If God doesn't exist...

[amrchaos]

So you decide which 'gods' are the creation of man and which aren't. What evidence is there that any human in history was more than human?

You simply believe in one more god than atheists do out of the 4,000 or so currently identified by humans.

What gives anyone the ability to discern that all the other 3,999 are false?

They are all the creation of man. All.

So you decide which 'gods' are the creation of man and which aren't. What evidence is there that any human in history was more than human?

You simply believe in one more god than atheists do out of the 4,000 or so currently identified by humans.

What gives anyone the ability to discern that all the other 3,999 are false?

They are all the creation of man. All.

What gives you the ability to discern that there's no such thing as God at all?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I'm an agnostic and a scientist, I don't say 100% that I know. But 99.999% yes, there is are no 'gods'. Rather odd that each person says 'no god', singular, referring of course to their own 'god'.

You of course cannot prove there is no Zeus or Mithra or the Spaghetti Monster. But that is exactly what theists do, they 'claim' to know there is only one 'god' and their 'god' is the only true 'god'.

If you would be an agnostics then you would say: "100% I don't know wether god exists or not". You are just simple an atheist - that's your belief. And you are without a big idea about when and how to use probability calculations. You just simple have some wrong ideas about other people who are not atheists (= a-atheists=theists). And in your self-created world - no: in the world of your indcotrinating ideology - you are thinking you are living in the noble world of science. But indeed believers of all religions - and not only atheists - are able to be scientists.

Yes there are scientists that are religious. Seems quite contrarian and they have to construct massive mental scaffolding in their heads to accommodate that but some do it.

I haven't seen any evidence of 'gods'. But there is voluminous evidence of humans needing to believe in 'gods' to explain that which they don't understand and are afraid of.

LOL And 'indocrination' to many means the same as college education, knowledge, and a life time of study of something.

Show evidence of any god that can be tested or correlated.

Nothing started the universe because there was nothing before not even a before.

It did have a beginning. Something from nothing notates a starting point.

What you say is without logic. If the universe had a beginning then existed a first cause - but a first cause is uncaused. So nothing started the universe.

How do you know the universe had a beginning?

I guess this thread is under the implied assumption that
1)the Universe had a start
2) that there is only one scientific theory to explain that start(false)
3) that theory is the Big Bang
4) that there is only one Big Bang theory.(false)

Whew, a lot of assumptions! I might have missed some other assumptions.

Anyway, this thread is dead. Turns out the op claims to be a pantheist.

Remember, we started out with "If there is no GOD" yada yada yada "Then what kicked started the Universe?"

If we are given the Pantheist GOD as not existing, then isn't the answer nothing?

Finally went back and spent some time reading and doing some research I see.

Having difficulties accepting that theology and theory might be one for some?

Oh by the way... Your answers were all FAILS ON YOUR PART...

Even in your current post.

*****ROFLMAO*****

I normally explain fails. It is to help the person to correct himself in future discussions.

Let start by showing that you just declare fails without any explanations behind them.

The first part of the post is a list of assumptions taken from themes argued through out the thread. Anyone can go back over the thread to see these themes.

The second part deal with the question posed by the OP. First, take note the OP later claims he is a Pantheist.

Pantheism is the belief that the Universe (or Nature as the totality of everything) is identical with divinity,[1] or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent God.


We are given that God does not exist by the Pantheist OP,
Then we are asked what kick started the Universe.

Since God=Universe(Pantheist definition) and there is no God, then we have no Universe. We have nothing, basically. This is all from given and knowing the OP

Now we are asked 'What jump started nothing?' The simplest answer is nothing.

Now I am happy to discuss any faults in the above logic. But just exclaiming fail without any explanation is not conducive to the discussion nor helps anyone following along.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

...and science holds the answer to all questions....

Then what kick started the universe?

After all we wouldn't want to violate one of Newton's three laws now would we?

If the scientific answer at this time is we don't know...

Then doesn't that mean a miracle occurred?

*****CHUCKLE*****

Every argument for God comes with a fatal flaw. Yours is obvious. Science doesn't claim to have all the answers. Some answers we may never know. This doesn't prove a God exists. It proves your belief is based on ignorance.

Get it? Your thought only proves sciences position is correct. We don't know, and we will keep looking.

And if an old established belief doesn't stand up to the scientific method, throw it out. Don't accept it just because it makes you feel comfortable.

I suggest you put down the bible and rent the cosmos.

Your arguments fatal flaw about my beliefs is obvious.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[zaangalewa]

It did have a beginning. Something from nothing notates a starting point.

What you say is without logic. If the universe had a beginning then existed a first cause - but a first cause is uncaused. So nothing started the universe.

How do you know the universe had a beginning?

It expands.

So? A balloon can expand, doesn't mean it started at the point where it started to expand.

I could give a million theories why it might expand. For example it could be a tube shape which is wider in places and narrower in others. When it narrows to a point then something happens, lots of energy together and then as it moves away from the narrow point it expands, then after a whole it narrows again.

Just a continual action that goes on and on and on forever. It never started, it'll never finish, it just is.

That is a bad analogy. Another closer but still not great analogy using a balloon would be you have a balloon that is already inflated and is still expanding in all directions equally. It is very easy to deduce that if you reverse time it collapses from all directions equally until you come to a point far enough back that is where it started expanding. Again, a balloon is a mediocre analogy but it gives a rudimentary idea of the process.

And that point has been measured to be about 13.72. billion years ago.

... about 13.82 billion years ...

 

[amrchaos]

...and science holds the answer to all questions....

Then what kick started the universe?

After all we wouldn't want to violate one of Newton's three laws now would we?

If the scientific answer at this time is we don't know...

Then doesn't that mean a miracle occurred?

*****CHUCKLE*****

Every argument for God comes with a fatal flaw. Yours is obvious. Science doesn't claim to have all the answers. Some answers we may never know. This doesn't prove a God exists. It proves your belief is based on ignorance.

Get it? Your thought only proves sciences position is correct. We don't know, and we will keep looking.

And if an old established belief doesn't stand up to the scientific method, throw it out. Don't accept it just because it makes you feel comfortable.

I suggest you put down the bible and rent the cosmos.

Hey sealybob

The OP claims to be a pantheist. Thus the answer to the op is trivial.

 

[sealybobo]

What gives you the ability to discern that there's no such thing as God at all?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I'm an agnostic and a scientist, I don't say 100% that I know. But 99.999% yes, there is are no 'gods'. Rather odd that each person says 'no god', singular, referring of course to their own 'god'.

You of course cannot prove there is no Zeus or Mithra or the Spaghetti Monster. But that is exactly what theists do, they 'claim' to know there is only one 'god' and their 'god' is the only true 'god'.

If you would be an agnostics then you would say: "100% I don't know wether god exists or not". You are just simple an atheist - that's your belief. And you are without a big idea about when and how to use probability calculations. You just simple have some wrong ideas about other people who are not atheists (= a-atheists=theists). And in your self-created world - no: in the world of your indcotrinating ideology - you are thinking you are living in the noble world of science. But indeed believers of all religions - and not only atheists - are able to be scientists.

Yes there are scientists that are religious. Seems quite contrarian and they have to construct massive mental scaffolding in their heads to accommodate that but some do it.

I haven't seen any evidence of 'gods'. But there is voluminous evidence of humans needing to believe in 'gods' to explain that which they don't understand and are afraid of.

LOL And 'indocrination' to many means the same as college education, knowledge, and a life time of study of something.

Show evidence of any god that can be tested or correlated.

It did have a beginning. Something from nothing notates a starting point.

What you say is without logic. If the universe had a beginning then existed a first cause - but a first cause is uncaused. So nothing started the universe.

How do you know the universe had a beginning?

I guess this thread is under the implied assumption that
1)the Universe had a start
2) that there is only one scientific theory to explain that start(false)
3) that theory is the Big Bang
4) that there is only one Big Bang theory.(false)

Whew, a lot of assumptions! I might have missed some other assumptions.

Anyway, this thread is dead. Turns out the op claims to be a pantheist.

Remember, we started out with "If there is no GOD" yada yada yada "Then what kicked started the Universe?"

If we are given the Pantheist GOD as not existing, then isn't the answer nothing?

Finally went back and spent some time reading and doing some research I see.

Having difficulties accepting that theology and theory might be one for some?

Oh by the way... Your answers were all FAILS ON YOUR PART...

Even in your current post.

*****ROFLMAO*****

I normally explain fails. It is to help the person to correct himself in future discussions.

Let start by showing that you just declare fails without any explanations behind them.

The first part of the post is a list of assumptions taken from themes argued through out the thread. Anyone can go back over the thread to see these themes.

The second part deal with the question posed by the OP. First, take note the OP later claims he is a Pantheist.

Pantheism is the belief that the Universe (or Nature as the totality of everything) is identical with divinity,[1] or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent God.


We are given that God does not exist by the Pantheist OP,
Then we are asked what kick started the Universe.

Since God=Universe(Pantheist definition) and there is no God, then we have no Universe. We have nothing, basically. This is all from given and knowing the OP

Now we are asked 'What jump started nothing?' The simplest answer is nothing.

Now I am happy to discuss any faults in the above logic. But just exclaiming fail without any explanation is not conducive to the discussion nor helps anyone following along.

You can't say God is universe so if there is no God there is no universe.

There is no need for God. The universe is the universe. It just is. Some things we may never know but its cool to speculate.

Do we need to worship it or go to hell? Does it have a heaven for me? And how do you know these things?

 

[JohnA]

It's called the big bang theory. Keyword is theory. Can not be proven, can never be proven. It can only be disproven.

Much like the theory of evolution has been mostly disproven over the last couple of decades.

The existence of God, or several gods can not be proven, at least not to everyone. Though to me, God proved Himself long ago, just depends on what you consider proof, I guess.

And, If and when God does decide to prove Himself to the world, most won't believe it.

The difference between science and religion is, science can be disproven, most gods cannot.

"Much like the theory of evolution has been mostly disproven over the last couple of decades."

Wow, Rick Perry is that you?

Evolution is accepted as fact by science, it has been for nearly a century. Those who need to believe in an invisible dad who lives in the sky and has magical powers won't accept fact which is ok. You like to live in fantasy knock yourself out. The rest of us rely on fact and evidence. However don't make statements like this that are simply untrue. 'Theory' in science doesn't mean 'not known and can never be known'. Relativity is a 'theory' but talk to any scientist and they know it is fact. Science simply has an honest way of viewing reality and doesn't hold to dogma like religion. You can prove any 'theory' is not correct? Get to it. Scientist do just that, they have an idea then set about challenging that idea to see if it holds up to minute detailed scrutiny. People who believe in 'gods' don't seek proof and never change their beliefs no matter what evidence comes to light.

I'm guessing you think the Earth is what, 6,000 years old? Rather than the 4.5 billion years old we know it to be?

Stick to chants and idols, leave reality to those who spend their lives studying it.

Sorry, but such scientists have left out GOD. Without GOD all computations become warped and distorted. Say for a moment you were God. Now say you said, "Let the stars appear." And suddenly there are stars. How old are those stars? Not how old do they appear --- but how old are they REALLY? Now, a scientist will say --- but it will take many years for the light of those stars to reach the earth. But oddly, the Bible clearly indicates that GOD created the light BEFORE HE created any sources for that light? How did ancient man formulate that light takes time to travel. I believe they didn't --- GOD revealed it to them.

you say scientists leave out god but religion leaves our science so the words they read in a holy books becomes real and factual

 

[amrchaos]

I'm an agnostic and a scientist, I don't say 100% that I know. But 99.999% yes, there is are no 'gods'. Rather odd that each person says 'no god', singular, referring of course to their own 'god'.

You of course cannot prove there is no Zeus or Mithra or the Spaghetti Monster. But that is exactly what theists do, they 'claim' to know there is only one 'god' and their 'god' is the only true 'god'.

If you would be an agnostics then you would say: "100% I don't know wether god exists or not". You are just simple an atheist - that's your belief. And you are without a big idea about when and how to use probability calculations. You just simple have some wrong ideas about other people who are not atheists (= a-atheists=theists). And in your self-created world - no: in the world of your indcotrinating ideology - you are thinking you are living in the noble world of science. But indeed believers of all religions - and not only atheists - are able to be scientists.

Yes there are scientists that are religious. Seems quite contrarian and they have to construct massive mental scaffolding in their heads to accommodate that but some do it.

I haven't seen any evidence of 'gods'. But there is voluminous evidence of humans needing to believe in 'gods' to explain that which they don't understand and are afraid of.

LOL And 'indocrination' to many means the same as college education, knowledge, and a life time of study of something.

Show evidence of any god that can be tested or correlated.

What you say is without logic. If the universe had a beginning then existed a first cause - but a first cause is uncaused. So nothing started the universe.

How do you know the universe had a beginning?

I guess this thread is under the implied assumption that
1)the Universe had a start
2) that there is only one scientific theory to explain that start(false)
3) that theory is the Big Bang
4) that there is only one Big Bang theory.(false)

Whew, a lot of assumptions! I might have missed some other assumptions.

Anyway, this thread is dead. Turns out the op claims to be a pantheist.

Remember, we started out with "If there is no GOD" yada yada yada "Then what kicked started the Universe?"

If we are given the Pantheist GOD as not existing, then isn't the answer nothing?

Finally went back and spent some time reading and doing some research I see.

Having difficulties accepting that theology and theory might be one for some?

Oh by the way... Your answers were all FAILS ON YOUR PART...

Even in your current post.

*****ROFLMAO*****

I normally explain fails. It is to help the person to correct himself in future discussions.

Let start by showing that you just declare fails without any explanations behind them.

The first part of the post is a list of assumptions taken from themes argued through out the thread. Anyone can go back over the thread to see these themes.

The second part deal with the question posed by the OP. First, take note the OP later claims he is a Pantheist.

Pantheism is the belief that the Universe (or Nature as the totality of everything) is identical with divinity,[1] or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent God.


We are given that God does not exist by the Pantheist OP,
Then we are asked what kick started the Universe.

Since God=Universe(Pantheist definition) and there is no God, then we have no Universe. We have nothing, basically. This is all from given and knowing the OP

Now we are asked 'What jump started nothing?' The simplest answer is nothing.

Now I am happy to discuss any faults in the above logic. But just exclaiming fail without any explanation is not conducive to the discussion nor helps anyone following along.

You can't say God is universe so if there is no God there is no universe.

There is no need for God. The universe is the universe. It just is. Some things we may never know but its cool to speculate.

Do we need to worship it or go to hell? Does it have a heaven for me? And how do you know these things?

I like your inquisitive nature. All I can say is look up the various forms of Pantheism.

However, you are over thinking it.
A Pantheist asked us to assume there is no God
(we have to assume the op God, since any other choice is considered a fail, by the op)

Then asked what jumped started the Universe.

 

[JohnA]

It's called the big bang theory. Keyword is theory. Can not be proven, can never be proven. It can only be disproven.

Much like the theory of evolution has been mostly disproven over the last couple of decades.

The existence of God, or several gods can not be proven, at least not to everyone. Though to me, God proved Himself long ago, just depends on what you consider proof, I guess.

And, If and when God does decide to prove Himself to the world, most won't believe it.

The difference between science and religion is, science can be disproven, most gods cannot.

"Much like the theory of evolution has been mostly disproven over the last couple of decades."

Wow, Rick Perry is that you?

Evolution is accepted as fact by science, it has been for nearly a century. Those who need to believe in an invisible dad who lives in the sky and has magical powers won't accept fact which is ok. You like to live in fantasy knock yourself out. The rest of us rely on fact and evidence. However don't make statements like this that are simply untrue. 'Theory' in science doesn't mean 'not known and can never be known'. Relativity is a 'theory' but talk to any scientist and they know it is fact. Science simply has an honest way of viewing reality and doesn't hold to dogma like religion. You can prove any 'theory' is not correct? Get to it. Scientist do just that, they have an idea then set about challenging that idea to see if it holds up to minute detailed scrutiny. People who believe in 'gods' don't seek proof and never change their beliefs no matter what evidence comes to light.

I'm guessing you think the Earth is what, 6,000 years old? Rather than the 4.5 billion years old we know it to be?

Stick to chants and idols, leave reality to those who spend their lives studying it.

I never put a number of years on how long Adam walked in the garden. I don't believe time as we know it, started being counted until the apple was taken from the tree, and sin entered the world.

Evolution may be accepted as fact by scientists, but not all of them accept it. There are too many holes in the theory, and many holes the scientific community does not want to acknowledge. Where are the fossils that show an evolving creature? Where is the evidence for macroevolution? The Cambrian explosion has shown great holes in the 'theory' of evolution. Holes big enough to bring the whole theory crashing down. Yet many scientists just make excuses. Excuses are not facts.

Like it or not, and we know you don't, and you could never admit, that evolution is just a theory. A theory that is being disproven, more and more, as every day passes.

The Scientific Case Against Evolution The Institute for Creation Research

But, hey, if you want to believe that your ancestors were invertebrate water breathers, more power to you, even though there is no real evidence to support your claims.

 

[sealybobo]

The point about language is a good one.

If you tell people there was nothing before the big bang they assume 'you mean a vacuum of empty space'. And no it means there was not even empty space. There was literally nothing. It is very hard for the human mind to grasp such a concept.

There are many things we don't know yet, but one can't then argue 'the god of the gaps' in our knowledge. Meaning many people will assert 'well if we don't know then that mean it was god'. No, it means we don't know yet, just as we didn't know what caused disease 300 years ago.

We do know the universe is 13.7 billion years old and there are hundreds of billions of galaxies, each with hundreds of billions of stars.

To believe in any god, you have to believe it was all put in motion and allowed to continue on for 13.7 billion years to wait specifically for humans to arrive or be placed on the scene. And all those other galaxies, stars, and planets billions of light years away are just stage dressing so 13.7 billion years later we'd have something to look at.

That is quite a leap.

An artist doesn't evolve a masterpiece. And likewise the Creator created everything in 6 days and rested on the 7th in order to illustrate to Adam exactly how he should spend his existence. The entire Universe illustrates the eternality of GOD, His power, and majesty. It is the limited minds of humans who must extrapolate that the Universe took billions of years to form when the Universe only represents a glimpse of eternity that can be just as likely to have been Designed a few thousand years ago..

This post proves that 'god' doesn't exist as perceived by theists.

Not at all!
We are talking of Christians and not theists. Theists merely believe that GOD is likely. They do not always believe in HIS revelation or the Bible or Christ.

My parents told me my whole childhood I was a gift from God so subsequently that's what I teach the members of my cult.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

I normally explain fails. It is to help the person to correct himself in future discussions.

You continually assumed my beliefs are Creationist in nature even after having been told my beliefs pages ago and I've constantly corrected you.

Let start by showing that you just declare fails without any explanations behind them.

I'm not going to explain something to you over and over again. If you don't know the answer or question why I post something perhaps you should ask what I mean instead of assuming or attacking. I believe that's why they call it a discussion.

The first part of the post is a list of assumptions taken from themes argued through out the thread. Anyone can go back over the thread to see these themes.

Isn't that what you do. Make assumptions? It sure looks like it to me.

The second part deal with the question posed by the OP. First, take note the OP later claims he is a Pantheist.

Quite a while ago if the truth be told. Not my fault none of you felt inclined to look it up.

Pantheism

is the belief that the Universe (or Nature as the totality of everything) is identical with divinity,[1] or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent God.

Yes

We are given that God does not exist by the Pantheist OP,
Then we are asked what kick started the Universe.

Clarify this or I'll give you another fail.

Since God=Universe(Pantheist definition) and there is no God, then we have no Universe. We have nothing, basically. This is all from given and knowing the OP

With you and a few others falling all over yourselves assuming that I had some Christian or other orthodox theological belief system that you could attempt to jump all over instead of questioning what my beliefs were.

Yes. You've shown how discussions work on this forum. Pretty much like other forums. Not discussions at all but just a bashing session.

Now we are asked 'What jump started nothing?' The simplest answer is nothing.

Well obviously it was a miracle to me. Which fits in nicely with my theological beliefs.

Would you like the definition of a miracle or can you look that up for yourself?

Which in the end makes what you're posting right now a fail.

Now I am happy to discuss any faults in the above logic. But just exclaiming fail without any explanation is not conducive to the discussion nor helps anyone following along.

You're doing a fine job of coming up with your big FAIL all on your own because you're more interested in bashing someone, instead of asking questions, while they make you look foolish..... We're going to get along just fine!

Now look over here and you'll see something wondrous.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[sealybobo]

If you would be an agnostics then you would say: "100% I don't know wether god exists or not". You are just simple an atheist - that's your belief. And you are without a big idea about when and how to use probability calculations. You just simple have some wrong ideas about other people who are not atheists (= a-atheists=theists). And in your self-created world - no: in the world of your indcotrinating ideology - you are thinking you are living in the noble world of science. But indeed believers of all religions - and not only atheists - are able to be scientists.

Yes there are scientists that are religious. Seems quite contrarian and they have to construct massive mental scaffolding in their heads to accommodate that but some do it.

I haven't seen any evidence of 'gods'. But there is voluminous evidence of humans needing to believe in 'gods' to explain that which they don't understand and are afraid of.

LOL And 'indocrination' to many means the same as college education, knowledge, and a life time of study of something.

Show evidence of any god that can be tested or correlated.

How do you know the universe had a beginning?

I guess this thread is under the implied assumption that
1)the Universe had a start
2) that there is only one scientific theory to explain that start(false)
3) that theory is the Big Bang
4) that there is only one Big Bang theory.(false)

Whew, a lot of assumptions! I might have missed some other assumptions.

Anyway, this thread is dead. Turns out the op claims to be a pantheist.

Remember, we started out with "If there is no GOD" yada yada yada "Then what kicked started the Universe?"

If we are given the Pantheist GOD as not existing, then isn't the answer nothing?

Finally went back and spent some time reading and doing some research I see.

Having difficulties accepting that theology and theory might be one for some?

Oh by the way... Your answers were all FAILS ON YOUR PART...

Even in your current post.

*****ROFLMAO*****

I normally explain fails. It is to help the person to correct himself in future discussions.

Let start by showing that you just declare fails without any explanations behind them.

The first part of the post is a list of assumptions taken from themes argued through out the thread. Anyone can go back over the thread to see these themes.

The second part deal with the question posed by the OP. First, take note the OP later claims he is a Pantheist.

Pantheism is the belief that the Universe (or Nature as the totality of everything) is identical with divinity,[1] or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent God.


We are given that God does not exist by the Pantheist OP,
Then we are asked what kick started the Universe.

Since God=Universe(Pantheist definition) and there is no God, then we have no Universe. We have nothing, basically. This is all from given and knowing the OP

Now we are asked 'What jump started nothing?' The simplest answer is nothing.

Now I am happy to discuss any faults in the above logic. But just exclaiming fail without any explanation is not conducive to the discussion nor helps anyone following along.

You can't say God is universe so if there is no God there is no universe.

There is no need for God. The universe is the universe. It just is. Some things we may never know but its cool to speculate.

Do we need to worship it or go to hell? Does it have a heaven for me? And how do you know these things?

I like your inquisitive nature. All I can say is look up the various forms of Pantheism.

However, you are over thinking it.
A Pantheist asked us to assume there is no God
(we have to assume the op God, since any other choice is considered a fail, by the op)

Then asked what jumped started the Universe.

It is all amazing. I can see why even without man made up religions people believe a watch can't be made without a watchmaker. But then what made the watchmaker?

How are all the elements for life in comits? We know everything comes from inside stars. How is human and all other life come from inside of stars? And what started the big bang?

I love looking for the answers rather than settling on one that makes me feel comfortable.

So far no signs or evidence convince me a creator exists.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

It is all amazing. I can see why even without man made up religions people believe a watch can't be made without a watchmaker. But then what made the watchmaker?

How are all the elements for life in comits? We know everything comes from inside stars. How is human and all other life come from inside of stars? And what started the big bang?

I love looking for the answers rather than settling on one that makes me feel comfortable.

So far no signs or evidence convince me a creator exists.

If God is God then the best answer he/she/it could give is.... I AM.

Sound familiar?

You can choose to believe or disbelieve all you want. However from my perspective the 'supposedly' scientifically oriented atheists and theists came up with pretty much the same theory/theology... However I'll point out that the theists came up with the theory first.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[amrchaos]

I normally explain fails. It is to help the person to correct himself in future discussions.

You continually assumed my beliefs are Creationist in nature even after having been told my beliefs pages ago and I've constantly corrected you.

Let start by showing that you just declare fails without any explanations behind them.

I'm not going to explain something to you over and over again. If you don't know the answer or question why I post something perhaps you should ask what I mean instead of assuming or attacking. I believe that's why they call it a discussion.

The first part of the post is a list of assumptions taken from themes argued through out the thread. Anyone can go back over the thread to see these themes.

Isn't that what you do. Make assumptions? It sure looks like it to me.

The second part deal with the question posed by the OP. First, take note the OP later claims he is a Pantheist.

Quite a while ago if the truth be told. Not my fault none of you felt inclined to look it up.

Pantheism

is the belief that the Universe (or Nature as the totality of everything) is identical with divinity,[1] or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent God.

Yes

We are given that God does not exist by the Pantheist OP,
Then we are asked what kick started the Universe.

Clarify this or I'll give you another fail.

Since God=Universe(Pantheist definition) and there is no God, then we have no Universe. We have nothing, basically. This is all from given and knowing the OP

With you and a few others falling all over yourselves assuming that I had some Christian or other orthodox theological belief system that you could attempt to jump all over my beliefs instead of questioning what my beliefs were.

Yes. You've shown how discussions work on this forum. Pretty much like other forums. Not discussions at all but just a bashing session.

Now we are asked 'What jump started nothing?' The simplest answer is nothing.

Well obviously it was a miracle to me. Which fits in nicely with my theological beliefs.

Would you like the definition of a miracle or can you look that up for yourself?

Which in the end makes what you're posting right now a fail.

Now I am happy to discuss any faults in the above logic. But just exclaiming fail without any explanation is not conducive to the discussion nor helps anyone following along.

You're doing a fine job of coming up with your big FAIL all on your own because you're more interested in bashing someone, instead of asking questions, while they make you look foolish..... We're going to get along just fine!

Now look over here and you'll see something wondrous.

*****CHUCKLE*****

Again, you do not explain the fail. Your comments does not have any connection to the quotes being.

A perfect example of this:

Since God=Universe(Pantheist definition) and there is no God, then we have no Universe. We have nothing, basically. This is all from given and knowing the OP

With you and a few others falling all over yourselves assuming that I had some Christian or other orthodox theological belief system that you could attempt to jump all over my beliefs instead of questioning what my beliefs were.
(Why was this necessary? Why did you put it here? Did you find fault in the relations given? No? Yes? If so, where?)

Yes. You've shown how discussions work on this forum. Pretty much like other forums. Not discussions at all but just a bashing session.
(I don't think God=Universe is a bash. That is the basic concept for Pantheism which you claim to be. Also, you are the one who proposed if there is no God. There isn't an insult anywhere in the post!)


You continue in this manner up to your conclusion(?). Then you declare a fail without explanation. You don't even challenge the argument.

Stranger, is your descent into the topics of miracles. Question, why is nothing producing nothing a miracle to you? To everyone else, that is simple logic.

Maybe you should sit down and rethink you op. Obviously it is badly worded, especially the use of God in it.

Normally, God on this board refer to the Judeo-Christian God. If you wish to talk about another God, you have to state which one or everyone is going to assume the God of the Bible.

In other words, it is not the fault of the posters for not guessing you are a Pantheist. It is your ignorance on how discussions work that led to that misunderstanding.


Oh well
Good luck in your 'debates'
If anyone has followed our discussions, they will no why I don't respond to you on this thread.

 

[zaangalewa]

... My parents told me my whole childhood I was a gift from God ...

And that's why you hated them and became a racist?

 

[sakinago]

Oh god, this stupid shit.. Who created god? It's a infinite cycle both ways, I just don't give a fuck.

Best answer I've heard in my drunk life

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Again, you do not explain the fail. Your comments does not have any connection to the quotes being.

What's the definition of a miracle?

A perfect example of this:

Since God=Universe(Pantheist definition) and there is no God, then we have no Universe. We have nothing, basically. This is all from given and knowing the OP

With you and a few others falling all over yourselves assuming that I had some Christian or other orthodox theological belief system that you could attempt to jump all over my beliefs instead of questioning what my beliefs were.

(Why was this necessary? Why did you put it here? Did you find fault in the relations given? No? Yes? If so, where?)

Magicians secret.

Yes. You've shown how discussions work on this forum. Pretty much like other forums. Not discussions at all but just a bashing session.

(I don't think God=Universe is a bash. That is the basic concept for Pantheism which you claim to be. Also, you are the one who proposed if there is no God. There isn't an insult anywhere in the post!)

Did I or did I propose that God does exist in my OP?

You continue in this manner up to your conclusion(?). Then you declare a fail without explanation. You don't even challenge the argument.

And in standard liberal atheist fashion many of you bashed away and even decided to employ personal insults.

Stranger, is your descent into the topics of miracles.

I believe I answered that two or three sentences ago... Yep! Sure did.

Question, why is nothing producing nothing a miracle to you?

Well it's pretty obvious that you're attempting to produce something from nothing. First with your assumption about the OP. Next with Isaac Newton's p) little post about how the universe was created from nothing.

To everyone else, that is simple logic.

Well you and a few others sure produced something from nothing since this thread is approaching 200 posts last time I checked.

Maybe you should sit down and rethink you op. Obviously it is badly worded, especially the use of God in it.

Why would I desire to that? It produced the exact results I thought it would.

Normally, God on this board refer to the Judeo-Christian God. If you wish to talk about another God, you have to state which one or everyone is going to assume the God of the Bible.

No! You should ask questions instead of looking for fault in others and their beliefs. You assumed and in the end became the first three letters in the second word of this sentence.

In other words, it is not the fault of the posters for not guessing you are a Pantheist. It is your ignorance on how discussions work that led to that misunderstanding.

So you're saying that anyone that states a belief in God around here is profiled as some Judeo-Christian and should be bashed by the majority..... How did I know you were going to say that? Oh!!!!!! I know! It's magic.

Look... If you're not going to ask questions about what someone else says and instantly go into bash and personal insult mode that's your choice.... If you don't like the end results it was your choice.

Oh well
Good luck in your 'debates'
If anyone has followed our discussions, they will no why I don't respond to you on this thread.

That is you choice also... However I've known a lot of posters similar in attitude to you and I don't think you can.

*****CHUCKLE******

 

[IsaacNewton]

No, physicists already know the current laws of physics did not reign during the big bang. And before that if there is nothing there are no laws.

Do you like to say natural laws were not existing in (and since) the second planksecond of the universe? Who says so? What's your source?

I'm not a physicist but there are plenty out there who know a lot more about this than either of us. Try googling Lawrence Krauss.

Never heard from him. A you sure he said our natural laws were not existing latest after the first plank-second of the existence of our universe?

I don't know the exact 'planck-seconds' of the timeline.

1,2,3,4,5 ... and so on.

LOL Better to buy a couple books of the leading physicists on the planet and see what they say rather than get that info from an internet message board. All the physicists that I've seen interviewed said the current laws of physics were not active at the big bang. They of course developed after the big bang but again you'll have to go to the experts to get the exact 'planck-second timeline'.

Lawrence Krauss' latest book is A Universe From Nothing. Well worth the read and though it is written for the public it is goes into quite complex issues.

But you did not read this books so you are not able to explain what you say on what reason. Why said you what you said if you don't understand it on your own?

Another Mobius?

 

[sealybobo]

It is all amazing. I can see why even without man made up religions people believe a watch can't be made without a watchmaker. But then what made the watchmaker?

How are all the elements for life in comits? We know everything comes from inside stars. How is human and all other life come from inside of stars? And what started the big bang?

I love looking for the answers rather than settling on one that makes me feel comfortable.

So far no signs or evidence convince me a creator exists.

If God is God then the best answer he/she/it could give is.... I AM.

Sound familiar?

You can choose to believe or disbelieve all you want. However from my perspective the 'supposedly' scientifically oriented atheists and theists came up with pretty much the same theory/theology... However I'll point out that the theists came up with the theory first.

*****CHUCKLE*****

So you're kidding? Chuckle?

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Do you like to say natural laws were not existing in (and since) the second planksecond of the universe? Who says so? What's your source?

I'm not a physicist but there are plenty out there who know a lot more about this than either of us. Try googling Lawrence Krauss.

Never heard from him. A you sure he said our natural laws were not existing latest after the first plank-second of the existence of our universe?

I don't know the exact 'planck-seconds' of the timeline.

1,2,3,4,5 ... and so on.

LOL Better to buy a couple books of the leading physicists on the planet and see what they say rather than get that info from an internet message board. All the physicists that I've seen interviewed said the current laws of physics were not active at the big bang. They of course developed after the big bang but again you'll have to go to the experts to get the exact 'planck-second timeline'.

Lawrence Krauss' latest book is A Universe From Nothing. Well worth the read and though it is written for the public it is goes into quite complex issues.

But you did not read this books so you are not able to explain what you say on what reason. Why said you what you said if you don't understand it on your own?

Another Mobius?

You do them so well.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[Damaged Eagle]

It is all amazing. I can see why even without man made up religions people believe a watch can't be made without a watchmaker. But then what made the watchmaker?

How are all the elements for life in comits? We know everything comes from inside stars. How is human and all other life come from inside of stars? And what started the big bang?

I love looking for the answers rather than settling on one that makes me feel comfortable.

So far no signs or evidence convince me a creator exists.

If God is God then the best answer he/she/it could give is.... I AM.

Sound familiar?

You can choose to believe or disbelieve all you want. However from my perspective the 'supposedly' scientifically oriented atheists and theists came up with pretty much the same theory/theology... However I'll point out that the theists came up with the theory first.

*****CHUCKLE*****

So you're kidding? Chuckle?

Am I?

*****CHUCKLE*****