jonbellion:
lol
You obviously didn't go far in physics

so something can come from nothing and by nothing, literally nothing?

Richirich713:


it's impossible to get something from nothing and by nothing, only mentally ill people like Richard Dawkins believe this is possible., he must be on that strong weed.

lol, so what was God gotten from? And if you dare say nothing, then you yourself is mentally ill!

KingEbukasBlog:


Theism : There is a God or there are deities

A-Theism : There is no God or there are no deities

What you see above are the basic definitions . The rejection , lack of belief or whatever are just embellishments .

That's why Diagoras of Melos according to history is the first atheist because He declared that there are no gods

Theist: There's a/are deity/deities and I believe in this deity/deities

Atheist: I don't believe in any deity

existence of deities to most atheists was clearly illustrated in my previous post which you quoted

benzics:
lol, so what was God gotten from? And if you dare say nothing, then you yourself is mentally ill!

I've already told u God is eternal? It seems u don't understand what that means, google it.

Richirich713:


I've already told u God is eternal? It seems u don't understand what that means, google it.

Theists just pull infinite regress tactics and use "god" to terminate the regress

its pretty dishonest

peacesamuel94:

If you believe that even priests can contribute to science, then there is no need trying to paint Religion as an inhibitor to innovation. Its a big contradiction to the purpose of your thread.

Take note, I said if the priest or whosoever, has already experimented using available evidence, then his discoveries are welcome... But when you start telling us of a talking snake, worldwide flood, creation by speech, you already know that a psychiatric ward is best for you.. .

Richirich713:


so something can come from nothing and by nothing, literally nothing?

well "nothing" is a strong word
Even at its lowest energy level, there are fluctuations in the quantum vacuum of the Universe. There are quantum particles popping into and out of existence throughout the Universe. There are always quantum fluctuations
Though I can't really say for sure the universe came from nothing religous Gods are as fake as el classico matches played at camp nou

Richirich713:


I've already told u God is eternal? It seems u don't understand what that means, google it.

Lol, is that what the Bible, written by a man, told you

OK, let us share in your ignorance a little, so god is eternal.. . How did God create the earth from nothing?

hopefulLandlord:


Theists just pull infinite regress tactics and use "god" to terminate the regress

its pretty dishonest

U actually dishonest, I didn't pull God here to end any regress, he ask me wer did God come from, implying that he thinks the word "God" entails a created being, so I corrected him.

hopefulLandlord:


Theists just pull infinite regress tactics and use "god" to terminate the regress

its pretty dishonest

Worst of all is that all their claims and "tactics" were gotten from a "book" written by a mad man..

"God" is a string term
A diestic version of God is highly probable
The problem i have is the people that say all sorts of bullshit giving God anthropomorphic qualities
they gave a relationship with the creator
They spoke to it today
God made me a better lover
God wrote his "inspired" word
Lol
Bullshit

jonbellion:
well "nothing" is a strong word
Even at its lowest energy level, there are fluctuations in the quantum vacuum of the Universe. There are quantum particles popping into and out of existence throughout the Universe. There are always quantum fluctuations
Though I can't really say for sure the universe came from nothing religous Gods are as fake as el classico matches played at camp nou

thought so, those particles don't literally come from nothing, they come from energy. So I actually do know my physics and u were just bluffing.

Richirich713:



thought so, those particles don't literally come from nothing, they come from energy. So I actually do know my physics and u were just bluffing.

and does energy come from nothing

benzics:

Take note, I said if the priest or whosoever, has already experimented using available evidence, then his discoveries are welcome... But when you start telling us of a talking snake, worldwide flood, creation by speech, you already know that a psychiatric ward is best for you.. .

One major misconception portrayed by your post is that religion stands as a barrier to research and claims to have all the answers, which is not true, Religion only claims to have the Final Answer to the cause of reality as well as the universal origin.
Theists believe God created the world,but for us to understand the world better, research must be carried out, science must be embraced. so as to change it for the better.


Science and religion are not antagonistic, they complement each other. science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.

benzics:


Lol, is that what the Bible, written by a man, told you

OK, let us share in your ignorance a little, so god is eternal.. . How did God create the earth from nothing?

Nope that's is what the definition of God tells me, a perfect being entails an eternal being.

Lol First ask ur mother how the universe came from nothing and by nothing ?

jonbellion:
and does energy come from nothing

Maybe, but it's impossible for anything to come from nothing and by literally nothing.

Richirich713:

huh

jonbellion:
huh

You'll see

Richirich713:


Nope that's is what the definition of God tells me, a perfect being entails an eternal being.

Lol First ask ur mother how the universe came from nothing and by nothing ?

I am not the one making claims that something can't come from nothing, so tell me how God created the earth from nothing??
Bunch of paradoxical beings, always contradicting themselves since 00bc

benzics:

I am not the one making claims that something can't come from nothing, so tell me how God created the earth from nothing??
Bunch of paradoxical beings, always contradicting themselves since 00bc

Don't know.

peacesamuel94:



Science and religion are not antagonistic, they complement each other. science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.

Here we go again, with this bullshit

There was always science long before a mad man thought of religion, so was science lame before religion? The scrolls that the Bible was written on, was it not provided by science? The lamps men were using back before religion, was it not science?

Religion is utter Nonsense!

Richirich713:


Don't know.

Lol, and since it's impossible for something to come from nothing, where does energy come from? ?

Its high time you lots start thinking!

benzics:

Lol, and since it's impossible for something to come from nothing, where does energy come from? ?

Its high time you lots start thinking!

It's impossible for something to come from nothing and by nothing is what I said. It's about high time you lots start listening!

Richirich713:


It's impossible for something to come from nothing and by nothing is what I said. It's about high time you lots start listening!

Impossible for something to come from nothing and by nothing?? Right... I guess God must have come from something then

hopefulLandlord:


Theist: There's a/are deity/deities and I believe in this deity/deities

Atheist: I don't believe in any deity

existence of deities to most atheists was clearly illustrated in my previous post which you quoted

So how are babies atheists since they don't believe in either the existence or non existence of God .

foladara777:

Impossible for something to come from nothing and by nothing?? Right... I guess God must have come from something then

That's a false dilemma(either something came from nothing or from something else).

There's three not two options one must consider when evaluating what accounts for or explains the fact something exists. Whatever exists must have an explanation of its existence, either something's existence is explained by another, explained by nothing, or its existence is explained by itself (aka self-existence).

Here an analogy given by Saint Anslem to help us get an idea on what is meant by option three:

"Suppose on a cold night we come upon a blazing campfire. We note that a rock a few feet from the campfire is warm. If we ask what explains this fact about the rock (that it is warm), it would be absurd to suggest that the explanation is to be found within the rock itself, that there is something about the nature of the rock that makes it warm. The fire and the nearness of the rock to the fire explain the rock’s warmth.

Suppose we then note that the fire is also warm. What accounts for the fact that the fire is warm? Here it does not seem absurd to suggest that the explanation lies within the fire itself. It is the nature of a fire to be warm just as it is the nature of a triangle to have three angles. To avoid confusion here we must keep clearly in mind that it is the fact of the fire’s warmth we are trying to explain, and not the fact of the fire’s existence. The fact of the fire’s existence is not due to the fire but to the camper who built the fire. The fact that the existing fire is warm, however, is a fact about the fire that is accounted for by the nature of the fire, by what it is to be a fire. We have here, then, an example of a fact about a thing (the fire’s warmth) that is accounted for not by something else but by the nature of the thing itself (the fire)."

God is self-existent and eternal. If we talkin about a being who doesn't have this attributes, then we aren't talking about God but about something else.

Richirich713:


That's a false dilemma(either something came from nothing or from something else).

There's three not two options one must consider when evaluating what accounts for or explains the fact something exists. Whatever exists must have an explanation of its existence, either something's existence is explained by another, explained by nothing, or its existence is explained by itself (aka self-existence).

Here an analogy given by Saint Anslem to help us get an idea on what is meant by option three:

"Suppose on a cold night we come upon a blazing campfire. We note that a rock a few feet from the campfire is warm. If we ask what explains this fact about the rock (that it is warm), it would be absurd to suggest that the explanation is to be found within the rock itself, that there is something about the nature of the rock that makes it warm. The fire and the nearness of the rock to the fire explain the rock’s warmth.

Suppose we then note that the fire is also warm. What accounts for the fact that the fire is warm? Here it does not seem absurd to suggest that the explanation lies within the fire itself. It is the nature of a fire to be warm just as it is the nature of a triangle to have three angles. To avoid confusion here we must keep clearly in mind that it is the fact of the fire’s warmth we are trying to explain, and not the fact of the fire’s existence. The fact of the fire’s existence is not due to the fire but to the camper who built the fire. The fact that the existing fire is warm, however, is a fact about the fire that is accounted for by the nature of the fire, by what it is to be a fire. We have here, then, an example of a fact about a thing (the fire’s warmth) that is accounted for not by something else but by the nature of the thing itself (the fire)."

God is self-existent and eternal. If we talkin about a being who doesn't have this attributes, then we aren't talking about God but about something else.

Apples and oranges. We are discussing the origin of the existence of a person but your reference is the existence of a nature of a thing... My question is not where did God's nature as a good god came from. If that was the question, the analogy to the origin of the warmth of the fire would be relevant but that's not the question. The question is of existence of the person of God and not his nature. For a nature to exist, there must be a thing possessing the nature.For the fire to be warm, there must exist a fire. For God to be good, there must exist a God... So, explain how God exists not how his nature exists

foladara777:

Apples and oranges. We are discussing the origin of the existence of a person but your reference is the existence of a nature of a thing... My question is not where did God's nature as a good god came from. If that was the question, the analogy to the origin of the warmth of the fire would be relevant but that's not the question. The question is of existence of the person of God and not his nature. For a nature to exist, there must be a thing possessing the nature.For the fire to be warm, there must exist a fire. For God to be good, there must exist a God... So, explain how God exists not how his nature exists

The analogy wasn't meant to explain how God is self-existent, it was meant to give us an idea about what it means to say an explanation of some fact is explain by itself.

"Explain how God exists not how his nature exists?"

How can I explain how God exists? What does that even mean? Should I answer by saying God has always existed, that he is eternal and self-existent?

Richirich713:


The analogy wasn't meant to explain how God is self-existent, it was meant to give us an idea about what it means to say an explanation of some fact is explain by itself.

"Explain how God exists not how his nature exists?"

How can I explain how God exists? What does that even mean? Should I answer by saying God has always existed, that he is eternal and self-existent?

So, man's existence cannot be explained by itself but God's existence can

foladara777:

So, man's existence cannot be explained by itself but God's existence can

Man is contingent, so I don't see that as being a possibility.

Richirich713:


Man is contingent, so I don't see that as being a possibility.

Man is contingent... What is God then??