haekymbahd: Just like asking how did the Hebrew knew Elohim means God.. why did Arab christians and Jews adopt the name Allah since Judaism and Christianity predate Islam in Arab or did Muhammad force them to use the name...
Allah SWT said: "Do you call upon Ba'l and leave the best of creators -" (QS. As-Saaffaat 37: Verse 125)
"Allah, your Lord and the Lord of your first forefathers?" (QS. As-Saaffaat 37: Verse 126)
Which idol bears Allah has proper name cos Allah claims he isn't Hubaal stop or are you insinuating that an idol has 2 proper names...
The Jews knew Eloha/Elohim as a TITLE meaning "God/god".
The title is used for any Deity not necessarily the specific God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Mohammed turned the generic name of Deity into a personal name because he never once heard the Jews call their God by His proper name except TITLES
haekymbahd: Allah himself claim he is the God of Abraham, Moses and Jesus which of the Arab idols has this attributes...
FALSE! Allah never claimed he is the God of Abraham, Moses and Jesus. Exo 3:6: "Moreover he said, I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look on God." Moses said to ELOHIM,
Exodus 3:14-15 God replied to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM. Say this to the people of Israel: I AM has sent me to you.” God also said to Moses, “Say this to the people of Israel: Yahweh, the God of your ancestors—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you. This is my eternal name, my name to remember for all generations.
haekymbahd: Allah means God (Elohim) and it is a title the Arabs knew that God exist didn't they but are only associating partners with God. ALLAH demands he should be worship alone pure monotheism without no partner which is what he sent Muhammad to correct...
maasoap: It is a reformed old one. They claimed that old one is not in tendem with the present reality
No sir. The old one had the clause of upgrade every three years based on the economic realities. It's more that 10 years with zero attempt of review. This is just one of the issues. The only New one is the rejection of IPPIS as not suitable for the University system
In as much as I don't like this midget, but I support him on this. Lecturers are pure evil, always dragging students backward with their unending strike. ASUU has been going on strike since I was in my mother's womb till date, all to the detriment of the students.
They want the government to treat them well, while maltreating the students and boasting unashamedly that nobody will pass their course even if God should come down and write the course.
Even if the FG should give them all what they demanded today, after few months, they will make new demands and embarked again on strike. You can never satisfy them. I am not supporting what the government is doing, but the truth must be said.
Lazy people parading as lecturers with their nonsense teachings , always victimizing the students and boasting that they can go to hell, sex starved Idiots, always using their position to their own advantage by sleeping with vulnerable students
Just few Nigerian lecturers deserves RESPECT, majority of them are bunch of irresponsible bastards.
It is unfortunate that students bear the brunt of this strikes. But the problem is not ASUU but the FG. If only the FG honoured the signed agreement, there would be no strikes. It's not a new agitation it is the old one.
Wilgrea7: That's the thing. I don't. And I'm not saying there are multiple Creators either. The purpose of this thread is simply to challenge the traditional concepts of God people hold.
Most theists don't just hold the belief that a God exists. They also believe it has to be a certain way. Like single, personal, all-powerful, eternal, and so on.
I'm simply showing alternative concepts to the nature of the first cause, which can also logically work.
But as far as proof goes, i have as much evidence for mine as they do for theirs. And that's the point. We simply don't know yet.
Okay But I think I answered all your objections. Check your original post and my first response
Wilgrea7: I don't quite agree with this analogy. I'd say bill gates is the creator of Microsoft for example, because he created the initial thing, in its most basic form, that eventually grew to become what it is today.
It started from something.. that something improved and grew over time. Sure, he may not contribute a line of code to it today.. but the initial form of the company, which is the starting point of what we see today, was created by him. And that's what I think qualifies him as the creator
I don't see how this excludes the possibility of another generation of creators. I'm not referring to other beings being created and being told to create a universe, as in the case of the programmer
The programmer working at Microsoft was employed there, for the purpose of creating, or working on Microsoft. Sure, that's one analogy. But there's also another possibility.
Bill Gates parents, didn't give birth to him for the purpose of making Microsoft. You can say he was created, by his parents, for whatever reason they chose to have a child.
The child grew up, developed into an adult, and decided, on his own, to make something like Microsoft.. sure, Microsoft is not a “human" or “child" ... But it is still something that was created by someone that was created by someone.
We call Bill Gates' name when we think of Microsoft. We don't call the name of his parents. That's the point I was trying to make.
My concept of a generation of creators is not one where a being is created by another being and instructed to make something. It's one where a created being, chooses to, on it's own volition, make something. Like bill gates chose to make Microsoft, on his own will, rather than that of his parents.
I think that's another way to look at time. For me, i think of time as something that defines the change of events, or the period between 2 events.
The issue I have with the concept of the singularity you presented.. Actually.. 2 issues.
The first is that, the existence of a gravitational singularity, shows that matter was acting a certain way, even before the big bang. The fact that gravity would even act on matter in a way to cause a singularity, shows that there were still laws of some sort, in place then.
The second, is the idea of the singularity which you presented as being timeless, before the big bang.
How i see it, for the singularity to be timeless, there would have had to be no change in the nature of the singularity at all before inflation. And if there was no change, then there was no period between events and time would be meaningless. That i agree with.
But the assumption that the singularity was all that existed before the big bang, seems like a bit of a stretch to me. Let me explain.
Our observations so far point to a time when matter was so packed together, in what we call a singularity. True. But nothing in the data shows that the singularity is all that was before the big bang.
As far as our knowledge goes, we still don't know what happened before the big bang. We can assume that the singularity existed, timelessly, until inflation. In this case, time would be meaningless before the big bang as you said.
But other assumptions, like a big bounce, or a child universe also seem to be possibilities.
That is, we don't know what led to the singularity, or if anything led to the singularity, or if the singularity always existed. Our knowledge hasn't gone that far.
This is getting really long, so i think I'll break it down into 2 parts
Do you have any evidence that there are other Creators of the universe? How did you come to this your conclusion?
For me, the same person who created the proton, neutron, electrons and the other subatomic particles created the rules for chemical reactions. The same chemicals made both plant and animal tissues. Within the same atoms are embedded the laws of physics. From these same atoms came the Sun and all the planets.
Nazgul: Are they fighting for their selfish interests or that of the students?
Personally, I don’t get seduced by the facade of fighting the government every time in the name of strike and people will willingly pull their strides behind ASUU. It doesn’t always move me. I want to ask the question; is ASUU really fighting for the well-being of the students, or are they using the fact that Nigeria is a failed government to clone as a facade to pursue their selfish interests, because they know that people will always fall behind them?
If ASUU is fighting for the welfare of the students, why won’t they also consider the welfare of the students and return to school? Why are they so comfortable that our students are at home since February, 2022 up till now? That is a period of 5 months and they are not even ready to move.
They don’t even care. As for me, I don’t support the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) joining ASUU in the strike. If ASUU is fighting for the welfare of the students, and they want us to believe that they have no ulterior motive, why haven’t they come out with their templates and convince Nigerians of their demands? Have they explained to the students exactly what they are fighting for and how it will benefit the students when granted?
During my days as a student, up till now, ASUU have always gone on strike and part of their demands have always been met, but I have never seen any significant improvement in the services they render to the students. The lecturers still trade sex for marks, they still sell books, handouts and collect inducements before a student passes their courses. And most importantly, they have not improved their teaching modules to enhance the education they offer.
So, how exactly is their protest in the interest of the students?
I want to know, and would be glad if anyone can help me out.
Cc. Mynd44, lalasticalala Dominique Seun.
ASUU is not pretending to be fighting for their students, they fight for themselves.
If you feel that their pay is commensurate with what their counterparts are earning outside Nigeria say it.
There are only two labour unions in Nigeria who have the liver to stand up to the impunity of the FG and these are NMA and ASUU.
Righteousness2: There is nothing absolutely wrong with her wearing a skirt. It's the same material, it's the same uniform.
Even in the military, you have women who put on their skirts.
Trouser is not for women! It's for men. Even if the whole women Worldwide our in trousers, it doesn't make it right. She is not man! And so her putting on skirt is not a crime.
Infact she is a worthy example for the ladies.
Trousers is not for women?
Shirts definitely is also not for women!
I don't know where you found this in the scriptures!
Wilgrea7: My apologies for the late reply. I'm just seeing this now.
No problems!
Wilgrea7: The creator is the cause of everything we can observe today. True. That doesn't mean it can't have another creator too.
Infinite regress only happens if you go back infinitely chasing a line of creators. I said earlier on, that it is completely possible, to have 2, 3 or even 10 generations of creators.
Take for example.. a human builds a robot. The human is the cause of the robot. But certainly not the ultimate first cause. The human has parents, and his parents have parents. I made it simpler by shortening the line of causes to low numbers like 2 and 3.
So as far as I've seen, nothing stops a creator, from having another creator. The uncreated creator, which is often seen as the first cause, can exist at the 10th generation.. not necessarily the first one
The definition of Creator is "The Uncaused First Cause". The ball rest squarely in his hands. Bill Gates is the Creator of Windows Operating system even though, he may not even contribute one line of code into the programming. The programmers are in thousands (from USA, to India, Japan, South-Korea etc) but their names are unimportant as the Creator Bill Gates.
Therefore, it is not reasonable saying that our Creators have other Creators.
Wilgrea7: I'm a huge fan of Arvin ash.. and I've watched that video before too.
You're right that nobody knows why the constants are the way they are. And of course, I agree that they are fundamental.
But the reason I said I don't know if the constants were created, is because I don't know of, or have imagined a time, when the constants didn't exist.
I'm not trying to use the constants as a replacement for God here. I guess what I was trying to say there was “was there ever a time, when there was truly nothing? (No constants, no laws, nothing at all)"
Beyond the time when the Gravitational Singularity existed, ALL the Laws of Physics including the universal constants breakdown or nonexistent!
Time started only AFTER the big bang (or Inflation if you want to use the current theory). Before the inflation, time was meaningless. Time makes sense only with space (length, breath, height)
God didn't create the universal constants directly: it is our measurements that revealed the symetries in our physical observables. For instance, ALL the Pyramid in Egypt could be found to have a height to base ratio of 1.66666, a mass to height ratio of 23.543kg/m, and a direction of entrance in perfect East-West alignment. All these values are our own observables showing that the early Pharaoh's DESIGNED the pyramids before building.
Same as the physical constants. They did NOT exist till after the big bang or Inflation AND it doesn't mean God used them as we know it. Our observations of the physical constants mean that the Universe is not a random chaotic effect but a planned execution.
Wilgrea7: My bad.. i looked it up to confirm.. it was 4 hydrogen atoms that fuse to form Helium.
But the point i was trying to make, was that it is possible for multiple agents to be the reason behind a cause, like in the case of helium.
Who is the creator of iPhones? I bet he didn't solder a single component on the printed circuit board of the iPhone.
That is why your theory of "other Creators" is not reasonable with respect to the creation of the universe.
Wilgrea7: I wasn't making reference to sub-creators. That was why i gave the example with hydrogen. The hydrogen atoms are not “sub" in any way.
But also, in regards to your sub-creator example.. it's actually something I've been debating here for a while. I think it comes down to creation vs ownership
There are instances where something can be created on behalf of, or in obedience to someone. But there are also other instances that are a bit more difficult to decipher.
I'll give some examples
1) If you create a wristwatch from scratch, and sell it to someone, are you still the creator? Even though the person is the new owner
2) if multiple people engage in a group project to create something, who then will claim ownership to the thing?
These are examples of cases where ownership does not automatically denote, or give one a claim to the title of creator.
If God is ALL-POWERFUL, why must He contract out the creations? The bible speaks of God COMMANDING things to be as He has designed it. God's words move things from the realm of invisibility to the realm of visibility or tangibility ACCORDING to His DESIGN!
If you make a wristwatch and sell it to someone, you are still the 100% the maker.
If a group of people execute a work, the owner of the idea and initiator is the CREATOR of the project outcome irrespective of the number of people working on the project.
Wilgrea7: I never said so. I never claimed the universe wasn't created with a reason in mind. The point i was trying to make, is that there is a big difference between saying
1) X was created for a reason (the reason here is arbitrary, and not yet defined, but agreed that there is a reason) 2) X was created for this specific reason
This is what i was talking about. By this statement, you're not just saying that the creator created the universe for a reason. You're also claiming to know the specific reason, which in this case would be
1. Created for himself 2. For the purpose of relating with it's inhabitants on a personal level
I can accept that we exist for a reason.. but I don't claim to know what that reason is. If someone tells me they do, i usually proceed to ask how they got to find out.
Understandable
The bible made it very clear that God made the Universe (like a garden of flowers) for His own purpose and delight. Rev 4:11: "You are worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power: for you have created all things, and for your pleasure they are and were created."
A farmer may find it difficult to comprehend why a rich man spent millions to development a garden of Flowers and Herbarium since none of it will translate into money. But, the owner just want a place of relaxation and rest.
Same also with the universe. It's like a garden of Eden for God!
MaxInDHouse: Both questions has been answered in the life and ministry of Jesus Christ!
If the Roman government wants to dominate or be in control of Judea it's OK from Jesus' standpoint and so if Russia wants to dominate Ukraine or Ukraine wants to dominate Russia it's OK from the standpoint of Christ and all his followers. What we will never do is pick up weapons in support of any side. So you insisting i support is a misconception because what i'm saying is: "It's no big deal, why should we support any side when our brothers in Christ are living in both side? We love our neighbours as ourselves {Mark 12:31} and our brothers just as Christ loves us {John 13:34-35} so politicians should go and sought out whatever is between them we will never pick up weapons in support of either side" Hope you understand now!
Sorry. All you did was to evade answering applied questions with respect to your personal views!
MaxInDHouse: From the standpoint of Jesus and his true disciples both are politicians (those that depends on the power of might) so whoever has more power decides what should be. That is the order from time immemorial so it's no big deal, whoever has more power rules as in dominate the other! Only God's Kingdom will come and settle all that so until then we surrender to the one who has more power never to support either side in taking the lives of our fellowman just because we want to be part of Hausa, Ibo or Yorùbá. Our own brothers in Christ are no part of the world where you people think of race! John 4:24
You see as you've gone tangent to the questions again. I thought you support the action of Putin who wanted to annex Ukraine! So I asked 1. Would it be okay if Ukraine also demand that Russia be annexed into their country? 2. If both is okay: how do you resolve the problem? You never answered my questions
The first question is a validation of your opinion and YES or NO would do.
If your answer is YES, how would you reconcile you supporting both sides.
MaxInDHouse: This is how you came in between the OP and myself:
And i told you that both are humans so they can easily resolve their issues all they needed is to calmly address the politicians involved if they don't want killings. But whoever picks up weapons in support of either side is not a lover of peace.
So i'm not supporting any side!
You forgot you were the one who said:
MaxInDHouse: You don't need to demonize one politician just to make the other look like an angel. I told you from the onset:
So if the ruler of Russia decides to extend his boarders in order to make Ukraine part of Russia there's no crime after all he's not making Ukrainians slaves to Russians rather he's trying to reclaim states that broke away from Russia. Then Ukrainians only need to surrender to the will of Russia their former country instead of planning a siege which has led to killings between the two countries.
So I asked you if Ukraine too should take such stance, would you say it's also okay ?
I thought you support the action of Putin who wanted to annex Ukraine! So I asked 1. Would it be okay if Ukraine also demand that Russia be annexed into their country? 2. If both is okay: how do you resolve the problem?
You see why I said: you never answered my questions?
MaxInDHouse: I just don't know the type of answer you're demanding!
You asked me a question and i told you what all JWs will do because we're no longer living for ourselves but for the one who died for us {2Corinthians 5:15} So stop deceiving yourself whether we (JWs) live or die it's for our God {Romans 14:7-8} because we're sure that it's just a sleep as our Master, Lord and King said about Lazarus {John 11:11} and the daughter of Jairus {Luke 8:52} if we die we're sure that he will bring us back to life when his kingdom begins operation {John 11:25} just as he spoke confidently to a dying man we will be with him in Paradise! Luke 23:43
So whether Russia attack Ukraine or Ukraine attack Russia we remain neutral as in no part of their troubles! John 17:14
Did you not imply that it's okay for Russia to demand annexation of Ukraine? And you said Ukraine should resolve the matter amicably through dialogue.
I now asked: I thought you support the action of Putin who wanted to annex Ukraine! So I asked 1. Would it be okay if Ukraine also demand that Russia be annexed into their country? 2. If both is okay: how do you resolve the problem? You never answered my questions!
MaxInDHouse: Did Jesus supported the Roman government when he said tax is a normal thing in this system of things? Mark 12:13-17 Or did he support the Roman armies when he told his disciples not to raise weapons against the invading Romans? Luke 21:20-21
Ọmọ just say you don't trust (believe) Jesus and let's TEACH you why he's the most wonderful counselor of all time! Isaiah 9:6
I am asking you a direct question based on what you said and you are using evasive technique!
MaxInDHouse: You said you believe (trust) in Jesus shey?
OK let's see what Jesus said when the same thing happened in the first century:
The Roman government has been in control of so many cities around the Mediterranean sea including Judea (Jesus' homeland) so when he began his ministry the Jews were anticipating a revolution against Rome after all the Messiah (Christ) is now with them and according to Daniel's prophecy the Christ will conquer all the kingdoms of the world {Daniel 2:44} and establish David's throne forever! Isaiah 9:6 -7
In fact the people got fed up with Jesus' story story ministry and decided to make him King by force since all evidence points to him as the expected Messiah (Christ) but instead of Jesus to start acting in line with their quest he ran away from them! John 6:15
Even John the baptist became confused as the last prophet who also taught the people so many things about the Christ, John's confusion became obvious when he was languishing in prison and Jesus didn't come to rescue him! Matthew 11:2-3
The situation keep getting worse and what did Jesus told his disciples about Jewish revolt against Rome? He made his disciples realize that by the time the Jews start to revolt against Rome his own disciples shouldn't join rather they should run away from Jerusalem because both the city and temple will be destroyed by the Roman government! Luke 21:20-24 compare to Matthew 24:1-2
Now you (TenQ) in particular do you think Jesus is making any sense with this statement? Because this is his country where his mother, brothers, sisters, cousins, uncles, aunties and many more lives so what do you think about his line of thought?
Well if you're interested in knowing the answer to the highlighted questions just signal by typing "i want to know" and i will TEACH you. Matthew 28:20 But as for your two questions it's clear from Jesus' words that his disciples aren't supposed to support even their homeland in times of WAR. So if you believe in Jesus that's what he taught his own disciples and that's exactly what JWs always do anytime there is WAR.
May you have PEACE!
I thought you support the action of Putin who wanted to annex Ukraine! So I asked 1. Would it be okay if Ukraine also demand that Russia be annexed into their country?
2. If both is okay: how do you resolve the problem?
JoeNL22: We the left-thinking Nigerians must remain steadfast in been obedient and Yus-ful in ensuring the country becomes great like never before. #GetYourPVCNotCVP
To be obedient to these people in the red and green house?
Can this happen in our present senate or is it that 1. Our Senators are no longer corrupt 2. Our Senate is now wiser and know how to prevent this kind of public embarrassment. 3. Our Chairmans, DGs and Heads of Parastatals are compliant with senators demands 4. Any other point!
MaxInDHouse: So Jesus didn't know his disciples will be affected when he was issuing the directive shey?
I thought you people also claim you believe (trust) Jesus?
Do you now see that only JWs truly believe in the Prince of Peace?
Why was it difficult for you to answer two simple practical questions?
I trust Jesus for my future! Jesus allows me to take personal decisions in my present. 1Cor 2:16: "For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ." In my present especially in difficult situation, He leads me to take the right decisions (especially when I ask sincerely).
Now I ask a question about the present with Ukraine and Russia.
As far as you are concerned, it is okay if Russia demand that Ukraine be annexed to their country. 1. Would it be okay if Ukraine also demand that Russia be annexed into their country? 2. If both is okay: how do you resolve the problem?
LordReed: It seems whatever you are smoking is making you more and more dense. What part of "we don't know" are you struggling with?
LMAO! You are so high you can't even understand a simple question. If your god is almighty why are you insisting he needs some constants to produce life but you are so dense you are comparing it to eyes, for the love of Andromeda did you insist that eyes are necessary for life? How are you so stupid?
Dumbo I am not the one insisting these constants are necessary for life, that's you but when faced with how dumb the idea sounds you turn into a blithering idiot. Stop smoking cheap drugs.
UgoFly: I read every post in this thread and it was filled with intelligent and sound arguments with very little insults. I appreciate everyone who contributed on both sides. I have learnt a lot. Muslims should be more open to interactions and discussions like this. I have learnt more about Islam from this thread.
Thanks for this observation. It is actually possible to trade hard truths from opposing sides without being abusive or insulting about it.
Poor upbringing whether of a Christian, Muslim, Agnostic or Atheists is what causes verbal diarrhea!
MaxInDHouse: From 1919~2019 means a 100 years that Jesus has worked with JWs throughout the earth to gather his prospective kingdom subjects so get prepared for the showdown because this is just the beginning of the end! Matthew 24:4-14
As for your question our Master, Lord and King Christ Jesus gave us a command saying:
“Also, there will be signs in the sun and moon and stars, and on the earth anguish of nations not knowing the way out because of the roaring of the sea and its agitation. People will become faint out of fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. And then they will see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. But as these things start to occur, stand up straight and lift up your heads, because your deliverance is getting near.” Luke 21:25-28
All we need is to keep calm and believe (trust) in the God of our salvation, so it's left to you if truthfully you also believe in the God that sent Jesus! Psalms 30:15
I asked you some certain practical questions that affect even you Jaws. But it seems you have no answer! I ask not about what will happen when Christ returns, I asked about JW views about their members in Ukraine AND Russia.
That's why I asked the questions As far as you are concerned, it is okay if Russia demand that Ukraine be annexed to their country. 1. Would it be okay if Ukraine also demand that Russia be annexed into their country? 2. If both is okay: how do you resolve the problem?
LordReed: Read the number 1 point you yourself highlighted and tell me how it is different from what I said. And contrary to your objection he does know what he is talking about since he is a subject matter expert while you are just some guy on the internet, we do not know period.
Your disappointment is irrelevant, all you have to do is produce the evidence that contradicts him.
Even though I don't want to overflog this: his first point was a mere assertion of the fact that he unconvinced and Dr Craig didn't give him any evidence. Only for him WITHOUT any evidence claim he doesn't know if life can exist if the physical constant change.
If the Physical Constant do not change, would LIFE therefore exist? You and your pastor should be able to answer this simple question!
You see why I said that you NL Atheists treat them like Christians treat their Pastors!? Your argument is that "he does know what he is talking about since he is a subject matter expert while you are just some guy on the internet," I clap for you!
And I'm asking you the same question for the third time now with no response:
Do you honestly believe that million of Universe exist simultaneously with our own?
LordReed: Also you still haven't answered why your god would be limited by these constants. I find it funny that someone who believes in an almighty god also seems to believe this almighty could not create life if the constants were different. Can you admit that that is actually contradictory?
I am laughing in your village dialect?
1. Do you think you make any sense? After the deed is already done you are asking if God couldn't have used other constants? It's like saying that God gave us a pair of eyes. Why couldn't He have given us 10 or 12 or even 30 eyes as He is God! Since God is all-powerful, why didn't He make humans to have speed or why didn't God make humans to be 30feet tall!? 2. You forget that the so-called universal physical constants are OUR OWN measurements using OUR OWN measurement scales in comprehending Patterns in PHYSICAL OBSERVABLES!
God didn't tell anyone that He used any constants. It is us in the cause of measurements arrived at the conclusion of symmetries in physical observables we call constants.
It's like studying the pyramid in Egypt and observing that it is facing a perfect East-West direction, and that the ratio of the height to the base is 3.143 and the ratio of the weight to the length is exactly 6,843kg/m. Now your question is like asking: why couldn't they make the constants different from what you have observed!
I shake my head for you falling for such a dumb question by your acclaimed "expert in the subject matter "!
Wilgrea7: Yes. But it is also possible that our creator, could also have a creator. We create robots. We are it's cause, but certainly not a first cause. It is also possible, that whatever the cause of the universe is, also had a cause. Sure, we need to avoid infinite regress. But we could have 2, 3 or even 10 generation of causes/creators.
The Creator is the first cause of everything and every other consciousness is an EFFECT. Therefore, our Creator cannot have another creator as it is scientifically and logically impossible to have an infinite regress of cause and effect
Wilgrea7: I agree with the complexity, and to an extent, intelligence. But I'm not sure I'll go as far as to say that the physical constants were "created". The reason we can say the universe was, is because we know of a time when it didn't exist. Based on our current knowledge, it was because of the value of the constants, that the universe came to be the way it is. Were they formed beforehand? We simply don't know.
The physical constants are the rules upon which everything physical is created. A little change in the physical constants results in no universe at all.
You can learn from this video by Alvin Ash (an atheist physicist)
No one knows why the numbers are what they are. But we know they are inter-related and a change of one even by a small amount changes EVERYTHING drastically.
Every programmer uses CONSTANT
Wilgrea7: I think you're mistaking first cause, with the agents responsible for that cause. For example, Helium is formed from 2 hydrogen atoms, coming together through nuclear fusion. The fusion, which results in the creation of helium, is thought of as the cause. But the agents that brought about the cause, are 2, not one, hydrogen atoms. In the case of ozone, we have 3 oxygen atoms.
The creation of the universe, which we've come to refer to as the big bang, was the "cause". The agents behind the cause, is what some people call God. In most cases, a singular one. What I'm wondering is if the agents/God behind the first cause could be multiple, just as the hydrogen atoms needed for fusion to produce helium are also multiple.
Your illustration as per the fussion of hydrogen atoms to create helium is very wrong
Hydrogen: Proton=1, Neutron=0, Electron=1 Helium: Proton=2, Neutron=2, Electron=2 There is no way two hydrogen atoms could fuse and become helium atom (where does the neutron come from?).
The big bang was not the cause of the universe it was an effect. The gravitational singularity would have remained itself for eternity as a constant UNLESS some external force (the first cause) causes it to change state.
If Minister for Power solved our Electricity problem in Nigeria in one week and we start producing 26GWatt of electricity. Buhari can truely claim he did it. And of course, it is Buhari's achievement. One of the achievement of OBJ as president was NAFDAC. True or false.
It is a lame argument to insist that the problem solver was not the president but the minister: just as you are trying to claim that maybe there are "sub-creators" who created the universe. Why does it matter?
Wilgrea7: That is true. I'll grant you that. I don't yet understand consciousness. But the relationship between intelligence and consciousness is one I agree with.
Okay
Wilgrea7: Saying something was created is one thing. Saying you know the purpose, for which something was created is another discussion entirely. Saying the creator, would want to relate with the creation at all, talkless of on a personal level, is another world of discussions entirely too.
Do you think people create/make things without any purpose? When you plant a garden, do you have a reason?
When you build a boat, do you have a reason?
When you paint a picture, do you have a reason?
When you build a bridge, do you have a reason?
You now expect the Creator of the Universe not to have any reason behind His creation?
If the Creator made the Universe for Himself and not for someone else, don't you think He would relate to it at a personal level?
Wilgrea7: Relative to us? Sure. But if it can be computed, If there exists a number for the amount of energy, no matter how high, then it is not infinite. But I will agree that the argument for omnipotence is a good one. Simply because we cannot know. At least, like you said, relative to us, we can grant the creators the attribute of omnipotence
The word infinity or infinite is NOT a specific number. It just means so large as to dwarf the nearest computation.
Therefore, the distance of the sun to the earth may be described as infinite with respect to the diameter of a Coca-Cola bottle cover.
Just look at the power in the first atomic bomb carried by a B12 Bomber to Hiroshima. What if the bomb was the size of the earth? The sun can contain almost a thousand earth's within its volume: how much energy do you think that is? Now our sun is one of the small stars and there are millions of stars. How much energy do you think that is?
This is why God the Creator is Infinitely powerful !
MaxInDHouse: The highlighted is what you should meditate upon thoroughly because if everyone in Russia and Ukraine are JWs no single person will lift up weapons against his fellowman!
Till Jesus comes, everyone cannot become nominal Christian not even to mention JW.
So, your scenario is an impossibility!
MaxInDHouse: As for resolving problems Jesus taught us not to wait for the problem to come before we take steps to confront it {Matthew 5:25} that's why God's word called him the world's most wonderful counselor of all time! Isaiah 9:6
We are his disciples and he's our King so whatever he says is our way of RESOLVING issues Sir! John 15:14
Unfortunately, this is already a problem where both Ukraine and Russia has members who are JW.
The problem has come, what is the solution?
That's why I asked the questions As far as you are concerned, it is okay if Russia demand that Ukraine be annexed to their country.
1. Would it be okay if Ukraine also demand that Russia be annexed into their country?
2. If both is okay: how do you resolve the problem?
This man opened up by saying that this is the best argument from the theological point of view. Why would he say such? He admits that if the universal constants change by a little, thing will change a lot
He now went off to give five objections to what he considers a terrible.
1. He is by no means convinced and Dr Craig does not give any evidence for it. We just don't know if life can exist if the physical constant change
He didn't really give any point of his number one point. If he doesn't know, what is he arguing against
2. God doesn't need to fine-tune anything. God doesn't care for the mass of the electrons.
He forgets that for there to exist order, there has to be rules. It's just like telling a programmer that he can program any computer without following any rules.
3. The constant is only apparent once we understand the physics of the universe better. We don't know the answer yet
But this is the best of physics we understand now. Arguments should be based on our current understanding of the laws of physics. It's like me arguing that 2+3=6.3 my argument based on the fact that in future a new mathematics would be invented that would justify the answer
4. Starting with Cosmological Multiverse you can arrive at the same parameters as our present universe
Unfortunately, there exist not even ONE evidence of another universe to prove this. If the Multiverse Theory is correct, we must have seen at least one of the millions.
5. Theism fails as an explanation based on the kind of universe we expect from both naturalistic views and theistic views.
He now creates Strawman arguments in what he expects creations to be under theistic views as against naturalistic view.
I was expecting some good stuff from this man being a Cosmologist but I am thoroughly disappointed in him (and this is an understatement)
Christianity Etc › Re: If Allah Is NOT Yahweh, All Muslims Are In Trouble by TenQ(op): 10:20pm On Jul 30, 2022
