all i have to say is look at the big bang theory. Used with math, what is the probability that the earth would land in the exact spot as to where its capable of containing living organisms. Its not too hot and not too cold. Also, for all that matter to be in existance, where'd it come from?
Also, the theory of evolution. Where'd the matter come from?
EVEN if it was all just POOF! and we were here, where'd we come from? If you say that we just appeared, or any form of matter in this case, you are denying science. Everything came from something. You have to start with something to have something. Seeing as God is not a form of matter, he did not have to be created.
what do you think?
2007-09-12 03:57:47 · 20 answers · asked by karate_grl4227 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yes There is a GOD!!! How could any one doubt it??? Just look around us at all the beauty and wonder of this world...And the hunan body,how complex it is, but also how it works so well ...Poof and the world was here and then we were here...,I don't think so....I know that didn't happen. Evolution-Darwin's Theroy ... people are still trying to prove this, it did not happen this way.... We all have proof that there is a GOD and that he created all the world,universe and everthing and one here!!! And the proof is here for everyone to read and to believe...
GOD did not have to be creatated. Oh just to let non-beleivers know GOD creatated MATTER to!!!
And I Do Believe There is a GOD!!!!
2007-09-12 04:59:07 · answer #1 · answered by topcat 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Creationism is all just poof and it's here whereas science knows that life took a very long time to evolve and I go with the scientific explanation, your God explanation does not explain how God came about except by fancy footwork sidestepping the issue and saying he always was...I say that he always wasn't is much more likely
2007-09-12 04:07:06 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't think there is either a God nor a God. The middle path outside of the paradox (or at the center of the paradox) is the only thing that really makes sense, though, I think you'll have to go through some intense reflection, philosophy, and the like to "see." Best of luck to all the travelers.
2007-09-12 04:03:49 · answer #3 · answered by Corvus 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Cosmological Argument - wiki that bad boy
If "everything must come from something" then where did god come from?
What's this "since god is not a form of matter he did not have to be created"? What? God is the MOST intelligent being ever, according to you guys. So MATTER needs creating but intelligence doesn't?
2007-09-12 04:03:52 · answer #4 · answered by Laptop Jesus 3.9 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
good, As a long way as I realize God is Spirit or a few kind of vigor interested in you while you consider on him that vigor(God) is with you, AND the unhealthy matters going flawed is meant to the satan's fault he governs this international that why existence isn't reasonable. God permit persons endure however he isn't the prompted of it, God isn't accountable for people destruction.
2016-09-05 11:23:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, but god/reality rather than a personified deity/entity/spirit, is the multi-dimensional field that we are a part of that is responsive to consciousness. Matter evolved out of the non-material field (google 'Holistic Physics') and interacts with matter.
Evolution of our massive thinking brain/consciousness makes us a creator in our experience of reality - not just by making material objects, etc., but our embedded belief systems which control feeling, thought and action, CAUSE events individually and en masse.
Reality mirrors the contents of consciousness. Every theology is some adept's (or more than one in Hinduism and Judaism) insight into the nature of the relationship of being to reality, mind/matter, psychology/physics.
2007-09-12 04:18:24 · answer #6 · answered by MysticMaze 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sigh.
Nobody can prove any gods, much less a specific god, exist. People believe in specific gods because of indoctrination from an early age, tradition, hallucinations, fear of torture (for gods sadistic enough to threaten it) and other similarly illogical reasons. But no gods exist in reality; these are all stories, created for people who were scared of the world long before we understood it. Now we have no more reason for these superstitions.
What's the harm in religion:
http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/harm.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_religion
How harmful the bible is in particular:
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/
http://www.evilbible.com/
The origin of the Jesus stories:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen048.html
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa2.htm
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/jesus.html
How illogical religion is in general:
http://godisimaginary.com/
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/
The alternative:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/
http://www.infidels.org/
http://www.positiveatheism.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitarian_Universalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism.
As for your science questions:
* matter always existed in one form or another - as far as I can tell - but I'm no physicist and that's a big bang question, and has nothing to do with evolution.
* If you reject the big bang, how do you explain CMB (cosmic microwave background) radiation?
* it's the argument from personal incredulity - "I personally can't understand this, so it must be a god, and specifically the one I beleive in".
* as for your claim that the universe is fine-tuned to allow human life:
1. The claim assumes life in its present form is a given; it applies not to life but to life only as we know it. The same outcome results if life is fine-tuned to the cosmos.
We do not know what fundamental conditions would rule out any possibility of any life. For all we know, there might be intelligent beings in another universe arguing that if fundamental constants were only slightly different, then the absence of free quarks and the extreme weakness of gravity would make life impossible.
Indeed, many examples of fine-tuning are evidence that life is fine-tuned to the cosmos, not vice versa. This is exactly what evolution proposes.
2. If the universe is fine-tuned for life, why is life such an extremely rare part of it?
3. Many fine-tuning claims are based on numbers being the "same order of magnitude," but this phrase gets stretched beyond its original meaning to buttress design arguments; sometimes numbers more than one-thousandfold different are called the same order of magnitude (Klee 2002).
How fine is "fine" anyway? That question can only be answered by a human judgment call, which reduces or removes objective value from the anthropic principle argument.
4. The fine-tuning claim is weakened by the fact that some physical constants are dependent on others, so the anthropic principle may rest on only a very few initial conditions that are really fundamental (Kane et al. 2000). It is further weakened by the fact that different initial conditions sometimes lead to essentially the same outcomes, as with the initial mass of stars and their formation of heavy metals (Nakamura et al. 1997), or that the tuning may not be very fine, as with the resonance window for helium fusion within the sun (Livio et al. 1989). For all we know, a universe substantially different from ours may be improbable or even impossible.
5. If part of the universe were not suitable for life, we would not be here to think about it. There is nothing to rule out the possibility of multiple universes, most of which would be unsuitable for life. We happen to find ourselves in one where life is conveniently possible because we cannot very well be anywhere else.
6. Intelligent design is not a logical conclusion of fine tuning. Fine tuning says nothing about motives or methods, which is how design is defined. (The scarcity of life and multi-billion-year delay in it appearing argue against life being a motive.) Fine-tuning, if it exists, may result from other causes, as yet unknown, or for no reason at all (Drange 2000).
7. In fact, the anthropic principle is an argument against an omnipotent creator. If God can do anything, he could create life in a universe whose conditions do not allow for it.
Links:
Drange, Theodore M. 2000. The fine-tuning argument revisited (2000). Philo 3(2): 38-49. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theodore_drange/tuning-revisited.html
Stenger, Victor J. 1997. Intelligent design: Humans, cockroaches, and the laws of physics. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/cosmo.html
Stenger, Victor J. 1999 (July). The anthropic coincidences: A natural explanation. The Skeptical Intelligencer 3(3): 2-17. http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/stenger_intel.html
Weinberg, Steven. 1999. A designer universe? http://www.physlink.com/Education/essay_weinberg.cfm
References:
1. Drange, Theodore M. 2000. The fine-tuning argument revisited (2000). Philo 3(2): 38-49. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theodore_drange/tuning-revisited.html
2. Kane, G. L., M. J. Perry, and A. N. Zytkow. 2000 (28 Jan.). The beginning of the end of the anthropic principle. New Astron. 7: 45-53. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0001197
3. Klee, Robert. 2002. The revenge of Pythagoras: How a mathematical sharp practice undermines the contemporary design argument in astrophysical cosmology. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 53: 331-354.
4. Livio, M., D. Hollowell, A. Weiss and J. Truran. 1989. The anthropic significance of the existence of an excited state of 12C. Nature 340: 281-284.
5. Nakamura, Takashi, H. Uehara, and T. Chiba. 1997. The minimum mass of the first stars and the anthropic principle. Progress of Theoretical Physics 97: 169-171. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/9612113
2007-09-12 04:11:54 · answer #7 · answered by Dreamstuff Entity 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No God is needed to explain the physics of the creation. Also, the myth of God doesn't explain anything, they just create an imaginary God to create things, but it doesn't explain where the God came from. It explains nothing about origins.
2007-09-12 04:03:33 · answer #8 · answered by Steve C 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Keep in mind, though: there are a billion trillion planets out there, and they have been mixing and matching chemicals for some 13.5 BILLION years.
It's not nearly as unlikely as you might think.
Besides which, the "Argument from Personal Incredulity" (i.e.; "I can't accept it, therefor it must not be true!") doesn't really have a leg to stand on...
2007-09-12 04:04:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Um, pardon me for sounding daft, but couldn't you ask where all matter came from even if God created it?
And, how does God create? How was he created?
2007-09-12 04:04:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋