Prove that Christian God is the Creator and...

[invictus1967]

There is absolutely no evidence at all to support any theory of the “Big Bang” happening over and over again.

 

That is something people uncomfortable with the idea of a Creator came up with. They didn’t like the notion of the universe having a beginning and thus a Beginner.

 

In fact, if you really research it, you will not find much in the way references for such a theory. You will find some webpages here and there, but nothing in the way of reputable science with documented evidence.

 

There is no evidence to support any concept of an eternal universe or a process where the “Big Bang” happens repeatedly.

 

All the evidence points to one (1) Big Bang.

[Vigile]

Deleted. I realized I had read the article I was replying to incorrectly after I posted.

[Guest Rufus]

Was just wondering why the "God has always existed" arguement was not valid? I assume it has already in some way been proved to be invalid and was wondering if someone could point me to the thread.

 

I'm also thinking the way to 'prove' the Christian God is the creator is to 'prove' the Bible to be factual. If 'proof' for the Bibles factuality can be 'proved' by scientific/historical methods then it would suggest (though not actually prove) that what it says is true.

[Guest Rufus]

Er, right, having read the whole thread I didn't see where you cleared it up, if you cank to the bit that would be cool, if not don't worry. I am confused though, the title to this thread is "Prove that Christian God is the Creator and..., Who created Him?????" Well wouldn't you need to look at the source text that claims He both exists and that He created everything? To prove the source text would suggest He both exists and created everything.

[Ouroboros]

No evidence that Christian God is the god either.  Assuming you are correct, for the sake of argument, now prove that the Christian God is the creator.

Uhuh! Now you're pulling Invictus into this thread too...

 

His argument is that because there is not evidence of a NoGod, that is in fact the evidence of a God. Inversed argument. Because we don't know how Big Bang started, it can only be God doing it. That's his argument. Based on time ripples and background radiation, pointing to a higher consciousness of design and purpose. Basically, things are unexplained, therefore God is the best explanation.

[Amanda]

Relative means that something is relative to everything else.

---------------------------------------------

Time exists, but it's not an absolute.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

HanSolo, could we then consider this? Everything springs forth from a point of origin? ...Big Bang? Does matter and light emit from this point of origin... therefore time, space, matter and all things? Would that make everything ultimately relative to that original point?

 

Is our perception based on our position, relative to our speed, the speed of light, and the speed of everything around us? Is our awareness based on the revelations exposed to us by the evidence through the light's illuminating force? If I were to leave this chair, go much faster than the speed of light, travel around the world, could I come back here and see myself just turning on the computer instead of typing? Would that then make time an illusion to my consciousness, revealed by the timing of light's illumination qualities?

 

Therefore, if time is an illusion based on the perceptive qualities of my conscious awareness... time being an illusion... then would that also make speed an illusion also, as speed can not be defined without time?

 

Matter is light, vibrations, and electromagnetic force, is that right? Is light only "something" that can appear through visual receptors based on the perception of an illusion? Vibration implies motion of particles, can movement be defined without speed, and speed without light? Isn't the electromagnetic force what brings these two illusions into manifestation?

 

Could it be that the point of origin is the manifestation of things not concretely here? If so, would that make the necessity of some sort of 'spirituality' necessary to define science, and perhaps science necessary to define spirituality?

[Amanda]

That still doesn't prove that the Christian God is "the creator" if there is one. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are many similiarities in almost all world religions.  Miracles can't be the judge because "miracles" happen to people of all races, religions, etc. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Thankful... The 'spirituality' of Chrisianity or the 'religion'? I think you know my sentiments on that one. Please consider that the "Book" says that ALL things were made by God and for God. If all things came out of 'Him" and therefore ALL things are parts of 'Him'... then... could God be the creator and created?

[Ouroboros]

HanSolo, could we then consider this? Everything springs forth from a point of origin? ...Big Bang? Does matter and light emit from this point of origin... therefore time, space, matter and all things? Would that make everything ultimately relative to that original point?

I like your thinking. You’re using your noodles.

 

In a sense it was emitted from one point, but light is the result of forces of nuclear processes, so light is spread out from the stars too. It’s like an ocean of light rays going cross the universe in all directions. The start systems and galaxies are moving away from one original point of origin. It’s in the center of the universe and that’s where big bang supposedly happened.

 

Is our perception based on our position, relative to our speed, the speed of light, and the speed of everything around us? Is our awareness based on the revelations exposed to us by the evidence through the light's illuminating force? If I were to leave this chair, go much faster than the speed of light, travel around the world, could I come back here and see myself just turning on the computer instead of typing? Would that then make time an illusion to my consciousness, revealed by the timing of light's illumination qualities?

Yes. Time and space is an illusion.

 

Consider that you never really see things, i.e. when you see a painting, you don’t see the painting, and you only see the light reflected on the painting then hitting your retina. You only see a reflection of the painting. And secondly, the light beam traveled (even though very short time), so what you see is the past and not the current painting. So space and time is very delusive.

 

If we were to be able to think in the speed of light, we would go crazy. The only reason we can understand time, is that our brain slices perception in segments. Anything that happens within about 0.1-0.2 seconds is recorded as a concurrent event in the brain. While our thought and reasoning goes with an extreme speed in our mind. Our thought process internally is much faster than that, we think hundreds of words a second, but I could be wrong about that number.

 

Therefore, if time is an illusion based on the perceptive qualities of my conscious awareness... time being an illusion... then would that also make speed an illusion also, as speed can not be defined without time?

Right.

 

Matter is light, vibrations, and electromagnetic force, is that right? Is light only "something" that can appear through visual receptors based on the perception of an illusion? Vibration implies motion of particles, can movement be defined without speed, and speed without light? Isn't the electromagnetic force what brings these two illusions into manifestation?

Matter is energy, light is energy, so they are siblings in the force of nature.

 

Could it be that the point of origin is the manifestation of things not concretely here? If so, would that make the necessity of some sort of 'spirituality' necessary to define science, and perhaps science necessary to define spirituality?

The definition if spirituality requires a little bit more than just reasoning in the scientific field. What’s interesting is that anything that we today would call supernatural, can in the future be called natural, after we have discovered the explanations to it. I believe some people need some form of spirituality, but I don’t believe that it means that “spirits” have to exist.

[Ouroboros]

But sweety, that's only if you believe "the" book, which, I don't.  You can't prove the biblegod is the creator, if one exists.  Why do you not see that?  Other religions say that their creator(s) is/are "the" creator(s).  Their religous texts claim to be THE TRUTH AND THE WAY.  So why are you clinging to Christianity as the only truth?????  And why are you trying to get me to accept Christianity, why?

I think Amanda is trying to find her own faith. She's in the search and asks questions in a way that can misinterpreted as "proselytizing". But I don’t think she is. She’s just trying to understand.

 

And I agree with you Thankful, the ball is back to if there is anything divine in this universe, one single book would not be able to give us the correct context or the full answer to this divine.

 

Amanda, faith should come from within, and not from a book or from a preacher. Your faith should be owned by you and by you only. So by accepting one single book as the only way, you are limiting the understanding of what “god” is. You need to expand your views. Read alternative books, and non-faith books. I know you do already, so just keep it up.

[Ouroboros]

Would this be an alright example from the bolded above?

 

In ancient times, people believed that the gods caused earthquakes and such.  Therefore, it would have been seen as a supernatural occurence, for those believing that way.  However, now, via science we know that earthquakes are caused because of faultlines and other things.  Without science, we might still be fearing, as some polytheist believing tribes in India, for example; that the gods are angry and because they are they are causing the earthquakes.

 

YES! Finally someone saw the connection.

 

That's my point! That's exactly the point I'm trying to get to Invictus!

 

Meteorology is a science that was developed away from the “god” explanation.

 

In ancient times, the weather was caused by the gods, but as soon humans tried to explain the phenomenon outside the “divine” argument, they started to see natural causes to the events.

 

The danger with religion is that it holds us back to discover the natural causes.

 

Science refuses the “god” concept to get into the picture, because it would stop the process of discover and learning.

 

If we claim God created the Universe, we will never know if it’s true or not. A scientist has to step outside the idea of a god and try to explain the universe without god. If he can’t, then it’s just a personal preference to believe in god, but if he can prove that god didn’t do certain things, then the religionist have to move god one step further away.

[Amanda]

But sweety, that's only if you believe "the" book, which, I don't.  You can't prove the biblegod is the creator, if one exists.  Why do you not see that?  Other religions say that their creator(s) is/are "the" creator(s).  Their religous texts claim to be THE TRUTH AND THE WAY.  So why are you clinging to Christianity as the only truth?????  And why are you trying to get me to accept Christianity, why?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sorry Thankful... I'm not trying to get you to believe in Christianity... it was less than a resourceful way to say I agree with you.

[chefranden]

When I click on your site, it says 'get a job, work till you're sixty, then move to Florida.' I assume it is a mistake. Are you coming here to Florida? We'd love to have ya'! Otherwise, I'm confused... and somehow I think you are not surprised that I am.    Is it something to really do with Ishmael?

 

That is the introduction if you wait or click the picture you will find more.

[Amanda]

That is the introduction if you wait or click the picture you will find more.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Chefranden... that is just a tease! It just tells me that Ishmael is the answer to everything, yet doesn't tell me what Ishmael is at all! Nooooow... I hope you are.

 

That Sheldrake site, to which you referred me, is fascinating! I like that guy Wilbert too... now he is fascinating on reality... on Karmic laws and how there really is far less free will than we are aware! They're either crazy or forging new territory? Thanks.

 

Now what's this Ishmael thing? Did you read the book?

[Guest aexapo]

Okay . . . this is the way it is.

 

God created everything, and controls everything. Just because He's God.

 

Then we started using the scientific method, and discovered a few things about weather, and then -- all of a sudden -- he didn't control those things anymore -- at least not directly.

 

Then, we discovered that there were things that had lived on the earth a lot longer than the earth had been around, mostly by their bones, fossils, and positions in the layers of the earth -- and then we realized (duh), that it probably wasn't such a young earth after all . . . that God had created it a long time ago, and the bible stuff was just figurative, except for that stuff about hell and eternal damnation -- that shit is real, mostly because we haven't discovered it yet.

 

Then, we found out more things through science, about medicines -- and low and behold -- we found out we could live longer and not necessarily die from any disease -- and all the time we had been killing people because we thought they were witches, etc., putting curses on people. So, God and Satan weren't responsible for that any more -- because we figured it all out.

 

What sucks is that the more stuff we find out about through science, the less there is for God to be the master of! I mean, how can anyone really believe that God started the big bang -- it's not even in the Bible!?!?

 

But, you're right, until we've figured it all out -- God will still be God -- at least of the unexplained.

[Ouroboros]

The God of the Gaps. (And I'm not talking about clothes)

[Amanda]

I suppose the wonderful thing is that ultimately, what is accepted as truth is left up to each person... and what any one person thinks isn't going to change what is.... whatever that may be. If we can all agree to disagree with acceptance and tolerance of each other... as long as it is respectful of each person... diversity can be a wonderful thing, no?

[Cerise]

The God of the Gaps. (And I'm not talking about clothes)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Although wouldn't it be cool if you were? Such a god...the Lord of Khaki and strange swing tunes and anorexic dancers! Every worshipper receives a gift bag and striped scarf upon entering.

[chefranden]

Chefranden... that is just a tease! It just tells me that Ishmael is the answer to everything, yet doesn't tell me what Ishmael is at all! Nooooow... I hope you are.

 

That Sheldrake site, to which you referred me, is fascinating! I like that guy Wilbert too... now he is fascinating on reality... on Karmic laws and how there really is far less free will than we are aware! They're either crazy or forging new territory? Thanks.

 

Now what's this Ishmael thing? Did you read the book?

 

That is because you need to read the book.

 

Here is a link that will be less confusing to you?

[Ouroboros]

Although wouldn't it be cool if you were?  Such a god...the Lord of Khaki and strange swing tunes and anorexic dancers!  Every worshipper receives a gift bag and striped scarf upon entering.

 

And a free gift to all guests, a cloth from Jesus burial, complete with his face burnet into the fabric. Totally authentic, every last one of them.

IT'S A MIRACLE!

[Penny1]

Okay . . . this is the way it is.

 

God created everything, and controls everything. Just because He's God.

 

Then we started using the scientific method, and discovered a few things about weather, and then -- all of a sudden -- he didn't control those things anymore -- at least not directly.

 

Then, we discovered that there were things that had lived on the earth a lot longer than the earth had been around, mostly by their bones, fossils, and positions in the layers of the earth -- and then we realized (duh), that it probably wasn't such a young earth after all . . . that God had created it a long time ago, and the bible stuff was just figurative, except for that stuff about hell and eternal damnation -- that shit is real, mostly because we haven't discovered it yet.

 

Then, we found out more things through science, about medicines -- and low and behold -- we found out we could live longer and not necessarily die from any disease -- and all the time we had been killing people because we thought they were witches, etc., putting curses on people.  So, God and Satan weren't responsible for that any more -- because we figured it all out.

 

What sucks is that the more stuff we find out about through science, the less there is for God to be the master of!  I mean, how can anyone really believe that God started the big bang -- it's not even in the Bible!?!?

 

But, you're right, until we've figured it all out -- God will still be God -- at least of the unexplained.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I think that is an oversimplification, aexapo. Using the example of JudeoChristianity does not disprove the existence of all gods/deities, as per the topic of JudeoChristian god vs. existence of other deities.

 

For example, in some other person's religious beliefs, they might believe in a god that started the Big Bang, but are not necessarily Christian.

 

Scientific discoveries do not necessarily disprove any god or deity from existing! Many other religions have different beliefs about gods also. So....

 

If this world is an illusion, then there must be ultimate reality beyond this world, as per alternate macrocosmic dimensions that scientists have theorized existed.

 

Looking down upon ancient peoples for their traditions and beliefs based on their limited knowledge is only too easy, aexapo. Continuing to believe myths in the face of all evidence is imbecilic. But, saying you can disprove divine beings with the discovery of the causes of weather, I find really very ridiculous.

 

Convince me. I want a better, more convincing argument that there's nothing out there, or even the existence of the soul and living in more than one dimensional reality at a time.

 

BTW just because there is linear time doesn't mean there are not other models of time, including circular time or loops. Also, consider the possibility that you exist in multiple dimensions, and that there are dimensions outside of three dimensions that you might exist in outside of these. You may be able to think a certain way in this dimension, while having very different sort of thought processes in a higher dimension.

[Ouroboros]

I think that is an oversimplification, aexapo. Using the example of JudeoChristianity does not disprove the existence of all gods/deities, as per the topic of JudeoChristian god vs. existence of other deities.

 

For example, in some other person's religious beliefs, they might believe in a god that started the Big Bang, but are not necessarily Christian.

 

Scientific discoveries do not necessarily disprove any god or deity from existing! Many other religions have different beliefs about gods also. So....

 

If this world is an illusion, then there must be ultimate reality beyond this world, as per alternate macrocosmic dimensions that scientists have theorized existed.

 

Looking down upon ancient peoples for their traditions and beliefs based on their limited knowledge is only too easy, aexapo. Continuing to believe myths in the face of all evidence is imbecilic. But, saying you can disprove divine beings with the discovery of the causes of weather, I find really very ridiculous.

 

Convince me. I want a better, more convincing argument that there's nothing out there, or even the existence of the soul and living in more than one dimensional reality at a time.

 

BTW just because there is linear time doesn't mean there are not other models of time, including circular time or loops. Also, consider the possibility that you exist in multiple dimensions, and that there are dimensions outside of three dimensions that you might exist in outside of these. You may be able to think a certain way in this dimension, while having very different sort of thought processes in a higher dimension.

 

Welcome Penny1.

 

You're right in the sense that there is no direct evidence against God, only that over and over again when religionist instist that the lack of disproof is also the proof of God, and when science break another barrier, the argument is only move one step even further.

 

There might be a God, and the might not. In the meantime, you can believe what you want, that's totally ok.

 

Actually if the brane theories are correct, and there are multiple universes, the chances of superior intelligence increases dramatically. Not saying there has to be gods somewhere, but the chances of beings of far more excellent skills than us are greater. The same way the chances of life somewhere else in cosmos increases the more planets we discover.

 

What Aexpo is ranting about is the attitude a lot of people take, that if they can't explain a phenomenon, they have to tag God "You're it", and then they leave it at that, and never research the real truth or events behind it. Many even start fighting to force other people to believe the same thing. And that is wrong, and Aexpo just wanted to show the examples from history, why this is wrong.

 

Anyway, I don't think you have a problem with this. I just wanted to clearify the issue a bit. (or maybe I confusicated it instead?)

[Penny1]

Welcome Penny1.

 

You're right in the sense that there is no direct evidence against God, only that over and over again when religionist instist that the lack of disproof is also the proof of God, and when science break another barrier, the argument is only move one step even further.

 

There might be a God, and the might not. In the meantime, you can believe what you want, that's totally ok.

 

Actually if the brane theories are correct, and there are multiple universes, the chances of superior intelligence increases dramatically. Not saying there has to be gods somewhere, but the chances of beings of far more excellent skills than us are greater. The same way the chances of life somewhere else in cosmos increases the more planets we discover.

 

What Aexpo is ranting about is the attitude a lot of people take, that if they can't explain a phenomenon, they have to tag God "You're it", and then they leave it at that, and never research the real truth or events behind it. Many even start fighting to force other people to believe the same thing. And that is wrong, and Aexpo just wanted to show the examples from history, why this is wrong.

 

Anyway, I don't think you have a problem with this. I just wanted to clearify the issue a bit. (or maybe I confusicated it instead?)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Interesting.

 

I wonder, is anyone interested in proving or disproving this? Does anyone have any true life experiences to share (from direct experience, not book) or scientific discoveries (real discoveries, interpreted impartially, not specious reasoning) that would prove or disprove the existence of divine beings? And if not, is this due to excess skepticism, or empirical evidence? And, if the latter, I woud be happy to hear it. Thanks.

[dr_funkenstein]

Interesting.

 

I wonder, is anyone interested in proving or disproving this? Does anyone have any true life experiences to share (from direct experience, not book) or scientific discoveries (real discoveries, interpreted impartially, not specious reasoning) that would prove or disprove the existence of divine beings? And if not, is this due to excess skepticism, or empirical evidence? And, if the latter, I woud be happy to hear it. Thanks. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How can you prove the existence of a being that supposedly exists outside the natural world? What observation or measurement can you make in the natural world that can possibly be explained supernaturally?

 

I can't conceive of a repeatable test that would prove the existence of a supernatural force short of one of the laws of physics being violated. In the end it comes down to faith - believing in something that you can't prove.

 

But then again - doesn't the bible teach us to not put god to the test? Convenient, that...

 

Christians would say that's the beauty of faith. Atheists would say that's the folly of faith.

 

I personally think that it's much easier to explain why human beings want to believe in a god. We want a parent figure to solve all our problems.

[Ouroboros]

How can you prove the existence of a being that supposedly exists outside the natural world? What observation or measurement can you make in the natural world that can possibly be explained supernaturally?

 

I can't conceive of a repeatable test that would prove the existence of a supernatural force short of one of the laws of physics being violated. In the end it comes down to faith - believing in something that you can't prove.

 

But then again - doesn't the bible teach us to not put god to the test? Convenient, that...

 

Christians would say that's the beauty of faith. Atheists would say that's the folly of faith.

 

I personally think that it's much easier to explain why human beings want to believe in a god. We want a parent figure to solve all our problems.

Yes, we want the parent, and we want to give a name and attributes to the Black Box that explains everything. We don't know what's in the box, and unfortunately the box is closed and locked and no one has the key. So we can only guess, until someone finds the right powertool to drill a hole and peek...

[Abiyoyo]

What makes the Christian god The one and true god???  IF there is a god(s), your god cannot be proven anymore than the Egyptian gods/goddesses, mithra, or the IPU (sorry guys).  What makes your god so special?? I'm asking for proof of the Christian God.  Christians have no problems asking for proof of life without god.  I'm demanding the same info regarding god. 

 

BTW...Been through the hole Hovind apologetic tape series with my lifegroup last year.  I'm very familiar with the whole "Job" thing and it can only be taken seriously if one believes the bible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Thankful,

 

 

Lets say there is nothing, no God, no creation. Why does one care then, if they see the TRUTH!?!

 

Lets say that there is something, God, Creator of all.

If thats true, didnt he send everone enough signs and wonders to either believe or disbelieve.

 

To sum my rant up, You either believe the story of creation and live by faith or not.

I know, I know, Its not that easy, I have to have a structure or support to my beliefs.

 

Really. Thats great. I would rather be stupid and not in tune with the "in" thought for the 20century and die by my way.

 

 

Your way isnt the right way YoYo.....dah, dah, dah da dah. blah blah blah blah blah

 

Is yours, prove it. I can go outside and look at the sky and the clouds(I live by beautiful clouds) and look at all the different types of animals, and insects and how they all realate to everything that is on earth. Thats the only proof I have, and all I ever want.

 

I can not deny that there is a Creator for the awesome creations that I see everyday. An ant is a good Godly insect to look at.

 

Have you ever seen an ant carry something thirty times its body weight?

 

Please, let the bashers stay in there cubby. I was merely giving a personall "wow" for me.

 

I look at the things I see, and I also look at the fact that even though God(Biblically Speaking) separated us into different languages, we still yet have so much desire to find our nature and creator.

 

The sad part is that He has been screaming it to us the whole time.

 

Really shows our ignorance(as humans in whole) and the rise and falls of Israel.

 

Why ask why, try Bud Dry?

 

Who really cares. Seriously.

 

All the debates and lashings I have personally been through with believers and even some Christians, I say WWWHHHOOO CCCAAARRREEESS!!!!!!!