31 Jul 15
Here the arrogant atheist professor Lawrence Krauss eventually has to admit that he is wrong and many of his views are speculative, even while he attempts to bully the debate with angry insulting rhetoric. He thinks ridicule is fine when he ridicules the ideas and beliefs of others. But he apparently does not like that all of his ideas, based on assumptions, are not accepted by everyone as facts, so he concludes anyone that disagrees with him must be ignorant.
Although I believe Islam is a counterfeit religion by Satan, who always includes truth with lies to deceive, I am impressed with how Hamza Tzortzis presents his argument for creation of the universe by God, even though the God of Islam is a counterfeit of the real God of the Holy Bible. Hamza Tzortzis almost seems like a Christian apologist in his reason and logic concerning a creator God.
31 Jul 15
Originally posted by RJHindsThe problem with an awful lot of arguments for the existence of God (the ontological argument, the argument from design, etc.), is that they either prove too little or too much. Too little: they merely show some sort of an unmoved mover was needed to get things going in the first place (which is the God of the philosophers, not the God of Abraham); or too much: the same argument, if valid at all, is valid for all the gods man ever postulated, including demons and green-eyed idols.
Although I believe Islam is a counterfeit religion by Satan, who always includes truth with lies to deceive, I am impressed with how Hamza Tzortzis presents his argument for creation of the universe by God, even though the God of Islam is a counterfeit of the real God of the Holy Bible. Hamza Tzortzis almost seems like a Christian apologist in his reason and logic concerning a creator God.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuTucfWTSgw
31 Jul 15
Originally posted by moonbusCould be so the natural universe could sustain life on this planet, just as all the gears of
... in the universe, why is there so much wasted space in it? It's about 99% empty (and getting more so, expanding at near light speed). Seems very inefficient. One planet and one sun would have sufficed to cover the creation story in Genesis. Any ideas?
an old watch were required to make it run properly.
31 Jul 15
Originally posted by KellyJayMaybe. But I presume that an omnipotent being, for whom all things are possible, was capable of creating a universe consisting entirely of our earth and our sun (and maybe a comet), plus the necessary natural laws to make that internally consistent, with no waste. So the question remains, is the universe as we see it, with 99% waste, indicative of intelligence?
Could be so the natural universe could sustain life on this planet, just as all the gears of
an old watch were required to make it run properly.
31 Jul 15
Originally posted by moonbusI can see your point, since the Muslims have a different view of the God of Abraham than Christians. And because of so much false teaching brought into the Christian church resulting in divisions and cult groups forming, the Christians and so-called christians don't agree either.
The problem with an awful lot of arguments for the existence of God (the ontological argument, the argument from design, etc.), is that they either prove too little or too much. Too little: they merely show some sort of an unmoved mover was needed to get things going in the first place (which is the God of the philosophers, not the God of Abraham); or too mu ...[text shortened]... id at all, is valid for all the gods man ever postulated, including demons and green-eyed idols.
31 Jul 15
Originally posted by moonbus
Maybe. But I presume that an omnipotent being, for whom all things are possible, was capable of creating a universe consisting entirely of our earth and our sun (and maybe a comet), plus the necessary natural laws to make that internally consistent, with no waste. So the question remains, is the universe as we see it, with 99% waste, indicative of intelligence?
It appears to me from comments reported from famous scientists that they seem to think so. One example I posted earlier was Einstein’s famous question: Did God have a choice in creating the universe?
31 Jul 15
1 edit
Originally posted by moonbusJust for giggles, if a omnipotent being wanted to do something no matter what way it was, do
Maybe. But I presume that an omnipotent being, for whom all things are possible, was capable of creating a universe consisting entirely of our earth and our sun (and maybe a comet), plus the necessary natural laws to make that internally consistent, with no waste. So the question remains, is the universe as we see it, with 99% waste, indicative of intelligence?
you think He would know better than us on the ins and outs of why?
31 Jul 15
Originally posted by KellyJayI have no idea what an omnipotent Being might do for fun. It must get boring being omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, omni-everything. Someone once said that humanity is God playing hide-and-seek with himself.
Just for giggles, if a omnipotent being wanted to do something no matter what way it was, do you think He would know better than us on the ins and outs of why?
31 Jul 15
Originally posted by RJHindsI don't expect we'll solve the mystery today. It has been interesting to hear the different view points. Thank you to all who have contributed.It appears to me from comments reported from famous scientists that they seem to think so. One example I posted earlier was Einstein’s famous question: Did God have a choice in creating the universe?
31 Jul 15
Originally posted by moonbusgives you room to explore.
... in the universe, why is there so much wasted space in it? It's about 99% empty (and getting more so, expanding at near light speed). Seems very inefficient. One planet and one sun would have sufficed to cover the creation story in Genesis. Any ideas?
plus why should we be the only intelligent beings god created?
31 Jul 15
Originally posted by moonbusNo waste, you know for a fact all the factors in discussion do not have a purpose?
Maybe. But I presume that an omnipotent being, for whom all things are possible, was capable of creating a universe consisting entirely of our earth and our sun (and maybe a comet), plus the necessary natural laws to make that internally consistent, with no waste. So the question remains, is the universe as we see it, with 99% waste, indicative of intelligence?
31 Jul 15
1 edit
Originally posted by ZahlanziExplore what? Our purpose in being put on this earth, according to Christian theology, is to explore the inner spiritual life and to worship God, not to go careening around the galaxy (much as I adore Star Trek).
gives you room to explore.
plus why should we be the only intelligent beings god created?
EDIT: Point 2. is better. Maybe we're not alone. As Suzi pointed out, it's probably better if we don't make contact with them (or they with us). We've had bad experiences with colonization here. There is safety in distance.
31 Jul 15
Originally posted by moonbusScripture says that we seek Him we will find Him, if you don't think it is worth the effort....?
I have no idea what an omnipotent Being might do for fun. It must get boring being omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, omni-everything. Someone once said that humanity is God playing hide-and-seek with himself.
31 Jul 15
Originally posted by moonbusI have no idea why He does what He does...I do think He gets something out of our ability
I have no idea what an omnipotent Being might do for fun. It must get boring being omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, omni-everything. Someone once said that humanity is God playing hide-and-seek with himself.
to make choices for ourselves, even those He disapproves of.