26
   

Scientific explanations for creation

 
 
Reply Wed 20 Nov, 2013 12:21 pm
How the first few moments of God were?
Imagine, you ever were alone in your home and something you did all by your self....we are talking about the omnipotent,omniscient,ever pervading, supreme power...from entity and interaction model that we can make like Codd rules, there must be some relationship between the God and the universe like at least an umbilical cord, and it means, the supreme lord must himself sacrificed to become this universe, so, this material universe in it self is God
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 26 • Views: 12,178 • Replies: 254

 
jespah
 
  4  
Reply Wed 20 Nov, 2013 12:26 pm
@at kishore,
There are no scientific explanations for God, creationism and the like. I say this as a religious person, I might add.

The two are not the same. Don't try to marry them together.
tsarstepan
 
  3  
Reply Wed 20 Nov, 2013 01:28 pm
@jespah,
jespah wrote:

Don't try to marry them together.

They would have some ugly children together. Sad
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  2  
Reply Wed 20 Nov, 2013 01:52 pm
@at kishore,
Did you hear about the dyslexic megalomaniac who sold his soul to Santa ?
Lordyaswas
 
  3  
Reply Wed 20 Nov, 2013 02:32 pm
@fresco,
Or the dyslexic sex addict, who filled his pockets with money and condoms, and headed for the nearest warehouse.
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Nov, 2013 02:42 pm
@at kishore,
Indeed Kish the pantheist agrees most wholeheartedly, the conventional dualistic notion being so rife with contradiction and paradox. Incompetently reducing it to everyday terms I might say Her interests are varied, Her motives including a curiosity as just how it all would turn out

…whereupon we can guess She was somewhat disappointed
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  6  
Reply Wed 20 Nov, 2013 03:46 pm
Scientific explanation . . . Ah-hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha . . . whoooo . . . ya can't beat this place for free entertainment.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  3  
Reply Wed 20 Nov, 2013 05:31 pm
@at kishore,
at kishore wrote:
How the first few moments of God were?

If science can explain it then it won't be "God" anymore, it'll just be a natural phenomena of some kind. The traditional definition of "God" assumes that it is Supernatural, and Science doesn't deal with the Supernatural, it only deals with explaining nature.
Jensi
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 01:39 pm
@at kishore,
Basically you follow his rules without any proof if his existence and you get to live with him in heaven and if you don't you get infinite torture ....
rosborne979
 
  4  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 02:05 pm
@Jensi,
Jensi wrote:
Basically you follow his rules without any proof if his existence and you get to live with him in heaven and if you don't you get infinite torture ....

That about sums it up. The greatest scam in history. Smile
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 02:14 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
If science can explain it then it won't be "God" anymore, it'll just be a natural phenomena of some kind.
But Ros what if She too is a natural phenom
rosborne979
 
  2  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 02:52 pm
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:
But Ros what if She too is a natural phenom

If it's a natural phenomena, then it isn't a God. Either that, or your definition of "God" isn't the traditional one (a Supernatural entity).
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 03:20 pm
@rosborne979,
rosborne979 wrote:
If science can explain it then it won't be "God" anymore. . .
I would take issue with that.
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 03:50 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

rosborne979 wrote:
If science can explain it then it won't be "God" anymore. . .
I would take issue with that.

Go for it.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 03:51 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

rosborne979 wrote:
If science can explain it then it won't be "God" anymore. . .
I would take issue with that.


On what grounds? I think rosborne is dead-on.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 03:51 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

rosborne979 wrote:
If science can explain it then it won't be "God" anymore. . .
I would take issue with that.


On what grounds? I think rosborne is dead-on.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 04:03 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
If, indeed, there is a creator, He would be the source of all that we call natural law. In the end, all things would be explained.
rosborne979
 
  2  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 04:28 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:
If, indeed, there is a creator, He would be the source of all that we call natural law. In the end, all things would be explained.

That's a meaningless answer Neo. What you just said is synonymous with: "If indeed there is magic, it would be the source of nature. And all things would be explained by that."

Which doesn't explain anything. And beyond that it doesn't address the statement to which you took issue.

Please try again. I would be truly interested if you could really come up with a rational perspective in which a "God" could be understood by science.
dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 05:11 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
I would be truly interested if you could really come up with a rational perspective in which a "God" could be understood by science.
Recent discoveries Ros that the various constants might be interdependent suggests that things are the way they are not because She made them so but because that's the way they have to be. Although I doubt Science will come to understand Her, It, completely, it will become increasingly apparent that Her existence or non- is more a semantic than "scientific" matter

"Creation" is dubious, owing to so much paradox and contradiction. Meanwhile it seem pretty safe to assume She, It, was always around in one form or another
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Nov, 2013 06:24 pm
@rosborne979,
I can't even begin to comprehend what sort of cockamamie concept of god/Santa must have been drilled into your mind while you were growing up; but
I grieve for you.

If you are unable to understand that natural law would be a necessary prerogative of a creator, I can't answer further except to point out I said necessary, not sufficient. That's the sum of my argument in this thread.
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Scientific explanations for creation
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/19/2021 at 09:23:56