Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 512. (Read 845435 times)
Scientific proof for God its a non sequitur.
do you think that when the Sun creates one deuterium atom from two hydrogen atoms, then god is the explanation?
I don't know that the sun does that, but if the sun does it, the process was originally created by God.
If you mean, does God involve Himself directly with each conversion, I don't know how much He has set the process on automatic where He doesn't have to involve Himself with it directly.
If you mean that deuterium can be made from hydrogen that ISN'T heavy hydrogen, I have never heard of that happening. Simply don't know.
Why do you want to know what I think about this? Or were you talking to someone else, and I answered out of turn?
We don't know as much about the sun as we think we do. The Revelation talks about an angel who is powerful enough that he/she/it is standing in the sun.
As I have said several times, and you can prove it to yourself through examination of the foundational scientific writings, the base for ALL understanding that the earth is more than about 25,000 years max, is in ifs and maybes. Check the books written by the scientists who have done that calculations. The say things like, "From this we can surmise that the age of the earth is ... ." The word "surmise" has to do with making an educated guess. The evidence that they use can be interpreted in ways different than the things that they say... even ways that show a young earth.
On the other hand, the more we learn about the activity of the earth and the universe, the more we see an ultra-complex machine. What we don't see is any kind of method that explains how this machine was made. ALL examination of the machine itself shows ONLY a slowing down, decaying, erosion, like a pendulum gradually going to bottom dead center. The science books that talk about these things explain it in this way.
The idea of evolution entirely contradicts the things that we see happening in nature. Evolution is a guesswork idea that flies in the face of the machinery of the universe gradually wearing down. Evolution says things increase in complexity. It is standard science that things wear out and wear down. There is nothing that shows the opposite. There is no evolution.
Machinery is built by a machine maker. The more complex the machinery, the more complex that machine maker. Any one of you, stand there and call a grain of sand into existence out of nothing. Nobody can do it, yet the stuff is here, and the so-called scientific methods suggested for where the stuff comes from are pure guesses. The evidence is overwhelmingly for a God, and a very powerful One.
You're right about this one On the other hand, the more we learn about the activity of the earth and the universe, the more we see an ultra-complex machine. What we don't see is any kind of method that explains how this machine was made. ALL examination of the machine itself shows ONLY a slowing down, decaying, erosion, like a pendulum gradually going to bottom dead center. The science books that talk about these things explain it in this way.
The idea of evolution entirely contradicts the things that we see happening in nature. Evolution is a guesswork idea that flies in the face of the machinery of the universe gradually wearing down. Evolution says things increase in complexity. It is standard science that things wear out and wear down. There is nothing that shows the opposite. There is no evolution.
Machinery is built by a machine maker. The more complex the machinery, the more complex that machine maker. Any one of you, stand there and call a grain of sand into existence out of nothing. Nobody can do it, yet the stuff is here, and the so-called scientific methods suggested for where the stuff comes from are pure guesses. The evidence is overwhelmingly for a God, and a very powerful One.
The only problem is that this "machine maker" is called entropy, not god
If you don't agree, do you think that when the Sun creates one deuterium atom from two hydrogen atoms, then god is the explanation?
Complete entropy in the universe would spread all the material and energy evenly throughout all space. There would be no stars, no planets, no heavenly bodies, no earthly bodies. All the material would have dissolved into its component energy, and there would be an similarity of existence between all the parts of the universe. Whatever it would be like - we don't know enough about how the dimensions work - it all would be essentially "dead."
That's where the universe is headed. If time and the dimensions remain constant until all the material and energy get to this state, it might take untold billions of years for it to happen. Since time and the dimensions are probably in entropy the same as energy and material, it will probably speed up exponentially, until there is what could be called a reverse big bang, and then, nothing but entropy.
The point isn't the entropy. The point is, we don't have a clue as to what is powerful enough to set things up, making all things to have existence that is so completely opposite of complete entropy as we see in the universe today. The Big Bang is a proposed idea that is based on so many "ifs" and "maybes" that it is science fiction. There are only two things that fit, based on what we know: 1) we don't know; 2) God.
Machinery is built by a machine maker. The more complex the machinery, the more complex that machine maker. Any one of you, stand there and call a grain of sand into existence out of nothing. Nobody can do it, yet the stuff is here, and the so-called scientific methods suggested for where the stuff comes from are pure guesses. The evidence is overwhelmingly for a God, and a very powerful One.
But this not evidence BADecker. I'm neutral, it makes no difference to me. Filling in the blanks with God because we don't understand something is not evidence.This is called "wishful thinking". Wishful thinking is not evidence. Sorry to burst your balloon, but it isn't.
First, there isn't any neutral. But that's another subject.
I understand why you don't say anything about the scientific observations being far less evidence for popular scientific theories than they are for God. The topic title is about God, not the scientific theories.
It's fun playing, but, scientists should also do something practical with their lives, rather than trying to find God proof. It won't happen... certainly not if what is called science today is any example of the success we are having.
As I have said several times, and you can prove it to yourself through examination of the foundational scientific writings, the base for ALL understanding that the earth is more than about 25,000 years max, is in ifs and maybes. Check the books written by the scientists who have done that calculations. The say things like, "From this we can surmise that the age of the earth is ... ." The word "surmise" has to do with making an educated guess. The evidence that they use can be interpreted in ways different than the things that they say... even ways that show a young earth.
On the other hand, the more we learn about the activity of the earth and the universe, the more we see an ultra-complex machine. What we don't see is any kind of method that explains how this machine was made. ALL examination of the machine itself shows ONLY a slowing down, decaying, erosion, like a pendulum gradually going to bottom dead center. The science books that talk about these things explain it in this way.
The idea of evolution entirely contradicts the things that we see happening in nature. Evolution is a guesswork idea that flies in the face of the machinery of the universe gradually wearing down. Evolution says things increase in complexity. It is standard science that things wear out and wear down. There is nothing that shows the opposite. There is no evolution.
Machinery is built by a machine maker. The more complex the machinery, the more complex that machine maker. Any one of you, stand there and call a grain of sand into existence out of nothing. Nobody can do it, yet the stuff is here, and the so-called scientific methods suggested for where the stuff comes from are pure guesses. The evidence is overwhelmingly for a God, and a very powerful One.
You're right about this one On the other hand, the more we learn about the activity of the earth and the universe, the more we see an ultra-complex machine. What we don't see is any kind of method that explains how this machine was made. ALL examination of the machine itself shows ONLY a slowing down, decaying, erosion, like a pendulum gradually going to bottom dead center. The science books that talk about these things explain it in this way.
The idea of evolution entirely contradicts the things that we see happening in nature. Evolution is a guesswork idea that flies in the face of the machinery of the universe gradually wearing down. Evolution says things increase in complexity. It is standard science that things wear out and wear down. There is nothing that shows the opposite. There is no evolution.
Machinery is built by a machine maker. The more complex the machinery, the more complex that machine maker. Any one of you, stand there and call a grain of sand into existence out of nothing. Nobody can do it, yet the stuff is here, and the so-called scientific methods suggested for where the stuff comes from are pure guesses. The evidence is overwhelmingly for a God, and a very powerful One.
The only problem is that this "machine maker" is called entropy, not god
If you don't agree, do you think that when the Sun creates one deuterium atom from two hydrogen atoms, then god is the explanation?
Complete entropy in the universe would spread all the material and energy evenly throughout all space. There would be no stars, no planets, no heavenly bodies, no earthly bodies. All the material would have dissolved into its component energy, and there would be an similarity of existence between all the parts of the universe. Whatever it would be like - we don't know enough about how the dimensions work - it all would be essentially "dead."
That's where the universe is headed. If time and the dimensions remain constant until all the material and energy get to this state, it might take untold billions of years for it to happen. Since time and the dimensions are probably in entropy the same as energy and material, it will probably speed up exponentially, until there is what could be called a reverse big bang, and then, nothing but entropy.
The point isn't the entropy. The point is, we don't have a clue as to what is powerful enough to set things up, making all things to have existence that is so completely opposite of complete entropy as we see in the universe today. The Big Bang is a proposed idea that is based on so many "ifs" and "maybes" that it is science fiction. There are only two things that fit, based on what we know: 1) we don't know; 2) God.
Machinery is built by a machine maker. The more complex the machinery, the more complex that machine maker. Any one of you, stand there and call a grain of sand into existence out of nothing. Nobody can do it, yet the stuff is here, and the so-called scientific methods suggested for where the stuff comes from are pure guesses. The evidence is overwhelmingly for a God, and a very powerful One.
But this not evidence BADecker. I'm neutral, it makes no difference to me. Filling in the blanks with God because we don't understand something is not evidence.This is called "wishful thinking". Wishful thinking is not evidence. Sorry to burst your balloon, but it isn't.
As I have said several times, and you can prove it to yourself through examination of the foundational scientific writings, the base for ALL understanding that the earth is more than about 25,000 years max, is in ifs and maybes. Check the books written by the scientists who have done that calculations. The say things like, "From this we can surmise that the age of the earth is ... ." The word "surmise" has to do with making an educated guess. The evidence that they use can be interpreted in ways different than the things that they say... even ways that show a young earth.
On the other hand, the more we learn about the activity of the earth and the universe, the more we see an ultra-complex machine. What we don't see is any kind of method that explains how this machine was made. ALL examination of the machine itself shows ONLY a slowing down, decaying, erosion, like a pendulum gradually going to bottom dead center. The science books that talk about these things explain it in this way.
The idea of evolution entirely contradicts the things that we see happening in nature. Evolution is a guesswork idea that flies in the face of the machinery of the universe gradually wearing down. Evolution says things increase in complexity. It is standard science that things wear out and wear down. There is nothing that shows the opposite. There is no evolution.
Machinery is built by a machine maker. The more complex the machinery, the more complex that machine maker. Any one of you, stand there and call a grain of sand into existence out of nothing. Nobody can do it, yet the stuff is here, and the so-called scientific methods suggested for where the stuff comes from are pure guesses. The evidence is overwhelmingly for a God, and a very powerful One.
You're right about this one On the other hand, the more we learn about the activity of the earth and the universe, the more we see an ultra-complex machine. What we don't see is any kind of method that explains how this machine was made. ALL examination of the machine itself shows ONLY a slowing down, decaying, erosion, like a pendulum gradually going to bottom dead center. The science books that talk about these things explain it in this way.
The idea of evolution entirely contradicts the things that we see happening in nature. Evolution is a guesswork idea that flies in the face of the machinery of the universe gradually wearing down. Evolution says things increase in complexity. It is standard science that things wear out and wear down. There is nothing that shows the opposite. There is no evolution.
Machinery is built by a machine maker. The more complex the machinery, the more complex that machine maker. Any one of you, stand there and call a grain of sand into existence out of nothing. Nobody can do it, yet the stuff is here, and the so-called scientific methods suggested for where the stuff comes from are pure guesses. The evidence is overwhelmingly for a God, and a very powerful One.
The only problem is that this "machine maker" is called entropy, not god
If you don't agree, do you think that when the Sun creates one deuterium atom from two hydrogen atoms, then god is the explanation?
There simply can't exist a proof that god exists! It just doesn't work that way. God can only exist for people who believe he/she/it does. All those 'scientific' proofs are bogus, if you ask me!
Stop right now, and look at the wall. No, seriously, stop what you are doing and look at the wall. I don't know if your wall is papered with wallpaper, or if you have paneling, or if it is simply painted. But whatever it is, how do you know that there is anything behind/beyond the surface of the wall?
You might have seen the wall built. You might have only tapped the wall with your knuckles, and it felt solid. You might have even put your fist through that wall at one time or another. But how do you know for a fact that there is anything behind/beyond the surface of that wall right now? For all we know, observing the substance behind the surface of the wall is the thing that brings that substance into existence, and that it really wasn't there before we brought it into existence through some form of observation.
The point is, how much evidence do you have to see in nature before you can postulate within yourself that God must indeed exist? EVERYTHING in life exists partially by faith. Nature seems to show that God exists. The surface of the wall seems to indicate that there is some kind of solidity behind the surface. But until you stand face to face with whatever, you have to live, at least a little, in faith.
ALL people live in faith many different ways throughout their whole lives. Meeting God in person is the only pure proof for His existence. But the evidence that He exists is great, far greater than the constant babbling of the scientists that evolution exists. In their babbling they live in faith just like everyone else.
BADecker you are falling under the burden of proof fallacy.
First, there is only one piece of evidence that the CHRISTIAN god exists. You must also consider there is the same evidence, and even more actually, for other gods that came long before the word "GOD" was ever used by anyone in the 4.54 BILLION years the earth has been in existence. BUT the most important thing in all of this is that you must prove your god is real, it is not the job of the non-believer to prove it. Your questions of the existence of things that are not currently being observed are non-sensical and go against everything we know to be true.
This universe we live in is likely to be a simulation, but whether it is or it isn't, we must go with the laws of physics that we can observe until we are able to observe more. Just because you can't be omnipotent and obverse all structures in the universe at all times, doesn't mean that you can just say the universe doesn't work the way that we believe it does to the best of our knowledge. Stop living with what was written down in a single book by people who literally never met jesus, and didn't start writing it 30 years after he died. What can you write about from 30 years ago? Were you even alive? You have your head in the sand my friend, please remove it and join us in the ways of scientific thinking which you are currently helping to hold us back from as a civilization.
As I have said several times, and you can prove it to yourself through examination of the foundational scientific writings, the base for ALL understanding that the earth is more than about 25,000 years max, is in ifs and maybes. Check the books written by the scientists who have done that calculations. The say things like, "From this we can surmise that the age of the earth is ... ." The word "surmise" has to do with making an educated guess. The evidence that they use can be interpreted in ways different than the things that they say... even ways that show a young earth.
On the other hand, the more we learn about the activity of the earth and the universe, the more we see an ultra-complex machine. What we don't see is any kind of method that explains how this machine was made. ALL examination of the machine itself shows ONLY a slowing down, decaying, erosion, like a pendulum gradually going to bottom dead center. The science books that talk about these things explain it in this way.
The idea of evolution entirely contradicts the things that we see happening in nature. Evolution is a guesswork idea that flies in the face of the machinery of the universe gradually wearing down. Evolution says things increase in complexity. It is standard science that things wear out and wear down. There is nothing that shows the opposite. There is no evolution.
Machinery is built by a machine maker. The more complex the machinery, the more complex that machine maker. Any one of you, stand there and call a grain of sand into existence out of nothing. Nobody can do it, yet the stuff is here, and the so-called scientific methods suggested for where the stuff comes from are pure guesses. The evidence is overwhelmingly for a God, and a very powerful One.
I think that people who believe in god are retarded
I don't think there is any need for that. People can believe whatever they choose. It's their choice.People who start blowing others up with missiles, generally doing bad things using God as a reason are the retarded ones.
There simply can't exist a proof that god exists! It just doesn't work that way. God can only exist for people who believe he/she/it does. All those 'scientific' proofs are bogus, if you ask me!
Stop right now, and look at the wall. No, seriously, stop what you are doing and look at the wall. I don't know if your wall is papered with wallpaper, or if you have paneling, or if it is simply painted. But whatever it is, how do you know that there is anything behind/beyond the surface of the wall?
You might have seen the wall built. You might have only tapped the wall with your knuckles, and it felt solid. You might have even put your fist through that wall at one time or another. But how do you know for a fact that there is anything behind/beyond the surface of that wall right now? For all we know, observing the substance behind the surface of the wall is the thing that brings that substance into existence, and that it really wasn't there before we brought it into existence through some form of observation.
The point is, how much evidence do you have to see in nature before you can postulate within yourself that God must indeed exist? EVERYTHING in life exists partially by faith. Nature seems to show that God exists. The surface of the wall seems to indicate that there is some kind of solidity behind the surface. But until you stand face to face with whatever, you have to live, at least a little, in faith.
ALL people live in faith many different ways throughout their whole lives. Meeting God in person is the only pure proof for His existence. But the evidence that He exists is great, far greater than the constant babbling of the scientists that evolution exists. In their babbling they live in faith just like everyone else.
BADecker you are falling under the burden of proof fallacy.
First, there is only one piece of evidence that the CHRISTIAN god exists. You must also consider there is the same evidence, and even more actually, for other gods that came long before the word "GOD" was ever used by anyone in the 4.54 BILLION years the earth has been in existence. BUT the most important thing in all of this is that you must prove your god is real, it is not the job of the non-believer to prove it. Your questions of the existence of things that are not currently being observed are non-sensical and go against everything we know to be true.
This universe we live in is likely to be a simulation, but whether it is or it isn't, we must go with the laws of physics that we can observe until we are able to observe more. Just because you can't be omnipotent and obverse all structures in the universe at all times, doesn't mean that you can just say the universe doesn't work the way that we believe it does to the best of our knowledge. Stop living with what was written down in a single book by people who literally never met jesus, and didn't start writing it 30 years after he died. What can you write about from 30 years ago? Were you even alive? You have your head in the sand my friend, please remove it and join us in the ways of scientific thinking which you are currently helping to hold us back from as a civilization.
I think that people who believe in god are retarded but one thing that i find even mooooore retarded are retarded people who believe in god but need a proof of his existence.
God is very much exists for sure . Science is not always right they send some machine to space and what photo that machine get here they believe
in that photo and tells that it is the proof . They also say that moon is separated from earth and it was part of earth but that is not true because
if it is part of earth then how exactly it become round and how exactly it is placed between earth and sun and why it is visible only at night all such questions are still un answerable . Air u can not see , soul - u can not see but u can feel in a similar God is there and through prayer u can feel his presence
in that photo and tells that it is the proof . They also say that moon is separated from earth and it was part of earth but that is not true because
if it is part of earth then how exactly it become round and how exactly it is placed between earth and sun and why it is visible only at night all such questions are still un answerable . Air u can not see , soul - u can not see but u can feel in a similar God is there and through prayer u can feel his presence
The moon is (mostly) visible at night, because when it 'could' be visible in the day, the sun is pretty much next to it, and being so many times brighter.. I can assure you however that at least twice a year I see the daytime moon. When we cant see it, it's because our shadow has crossed it's face. However it is and always is there, every night.. wether above or below our horizon, which of course, depends on where you live. I am however quite convinced (naturally) that the moon is not a child of earth or vice versa.. how it became round? Same as EVERY other sphere up there.. by rotating in it's orbit, and sanded by the interstellar dust's of time, which is beyond any human understanding.. yeah they made instruments that state the universe is 'x' years old, but as I say, the test equipment was designed with the 'expected' answers included in the design.. just like a multimeter..
The universe is so old there is NO device that is capable of telling us how old the universe is, since it would need to include the void that clearly existed before the vibratory sounds were triggered. This void would also need to be added to the answer, since without it, the space has nowhere to exist..
No need to feed the troll.
What do you think?
Please share your opinion about this article.
101 Proofs For God
A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.
Proof for God, #65 Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam
Genetic scientists seem to be in general agreement that we are all descendants of one woman and one man. This research was fairly recent, starting about 1978. They, of course, do not believe in the creation story of Adam and Eve in the Bible, but their conclusions are getting closer and closer.
In case you have not heard about this, it makes very interesting reading. But I think it raises a number of profound challenges to the Theory of Evolution.
The scientists base the above conclusions on the known facts of human reproduction, specifically on properties of the sperm and egg. .....
Full article read here: http://101proofsforgod.blogspot.com/2014/07/65-mitochondial-eve-and-y-chromosome.html
Please share your opinion about this article.
101 Proofs For God
A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.
Proof for God, #65 Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam
Genetic scientists seem to be in general agreement that we are all descendants of one woman and one man. This research was fairly recent, starting about 1978. They, of course, do not believe in the creation story of Adam and Eve in the Bible, but their conclusions are getting closer and closer.
In case you have not heard about this, it makes very interesting reading. But I think it raises a number of profound challenges to the Theory of Evolution.
The scientists base the above conclusions on the known facts of human reproduction, specifically on properties of the sperm and egg. .....
Full article read here: http://101proofsforgod.blogspot.com/2014/07/65-mitochondial-eve-and-y-chromosome.html
Every living thing on earth is descendent of one organism as shown by the universality of codons as well as DNA/RNA structure. It doesn't have to mean that we all descended from 1 man and 1 women. It means that all life on earth is related and shared a common ancestor that predates mankind along with probably every other species known on earth (I'm sure there are still deep ocean species that have not been discovered that with a very very low probability could be a direct descendent without very much genetic change).
Holy shit, someone has way too much time on their hands LOL 
It appears from Ezekiel 28...
Hmm.Not sure I give any credit to the book you're talking about.
haha, it's in need of some serious debugging, needs to be put on github.
mmm, more questions popping up in my mind ...
it's a bit puzzling. for example, that his desire for the good of people imply the men's suffering.
how many innocent men suffer and die every day without reason?
even if someone reply "because of original sin", make suffer all the progeny of adam for his disobedience is too much even for the most vengeful man.
If I understand what you are saying, God doesn't desire for man to have pain. However, if it is a choice between no pain/no salvation, take the pain and the salvation.
if god really doesn't desire pain for men, he could simply do not make men suffer and give them salvation, he is omnipotent.
Quote
The reason behind it all is difficult to understand. It is the method that God is using to correct a race (humans) who turned against Him... so that they can be saved. Why this method? Can't say all the reasons. But it is the best method, or God wouldn't have done it this way.
But was god that create us in the way we are (prone to sin). What is the point to correct our behaviour since we were created in that way by him?
Furthermore he is omniscient, he knew in advance that adam would have committed the original sin ...
all of this sounds unfare to me.
you are saying that it is the best method for save the people, but it is not from my viewpoint (assuming that he is a good god that wants only men's good and not pain).
i haven't read all thread, but i have an easy question: why a perfect entity had the urge to create men?
honestly i have a bunch of simple questions since my childhood that never got a satisfing answers; maybe someone here could shake my opinions ...
honestly i have a bunch of simple questions since my childhood that never got a satisfing answers; maybe someone here could shake my opinions ...
Several simple answers.
1. God wants companionship. He is great beyond understanding. He wants companionship that will match His greatness. That's why He made angels and people. The fact that there are different kinds of angels suggests that there might be a tremendously large number of different kinds of angels. We all have been created for His companionship.
imaho there is a central flaw in the relation between god's omnipotence/greatness and the need of companionship.
assuming that an entity is perfect, that entity will be free of all needs. The need of companionship imply that he is not perfect particularly if it is a tremendous big need (he created tremendously large number of different entities).
Moreover those entities will not match His greatness because are all inferior, this could imply that He need to boss them (worst need than the first).
furthermore, if we assume that he is good and forgiving, how he could inflict eternal damnation to his creatures when they misbehave (according to His law) ? inflicting eternal sufferings and being good does not match
I don't know that God needs companionship. That isn't something that I said. If I said it, I didn't mean it that way.
Probably the closest to God having need is like this. God is unimaginably Great and Wonderful. He is simply Fabulous, and in part, Fabulous beyond mans' understanding.
When God envisioned man, He saw how great and wonderful it would be for man to stand in awe of something so Great and Fabulous as God. And, having loved man before He even made us, He wanted to give us the best, and that "best" included making us so that we could recognize how Great and Wonderful He is.
Something like this might sound like conceit. But is it conceit if it is the absolute truth? Since it is the truth, it is complete humility on the part of God.
So you see? God's "need" to have companionship doesn't really have to do with Him having to have people around Him. Rather, it has to do with His desire for the good of all people.
mmm, more questions popping up in my mind ...
it's a bit puzzling. for example, that his desire for the good of people imply the men's suffering.
how many innocent men suffer and die every day without reason?
even if someone reply "because of original sin", make suffer all the progeny of adam for his disobedience is too much even for the most vengeful man.
If I understand what you are saying, God doesn't desire for man to have pain. However, if it is a choice between no pain/no salvation, take the pain and the salvation.
The reason behind it all is difficult to understand. It is the method that God is using to correct a race (humans) who turned against Him... so that they can be saved. Why this method? Can't say all the reasons. But it is the best method, or God wouldn't have done it this way.
Death is the end for all of us. We need to remain faithful to God, expecting that He will raise us from the dead in the last day, because of the salvation Jesus did on the cross, and because of the resurrection Jesus did from the grave on the third day.
for the
however i have a deep respect for strong faith, and i don't want bother you too much
however i have a deep respect for strong faith, and i don't want bother you too much
Keep reading the Bible. Keep the faith strong.
for the sake of curiosity, which religion you belong?
Christian. Not Judaism, Islam, Shintoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Humanism, Scientology, etc.
i haven't read all thread, but i have an easy question: why a perfect entity had the urge to create men?
honestly i have a bunch of simple questions since my childhood that never got a satisfing answers; maybe someone here could shake my opinions ...
honestly i have a bunch of simple questions since my childhood that never got a satisfing answers; maybe someone here could shake my opinions ...
Several simple answers.
1. God wants companionship. He is great beyond understanding. He wants companionship that will match His greatness. That's why He made angels and people. The fact that there are different kinds of angels suggests that there might be a tremendously large number of different kinds of angels. We all have been created for His companionship.
imaho there is a central flaw in the relation between god's omnipotence/greatness and the need of companionship.
assuming that an entity is perfect, that entity will be free of all needs. The need of companionship imply that he is not perfect particularly if it is a tremendous big need (he created tremendously large number of different entities).
Moreover those entities will not match His greatness because are all inferior, this could imply that He need to boss them (worst need than the first).
furthermore, if we assume that he is good and forgiving, how he could inflict eternal damnation to his creatures when they misbehave (according to His law) ? inflicting eternal sufferings and being good does not match
I don't know that God needs companionship. That isn't something that I said. If I said it, I didn't mean it that way.
Probably the closest to God having need is like this. God is unimaginably Great and Wonderful. He is simply Fabulous, and in part, Fabulous beyond mans' understanding.
When God envisioned man, He saw how great and wonderful it would be for man to stand in awe of something so Great and Fabulous as God. And, having loved man before He even made us, He wanted to give us the best, and that "best" included making us so that we could recognize how Great and Wonderful He is.
Something like this might sound like conceit. But is it conceit if it is the absolute truth? Since it is the truth, it is complete humility on the part of God.
So you see? God's "need" to have companionship doesn't really have to do with Him having to have people around Him. Rather, it has to do with His desire for the good of all people.
mmm, more questions popping up in my mind ...
it's a bit puzzling. for example, that his desire for the good of people imply the men's suffering.
how many innocent men suffer and die every day without reason?
even if someone reply "because of original sin", make suffer all the progeny of adam for his disobedience is too much even for the most vengeful man.
however i have a deep respect for strong faith, and i don't want bother you too much
for the sake of curiosity, which religion you belong?
If you had said your eyes were set that you couldn't see, you might have an excuse. But now that you say (essentially) that you understand, you are taking responsibility for yourself before God. Better be the right response.
Excuse? I've done nothing wrong.
You back to that old fear mongering again? When will the penny drop?
If it is mine, Buffer everything you every did is forgiven. Why? Because my God doesn't have 'abstract' rules of what's right and what is not.
Well, we are talking about the BIG God. You know, the God Who made nature. There are rules of nature that He set in place that if you don't follow them, you hurt yourself, or even die.
The BIG Him
If you had said your eyes were set that you couldn't see, you might have an excuse. But now that you say (essentially) that you understand, you are taking responsibility for yourself before God. Better be the right response.
Excuse? I've done nothing wrong.
You back to that old fear mongering again? When will the penny drop?
If it is mine, Buffer everything you every did is forgiven. Why? Because my God doesn't have 'abstract' rules of what's right and what is not.
Well that's true. I'd prefer your God with the clear rules.
With the lesser 'abstract' one, followers can just make up the rules as they see fit. Consulting the bible won't guide them because of all the endless contradictions as confirmed earlier. In fact that's more likely to misguide them if anything!
I'm starting to get bored of this thread now. I think it's reached the end of it's useful life. (If it ever had one.)
However, even with the abstract one, there are limits to the rules. For example, even if it is in the rules that a person can simply stand out in his driveway and jump to the moon, he still won't be able to do it. So, essentially, man-made rules are limitations on man.
Jump to: