What evolution does NOT explain

Lonnie · Apr 8, 2005

"Even your God needs a cause."
"Everything needs a cause"
~ Lucretius

Every thing that HAS a beginning needs a cause. God has no beginning, so He has no cause.

Lucretius · Apr 8, 2005

Lonnie said:
"Even your God needs a cause."
"Everything needs a cause"
~ Lucretius

Every thing that HAS a beginning needs a cause.

Yes. Time is not necessary though.

The Universe does not need time to have begun. The singularity has always existed. Adding God is a violation of Occam's Razor.

Hydra009 · Apr 8, 2005

You believe that "Nothing caused the universe and everything in it" is more logical than, "Something caused the universe and everything in it"?

Well, "God created the universe. God just exists." is a heck of a lot less logical than, "The universe just exists."

Edx · Apr 8, 2005

JohnR7 said:
A snow flake is crystalized h2o and they have a very unique pattern. So if there is no designer than at least there sure is a design. I guess you can say that the natural laws are the designer, and just leave it unknown as to where the natural laws came from.

If you trace how a snowflake forms back far enough it is all from simple chemical reactions.

Just because we dont know exactly the process the universe formed with those "laws" doesnt equal a designer. Its when Douglas Adams likened it to a puddle saying how perfectly it fit, and how perfectly it thought the universe was designed for its existence. I just dont see have reason to think there was a designer.

Ed

Lonnie · Apr 8, 2005

Please define time.

Edx · Apr 8, 2005

Lonnie said:
Please define time.

learn to quote so we know who you are talking to and what you are responding to

Lonnie · Apr 8, 2005

Edx said:
learn to quote so we know who you are talking to and what you are responding to

Sorry, I will try to quote more often.

Lucretius, please define Time.

Lucretius · Apr 8, 2005

Lonnie said:
Sorry, I will try to quote more often.

Lucretius, please define Time.

A nonspatial continuum in which events occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future.

An interval separating two points on this continuum; a duration: a long time since the last war; passed the time reading.

llDayo · Apr 8, 2005

Lonnie said:
God has no beginning, therefore the Law of Causality does apply to God.

Evidence?

llDayo · Apr 8, 2005

ServantofTheOne said:
the Creator is not a thing contained within this universe, and He is not restricted by its laws.

a programmer creates a program that does adds only like numbers, 1+1=2, 2+2=4, etc etc... and the "universe" of this program is limited to this Law. similarly we are created with certain finite laws governing our universe and all things follow certain properties and by certain criterea... one of these properties is cause and effect. every result in this universe follows this property, despite we might not know the cause of certain things that seem spontaneous.

this property cannot be applicable to the Creator just like the restrictive properties of the computer program cannot be applied to the programmer.

So, something doesn't need to be contained in this universe? Why can't some non-intelligent beginning be the start of our universe that exists outside of it?

atechnie · Apr 8, 2005

Lonnie said:
Every thing that HAS a beginning needs a cause. God has no beginning, so He has no cause.

Why not?

-atechnie

JohnR7 · Apr 8, 2005

llDayo said:
Why can't some non-intelligent beginning be the start of our universe that exists outside of it?

Because the universe is an intelligent design.

atechnie · Apr 8, 2005

JohnR7 said:
Because the universe is an intelligent design.

Why does it need to be an intelligent design?

-atechnie

Self Improvement · Apr 8, 2005

atechnie said:
Why does it need to be an intelligent design?

-atechnie

Because he can't understand it, thats why.

CuteAlien · Apr 8, 2005

Lonnie said:
You believe that "Nothing caused the universe and everything in it" is more logical than, "Something caused the universe and everything in it"?

Funny - this is one of the major reasons why i stopped believing in a god.
"Universe+God" is more complicated than just "Universe" -> therefore the Universe without God is more plausible (as long as there are no observable signs of a god).

How can you believe in something that is even bigger than the universe when you even have trouble believing the universe itself could exist?

JohnR7 · Apr 8, 2005

atechnie said:
Why does it need to be an intelligent design?

It is not a question of what it needs to be, it is a question of what it is.

Self Improvement · Apr 8, 2005

JohnR7 said:
It is not a question of what it needs to be, it is a question of what it is.

So you don't know what it is?

atechnie · Apr 8, 2005

JohnR7 said:
It is not a question of what it needs to be, it is a question of what it is.

Suppose we were arguing about whether chocolate tastes fantastic or not. I think it does. You don't think so.

Suppose I reply to you with a "It is not a question of what chocolate needs to be, it is a question of what is."

What would you say to me?

-atechnie

corvus_corax · Apr 8, 2005

JohnR7 said:
It is not a question of what it needs to be, it is a question of what it is.

Unprovable statements of faith are great and all, but you should really qualify them as such when you make such.

JohnR7 · Apr 8, 2005

atechnie said:
What would you say to me?

I would say you lost me somewhere along the way. I think that we are talking about two different things.

What evolution does NOT explain

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

bel esprit

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Naclist Hierophant and Prophet

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency