Total Posts:70|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Good news for THEISTS!

Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2013 5:42:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I welcome myself to your blessed forum - or I hope it is - and hope my stay here will be fruitful and enriching. The good news for my fellow theists is : Theism is rational and atheism is irrational . Atheism = no Creator = something(as huge as universe) is due to nothingThis is against all reason, understanding, logic and rational thinking that we have acquired up to now and that never failed. atheists will need to be very lucky to succeed , and whatever they say against God they are taking the risk, they are the most courageous people for hoping that all rules we have in the cosmos are an accident, and finally they must certainly be fool to give in to a tiny probability and firmly say: there is no God! from now on , dear theists, you can consider you are right to ignore atheists until they bring a stronger argument than the possibility of "nothing" .and till then, let's enjoy talking about our religions With kind regards to theists only!
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2013 8:10:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/16/2013 5:42:23 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
I welcome myself to your blessed forum - or I hope it is - and hope my stay here will be fruitful and enriching. The good news for my fellow theists is : Theism is rational and atheism is irrational . Atheism = no Creator = something(as huge as universe) is due to nothingThis is against all reason, understanding, logic and rational thinking that we have acquired up to now and that never failed. atheists will need to be very lucky to succeed , and whatever they say against God they are taking the risk, they are the most courageous people for hoping that all rules we have in the cosmos are an accident, and finally they must certainly be fool to give in to a tiny probability and firmly say: there is no God! from now on , dear theists, you can consider you are right to ignore atheists until they bring a stronger argument than the possibility of "nothing" .and till then, let's enjoy talking about our religions With kind regards to theists only!

Well, a kind "stuff you" to you too.

In the future, I'd be careful about how proudly you boast about yourself; it's difficult to bring a new, interesting point to this very old, very worn-out table and out of all the points you made in your initial post, I saw none.

Be humble from the start, even if it's feigned; you'll eventually discover your humility is well-placed. Time will tell, I suppose, if you can represent theism well or not, though.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyways.

For why God exists I will answer it after you guys answer why universe, which is way more recent, exists?!

Can you see that if you ignore why God exist , or you know it , God still exists ?
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2013 11:35:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyways.

For why God exists I will answer it after you guys answer why universe, which is way more recent, exists?!

Can you see that if you ignore why God exist , or you know it , God still exists ?

Okay, my answer is "I don't know". Your turn.
THEVIRUS
Posts: 1,321
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2013 11:43:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
FAIL. That is nothing new, at all.
"So you want me to go to the judge with 'unit, corps, God, country'?" - A Few Good Men

"And the hits just keep on comin'." -A Few Good Men
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2013 11:47:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/16/2013 5:42:23 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
I welcome myself to your blessed forum - or I hope it is - and hope my stay here will be fruitful and enriching. The good news for my fellow theists is : Theism is rational and atheism is irrational . Atheism = no Creator = something(as huge as universe) is due to nothing

We don't make a claim on why the universe is here. That isn't the same as saying the universe is here "due to nothing".

This is against all reason, understanding, logic and rational thinking that we have acquired up to now and that never failed. atheists will need to be very lucky to succeed , and whatever they say against God they are taking the risk, they are the most courageous people for hoping that all rules we have in the cosmos are an accident, and finally they must certainly be fool to give in to a tiny probability and firmly say: there is no God! from now on , dear theists, you can consider you are right to ignore atheists until they bring a stronger argument than the possibility of "nothing" .and till then, let's enjoy talking about our religions With kind regards to theists only!

God is a leap that can't be substantiated.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2013 11:50:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyways.

Because it's easier to accomplish if you break it up into more manageable steps. Patience, young grasshopper, and may the force be with you, always.


For why God exists I will answer it after you guys answer why universe, which is way more recent, exists?!

I don't know. You can't use the same answer though. Since the universe is apparent, we know it's here, the same can't be said for gods.


Can you see that if you ignore why God exist , or you know it , God still exists ?

If any gods exist.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2013 11:53:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyways.

Well, there are several scientific hypotheses. The one that seems to be gaining the most ground is the zero energy hypotheses. This suggests that the total net energy of the universe equals zero (with the negative energy of gravitational attraction exactly offsetting the positive energy of gravitational attraction). This is supported by mathematical calculations predicting a zero energy universe, and negative energy being confirmed between two Casimir plates (while it is compelling, there is still not enough evidence yet to call it a scientific "theory"). If this is the case, then if there was ever no energy or matter, there would have been a zero total net energy. However, even with a universe we would still have a zero net matter. This would mean, that asking where the matter/ energy comes from becomes a trivial question, because the net energy of reality wouldn't change, whether there was no energy or matter, or some energy and matter (with the negative energy to balance it out).


For why God exists I will answer it after you guys answer why universe, which is way more recent, exists?!

Can you see that if you ignore why God exist , or you know it , God still exists ?

Asking for an answer to why the universe exists, is not a reason for why God exists. For all we know, the universe existed in timeless a symmetric state and spontaneously made a transition from a non-temporal frame into a temporal frame due to the very strange nature of this reality. For all we know, there existed some supernatural being who willed the universe into existence for some divine purpose we don't fully understand due to nature of this being.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2013 11:54:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/16/2013 11:50:43 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyways.

Because it's easier to accomplish if you break it up into more manageable steps. Patience, young grasshopper, and may the force be with you, always.


For why God exists I will answer it after you guys answer why universe, which is way more recent, exists?!

I don't know. You can't use the same answer though. Since the universe is apparent, we know it's here, the same can't be said for gods.


Can you see that if you ignore why God exist , or you know it , God still exists ?

If any gods exist.

(Correction)

*(with the negative energy of gravitational attraction exactly offsetting the positive energy of matter and motion)
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/16/2013 11:56:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/16/2013 11:53:48 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyways.

Well, there are several scientific hypotheses. The one that seems to be gaining the most ground is the zero energy hypotheses. This suggests that the total net energy of the universe equals zero (with the negative energy of gravitational attraction exactly offsetting the positive energy of gravitational attraction). This is supported by mathematical calculations predicting a zero energy universe, and negative energy being confirmed between two Casimir plates (while it is compelling, there is still not enough evidence yet to call it a scientific "theory"). If this is the case, then if there was ever no energy or matter, there would have been a zero total net energy. However, even with a universe we would still have a zero net matter. This would mean, that asking where the matter/ energy comes from becomes a trivial question, because the net energy of reality wouldn't change, whether there was no energy or matter, or some energy and matter (with the negative energy to balance it out).

The problem is for 0 to be seen as 1-1, something probably changed. It seems strange that it wouldn't just stay at 0. Although it's an interesting consideration.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 12:03:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/16/2013 5:42:23 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
Atheism = no Creator = something(as huge as universe) is due to nothing
Theism = eternal Creator (who was not created) = something (that created the universe) is due to nothing.
Your 'theory' only tacks on an extra layer of complexity, really. Try again.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 12:32:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/16/2013 11:56:56 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:53:48 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyways.

Well, there are several scientific hypotheses. The one that seems to be gaining the most ground is the zero energy hypotheses. This suggests that the total net energy of the universe equals zero (with the negative energy of gravitational attraction exactly offsetting the positive energy of gravitational attraction). This is supported by mathematical calculations predicting a zero energy universe, and negative energy being confirmed between two Casimir plates (while it is compelling, there is still not enough evidence yet to call it a scientific "theory"). If this is the case, then if there was ever no energy or matter, there would have been a zero total net energy. However, even with a universe we would still have a zero net matter. This would mean, that asking where the matter/ energy comes from becomes a trivial question, because the net energy of reality wouldn't change, whether there was no energy or matter, or some energy and matter (with the negative energy to balance it out).

The problem is for 0 to be seen as 1-1, something probably changed.

Why is that a problem?

It seems strange that it wouldn't just stay at 0.

Yes, it does. Maybe, it would be simply in its nature to make the transition spontaneously.

Although it's an interesting consideration.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 12:45:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/17/2013 12:32:55 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:56:56 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:53:48 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyways.

Well, there are several scientific hypotheses. The one that seems to be gaining the most ground is the zero energy hypotheses. This suggests that the total net energy of the universe equals zero (with the negative energy of gravitational attraction exactly offsetting the positive energy of gravitational attraction). This is supported by mathematical calculations predicting a zero energy universe, and negative energy being confirmed between two Casimir plates (while it is compelling, there is still not enough evidence yet to call it a scientific "theory"). If this is the case, then if there was ever no energy or matter, there would have been a zero total net energy. However, even with a universe we would still have a zero net matter. This would mean, that asking where the matter/ energy comes from becomes a trivial question, because the net energy of reality wouldn't change, whether there was no energy or matter, or some energy and matter (with the negative energy to balance it out).

The problem is for 0 to be seen as 1-1, something probably changed.

Why is that a problem?

It seems strange that it wouldn't just stay at 0.

Yes, it does. Maybe, it would be simply in its nature to make the transition spontaneously.


Although it's an interesting consideration.

For the same reason two identical cars facing opposite directions, with a magic rope that doesn't stretch or break, and are not applying any forces against each other, wouldn't spontaneously start applying any forces in equal amounts in opposite directions.

There could definitely be a reason for it happening on this scale though, but I still think we need to ask why.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 1:20:16 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyway.

Where do you get you information?


For why God exists I will answer it after you guys answer why universe, which is way more recent, exists?!

The Big Bang. Now answer.


Can you see that if you ignore why God exist , or you know it , God still exists ?

Yes. If I were to be in a situation where god exists, which I do not know if I am, and I ignored the existence of god, he would still exist.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 1:26:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/17/2013 12:45:47 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 4/17/2013 12:32:55 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:56:56 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:53:48 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyways.

Well, there are several scientific hypotheses. The one that seems to be gaining the most ground is the zero energy hypotheses. This suggests that the total net energy of the universe equals zero (with the negative energy of gravitational attraction exactly offsetting the positive energy of gravitational attraction). This is supported by mathematical calculations predicting a zero energy universe, and negative energy being confirmed between two Casimir plates (while it is compelling, there is still not enough evidence yet to call it a scientific "theory"). If this is the case, then if there was ever no energy or matter, there would have been a zero total net energy. However, even with a universe we would still have a zero net matter. This would mean, that asking where the matter/ energy comes from becomes a trivial question, because the net energy of reality wouldn't change, whether there was no energy or matter, or some energy and matter (with the negative energy to balance it out).

The problem is for 0 to be seen as 1-1, something probably changed.

Why is that a problem?

It seems strange that it wouldn't just stay at 0.

Yes, it does. Maybe, it would be simply in its nature to make the transition spontaneously.


Although it's an interesting consideration.

For the same reason two identical cars facing opposite directions, with a magic rope that doesn't stretch or break, and are not applying any forces against each other, wouldn't spontaneously start applying any forces in equal amounts in opposite directions.

If it was a "magic" rope, then why not? Also, something happening spontaneously is not unheard of. You are making it out to be some problem, when I do not really see how it is.


There could definitely be a reason for it happening on this scale though, but I still think we need to ask why.

I do believe we need to ask why as well, that doesn't mean the reason can't have to do with spontaneity. I'm not saying the transition would happen for no reason, the reason would be that it could be in this hypothetical zero-energy pre-universe's nature, to make a transition into a universe with a beginning spontaneously.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 1:36:23 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/17/2013 1:26:08 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/17/2013 12:45:47 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 4/17/2013 12:32:55 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:56:56 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:53:48 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyways.

Well, there are several scientific hypotheses. The one that seems to be gaining the most ground is the zero energy hypotheses. This suggests that the total net energy of the universe equals zero (with the negative energy of gravitational attraction exactly offsetting the positive energy of gravitational attraction). This is supported by mathematical calculations predicting a zero energy universe, and negative energy being confirmed between two Casimir plates (while it is compelling, there is still not enough evidence yet to call it a scientific "theory"). If this is the case, then if there was ever no energy or matter, there would have been a zero total net energy. However, even with a universe we would still have a zero net matter. This would mean, that asking where the matter/ energy comes from becomes a trivial question, because the net energy of reality wouldn't change, whether there was no energy or matter, or some energy and matter (with the negative energy to balance it out).

The problem is for 0 to be seen as 1-1, something probably changed.

Why is that a problem?

It seems strange that it wouldn't just stay at 0.

Yes, it does. Maybe, it would be simply in its nature to make the transition spontaneously.


Although it's an interesting consideration.

For the same reason two identical cars facing opposite directions, with a magic rope that doesn't stretch or break, and are not applying any forces against each other, wouldn't spontaneously start applying any forces in equal amounts in opposite directions.

If it was a "magic" rope, then why not? Also, something happening spontaneously is not unheard of. You are making it out to be some problem, when I do not really see how it is.

Yes, I made it "magic" for hypothetical purposes. I was only pointing out that the change from 0 to 1-1 wouldn't necessarily happen. When we're taking about the creation of the universe, or reality, we can't just say "spontaneous" and leave it at that. We'll need evidence for it first, and once we have that it becomes a better suggestion. But once we have evidence for that, we'll need to ask why it happened "spontaneously". It's more of a problem before we have evidence, and you've already suggested some. Before evidence, it doesn't have good face value.



There could definitely be a reason for it happening on this scale though, but I still think we need to ask why.

I do believe we need to ask why as well, that doesn't mean the reason can't have to do with spontaneity. I'm not saying the transition would happen for no reason, the reason would be that it could be in this hypothetical zero-energy pre-universe's nature, to make a transition into a universe with a beginning spontaneously.

Yup. I always wonder if it will end up being thought about purely logically or mathematically. We need a very clever step.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 1:48:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/17/2013 1:36:23 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 4/17/2013 1:26:08 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/17/2013 12:45:47 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 4/17/2013 12:32:55 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:56:56 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:53:48 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/16/2013 11:27:02 PM, Fruitytree wrote:
At 4/16/2013 7:28:37 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
dude you are a little behind. scientists have been theorizing what caused the universe. also explain to me why there is a god

Scientists theorized about the transformations that led to the existence of universe as we know it today, they never theorized on where the initial matter comes from anyways.

Well, there are several scientific hypotheses. The one that seems to be gaining the most ground is the zero energy hypotheses. This suggests that the total net energy of the universe equals zero (with the negative energy of gravitational attraction exactly offsetting the positive energy of gravitational attraction). This is supported by mathematical calculations predicting a zero energy universe, and negative energy being confirmed between two Casimir plates (while it is compelling, there is still not enough evidence yet to call it a scientific "theory"). If this is the case, then if there was ever no energy or matter, there would have been a zero total net energy. However, even with a universe we would still have a zero net matter. This would mean, that asking where the matter/ energy comes from becomes a trivial question, because the net energy of reality wouldn't change, whether there was no energy or matter, or some energy and matter (with the negative energy to balance it out).

The problem is for 0 to be seen as 1-1, something probably changed.

Why is that a problem?

It seems strange that it wouldn't just stay at 0.

Yes, it does. Maybe, it would be simply in its nature to make the transition spontaneously.


Although it's an interesting consideration.

For the same reason two identical cars facing opposite directions, with a magic rope that doesn't stretch or break, and are not applying any forces against each other, wouldn't spontaneously start applying any forces in equal amounts in opposite directions.

If it was a "magic" rope, then why not? Also, something happening spontaneously is not unheard of. You are making it out to be some problem, when I do not really see how it is.

Yes, I made it "magic" for hypothetical purposes. I was only pointing out that the change from 0 to 1-1 wouldn't necessarily happen.

Nobody is saying it would, it's just a plausible idea. Also, if it was in this pre-universe's nature to make this transition spontaneously, then it would necessarily happen.

When we're taking about the creation of the universe, or reality, we can't just say "spontaneous" and leave it at that.

Nobody is. I'm saying, the reason for the transition could be that it's in this pre-universe's nature to make this transition spontaneously. There is nothing which rules this out, or makes it unlikely. I'm not saying this transition being spontaneous has to be the case.

We'll need evidence for it first, and once we have that it becomes a better suggestion.

Well, we have evidence of a zero energy universe. Calculations assuming uniformity in certain areas predict it, plus negative energy was proven to exist using Casimir Plates. Even though it's still just an interesting hypothesis, it's not just all speculation. The spontaneous transition, is just a speculative idea added on by me.

But once we have evidence for that, we'll need to ask why it happened "spontaneously".

It could have happened spontaneously if it was in this pre-universe's nature to make this transition spontaneously.

It's more of a problem before we have evidence, and you've already suggested some. Before evidence, it doesn't have good face value.

All I'm saying is that it is a plausible, and a non-ruled out explanation. I'm not saying it's true for sure, or this is what happened




There could definitely be a reason for it happening on this scale though, but I still think we need to ask why.

I do believe we need to ask why as well, that doesn't mean the reason can't have to do with spontaneity. I'm not saying the transition would happen for no reason, the reason would be that it could be in this hypothetical zero-energy pre-universe's nature, to make a transition into a universe with a beginning spontaneously.

Yup. I always wonder if it will end up being thought about purely logically or mathematically. We need a very clever step.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 3:33:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Hi,

Because I am unable to quote and reply (spontaneously and for no rational reason ;) )I will just put the username of the person - or ghost- I'm replying to.

I will be fair and reply one by one without ignoring the trolls. but outside this thread I will ignore the atheists and their "nothing" they stick to for good.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 3:42:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
@ DakotaKrafick
Hi,

If you see no point then you lack logic and common sense. True there is no new element, but Theists trying so hard to convince you guys of the existence of God when they have a strong argument that is rational while you have "nothing".

For humility and pride, you are right I should be more humble, and I believe none has the right to be proud of something they were given , including their intellect, and I rather be grateful to God ,as I am a theist, you can be grateful to "nothing".
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 3:47:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Continuing with DakotaKrafick

so you do not know the reason, and that is plain honest, I do not know the reason God exist if there should be any, God does not need to be justified other then by his creation.

What do you say ?
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 3:47:48 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/17/2013 3:33:30 AM, Fruitytree wrote:
Hi,

Because I am unable to quote and reply (spontaneously and for no rational reason ;) )I will just put the username of the person - or ghost- I'm replying to.

I will be fair and reply one by one without ignoring the trolls. but outside this thread I will ignore the atheists and their "nothing" they stick to for good.

A: Atheism does not necessarily imply any explanation for anything. It doesn't even imply that one does not believe it was a god who created the universe.

B: Do you intend to only debate with theists?
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 3:51:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
THEVIRUS

I did not pretend there is something new, but still thanks for participating.

I see you atheists are the most interested in the religion section! ouaah
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 4:00:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
AlbinoBunny

You say :We don't make a claim on why the universe is here. That isn't the same as saying the universe is here "due to nothing".
I agree it is not the same, but don't get where you want to go with it.

You say: God is a leap that can't be substantiated.

He is justified by the universe.

You say: Patience, young grasshopper, and may the force be with you, always.

Not the force little rabbit, "nothing" be with you.

the rest is yes.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 4:28:18 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Rational_Thinker9119 ? truly?

Let me assume the "theory" you are proud of is a fact.

you say this happened spontaneously ? spontaneously means I do not know the reason , it doesn't mean there is no reason , but as the scientists behind those theories are biased atheists , they do not want to say : for unknown reason , but they rather say spontaneously which will leave them with a new enigma once they are successful to prove the theory to be true.

Excuse me my baby spontaneously started crying and I'm sure there is no reason she should cry ;) , a lot of spontaneous things happening to me today, must be the anger of "Nothing" on me, keep sticking to it and it will lead you nowhere.

the word spontaneous is, in fact, irrational , you gota hate it or explain it.
atheismo
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 4:33:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
wow this is how stupid theists are theat they think arguments from ignorance and incredubility are convincing to any rational person..
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - Carl Sagan
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 4:34:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Good job Bunny , you start to understand, if we assume the theory is true is still doesn't negate God existence Au contraire!
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2013 4:41:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
drhead
You say: Theism = eternal Creator (who was not created) = something (that created the universe) is due to nothing.
Your 'theory' only tacks on an extra layer of complexity, really. Try again.
No Dr it's rather this way, don't add up words I did not speak about on your own:

Theism = There is a creator = this universe is due to something

Now when you take it to the creator level your universe rules don't have to apply , there still be rules but not the ones you know. so him being not created depends on these new rules.

How was I doctor?