LOL great quote sieanr. "Technology", indeed.

Cadence said: God is a space-filler until science solves everything.

 Actually that would be impossible. Assuming God is God (to logically disprove something one would have to assume that this "something" is true) then Science is the study, understanding, and experimentation of the Natural Laws of the Universe and God's creative omnipotence. Basically this means that Science can only explain what God has created and how these created things function. Science cannot disprove God and i don't understand how some people think it can. 

 

It would be bad if everyone was scared to hell by a god just standing their to be good because then everyone would be the same. Freewill and Freedom is the greatest gift we have. It lets us live our lives as ourselves, so that we are all different intersting people, instead of being billions of nearly identical clones who just look different.

This would be espiecally true if God is truley omnipotent. I like to think he's not because I don't want to think someone is always looking at me when i'm going to the bathroom, and other private moments as such.

At the end of the day, if there is an all powerful god he gives us a chance to go out and live on our own and be our own people. (Well except for the evangelists apparently.)

Sure you can say if he's omnipotent "He knows some of us are going to fail and is an ass."

But haven't you ever let your friends do something you know they shouldn't just because it's their choice? You spoke your few words, then let them be.

Morality at gunpoint is no morality at all. Being good due to fear of damnation and desire for paradise is not morality. It's like doing your chores just so your parents don't beat you, or getting good grades because your grandma will give you $5 per A. It's not moral. Morality does not come from religion. It comes from socialization.

And if there was a G-d, how could Madden be the best-selling game each year, while games like Katamari slip under the radar?

Rubang B said: Morality at gunpoint is no morality at all. Being good due to fear of damnation and desire for paradise is not morality. It's like doing your chores just so your parents don't beat you, or getting good grades because your grandma will give you $5 per A. It's not moral. Morality does not come from religion. It comes from socialization. And if there was a G-d, how could Madden be the best-selling game each year, while games like Katamari slip under the radar?

Oddly, that was my point too.  Hence why god wouldn't just go "Hey i'm god. Do what I say." 

As for Madden.  You have to keep in mind that we live in a bell curve universe.

chriscox1121 said: God has already proved his existence to mankind....and none will be without excuse. (Romans 1:20) What a waste of your life trying to disprove God. When people go around saying there is no God...sometimes I just laugh. How stupid can mankind be. Especially with all of the prophecies of the Bible being fufilled.

I dont know if your post was meant to be sarcastic or not.

If it was meant to be sarcastic then i have to say good post.

If it was meant to be literal, then you lead a very very poor argument. Anyone can write down in a book (eg the bible) that god has proven himself. Your other point, in my eyes im not trying to disprove anything, in my mind you are the one that is having trouble proving "god". Also, what "prophecies"? Do you mean Jesus? The Bible was written after Jesus was around, giving the authors the right to write whatever they wanted, such as saying that jesus was a prophecy fufilled.

 

rickthestick2 said: Cadence said: God is a space-filler until science solves everything. Actually that would be impossible. Assuming God is God (to logically disprove something one would have to assume that this "something" is true) then Science is the study, understanding, and experimentation of the Natural Laws of the Universe and God's creative omnipotence. Basically this means that Science can only explain what God has created and how these created things function. Science cannot disprove God and i don't understand how some people think it can.

 Ok you are being a bit anal with your precision here.  The OP merely stated that God, defined as an omnipotent being that is capable of some physically impossible tasks such as knowing everything about the universe, including people's thoughts and wishes, etc, is largely a God of the gaps.  Ie that which one does not understand get's attributed to a creator because it is natural to make that assumption given the way people think and how they interact with the world and create things.

 

Science can show that this type of god is so unlikely to exist by uncovering explainations for more and more of the mysteries that were once thought of as "proof" for god becuase they were thought to be unexplainable otherwise. 

Your post has no logical relevance to it at all really.  You cannot disprove the existence of unicorns 100% or any other creature of fantasy.   There is no evidence that they ever existed, yet that could just mean we missed something somewhere.  So what?  The lack of evidence against is not evidence for, and in the case of god, there is no evidence for its existence, and a great deal of evidence showing that the claims of all religions are either scientifically invalid.  More importantly, social and biological sciences have given us a lot of evidence that leads us to conclude that religion is a natural phenomenon.  Or in short, religion is a product of man and anything that comes out of it certainly is not a proof of god.

Even if God is defined as the cause for the existence of the universe and simply left at that, ie no intervention, no sacrificing himself to himself or any of that, then it is possible that there will be a theory that explains this too.  Neil Turok ( not to be confused with the dinisaur hunter) just gave a talk at my school and outlined a series of experiments that could find evidence to test his theory about the "creation" of the universe.   It's just a neat idea and someday it may be possible to model the creation of our universe and test it with astronomical observations. I guess though the "logic" would then be that even with strong evidence for something, you still can't prove it 100%, therefore there is a god.  Or God created the Multiverse and created the mechanisms in it whch led to the creation of our universe and to the creation of the earth and then created man and decide to eavesdrop on everyone's thoughts for the last few millions of years ( 6000 if you are a "true" christian)  Am I correct in this assumption?

Dinzy said: rickthestick2 said: Cadence said: God is a space-filler until science solves everything. Actually that would be impossible. Assuming God is God (to logically disprove something one would have to assume that this "something" is true) then Science is the study, understanding, and experimentation of the Natural Laws of the Universe and God's creative omnipotence. Basically this means that Science can only explain what God has created and how these created things function. Science cannot disprove God and i don't understand how some people think it can.   Ok you are being a bit anal with your precision here. The OP merely stated that God, defined as an omnipotent being that is capable of some physically impossible tasks such as knowing everything about the universe, including people's thoughts and wishes, etc, is largely a God of the gaps. Ie that which one does not understand get's attributed to a creator because it is natural to make that assumption given the way people think and how they interact with the world and create things.   Science can show that this type of god is so unlikely to exist by uncovering explainations for more and more of the mysteries that were once thought of as "proof" for god becuase they were thought to be unexplainable otherwise. Your post has no logical relevance to it at all really. You cannot disprove the existence of unicorns 100% or any other creature of fantasy. There is no evidence that they ever existed, yet that could just mean we missed something somewhere. So what? The lack of evidence against is not evidence for, and in the case of god, there is no evidence for its existence, and a great deal of evidence showing that the claims of all religions are either scientifically invalid. More importantly, social and biological sciences have given us a lot of evidence that leads us to conclude that religion is a natural phenomenon. Or in short, religion is a product of man and anything that comes out of it certainly is not a proof of god. Even if God is defined as the cause for the existence of the universe and simply left at that, ie no intervention, no sacrificing himself to himself or any of that, then it is possible that there will be a theory that explains this too. Neil Turok ( not to be confused with the dinisaur hunter) just gave a talk at my school and outlined a series of experiments that could find evidence to test his theory about the "creation" of the universe. It's just a neat idea and someday it may be possible to model the creation of our universe and test it with astronomical observations. I guess though the "logic" would then be that even with strong evidence for something, you still can't prove it 100%, therefore there is a god. Or God created the Multiverse and created the mechanisms in it whch led to the creation of our universe and to the creation of the earth and then created man and decide to eavesdrop on everyone's thoughts for the last few millions of years ( 6000 if you are a "true" christian) Am I correct in this assumption?

Good post, Dinzy, but there are some problems. 

First, the unicorn example is crap.  Unicorns (as I understand the myth, and maybe I'm wrong) would have to actually physically exist in this world.  Same for Bigfoot, dragons, etc.  So in that case, every place we can show that they don't exist is actually a small bit of evidence that they don't exist ANYWHERE on this planet. 

But God is different.  He doesn't have to have physical, detectable presence on Earth.  In fact, God (if He exists) can do stuff and erase all evidence of His actions.  Maybe there WERE unicorns, but God, in His Old Testament phase (i.e. pissy, vengeful, etc.), decided to wipe them off the face of the planet ALONG WITH ALL TRACES OF THEIR EXISTENCE.  (Or maybe they just missed the boat. )

I'm not trying at all to argue that God does exist, but even rock solid proof that humans have a mental need for Big Brother would be in no way proof of God's nonexistence.  After all, maybe He just wanted to give religion a bitsy little advantage? 

As for the creation of the universe, I didn't think anyone had come up with a solution for the "cause before causality" problem.  I mean, whatever you find out there isn't going to be evidence that God DIDN'T do it, it's just going to be evidence of what method He chose to use if He does exist. 

Finally, I don't know why you seem to think that someone can't believe that Genesis is not meant to be seen as a literal, historical account of the creation of the planet and everything on it in 144 hours and still be a "true" Christian.  If you really think that, then you have a belief in common with fundamentalists. 

Yes there is a God. Street Fighter IV got announced yesterday. If that isn't a miracle, I don't know what is

Slightly back to the red giant star thing, when a star exhausts it's supply of Hydrogen, it begins fusing helium. That requires a higher temperature, so the sun expands, but since it becomes so large, the outer shell turns red/orange (in any case, darker) due to the distance between it and the core, because the heat dissipates slightly before it reaches that far. In larger stars, after the Helium is all fused, it will switch to fusing Carbon, then Neon, then Oxygen, then Silicon, on down to Iron. Any elements heavier than that are produced by explosion of a supernova.

On a side note, no elements existed aside from hydrogen and helium in the early universe, aside from tiny trace amounts of Deuterium, Lithium, and Beryllium. Everything else has been fused together by a star sometime in the last 14-15 billion years.

For further information I would recommend looking up Stellar Nucleosynthesis. Also Big Bang Nucleosynthesis.