generic image
Processing...
  • Games
  • Catalog
  • Develop
  • Robux
  • Search in Players
  • Search in Games
  • Search in Catalog
  • Search in Groups
  • Search in Library
  • Log In
  • Sign Up
  • Games
  • Catalog
  • Develop
  • Robux
   
ROBLOX Forum » Club Houses » Off Topic
Home Search
 

Re: WHy a theological entity almost certainly cannot exist.

Previous Thread :: Next Thread 
devildog199 is not online. devildog199
Joined: 05 Dec 2010
Total Posts: 7887
04 Nov 2011 06:08 PM
1) The space-time boundary, entropic fluctuation, and big-splat models all take out all room for the existence of any such God.
2) The gaps that people wedge open to 'prove' a God (I.E.; We don't have the actual method of abiogenesis that occured to begin life, etc.) are quickly dissappearing, leaving little room for a creator.
3) There are a number of (and this is only for creationist theists) errors in human and other animal's genes that imply natural selection and not creation (I.E. an upside-down retina.
4) A God, by definition, would have to exist outside of time. The only true way to do this would be to travel at the speed of life, leaving you outside of null cones. The only way to do that would be to be massless, and massless particles can not comprise an entity.
5) So many things can go here, but I'm not going to ramble on...
Note: Newton, Einstein(An agnostic later in his life), etc. believe(s,d) in God, who are you to question them, is not a valid argument,
Report Abuse
BuilderoftheIons is not online. BuilderoftheIons
Joined: 22 Sep 2011
Total Posts: 189
04 Nov 2011 06:09 PM
i think you ctrl c and ctrl v this
Report Abuse
devildog199 is not online. devildog199
Joined: 05 Dec 2010
Total Posts: 7887
04 Nov 2011 06:14 PM
Builder, no.
I want you to find a thread like this.
Report Abuse
Boeing717 is not online. Boeing717
Top 25 Poster
Joined: 08 Jun 2008
Total Posts: 70007
04 Nov 2011 06:15 PM
"A God, by definition, would have to exist outside of time"

Why?
Report Abuse
supershadow2113 is not online. supershadow2113
Joined: 10 Apr 2008
Total Posts: 7316
04 Nov 2011 06:19 PM
I would explain number 3

but I would only get banned/warning for "spam"
Report Abuse
dutzy is not online. dutzy
Joined: 27 Oct 2011
Total Posts: 416
04 Nov 2011 06:23 PM
your reasons are full of fallacies.


"1) The space-time boundary, entropic fluctuation, and big-splat models all take out all room for the existence of any such God."

To make this claim you have to know how much "space" a "god" would take up. You are assuming you know this, but since you don, that point is moot.

2) The gaps that people wedge open to 'prove' a God (I.E.; We don't have the actual method of abiogenesis that occured to begin life, etc.) are quickly dissappearing, leaving little room for a creator.

Not everyone who believes in a* God is a fundamental. lern2derp



"So many things can go here, but I'm not going to ramble on..."

Report Abuse
devildog199 is not online. devildog199
Joined: 05 Dec 2010
Total Posts: 7887
04 Nov 2011 06:24 PM
Boeing, a true God would be ominipotent. I do agree that I postulated that the God you believe in is omnipotent, and that is incorrect, but wouldn't it make sense that a true God would have the ability to travel out of time?
Report Abuse
gsterman is not online. gsterman
Joined: 14 Sep 2008
Total Posts: 7165
04 Nov 2011 06:25 PM
[ Content Deleted ]
Report Abuse
devildog199 is not online. devildog199
Joined: 05 Dec 2010
Total Posts: 7887
04 Nov 2011 06:26 PM
Dutzy
1. I am not mentioning how much space a God would take up because that is irrelevant. In the term of space-time boundary, someone who existed beforehand would be outside of time and space, and effectively nonexistant.
FOr the entropic fluctuation and Big Splat, a God is simply not a viable explanation.
2.Dutzy, not everyone is a fundamentalist, but almost every theist cites gaps.
Report Abuse
devildog199 is not online. devildog199
Joined: 05 Dec 2010
Total Posts: 7887
04 Nov 2011 06:27 PM
GSter
I like how well-thought out your argument was. I especially like how you took in all of the facts and make sure to refute everything I said.
^.^
Report Abuse
dutzy is not online. dutzy
Joined: 27 Oct 2011
Total Posts: 416
04 Nov 2011 06:28 PM
A.) If there were a God, trying to describe it in terms of an abstraction set that does not encase that set is impossible.

B). Point A. invalidates itself, yet remains valid.

C.) Point B. invalidates point A, which invalidates point C, yet this point remains valid.

ad infinitum.

Conclusion: If* there is a God, trying to rationalize it is futile, and you may as well carry on with your life.
Report Abuse
dutzy is not online. dutzy
Joined: 27 Oct 2011
Total Posts: 416
04 Nov 2011 06:30 PM
ADDENDUM: The reason point A is invalid is because it is trying to rationalize an (if*) God, by attempting to rationalize how it can not be rationalized. It is attempting to describe a void positive.
Report Abuse
HiGuiseItsChaos10 is not online. HiGuiseItsChaos10
Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Total Posts: 1402
04 Nov 2011 06:31 PM
science vs religion

fact vs faith


same thing

religion is faith not science

so stop trying to use science when talking about religion plz

thx
Report Abuse
dutzy is not online. dutzy
Joined: 27 Oct 2011
Total Posts: 416
04 Nov 2011 06:32 PM
A.K.A. What is nothing, and how can we study nothing?

Study of nothing encompassed in one set:

Done.

Yet, professors disagree, yet it takes the simplest mind to accept the study of nothing, while the greatest minds don't want to stop at that, yet that would bring in vacuum energy, which would not be nothing.

Commence depressing spiral questioning existence.

Been there, done that.

Don't want to go down that road again, trust me OP, just move on. Oh boo-hoo, someone disagrees with you. It's not worth losing your sanity.
Report Abuse
kyrospawn is not online. kyrospawn
Joined: 25 Sep 2011
Total Posts: 494
04 Nov 2011 06:32 PM
i luv u
Report Abuse
devildog199 is not online. devildog199
Joined: 05 Dec 2010
Total Posts: 7887
04 Nov 2011 06:37 PM
I love how you put up a word wall.
I am using a scientific argument because science is the only valid field.
Report Abuse
dutzy is not online. dutzy
Joined: 27 Oct 2011
Total Posts: 416
04 Nov 2011 06:40 PM
Nothing, more referred to as "not-being". Not to be confused with a vacuum. Even vacuums have vacuum energy. Some say distance or dimensional space as we know it can not exist without objects to measure between. It stands to theoretical test that these vacuum ghost particles may be responsible for the poetically described "ethereal" fabric of dimensional space.

Fizzling like a cathode tube TV screen. Something where there might be apparent nothing.

Nothing taken as an is-ing, then is an is. This linguistic trap has been voiced as to be avoided at all costs.
Report Abuse
Misheard is not online. Misheard
Joined: 23 Sep 2011
Total Posts: 1010
04 Nov 2011 06:45 PM
I like dutzy, so much now.

Anyway, if a theological entity did exist, then it would essentially be the creator of all. If it's the creator of all, then it has a method of bypassing all the rules, otherwise it wouldn't be a good creator. Kind of like politicians, except they get caught.
Report Abuse
Previous Thread :: Next Thread 
Page 1 of 1
 
 
ROBLOX Forum » Club Houses » Off Topic
   
 
   
  • About Us
  • Jobs
  • Blog
  • Parents
  • Help
  • Terms
  • Privacy

©2017 Roblox Corporation. Roblox, the Roblox logo, Robux, Bloxy, and Powering Imagination are among our registered and unregistered trademarks in the U.S. and other countries.



Progress
Starting Roblox...
Connecting to Players...
R R

Roblox is now loading. Get ready to play!

R R

You're moments away from getting into the game!

Click here for help

Check Remember my choice and click Launch Application in the dialog box above to join games faster in the future!

Gameplay sponsored by:
Loading 0% - Starting game...
Get more with Builders Club! Join Builders Club
Choose Your Avatar
I have an account
generic image