No God
-
An interesting and common misconception amongst people seems to be that if evolution exists, that means God does not.
I say interesting, because it is not only "scientists" who seem to have this view but also "Muslims".
As always, why not read what The Quran says about the topic? A simple google of "evolution in quran" will do for a starting point.
-
Peace,
Life on Earth is formed through a cause and effect where the laws and conditions where pre-designed at the moment of the Bigbang that eventually led to the outcome of Intelligent life. Thus there is no blind chance involved (Darwinism) or a constant tinkering and interfering (ID-Creationism). The laws of the Universe create a direction for the chaotic process of evolution. The biggest mistake people make is when they try to use Biological evolution as the basis for there is no designer, while they completely ignore the Physical laws that allow evolution that show clear traces of design. This so-called black-and-white vision is created through the non-objective and unscientific debate between evolutionists and creationists, while these two do not all determine the true conclusion if there is a God or not. The ONLY persons who can give this conclusion are the Cosmologists, Quantum Physicists and Higher Physicists as they research the systems of laws that control ALL processes within the universe. Evolution is just 1 process within the grand-design of the universe and thus can never be the indicator of design or not, only the outerframe of the natural laws can give this conclusion.
The nr.1 Astrophysicist Professor Paul Davies
?There is no doubt that, even in the crude form, the hypothesis of an intelligent designer applied to the laws of nature is far superior then the designer considered in the previous section (of his book that discussed creationism red.), who violates the laws of nature from time to time by working miracles in evolutionary history. Design-by-laws is incomparably more intelligent than design-by-miracles. If I were an omnipotent being who wanted to make an inhabited universe like ours, and I could achieve this simply by conjuring up what I wanted when I wanted it, I wouldn?t regard my activities as very clever. But to select a set of laws that, without nay periodic fixing up and micromanagment, can bring a universe into being and bring about self-organisation, self-complexification and self-assembly of life and conciousness-well, that looks very clever indeed! So the ?intelligent?design beloved of the Intelligent Design movement strikes me as not very intelligent at all, in contrast to a designer of laws of nature which by themselves have such astonishing creative ability without the need for intervention and miracles. Intelligent design of the laws does not conflict with science, because it accepts that the whole universe runs itself according to physical laws, and that everything that happens in the universe has a natural explanation. There are no miracles other than the miracle of nature itself. You don?t even need a miracle to bring the universe into existence in the first place, because the big bang may be brought within to explain the origin of the universe from nothing, or by assuming something like eternal inflation. The designer-of-laws is responsible for the universe, and might be thought of as upholding its existence at every moment, but does not tinker with its day to day operation. The type of God I am describing comes close, I think, to what many scholarly theologians-and for that quite a few scientists-profess to believe in.?
Page 226. The Goldilocks Enigma by Paul Davies, 2006.
Evolution does not exclude God, as the laws of the Universe allow a perfect condition wherein the chaotic process of evolution is destined to create intelligent life as Paul Davies mentions above.
Evolution is like a rubber ball that is thrown in a room, the walls give direction and limits to the ball. While the bouncing of the ball looks chaotic and designless, when we look beyond the ball, we see a clear pattern of design as gravity, the molecular structure of the ball, the walls and their strucute and position, and the throw of the ball itself were all works of an intelligent designer.
This is very unconvincing.God ,now as designer of laws,not intelligent designer,God who starts the ball rolling,blows the whistle and starts the game.
Why.The all powerful God of Abrahamic religion can create immediatly,why wait for trillions of years to see what develops.
This God seems to be like the "ghost" in the machine,not required for the functioning of it,a construct of our minds. -
How can I do other though in the face of the facts?
Which facts ? that the universe came into existence from nothing and innate matter made of sub-atomic particles which magically attained mass and united into 92 natural elements then combined into unique 4 bit chemical code for each of the billions of species or that Einstein and G?del concluded that time was fiction...
http//www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/02/28/050228crat_atlarge
"There is no physical universe! Nothing but a vast collective halucination!" -- The Serial Universe By J. W. Dunne
632 And the life the present/worldly life is not except amusement and play things, and the life in the hereafter is by far the better for all who are conscious of God. Will you not, then, use your reason?
Peace
-
Why.The all powerful God of Abrahamic religion can create immediatly,why wait for trillions of years to see what develops.
Excellent question. I will test your thought process now. Tell me, have you thought of the possible reasons for doing it in this manner?
-
The All Powerful God of Abrahamic religion created matter and the laws of physics, and made matter submissive to those laws. Those laws have guided matter to an arrangement that includes you, me, our philosophies and reasonings, and this discussion. Those laws will determine what happens from here onward. Everything we do is determined by those laws, and thus was determined at the beginning of the universe. You say that this argument turns God from being an "active" God into an "inactive" God who only got things started, but your point of view is confining God to the limits of time (a thing which is effected by gravity and mass, which means it is created, which means God is not subjected to it). God created matter and the laws governing it at the beginning of time, but that moment has not passed for Him, He is eternal and not bound by the constraints of time. Instead of doubting the existence of God you should be doubting your reasoning for confining God to the limits He has set for us.
I'd recommend that you read "Beyond Einstein;" a physics book about the fundamental nature of existence. You will be surprised what those secular scientist's conclusion is (spoiler it's God). The idea that science disproves God was in fashion for a while but modern scientific research is absolutely in support of the existence of an uncreated God-creator. What books have you been reading?
-
Interesting thing about Einstein - he didn't believe in God, but he did believe in Intelligent Design. He rejected the idea that the universe was random - so he would have been against Dawkins et al.
-
The All Powerful God of Abrahamic religion created matter and the laws of physics, and made matter submissive to those laws. Those laws have guided matter to an arrangement that includes you, me, our philosophies and reasonings, and this discussion. Those laws will determine what happens from here onward. Everything we do is determined by those laws, and thus was determined at the beginning of the universe. You say that this argument turns God from being an "active" God into an "inactive" God who only got things started, but your point of view is confining God to the limits of time (a thing which is effected by gravity and mass, which means it is created, which means God is not subjected to it). God created matter and the laws governing it at the beginning of time, but that moment has not passed for Him, He is eternal and not bound by the constraints of time. Instead of doubting the existence of God you should be doubting your reasoning for confining God to the limits He has set for us.
I'd recommend that you read "Beyond Einstein;" a physics book about the fundamental nature of existence. You will be surprised what those secular scientist's conclusion is (spoiler it's God). The idea that science disproves God was in fashion for a while but modern scientific research is absolutely in support of the existence of an uncreated God-creator. What books have you been reading?
Genetic science evidences the fact that biological evolutuoion can be traced.Physical science theorises as to the development of the universe and its atomic makeup(which has evidence),the sequence of events dont appear random because of the vast,unimegianble lengths of time involved,but random they were.As species change in accord with the environment,over time changing into differant species.
If God created us,by setting the ball rolling and knowing that we would be the result,why did it have to be so complicated and he needed other species to enable us to function-Mitochondria-he couldnt just make us.We are in effect x2 co existing animals,human and mitochondria.For those uninitiated,they are bacteria like organisms that convert oxygen into fuel for us,they have a differant DNA,to us.
What books have you been reading? -
Interesting thing about Einstein - he didn't believe in God, but he did believe in Intelligent Design. He rejected the idea that the universe was random - so he would have been against Dawkins et al.
I believe Einstien was a Deist a bit like Pantheism,I can go along with that idea to a degree,but this seems to rule out the personal God of the Abrahamic religions.
-
Genetic science evidences the fact that biological evolutuoion can be traced.Physical science theorises as to the development of the universe and its atomic makeup(which has evidence),the sequence of events dont appear random because of the vast,unimegianble lengths of time involved,but random they were.As species change in accord with the environment,over time changing into differant species.
If God created us,by setting the ball rolling and knowing that we would be the result,why did it have to be so complicated and he needed other species to enable us to function-Mitochondria-he couldnt just make us.We are in effect x2 co existing animals,human and mitochondria.For those uninitiated,they are bacteria like organisms that convert oxygen into fuel for us,they have a differant DNA,to us.
What books have you been reading?I told you what books I have been reading, Beyond Einstein; and obviously Qu'ran .
So your question is, if God is all-powerful why didn't he just create us all at once, right?
Maybe he did. What do you know? Look at the sky, and you see stars. Go up into the sky and you could go on for a long time... forever, maybe. We can't say, we haven't reached the end yet. Then what is the earth? Look at yourself, and you see organs, cells, organelles, molecules, atoms, subatomic particles, sub-subatomic particles, and even further. We can't say, we haven't reached the end yet. Look back in time, and you see your childhood, your parent's life, the history of your nation, the history of your species, the history of your planet, the history of your universe... where does it end? It's been theorized that time is of matter (like space) and this moment, "NOW," is all that we have, and no matter how far we look back or how far we look forward we'll only see infinity (the same for looking out from the earth or in into ourselves, or into a Mandelbrot Set). Let me ask you again WHAT DO YOU KNOW?
You are citing examples from biology and physical science, but they have their limits. What explains the most fundamental, basic unit of matter than mitochondria and DNA are made out of? NOTHING (as of yet). There are theories but nothing is conclusive. It's true that species change over time, we've seen that happen; whether they change into other species I can't say (there is currently much debate on this, if you think you have the answer you should share it with those debating it), however, that's irrelevant to the question "is there a god?" God creates what He wills, and the naturals laws are one of His mediums and represent the execution of His will.
There absolutely must be a God; He may not be a "personality" like Christianity and Judaism and orthodox Islam paint Him, but all of these have been corrupted by their culture's traditions. The Qu'ran stands up to your criticism.
-
No please tell me,you have concluded He did do it that way.Is this what orthodox Islam holds to be the case?
I never concluded anything.
Your response "Why.The all powerful God of Abrahamic religion can create immediatly,why wait for trillions of years to see what develops." implied you could not think of a reason for doing it in such a manner. So I asked can you think of any possible reason(s) for doing it in this manner? Have you even thought about it?
I will wait for some possibilities first before replying.
-
"Excellent question. I will test your thought process now. Tell me, have you thought of the possible reasons for doing it in this manner?" - Wakas
My apologies,I wrongly assumed you hold this view,based on the slant I percieved in your post.
Nothing springs to mind,it makes no sense to me. -
Actually,the only thing that comes to mind is that the spirit would need to learn lessons and could only do so by experience and struggle,ie,evolution.This however would feed into the idea of reincarnation,in that the spirit would move successively through each stage before developing into man.
Ramadan Mubarak to everyone. -
The first possibility that springs to my mind is that an alternative to God must exist. After all, that is the purpose of this life. If all or most of the evidence pointed to God existing or God not existing, then the test would be heavily weighted towards one of the answers. A fine balance must be struck.
Interestingly, from the information out there on this subject, the balance seems to be just about right. Not to mention, trillions of years is nothing for God, so the time aspect is irrelevant.
So let's say God exists, and makes creation in such a way that God can be found and at the same time can imply there is no God....i.e. strikes a fine balance, leaving the question open to our own free choice, is that not genius?
-
-
i sincerely believe the answers the apparent godlessness in time and space are in the example of the Mandlebrot set, that we live in A divinely created one in both spatial and temporal dimensions. I am disappointed that you all overlooked that possibility
DOH!
