Is God an Eternal Entity or a Human Construct?

[The Grimmus]

I was listeng to an atheist and a christian debate (really juts putting each other down)over the existence of god, One siad where did the unievers coem from the atheist said that it was always there but the christian siad god then the atheist asked where god came from and the christian siad he was always there.

Now i ask where dose god come from?

 

[kyle_soule]

The scientist doesn't know where the singularity came from, but they don't stop with that, they work on finding out. The Christian doesn't know where God came from but they don't care and don't try to figure it out.

As of now, both are just assumed to have been there.

Debating doesn't involve insulting, nor do I know about any insulting in this forum.

Also, just a note, no scientists claims the universe has always been there, it started about 13.6 (I'm not positive on that figure) billion years ago. But according to Creationists, God has always been around and has come from nothing, just always been[?].

 

[FZ+]

Originally posted by The Grimmus
Now i ask where dose god come from?

Our imagination.

(waits for inevitable flames )

 

[Laser Eyes]

A clever and amusing answer FZ+.

Now i ask where dose god come from?

Let's deal with this question philosophically. Why is it necessary that he has to come from something or somewhere or someone? Why can not God always have been?

 

[Kerrie]

laser eyes, i think that this is a valid question, and i think the best answer to it is, it depends on your definition of "god"...

 

[heusdens]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
The scientist doesn't know where the singularity came from, but they don't stop with that, they work on finding out. The Christian doesn't know where God came from but they don't care and don't try to figure it out.

As of now, both are just assumed to have been there.

Debating doesn't involve insulting, nor do I know about any insulting in this forum.

Also, just a note, no scientists claims the universe has always been there, it started about 13.6 (I'm not positive on that figure) billion years ago. But according to Creationists, God has always been around and has come from nothing, just always been[?].

Science doesn't say that time began, or the universe began 13.6 billions of years ago, at most they claim that is the farthest back we can have evidence of.
Some extensions to the BB theory perhaps claim that also at the singularity time began, but that is a peculiar question.

For most scientist the question of a beginning is not settled, and a reasonable amount of scientists will claim that there can not have been a begin of time.

Just because of the assumption that time could have a beginning, this implies "something" must have started it. This then calls for a Deity.
But then one can ask, where did this Deity come from. The defenders of that Deity then claim that this Deity always existed.
The question is however, why something which is stated to be impossible for the world itself, is not impossible for this Deity.

The only reasonable answer to that is that it isn't necessary to state the the world had a beginning in time, and therefore a Deity is not to be assumed.

That is also why science wants to know what conditions determined the early universe, and what could have caused the Big Bang.
So far a reasonable theory has come up that can explain this, and removes the beginning of time issue, explains why our universe looks the way it does and makes predictions that can be tested. This theory goes under the name eternal, chaotic or open inflation, developed by andrei linde of stanford university. It looks to be a better theory then the Hawking-Turok Instanton "pea" (invoking a beginning of time issue), or the ekpyrotic model of brane cosmology (which has it's own problems like brane stabilization, and invokes us to accept a mathematical model of 10-D space of branes and superstrings, that sofar never could be tested experimentally).

 

[Laser Eyes]

Originally posted by Kerrie
laser eyes, i think that this is a valid question, and i think the best answer to it is, it depends on your definition of "god"...

I didn't mean to imply it wasn't a valid question. I think it is definitely a legitimate question. The Bible answer is that God has always existed and has no creator, ie he didn't come from anywhere.

 

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by heusdens
Science doesn't say that time began, or the universe began 13.6 billions of years ago, at most they claim that is the farthest back we can have evidence of.
Some extensions to the BB theory perhaps claim that also at the singularity time began, but that is a peculiar question.

I did not address the issue of time, and I was simply using the current prediction the big bang has set from the singularity.

 

[chosenone]

If Jesus was here and could speak for God.how would he answer this question about qhere God came from.If there was a beginning and God came into existence,In a instant and became self aware of himself,and found himself a God capable of creating a universe any way he wanted.How could he answer that question and say he knew.If you just became aware of yourself,how would you know where you came from.do you remember when consciousness ocurred in you mother womb,or being a baby for that matter.I'm sure he if anyone would have a good guess,like anyone else,but that's probable the best even God could do,just guess.

 

[kyle_soule]

This is a good point, perhaps God only became aware of himself before he created the world, and when he became aware of himself there was nobody else in existence, therefore he concluded (without challenge) he always was, maybe someone created him

 

[newton1]

Originally posted by The Grimmus
I was listeng to an atheist and a christian debate (really juts putting each other down)over the existence of god, One siad where did the unievers coem from the atheist said that it was always there but the christian siad god then the atheist asked where god came from and the christian siad he was always there.

Now i ask where dose god come from?

no one know this answer...
because what we say is just what we think about god
maybe the question can change to
"the human want the god come from where?"
(^_^)

 

[TENYEARS]

He would speak in riddles and would not directly answer the new kind of phara seee nots. Not much would change. Some would come to understand his words and some would not. Others would be jealous and some would not care less unless it affected them somehow which goes against there present goals in any way.

 

[eureka]

maybe.. just maybe, our knowledge is not enough to reach the thing about "where did god came from"

 

[TENYEARS]

It's difficult to comprehend something that has always been and yet infinite creation has always been. I had this battle with original sin many years ago and thought where did this separation occur? Ha, jokes on me. To understand all of life is not difficult, just be like a child look listen and learn. Water, air, fire, earth. You have the ability to know anything you really want to know.

 

[Zero]

If we listen long and hard enough...we will hear whatever answers we already want to hear.

 

[TENYEARS]

That is correct and eventually you will see what is if your desire is great enough. If you do not understand this, then science would be quite imppossible would it not?

 

[Zero]

That's nonsense...no matter how much we look, how much we desire, reality is what it is, no more and no less. If you see or hear anything else, it is because you are delusional, and there are medications that can help you stop having psychotic episodes in which what you want becomes so simply because of your desire.

 

[kyleb]

Originally posted by Zero
That's nonsense...no matter how much we look, how much we desire, reality is what it is, no more and no less.

your rebuttal is nonsense, TENYEARS never claimed that reality is anything more or less than what it is, only ones perception of it.

 

[TENYEARS]

I agree that any type of manifestation which occurs is a manifestion of self. Sometimes these have happened to people in cases where they were entrenched relgious expectations and yet part of this experience was nonrelative. Was there delusion, yes and yet in some cases there was also nonrelative knowing.

According to what you have spoken you relate to the manifestation of self and not to the nonrelative. There is a state of knowing without manifestation and there is one which is with manifestation which is in balance across the board which is what Wu Li says in his post existence is all I need. It has been said of the americian indians and every major culture or religion which was formed by this central experience.

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by kyleb
your rebuttal is nonsense, TENYEARS never claimed that reality is anything more or less than what it is, only ones perception of it.

No, he's claiming that there is some sort of magical world, only accessable through magical senses...which sounds rather fanciful, at least to me.

 

[TENYEARS]

There is no magic. It is a function of human beings and no magic to it. The american indians would undergo trials to experience visions to become a warrior. These visions although sometimes with animals or whatever were a minifestation of the subconsious which is connected to all things. In this way they understood. No drugs needed.

 

[kyleb]

well a little peyote helped things along on occasion.

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
There is no magic. It is a function of human beings and no magic to it. The american indians would undergo trials to experience visions to become a warrior. These visions although sometimes with animals or whatever were a minifestation of the subconsious which is connected to all things. In this way they understood. No drugs needed.

No drugs?!?


Well,ok, sometimes they resorted to extreme heat, pain, dehydration, hunger, or lack of sleep, but it comes to the same thing...they altered their brain chemistry in order to 'see' things. Hallucinate, in other words.

 

[greeneagle3000]

nowhere

it is true that god does comes from our minds.
and that god also comes from the other gods.

 

[TENYEARS]

It is not so much an altering of things than it is sometimes a cleansing and polarization followed by the experience itself. Many cases may have had just hallucination some not some a mix and some may have just had pure vision. There is nothing exact about the way these experiences occur, but all you need to do is have one and you would doubt the words of a billion universes of opinion before you would not change your mind because in one of these experiences there is no mind to change.

 

[heusdens]

Originally posted by Laser Eyes
A clever and amusing answer FZ+.

Let's deal with this question philosophically. Why is it necessary that he has to come from something or somewhere or someone? Why can not God always have been?

Why wouldn't that be possible for the world itself in the first place? Then. Who needs God?

 

[Laser Eyes]

Originally posted by heusdens
Why wouldn't that be possible for the world itself in the first place? Then. Who needs God?

Because it would be contrary to a proven scientific fact. Science has proven that the world did have a beginning. It is not unlimited in age.

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
It is not so much an altering of things than it is sometimes a cleansing and polarization followed by the experience itself. Many cases may have had just hallucination some not some a mix and some may have just had pure vision. There is nothing exact about the way these experiences occur, but all you need to do is have one and you would doubt the words of a billion universes of opinion before you would not change your mind because in one of these experiences there is no mind to change.

Hmmmmm...is there some sort of measurable difference between 'visions' and psychotic episodes, or hallucinations? Or do they only count as 'visions' based on whether or not the hallucination conforms to some sort of spiritualist mumbo-jumbo?

 

[TENYEARS]

If a person is having a psychotic episode it is as real to the as anything else in life. They will not be able to tell the difference from reality and unreality. It is greatly in my opinion a manifestation of unexpressed subconscious thoughts. I do leave in the possiblity for something else here crazy as it sounds. There may be a possiblity that even a person who would be considered crazy or as gone off the edge or maybe partially experiencing an aspect of the greater conciousness. This could be due to extreme states caused by chemical imbalances or whatever. Due to the nature of visions in general, it would be a difficult thing to show because it is already based on an inconsistancy of the imbalance itself which manifests itself out of the norm. That is why I percieve some cultures used to reverere what we used to call a touched individual.

As to a vision, there are things you will see and a some time or multiple times in the vision there will be a state of knowing. When that happens they always occur and you know they will. These are also mostly events where an individual would have no control over as opposed to a self fulling proph/dream. There are also some which will not be understood until the time of the happening. There are also some events which may be far in the future and not manifest themsevles during the seers present life time. In the old PF one of our eastern friends had a real interesting post on Nostradamus.

When it happens to you the experience will be the only confirmation you will need.

 

[Zero]

TENYEARS, you scare me. Alot. Nothing you have describes sounds like anything but the ravings of a messianic psychopath. I can't see past that, so i guess I'll put you on ignore or something. Sorry I wasted your time.

 

[kyleb]

lol Zero, it seems to me that he just likes to speak of things that are somewhat difficult to express in english which is why it will sometimes come out sounding similar to a messianic psychopath. i assure you there is really nothing to be afraid of. if you haven't see it yet, or even if you have; "The Messenger", a movie about Joan of Arc does much to explain what TENYEARS was talking about. granted, most atheists i know claim just interpret it in their own perspective and claim the point of the movie was to show that she was crazy; however, if you might watch it while entertaining the possibility that it is not intended to slander the poor woman, you might see what TENYEARS is referring to.

 

[TENYEARS]

There was once a man at a well who was told by a spirt do not drink the water from the well or you will go mad. The man did not drink and started speaking in tongues. They said he is mad, or whatever. He looked at them and said no problem, he grabbed a cup filled with the well water and drank it. He then said now I am like you.

Good luck.

 

[Zero]

Until someone presents something EXTERNAL as proof, I have no way of telling ayour vision from a mental illness...

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
There was once a man at a well who was told by a spirt do not drink the water from the well or you will go mad. The man did not drink and started speaking in tongues. They said he is mad, or whatever. He looked at them and said no problem, he grabbed a cup filled with the well water and drank it. He then said now I am like you.

Good luck.

English, not homemade fables. Jeez, how hard is it??

 

[heusdens]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
Also, just a note, no scientists claims the universe has always been there, it started about 13.6 (I'm not positive on that figure) billion years ago. But according to Creationists, God has always been around and has come from nothing, just always been[?].

Science doesn't claim that the world started 13.6 billions years ago, as this makes no sense. What then 'caused' the world to be there in the first place? There is no other theoretical possibility then to say that the world exists eternally. The Big Bang is just a large scale transformation of matter, not a begin of the material world.

Noone has seen or witnessed the actual presence of God, so all called "proofs of God" are derived indirectly, bystating or 'proving' that f.i. evolution can't provide the answer for existence of life, or the Big Bang can't 'proof' the existence of the universe, etc.
But that what they claim, is impossible for the world (having eternal existence of instance), is possible for their God. So in this way, all claims on God are made on ill assumptions of how the world works, and the only way to know how the world really works, is through science.

Religion is not an answer to any question mankind has, but is the problem of thinking, cause it imposes a wrong vision on how the material world works.

 

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Grimmus
Now i ask where dose[/color] god coem[/color] from?

Hypo man! Hypo! Or, would that be typo?

 

[Psyber freek]

Originally posted by heusdens
Religion is not an answer to any question mankind has, but is the problem of thinking, cause it imposes a wrong vision on how the material world works.

Science doesn't answer these questions either. Science doesn't give us any sense of morality, just sense of survival and there's more to life than that. We need to have absolute truth, otherwise everthings just an opinion.

Anyway, religion does give us the answers. It answers what we should live for. It answers how we should live. These are the most imporant answers to us as humans.

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by Psyber freek
Science doesn't answer these questions either. Science doesn't give us any sense of morality, just sense of survival and there's more to life than that. We need to have absolute truth, otherwise everthings just an opinion.

Anyway, religion does give us the answers. It answers what we should live for. It answers how we should live. These are the most imporant answers to us as humans.

We don't NEED absolute truth! And, in fact, your feeling that we need it so bad would explain why people make up religions; because we don't like ambiguity, not because there is an actual God.

 

[TENYEARS]

Ok, interpreted as read, but not neccessarily ment. What Phyber could have ment is a true need to understand.

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
Ok, interpreted as read, but not neccessarily ment. What Phyber could have ment is a true need to understand.

But, what I see is when that need to understand hits a wall, people create myths and religion to fill in that gap. It doesn't have to be right, so long as it fills the gap.

 

[TENYEARS]

A true need to understand does not stop by it's very nature. It accepts nothing.

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
A true need to understand does not stop by it's very nature. It accepts nothing.

In your case, it seems to accept everything and anything...so long as it isn't real?

 

[TENYEARS]

No wheaties today?

 

[megashawn]

Anyway, religion does give us the answers. It answers what we should live for. It answers how we should live. These are the most imporant answers to us as humans.

And if society still functioned by these same answers and "what we should live for" then the world would be 100's of years behind technologically. We'd still die around 40-50 if we were lucky, and be secluded from all the world. We certainly would not be sitting here talking about it, if the world lived by what your religion says is "what we should live for". We'd be lucky to have those cool inflatable churches you probably had your revival in.

 

[Psyber freek]

Originally posted by megashawn
And if society still functioned by these same answers and "what we should live for" then the world would be 100's of years behind technologically. We'd still die around 40-50 if we were lucky, and be secluded from all the world. We certainly would not be sitting here talking about it, if the world lived by what your religion says is "what we should live for". We'd be lucky to have those cool inflatable churches you probably had your revival in.

The same would be true if weren't answers and this "what we should we live for" because half of us would be dead since "there was just nothing to live for."

 

[Alexander]

Origin of Gods? Easy.

As my 4-grade textbook says, ancients did not know who throws lightning bolts, so they decided to claim that it is likely a man-looking creature named Zeus. They also did not know who pushes Sun across the sky, so they guessed that it is mighty man-looking creature and they named it Apollo. And so on.

Later many separate gods were consolidated into single one (for political reason: simplification of managing masses by single dictator rather than many tribe leaders). That is why we have many Gods in multi-dictators communities and one God in single-leader communities.

So, according to this textbook, god(s) is (are) what we personally don't know. Say, if we don't know who makes crystals to grow or cells to interact, or galaxies to collide, or volcanoes to erupt, then we assign this responsibility to some creatures (and call them god(s)).

 

[BoulderHead]

So, according to this textbook, god(s) is (are) what we personally don't know. Say, if we don't know who makes crystals to grow or cells to interact, or galaxies to collide, or volcanoes to erupt, then we assign this responsibility to some creatures (and call them god(s)).

Does this mean that more knowledge = fewer Santa Clauses, by any chance?

 

[Alexander]

Generally, yes. Magnitude of education (not general ed, but about nature, i.e. physics, math, chem, bio, astro, geo, etc) anticorellates with magnitude of beliefs in superstitions.

You can also look at correlation of belifs with age groups: more believers at 0-20 and 50-100 age groups (when knowledge is either not there yet, or already not there due to brain/memory detirioration) than in 20-50 group.

 

[TENYEARS]

If you want to see where god comes from I give you a simple solution to any and all. Believe nothing. If you do that you will actually learn some science. They go hand in hand.

My vision where this will be proven will happen in this lifetime. One thing though you will still be nothing more and nothing less than a new kind of believer when it happens. In order to experience reality you must have the need to find it and not settle.

 

[Alexander]

I think this already happened many times over. First, with Ra. Then with Zeus. Then with Bahus, and then many other gods. One by one, they were retired.

Interesting that some theists seeing impossibility to keep last gods around, redefine them in such a way that they can't be traced at all in our world (and even keep redefinig them more and more remote from this world).