English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-06-19 20:49:44 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Im talking about to the beginning

2007-06-19 20:54:54 · update #1

Now i am just asking a simple question.

2007-06-19 20:59:44 · update #2

When i received Jesus in my heart I felt peace and love like I never knew exsisted but that is what happened to me.I am not belittling you or mean no harm.In fact I love everyone.

2007-06-19 21:02:25 · update #3

I screw up just like anyone else

2007-06-19 21:04:21 · update #4

Jesus is the alpha and omega

2007-06-19 21:09:14 · update #5

26 answers

why the assumption of a "who" as opposed to a "what"?

2007-06-19 20:57:09 · answer #1 · answered by Bouken SocratiCat 6 · 2 0

This problem is known as negative progression. Simple put, it is the assertion that everything must have a cause.

This assertion has not been proved. Rather, it is often taken as a mere premise, which may or may not be correct.

Assume for the moment that it is true; everything must have cause. Our parents came from their parents, their parents come from their parents, and so on.

Which, if this line of thinking is taken to the extreme, then the question remains, where did our original parents come from?

Many religions would say that their god created the first human beings, that their god is the "unmoved mover". This is also one of St. Thomas Aquinas' so-called proofs of God.

However, if one is to play this game of negative progression, then they would also have to define what caused their god. Since everything must have a cause, then their god must also have a cause.

Its considered cheating if someone were to change the rules of a game while in the middle of playing. And this is where most, if not all, religions fail in honesty or logic (your choice).

If a religion were to claim that their god was the start of everything else, they would not only have to prove the following;

1) The negative progression problem is an valid premise.
2) The negative progression problem has a solution
3) This solution has been solved by their religion
4) There was only one cause, and not multiple causes
5) Their god was the cause of everything else.

This is a tall order to fulfill.

Again, this approach is considered cheating. One can also make the assertion that a unicorn, a dragon, or other mystical beast created the world. Note that this not so far fetched as you might believe.

Having a book that says so does not make this assertion true - there have been many books and documents that say other deities were the the cause of the world and universe.

No one knows where everything originally came from. And that includes you too ;)

Rob

2007-06-20 04:33:19 · answer #2 · answered by barefoot_rob1 4 · 0 0

HI Cindy,
I am a christian catholic.
Glad to know that you are closer to Jesus, Jesus will touch the hearts and minds of Atheists and they will know that God does exists!! Its a good question you put up.
Many will give a scientific explanation on how human beings came into existance, but they must know that there is creator behind this and he is God the almighty!! without a creator we would not ve being here.

2007-06-20 05:05:58 · answer #3 · answered by Bluebird 1 · 0 1

To the atheists here, please dont be rude. She's just asking you people an honest question. 1) Evolution does not explain the beginning of life. I believe it but its merely a process by which organisms continually adapt thru time and become different. 2) being "created" in this question doesn't mean she means to say "mom and dad fell in love and had you" therefore you are created by them. That is not the context used here. Please be aware of that.

God Bless,

2007-06-20 08:51:39 · answer #4 · answered by 0 3 · 0 0

No one created our ancestors and I have no idea how the first life started but I'm not a biologist

but to quote Eddie Izzard

"if there are a few holes in your theory you don't therefore go 'f**king magic!'"

However since you clearly thing god is the creator then who created god? You can't claim that everything needs a creator then claim that god doesn't need one. That shows that everything doesn't need a creator. It's a very weak argument

2007-06-20 05:39:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

all living things on this planet share, through their DNA, a relationship. this relationship can be mapped and shown graphically as a tree. a reasonable deduction can be made that this tree shows that life originated from a common source. this is supported by the fossil record that shows how the life forms on this world changed across time. there are, of course, gaps in this record because fossils are only created in special circumstances. you only have to drive along a country road to know how fast any road kill is finished off by the other wild life to understand that fossilisation is a rare event. but saying that there is enough fossil evidence to build a good picture of how life came to change through time evolving to fit the changing environment, the challenges posed by other life and the vagaries of sexual selection. my most remote ancestors were probably helices of RNA, the most primitive form of replicating molecule, somewhat like viruses. at this moment in time scientists have been making good progress in creating enviroments where basic organic chemicals, such as the nuclotides found on meteorites and made from the basic carbon compounds, (by that i mean carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen and so on, not bits of living tissues). they have created basic replicating molecules by processes that can be duplicated in nature. now it would not be unreasonable given the evidence available to accept that evolution and a chemical abiogenesis is the most likely explanation for life on this planet. i mean, a lot of people receive death sentances with substantially weaker evidence and the creationists who rail against evolution seem happy with the level of evidence the state uses to kill people. as far as i know not one basic element of evolution has ever been successfully challenged or proved wrong. i'm happy to state that my ancestors and me are the product of the natural universe and serendipity.

2007-06-20 04:29:09 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Simple, the ancestors' ancestor ..... who else? In the beginning as well..... try asking your ancestors' ancestor ......

So ..... who created this creature you call a god? Did this creature tells you himself or you read it from some old rusty man made book which they call it the truth back in the days where superstitions rules the world?

2007-06-20 03:59:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

My ancestors were created by a man and a woman who love each other very much, they get together and the man puts his.... well you get the idea.

2007-06-20 12:12:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well, they were created from the union of sperm and egg, I would assume, the same way I was.

They were not made by anyone or anything except maybe themselves and their DNA. I'm sorry if this doesn't make sense to you.

2007-06-20 03:54:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

the question is misguided. our ancestors were not created. the leading scientific theory on how life arose on this planet is called evolution.

2007-06-20 04:41:10 · answer #10 · answered by Tree Hugger 2 · 0 0

When a man and a woman love each other very much... oh, you know where this is going.

2007-06-20 05:17:15 · answer #11 · answered by mickingundagai 2 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers