Is there a God??

I'm not going to argue conciousnes vs. reasoning. Mostly because I do believe in a certain amount of evolution. I do believe that what seperates us from animals is our capacity to learn and our soul. I am also not going to argue the existance of the soul because it's a dead end road. Either you believe or you don't.

I will go back to a question asked earlier. Where did the universe come from? I understand that science has no real proof on it's origins and all it has is guesses or "theories". Some of them are facinating but in the end they are guesses. Aren't you the least bit curious how it all began? I am.
Science is a great tool but there are certain things it will never do. Create life from nothing and explain how all things started from nothing.

As a Christain (and I wasn't always a Christain) I think science is a great thing. Science and religion are not opposed to each other. If they were then you wouldn't see so many scientist that are religious. As I said earlier; being a Christain doesn't mean we are blind to fact. Science helps me understand the universe God created. It's only a tool but sadly it's treated as a religion by many.

You raise some good points, and I agree that science cannot explain how "life" actually begins, what actually seperates inanimate from animate. I fail to understand, though, how a synthesis of religious (especially Catholic) and scientific beliefs. I left the Catholic church because it made sense to me than in order to receive communion and partake in "worship," it required full belief in Catholic doctrine. A lot of the stances taken by the Church are absolutely ridiculous, although the Pope has finally admitted that evolution does in fact occur.

I would be interested to know more about what pieces of Christianity and what pieces of Science you synthesize in your beliefs. The two seem largely incompatible to me.

Ok... Yo, Animaks DO NOT have rational thought, duh, that is what makes us intelligent life, and NOT animals. When SETI is out looking for Alien life-forms, they are looking for "intelligent" life, or rational thinking life, not primitve life. Animals are social creates, Hunny Bees, Wolf-packs, all have forms of expressing ideas to each other, and obviously teach the new members these ideas, but rational thinking? Come on now, and porfessor will tell you no. An animal cannot think about the consequences of its actions, or reason between choices, it acts on IMPULSE.
Like said before, science is only guessing to explain the origins of life/the universe. If you do not believe in God, give me a BETTER explaination for the origins?

If you do not believe in God, give me a BETTER explaination for the origins?
That makes no sense. You can't prove what you can not test. You can't do testing on how all life began, and where the universe started. You can choose to believe what you want to believe, but face it, no idea is any less likely than any other.
If I were to say that the universe began from a giant potatoe, how could you prove me wrong? You have as much evidence saying I'm wrong, as I do saying that I'm right.
Also, some people might point out that animals do show the capability of logical thought, you might remember those famous studies, where they'd hang a banana from the cieling, and then see if the animal in question was smart enough to stack objects on top of eachother to get it. That's logic, plain and simple. If a primate cared what a lightbulb was, they could put him in a room with a fresh one, and a ladder, and he'd be up there changing out the old one. How is that not rational thought?

Ok... Yo, Animaks DO NOT have rational thought, duh, that is what makes us intelligent life, and NOT animals. When SETI is out looking for Alien life-forms, they are looking for "intelligent" life, or rational thinking life, not primitve life. Animals are social creates, Hunny Bees, Wolf-packs, all have forms of expressing ideas to each other, and obviously teach the new members these ideas, but rational thinking? Come on now, and porfessor will tell you no. An animal cannot think about the consequences of its actions, or reason between choices, it acts on IMPULSE.
Like said before, science is only guessing to explain the origins of life/the universe. If you do not believe in God, give me a BETTER explaination for the origins?

Eh, chimps can recognize themselves in mirrors, plan for future events, fashion tools, cooperatively hunt, learn symbolic language, and even place objects into arbitrary categories, which is rational thinking and reasoning, without a doubt. Seriously, go pick up an Anthropology or Primatology book and read all about it, and stop being so damn anthropocentric.

wow, i applaud all of your efforts to try to lessen to validity of the existense of god, but unfortunately all you have said is, i don't believe because science makes more sense, first of all it makes much less sense becuase you have no idea how the universe got here, and to put your faith in someone in the future to find out how it began(which will never happen) is rediculous, i'm not gonna argue the whole ration being BS, becuase its not important.

granted that evolution is very appealing and has so much support. it also rely's on a secular beggining, which you obviously don't have, please don't try to say my beliefs are wrong until you have yours straight..........

I've never said it made more sense. It would be ignorrant to assume science (so far as the begining of the universe is concerned) makes more sense. It would be equally ignorant, to say that God makes more sense. That is why it is stupid to say God didn't make the universe, when you have nothing to prove or disprove that theory.

You raise some good points, and I agree that science cannot explain how "life" actually begins, what actually seperates inanimate from animate. I fail to understand, though, how a synthesis of religious (especially Catholic) and scientific beliefs. I left the Catholic church because it made sense to me than in order to receive communion and partake in "worship," it required full belief in Catholic doctrine. A lot of the stances taken by the Church are absolutely ridiculous, although the Pope has finally admitted that evolution does in fact occur.

I would be interested to know more about what pieces of Christianity and what pieces of Science you synthesize in your beliefs. The two seem largely incompatible to me.
I can't speak for Catholicism; mostly because I don't completly agree with some of their doctrines but that doesn't mean they are wrong. What I can do is tell you how I believe. I beleive that there was a certain amount of evolution did transpire and is still happening. Science has proven to me that it happens. I believe that God created the universe and set natural laws in place that govern the workings of the universe. Did man evolve? If so then how do I as a Christian ignore what is written in Genisis? I can't ignore it. I believe that God created man. I believe that he created him in an instant and not through evolution. That doesn't mean that evolution didn't happen or that it didn't happen to primates. I just don't believe it happened to the primate man. That's not to say that evolution didn't come very close to what we know as modern man but I believe they lacked something that was crucial to what we have today. They lacked the spirit of God. ("...and God created man in his own image." ) So where are these cavemen today if God created man and evolution was still taking place? That's one I can't answer. Possibly they died out because of some catastrophy that also killed the dinosuars. Possibly they died out because of some disease like aids or small pocks or the plague. Look at the most recent Cro-magnon (suppose to be the ancestor of modern man) skull found. It is dated at around 28,000 years. According to most Biblical scholars modern man has been on the earth for around 10,000 years. What happened between the 28,000 and 10,000 years? Possibly we just haven't uncovered more recent fossils yet. There was found a skull of a Homo-neanderthalensis that was dated around 35,000 years. Roughly the same time of the Cro-magnon man. They completly disapeared from the earth. Some scientist beleive it is a subspecies of homo sapiens but what happened to them? Did they die off? Did they quit evolving? Did they get wiped out by the more intelligent Cro-magnon man?

Lot's of questions and not enough answers yet. That doesn't mean that I just give up and say God did it. Some things I can say God did it because of my faith in Him and when he says I did it then that means He did it. When he doesn't say I did it then I am open for whatever man can figure out about it. Christianity and science can coexist and can benefit from each other.

Posted by Joseph1082: If there existed no evil, I believe free-will would no longer exist either, so yes it is essentially to the cosmic puzzle. The Forbidden Tree was there for a reason, to balance things out. If evil is against God, and good is Pro-God, then w/o evil there'd be no reason for existence, because God supposedly gave us the choice to be for him or against him, thus the basis of free-will. W/o the second choice, leaving only one choice, there is no free-will Posted by DGB454:Good point. One question though. Before God created anything and there was only God did evil exist?
Joseph1082,

If you are interested I would like to get your take on my last question. You brought up some great points and I would like to get your perspective on it.

Thanks

wow, i applaud all of your efforts to try to lessen to validity of the existense of god, but unfortunately all you have said is, i don't believe because science makes more sense, first of all it makes much less sense becuase you have no idea how the universe got here, and to put your faith in someone in the future to find out how it began(which will never happen) is rediculous, i'm not gonna argue the whole ration being BS, becuase its not important.

granted that evolution is very appealing and has so much support. it also rely's on a secular beggining, which you obviously don't have, please don't try to say my beliefs are wrong until you have yours straight..........

You also have no idea how the universe got here, you just choose to believe some BS that people thousands of years ago came up with. The best thinkers in the world back then came up with the creation stories. Well, the best thinkers in the world in the thousands of years since then have had a lot of time to ponder the world, and it just may make sense that we have a better idea of how the world works, and also how it began. The path to understanding is not relying and holding on to tradition, it is builiding on top of tradition, in that we can know more.

I believe in some supernatural force that drives the universe, a force that is outside of the realm of human understanding. But let's be realistic; the creation stories are far fetched, and do not make a bit of sense.

The creation stories that say God created the earth?
You believe in a supernatural force but limit it's power?
I am confused.

Creation stories like "God created all of the birds and bees and trees, and split the sky, and created night and day and blah blah blah." I don't claim to know how the universe began, but most of the creation stories I know of are very far fetched. The driving force I speak of is simply that which just makes everything work the way it does, not a "being", rather simply put just a supernatural force. I do not agree with the asserition that god is in any way a "being" with consciousness, that's what I meant.

Ok fair enough. Although I am still confused about what the supernatural force might be. To each his own I guess.
Anyway did you get what I was saying about Christianity and science and how they aren't opposed to each other in my mind?

ok, so everyones said that "god doesnt exist, science makes more sense" or "how else do you explain the creation?"

and this has gone back and forth and back and forth, so from a philosophy majors thought process here it is. keep in mind i am refering to a christian god, though many of these arguments will apply to any religion.

God is perfect right? why did he need to create the world then? was he lonely? bored? would a perfect being of infinate powers get bored or lonely? perhaps god was just egotistical and decided to creat beings to worship him...is god then worthy of worship? the definition of perfection contain "completeness" if God needed to create the world, he was not complete, thus not perfect.

perfection also begets perfection...what purpose would there be in a perfect being creating such an imperfect world?

Hume teaches us that belief in a god is simply irrational. again, our imperfect world is all that we know, how can we rationally infer a perfect creator? and then arguement from design (something had to have designed the world for it to run so smoothly) even if you accept this as true (which you rationally shouldnt) it still doesnt net you a perfect god, or a judeo/christian/muslim god by any stretch of the imagination.

note: alot of this arguement was (for brevities sake) summarized from an article wiriten by Chad Docterman called "why the christian god is impossible" the link to the article follows http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/library/cd_impossible.html

This is all im going to say on this subject in this forum so ill keep this simple and sweet. There has to be a God, if there wasnt, the religion posts wouldnt keep poping up because people are searching for answers. I have found that the only answers are in the bible and everything else that says they do, flakes out in the end. Prophsey in about the end times is developing into past events like left and right but another prophecy is being foretold with the masses rejecting the truth. So in short, the hole left when God left our hearts cant be filled with everything else. It has to be filled with God and the way that happens is when we accept Jesus into our hearts as lord and savior. Its as simple as that and you can try to fill your heart with worldly desires but it just wont be fufilled.
Now I hope that I havent offended anybody by me writing this so Im not going to go bible thumping like I have in the past and end up offending every single person that dosent belive just like me. I might respont do a couple people that respont to this post, but thats it. I just love Jesus and know deep in my heart that he can do for the whole world what he has done for me.

Sorry about the typing errors in this, im pretty tired so please bear with me on the spelling in my previous post!

Ok, a couple of things...
first off to lazysmurff,
Ok, but you cannot bring up one school of philosophy and take it as absolute, Leibniz pointed out very clearly the answer to an infinite God creating this World... this World is PERFECT, it is the best of all possible possibilities. Every variable needs to be balanced against the others, so that the scale doesn't tip. So this world we live in is perfectly balanced, the best possible one overall!
Ok, as for God vs Big-bang, as long as you don't trash God theory we won't trash yours, they both hold EQUAL weight.
Evolution, well, has many, MANY holes, 1st off, where r all the links, y have none of them survived as modern species, and even so, where are all their fossils, come on, gimme a break... there should be at least a dozen link species between every similar modern day species, this results into millions of dead links, tens of millions over the course of what, 400 million years of evolution. 2nd off, it is a fact of modern science that physical changes, say a scar, or loss of limb, aren't pass on through the gene pool, so how can the so-called adaptations be passed on. And Y is there never ANY evidence ever of a positive mutation?
To DGB,
You may not like my answer, but what I have to say is first off, realize that God is infinite, in every way. Your question, "before" Man existed was there "evil"? Well, the terms "before" and "evil" are human terms to describe concepts and phenomena. There is no before man, God exists at every point in time all at once, so to speak. Evil is simply the phenomenon we experience in our world and its label.
Ok, but to address what you asked, in my opinion then, no, there was no evil before man. Evil only came at the moment free-will came, it is the "other" option. It is what defines Free-will.

note: alot of this arguement was (for brevities sake) summarized from an article wiriten by Chad Docterman called "why the christian god is impossible" the link to the article follows http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/library/cd_impossible.html

Very interesting article. There are many things in that article that I agree with, but there are also some that I do not. Just to play devil's advocate (no pun intended), the author bases his whole argument on the premise that God isn't perfect, yet he claims to be. We've already discussed that the bible was written by man, and thus can not be the complete word of god. Especially since things were omitted.

Another perfection argument that I have is that how can perfection exist when imperfection does not? It's all relative.

To Joseph.. not all non-relgious types believe in the big bang/evolution/any other scientific thing you can dig up.

To crapmaster, just because religion posts keep popping up, doesn't make your religion true.

I've said it along with many people in here. You can't prove either side. Saying your side is 100% correct is a fallacy.

To DGB, You may not like my answer, but what I have to say is first off, realize that God is infinite, in every way. Your question, "before" Man existed was there "evil"? Well, the terms "before" and "evil" are human terms to describe concepts and phenomena. There is no before man, God exists at every point in time all at once, so to speak. Evil is simply the phenomenon we experience in our world and its label. Ok, but to address what you asked, in my opinion then, no, there was no evil before man. Evil only came at the moment free-will came, it is the "other" option. It is what defines Free-will.

Good point. Maybe I am falling into human based ideas when discussing evil and time. I usually try not to head that way when discussing God but it's not always that easy. Anyway thanks for your answer. I think we agree for the most part.

ok, so everyones said that "god doesnt exist, science makes more sense" or "how else do you explain the creation?"

and this has gone back and forth and back and forth, so from a philosophy majors thought process here it is. keep in mind i am refering to a christian god, though many of these arguments will apply to any religion.

God is perfect right? why did he need to create the world then? was he lonely? bored? would a perfect being of infinate powers get bored or lonely? perhaps god was just egotistical and decided to creat beings to worship him...is god then worthy of worship? the definition of perfection contain "completeness" if God needed to create the world, he was not complete, thus not perfect.

perfection also begets perfection...what purpose would there be in a perfect being creating such an imperfect world?

Hume teaches us that belief in a god is simply irrational. again, our imperfect world is all that we know, how can we rationally infer a perfect creator? and then arguement from design (something had to have designed the world for it to run so smoothly) even if you accept this as true (which you rationally shouldnt) it still doesnt net you a perfect god, or a judeo/christian/muslim god by any stretch of the imagination.

note: alot of this arguement was (for brevities sake) summarized from an article wiriten by Chad Docterman called "why the christian god is impossible" the link to the article follows http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/library/cd_impossible.html

Why did God create? It's in his nature to create. He is the creator. IMO.

Imperfect world? What would constitute as perfect? A world where there was no evil? That would then make us imperfect because free will wouldn't exist. Man causes evil and the only way to stop man from doing evil things would be to take away free will.
What is perfection? Who can judge what is perfect? You? Me? a philosopher? You would get different answers from all 3. So who should judge what perfection looks like other than the creator of the subject that is being measured against perfection. For example; If I created a painting and said it was perfect. Someone else might say it has too much blue in it. Someone else may say there is too much red in it etc....
but it's perfect to me who created it. It is perfect for what I wanted.

Evolution, well, has many, MANY holes, 1st off, where r all the links, y have none of them survived as modern species, and even so, where are all their fossils, come on, gimme a break... there should be at least a dozen link species between every similar modern day species, this results into millions of dead links, tens of millions over the course of what, 400 million years of evolution. 2nd off, it is a fact of modern science that physical changes, say a scar, or loss of limb, aren't pass on through the gene pool, so how can the so-called adaptations be passed on. And Y is there never ANY evidence ever of a positive mutation?


Easy there, I think you need to take a refresher course in evolution and paleontology. Acquired characteristics are not passed on through generations, that is called LaMarckian evolution, and has been known to be false for about 150 years. Mutations that cause variance in reproductive success are what ultimately lead to changes in allele frequency in a population. And mutations are neither good nor bad, they are neutral. Sometimes they turn out to give an individual higher fitness, but they are random. The argument that evolution has MANY holes is outdated and not really accepted in the scientific community anymore. Nothing in biology makes sense without evolutionary theory.

There are species that have survived for very long periods of time. Crocodiles and Alligators have been around for 200 million years, Ceolocanths have been around for 200 million years, and Great White Sharks have been around for about 400 million years. The first life appeared around 4.5 billion years ago, and the Cambrian explosion (about 550 mya) was when life really started to proliferate. When you take into acount the fact that the conditions required for fossilization are rarely present in natural environments, you begin to see that we are incredibly lucky to have the fossils that we do. 500 million years is a long time, and organic materials break down much quicker than that, so unless they are replaced by minerals, you can't expect to have a complete fossil record of every species that has inhabited the earth. We have a plethora of fossils from the recent past (last couple hundred years), but reconstructing the past beyond that is very difficult, as the fossil record will never be complete.

Anyway did you get what I was saying about Christianity and science and how they aren't opposed to each other in my mind?

I get what you are saying, I could see how that would work. It's consistent, not what I choose to believe, but that's ok.

About the Cro-magnon and neanderthals, the most recent evidence from anthropologists suggests that anatomically modern Homo sapiens were present around 100 thousand years ago, and that we simply out compteted the neanderthals and Cro-magnon, as a result of our superior problem solving and adaptibility to environments.

I get what you are saying, I could see how that would work. It's consistent, not what I choose to believe, but that's ok. About the Cro-magnon and neanderthals, the most recent evidence from anthropologists suggests that anatomically modern Homo sapiens were present around 100 thousand years ago, and that we simply out compteted the neanderthals and Cro-magnon, as a result of our superior problem solving and adaptibility to environments.

Question: If we supposedly evolved from the cro-magnon line then why would cro-magnon be competing with modern man? Wouldn't cro-magnon have evolved past that point and become modern man? Was it selective evolution where only pockets of cro-magnon evolved while others remained in the cro-magnon state of evolution?

Ok, I see everyone's point
to thrasher,
But how come Y have Dinosaur Fossils from oh, say, the Jurasic period, yet have no fossils of links from a quarter of that time ago?
to Lazysmurff,
read my post #76 abd let me know who made Hume's philosophy have more weight than all the others, and let me know waht proof you have that the World is not perfect... you don't because we have nothing to compared it to.
In this respect the argument of whether God is pefect or not is moot... we have no idea what perfect is any, all we can say is that God is infinite.

noone said Hume carries more weight than anyone else.

but i can name SEVERAL philosophers who believe liebniz to be worthless, and call me a cynic, but i reject his best of all possible worlds statement.

if this is the best of all possible worlds that God could come up with, God must have the rational ability of Homer Simpson. Surely we can all imagine a world with no hitler.

i'll let thrasher cover the evolution thing, but even the pope has admitted it happened, i think you can too.

saying god created because he is a creator is a circular arguement.

oh and joseph, we cant know whether this world is perfect or not (which you said in your last post #82) directly contradicts what you said in post #76 about this being the best possible world. it also agrees 100% with Humes arguement as to why it is irrational to believe that a perfect God created this world...This is our only "world" experience, we've got nothing else to base it on. for all we know, this could be gods rough draft.

Question: If we supposedly evolved from the cro-magnon line then why would cro-magnon be competing with modern man? Wouldn't cro-magnon have evolved past that point and become modern man? Was it selective evolution where only pockets of cro-magnon evolved while others remained in the cro-magnon state of evolution?

Not to distract from the topic of the thread (and its been the best behaved religous thread I've ever seen here) but take a look here to see the evolutionairy path for modern humans http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/a_tree.html

Lazy,
The not knowing what's perfect, i'm pretty sure I read that in Hume... I was using Leibniz to offer an explaination as to how this world COULD be perfect, and then am pointing out the absolute notion that a perfect World is a subjective thing.
1st off, we have nothing to measure THIS world against, you know this.
2nd, perfection itself is a somewhat subjective term, what you envision as a perfect world may be not be the same as what I do... so who's to say what is perfect? Perhaps I beleive that a World with death and disease is perfect because they balance out the popualtion. What about suffering, well, isn't it essential to human growth? You see my point.
I was unaware that the pope has accepted evolution, to be that seems like blasphemy. I still dont accept it. See, like I said, no one has been able to actually answer me as to the missing links? And as far as mutations, someone said they were nuetral, but I would consider mutations that have advantageous results to be positive, say those mutations that led to the human brain. Alligators have been here for XXX millions of years... ah, this proves my point, Y in all this time have they not produced a newer, better species, modern man only appeared 100,000 years ago, you'd think in all those millions of years alligators would have produced some positive mutations, created an off-shoot species, and eventually be replaced, right?
Oh, and as for animals reasoning, I think you are misunderstanding me. I SAID, yes, a mouse can do a maze, so chimps can pile up blocks to get food, but the Chimp cannot think RATIONALLY, he cannot say to himself, "If I leaved the blocks like that, I will be able to use this devise tomorrow in the event thy put food up there again."

so you accept this to be the best of all possible worlds. cool deal, i'll accept that.

there are imperfections in this world, correct? people born with only one arm? good people dying too soon (MLK anyone)? humanity itself is surely imperfect. come to think of it, i dont think ive encountered anything or anyone that was perfect. especially seeing as prefection is such a subjective thing.

how then can we infer that there is anything that is perfect? at all. where does the concept of a "perfect" god come in? imperfection in a created world begets imperfection in its creator. he may be perfect to you, certainly seems that way. God is not (if s/he exists) perfect for me. you admit this possibility yourself.

then can god exist in two states? perfect and imperfect? we get into the schrodengers cat problem. certainly a truly perfect being would have worked out someway to avoid this very problem in themselves.

oh, and missing links...here we go (i am a philosophy major, not biology or anthropology, so if i screw something up, please feel free to inform me)

the alligator has no changed in x span of time is a false statement. they have definately gotten smaller, and as a result quicker on land, seeing as the huge expanses of water they were used to are drying up. they have changed in any huge ways because they havent needed to in order to survive and propogate their species. same thing with roaches, and snakes.

links have been found in human evolution (lucy for instance) and several neandertal skeletons as well.

i suggest you do further research if your curious, as thats all i have to offer on the subject.

I left the Catholic church because it made sense to me than in order to receive communion and partake in "worship," it required full belief in Catholic doctrine. A lot of the stances taken by the Church are absolutely ridiculous, although the Pope has finally admitted that evolution does in fact occur.

I would be interested to know more about what pieces of Christianity and what pieces of Science you synthesize in your beliefs. The two seem largely incompatible to me.

dude the catholic church to me is a piece of crap, it has always and will always be a fasle set up and corrupt, thats why i am a protestant, yet i am a christian.

I left the Catholic church because it made sense to me than in order to receive communion and partake in "worship," it required full belief in Catholic doctrine. A lot of the stances taken by the Church are absolutely ridiculous, although the Pope has finally admitted that evolution does in fact occur.

the pope is all screwed up old guy, other teachings like u need a pope and he is in charge is pplz pardon my words shit. i dont have full belief in the catholic doctrine, in fact not all catholics are christians, you dont have to be catholic to be a christian is what i am saying.

what does any of that have to do with the existence of god?

Hey Lazy,
Yes I said myself, pefect isn't a good word, infinite is... so for the Record God is not "Perfect" which is a subjective and totally not absolute term. Infinite on the other hand is definitely an absolute term, there is no confusion or debate about it, so God is infinite!
Allegators getting smaller isn't evolution, just like humans gettin taller, or living longer, isn't evolution. Evolution is the creation of brand-new sub-species etc. In XX millions of years, allegators have failed to produced any new species, the allegators of yesteryear are genetically identical to those of today, hence we use the same term "allegators" to describe them. In this time, how many new species of mammals mutated and popped-up??? So what went wrong w/ allegators? We need thrasher here!

Oh, and I am not nessesarily sure this is the best possilbe, most perfect world, I was just answer the question of "How could a Perfect God create an imperfect World" well, since whether or not this world is perfect is an opinion, then the question kind of gets thrown out. And how could God make this, well, like I said, God is INFINITE, so he is capable of infinite things, so he could make this world, he could make any world.

ok, this makes my job a little more difficult, but i'll see what i can do.

to be infinite, God would have to be infinite in everything we can come up with. infitnite in size, in wisdom, in power, in knowledge, in time, and in energy.

this raises a few problems (keep in mind, we are supposing the existence of God here, even though i will try to prove non existence, i may just end up proving God finite-ness) An infinite being is a complete being correct?

why would a being that is totally complete create a world such as this? surely there is no reason that would not point out some lack on God's part that makes him finite. God is complete within itself. God needs no companionship, no underlings, no entertainment, etc...

also, god is infinitely just, then why are we punished for an infinite time (eternity) for finite sins. doesnt seem too just to me (or any other philosopher i can think of)

an infinitly knowledgable god would have to have known the world would end up just like this. yet on several occasions (within the scripture no less, the very world of God) God is suprised. obviously not infinitley knowledgable.

man, i could go on, but im tired, and my brain hurts, and im sure your getting the point by now

oh, evolution vs. noahs ark

given the dimensions in the bible , every known species of animal on earth today would have had something like 1/32 of an inch of space to itself.

either the devine word of God is mistaken (not infinitely knowledgable), or evolution occured...take your pick.

Evolution is the creation of brand-new sub-species etc. In XX millions of years, allegators have failed to produced any new species, the allegators of yesteryear are genetically identical to those of today, hence we use the same term "allegators" to describe them. In this time, how many new species of mammals mutated and popped-up??? So what went wrong w/ allegators? We need thrasher here!

Nothing went wrong with alligators. Evolution might BE a new subspecies, but it GETS that way through gradual development occuring through natural selection. Giraffes were probably similar to horses and developed their long necks and legs when those with the smaller necks couldn't reach the leaves way up high. The small-necked giraffes died off, the long neck giraffes mated, and the genetic pool was altered. Get how it works?

Just because a few species haven't changed doesn't mean evolution doesn't occur. These species have been at the top of the food chain, and live in very stable environments where they don't need to change to survive.

God creates because it is in his nature may be a circular arguement but that doesn't make it false.
Perfection again: Who has the right to judge ones creation as perfect or imperfect other than the creator? Who elses opinion matters?


Noahs ark. One possibility:http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c013.html

Out of curiosity where in the Bible is God suprised? I don't recall reading a passage where he appears suprised. Possibly appauled but not suprised.

dude the catholic church to me is a piece of crap, it has always and will always be a fasle set up and corrupt, thats why i am a protestant, yet i am a christian.


the pope is all screwed up old guy, other teachings like u need a pope and he is in charge is pplz pardon my words shit.

This thread had gone six pages without stupid bigotted comments like this. :disappoin

Please save those for stress release.

I belive in God the Son and the Holy spirit. And yes i do belive that the catholic church is still messed up. Everyone has their doubts, even i have but i still belive.

Ok Lazy,
God is infinite, in every characteristic, yes, power, knowledge, etc.
God has infinite free-will, does he not, he is God... he can create any World he wants, because nothing is beyond his power.
Also, keep in mind the Word "Infinite" can refer to a line that keeps going forever or a sigular point, hence a singularity, which is a more realistic picture of how God exists. He is timesless, so every moment in time is the same moment for him, that is how it will be for the punished sinners.
If you'll notice I rarely if ever brought up the Bible in MY posts. And in the Bible, a work of literature, there is PERSONIFICATION of God, a literary device... just like writers may do to inanimate objects, personify a car for example in some story. He is GOD, he isn't really surprised. Do you think the ancients had any idea about his nature, that of a singularity and infinity and timelessness, and occupying all points in the Space-Time continuum at once? What was written is on a certain level for the people of the time, so they may understand it. The clue, I posted this already, God refers to himself as "I AM" this reflects an Omnipresent being existing as a singularity.
As for evolutionists, I don't feel you have hit me with any hard evidence yet.

As for evolutionists, I don't feel you have hit me with any hard evidence yet.

If you want to be convinced of evolution, I highly recommend "The Diversity of Life," by Edward O. Wilson. He is basically the leading evolutionary biologist in the world, and in this book he provides masses of irrefutable evidence for evolution, as well as explaining very clearly how the mechanisms of evolution work. It is the best book out there about biodiversity and evolution for non-biologists. Pick it up, it's a great read.

I can, however, provide you with a perfect example. Horses, humans, cats, bats, and whales all have identical forelimb bones. The arrangement of the specific structures are different, but the bones themselves are the same. This points to the idea that we all share a common ancestor, through which we inherited these structues. The structures have been modified by each species through time to help fill our ecological role, but they are nonetheless essentially the same.

A little more about the alligators, though Prelewd hit it dead on the nose. The alligators probably have evolved, becuase evolution is defined as any change in allele frequency over generation. (BTW, alleles are alternative forms of the same gene, for example blue eyes and brown eyes are controlled by different alleles for the eye color gene.) Essentially, though, they have remained largely unchanged because they are so successful in their ecological niche, and there aren't any environmental pressures exerted on them.

so what if we all have the same forelimb bones. We all have eyes, brains, bones, blood, and many other things in common.

God, along with Heaven and Hell, is something created by man to calm their fear of death. Every religion addresses what happens after you die, therefore all can be said to be based around the same thing, death.

Same thing can be said with time... man needed something to calm their fear of what they didn't understand so therefore created a name for it and left it at that.

"Man fears the darkness so he scraped away at the edges with fire"
-N.G.E.

"Close this world...txEn eht nepO"
-S.E.L.

Ok, as you can tell by my posts, I am a scientist at heart, and I will look into that book, maybe it will change my views... someone said alligators have gotten smaller over time, thus evoling, but isn't this exactly what we said isn't evolution (physical changes) this also refutes the Giraffe example, where as the creature stretched it's neck and passed it to his offspring... but i'll read the book.
BTW, Thrasher, or U an evolutionary scientist? or just a big fan?
Even if would accept evoution, I still believe in God, there still is no better explaination as to the origins of the universe, the simple premise, "How can something come from nothing" simple philosphy, there has to be something to start.

god as an infinite sigularity....owwie, did i mention my brain hurt?

ok, this will have to do for an arguemtn until after finals are over, seeing as i need to be concentrating my efforts elsewhere at the moment (of course by then i expect this thread to be long dead). so here we go.

we can understand the premise of an ifinite line, even of an infinite plain, infinite space gets a little more difficult, but think long enough and youll get the concept.

while me may realize these rational "ideas" we have never actually encountered anything of infinite length, width, or hieght. everything has its bounds, at least in the course of human experience. ill go back to an original argument here. since we have not ever experienced anything that is infinite, how can we rationally believe that such a thing exists? we cant, we have no reason to. It's like never experiencing Thai food, and claiming (quite wrongly) that it will be mild. (ok, bad example, but you get the idea)

also, for DGB454, claiming that god creates because he is a creater is a circular argument. your right, saying its circular doesnt PROVE god doesnt exist, but it sure as hell wont convince me he does.

so really? why? if god exists, why do we? or better, why did he create us? im still waiting for an answer.

and as far as fighting against evolution because you believe in god, i hasten to point out that i know several people (though all of protestant persuasion) who believe God created (and still creates) using evolution as a tool. I think thats a great way to look at it if you insist on the existence of God.

Joseph. I accept evolution and God. I wouldn't sweat that part too much. It's a minor detail that isn't worth getting to off track on. :2cents:

god as an infinite sigularity....owwie, did i mention my brain hurt?

ok, this will have to do for an arguemtn until after finals are over, seeing as i need to be concentrating my efforts elsewhere at the moment (of course by then i expect this thread to be long dead). so here we go.

we can understand the premise of an ifinite line, even of an infinite plain, infinite space gets a little more difficult, but think long enough and youll get the concept.

while me may realize these rational "ideas" we have never actually encountered anything of infinite length, width, or hieght. everything has its bounds, at least in the course of human experience. ill go back to an original argument here. since we have not ever experienced anything that is infinite, how can we rationally believe that such a thing exists? we cant, we have no reason to. It's like never experiencing Thai food, and claiming (quite wrongly) that it will be mild. (ok, bad example, but you get the idea)

Ok, let's say that because we have never experienced anything infinite we can not expect that something infinite exist. Very limited thinking but I will go along with it. In that case then the universe or space must be finite. If the universe is finite then what lays beyond the universe? What is just on the other side?

also, for DGB454, claiming that god creates because he is a creater is a circular argument. your right, saying its circular doesnt PROVE god doesnt exist, but it sure as hell wont convince me he does..

To be honest words will never convince someone who doesn't want to believe. On the other hand it's somewhat entertaining.

dude the catholic church to me is a piece of crap, it has always and will always be a fasle set up and corrupt, thats why i am a protestant, yet i am a christian.



the pope is all screwed up old guy, other teachings like u need a pope and he is in charge is pplz pardon my words shit. i dont have full belief in the catholic doctrine, in fact not all catholics are christians, you dont have to be catholic to be a christian is what i am saying.
How ignorant can you be? Just b/c you don't believe in something don't go and criticize someones religion. And yes I am catholic. I don't believe in every thing that's taught, but it's still my religion and it offends me when people like you assoicate things with what you see in the news.

It is almost if not the oldest church in the christian faith. That may be why everything is so strict with beliefs. I don't see how you can say that it is a false set up(whatever that is) and corrupt.

beats me man, beats me, ill leave that one to the astro physicists. but the point still stands, i can no more believe in an infinite god than i can infinite space. i mean, really think about it. can you tell anything about god except that s/hes infinite? beyond that, what have you really got but a few words in a book?

also, yes, words will never convince me god does exist, and will never convince you he doesnt, simply because a concrete definition of GOD can never be reached (see above) and so, effectively you cannot argue logically about it. even if i provided you with concrete logical proof of his non existence, you would tell me logic doesnt apply to god.

the arguement is an impasse, but a fun one non the less and i truly have enjoyed it.

me too..

also, yes, words will never convince me god does exist, and will never convince you he doesnt, simply because a concrete definition of GOD can never be reached (see above) and so, effectively you cannot argue logically about it. even if i provided you with concrete logical proof of his non existence, you would tell me logic doesnt apply to god.



I think what can and should be agreed upon is that regardless of how you imagine God, he/she/it does exist in some form or another, simply in the sense that there are powers at work that are outside of the scope of our understanding, and more importantly, outside the scope of our control and ability to manipulate.

so what if we all have the same forelimb bones. We all have eyes, brains, bones, blood, and many other things in common.

This even furthers my argument. Many of the similarities we share with mammals are ancestral, meaning they come from a shared common ancestor. Sure, there are non-mammals with eyes and blood and bones, but those with the most similar structures to us shared a more recent common ancestor. Our bones and eyes, and our sense of smell especially, are much more similar to a those of a primate than to those of, say a shark, as we have much more recently shared a common ancestor.

BTW, Thrasher, or U an evolutionary scientist? or just a big fan?

Yeah, I'm an undergraduate ecology, evolution, and animal behavior major/Anthopology minor

So who did the first creature to climb out of the primordeal(sp?) soup mate with? Did 2 of them of opposite sexes evolve together? Just curious.

So who did the first creature to climb out of the primordeal(sp?) soup mate with? Did 2 of them of opposite sexes evolve together? Just curious.

Probably itself...

http://biology.about.com/library/weekly/aa090700a.htm

so really? why? if god exists, why do we? or better, why did he create us? im still waiting for an answer.

he created us because he was lonley, or something like that. Thats what a wittle wittle dork learned in Sunday Skool.

How ignorant can you be? Just b/c you don't believe in something don't go and criticize someones religion. And yes I am catholic. I don't believe in every thing that's taught, but it's still my religion and it offends me when people like you assoicate things with what you see in the news.

It is almost if not the oldest church in the christian faith. That may be why everything is so strict with beliefs. I don't see how you can say that it is a false set up(whatever that is) and corrupt.

lol, sorry dude, so now i cant critizize a religion, hey all these ppl are criticizing evolution or God, im sorry i offended you but i said what i believe, you can feal free to criticize me, and me being a protestant.

This is I think one of the most interesting threads on AF.
Ok, so we can never conceptualize "Infinitity" because we ourselves are finite... but we can understand the concept of something being infinite, at least I can. And God exist outside of our Space-Time continuum, our Multiverse, whatever you want to call it. He has a totally seperate reality, so our laws of science do not apply there, the laws he created. Of course an Infinite being could create a finite world, it is below him, in fact, isn't the universe infinite, so wouldn't it take an infinite being to create such a place? I still hold God as the answer to all.

we do not, in fact, know that our universe is infinite. thats just the current theory. your making this very hard on a sophmore philosophy major.

however, just to (kinda) cede the argument, it seems much more likely, and easy to prove, the existence of a Spinoza-esque god (ie, god is resprentational of and in nature) because all we are arguing here seems to be the existence of a seperate, benevolent god.

and dork?...isnt lonelyness a concept known only to those who have known company before? are you suggesting there is more than one God, or that God perhaps is lacking in some way as to need company?

and i think what tex was getting at was your critisim was untimely, unecessary, totally irrelevant to the current state of the thread, and quite unreadable.

quite unreadable.

well u dont have to read it, and i already said that im sorry for offending any one, and about God being lonley i dunno i just heard that some where, but i think that, that is correct, why else make man?, ill look it up to see if it is correct according to the Bible.

Sorry for stretching your brain too much, but exercise is always a good thing. For the record I don't feel that God created this world out of lonliness or boredom, that'd make him incomplete, I cannot say the reson behind this owrld after all i'm not God.

i think that it is perfectly logical to think that we are the product of gods boredom.........i mean he created us in his image, that means that we are similar to him in our ways of thinking, personality, etc..... so why can't god get bored, i mean i think that it would be ignorant to think that we are the first and the last thing that god has created. i don't think that this would make him incomplete at all, it would just give god one more man-like attribute(although originally god-like because he gave it to us), and i think that the church today is afraid to do that(not gonna get into an argument about the church).

he's god, just by himself for eternity, what is he gonna do? why not create some things with the soul purpose to give him glory?- i think thats how it went down, otherwise whats the point of it all: the fall of man, jesus dying, him coming back to save those of us who believe, i mea its like a big hollywood storyline, ENTERTAINMENT :)

exactly, but boredem makes him imcomplete, so does lonliness, and goes against the established idea that god is infinite in time

I don'tthink he was looking at it from a philosophical point of view as are you and I. God created us, Y, cause he is God, nuff said!

I don'tthink he was looking at it from a philosophical point of view as are you and I. God created us, Y, cause he is God, nuff said!

That's not "nuff said" for me. I just can't accept that God created us because God created us. I still see no evidence of God existing. At least evolution is a bit logical, if you have read and understand it. :2cents:

This is where the phrase "agree to disagree" comes in.

Evolution may make some sense but the universe existing just because it exist doesn't. I know that the next thing that will probably be said that God existing just because He exist makes no sense either. Granted it may not but at least there is intellegence in God where the universe in itself is not intellegent. I see intellegence in design in the universe so God makes more sense to me. Not to mention I have never had a relationship with the universe.