelligent designer? Why can't beauty come from nature itself? Beauty is something we see when we look at the natural
world, it exists in our minds, it is not a physical quality in that it is meaningless unless we give it meaning. Beauty is not contingent upon God. All it takes to see beauty are eyes, and those
evolved through natural processes as well. Beauty is a concept of our lowly human minds and it is natural. No God necessary.
@Phil: You still haven't answered ANY of my objections!!!
If you want to claim God exists as a physical person and has always been here even before the creation of our Universe, he has to be the Universe and all of us for it to exist since those fundamental laws of physics cannot be broken.
Amen, brother. "Thou art god."
The Source is not created and thus the principles of His essence can not be explained through physics and its laws ... uncreated "matter" - that being the Source which is God whose essence can not be confined to science.
You can't just assert junk like this and expect to be believed on this board. We actually THINK here. You're going to have to offer some evidence.
I marvel of what man has invented and we get to enjoy these inventions, buildings, bridges, highways, TV's computers, radio, etc, etc, etc. All this came about by sheer chance? Yes, I pity those who don't believe in a CREATOR.
No rational thinker asserts that it came about "by sheer chance." You are arguing against a point that nobody is making, like a lame JW demonstration at the service meeting.
People who don't believe in a CREATOR don't "believe in" ANYthing. They examine the available evidence, test it whenever possible, and proceed as if the most likely conclusions are the correct ones. There is no evidence of an external creator who is a separate being from the rest of the universe. There is no way, therefore, to test any assertion that he exists. Since there are FAR MORE LIKELY origins for the universe we live in than an invisible omnipotent intelligent entity, those far more likely hypotheses are accepted and the god hypothesis is rejected.
The only sort of "god" that could even be found by science would be a pantheistic or panentheistic god that exists in all things. Any other god is literally supernatural, beyond nature, and is therefore completely irrelevant to our lives, which is why I think theism and deism are both major intellectual cop-outs. A pantheistic god hasn't been found either, though I'm not sure how hard anyone has looked. I have to admit that I find that construct to be a useful and practical mythology to structure a worldview around, unlike theism.
I just thought of something. If God is omnipresent, that means he's hiding in our peanut butter, under our bed, in our brains, inside the universe, every part of it. If God takes up an infinite amount of space, nothing else can exist because he is taking up all that space. Unless he's INSIDE everything. But, then again, does he exist at the quark level? Is he subatomic? If he is that small, he can't be that big anymore, can he? And the weirdest part of him being inside and outside of everything is this: he is VERY intimate with us. In more ways than one.
