bouzane said:
Roma said:
bouzane said:
"so with that thought in mind why is it so hard to believe that we are created by the creator? "
I believe what the current evidence supports. I do not believe in God for the same reason I do not believe in unicorns, leprechauns or ghosts. Additionally, God is not necessary to explain anything. In fact, explaining the origin of God complicates things and Occam's razor tells us that the simplest explanation is typically the correct one.
The question should not be "why is it so hard to believe that we are created by the creator" but why is it so hard to believe that there is no such creator? |
well because there is nothing that can come out of nothing. isn't that what science says? did the universe create itself? can a women give birth to herself? of course not because that means she has to exist to be able to give birth to herself which in itself is not possible.
what kind of evidence would convince you of a creator?
|
Actually, out of the void it is possible to create both an equal part matter/energy and anti-matter/energy. From zero arises both one and negative one. If you simply combine all of the matter/energy and anti-matter/energy all of it would cease to exist along with the distortions in the space-time continuum that give rise to gravity and time. All of reality is simply like a series of waves on a pond with matter/energy as the crests and anti-matter/energy as the troughs). The origin of this distortion is still a mystery but a magic, omnipotent creator is such an absurd, inelegant explanation that I would never entertain the prospect without hard evidence. What kind of evidence would I require? Anything that is quantifiable and absolute and nothing that is ambiguous and ill-defined.
|
What, is then, the catalyst of such reactions? IE:0 -> -1+1
