quote:
Time is not established by MY definition, but by science's. No where in science (true science) will you ever find anyone saying that natural laws are outside of time.
You stated that God is something that exists outside time. This establishes a state of being outside our universe.
Now, I did not mean to imply that the natural laws of our universe exist outside our universe... only that whatever there was before our universe came into being would have natural laws of its own, and that those natural laws could conceivably allow for the formation of our universe.
quote:
What you want me to do is take a can opener and peel back the heavens and show you an old man with long gray beard sitting on a throw with lightning in his hand. I can't do that.
No. What I want you to do is address my earlier point:
Dan writes:
I'm open to the idea of an outside variable having a hand in the origin of our universe. But if you'd like to include one, please tell me:
1) What that variable is. (Not what it is named.)
2) Specifically, what effect that variable had on the origin of the universe.
As always, I am assuming only that what we see is here. You are the one trying to establish an outside influence.
quote:
Just assume for a minute that you do believe in God. He exists. How would he communicate with his creation. He could just come a talk with him. And He did. But because of man's sinfulness and God's Holiness he can't look upon sin. So he chose to have a written Word, a "letter to man kind" so to speak. No you can either have faith to believe His Word, or have faith not to.
Assumptions:
1) God exists
2) God can talk with his creation.
3) God did talk with his creation.
4) Man is sinful.
5) God is holy.
6) God's holiness prevents him from associating with sinful beings.
7) God delivered his message in another manner.
So there's seven prerequisites to even begin to wind our way through this one. And I have no idea how any of these assumptions support your final point:
quote:
You can have faith that God DOES exist. Or you can have faith that God does NOT exist. Either way you need faith.
Which is patently untrue. I don't have faith in God one way or the other. I'm just looking at what I see. If you want to tell me there's more than what I see, go nuts. But don't expect me to go investing a whole lot of stock in it without something to back it up.
As always, my only assumption, the only thing in which I have faith, (as far as this conversation is concerned) is that what I see in front of me really exists. Apart from that, if you want to begin telling me that I should even consider the existence or non-existence of God, please begin by telling me what God is? What am I considering?
Where is the faith in looking at my desk and computer, and seeing only my desk and computer? I don't see a rabid mongoose in a samurai outfit, and it takes no faith to work under the assumption that there's not one there.
quote:
Let's try an experiment:
Let's try a more appropriate one.
Take a deck of 52 cards. Shuffle it. Deal five cards. See if you get a royal straight flush. If you don't, repeat the process until you do. See how many tries it takes to get a royal straight flush.
By the time (if ever) you get one, it would seem pretty damn improbable, huh?
Now, try the same experiment, but instead of dealing for a royal straight flush, deal for a two of clubs, a queen of hearts, an ace of hearts, a ten of diamonds, and a six of diamonds.
See how different the odds are.
Here's a hint: they're exactly the same. A royal straight flush is simply a happier outcome, which would prompt anyone sitting on that hand to happily yell, "holy crap! What are the odds?" while ignoring that the odds are exactly the same as any other specific hand.
Your brick factory metaphor receives the same response.
quote:
It was concluded at these meetings that there was still NO KNOWN LAW OF NATURE, NO KNOWN PROCESS, AND NO KNOWN SEQUENCE OF EVENTS WHICH CAN CAUSE INFORMATION TO ORIGINATE BY ITSELF IN MATTER.
I refer you to the many information threads on this forum.
In the meantime, I will point out that you are once again using "God" as a synonym for "I don't know".
They are not the same concept.
quote:
Life in all it's complexities is simply too complicated and intracate to have originated apart from God.
So now complexity is what demands a creator? God, as our creator, would have to be far more complex than we are. So once again, we're moving the goalposts. Isn't it far more likely that the less complex humans had no creator than it is that the more complex God had no creator?
"Perhaps you should take your furs and your literal interpretations to the other side of the river."
-Anya
™ Version 4.2
