Music Banter
Page 5 of 13 « First 34 5 67 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/)
-   -   The Big Bang AKA Where The **** Did It All Start? (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/56466-big-bang-aka-where-did-all-start.html)

Scarlett O'Hara 05-28-2011 04:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra (Post 1060405)
Matter comes from energy, not nothing. Something we know happens. Energy changes matter.

IE. Fire turns water into mist.

In fact, all organic matter is converted from sunlight. Sunlight is a type of energy, and matter comes from it.

As for what your saying, this line of thought is just pretentious. You're saying it's an absolute necessity that God be human-like, and must create with a humanlike pattern.

Labeling God as 'he' indicates an attempt to humanize the concept of the universe, which has shown 0% evidence of ever assuming a human-like entity, or will to work in a sense that benefits the motives of a human-like lifeform.
How did you come to that conclusion? Well God can't be human-like as humans can't create the Universe. That's what makes him a higher being. He created humans for his own purpose. What part of the earth is humanized other than humans?

djchameleon 05-28-2011 05:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanilla (Post 1061103)
How did you come to that conclusion? Well God can't be human-like as humans can't create the Universe. That's what makes him a higher being. He created humans for his own purpose. What part of the earth is humanized other than humans?
Ska comes to that conclusion because you keep using "he" to describe God as if you are assigning him a gender. Only humans have genders.

Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra 05-28-2011 08:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by djchameleon (Post 1061129)
Ska comes to that conclusion because you keep using "he" to describe God as if you are assigning him a gender. Only humans have genders.
Well, not just gender, but 'he' usually refers to a living organism that adopts a thought pattern of some sort. You don't call a rock, or a cloud 'he'. So 'he' makes the assumption that we're speaking of a conscious singular being. Which, if studies of the earth and universe are correct, is unlikely.

RVCA 05-28-2011 11:23 AM
:banghead:

Scarlett O'Hara 05-28-2011 05:22 PM
Whatever man, God is 'it' then. Happy?

Neapolitan 05-28-2011 05:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra (Post 1061005)
If you look at things in the sense the universe itself is God, and has no particular humanlike aspects, then there's truth to this.
The Universe is created by God, God is not the Universe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra (Post 1061005)
However, from a Western point of view, what makes God different from Existence is a 'motive'. There is no centralized motive to the universe. Therefore, Judeochristian theories of God are unlikely.
What do you mean "motive?" The God in Judeo-Christianity is not physical matter, nor contains physical matter, God is a perfect Being that transcends Space and Time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra (Post 1061005)
The big bang MAY be the birth of existence, or a continuation of a cycle.
The big bang is the being of the physical universe, "birth" and "existence" are used to describe a sentient being, the universe is not a sentient being.

Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra 05-28-2011 05:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan (Post 1061295)
The Universe is created by God, God is not the Universe.
Not to the Hindus.

Quote:
What do you mean "motive?" The God in Judeo-Christianity is not physical matter, nor contains physical matter, God is a perfect Being that transcends Space and Time.
I mean this: God created the universe... why? What is the motive to the universe's creation? If we can assume there's one singular force that's more powerful than everything dictating everything, then what's it's purpose?

Quote:
The big bang is the being of the physical universe, "birth" and "existence" are used to describe a sentient being, the universe is not a sentient being.
On what grounds do you make that assumption?

Neapolitan 05-28-2011 06:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra (Post 1061297)
If we can assume there's one singular force that's more powerful than everything dictating everything, then what's it's purpose?
It's all how you look at it, God is not "dictating" everything - that's your assumption. God created human beings and they have free will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra (Post 1061297)
On what grounds do you make that assumption?
I made the assumption that the big bang is the being of the physical universe based on The Big Bang Theory.

Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra 05-28-2011 06:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan (Post 1061318)
It's all how you look at it, God is not "dictating" everything - that's your assumption. God created human beings and they have free will.
How I look at it, assuming there's a God is an act of redundancy, entirely.

Freebase Dali 05-28-2011 08:24 PM
I know it's 100 percent probable that these types of threads will result in debates about whether there's a god, but this thread is about the Big Bang theory, if I'm not mistaken. We have plenty of "is there a god" threads.
I shouldn't need to do something as drastic as editing the thread title and adding "NO GOD DISCUSSIONS", but I think there are enough people in this forum who like to have scientific discussions without people bringing god into it and starting a never-ending debate about it.

So if we can, please, let's stay on topic.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:36 PM.
Page 5 of 13 « First 34 5 67 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.