The knowings and Unknowings of our Existence

Warskum · February 25, 2004

So the other question must then be, why is it that he chose not to make that his will?

EWS · February 25, 2004

WHy do you believe in a god?

Warskum · February 25, 2004

WHy do you believe in a god?

Because I just know He is there somewere, I believe that there must be higher power who made us, i dont believe things like big bang cuz they are not logical.

Why don't you believe in God?

EWS · February 25, 2004

How is the big bang not logical? It is perfectly logical.

Warskum · February 25, 2004

How is the big bang not logical?

wraith126 · February 25, 2004

god allows bad things to happen because every1 has a different vision on the perfect world

if he created a "preferct" world the ideas would clash

EWS · February 25, 2004

It is a fact that particles can appear out of nowhere (for example a pink elephand appearing next to a black hole) so this is how it created. I am going to have to retract my statement and say that I beleive the more scientific route. For me to say that there must be something from nothing is kinda not applicable in this case.

As for the big bang. Smaller "bangs" have been observed by the the Hubble which has created stars and star systems, this is what they use to back up their claims of a big bang. Further, they have found particles that have dated back from the time when they thought it took place. Now I put this in italics as there is a new theory emerged that finds that the date may have been earlier.

So I answer your question.

ps. at last, a decent conversation!

wraith126 · February 25, 2004

i think einstein said something like particle cannot be created or destryoed, only displaced

Warskum · February 25, 2004

It is a fact that particles can appear out of nowhere (for example a pink elephand appearing next to a black hole) so this is how it created.

TMA_1 · February 25, 2004

I believe in the big bang, but not the theory where the universe implodes and explodes over and over. It has been pretty much proven that the entropy of the universe would not allow another big bang to happen. THe universe might crunch on itself, but it does not have the power to re-explode so to speak. Also it is most likely that it will keep expanding filecore, so the cosmology of a "rebirthing" universe from buddhism and hinduism is silly. Also, I hate when these people say, well I hate christianity therefore I am going to say that buddhism, or hinduism has better answers. Have you ever studied the spiritual books? do you know how odd it really is? The idea of soul transmigration, that there is no creation which is false as there is a beginning. Not only this but buddhists and christians actually tolerate and like eachother. Buddhism is not a religion where disenfranchised athiests go.lol It is a religion that takes more than that.

Also I cant stand when people say that these eastern religions are somehow "modern" and make more sense. FOr instance, Buddhism generally dislikes abortion (willful killing of an organism), gay relationships (they do not breed life, therefor they are sexual in mindset). Some buddhist sects are pretty male dominant. I mean are those stances progressive? I think not.

I mean when will people actually study these religions?lol It just frustrates me when people dont know the whole of what they are saying, and will join or think of joining a religion to spite another. it is silly.

EWS · February 25, 2004

Yes, particles can randomly appear and disappear. Dust Scout should be able to testify as to that!

wraith126 · February 25, 2004

if the universe kept exploding then there must be a way to create more energy by using less

Warskum · February 25, 2004

I believe in the big bang, but not the theory where the universe implodes and explodes over and over. It has been pretty much proven that the entropy of the universe would not allow another big bang to happen. THe universe might crunch on itself, but it does not have the power to re-explode so to speak. Also it is most likely that it will keep expanding filecore, so the cosmology of a "rebirthing" universe from buddhism and hinduism is silly. Also, I hate when these people say, well I hate christianity therefore I am going to say that buddhism, or hinduism has better answers. Have you ever studied the spiritual books? do you know how odd it really is? The idea of soul transmigration, that there is no creation which is false as there is a beginning. Not only this but buddhists and christians actually tolerate and like eachother. Buddhism is not a religion where disenfranchised athiests go.lol It is a religion that takes more than that.
Also I cant stand when people say that these eastern religions are somehow "modern" and make more sense. FOr instance, Buddhism generally dislikes abortion (willful killing of an organism), gay relationships (they do not breed life, therefor they are sexual in mindset). Some buddhist sects are pretty male dominant. I mean are those stances progressive? I think not.
I mean when will people actually study these religions?lol It just frustrates me when people dont know the whole of what they are saying, and will join or think of joining a religion to spite another. it is silly.

I havent really studied those religions but we learned abit from school and my dad tought me some stuff to.

EWS particles cannot be destroyed, i dont know if they can appear but i am quiet sure they cant be destroyed or disappear, they might be converted to something else but not totaly destroyed.

Dante · February 25, 2004

i think einstein said something like particle cannot be created or destryoed, only displaced

So who says it has to be destroyed? The current theory is that the entire universe is centered around a gigantic black hole. Current theory also states that the big bang flung out a lot of matter which is still moving outward, but slowing down.

Now here's another thing. There is a theory wherby the big bang was in fact a 'white hole.' This is like the opposite of a black hole in that it spews forth matter and energy.

Right. Logic time. If the galaxies etc are moving outwards from a single point now, it makes sense to call that point the origin of the big bang, and it also makes sense to call the big bang a 'white hole.' And if the matter is slowing down, eventually it will stop and reverse direction, travelling back towards what is now the giant black hole in the centre of the universe. When it gets there, crunch. Scientists call it 'the Big Crunch.' They believe that so much matter would be forced into such a tiny space by the black hole's gravity that it would then immediately spew out again in another white hole or Big Bang.

Thus the universe goes Bang...Crunch...Bang...Crunch... etc again and again and again. So matter isn't destroyed in a black hole or created in a white hole, it is just under a lot of pressure.

The big bang; a small collection of enegy that explodes and becuz of the explosion planets were made and living thing etc.
Then i ask you if there was nothing then were was that small colection of enegy? in space? no cuz there was no space, there was no place, were did it come from? you believe that everything must have a beginning then how did that enegry get created?
Its more simple to just believe that a always existing higher power made everything.

Simplicity does not equate to being correct. And if you can accept the existance of an inexplicable higher power then why is an inexplicable scientific theory so hard to grasp or believe in?

god allows bad things to happen because every1 has a different vision on the perfect world
if he created a "preferct" world the ideas would clash

Wouldn't God be more likely to mould the world into a better place? Or change everyone's perceptions to make us agree? And anyway, how can a being that is supposedly perfectly good allow bad things to happen when they could be prevented, however justified their reasoning?

Because I just know He is there somewere, I believe that there must be higher power who made us, i dont believe things like big bang cuz they are not logical.
Why don't you believe in God?

1)Again I say, if a higher power, then why not a complex theory? The Big Bang is no more or less logical than putting faith in a sadistic (assuming existance) entity.

2) Aside from the logical impossibility or at least impracticality; God has done nothing for me and I owe it nothing.

Yes i would, becuz if he says something like that then that means he has a good reason, but the fact is he doesnt/wont say something like that so this is a wrong question.

How can you predict the will of something that you accept is so much higher than you? You cannot say god's will will not change because the whims of a dictator, however benign, always do. Just like Euthyphro, one of Plato's characters.

He posed the question as to whether God's will was morally right because God said so, or whether it was morally right beforehand and God just copied the rules. If the former case, why should we obey the whimsical orders of a dictator, even one with lightning bolts? If the latter, then we don't need God as a middleman at all.

Warskum · February 25, 2004

So who says it has to be destroyed? The current theory is that the entire universe is centered around a gigantic black hole. Current theory also states that the big bang flung out a lot of matter which is still moving outward, but slowing down.
Now here's another thing. There is a theory wherby the big bang was in fact a 'white hole.' This is like the opposite of a black hole in that it spews forth matter and energy.
Right. Logic time. If the galaxies etc are moving outwards from a single point now, it makes sense to call that point the origin of the big bang, and it also makes sense to call the big bang a 'white hole.' And if the matter is slowing down, eventually it will stop and reverse direction, travelling back towards what is now the giant black hole in the centre of the universe. When it gets there, crunch. Scientists call it 'the Big Crunch.' They believe that so much matter would be forced into such a tiny space by the black hole's gravity that it would then immediately spew out again in another white hole or Big Bang.
Thus the universe goes Bang...Crunch...Bang...Crunch... etc again and again and again. So matter isn't destroyed in a black hole or created in a white hole, it is just under a lot of pressure.
Simplicity does not equate to being correct. And if you can accept the existance of an inexplicable higher power then why is an inexplicable scientific theory so hard to grasp or believe in?
Wouldn't God be more likely to mould the world into a better place? Or change everyone's perceptions to make us agree? And anyway, how can a being that is supposedly perfectly good allow bad things to happen when they could be prevented, however justified their reasoning?
1)Again I say, if a higher power, then why not a complex theory? The Big Bang is no more or less logical than putting faith in a sadistic (assuming existance) entity.
2) Aside from the logical impossibility or at least impracticality; God has done nothing for me and I owe it nothing.
How can you predict the will of something that you accept is so much higher than you? You cannot say god's will will not change because the whims of a dictator, however benign, always do. Just like Euthyphro, one of Plato's characters.
He posed the question as to whether God's will was morally right because God said so, or whether it was morally right beforehand and God just copied the rules. If the former case, why should we obey the whimsical orders of a dictator, even one with lightning bolts? If the latter, then we don't need God as a middleman at all.

Its hard for me to believe in a theory that humans made up, since humans are not perfect they make more mistakes then they do things right so how do i know if the scientist arent just making a mistake with there theories?

God makes the rules so its morraly right becuz God says so.for Him all humans no matter there collors/cultures etc. are equel, so he will not say something like: kill all black ppl or something like that.

His will could change but i dont think it would change into something bad, since God is a good beeing.

God has given us free will, but we ppl seem to abuse it we do bad things and mess the world up, God could intervere, but i think sending us into this world is a kind of a punishment, so wenn we mess up we hurt our self and others and thats a punishment for the ppl who get hurt. If God would intervere we wouldnt have free will and so out lifes wouldnt have much of a meaning since we dont control what we do.

"God has done nothing for me and I owe it nothing."

This why there are problem in the world, you only give wenn you get, you should learn to give and not always expect to get back, just give and the feeling you get that you done something right will have more value then money or something like that.

EWS · February 25, 2004

Just a small one to say,

We don't have free will! Just the illusion of it!

Dante · February 25, 2004

Its hard for me to believe in a theory that humans made up, since humans are not perfect they make more mistakes then they do things right so how do i know if the scientist arent just making a mistake with there theories?

You don't believe in a theory that humans made up. Then why oh why oh why do you believe in the christian religion?

God makes the rules so its morraly right becuz God says so.for Him all humans no matter there collors/cultures etc. are equel, so he will not say something like: kill all black ppl or something like that.
His will could change but i dont think it would change into something bad, since God is a good beeing.

Need I bring up the various acts or incitements of 'divine' retribution and slaughter in the bible against Jews, gays, non-believers in general, women... God is only good because God says so to you. If God were to say "All black people are evil," for example, then that would be considered good because it is God's will. It wouldn't be evil, it would be good.

God has given us free will, but we ppl seem to abuse it we do bad things and mess the world up, God could intervere, but i think sending us into this world is a kind of a punishment, so wenn we mess up we hurt our self and others and thats a punishment for the ppl who get hurt. If God

TMA_1 · February 25, 2004

This is a superior being we are talking about, you cant use these simple ideas you guys. I mean you judge a God simply because it is all knowing. He allows a free will because he is a fair God, but in jeremiah it says that God choreographs around our free will, works around it so that it is in tact, but we still are subject to destiny, and God knows that destiny and works with it and through it. There is free will, but we are dealing with a being that goes beyond the normal thought patterns of time so that it can still use us and judge us since iti s a perfect being. Gotta think outside the box.

Apollyon · February 25, 2004

"Its more simple to just believe that a always existing higher power made everything."

You said that a while back in following your disbelief of the big bang based on gas just 'suddenly appearing', warskum. Well then how did this supreme being get here? Lol. It's much simpler to believe that a simple gas, gas, that thing we see everyday on Earth, existed rather than an incredibly complex omnipotent being that there is absolutely no evidence of the existence of.

Navaros · February 25, 2004

"Big Bang" is by far one of the most asinine things i've ever heard of in my life and btw it does not even meet the Universal scientific STANDARDS necessary to validate it as a "theory" LOL

Sardauker-Kirov · February 25, 2004

The White hole is still a theory. But I found Dust's scout theory to be very interesting.

Since the black hole is still an enigma, we can't say what will happen if the matter is sucked into the black hole.

What I find so bizarre about all this is that the scientists spotted a few massive black holes in several galaxies.

Maybe that explains why the galaxies have that 'well-known whirlpool form'

The black holes could in fact suck the stars up at a very, very slow pace.

Satan and God can be compared with Ying and Yang.

The two forces, called good and evil constantly battles eachother.

Sometimes good happen, sometimes evil.

If there is too much evil, then the world will become a hell.

If there is too much good, then the world will.. have sickening kind people?

God might be almighty, but what if Satan is almighty too? That would be like two hackers fighting eachother with the same weapons.

Dante · February 25, 2004

"Big Bang" is by far one of the most asinine things i've ever heard of in my life and btw it does not even meet the Universal scientific STANDARDS necessary to validate it as a "theory" LOL

You're going to need to provide more detail than that if you want to be taken seriously.

This is a superior being we are talking about, you cant use these simple ideas you guys. I mean you judge a God simply because it is all knowing. He allows a free will because he is a fair God, but in jeremiah it says that God choreographs around our free will, works around it so that it is in tact, but we still are subject to destiny, and God knows that destiny and works with it and through it. There is free will, but we are dealing with a being that goes beyond the normal thought patterns of time so that it can still use us and judge us since iti s a perfect being. Gotta think outside the box.

There is no 'outside the box.' Anyhow, free will does not exist, and here's how...

To make a decision is supposedly exercise 'free will.' But this decision was made in relation to given circumstances and via a given thought process.

Think of it like a computer program. You have the input (choice) which goes through the processing (thought) and emerges as output (decision). There is no way the output can be different without changing either the processing or the input.

Thus to change our decisions (and therefore have free will) we must either change the input (laws of nature, impossible) or the processing (our own minds, also impossible as this has been sculpted by other inputs such as parental influence). Since it is impossible to change either the input or the processing we cannot change the output.

For those of you who in relation to this just say "EH? What?" Then here's a summary:

Causality. Action, reaction; cause, effect. Due to cauality the human decision-making process is no more than a computerised reaction to given circumstances. And how could a mere reaction to circumstances ever be free will?

Thus free will does not exist.

Acriku · February 25, 2004

agnostic athiest? that doesnt eixst. Of course you argued on this topic before with your own twisted view of athiesm that isnt in any dictionary I have ever seen. In fact we argued about this and told me that "the dictionaries are wrong".lol

Your ignorance to the subject is astounding. Think about this: does an agnostic as you describe have a belief in any god? No. Therefore, he is an atheist. It's that simple. And yes, dictionaries are wrong sometimes - they aren't infallible. Wake up TMA from your naive little world, and wake up to reality.

If you are going to create your own standards, and then make double standards. I have seen you say with your knowledge ind ebating and in logic say oyu cant prove a negative, now you are saying you can. YOu constantly reinvent yourselfa nd your opinions, it is a tad bit silly is all I am saying.

Wait a minute. Are you saying I can't change my mind after finding out that I'm wrong? And you say I'm too hard-headed! Now who has the double-standards, TMA? The fact is, what I am saying now is what I think is true. Just because I may have said something different before does not mean I did not dismiss it and believe what I'm saying now. Grow up TMA, people change.

And of course agnosticism isnt a choice between theism and atheism. It is a state of mind where you believe you dont have enough information to say if there is or there isnt a God/gods/goddess'/forces/blah.

Thank you for finally agreeing that people are either atheist or theist. They either have the belief in a god, or they don't. In addition, they either think that they have enough knowledge to know, or they don't.

Athiesm is when you reject the idea of a deity or of any sort, where you choose not to believe in one. This is where you get into your own created views on what athiesm is, and where you come up with the term agnostic athiest. There is no such thing. YOu want to argue with me? then yo uwould be involving yourself in semantics, whcih you have been doing a lot lately.

You're defining atheism as the active rejection of the idea of a god, which is putting a little more into what's there. It's simply the lack of belief in a god. It's a very general term. You can get more specific and say that the person actively rejects the idea of a god, but that would be another term. Maybe, active atheism who knows.

not trying to attack you man, I just dont see any logic in what you are saying. it just baffles me. and talking to others about your opinions on what athiesm is, they totally disagree with you. just doesnt make any sense.

Then bring them here so that I can tell them they are wrong. It's not that hard of a concept, and I explained it throughout this post. If there is a belief lying in your mind in a god, then you're a theist. If not, then you're an atheist. Imagine the simplicity!

filecore · February 25, 2004

the cosmology of a "rebirthing" universe from buddhism and hinduism is silly. Also, I hate when these people say, well I hate christianity therefore I am going to say that buddhism, or hinduism has better answers. Have you ever studied the spiritual books? do you know how odd it really is? The idea of soul transmigration, that there is no creation which is false as there is a beginning. Not only this but buddhists and christians actually tolerate and like eachother. Buddhism is not a religion where disenfranchised athiests go.lol It is a religion that takes more than that.
Also I cant stand when people say that these eastern religions are somehow "modern" and make more sense. FOr instance, Buddhism generally dislikes abortion (willful killing of an organism), gay relationships (they do not breed life, therefor they are sexual in mindset). Some buddhist sects are pretty male dominant. I mean are those stances progressive? I think not.
I mean when will people actually study these religions?lol It just frustrates me when people dont know the whole of what they are saying, and will join or think of joining a religion to spite another. it is silly.

Yes, I totally agree with everything you just said. But something that's sillier than that is not reading people's posts. I used a lot of qualifiers to what I said about Buddhism and you'll notice that I NEVER DID say ANYTHING that you commented on in your post. That's simple distractionism. Although I agree with it all, it was not relevant to my own post and therefore unfair.

The whole point I was trying to make was not to move to Buddhism, that it was NOT "better" in any sense. I didn't even try to compare the two. ALL that I said was that perhaps if people looked to OTHER religions, they might find things that they appear (from the evidence of these very forums, if nothing else) to be lacking in Christianity. Lots of people, conversely, appear to find Christianity fulfilling and that's fine for them, I'm happy for them. I was simply pointing out other points of view.

To get back on topic: I seem to recall reading something a while ago about the existence of other types of 'holes' in other spectra, from the debated "white hole" to red holes, blue holes, and infra-red holes, depending on the spectrum within which the hole exists. There is too much to this area of physics that I don't know, so I don't even want to get into a discussion on it.

As for tying it to big bang, however, I have to go with the scientific view on this. Particles have been observed to spontaneously appear/disappear, as well as to exist in two places simultaneously (some sort of quantum particle if I recall correctly?). There are also quarks, which never can exist below the speed of light, which of course is supposedly the absolute speed limit of the universe. So if these mere particles can defy the so-called "laws" by which we interpret the universe (note I said "we interpret", not "by which the universe runs"), then maybe our science isn't yet perfect and these types of particle behaviours support big bang theory.

Then again if these surreal particles really exist, perhaps that could prove a scientific foundation for the existence of God in a hyper-real and theoretically "omnipresent" realm. Thoughts?

TMA_1 · February 25, 2004

lol, not even going to dignify that post with a retort acriku. most of that was just hot air and insults. I think though that I got through to you since you are overreacting a bit.

and filecore Ill respond to you in a second, gotta let my sis on but you brought up some good points i really want to clarify.

Sign In

The knowings and Unknowings of our Existence

Recommended Posts

Warskum

EWS

Warskum

EWS

Warskum

wraith126

EWS

wraith126

Warskum

TMA_1

EWS

wraith126

Warskum

Dante

Warskum

EWS

Dante

TMA_1

Apollyon

Navaros

Sardauker-Kirov

Dante

Acriku

filecore

TMA_1

Join the conversation

Activity

Important Information