Why Creation Is The Only Logical Explanation...

Everything and nothing simultaneously.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Well that explains it all.

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Well that explains it all
As long as someone understands. .

a reply to: edmc^2

The one thing Atheist hate to admit, and often stubbornly refuse to admit. They believe in something they can't and likely will not be able to prove. They have faith in Atheism, in the same way that I have faith in God.

I believe in a God that created time. That outside of this universe their exits a place where God always was and always will be. That a creator of the universe does not need to be bound by either are small minds or the perfect laws that govern our universe.

Although it can't be proven, God it is at least as logical as what atheist can't prove. I get tired of Atheist thinking somehow they are more intelligent for their faith in what can't be proven then for my faith in God.

To me if there was no God we would never wonder why we are here. The simple question begs for an answer. And to say there is no reason for life is no reason at all and leads many to nihilism.

It is much more intelligent in my opinion for one who does not believe in the God of religion to be agnostic. As agnosticism is saying I don't know.

Atheism is an arrogance that says I don't know, yet pretends by blind faith that it does know. Atheism is a faith based belief because science has far from proven that life originated from natural causes apart from God.

We have no understanding of Abiogenesis. And many famed scientists have believed it is simply impossible. And currently as far as science is concerned 2 things are impossible without an imagination. Abiogenesis and single cell evolving to multi cell.

Without any scientific evidence that Abiogenesis or a single cell evolving to a multi cell organisms is possible, an atheist simply has faith that someday science will answer the question.

Atheism is faith and the outcome is nihilism.

Right or wrong my life has a purpose greater than chaos. Why should anyone believe an Atheist whose faith lies in chaos? It is simply illogical to believe that a mathematically perfect universe was created by anything less than a mathematician.

If creation is based on Chaos we should expect to find chaos in the universe. But man seems to be the only chaotic creature that was created.

a reply to: edmc^2

The force gravitation is energy, he talks about why planets circle around eachother in that quote. And we know we are still expanding as a universe, so you don't need god, unless you say he was that massive energy that exploded, but then it is pretty save to assume he is dead.

originally posted by: edmc^2
Why is Creation the only logical explanation for the origin of life and the universe?

Actually, logically, scientifically, philosophically... 'creation/causality' is impossible.
Any avenue of honest critical inquiry yields paradox, meaning error in the assumption!
The only place that an imaginary 'creation' can exist is in the imagination, where 'beliefs' exist.
If you find some non-belief addled logical support for your 'ID' or 'creation', it is because you have stopped just far enough into your inquiry to feed the belief, and not fully examine the impossible assumption.
And 'life' is whatever you 'imagine' it is.
There is no 'origin' of anything! Another failed assumption.
But after accepting irrational 'beliefs', all 'logic' is ... 're-purposed'... to feed and validate the 'beliefs'..
Sorry, but other than in your imagination, what you suggest is impossible.

a reply to: edmc^2

"Life comes from pre-existing life" vs "Out of nothing, something".

That's a false dichotomy, a logical fallacy. Your main argument runs against the title of your own thread.

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: edmc^2

There MUST be a pre-existing all powerful intelligent life to produce the physical Universe and all the things in it.

Why?

Of course, there's much more evidence supporting my position but the above is a good starting point.

Not if the only thing you are basing it on is your belief that the Bible is the word of your creator instead of various superstitious men.

Why?

Because the alternative is to believe / accept that "nothing" created everything. Hence blind faith.

And the Bible is not the only source for evidence that life or the universe was a creation by God.

Creation or nature also gives us evidence.

Let me throw a little monkey wrench in your program. I consider my self somewhat atheistic...and...I don't believe universe was created out of "Big Bang". I think we still don't know how it came to be. Therefore...by your reasoning...I dont have blind faith in scientific explanation, not because I don't believe in science...but because I think it's equally wrong as God explanation, and I certainly don't believe it came from "nothing".

So now what ?

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Well that explains it all.

As soon as there is someone who understands, there is apparent separation of nothing into illusory things.
The illusion is that there is someone - that is the first concept which arises from the non concept.

a reply to: edmc^2

Actually, creation is very illogical explanation, that can satisfy kids and those who don't care about evidence and knowledge. Simply put, replacing theory of Big Bang, hypothesis of Abiogenesis and theory of evolution (of cosmos and life on earth) with simple explanation that some supreme being for whatever reason did it is just laughable and easy way out.

It seems to me that you accepted authority of book written from folklore tales (we have evidence for this) by many authors (this is evident form style of writing of bible) and compiled and recompiled many times (we have evidence for revisions) and are trying to prove your self its logical...

Sorry, not much logic there... on contrary, whole 'my god is righ' thing is very illogical. As Dr. Dawkins once said - only reason you believe in God you do is by pure luck - if you were born at different place in different time, you would believe in different God.

a reply to: namelesss

Unless causality is actually determined will.

Like so:

1. "Nothing" as define as: "a thing that has no existence", does not, and cannot, exist. If it did exist, it could only exist as "something": "a thing which exists".

2. The fact that nothing cannot exist as "nothing" means that "something" could not have come from "nothing".

Therefor, "something" must come from "something".

3. Further, the fact, that, "something" cannot come from "nothing", means that, what does exist, must have always existed, in some form or another.

Therefor, eternity and infinity, must be true about "something". "Something" must have always existed in some form or another, because you cannot create "something" from "nothing".

4. The fact that "something" must arise from "something" that is eternal and infinite, means that "causality", or "cause and effect", can not be the causation for "something" from "something", because "causation" requires initiation, and initiation cannot come from something without a start, or "something" that is eternal and infinite. That is, "cause and effect", as it is define, cannot be infinite or eternal because "causation" requires initiation.

*And I think that is where you stopped at, because you know, intuitively, that "causation" cannot be its own infinite "cause and effect", if "causation" requires initiation.

But instead of stopping, because of the problem with "causation", you should have realized that:

5. "Causation" must be something other than what it is defined as. "Causation", or "cause and effect", must be an effect of something without a cause, because in order to come from "something" eternal and infinite, you must have "something" that, itself, has no initiation - "something" that is, itself, not only free from "cause and effect", but is the cause of said "causation".

So, what is there that meets such requirements?

6. Free will. Free will is not bound by causation, it is, after all, free. And further still, free will causes things to happen all the time, that is, by determining will, a person with will creates "causation".

So what is "causation"? It must be determined will - it is the only thing that meets the requirements. The thing which caused "something" from itself must be the will of someone eternal, as will can only be willed by a person.

So...

7. God did it.

lol, it is the only logical conclusion. Someone who is eternal must have created, or caused, from their eternal will, "something."

a reply to: edmc^2

I agree with the point you made in the OP. But there's something missing that I think will clear up a few things.

Many of the high profile scientists whose theories we hear about are theoretical physicists. Here are 2 good definitions I found online for "theoretical physics" (I bolded some parts for emphasis):

Theoretical physics is a branch of physics which employs mathematical models and abstractions of physical objects and systems to rationalize, explain and predict natural phenomena. This is in contrast to experimental physics, which uses experimental tools to probe these phenomena.

Theoretical physics is the field that develops theories about how nature operates. It is fundamentally physics, in that the ultimate goal is to describe reality. It is informed by experiment, and at the same time it extends the results of experiments, making predictions about what has not been physically tested. This is accomplished using the language of mathematics, and often the demands of theoretical physicists force mathematicians to extend this language in new directions, but it is not concerned with developing the language of math.

In short, theoretical physicists make dramatic & unproven predictions based on provable formulas & ideas. I don't have a problem with theoretical physicists in general, because their ideas can help push our technology & understanding of the universe into new directions. Plus I love their sheer creativeness & ability to inspire brainstorming.

I only have problems with it, 1.when people quote their predictions of reality as facts (since most of their grand ideas haven't been proven yet), and 2. when people try to dispute someone's beliefs with theoretical physics. Because you can't honestly disprove someone's beliefs by using hypotheticals.

That's why I half jokingly refer to the high profile theoretical physicists as science's "prophets". And I especially like calling out atheists who bash religions by quoting these "scientific prophets", since they can't prove their grand predictions either. All they can do is go back and quote the words and findings of their scientific prophets, just as strictly religious people go back & quote the words and findings of their prophets. It's pretty ironic & entertaining to watch.

It would be fine if people just accepted that either side could be right or wrong, or that there could be a happy medium. Personally, I believe that the natural sciences explain how God does things. So I don't see them as opposing sides. But sometimes I feel like I'm in the minority when it comes to that perspective.

originally posted by: edmc^2
Why is Creation the only logical explanation for the origin of life and the universe?

Simply put it makes sense,

No, it does not.

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: edmc^2

The one thing Atheist hate to admit, and often stubbornly refuse to admit. They believe in something they can't and likely will not be able to prove. They have faith in Atheism, in the same way that I have faith in God.

I believe in a God that created time. That outside of this universe their exits a place where God always was and always will be. That a creator of the universe does not need to be bound by either are small minds or the perfect laws that govern our universe.

Although it can't be proven, God it is at least as logical as what atheist can't prove. I get tired of Atheist thinking somehow they are more intelligent for their faith in what can't be proven then for my faith in God.

To me if there was no God we would never wonder why we are here. The simple question begs for an answer. And to say there is no reason for life is no reason at all and leads many to nihilism.

It is much more intelligent in my opinion for one who does not believe in the God of religion to be agnostic. As agnosticism is saying I don't know.

Atheism is an arrogance that says I don't know, yet pretends by blind faith that it does know. Atheism is a faith based belief because science has far from proven that life originated from natural causes apart from God.

We have no understanding of Abiogenesis. And many famed scientists have believed it is simply impossible. And currently as far as science is concerned 2 things are impossible without an imagination. Abiogenesis and single cell evolving to multi cell.

Without any scientific evidence that Abiogenesis or a single cell evolving to a multi cell organisms is possible, an atheist simply has faith that someday science will answer the question.

Atheism is faith and the outcome is nihilism.

Right or wrong my life has a purpose greater than chaos. Why should anyone believe an Atheist whose faith lies in chaos? It is simply illogical to believe that a mathematically perfect universe was created by anything less than a mathematician.

If creation is based on Chaos we should expect to find chaos in the universe. But man seems to be the only chaotic creature that was created.

If I do not believe in Santa Claus, that does not mean I believe in Santa Claus.

It's literally impossible to demonstrate to a believer that atheists do not "have faith".

No.

We cannot accept a belief in a deity, so we move past it. We don't continue to consider it. We just carry on, NOT believing.

That is not a faith. And if you compare your faith to those activities, then you don't have faith either.

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: edmc^2

There MUST be a pre-existing all powerful intelligent life to produce the physical Universe and all the things in it.

Why?

Of course, there's much more evidence supporting my position but the above is a good starting point.

Not if the only thing you are basing it on is your belief that the Bible is the word of your creator instead of various superstitious men.

Why?

Because the alternative is to believe / accept that "nothing" created everything. Hence blind faith.

That's called Occam's Razor.

And the Bible is not the only source for evidence that life or the universe was a creation by God.

Creation or nature also gives us evidence.

It does? Where? I haven't seen any objects in the universe stamped "Made by God".

Your entire OP seems to be wishful thinking. God exists because you WANT him to exist. That isn't evidence. That is just faith.

a reply to: Bleeeeep
Copy and paste job?

originally posted by: edmc^2
Of course to my Athiest's friends, it's your prerogative to prove me wrong.

As has been explained to you many many times, it's down to those making the claim to carry the burden of proof.

You along with the other superstitionists claim that a bronze age myth created the universe and so you need to demonstrate this to be true before anyone has any requirement to prove you wrong.

Your OP brings nothing but your credulity and dishonesty to the table, and comments such as 'it makes sense' demonstrate this beyond any doubt.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

God exists because you WANT him to exist.

What is existing?
What is appearing here and now (which is always and everywhere) is the manifestation of God.
That which is seeing the manifestation of God, is God.

a reply to: rossacus



No, it took me awhile to type that out just now, but I have stated it very similarly around here several times.

Hebrews 11:3
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Doesn't come from nothing, but rather, something that is unseen... like will, or rather, the spirit being translated into form.

Colossians 1:13
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Just like you translated your will, the forces which give you ability, or your spirit, as you seen it, into the words of your post.

It is so subtle that everyone is missing it: you take in formulated forces, the breath or words of God, and reform them as your own translations, your own words or body.

But that eternal will, that is the Holy Spirit, the will of God which Father translated into form, or formulated forces. The form is Jesus, the body of everyone, the translator or soul is Father, who Jesus is the image of - like your words being the image of your awareness of your will.

Job 38:4-7

4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Father is the translator, the original observer.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

God exists because you WANT him to exist.

What is existing?
What is appearing here and now (which is always and everywhere) is the manifestation of God.
That which is seeing the manifestation of God, is God.

I don't even know what this is supposed to mean. Nor can I figure out what it has to do with the part of my post that you quoted.