Creator of God, Big Bang

no more are they an invalid, than when all the world accepted the science that the earth was flat. they only know what they can see of it, and make a guess at what they cannot verify. but when verification comes, should they not accept the reality of it ? yes, impossible I'd agree. see, God is not created, but was. you ask before the big bang? (if you don't, you should) ok there was a greater heaven that God was with (before that?) another heaven. (before that?)you could go on all day. ok God. before that? (a bigger God) before that?go on all day.eventually there is only one thing that was first. nothing is outside of energy, and as long as two energies are, before that is relevant.so you you can OK I GET IT ONE THING WAS FIRST SIGULAR ENERGY AND ALL THINGS CAME FROM IT.and ill go: ok...what is it?so apply a singular energy that created from itself to scientific reason. what do you get?intelligent? not intelligent?
how did it know it was?
chaotic energy?
pure order?
if ordered, that shows intelligence for such a complicated energy.
if chaotic, how could it become ordered forms?Edited by tesla, : removed irrelevent

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

your name would show you are a scientist and a christian. but you argue against creation?an ordered element is order and behaves as it should for its property.elemental tables. ordered elements with natural behaviors for its ordered form.now, almost all of the elements we have forced into creation exist only a short time because they cannot maintain order in that form.therefore, the elements of salt, and water, and even together apparently as one, behave as they should for the condition they exist in the natural "order"if you disagree, then i cant hope for you to understand the science.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

Its true. Actually, I do believe that God created everything, I just think that Intellegent Design is a piece of shit. Wow, just wow. All of that shows just how little you understand.The funniest part is that water is not an element, but is made up of two elements: oxygen and hydrogen. But your general misunderstanding of what an element is and how they behave, and the false assertion that "almost all" of them are unstable, are also pretty funny. I have a Bachelor's of Science from one of the top 10 universities in the United States so I'm sure that I can understand the science.You've just exemplified how little you understand and how much you misunderstand. Actually, I suspect that you are a young person.But anyways, I bid you farewell. I don't feel like wasting anymore time on you.

i meant almost all of the MAN created. then how come you cannot understand the difference between order, and disorder?water is an ordered structure. the elements that exist are ordered structures. if disorder, they would not hold form.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

When people bring up this argument I like to throw out this one possibility of what God is.You could look at God as the eternal existence of everything that ever has existed and ever will exist. all the power, all the matter, all the knowledge, all the possibilities. All put together. When you look at it this way its not that hard to believe. The concept of something coming from nothing is much more impossible than something always having existed. And when you look at God in this manner you get something that is infinite and eternal.If you think about it there must be an infinite amount of matter, time, and space. Anything else doesn't make since, we ask ourself "what is beyond the edge of the universe." Theoretical Scientists call this the theory of a multi verse. That beyond our universe there are an infinite number of other universes. and thus infinite time, space, and matter. And it all must have always existed.I guess you could say God took a big chunk out of himself and made all of the universes. This could also be described as the super "big bang" that created the multi verse.This is just one way of thinking of it and is probably incorrect. but given an infinite "multi verse" anything is possible, and all things that are possible must happen given an infinite amount of time. God may be something that evolved in the multi verse or another universe to a "higher state of being", or a always existing super "thing" that may be sentient. who knows what god really is, but I believe he must exist.btw: Please don't give me any grief over this post. This is one of many ideas about what God could be and there is no way to know for sure. you may however debate over infinite possibility, the theory of a multi verse, and other topics within this post. but please don't bother saying this idea of "what God really is" is bs, because I'm sure there are numerous problems with this, and i don't really want to get into a debate over this. We cant prove what God really is so why bother, and it might be best we never know.Edited by willietdog, : No reason given.

Tesla, in the spirirt of communiction could you please write in sentences and in a more prosaic way?I find I have to read you comments a couple of times to understand what you are trying to say.Is English your mother tongue?

Almost all? So then your statement is meaningless. You are aware of uranium? Remember your last statement - behave as they should for the condition they exist in the natural "order", run it through your mind for a while. Please explain.

Because you are using unconventional definitions. (or just plain don't understand it)By conventional definitions, water (meaning water molecules in the liquid phase) are NOT an ordered structure and it does not hold form. Pour a glass of water out on your desk and tell me the shape of its form. Because liquids have no resistance to shear, they will not hold form. Ice, on the other hand, can hold form as it is a solid, which has an ordered structure.The elements that exist don't have just one specific "ordered structure" (as you put it). Take carbon. If it finds itself in the ordered structure of a hexagonal crystal, then it is in the form of graphite. However, if it finds itself in a face-centered cubic structure, then it is the form of diamond.But again, these are not the definitions that you are using.I think by saying that water is ordered, you are meaning that water molecules have a specific molecular geometry. The are bent molecules, in the shape of a 'v', with an angle of 104.5 degrees. If that angle was off by a little, then ice would not be less dense than water (and would not float) and life on this planet as we know it would be impossible.It seems that you are trying to make an Anthropic argument.The problem is that you don't know what you are talking about. And on top of that, you are acting like you think that you know what you are talking about and are condescending to people who try to correct you.Nobody is going to give you the time of day if you don't respect them and act like you are going to try to learn something.

---

In Message 77 you wrote:

quote:

---

an ordered element is order and behaves as it should for its property.

---

This definition is a tautology. you could have said as much saying that a red item is an item that is red

quote:

---

now, almost all of the elements we have forced into creation exist only a short time because they cannot maintain order in that form.

---

Radioactive elements don't have shorter half-lives because they cannot maintain order. Again, you are misusing (probably misunderstanding) the terms and then trying to act like you know what you are talking about.Basically your argument comes down to that god must exist because things are they way that they are. You haven't really brought anything profound to the table.

good research what i mean by natural order is what was directed by God's design, and things man have created within the natural order (computers and elements) are man made orders. like building a house on sand. mankind can destroy the earth, by mans means. man has the ability to warp and distort the natural order to the will of man.of what is within man's means. (concerning inability to explain)if someone does not know the difference between order and disorder, its impossible to have a true discussion.its like having a political discussion with someone who's only position is: Clinton did good when he was in office, so Hilary is the best candidate.you can argue all day long and ask them why Hilary would make a good president, but you'll discover the individual doesn't know that Hilary is against guns, he is an owner of several guns , and an NRA supporter, and regardless of any evidence you show of Hilary's positions in politics, the individual will still claim because Clinton was in a strong economy, his wife Hilary will be the best candidate of them all.you see, as with in politics, dogmatism can be held on apparent things, as opposed to true things. because many will believe that the apparent is the truth, without any willingness to see if what is "apparent" is real.ghost flies into your room and disappears. for the rest of the person life they claim they know ghosts are real they saw one. what the person didn't know is that it was a mirror trick an 8th grader did just to harass his neighbor with a little magic he was learning.i hope i answered your questions, and was able to explain what i meant about the natural order, since some words have different intents (and sometimes definitions) by context.Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

it holds the form of water. if it was a disordered form, it would not remain as water. it behaves as it should for the condition it exists (it does as water should. a red item is red as you say if you understand that simpler)

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

if only i could larni i actually speak three languages fluently: English, bad English, and worse English.its hard for me to explain concepts that the English language doesn't properly give words to describe.(faith for example, few understand its true definition, so its usage can greatly be distorted in conversation)Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

since you know the elements, let me explain conditions in hopefully a language you understand.lets take the most volatile of man discovered elements.its existence is for a very very short fraction of a second.but under the proper condition, of continual bombardment by forces that would mirror how we discovered it, it would exist continually. perhaps in the center of a red giant.but outside the condition it needs to exist, it cannot exist.an analogy is building a fire in water. fire can exist underwater with a continued force that is protected from the water, but if you try to take say, wood, and a match and build a fire inside water, it is impossible. not the right conditions.so also, is the existence of this universe and everything in it, dependant on the condition that sustains it. this condition is existence itself (God) and without that..nothing is.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

so you ARE making an Anthropic Argument? Here is the wiki page on the criticisms of the Anthropic Principle.Enjoy. I also want to point out, again, that while I don't have a problem with you defining your god in this way (as the sum of existence in the condition that everything is dependent on the condition that sustains it), but when you define god like this, you are no longer talkin about the Christian God, who has been anthropomorphized throughout the Bible.

---

Science fails to recognize the single most potent element of human existence.
Letting the reigns go to the unfolding is faith, faith, faith, faith.
Science has failed our world.
Science has failed our Mother Earth.
-System of a Down, "Science"He who makes a beast out of himself, gets rid of the pain of being a man.
-Avenged Sevenfold, "Bat Country"

Luke 4:4
mark 13:31
mark 12:271 Corinthians 8:5for though there be that are called gods. whether in heaven or in earth (as there be gods many, and lords many)
but to us there is but one God, the father of whom are all things, and we by him.Mathew 23:19i fail to understand why you don't see that without God nothing has been, nor will be at the end.it is true that man has separated themselves from God, and God gave us medicine to eat and drink, but God did not leave anyone or anything, but sustains it til the time appointed that only that which is of him will be retained.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

If you're going to quote the Bible, then at least QUOTE THE BIBLE....

quote:

---

Luke 4:4

​

4And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

​

mark 13:31

​

31Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.

​

mark 12:27

​

27He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

​

1 Corinthians 8:5

​

5For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

​

Mathew 23:19

​

19Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?

---

What do any of those passages have anything to do with our discussion? What makes you think that I don't see that? So what?All this has nothing to do with the failure of your argument.

---

I take god on faith, as he desires it. Its stupid to try to prove that god exists. Plus, if you did, then you wouldn't have faith anymore.ID is a piece of shit. That's what your going to see me arguing. It is bad science and even worse theology.