12-28-2005
| #11 (permalink) | |
 Creating | Re: where and when was God formed? The problem with understanding God, is that God can only be explained in terms of what humans can understand. As an analogy, if one was giving a presentation about String Theory to a group of elementary students, who are just learning to add and subtract, the best one could do, without losing the audience, would be to overview the model in simply terms using analogies that the students are able to understand. This presentation could only reflect simple ideas about string theory but could not go into the details needed to prove the value of the theory. It is very likely, that something/someone as omnipotent as God can not be exhautively defined to a human audience without losing the audience. Simple analogies to human behavior, personality and appearance gets the gist across. But too many believers assume that the gist is all the truth. Much of this gist was written for the ancient mind before modern science. In many religions, it is believed that upon death, the mortal body remains and decays but the eternal soul goes to heaven and eternity. Personally, I do not see why the science community has a big problem with this. For example, science has posulated other dimensions within space/time. They have also postulated energy based references (leave the matter behind) as well as particles that appear to go faster than the speed of light and might disappear before they exist. These theories combined almost appear to say the same thing the ancients said about death, thousands of years ago. In the beginning the spirit of God was brooding over the deep. This seems to indicate an empty universe. Let there be light. Energy appears within the empty universe. It also implies the spirit of God being different than energy, something that lasts eternity outside of space and time. Maybe physics can help build a bridge. One of the primary tenents of religion is faith. We start with simple understanding and with faith are able to perceive that which is difficult to put into words. Maybe the intution from faith, with the humanistic starting point, gives one a perception toward more advanced understanding. This is true in science. Last edited by HydrogenBond; 12-28-2005 at 03:11 PM. | |
 | ||
|
12-31-2005
| #13 (permalink) | ||
 Doing the Impossible    | Re: where and when was God formed? Quote:
We are going to look together at the universe through the eyes of a objective observer. This is only an intellectual exercise. Please do not look at it as a statement of facts that cannot be proven. I am looking for plausablility only. Here we go... A group of scientists are seeking to perform a series of experiments. They are trying to recreate in the laboratory the creation of life on earth. They find a suitable planet, but it needs modifications to apply the experiment. It is a rocky, molten, barren world. None of the most needed elements of life can exist there. The only correct thing is the distance from the central star. They decide that the planet's orbit and spin are not entirely correct for the experiment. In the far reaches of the system they gently nudge a large body. It is not a great force, just very well calculated. As it falls into the grip of the central star's gravity it begins to accelerate inward toward its target. When it collides with the planet there is a mighty collision. The planet's axis is tilted, and its speed of rotation altered as a large mass is separated from it that becomes the moon. This will be needed to provide tides to the oceans - preventing them from becoming too static. There is no water on the planet, so they go out to the outermost reaches of the systm and find frozen water and minerals under the slightest influence of the sun. With careful calculation they gently nudge these peices so they will collide with the planet far to the center, each providing a supply of water and other rare elements and minerals randomly across the surface of the world. Eventually enough water, nitrogen and oxygen is sent to the surface to create liquid oceans and atmosphere critical for the experiment. There is great debate among the otherwise patient scientists about how long to wait to see if life begins "on its own" or if they should plant some of the required building blocks on the planet that now has a young and very energetic atmosphere. Eventually there is evidence of basic life. Observations continue to see how evolution progresses. And debate among the scientists rages over how long to let evolution happen "of its own accord" When life eventually organizes into something that can understand the principles of the scientists, the beings on the planet develop the notion of a "God: Creator of the Universe". Their notion of a God that created the universe is wrong, but do they not have a creator "God" in the form of the scientists? They would not exist without them, yet the scientists are not supernatural. Bill Last edited by TheBigDog; 12-31-2005 at 02:26 PM. | ||
| | |||
|
01-01-2006
| #15 (permalink) | ||
 Resident Bright | Re: where and when was God formed? Quote:
IT seems to me that gravity is the force that opperates (Rules) on the large scale. So, IT would be likely the IT, gravity, is He. Recall the spirit of gravity, from Thus Spoke Zarathustra. BUT, and that's a Big But, gravity, on the small scale seems irrelevant. Now, If He is opperational on the large scale, why has He abandonned, say us, on the small. Isn't He supposed to be omnipresent? Actually gravity is almost everywhere so I'm barking up the wrong tree. Food for thought. As far as where and when IT was formed. If He is Gravity, or some other Force, Power, or what have you, then He should always have been here. Those who know my mind state, know that Coldcreation is inclined, i.e., has tendencies to believe that the universe is infinite in all directions, both spatially and temporally. Meaning: the universe was not created at any given time or place, IT has, in effect, always been. This apriori provides glimps of hope for those illuminated, like Her Questor, or HydrogenB. Had the universe began at t = 0, contrary to what writes Sir Hawking et al, there may have been a creator, but HE was not always present. True no one knows what happened before t = 0, but it is thought that there was no space and no time, no gravity or other force, power or HE. The Pope in 1952 then erroneously accepted the bb theory as supporting St Augustines Fiat Lux, when the only tenable hypothesis for HIS existence is in an eternal universe. Why because He too is thought to be eternal. I think that one (the universe) cannot Be without the other (IT). cc PS. If no one responds to what I just wrote, that's ok, I'm getting used to IT. ---------------- Coldcreation | ||
| | |||
|
01-01-2006
| #16 (permalink) | ||
| Doing the Impossible | Re: where and when was God formed? Quote:
Bill | ||
| | |||
|
01-01-2006
| #17 (permalink) | ||
| Doing the Impossible | Re: where and when was God formed? Quote:
Is mass the cause of gravity, with gravity being the effect of mass? Or does gravity exist independent of mass? Bill | ||
| | |||
|
01-01-2006
| #18 (permalink) | ||
| Resident Bright | Re: where and when was God formed? Quote:
My personal view on He has been made clear in other threads. Here it is again for those who missed it: Man created god, not the other way around. That answers, albeit indirectly, the question of this thread: Where and when was God formed? When: He was formed probably when primitive homonid bipeds tried to expain things like a mango falls (instead of floating away) from a tree. Or why bananas grew from a seed turned green, then yellow, then brown, then withered away to nothing. Where: That could have been in Africa (I have no reason to doubt the "out-of-Africa-theory.") Coldcreation Coldcreation ---------------- Coldcreation | ||
| | |||
|
01-02-2006
| #19 (permalink) | |
 Creating | Re: where and when was God formed? CC, here again is shown the inability of many to separate the idea of a man made concept of a creator from the possible existence of a supreme being. why is it so difficult to imagine the universe without man or the earth. without that ability all these arguments fall back on the same old refrain. ''God is a creation of man's mind'' that is true, but in the absence of man, the universe would still exist. the question them becomes how was the universe itself created. that is the question to be argued. whatever event caused the universe to be or if it was always here, something created or caused to happen at different time periods, stellar formation and death, fission and fusion, formation of elements and all the other physical forces and laws that are apparent. the basic question is, what do you believe caused this to happen? you believe in cold creation. what do you think initiated this process, and if it is not still occurring, why not? | |
| | ||
|
01-03-2006
| #20 (permalink) | ||
| Resident Bright | Re: where and when was God formed? Quote:
You do raise interesting points, but no one ever said it was difficult to imagine the universe without man or the earth. It is not difficult at all. In that case there would be no such thing as god. The universe evolves without something supreme, supernatural, superior, divine, metaphysical. There simply is no need to introduce an outside (or even inside) force other than those that are already known (the four forces of nature). An infinite universe is not created at any given time. Certainly, chemical creation, or fusion does occur. It is doubtful that galaxies have always existed, as postulated in the quasi-steady state cosmology model. Why, to the ladder, is beyond the scope of this thread. So too is the concept of the Coldcreation theory. (For that, and hence, for the answer to your last four questions above, see the thread titled Material Creation. There, you will note that no matter how far back in time you wish to consider, the universe will always contain, zero point fluctuations of zero point (or ground state) energy, ZPF, ZPE, and to that, you can include zero point gravitation, ZPGŠ. The universe could never have been at any time during its history a perfectly flat, isotropic, homogenous, stable equilibrium state. That state would violate GR, QM and thermodynamics.) It is via ZPF and interactions of the irreducible ZPE that evolution was inevitable, without a creator. Had there been no physical explanation for evolution (in the large-scale sense of the term, not solely Darwinian), the creator idea would have still been untenable. As there simply is no way to explain IT by physical means. I disagree with someone above that says we have a limited capability of conceptualizing, visualizing or imagining all possible histories of the universe. This unlimited imagination, ironically, is what permits us to invent concepts such as He, and such as evolution in accord with natural laws. The only problem is then to disentangle, distinguish between those histories that are possible and those that are not (or at least very unlikely), i.e., that are pure machination. Coldcreation ---------------- Coldcreation | ||
| | |||
