Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

discussion on the nature of the creator of the heavens and earth


Recommended Posts

ok, that's unlikely, ....you said it yourself that it may not be far off in the future and that it may happen in the next few decades, so you are with your own words affirming that it didn't happen yet, so that's why it's unlikely. You watch too much tv to think that scientists are not far off from creating UNIVERSES!!??

LOL, what I want to see is for them to create even a fly, or even a fly's wing or a mosquito's stinger.. they could never do it or create anything at all except that they have to take elements that already existed, that God already created and fashion them into things.

God is the ONLY one who has the ability to create something from nothing. If everything you see like the birds and the trees and the people and the plants created themselves, then they, themselves would be Gods, but that is not how it happened because our universe is not an intellegent entity all by itself. It is a beautifully fashioned peice of machinery but it still needs an external force or power source to maintain it and that force is God. One day you'll be certain of that.

 

 

Actually, I am fairly well read in contemporary thought in physics, from realiable sources like Scientific American, and many theoretical physicists believe that the ability to create a new universe may be only a few years away. Additionally, you are thinking in a very limited way about what is possible for us on this planet at this time in this universe. In other universes, or even in our own, there may be intelligent beings that can create universes, indeed, it is possible that our universe is a result of a temporal intelligent being experimenting with universe models, so they can explain there own. This person would have some of the same characteristics of a god, in that we would most likely not be able to interact with this person in any physical way, because we would basically exist on a different dimensional plane, which scientists refer to as a membrane, or brane for short. Although all of this may sound like science fiction to you, all of what I am saying is pretty well established theorizing in the scientific community, and may be the key to some of the answers of our cosmos as we are able to observe it.

 

There is also no evidence in our physical world that any external power has been working on the Universe since the big bang, and no reason to believe that any outside force would be needed to "maintain" the universe. I am not saying that the evidence does not exist, I am just saying that no evidence has been found that anything needs to keep the universe running except for itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

because men do not create things from nothing, did you ever see a man create something from thin air? Also, how could a person (who has human limitations) Be all knowledgeable?

Because a true God should be all knowledgable right?

 

Look, there has to be a criteria when we speak about anything. When you and I sit down and talk about let's say a certain movie, let's say Star Wars. We know what the movie star wars is, It was the movie with Chewbacca and Han Solo , Luke Sywalker and oB1, Yoda, right? So , now we've established what movie we are talking about because we know what that movie consists of, well, If you don't know who God is , or you don't have any clue what exactly makes God, a true God, then you need to find out so you can talk about God otherwise this conversation will remain all over the place and I'll be talking about star wars and you'll be thinking spiderman was in the movie starwars and we'll never accomplish anything.

 

 

 

well, I showed the invalidity of every false God you mentioned using logical methods and by showing how the God that muslims beleive in is the only God worthy of worship.

 

Asking me to prove that Allah is more valid without using proof is like a judge asking a district attorney to prove a murder case without using the murder weapon , dna , fingerprints, witnesses, etc. The proof is the proof and if you want it , it's there, otherwise I'm not sure what else to say to you.

 

 

I understand what you are saying about criteria, all I am saying is there is no reason to beieve that if an intelligent force created the universe, that it is all knowledgeable. I don't need to know everything about growing wheat, processing it, the nature of thermodynamics and the thermal properties of metal to make a pancake do I? To be honest, to another being, our Universe may be no more complicated to them than a pancake is to us.

 

First off, to address your second point, I never said anything about worship, I was speaking of belief. Whether something is worthy of worship is a totally different issue. And you did use a circular argument, you set up criteria, and then explained to me why your God, which we only know about through the intercession of other human beings, lives up to a definition that they set up. Sounds like they created God to fit there definition of what God should be, not the other way around.

 

I am not asking you to prove that Allah exists without proof, but you did not give me any besides. I was simply asking you not to make a self-fufilling argument. Besides, if you were to say you could prove that God exists logically, you would be the first philosopher since Des Cartes to do it five hundred years ago! And guess how he did it? A circular argument, which has been destroyed by many other philosphers! Since then, many have tried, and no one has been successful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not saying that people do not have the ability to study the framework of a molecule and then take elements that exist and fashion one' date=' All I'm saying is that people do not have the ability to create from nothing.[/quote']

 

How do you know that Allah created everything from nothing? Perhaps Allah is actually some kid who created our universe, and interacts with it every once in a while because he thinks it is fun to fuck with us. Maybe Mohammed was being fed all this stuff from this kid, and the kid is just laughing on the toilet, and can't get over the fact that so many people bought it!

 

Also, there are basically some wierd rules in quantum physics that describe certain particles that pop in and out of existence, from nothing at all! Perhaps it would be possible in the future for us to control these mechanisms and in fact create something from nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Krishna did not create the universe in Hindu mythology, Brahma did. Brahma is eternal. But there is no reason not to think that if our universe was created, that it was created by a temporal being. Perhaps something in another universe created the universe, died in that universe, and now our universe is just running on its own. There is, of course no way to know if that is true or not, and it is no more or less likely from a logical point of view than your belief that an all powerful, all knowing being created it. And before you say that your God created the all the universes that ever existed, how do you know that the universe even needs to be created by something? Why can't it just exist on its own?

 

 

 

I've never , In my very humble, small amount of time on this earth seen anything (living) exist on it's own without external assistance , nevermind everything existing on it's own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Russel Jones is right. Brahma is a rather strong concept.

 

It is a concept that goes through many of the asian/indian religions. Think of Taoism with the Tao, an eternal and infinite guiding force. It ends up being expressed as a set of statements that relate to the infinite expressions of something that Spinoza took to be God, or the Way. Expressions of the Way in Taoism express the guiding force and the multitude of actions capable by allowing the way to act through you. Sound familiar? cus it should.

 

 

Even things like zen can be, by a stretch, seen as these came concepts. The focus on any given action used in Zen practis, the concentration and engagement of unity of existence through the singular contemplation of a single act, is rather similar to an understanding of finding those Multivaried essential attributes of this Higher Power being spoken of.

 

I spoke of Spinoza because he represents the transfer of this rather Eastern Concept of a higher power to classical western philosophy and to God as you may see it. Spinoza tried to reconcile the metaphysics he created with his belief in a god, and ended up with what we call deism. Spinoza's felt that God is but the reflection of the multitude of possibilities that are enacted through our lives now. We are part of the reducible whole of God's eternal attributes. Everything that we see and are, are those infinite attributes and we act for God by living our lives at all. We are God, in so much as that which is god is merely existence itself. For if existence represents the infinite possibilities contained in a given metaphysics, then God defined as being eternal and having eternal attributes could be expressed as existence.

 

My grandfather is muslim and my mother was raised in his household much of which I was raised to understand, so I feel comfortable talking about what I think the general tenets of it are. Islam, just like christians, Spinoza(and in a roundabout way these eastern concepts)

believe that God is something that acts through people whom believe in him. Do you go throughout your days trying to express god's will? That your actions be the actions of Islam and Allah? I hope you see my train of thought in finding a similarity between that and the infinite expressions of The Way, God, etc. as expressed in their respective texts.

 

This I is where I feel you if anywhere would see my believe that most religious expressions of a higher power are similar in many respects respects. Just because it has different words and names doesn't mean that the any concept concerning such is less valid to any varying degree. I could even argue by degrees of seperation that the simlarities outweigh the contrasts suggested in the minutia of their dogmas. And as such suggest that there is a possible common strand among them. (I think I need to take a course in comparitive theology, that would be fun.)

 

 

Not only this but to clear up some physics stuff.

 

 

Something from nothing

 

ZPE, or ZERO POINT ENERGY

 

This is a concept that is many years old by now and I'm sure being manipulated to astounding results. By process of the Casmir Effect, Virtual particles are brought into existence within the vacuum necessitated for said Effect. There is work that has been done on the possibility of capturing the respective energy of said particles after they have slipped into existence. Virtual particles themselves would need the introduction of actual energy into the system to fully pull them into existence, so they pop in and out as they see fit. There are connections some believe to the biological processs of microcavitation, and bioluminescense. Shrimp accessing large amounts of energy in instantaneous moments to stun there tiny prey before they eat them, and the rather large packs of shirmp and other sea creatures that at night basically "light up."

 

 

Again, you need not believe the theories, or what they entail, but the results are fucking there. The fact that there are instances where a little bit of energy can "project a particle into existence" is fucking amazing. It is experiments like this and other ones being conducted at places like CERN, the Fermi Labs, Indiana University, and other high energy particle studies are basically looking at the seams of the universe. For all intensive purposes they are closer to a god than any of us could ever understand.

 

To go on in this rediculous rant.

 

Perhaps it is my own bias, but I feel as a person whose subjective perception is constrained by something like logic, I find a common strand among the things which I don't believe in. Essentially that these things I have been talking about seem rather similar when abstracted to the point of all religions without one being better than the other. God can be called anything, but as I have tried to show, the essential expressions are the same.

 

Russell's qoute that has inspired this new round of discussion in here was merely trying to suggest the equality in validity that any one religion may have. And in so much as that is the case, it is supposed to suggest perhaps if one is just as good as the other, what does that say about their validity as a whole. I think it had less to do with going through and trying to nitpick the specifics of the beliefs. It was above that in the scale of its ontological implications.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just thinking about this before I read the new messages in this thread. Why MUST there be one God? Why not two? And what would motivate this one God, or any Gods, to create man? Why would it or they do this? What purpose would that serve for a God? To create more than one who could experience life? Then why not create more than one Gods to experience what it experiences? How could limiting It's existence and experience as being the ONLY one be considered anything other than selfish? What purpose would we serve if we were inferior to just one being and could never attain that level of existence?

 

I'm came to this revelation: Those who created one-god religions have done so in order to pre-emptively overrule the questioning of one God's beliefs and values. With only one God, there is no counterpoint, there is only ONE WORD that we are to listen to. It limits our imagination severely and if there was a God who granted us the ability to imagine, then why would he put such a heavy limitation on this? Why enact this punishment, this inability to choose from the start of our existence? That would negate the concept of free will. We are not allowed to choose without punishment. If we choose not to believe in God, in one God, then we are punished for our imagination. If God wanted us to excel, to evolve into enlightened human beings, to explore the universe, then why would he enact this limitation to us?

 

Why would he create a universe only to limit us to one planet? Why wouldn't he also give us the ability to travel at the speed of light? To give us the opportunity to see beyond this galaxy, this is not granted. Why would he create us without technology? Why force us to suffer through thousands, millions of years without granting us freedom from this planet, or even a wheel? How is it that this God can create such majesties as stars and black holes and water and fire and not be able to create us as knowing this things, being able to experience them without the burden of what we currently carry around with us? What purpose does that serve to God? Why would an this being torture us with all that we have, what would be the purpose of this "test"?

 

If we were to blindly accept God, to not question him, to not question what he has given us, Dawood, if everyone did it, then we would not go anywhere, the wheel, the concept of physics and astrophysics would not evolve as we would believe that we already know all we need to know.

 

Why make us live in caves? Why not create houses for all? Why force millions, billions of humans both alive and now dead to suffer through poverty, starvation, brutality? Without even hope or a chance of survival, as is the case in many parts of Africa? What did the emacitated child who cannot even brush away the flies that are already feeding on his flesh, what did he do to deserve the punishment of not even knowing, not ever knowing this God who created him?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just thinking about this before I read the new messages in this thread. Why MUST there be one God? Why not two? And what would motivate this one God, or any Gods, to create man? Why would it or they do this? What purpose would that serve for a God? To create more than one who could experience life? Then why not create more than one Gods to experience what it experiences? How could limiting It's existence and experience as being the ONLY one be considered anything other than selfish? What purpose would we serve if we were inferior to just one being and could never attain that level of existence?

 

I'm came to this revelation: Those who created one-god religions have done so in order to pre-emptively overrule the questioning of one God's beliefs and values. With only one God, there is no counterpoint, there is only ONE WORD that we are to listen to. It limits our imagination severely and if there was a God who granted us the ability to imagine, then why would he put such a heavy limitation on this? Why enact this punishment, this inability to choose from the start of our existence? That would negate the concept of free will. We are not allowed to choose without punishment. If we choose not to believe in God, in one God, then we are punished for our imagination. If God wanted us to excel, to evolve into enlightened human beings, to explore the universe, then why would he enact this limitation to us?

 

Why would he create a universe only to limit us to one planet? Why wouldn't he also give us the ability to travel at the speed of light? To give us the opportunity to see beyond this galaxy, this is not granted. Why would he create us without technology? Why force us to suffer through thousands, millions of years without granting us freedom from this planet, or even a wheel? How is it that this God can create such majesties as stars and black holes and water and fire and not be able to create us as knowing this things, being able to experience them without the burden of what we currently carry around with us? What purpose does that serve to God? Why would an this being torture us with all that we have, what would be the purpose of this "test"?

 

If we were to blindly accept God, to not question him, to not question what he has given us, Dawood, if everyone did it, then we would not go anywhere, the wheel, the concept of physics and astrophysics would not evolve as we would believe that we already know all we need to know.

 

Why make us live in caves? Why not create houses for all? Why force millions, billions of humans both alive and now dead to suffer through poverty, starvation, brutality? Without even hope or a chance of survival, as is the case in many parts of Africa? What did the emacitated child who cannot even brush away the flies that are already feeding on his flesh, what did he do to deserve the punishment of not even knowing, not ever knowing this God who created him?

 

 

Reposted for a new page because I think it raises some important questions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the.crooked. On a friends computer:

 

 

I think you rather nailed it in your second paragraph. It is a built in truth default.

 

 

If you are spreading a concept which will limit the actions of people's lives. And lets not mince words here thats what religion does. Just as with any given moral ontology. But unlike intrinsic morality, religion is structured so that it can't be questioned and so that to do so would go against its basin nature.

 

 

I think this was rather brilliant. If you consider some of the things that religion does, spread morals, help people live their lives, etc, then one may come to the same conclusions that I have. Controll, is what religion is ultimately about, and it does it damn well.

 

I'll respond some more when I get to work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reposted for a new page cus well yeah.

 

 

 

Dawood-

 

Russel Jones is right. Brahma is a rather strong concept.

 

It is a concept that goes through many of the asian/indian religions. Think of Taoism with the Tao, an eternal and infinite guiding force. It ends up being expressed as a set of statements that relate to the infinite expressions of something that Spinoza took to be God, or the Way. Expressions of the Way in Taoism seem to suggest that is a guiding force and the multitude of actions capable by allowing the way to act through you. Sound familiar? cus it should.

 

 

Even things like zen can be, by a stretch, seen as these came concepts. The focus on any given action used in Zen practise, the concentration and engagement of unity of existence through the singular contemplation of a single act, is rather similar to an understanding of finding those multivaried essential attributes of this Higher Power being spoken of.

 

I referrenced Spinoza because he represents the transfer of this rather Eastern Concept of a higher power to classical western philosophy and to God as you may see it. Spinoza tried to reconcile the metaphysics he created with his belief in a god, and ended up with what we call deism. Spinoza's felt that God is but the reflection of the multitude of possibilities that are enacted through our lives now. We are part of the reducible whole of God's eternal attributes. Everything that we see and are, are those infinite attributes and we act for God by living our lives at all. We are God, in so much as that which is god is merely existence itself. For if existence represents the infinite possibilities contained in a given metaphysics, then God defined as being eternal and having eternal attributes could be expressed as existence.

 

My grandfather is muslim and my mother was raised in his household much of which I was raised to understand, so I feel comfortable talking about what I think the general tenets of it are. Islam, just like christians, Spinoza(and in a roundabout way these eastern concepts)

believe that God is something that acts through people whom believe in him. Do you go throughout your days trying to express god's will? That your actions be the actions of Islam and Allah? I hope you see my train of thought in finding a similarity between that and the infinite expressions of The Way, God, etc. as expressed in their respective texts.

 

This I is where I feel you if anywhere would see my believe that most religious expressions of a higher power are similar in many respects respects. Just because it has different words and names doesn't mean that the any concept concerning such is less valid to any varying degree. I could even argue by degrees of seperation that the simlarities outweigh the contrasts suggested in the minutia of their dogmas. And as such suggest that there is a possible common strand among them. (I think I need to take a course in comparitive theology, that would be fun.)

 

 

Not only this but to clear up some physics stuff.

 

 

Something from nothing

 

ZPE, or ZERO POINT ENERGY

 

This is a concept that is many years old by now and I'm sure being manipulated to astounding results. By process of the Casmir Effect, Virtual particles are brought into existence within the vacuum necessitated for said Effect. There is work that has been done on the possibility of capturing the respective energy of said particles after they have slipped into existence. Virtual particles themselves would need the introduction of actual energy into the system to fully pull them into existence, so they pop in and out as they see fit. There are connections some believe to the biological processs of microcavitation, and bioluminescense. Shrimp accessing large amounts of energy in instantaneous moments to stun there tiny prey before they eat them, and the rather large packs of shirmp and other sea creatures that at night basically "light up."

 

 

Again, you need not believe the theories, or what they entail, but the results are fucking there. The fact that there are instances where a little bit of energy can "project a particle into existence" is fucking amazing. It is experiments like this and other ones being conducted at places like CERN, the Fermi Labs, Indiana University, and other high energy particle studies are basically looking at the seams of the universe. For all intensive purposes they are closer to a god than any of us could ever understand.

 

To go on in this rediculous rant.

 

Perhaps it is my own bias, but I feel as a person whose subjective perception is constrained by something like logic, I find a common strand among the things which I don't believe in. Essentially that these things I have been talking about seem rather similar when abstracted to the point of all religions without one being better than the other. God can be called anything, but as I have tried to show, the essential expressions are the same.

 

Russell's qoute that has inspired this new round of discussion in here was merely trying to suggest the equality in validity that any one religion may have. And in so much as that is the case, it is supposed to suggest perhaps if one is just as good as the other, what does that say about their validity as a whole. I think it had less to do with going through and trying to nitpick the specifics of the beliefs. It was above that in the scale of its ontological implications.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i beleive in god... and thats how i was raised but people think im some fuckin jesus freak animal... but im just a normal guy... i accually hate most christians cuz of the reason they are always so selfish and think their better than everyone... it just pisses me off... but i def belaive in god... cuz id rather belaive in something than nothing... and if there is a heaven, other know as paradise... why not beleive... its either real or fake right? id rather shoot for real... so whatever....

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Russell's qoute that has inspired this new round of discussion in here was merely trying to suggest the equality in validity that any one religion may have. And in so much as that is the case, it is supposed to suggest perhaps if one is just as good as the other, what does that say about their validity as a whole. I think it had less to do with going through and trying to nitpick the specifics of the beliefs. It was above that in the scale of its ontological implications.

 

 

I don't know if that is how interpret the quote, but I like your line of thinking anyway. I myself do not agree with the quote, I am agnostic, and not an atheist of any sort. My point in bringing up the quote was to show the limits of logic. There is nothing logical about believing in God, because of the almost infinite possibilites for deities or any other sort of supernatural being to take shape. And of course there is the possibility that there are no supernatural beings at all. My point was to show that to believe in God is irrational, but not necessarily invalid. If you believe, you must realize that your belief cannot be proven. Christians define this as faith. I believe that faith in God, rather than a rational belief in in God, is a teneable postion to hold, although I do not hold it myself.

 

In other words, Dawood could have very quickly shut me up by saying "I just believe, I don't have a good reason other than I believe."

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^Word. I knew it was something along those lines. I just wanted to pull out the main things that the qoute perhaps was suggesting.

 

 

 

I was trying, I suppose, to be sensitive to Dawood's belief in God, by going the equality route.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was just thinking about this before I read the new messages in this thread. Why MUST there be one God? Why not two? And what would motivate this one God, or any Gods, to create man? Why would it or they do this? What purpose would that serve for a God? To create more than one who could experience life? Then why not create more than one Gods to experience what it experiences? How could limiting It's existence and experience as being the ONLY one be considered anything other than selfish? What purpose would we serve if we were inferior to just one being and could never attain that level of existence?

 

I'm came to this revelation: Those who created one-god religions have done so in order to pre-emptively overrule the questioning of one God's beliefs and values. With only one God, there is no counterpoint, there is only ONE WORD that we are to listen to. It limits our imagination severely and if there was a God who granted us the ability to imagine, then why would he put such a heavy limitation on this? Why enact this punishment, this inability to choose from the start of our existence? That would negate the concept of free will. We are not allowed to choose without punishment. If we choose not to believe in God, in one God, then we are punished for our imagination. If God wanted us to excel, to evolve into enlightened human beings, to explore the universe, then why would he enact this limitation to us?

 

Why would he create a universe only to limit us to one planet? Why wouldn't he also give us the ability to travel at the speed of light? To give us the opportunity to see beyond this galaxy, this is not granted. Why would he create us without technology? Why force us to suffer through thousands, millions of years without granting us freedom from this planet, or even a wheel? How is it that this God can create such majesties as stars and black holes and water and fire and not be able to create us as knowing this things, being able to experience them without the burden of what we currently carry around with us? What purpose does that serve to God? Why would an this being torture us with all that we have, what would be the purpose of this "test"?

 

If we were to blindly accept God, to not question him, to not question what he has given us, Dawood, if everyone did it, then we would not go anywhere, the wheel, the concept of physics and astrophysics would not evolve as we would believe that we already know all we need to know.

 

Why make us live in caves? Why not create houses for all? Why force millions, billions of humans both alive and now dead to suffer through poverty, starvation, brutality? Without even hope or a chance of survival, as is the case in many parts of Africa? What did the emacitated child who cannot even brush away the flies that are already feeding on his flesh, what did he do to deserve the punishment of not even knowing, not ever knowing this God who created him?

 

 

Reposted for a new page because I think it raises some important questions.

 

 

you asked a lot of valid questions, but they are either hypothetical questions or questions for God, not me, so I'm not really going to attempt to answer them even though I could try but I'd probably be more wrong that right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Reposted for a new page cus well yeah.

 

 

 

Dawood-

 

Russel Jones is right. Brahma is a rather strong concept.

 

It is a concept that goes through many of the asian/indian religions. Think of Taoism with the Tao, an eternal and infinite guiding force. It ends up being expressed as a set of statements that relate to the infinite expressions of something that Spinoza took to be God, or the Way. Expressions of the Way in Taoism seem to suggest that is a guiding force and the multitude of actions capable by allowing the way to act through you. Sound familiar? cus it should.

 

 

Even things like zen can be, by a stretch, seen as these came concepts. The focus on any given action used in Zen practise, the concentration and engagement of unity of existence through the singular contemplation of a single act, is rather similar to an understanding of finding those multivaried essential attributes of this Higher Power being spoken of.

 

I referrenced Spinoza because he represents the transfer of this rather Eastern Concept of a higher power to classical western philosophy and to God as you may see it. Spinoza tried to reconcile the metaphysics he created with his belief in a god, and ended up with what we call deism. Spinoza's felt that God is but the reflection of the multitude of possibilities that are enacted through our lives now. We are part of the reducible whole of God's eternal attributes. Everything that we see and are, are those infinite attributes and we act for God by living our lives at all. We are God, in so much as that which is god is merely existence itself. For if existence represents the infinite possibilities contained in a given metaphysics, then God defined as being eternal and having eternal attributes could be expressed as existence.

 

My grandfather is muslim and my mother was raised in his household much of which I was raised to understand, so I feel comfortable talking about what I think the general tenets of it are. Islam, just like christians, Spinoza(and in a roundabout way these eastern concepts)

believe that God is something that acts through people whom believe in him. Do you go throughout your days trying to express god's will? That your actions be the actions of Islam and Allah? I hope you see my train of thought in finding a similarity between that and the infinite expressions of The Way, God, etc. as expressed in their respective texts.

 

This I is where I feel you if anywhere would see my believe that most religious expressions of a higher power are similar in many respects respects. Just because it has different words and names doesn't mean that the any concept concerning such is less valid to any varying degree. I could even argue by degrees of seperation that the simlarities outweigh the contrasts suggested in the minutia of their dogmas. And as such suggest that there is a possible common strand among them. (I think I need to take a course in comparitive theology, that would be fun.)

 

 

Not only this but to clear up some physics stuff.

 

 

Something from nothing

 

ZPE, or ZERO POINT ENERGY

 

This is a concept that is many years old by now and I'm sure being manipulated to astounding results. By process of the Casmir Effect, Virtual particles are brought into existence within the vacuum necessitated for said Effect. There is work that has been done on the possibility of capturing the respective energy of said particles after they have slipped into existence. Virtual particles themselves would need the introduction of actual energy into the system to fully pull them into existence, so they pop in and out as they see fit. There are connections some believe to the biological processs of microcavitation, and bioluminescense. Shrimp accessing large amounts of energy in instantaneous moments to stun there tiny prey before they eat them, and the rather large packs of shirmp and other sea creatures that at night basically "light up."

 

 

Again, you need not believe the theories, or what they entail, but the results are fucking there. The fact that there are instances where a little bit of energy can "project a particle into existence" is fucking amazing. It is experiments like this and other ones being conducted at places like CERN, the Fermi Labs, Indiana University, and other high energy particle studies are basically looking at the seams of the universe. For all intensive purposes they are closer to a god than any of us could ever understand.

 

To go on in this rediculous rant.

 

Perhaps it is my own bias, but I feel as a person whose subjective perception is constrained by something like logic, I find a common strand among the things which I don't believe in. Essentially that these things I have been talking about seem rather similar when abstracted to the point of all religions without one being better than the other. God can be called anything, but as I have tried to show, the essential expressions are the same.

 

Russell's qoute that has inspired this new round of discussion in here was merely trying to suggest the equality in validity that any one religion may have. And in so much as that is the case, it is supposed to suggest perhaps if one is just as good as the other, what does that say about their validity as a whole. I think it had less to do with going through and trying to nitpick the specifics of the beliefs. It was above that in the scale of its ontological implications.

 

 

i did read your physics stuff, and the fact that there are instances where a little bit of energy can "project a particle into existence" still does not make enegy a creator ecause energy is a creation itself.

 

As far as all religions sharing a common strand. Yes there are similarities in amost all of the worlds religions , for sure although the unique aspect of Islam that sets it apart from every other religion is how God is viewed. EVERY religion on the face of the earth attributes human or worldy qualities to God.

 

In Islam, God is not looked upon as being part of his creation unlike every other religion where God is a part of creation and in certain instances is even human. That is the main thing that seperates Islam from every other faith. Agree or disagree, that is the fact.

I don't think the issue is as much what name we call God or whatever, more than what exactly do we beleive about God.

I think it is very important to know exactly what it is that you beleive about God. Because knowledge precedes speech and action.

You wouldn't attempt to fly a plane without knowledge of how to fly, because you have the potential of killing yourself, right?

Well, then if you intend to believe in God, then in your mind God shouldn't be some vague idea, but you should know (to the best fo your ability) exactly who God is and what makes God worthy of worship. To me, if something is dead, then It doesnt deserve my devotion.

Or if something was born then obviously it never created the universe because how could a God be born? If it were born then why wouldn't it's mother or father be Gods too?

The idea of multiple Gods doesn't make sense due to the fact that there would be confusion. There can't be 2 fathers in a family, 2 heads of a household. There would be chaos. Each one would be trying to overcome the other.

 

you don't have to beleive the way I do, but, bear witness that you heard the message.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And for the ones who say it is illogical to beleive in God, then is it illogical to beleive that a murder took place when you see a bloody dead body?

 

Peices of evidence left behind at the scene of a crime are considered incriminating proofs that lead courts to settle cases in an absolute manner. In the same way, God's signs within his creation and the logical evidences contained within his revalation contain even more definate proofs that we were created by an all knowing All powerful God.

 

the reason some people don't see that is because they refuse to look.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno man, I'm looking around but I don't see any power-tools or footprints that have God's name on them. I don't think he puts his name up on atoms or brick walls. What sort of signs are you talking about?

 

 

Another question, for God or for whoever: If God teaches forgiveness and love, then why would someone be damned for ETERNITY, with no chance of redemption? I feel that is pretty hypocritical as well, saying "oh you have free will and you can always redeem yourself in the eyes of God or Jesus or Allah or....", but you can be damned to Hell for all eternity. These questions, I'm not expecting answers but I'm really asking them because they point out significant flaws in a monotheistic theory of religion. God really seems to have an inferiority complex, NO ONE can be as great as he, no one can see as he sees. If he's God and creator of all, then it's his fault or doing that it is this way. If God really wants us to see the light, to know him and understand him in order to live our lives as good souls, then why not share the whole love with us?

 

 

Dawood, I may have asked this before, but I'm not sure, is there a Hell in Islam? What is in this hell, according to scripture? Are there demons, devils, "the" Devil?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried editing this, but 12oz fucked me, let me see if I can burn through it again:

 

 

Basically, If God cannot create another as equal to him, then it means that there are limitations as to what God can do. So then where or who did this limitation come from? If he is powerless to do so, then God is not without limit. God is not all-powerful. If God created this universe, then why would he put that limitation on himself? And what would force him to enforce his own law in this fashion? If this law is enforced on him, then certainly there must be something before him, something that he may not even know.

 

If it were God's CHOICE to not, ever, make anyone as equal as he is, this would be the only other possible situation. So then, God is selfish? God has an inferiority complex? God is imperfect. How could God expect us to know him when he will not give us the chance to KNOW? We can be given signs, hints, glimpses of his glory and perfection, but then, by standard monotheistic belief, we are supposed to KNOW him in all entirety. This is not possible, because in order to know who one is, completely, we must be equal to this person. It is the same thing to the constant desire of millions to BE or KNOW that rockstar, that movie star, the PRESIDENT. We, individually and collectively, will never know what it is like to be John F. Kennedy or Brad Pitt or Kurt Cobain, because they are one person, and the experience of man, by monotheistic definition and scientific definition, is unique and unreplicable. An individual can reach that level of status and see it from their own eyes, but it will be different. They will not have the same memories as we cannot exist in the same time as anyone else but ourselves.

 

So, God is all-knowing, perfection, limitless, timeless. We could exist as God does, if we could surpass the boundaries of time. God, the all-powerful could make this happen. Perhaps, if we go to "heaven", then we become God, God is the collective. If that is in the Koran or the Bible than I will eat my computer. But all I hear is that God is in every one of us, but we cannot be God. It is the same as a King's bounty on his people. Only the King and Queen can be the most powerful, and no one else but their BLOOD. This is because of a horrible greed to keep power and money even in death. If you live in their land, than you are by default, their subjects and as a result you MUST pay your taxes and respects to them. Even if that King is the worst, and there were lots of bad Kings.

 

So, God is considered by many to be King of the Kingdom of Heaven, and we are all his subjects. The subjects can never be the equals of the king, by default, because there is only one KING. I cannot accept a God that would knowingly create a universe in which not a single soul or cell can ever reach the top. That would mean that we are all prisoners of existence. If we can attain the "bliss" of God upon death, and we would not worry or question, then it would be like the Matrix from the film of the same name. "A prison you cannot touch, smell, taste, or see", a place where there was a beyond, a greater place, but we are feed bliss in order to never know it.

 

This is why I am more open to religions such as Buddhism, where anyone can attain the level of Buddha, potentially. Or Hinduism, where a man or animal can become a God. A religion where the Gods existed in a universe before ours. It still throws this burden of time onto us, but at least it does so without telling us that when our time is up, we'll still be servants.

 

I'm not saying this to offend anyone. Dawood, I know you are one of the most religiously-faithful around these parts, especially on this thread. I hope that you won't just dismiss me or consider me blasphomous and damned. I'm not saying you display traits of this, but there are many who would just tell me I'm damned to hell. I think that we, here, are going to be around each other and many others for years and to know and listen to each other is our best bet. I like that you post scripture for us, I think that even if we do not believe, it can do us some good. I like that you pull it straight from the Koran, rather than hotlinking. I wish there were more on here that could do so, for Hinduism or Christianity. I think that with graffiti, it is very hard for someone who has such strong religious values to break the law and also to put up with some of the terrible shit that happens in this culture (drugs, fights, ignorance).

 

For some of us, being atheist or agnostic is not black or white, it's not just an THERE IS NO GOD sort of deal, or "uhhh, yeah I dunno, I guess not" type of deal. It's a struggle for me, because I feel like the majority of the planet does not ask these questions and does not care, and I see this planet going to shit, especially my country. I also have such a strong desire to learn, and to know things that I may never know in my lifetime, like what it is like to step foot on another planet, in another universe, another dimension, another time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with much of what you said 666, especially with Buddhism. What I like most about some forms of Buddhism is that there is no dogma, no core beliefs and nothing that is not possible. Like you said, everyone can strive to achieve Buddhahood, but on the other hand, you can also believe that Buddha never existed and is a crock of shit, but still practice Buddhism. You can be a Muslim and practice Buddhism, although Dawood may not agree. Ain't it great!

 

I can relate to that, because I also cannot see things in black and white very easily; there are just too many possibilities. On the other hand, I respect the beliefs of others, like Dawood, who can believe in one god. It is a bigger leap than I could probably ever make though. I like these kinds of arguments because they help me, and hopefully others, to think about the world we are living in, and ask more questions. Also, arguing helps keep me sharp!

Link to post
Share on other sites

of the creator of the heavens and earth

 

I dunno man, I'm looking around but I don't see any power-tools or footprints that have God's name on them. I don't think he puts his name up on atoms or brick walls. What sort of signs are you talking about?

 

 

 

Signs, man, The sun, the moon, the trees, the people, the insects, the animals. etc.

If you can't see that inanimate objects don't just animate themselves then I don't know what else to say. Even a machine like an automobile that only lasts 20 years or so needs an intellegent manufacterer , well look at a human that lasts an average of 80 years give or take. Don't you think that a design as complex as a human necessitates a designer? You won't find a design as simple as a tennis ball without a designer. There is not an example of anything that exists within this universe that originated itself , but you'd like me to beleive that the universe just randomly happened without any sort of thought?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Another question, for God or for whoever: If God teaches forgiveness and love, then why would someone be damned for ETERNITY, with no chance of redemption? I feel that is pretty hypocritical as well, saying "oh you have free will and you can always redeem yourself in the eyes of God or Jesus or Allah or....", but you can be damned to Hell for all eternity. These questions, I'm not expecting answers but I'm really asking them because they point out significant flaws in a monotheistic theory of religion. God really seems to have an inferiority complex, NO ONE can be as great as he, no one can see as he sees. If he's God and creator of all, then it's his fault or doing that it is this way. If God really wants us to see the light, to know him and understand him in order to live our lives as good souls, then why not share the whole love with us?

 

Dawood, I may have asked this before, but I'm not sure, is there a Hell in Islam? What is in this hell, according to scripture? Are there demons, devils, "the" Devil?

 

There is a chance for redemtion, for your whole life there is a chance for you to repent and ask forgiveness for receiving God's blessings and not being thankful for them.

It's a huge crime to live here in Allah's world but never show gratitude to him through worship. How can God have an iferiority complex? This is an EXTREMELY arrogant statement.

God is the most exalted being , man! Nothing is above him in greatness. He created you and everything you know, everything you eat or drink belongs to him. The world you live in is HIS! , and then you have the nerve to accuse him of being unjust. You are an ingrate.

If you had children you would understand. Imagine having children and sacrificing your time, your money, your life for them. So that they can be safe and properly taken care of.

You do everything for them, they live in your house , eat the food you buy with your hard earned money, then they turn around and accuse you of having an inferiority complex and being an unjust hypocrite. Have some gratefulness, it will make you a better person to be thankful.

Also, as for being damned to hell, God is not unjust to anyone, if he damns a person to hell for eternity (and yes there is a hell in Islam) then he knows full well that they deserve it and that if he allowed them to live in this world forever that they would rebel agaisnt him forever. And similarly if he allows one of his servants into paradise, then that is his justice and reward for their gratitude and thankfulness for his blessings.

In other words, Good only brings more good, but evil only brings you more evil, so is'nt it time that your heart wakes up and brings yourself some good?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...