Religion

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by WhatsUp, Mar 19, 2016.

  1. Lets just agree that much more intelligent men or women than you or i have had this conversation and arrived at the same conclusion. That there are no conclusions to be had lol

    I will not believe we are random until scientists can show me how life was created from nothing, and maybe you wont believe in a god until you meet one. So the cycle continues. Debating is good though, forces us to take a closer look
     
  2. Lol its not if I met a god I'd believe I just don't see any signs of a god is all I believe things you believe things you're right though on the 1st bit.
     
  3. Life was never formed from nothing, so i suppose you could wait a long time. Scientists however have a rather good ideo of abiogenesis (formation of life), it basically started as a self replicating molecule, which mutated, it's mutation happened to be better resistant to the environment so it could replicate again. The very first process of evolution. You can look on youtube for better videos regarding the process.
     
  4. And this molecule just what? Has always been? Molecules have a creation process as well. See this is the problem with atheism. Ya weve already established that life started as a molecule or from particles that caused a reaction that created molecules. But where did these things start? None of them just are, they all undergo a process to exist. It had to start somewhere.

    So technically if you subscribe to atheism then you subscribe that there is a god like molecule that started it all, a molecule that wasnt created, it just was?

    How is that any different than believing in a god?


    Ill explain briefly how its all a loop, in short molecules are created by atoms, atoms are created by energy. So what is energy? Is it the thing that has always existed that started the first molecule? Nope, i wish it were that simple, energy is created by interactions between molecules atoms photons and other things that all have their own creation process. So you see one creates the other and visa versa.

    None of the things that create life just are, they all begin somehwere. Unless you buy into that one of these things was just always there and somehow didnt have to be created, wich breaks the laws of science as much as a god does......so here we are, believing in one defys science as much as the other
     
  5. Gods have omnipotent or supernatural powers...the originating matter does not.
     

  6. The originating matter would have to have some supernatural power as well as it defys all laws of science and nature by just being and not having a creation process, just as conceivable to say the universe just is and nothing under went a creation
     

  7. Unless all matter is infinite in both directions of time and just exists in a constant state of change. I won't disagree that creationism isn't possible but neither will i disagree with the possibility of infinite time and space without further limitations.
     

  8. Exactly bud now we're agreeing. Im defending believing in creation bc so many these days mock it but its just as probable as atheism.

    Like in this scenario, "i believe in god", atheist laughs. "based on what" ...faith i say...faith that hes always existed and is the creator...most on these forums make fun of statements like that..

    Well let's reverse it....ask the atheist why believes the creation matter forwent a creation process and always existed and created all life? Faith...lol

    See the connection? Something that cant be proved and defys logic can only be believed in through faith bc you cannot reason it. Wether its a god starting it all
    Or some matter that somehow just was
     
  9. God visited me last night. I was awake when it happened.

    He told me that humans have strayed from the path he set for us, too much emphasis is going on how, and not enough on why. He told me that the church is not how it was intended to be, it is flawed and corrupt, unwilling to change to keep up with humanities progress.

    He told me that science is looking the wrong way, and that instead of trying to solve how we were created, we should be trying to figure out how to be more.
     
  10. I agree with all of that
     
  11. Lol,

    So much ignorance ...

    I don't even know where to start ...
     
  12. Enlighten us then, oh wise one
     
  13. For starters,

    The God particle has nothing to do with God.

    It was ripped from the title of a book that was originally supposed to be the Goddamn particle.

    The editor or so thought the title would be too controversial and changed it into the God particle.

    The correct scientific name is the Higgs Boson.

    In the theory of particle physics there were/are a lot of open questions. Amongst other things, the exact behaviour like the atomic weak force that couldn't quite be explained.

    One theory was the existence of this elusive particle that could fill the gaps in particle physics. But since it disappeares almost immediately after it gets created, scientists built the Large Hadron Collider to investigate what happens when they shoot 2 protons together at astronomical speeds.


    So they observed the protons decay into smaller entities, one of which was the Higgs Boson...

    Particle physics is an ongoing field and these theories continue to be tested, but I think we can all agree that making observations to better understand the nature of that small scale, isn't like using a magnifying glass to have a look, so it will take time to unravel the truth ...
     
  14. How then did a god create all this from nothing? Where did God come from? Your own logic just proved your point moot.
     
  15. Wow ok lets just regurgitate the same question every two pages. Ok how does what you quoted proof my point moot? That i will not convert to atheism until science can explain to me how the first bit of matter that started it all came into being without being created? Not following how this proves anything to one side or the other. More ignorant ramblings to things you know there are no answer..

    Ok since this is a persistent line of questioning then you answer your own question. Where did the first lige matter come from? How was it always just "there", how is that possible? There ya go fair is fair, shoot smart guy
     
  16. This is typical of pseudo arguments like the "God of the gaps".

    They require stringent 100% proof from science to explain something. (* and science hasn't got all the answers yet it is a continuing work *)

    But what they offer up as the alternative (=the existence of their flavour of the imaginary friend), lacks any proof what so ever.

    We have come a long way from attributing a god riding a chariot with the sun through the sky, to seeing God in particle physics. They are just clinging on to straws that keep getting smaller and smaller ...
     
  17. And im sorry but all youve proven me wrong on is that i used the non scientific term for the particle, it is referred to as the "god particle" when they speak of it in the news and in articles so apparently that makes everyone publishing on it an idiot to.
     
  18. Please run by me where I called anyone an idiot???

    Another clear sign of lack of debating skills; Putting words in the mouth of the opposition that they never uttered ...
     
  19. Obviously a lot of peeps on this thread need Jesus in their life. Your life would be more fulfilling if you did. It's never too late.
     

  20. Again it goes both ways, is science closing in on something im unaware of? Every new theory or test raises more questions. And they are no closer to explaining how life started from scratch than they were when we developed the technology to research it.
    They will never unravel it as we were not meant to know it. We can have the same convo 50 years from now and it will be some different "flavor" of theory the science community is subscribing to That is being tested and could be the link weve been looking for!!!!!

    But it wont be, it will be another failed almost and you will still argue that science is closing in on the answer