h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

<>

We already have a word which describes the above. And, in fact, you used it. "Universe." Why call the universe "god"? Why bow down and worship it, or talk to it, or perform silly ceremonies in honor of it? What's the point?

Whats the point????
Simply if wasnt for the universe being here we wouldnt be here,or anything else ?
I regard anything that made our very existence possible,as God.


Ofcourse thats in my opinion.

Well, your existence depends on a whole lot of things, so you'd be pretty busy with the whole worship thing. For example, existence would be pretty difficult without the ozone layer, and I'm not really sure which animal sacrifices have a pleasing aroma to ozone. And parents generally appreciate a bit of appreciation, but I don't think there are too many mothers who would welcome bowing and fawning, even if it was only on special occasions.

If it weren't for the universe you wouldn't be here, but then, if you weren't here, would you even notice?

i dont worship everything,Infact i wouldnt expect God to expect me,a small uniportant creature to worship him/her/it,as i believe God would be past the,expecting things to bow down to him/her/it.
As for your last bit you posted,i am here ,so somthing must have started the ball rolling for me to be able to say I AM HERE.

But why call that something "god"?

Cause the excuse of the big bang,Doesnt quite fit with me,I have had this discussion a few times on here.At the beginning there was nothing.and now we have the vast thing called the universe.
theres Radioactivity throughout the universe proving there was an explosion.
we all understand when you have an empty jar.if you dont put anything into the jar,it will always remain empty,

So i see it this way when the universe started, God came into Existence,Therefor in billions of years later creating us,and life as we understand it.

If God had not come into being,nothing else would have.

Kindly explain how these two propositions are different:

1) At the beginning there was nothing.and now we have the vast thing called the universe.

2) At the beginning there was nothing.and now we have the vast thing called God.

Im just calling the big bang and everything since then,i call that god.
The idea of the fact we came about from nothing is mind blowing,so im putting that down to god,

I would like to add,certain ppl mock others beliefs in mystical and magical things.Usually atheist's do it.They are straight down the line,And think we are deluding ourselfs into believing things,like god,the after life etc.
Yet the make up the biggest mystical conclusion ever,in the big bang excuse.
Come on now atheist,whos the one making up the mystical belief now??

>>Actually the same argument as the first is it not<<

Not really, it avoids getting trapped in determinism, which happens with the first one. Plus, it doesn't need omniscience to work, I just wanted to compare like with like so I left it in. They are very close though and I had to be quite careful when writing them so I didn't make the same point twice

>>"theres Radioactivity throughout the universe proving there was an explosion."

Actually, there's *electromagnetic radiation* in the form of a weak microwave signal, but not radioactivity.

It's not at all clear that there was nothing before the Big Bang, just as it's not at all clear that what we call the Universe *is* actually everything - it may be a Vanishingly small part of some much greater system.

In terms of an 'empty' jar, physics would seem to indicate that there may be no such thing as absolutely empty volume of space

Sorry Ictoan, I didn't read your response properly before answering.

I still stand by my point though, if an omniscient God chose not to use their omniscience then I don't think there would be a problem with determinism. The God sees what would happen if omniscience were used with humans and free will, doesn't like what he/she/it sees and doesn't use that omniscience. Presumably in a deterministic universe with a god, that god would be able to make different choices, because ultimately he/she/it is the only creature with the ability to choose.

Or you could just get rid of omniscience from the second example, I'm starting to like that idea more now

if something is empty its empty,so all im saying what filled the uiverse is God,
So i guess im saying the whole ideal is mystical,GOD created everything,If he/she/it didnt,well im not here to be chatting to any of you,

<>

Again, what is the difference between these two propositions:

1) The universe created itself.

2) God created himself, and then he created the universe.

The difference is that the second one is the more absurd of the two. If you're saying the universe is too complex to have created itself, then that assumption eliminates the chance that God could have created himself. He would, after all, have to be more complex than his creation. Your argument basically says that a sheet of paper cannot have created itself, but was created by an 18-volume set of encyclopedias which created itself.

<>

There has been no mockery to this point. But it's worth pointing out how quickly believers go on the defensive when their emperor is shown to have no clothes.

<>

It's worth noting that atheists do not have sole proprietorship of the Big Bang Theory. There are quite a few theists who recognize the merit of the theory, because it is supported by real-world observations and calculations. It is treated as any theory, which means that it is not accepted as thoroughly proven, and is constantly scrutinized and re-examined in the presence of new data. Big Bang also does not propose to explain the ultimate answers of how life came to be, nor even why a Big Bang happened at all.

The god theory, on the other hand, summarily ignores any new evidence. It also proposes to explain how life came to be, but it does such a poor job of it that it's not worth taking seriously.

It's perfectly acceptable to look at the universe, or certain aspects of it, and feel awe and inspiration at its functionality and its beauty in a way that feels, for lack of a better term, "spiritual", without inventing a whole lot of nonsense to explain it.

God is everything,I never said god came about himself/herself/itselfs, then created the universe.God came into Existence when everything started,he/she/it ,is therefor the stars the planets,earth me and you etc.God is everything.

Its to easy to say that the universe came from mere atoms,no the universe was meant to to turn out this way,
The way gravity works,BioChemics work,they worked out pretty well to be able to eventually create us.

In your thinking mankind got pretty lucky,not only do we live in a universe that came from nowhere,also in the universe we are living there was the right chemicals to be able to create life US.

My GOD Makind got very lucky.

<>

So *you* are also God, Boxing?

(that's a serious question, btw)


az

>>"if something is empty its empty,so all im saying what filled the uiverse is God."

Unfortunately, Quantum Mechanics would seem to indicate that 'empty' is a term of dubious meaning.

>>"The way gravity works,BioChemics work,they worked out pretty well to be able to eventually create us."

When people say things like that, I do wonder whether they are often in fact saying:
"The universe worked pretty well to be able to create *me*"

Az,yes thats what im saying,I am here,so is the stars the plants and everything.

All the things above,came into existence from nothing,so i guess along the line im involved.

Potholer,you saying empty cannot be defined??Put it this way then,everything came from the big bang,I recall another person saying <in another thread) time started at the Precise moment universe came into being,all im saying if empty cannont be defind,

there must have been something before the universe came about,
as you say Quantum Physics is a term of dubious meaning.when it comes to the word empty.

I still say God came into being when everything started.

<>

But of course, your definition of "God" is "everything", therefore this statement can be rewritten as, "I still say everything came into being when everything started." That's a fairly redundant and meaningless statement.