I do believe in a god who loves us allKeep up to date with the current discussion. Although the thread starts out with a simple question, it has turned into a valid debate.~DGEmu StaffP.S. do NOT report short posts made prior to December 8th, 2007Disregard the report date. DO NOT report anything older than 2 weeks. Thanks.
God real or not?
Started by
Guest_stubblehamster
, Feb 15 2005 12:22 AM
6399 replies to this topic
#2
Guest_AdamM
Guest_AdamM
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 12:40 AM
All the major monotheistic religions are merely gigantic conspiracies by the Illuminati to subtly control our way of thinking on a massive scale. Imagine what they do with that sort of pow-*ssssssssss*They're on to me!! There's a weird yellow gas coming through my window, it's-Uurrrrrhh...*hits keyboard with thud*
#3
Guest_DCCJ(!)
Guest_DCCJ(!)
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 12:42 AM
God exists, religion doesn't.
#4
Guest_stubblehamster
Guest_stubblehamster
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 12:44 AM
Nondenominational is the way to be if you believe in god
#5
Guest_AdamM
Guest_AdamM
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 12:50 AM
Christians! The wool is being pulled over your eyes! You are being blinded by the truth! We must rise up and stop the conspiracy before it is too...Is that a silencer at my wind-*pewwww**hits keyboard with thud*
#6
Guest_stubblehamster
Guest_stubblehamster
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 12:53 AM
what makes you think that Christianity is a conspiricy?
#7
Guest_2003raptor
Guest_2003raptor
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 01:24 AM
Well if God exists then Religion has to exist.Both are inextricably intertwined.& Christianity isnt a conspiricy.. loland those who believe in the big bang theory, why would you want to believe in that in the first place? you like the fact that you were spec's that evolved into bigger specs and after soo long became a human? even if God Doesnt exist (which he does), why wouldnt you want to believe that you were created by God? that you didnt just evolve from some crap floating around in space that evovled.. and the fact that it cant be duplicated again? isnt that a clue? that u arent an evolved species? anyways, thats enough for todays lesson, feel free to reply to this, and No Flamming.God exists, religion doesn't.
#8
Guest_stubblehamster
Guest_stubblehamster
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 01:29 AM
you are a very smart person, but when we say religion we mean we are not seprate groups of religions (baptist, methodist, ect.) we all believe in the same god and a lot of times people dont look at that and only look at their denomitation
#9
DarknessR18
-
- Member
-
- 123 posts
Hatchling
Reputation: 0
Neutral
Posted 15 February 2005 - 01:36 AM
I don't believe in one, all-supreme all-loving god. There are many gods. Which one you choose to worship depends on your religion I guess. I don't have any religion, except for videogames. If you could call that a religion. Which you can't. So there. 
#10
Guest_Bejaz
Guest_Bejaz
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 01:44 AM
I don't believe in a god at all. If I did believe an omnipotent being existed, I'm not sure I'd worship it, either.
#11
Guest_BOMEz
Guest_BOMEz
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 01:45 AM
I am also a Christian....just find it tough sometimes to always do the right thing.....I believe in the teachings....I'm just soooo full of sin someitmes
#12
Guest_stubblehamster
Guest_stubblehamster
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 01:53 AM
It is really hard! Everyone I know including myself have the same problem! but what my spiritual advisor (my preacher) always says is to make everyone see you doing the right thing and lead by example
#13
DarknessR18
-
- Member
-
- 123 posts
Hatchling
Reputation: 0
Neutral
Posted 15 February 2005 - 01:55 AM
Just don't let them see you doing the wrong thing! Then you can pretty much get away with anything.
#14
Guest_JohnXIV
Guest_JohnXIV
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 02:02 AM
yea, i do.life (for.. everything) has evolved at some point or another, what's stopping some random bacteria turning us into humans?and how come whales can't breathe underwater? fish can breathe underwater perfectly fine, but whales. they had like 5 billion years, but they still can't breathe like other fish can.can god make a rock he can't lift?God exists, religion doesn't.and those who believe in the big bang theory, why would you want to believe in that in the first place? you like the fact that you were spec's that evolved into bigger specs and after soo long became a human?
#15
Guest_Tineen
Guest_Tineen
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 02:25 AM
i dont believe in God. I believe that humans made him up so that they wouldnt feel alone in the universe.
#16
OuT4BlOoD
-
- Active Member
-
- 43 posts
Egg
Reputation: 0
Neutral
Posted 15 February 2005 - 02:27 AM
i believe in god if there was no god why are we living righ tnow
#17
Guest_bigairman
Guest_bigairman
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 02:35 AM
just think of any experience you have had with god... no one i know has one. if you think of a small organism, it is living on its own and nothing is helping it. we just evolved from small things faster than others.
#18
Guest_The_1ron_lung
Guest_The_1ron_lung
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 02:50 AM
ok.. this is the way i see it. one has to think about the sheer odds being overcome for spontaneous generation to happen.. you know that the chances af a series of amino acids becomeing the exact right protiens to create just one strand of human dna for life at one time is the same as if you layed out every single part of a boeing 757, like washers and nuts and screws all, then a tornado coming through and assembling them all together perfectly.. thats some amazing odds there.. so that is why i believe.. the sheer perfection of everything.. gravity for instance. if it was a little lighter, then we'd float off into space.. if it were a little more our bones would be crushed. i don't know if many people know this.. but before darwin died he had examined the structure of a human eye... the cone shaped parts and how everything worked intricatly and perfectly, he saw this and after alot of math he said that there is almost no way, the odd were so great against an eye this spectacular that, even over anamazing amazing amount of time.. there is almost no way that couyld be developed. and that something must have CREATED it, that something being God. also the concept of human imagination.. taking something that doesnt exist and putting a picture of it in our mind and creating thisngs liek that.. do you see any other animals making new moves like say.. a brd putting leaves on its wings for a greater wingspan.. and therefore a easier way to fly... no of course not.. they know only what they see and feel..all these things seem to stack up very greatly against a non God world.. i dont think any of these things could have ever existed without something bigger than us.. and that is just the problem in some people today.. they cant come to gripps with the fact that they arnt in control... they think they have everything planned and then something bad happened.. up until that point they never even acknowlaged God.. but when something bad happens they always seem to blame Him.. thats how i feel about things
#19
Nightblade
-
- Dragon's Elite
-
- 347 posts
Split-Image Slice
Reputation: 1
Neutral
Posted 15 February 2005 - 03:00 AM
the 1ron lung, i think it is a pure coincidence and amazing luck that our world has life in it. the universe is infinite, so there must be at least one planet with life on it. and one of those is earth.
Those clowns in congress did it again! What a bunch of clowns! 
<font color="#FF0000" size="2"><b>
NEWBS CLICK HERE FOR EASY GPs! Post a Simpsons joke HERE!
Have a question about N64 emulation? Go here! About DP's and GP's</b></font>
<td background="http://img.photobuck...22/zertxtr.gif" align="center" width="2%"><font color="#FF6600"><b>N<br /><br />I<br /><br />G<br /><br />H<br /><br />T<br /><br />B<br /><br />L<br /><br />A<br /><br />D<br /><br />E</b></font></td>
<font color="#FF0000" size="2"><b>
NEWBS CLICK HERE FOR EASY GPs! Post a Simpsons joke HERE!
Have a question about N64 emulation? Go here! About DP's and GP's</b></font>
<td background="http://img.photobuck...22/zertxtr.gif" align="center" width="2%"><font color="#FF6600"><b>N<br /><br />I<br /><br />G<br /><br />H<br /><br />T<br /><br />B<br /><br />L<br /><br />A<br /><br />D<br /><br />E</b></font></td>
#20
Guest_The_1ron_lung
Guest_The_1ron_lung
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 03:07 AM
ok.. im sure your a card playin kinda guy. its all lick. think.. its so hard to get a flush.. thats just 5 cards of the same suit.. and that is so rare. and you think that simple luck will bring around an organism like yourself... i think your a smart guy nightblade..but just think about it.. cards to human life.. all luck.. i think not.. and then if that were to happen once.. think of all the organisms thats soem freakin big luck
#21
Guest_stubblehamster
Guest_stubblehamster
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 04:20 AM
How could there not be a god how was everything created in the first place?
#22
Guest_Ludakris
Guest_Ludakris
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 06:30 AM
I strongly oppose the ideas of a other-wordly spiritual being watching and creating us.For all of us,it's all scientific-based.We were all created from evolution.The Big Bang made the universe,since the matter waged war with itself,causing it to explode.The explosion waves are still going,which are creating more universes.GOD.What did he ever do it for us?Was he there to help us when we broke our bones?No.Was he there when we were in a car accident?No.Was he there when our pet or a close family member died?No.Was he there to stop the Cubs fan interfering with the ball?No.At first you may argue,God is almighty!God is just another excuse for little kids to shut up and be good so they won't go to hell.God is just another excuse for us to wage war on other religions.God is just another excuse to deny scientific theories that are possible and believable.I don't know how many religious topics I posted about this.God does not exist.PERIOD.Peace,Ludakris.How could there not be a god how was everything created in the first place?
#23
Guest_stubblehamster
Guest_stubblehamster
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 06:59 AM
If the big bang theory is correct then what created mass? or if you look at the big bang theory as there was once one gigantic rock that exploded what created that rock? Another thing God gives us tests that help prove our faith when we are doubting everything you just said reinforced my belief in god that much. Thank you I needed an enlightening experiance today.
#24
Guest_intoxik8
Guest_intoxik8
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 03:37 PM
God in some form or another, but not as Christians or religion would have us believe.
#25
Guest_Ludakris
Guest_Ludakris
-
- Guest
Posted 15 February 2005 - 06:00 PM
Of course,that question may not be ever answered,but it's possible.Now stop defending God,for he does not exist,nor did he help us in our times of need.All he cares about is his brat,Jesus.(This article is a transcript of a lecture Dr. Schaefer presented at the University of colorado in the spring of 1994, sponsored by Christian Leadership and other campus ministries. Over 500 students and professors were present.)Stephen Hawking's bestseller A Brief History of Time is the most popular book about cosmology ever written. The questions cosmology addresses are scientifically and theologically profound. Hawking's book covers both of these implications.Cosmology is the study of the universe as a whole--it's structure, origin and development. I won't answer all the questions Hawking raises concerning cosmology, but I will try to make comments on many of them. I caution here that you should not confuse cosmology with cosmetology, the art of beautifying the hair, skin, and nails!Here are some of the questions cosmology seeks to answer (As elsewhere in this lecture, I borrow heavily from astrophysicist Hugh Ross' excellent books The Fingerprint of God and The Creator and the Cosmos.):Is the universe finite or infinite in extent and content? Is it eternal or does it have a beginning? Was it created? If not, how did it get here? If so, how was this creation accomplished and what can we learn about the agent and events of creation? Who or what governs the laws and constants of physics? Are such laws the product of chance or have they been designed? How do they relate to the support and development of life? Is there any knowable existence beyond the known dimensions of the universe? Is the universe running down irreversibly or will it bounce back? Let me begin with five traditional arguments for the existence of God. It may seem an unlikely starting point for this topic, but I think you'll see as time goes on that these arguments keep coming up. I'm not going to comment right away on whether these arguments are valid or not, but I will state them because throughout astrophysical literature these arguments are often referred to:The cosmological argument: the effect of the universe's existence must have a suitable cause. The teleological argument: the design of the universe implies a purpose or direction behind it. The rational argument: the operation of the universe, according to order and natural law, implies a mind behind it. The ontological argument: man's ideas of God (his God-consciousness) implies a God who imprinted such a consciousness. The moral argument: man's built-in sense of right and wrong can be accounted for only by an innate awareness of a code of law--an awareness implanted by a higher being. The Big BangThe idea that the universe had a specific time of origin has been philosophically resisted by some very distinguished scientists. We could begin with Arthur Eddington, who experimentally confirmed Einstein's general theory of relativity in 1919. He stated a dozen years later: "Philosophically, the notion of a beginning to the present order is repugnant to me and I should like to find a genuine loophole." He later said, "We must allow evolution an infinite amount of time to get started."Albert Einstein's reaction to the consequences of his own general theory of relativity appear to acknowledge the threat of an encounter with God. Through the equations of general relativity, we can trace the origin of the universe backward in time to some sort of a beginning. However, before publishing his cosmological inferences, Einstein introduced a cosmological constant, a "fudge factor," to yield a static model for the universe. Einstein later considered this to be the greatest blunder of his scientific career.Einstein ultimately gave grudging acceptance to what he called "the necessity for a beginning" and eventually to "the presence of a superior reasoning power." But he never did accept the reality of a personal God.Why such resistance to the idea of a definite beginning of the universe? It goes right back to that first argument, the cosmological argument: (a) Everything that begins to exist must have a cause; (B) If the universe began to exist, then © the universe must have a cause. You can see the direction in which this argument is flowing--a direction of discomfort to some physicists.In 1946, George Gamow, a Russian-born scientist, proposed that the primeval fireball, the "big bang," was an intense concentration of pure energy. It was the source of all the matter that now exists in the universe. The theory predicts that all the galaxies in the universe should be rushing away from each other at high speeds as a result of that initial big bang. A dictionary definition of the hot big bang theory is "the entire physical universe, all the matter and energy and even the four dimensions of time and space, burst forth from a state of infinite or near infinite density, temperature, and pressure."The 1965 observation of the microwave background radiation by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson from the Bell Telephone laboratories convinced most scientists of the validity of the big bang theory. Further observations reported in 1992 have moved the big bang theory from a consensus view to the nearly unanimous view among cosmologists: there was an origin to the universe approximately 15 billion years ago.About the 1992 observations, which were from the COBE (the NASA satellite Cosmic Background Explorer), there was a story on the front page of virtually every newspaper in the world. The thing that the London Times, New York Times, etc. seemed to pick up on was a statement by George Smoot, the team leader from the Lawrence-Berkeley Laboratory. He said, "It's like looking at God." Obviously, this captured the public's attention.A somewhat more sober assessment of the findings was given by Frederick Burnham, a science-historian. He said, "These findings, now available, make the idea that God created the universe a more respectable hypothesis today than at any time in the last 100 years."Not everyone was ecstatic about these observations that revealed the so-called "big bang ripples." Certainly, those who had argued so strongly and passionately for a steady-state model of the universe didn't like the interpretation of these results at all--primarily two persons, Fred Hoyle, the British astronomer, and Jeffrey Burbidge, a very distinguished astrophysicist at the University of California at San Diego.We can begin to get into the philosophical implications of these observations when we assess Burbidge's statement (made during a radio discussion with Hugh Ross) on these things. Burbidge discounts the new experiment. He is a strong advocate still today, in the face of overwhelming evidence, of the steady-state theory. He says these new experiments come from "the first church of Christ of the big bang." I can tell you that my former colleague George Smoot, at the Lawrence-Berkeley Laboratory, took strong exception to this statement. He absolutely insisted his observations were in no way colored by any religious presuppositions.Burbidge does say something that is true, however. He favors the steady-state hypothesis and claims his view supports Hinduism and not Christianity. That is correct, because a steady-state theory of the universe, were it to be true, would provide some support for the endless cycles taught by Hinduism. The big bang theory is significant evidence against Hinduism.Hugh Ross, an astrophysicist, has written very persuasively on this topic. He again brings us into the philosophical implications. Ross says that, by definition,Time is that dimension in which cause and effect phenomena take place. . . . If time's beginning is concurrent with the beginning of the universe, as the space-time theorem says, then the cause of the universe must be some entity operating in a time dimension completely independent of and pre-existent to the time dimension of the cosmos. This conclusion is powerfully important to our understanding of who God is and who or what God isn't. It tells us that the creator is transcendent, operating beyond the dimensional limits of the universe. It tells us that God is not the universe itself, nor is God contained within the universe.These are two very popular views, which brings us to something very significant metaphysically or philosophically. If the big bang theory is true, then we can conclude God is not the same as the universe (a popular view) and God is not con-tained within the universe (another popular view).Stephen Hawking has said, in his writings, "the actual point of creation lies outside the scope of presently known laws of physics," and a less well-known but very distinguished cosmologist, Professor Alan Guth from MIT, says the "instant of creation remains unexplained."I want to quote from a book that I don't recommend. It is by a brilliant physicist, Leon Lederman, a Nobel Prize winner. It is called The God Particle and although the title sounds very appealing, the good information is all in the first paragraph. The rest of it is just a case for the building of the SSC, the Super Conducting-Super Collider, which we now know is not going to be built. Therefore the book is a bit of a Rip Van-Winkle sort of experience! But the first paragraph is wonderful; it's a great summary of what I have said so far:In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential. A story logically begins at the beginning, but this story is about the universe and unfortunately there are no data for the very beginnings--none, zero. We don't know anything about the universe until it reaches the mature age of a billion of a trillionth of a second. That is, some very short time after creation in the big bang. When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up--we are in the realm of philosophy. Only God knows what happened at the very beginning.That is about all that Lederman has to say about God--in the first paragraph--and that's the end of it. The thing that has made Hawking's book so popular is that he is talking about God from beginning to end.Stephen HawkingHawking is probably the most famous living scientist. His book, A Brief History of Time, is available in paperback and I strongly recommend it. It has sold in excess of 10 million copies, and I think he sold about five million before the paperback version. For a book to sell so many copies is almost unheard of in the history of science writing.There has been a film made about the book. The film is also good. There has even been a book made about the film. Hawking has a wonderful sense of humor. He writes in the introduction of the second book, "This is the book of the film of the book. I don't know if they are planning a film of the book of the film of the book."I want to begin by saying something about Stephen Hawking's scientific research. Hawking has made his reputation by investigating, in great detail, one particular set of problems: the singularity and horizons around black holes and at the beginning of time. Now, everyone is sure if you encountered a black hole, it would be the last thing you ever encountered--and that is correct! A black hole is a massive system so centrally condensed that the force of gravity prevents everything within it, even light, from escaping.Hawking's first major work was published with Roger Penrose, a physicist very famous in his own right, and George Ellis, during the period 1968-1970. They demonstrated that every solution to the equations of general relativity guarantees the existence of a singular boundary for space and time in the past. This is now known as the "singularity theorem," and is a tremendously important finding.Later, working by himself, in 1974, he began to formulate ideas about the quantum evaporation of exploding black holes, the now famous "Hawking radiation." These are all tremendously important scientific works.The work most referred to in A Brief History of Time is also the most speculative: the 1984 work with James Hartle, a professor at the University of California at Santa Barbara. Using an elegant vacuum fluctuation model, they were able to provide a mathematical rationalization for the entire universe popping into existence at the beginning of time. This is also called the "universe as a wave function." I need to emphasize that they were using very simple models. Now, while such mathematical exercises are highly speculative, they may eventually lead us to a deeper understanding of this creation event.Hawking is certainly the most famous physicist in history who has not won the Nobel Prize. This has puzzled people. They automatically assume he has won the Nobel Prize. He has not yet. This is because the Swedish Royal Academy demands that an award-winning discovery must be supported by verifiable experimental or observational evidence. Hawking's work, to date, remains unproved. The mathematics of his theory, however, are certainly beautiful and elegant. Science is just beginning to verify the existence of black holes, let alone verify "Hawking radiation" or any of his more radical theoretical proposals.My opinion is that within the next year or two we will have firm evidence for the existence of black holes. Unfortunately, I think the person who will get the Nobel Prize will be the observa-tionalist who comes up with its data. So I think Hawking may not get the Nobel Prize soon, even though he's the world's most famous scientist.Even if some aspects of Hawking's research turn out to be wrong, he will have had a profound impact on the history of scientific thought. Einstein was wrong about all matter of things, especially quantum mechanics, and we still recognize him as one of the three great geniuses of physics.And GodA Brief History of Time says a lot about God. God is mentioned in this book from beginning to end. So let us try to put Hawking's opinions about God in some sort of a context. The context is that Stephen Hawking made up his mind about God long before he became a cosmologist.The principle influence in his early life was his mother, Isabel. Isabel Hawking was a member of the Communist Party in England in the 1930's, and her son has carried a good bit of that intellectual baggage right through his life.By the time he was 13, Hawking's hero was the atheist philosopher and mathematician, Bertrand Russell. At the same age, two of Hawking's friends became Christians as a result of the 1955 Billy Graham London campaign. According to his 1992 biographers, Hawking stood apart from these encounters with "a certain amused detachment." There is nothing in A Brief History of Time that deviates in a significant way from the religious views of the 13-year old Stephen Hawking.The most important event of his life occurred on December 31, 1962. He met his future wife, Jane Wilde, at a New Year's Eve party. One month later, he was diagnosed with a terrible disease, ALS, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. He was given two years to live at that time. That was 32 years ago. I have had three friends die of this disease. It's a horrible disease. They lasted two, three, and five years, respectively. By anyone's estimation, Stephen Hawking is a medical miracle.At this point in his life, 1962, Stephen was by all accounts an average-performing graduate student at Cambridge University. Let me quote from his biographers, White and Gribbon, on this point:There is little doubt that Jane Wilde's appearance on the scene was a major turning-point in Stephen Hawking's life. The two of them began to see a lot more of one another and a strong relationship developed. It was finding Jane that enabled him to break out of his depression and regenerate some belief in his life and work. For Hawking, his engagement to Jane was probably the most important thing that ever happened to him. It changed his life, gave him something to live for and made him determined to live. Without the help that Jane gave him, he would almost certainly not have been able to carry on or had the will to do so.They married in July of 1965. Hawking himself has said that "what really made a difference was that I got engaged to a woman named Jane Wilde. This gave me something to live for."Jane Hawking is an interesting person in her own right. I think she decided early on to get into an academic discipline as far as possible from her husband. She has a doctorate in Medieval Portuguese Literature!Jane Hawking is a Christian. She made the statement in 1986, "Without my faith in God, I wouldn't have been able to live in this situation;" namely, the deteriorating health of her husband. "I would not have been able to marry Stephen in the first place because I wouldn't have had the optimism to carry me through and I wouldn't have been able to carry on with it."The reason the book has sold 10 million copies, i.e., the reason for Hawking's success as a popularizer of science, is that he addresses the problems of meaning and purpose that concern all thinking people. The book overlaps with Christian belief and it does so deliberately, but graciously and without rancor. It is an important book that needs to be treated with respect and attention.There is no reason to agree with everything put forth in A Brief History of Time and you will see that I have some areas of disagreement. It has been said that this is the most widely unread book in the history of literature. I first prepared this material for a lecture in December 1992, because I was asked by a friend in Australia to come and speak on it. He told me, "A great many people in Sydney have purchased this book. Some claim to have read it." So I encourage you to be one of those who have actually read A Brief History of Time.This is not mine,but hopefully you read this,because this is the same essay that made me not believe in God.God does not exist,period.I deny the theory of another being watching us and creating us.Peace,Ludakris.If the big bang theory is correct then what created mass? or if you look at the big bang theory as there was once one gigantic rock that exploded what created that rock? Another thing God gives us tests that help prove our faith when we are doubting everything you just said reinforced my belief in god that much. Thank you I needed an enlightening experiance today.
