18 Oct 17
Originally posted by @eladarWhy did you not say that at the beginning? It was like pulling teeth to get that out of you.
I believe God created a Universe based on natural laws with the history in place. In other words God could have imagined the universe from a big bang then instantaneously created the universe as it would have been if the big bang actually happened. This would also include life and the fossil record.
Of course that is just my personal belief.
I think they call that last tuesdayism. That way you can refute anything a scientist says with no fear of refutation yourself.
One problem with that idea: It is clear the motivation for that comes from the fact that humans put themeselves, as a species, high on the spiritual totem pole and therefore worthy of the attention of a god.
But to create a universe specifically to fool mankind into believing one thing while hiding the truth about the origine of the universe, that has a plot problem:
That POV assumes Humans to be the only thinking beings in the universe. Otherwise, we see stuff that happens in the universe like novae and such that started the journey of light billions of years ago in some cases, others maybe a few thousand years ago between when the event happened and news reaching Earth at the speed of light, which is a snails crawl in terms of the whole universe.
Now suppose we are NOT the only thinking species in the universe and there are others, LOTS of others.
Their timeline would not be like ours, so a god could make a last tuesday universe which would satisfy the parameters of fooling humans as to the age and so forth of the universe. But this god could not make a universe where ALL intelligent life forms are thus fooled, each one would have a different time line, some not coming into existence for a million years some who have been around for a billion, at least started on the road to intelligence a billion years ago.
It is only the arrogance of humans to make a situation where a god would be so paranoid as to make a universe in such a way as to hide the truth from science seeking humans.
That is why I say humans put themselves on such a high plane as to be worth of the attention of a god. But that foolery going on would have been present before the Neandertals came about and they wouldn't know science from a hole in the ground so such an effort by a god would be lost on them and all humans throughout history where we didn't even know about such things as the big bang or the cosmic background radiation till the mid 20th century so the plot caused by your god would only be noticed by us now.
It is just human arrogance to make up such a myth.
18 Oct 17
Originally posted by @sonhouseYour opinion is your opinion.
Why did you not say that at the beginning? It was like pulling teeth to get that out of you.
I think they call that last tuesdayism. That way you can refute anything a scientist says with no fear of refutation yourself.
One problem with that idea: It is clear the motivation for that comes from the fact that humans put themeselves, as a species, hig ...[text shortened]... your god would only be noticed by us now.
It is just human arrogance to make up such a myth.
18 Oct 17
8 edits
Originally posted by @eladarWHY would your 'god' dishonesty create such fake evidence for the big bang and old fossils etc to deceive us of all these 'lies' when in fact NO big bang happened and NO fossils are old etc?
God could have imagined the universe from a big bang then instantaneously created the universe as it would have been if the big bang actually happened. This would also include life and the fossil record.
For exactly what possible purpose? That makes no sense.
This is not part of the Christian religion that 'god' is just such a lying dishonest fraudster as not only is there no indication of this in the Bible but the Bible in some places indicates (albeit generally a bit vaguely) the contrary.
So by saying 'god' could have done this dishonest fraudery, not only is that against the Bible and not only does your hypothesis make no sense, but you are speaking against you 'Christian god' and can validly be accused of being anti-Christian for doing so.
But I guess you aren't too concerned with such logical inconsistencies in you blind religious beliefs.
18 Oct 17
Originally posted by @humyWhy would it be dishonest to create a perfect universe based on the natural laws that he put into place? I suppose that could be a point of view, but it is not absolute.
WHY would your 'god' dishonesty create such fake evidence for the big bang and old fossils etc to deceive us of all these 'lies' when in fact NO big bang happened and NO fossils are old etc?
For exactly what possible purpose? That makes no sense.
This is not part of the Christian religion that 'god' is just such a lying dishonest fraudster as not only is the ...[text shortened]... guess you aren't too concerned with such logical inconsistencies in you blind religious beliefs.
Why do you believe your point of view is absolute truth?
18 Oct 17
Originally posted by @eladarEladar - the dishonest part is where your only dispute is with the timeline of events. You are saying all of pre-Biblical history occurred instantaneously. Why? Why wouldn't God just set it in motion and let it play out? We would arrive at the same point, beliefs intact, and no natural laws would have to be broken.
Why would it be dishonest to create a perfect universe based on the natural laws that he put into place? I suppose that could be a point of view, but it is not absolute.
Why do you believe your point of view is absolute truth?
18 Oct 17
Originally posted by @wildgrassYeah, well that's all assumption now isn't it. We don't know what happened now do we? Why limit God? Why assume God must be wrong? Why assume you must be right, especially given the fact that man's knowledge of the universe is changing so rapidly. In a thousand years do you think our view will be any more accurate than the ancient Greek point of view appears today?
Eladar - the dishonest part is where your only dispute is with the timeline of events. You are saying all of pre-Biblical history occurred instantaneously. Why? Why wouldn't God just set it in motion and let it play out? We would arrive at the same point, beliefs intact, and no natural laws would have to be broken.
18 Oct 17
Originally posted by @eladarYou think it my opinion those stories were done in JC's lifetime? That is a proven fact, done decades later by dudes like Paul. Paul wanted a rival religion to shoehorn into Roman society and they DEMAND miracles. So Paul gave them a bunch, wine into water, walking on water, up from the dead. That was Paul. 50 years after the fact.
Your opinion is your opinion.
18 Oct 17
Originally posted by @sonhouseNo, that those stories are not literally true and are unreliable.
You think it my opinion those stories were done in JC's lifetime? That is a proven fact, done decades later by dudes like Paul. Paul wanted a rival religion to shoehorn into Roman society and they DEMAND miracles. So Paul gave them a bunch, wine into water, walking on water, up from the dead. That was Paul. 50 years after the fact.
18 Oct 17
1 edit
Originally posted by @eladarIt wouldn't be and that is not what I said at all.
Why would it be dishonest to create a perfect universe based on the natural laws that he put into place?
I just asked
"WHY would your 'god' dishonesty create such fake evidence for the big bang and old fossils etc to deceive us of all these 'lies' when in fact NO big bang happened and NO fossils are old etc? "
WHERE in the above did I ask/imply if it was "dishonest to create a perfect universe based on the natural laws"?
Please don't put words into my mouth.
I said/implied nothing about a 'god' making all the natural laws and NOT making it look like the universe is older than what it is. Why cannot a 'god' make all the natural laws and the universe be as old as the evidence says it is? There would be nothing dishonest about that. But to make the evidence says it is much older than what it is would be dishonest. Why do that?
Your none answer to my question tells me you cannot explain your claim of 'his' dishonesty.
18 Oct 17
Originally posted by @humyYou opinion of dishonest is only true from a certain point of view. It is not absolutely true.
It wouldn't be and that is not what I said at all.
I just asked
"WHY would your 'god' dishonesty create such fake evidence for the big bang and old fossils etc to deceive us of all these 'lies' when in fact NO big bang happened and NO fossils are old etc? "
WHERE in the above did I ask/imply if it was "dishonest to create a perfect universe based on the ...[text shortened]... .
Your none answer to my question tells me you cannot explain your claim of 'his' dishonesty.
Your belief in the absolute truth of your point of view makes it imposdible to discuss anything with you.
18 Oct 17
2 edits
Originally posted by @eladartell me under exactly what "point of view" would it be "honest" to make the evidence say something that is not so and so to make people believe from such fake evidence that something is truth when it isn't?
You opinion of dishonest is only true from a certain point of view.
-I am expecting yet another non-answer from you here, as usual. But everyone here can obviously see you are wrong and I am right; it IS dishonest to fake evidence.
18 Oct 17
Originally posted by @humyYou continue to describe things from your point of view.
tell me under exactly what "point of view" would it be "honest" to make the evidence say something that is not so and so to make people believe from such fake evidence that something is truth when it isn't?
-I am expecting yet another non-answer here.
From what point of view is God not being misleading, mine.
18 Oct 17
Originally posted by @eladarYou're missing the point. Rather than limit God, I was merely pointing out that either scenario A, where the pre-Biblical world was imagined and created instantaneously to contain the pretense of old age, or scenario B, where the pre-Biblical world was set in motion and tromped along in real time, lead to the exact same present. My beliefs, your beliefs and the basic tenets of science are all intact regardless.
Yeah, well that's all assumption now isn't it. We don't know what happened now do we? Why limit God? Why assume God must be wrong? Why assume you must be right, especially given the fact that man's knowledge of the universe is changing so rapidly. In a thousand years do you think our view will be any more accurate than the ancient Greek point of view appears today?
In other words, if your only contention is the normal passage of time vs. the pre-historic artificial appearance of normal passage of time, then this entire debate is meaningless.
19 Oct 17
Originally posted by @wildgrassAccording to all others in this forum, if science os correct, then the creation account is false.
You're missing the point. Rather than limit God, I was merely pointing out that either scenario A, where the pre-Biblical world was imagined and created instantaneously to contain the pretense of old age, or scenario B, where the pre-Biblical world was set in motion and tromped along in real time, lead to the exact same present. My beliefs, your beliefs a ...[text shortened]... istoric artificial appearance of normal passage of time, then this entire debate is meaningless.