PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
????.......I don't need to "know".......I have chosen to believe.......
The universe requires a Creator
- Thread starter Grugore
- Start date
I am on record as saying it APPEARS as though it began. Science indicates a Big Bang. Something like that seems to have happened. It does seem as though this thing we humans call "the universe" had a beginning of sorts.
I DO NOT KNOW...
...AND NEITHER DO YOU.
I have no problem with you blindly guessing that "a god" caused it.
I'd prefer not to guess...and stick with "I DO NOT KNOW."
I also have no problem with the fact that you do not have the honesty and integrity to acknowledge that you do not know.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
its boring trying to argue with someone who's only response is "I don't know".......its a shame agnostics are so wishy-washy.....
There is no such thing as an agnostic, according to the Bible. You either believe in God or you don't. And God has made it clear to us that He does exist. There will be no excuses on Judgement Day.
Nope. Sure don't.
We are finding that the majority of the universe is made up of stuff we can't see, feel or detect. Invisible shit of some sort. The only proof of it is that the stuff we CAN see and detect is insufficient to explain how everything works. Doesn't mean we need your god to fill in the blanks.
We don't need your creator to explain things we're still trying to figure out scientifically. Notice how your creator and his realm shrinks with every advancement of science. That's going to be the case, pally, until your god shrinks away to nothingness.
BTW, how did your god create himself?
You're speaking of a supernatural god that created himself and YOU want to talk sense? PRICELESS!
I am not being wishy-washy...I am being TRUTHFUL. (Look it up...try to understand what it means.)
And if you are bored...go argue with someone else.
The topic here is an assertion that the universe requires a "creator."
You don't actually want to argue that...you want to assert it and accept it as fact. Your problem with me is not that I am refusing to debate...but rather that my argument is so strong it defeats anything said in rebuttal.
The assertion "The universe requires a creator" CANNOT be substantiated. It is nothing more than a blind guess.
You seem to be bothered that I've called that to your attention.
I can understand why you are pretending to ignore me now.
If you Bible claims that there is no such thing as an agnostic...it has proved itself to be questionable, because there are huge numbers of agnostics.
"Judgement Day!" That is the day this god you "love" decides whether it is going to reward people like you with "eternal life"...and people like me with torture and pain for ETERNITY.
Yeah...a guy like you would "love" something like that.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
I haven't even engaged in the argument that the universe requires a creator, nor have you......all you've done is express your denial......that is not an argument......
what I have done is engage in an argument over your claim the universe has no beginning, ironically your own blind guess.......of course you will deny you are arguing that as well........
but you do raise a good point......since you are boring, I should go argue with someone else......
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
the reference isn't to whether you exist, but to the fact that all unbelievers, including the agnostics, will share the same consequences.........not sure why you are complaining about judgment day.......its exactly what you have chosen........
I have NEVER argued that the universe has no beginning.
I have argued that the universe MAY NOT HAVE HAD A BEGINNING.
THE UNIVERSE may be eternal. This despite the seeming Big Bang start to what we humans call "the universe."
We do not know...the scientists DO NOT KNOW...Albert Einstein DID NOT KNOW...Stephen Hawking DOES NOT KNOW.
You, unfortunately for you, are not able to acknowledge you do not know...and the guy who started this thread cannot either. Too bad that, because all it takes is a sense of integrity and a bit of honesty...which you two apparently do not possess.
The question of whether or not gods exist...has been discussed and debated by the finest minds that have lived on this planet...and they have not been able to come up with an answer. We are not going to do it here. The guy who started this thread is not going to simply declare that a god is required; have someone like you agree...and PRESTO...the question is answered.
Amazing you are not able to see the absurdity of that.
Anyway, I am glad you finally realized you should go argue with someone else. I doubt you have the spine or integrity to do that, though...and I think you will continue to trade barbs with me. I suspect you don't have what it takes to actually make a move like that.
Jesus H. Christ!
First that crap about changing what he said from "the universe" to "THIS universe"...and now you are trying to change this also.
He said, "There is no such thing as an agnostic, according to the Bible. "
What the hell are you...his interpreter?
If you are...use what the guy actually says or writes...rather than making up stuff you see as more worthy!
Just to attempt to get this thread back on track for a bit…the notion that “since this is a creation”…a “creator” is required…is self-serving nonsense.
This MAY NOT BE a creation…no matter that this thing we humans call “the universe” appears to have come about via properties we are still trying to understand.
And this thing we humans call “the universe” has been growing throughout human history from a pancake flat object smack dab in the center of EVERYTHING…to “humans inhabit a rock circling a not especially impressive star in a not especially impressive galaxy" among hundreds of billions of galaxies.
One hundred and twenty years ago...science did not even know about other galaxies. Two hundred and fifty years ago…science thought the entire of the universe was what we can see in the heavens…which really are only the stars in the surrounding area of the spiral arm in which our sun is located.
A hundred years from now our understanding of “the universe” may be as different from what it is today…as what today’s understanding is from what Ptolemy supposed back in Egypt.
And so forth!
This MAY NOT BE a creation…no matter that this thing we humans call “the universe” appears to have come about via properties we are still trying to understand.
And this thing we humans call “the universe” has been growing throughout human history from a pancake flat object smack dab in the center of EVERYTHING…to “humans inhabit a rock circling a not especially impressive star in a not especially impressive galaxy" among hundreds of billions of galaxies.
One hundred and twenty years ago...science did not even know about other galaxies. Two hundred and fifty years ago…science thought the entire of the universe was what we can see in the heavens…which really are only the stars in the surrounding area of the spiral arm in which our sun is located.
A hundred years from now our understanding of “the universe” may be as different from what it is today…as what today’s understanding is from what Ptolemy supposed back in Egypt.
And so forth!
How is that any worse than believing that the universe created itself?
Still in that mode that "the universe" has to be a "creation"...so that you can claim that god of yours is its creator.
Seems to me that god of yours is too busy being offended if people eat meat and dairy products at the same meal...
...to be creating any universes.
I have to laugh at your lame massively lame OP. You maintain things cannot create themselves but hang your hat on a supernatural being that created himself. Then, you want to talk sense?
Priceless!
God was not created. He has always existed.
Says who?
For him...the universe had to be "created"...but his god does not have to be created.
No cutting out the middleman with folk like him.
If there were a thread entitled, "The existence of a god requires a creator"...he would be one of the people talking about the absurdity of the assertion.
But he is blind to the absurdity of his assertion.