Go to LETTERS, ESSAYS & SHORTS
- Add a comment
- Go to THE ULTIMATE CHALLENGE TO US ALL! I WILL BE WAITING FOR YOUR ANSWER!
I believe it is possible that life was sparked by other intelligent beings. Based on our own human nature, I can imagine other beings "playing God." We make robots, right? We make organs. The only issue is time. Is there time for a intelligent race to become that advanced before a sun goes out or the universe collapses back in on itself, or spreads too far apart? If there is enough time, then somewhere, someone has created life. Well, we have done that. Life up to par with ourselves. Given time, someone somewhere is doing it recklessly, or objectively, as an experiment. I'm not saying that is the case with us. Who knows? Given time, everything has happened. So yeah, our creation might have been sparked by something, we see this in the world around us so it i ok to believe it. But who is to say that that which created us is perfect or benevolent, sinless? When we have yet to see an example of that in the universe. I'm just saying, to me what you say makes perfect sense, but it is a long way from proving GOD.
posted by
Arcadio
on June 15, 2007 at 1:33 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Interesting post
God is the father of logic.
I'm not sure about the "logic" bit.
posted by
joab1
on June 13, 2007 at 2:36 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: The Paradox in Your Theory
Actually, all the questions you raise are really good questions, and I, myself, have spent more than a little time pondering them all. First, we can rule out any kind of "spontaneous generation" theory. SOMETHING can not possibly spring from ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, spontaneous or any other way. Our own scientists have proven that. (See the web under "spontaneous generation).
We can speculate on the rest of it, and that is about all we can do. We (you and I) are finite. Everything we know has a beginning and an end. The dimension of the infinite is "way out there," and to ponder too much is to invite lunacy into our lives. We will know these answers someday, but not tomorrow! Nor do we NEED to know them.
However, I would speculate that one of the very first things God would want to do would be to quiet His lonliness. The first things He would create would be the Angels. All things, even for God, take time. How much? Well, let's just say, more time to create and grow an oak tree than a willow! How long? The Universe is approximately 17 to 20 Billion years old. Did it require an eternity for that or has God done it over and over again ad infinitum? Your guess is as good as mine! Have a go at it, if you will. As for me, I am now as satisfied as I need to be... but ummm! No; forget it. Somtimes, you just need to know when to let go!
Have a good day!
Gerald
posted by
GEPRUITT
on June 12, 2007 at 8:28 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Good blog
Thanks, Slam, and welcome to my post! By the way, you sound British to me! I have always loved England and hope to visit there one day.
Actually, I cheated! I read your "about me" page! So don't worry; your English sounds just like, well ... English to me!
Gerald
posted by
GEPRUITT
on June 12, 2007 at 1:17 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: The Paradox in Your Theory
"Taken back in time as far as you care to, ALL things, except God, eventally disappear."
This is why I tend to keep an open mind on the matter. You can never rule out anything when so much is unknown. Im afraid our tiny little minds are incapable of figuring out all the mysteries of the universe at this point and time. However, I will pose this question to you:
If you go back in time to the point where the only thing that existed was God, exactly how long would that period be? If you kept going back in time, how long would you be able to go with only God and nothing else? Would you eventually run into something else besides God, or the spontaneous creation of God? What was God doing in the nothingness? Does an all powerful being truly have power, or even know he has power, when there is nothing in existence? How did God know he was God and what he was capable of? Im just trying to picture God floating around by himself in a pool of nothingness, trying to decide what he wants to do.
posted by
FattyMcButterpants
on June 12, 2007 at 1:12 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Interesting post
Yes! And thanks for the alert. You can be sure that my head's up! I read every word of your comment, and you are right on target! Please visit again. I am lucky to have so many well-informed associates!
posted by
GEPRUITT
on June 12, 2007 at 1:05 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: The Paradox in Your Theory
Thank you, too, for your honest and exceptually well-informed opininion!
I, too, as I'm sure you know by now, am a man of science. I sense somehow, however, that I may have been somewhat less than careful, especially if I gave the impression of disagreeing with the theory of the "Big Bang!" I am completely comfortable with this theory, and it very well might have happened precisely that way!
I am also aware that the Bible is full of "holes!" I believe that the Bible is also a very valuable book, but also that it was neither written by God, Himself, nor inspired by Him to be written by others.
One other point: it would be foolish and unproductive to pursue the "Who, then, created God," because, once having answered that one, the next question would be, "Well, who created HIM? And so on and on, in an endless and meaningless cycle, with there never being a solution! But, we KNOW there is a solution! Things are, the Universe Is, and God is. Everyhing started with Him. The answer to William Shakespeare's question, "To be or not to be; that is the question!" is "To BE; THAT is the answer!" Taken back in time as far as you care to, ALL things, except God, eventally disappear. This God, then, is THE GOD, the "I AM!" Before I AM was also I AM! There has never been a time when ABSOLUTELY NOTHING existed! I AM has always existed. You say that one can not say that. I say that one MUST say that! There is simply no other answer! Shakespear's question has but one answer, and that is "To be!" As difficult as this may be for the human mind to understand, it MUST be so, because we ARE!
I hope this helps to clarify my position.
posted by
GEPRUITT
on June 12, 2007 at 12:53 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: GE -
Sannhet,
You are on the perfect glidepath to "Heaven," and so am I. I look forward to meeting you there, if not before! Thanks for your continued support and valuable comments!
Gerald
posted by
GEPRUITT
on June 12, 2007 at 11:32 AM
| link to this | reply
The Paradox in Your Theory
I am certainly not one to exclaim with any certainty that there is or isnt a God, because I don't have the slightest idea. I am though, a man of scientific beliefs, and I am a strong believer that a lot of what is written in the Bible can be disproven by modern science, and to pre-suppose that the bible is "literally" the word of God is to also assume that scientific laws as we know them today have been changed along the way somewhere in order to explain the deficiencies in some of the Bible stories.
That being said, here is my problem with intellegent design. Although I agree that science can only take you so far before you have to ask "what before that", as you have illustrated in you argument against the big bang, there are caveats. Modern science cannot explain everything, as of now. But remember, our understanding of science is constantly growing as we evolve as a race, allowing us to explain things now that couldn't be explained years ago. So I will say, that even though science cannot currently explain what was in existence before the big bang, that does not necassarilly mean that it won't explain it someday when we better understand the universe. And it seems that much of the support for intellegent design comes from science's inability to answer that question about "what about before that?"
For example, a few hundred years ago, science could not explain certain diseases that killed people for no reason. We had no knowledge of bacteria, viruses, or micro-organisms, and people often dismissed disease as punishment from God or evil demons. Of course, then science evolved, we gained a better understanding of what was previously unknown, and now we don't have those beliefs. This sort of knowledge evolution "could" potentially lead to answers that ultimately explain some of the questions posed by intellegent design.
But here is the paradox with intellegent design. If you accept as truth or fact that science can only take you so far before you ask, "what before that", and you come to the conclusion that God placed things into empty space because "how else could anything ever come to be?", then it is only fair to ask the same question about God himself. If God was there to put something where something was not there before, it is only fair to ask what put God there? Is there a God of God, who created the God that created us? You can't just say "Well God has always been" and expect that to settle the issue. I say this because the whole basis for intellegent design is that "something had to place the basic elements into empty space, those elements could not have just always been there." A believer in the Big Bang could always argue that the "elements in space that led to the Big Bang were always there". If you accept that as the flaw in the argument for science, you must also be willing to address the same paradox with God. The question of "what about before" can really be asked no matter what solution you come up with.
posted by
FattyMcButterpants
on June 12, 2007 at 11:31 AM
| link to this | reply
GE -
I'm completely comfortable in the fact that there is, always has been and always will be, some sort of "God". I also believe that each person will come to this conclusion eventually, if not in this life, then in another. So the best I can do while I am here is to humbly serve as best I can.
posted by
sannhet
on June 12, 2007 at 8:13 AM
| link to this | reply
Interesting post
I want to alert you to some things from the past which point to the fact that there is very often more to life than what is going on at visual range.
I believe that one day our science will have to face up to the fact that there is intelligent design and intent behind the human form.
God is the father of logic, maths and science. He gave us a logical mind so that we would have to use our minds in trying to figure out our purpose and destiny.
We have sciences out there which the scientific community does not want to deal with because they completely turn conventional thought and wisdom on it's head.
People who have proved the existance of these 'new' sciences have mysteriously dissappeared from society at times when the technology they discovered could have been pivotal in alleviating human suffering. You just have to look at all the information on zero-point energy to realise there is alot that our scientists are keeping from us, because they are backed by large companies who don't have the best interests of the population in mind. It doesn't matter whether or not God exists, because we can't even live in peace or do not have the best interests of our brothers at heart.
Very often those people in ancient times who contradicted conventional science, backed by the church, were burnt at the stake for heresy.
There are many things which we don't know about, but to say that there is no God is a very arrogant attitude. Even now scientists are adjusting their paradigms to take into account that the possibility that many inhabitable planets exist.
posted by
Soterios
on June 12, 2007 at 8:00 AM
| link to this | reply
Good blog
posted by
slam
on June 12, 2007 at 4:03 AM
| link to this | reply