50 Simple Proofs, God is Imaginary

[Ace Otana]

Because if God is real than the creator of the universe should be testable by the creatures?

If he/it/thing is beyond any scientific method of research then why should I believe in it's existence? If it cannot be proven to exist and have no supporting evidence either then what reason is there to believe it? Should you believe in the easter bunny despite total lack of evidence? Of course not, well its the same for god. Your god is only a concept, an assertion that is unprovable. There is no reason to take the whole god claim seriously, and so I don't.

[chatpilot]

Ace I totally agree and I don't differentiate between believing in myths and believing in God. In my mind they fall under the same category.

[Violet]

If time did not exist before the 'Big Bang'... then the Big Bang could never have happened There is no time in which the actions of the Big Bang could take place... so essentially there would have to be time behind the Big Bang. They do not ask this question erroneously, because there would have had to be a 'before the Bang' for the Bang to have taken place. Unless "nothing became something and exploded into everything" is "true" to the theory of the Big Bang ^_^

It doesn't mean Hes overall disappointed, just in that point of time for us. It would He doesn't act in the same way we act. I think it would mean all His actions would be performed in an instant and in a way an auto reaction to the world in accordance with His nature, as unlike us He doesn't need time to think about and carry out His actions, they would be instant choices and 'actions'. I think......lol

??? Nothing is instantaneous. Nothing at all. For an action to occur... it requires time in which to occur. Or else it will never occur

just in that point of time for us

Honestly... time for us is similar to time for him. Otherwise he could not interact so well with us. Think about it this way: If I increase the vibrating of my body to the point it is invisible to you... time is extra fast for me. I could not hold a conversation with any of you... and I would be moving so fast that a relevant month for me would be but a second for you. Time is relative... I could hold no conversations with you. For this reason: 'God' has to be functioning at a similar time to us to be able to converse with us. His words would be accelerated or decelerated to the point that they are either difficult to understand, or completely inaudible otherwise.

Although you would probably die from such intense vibrating... if you survived: you would live out a 'normal' life to yourself... but everyone around you would see you moving extraordinarily fast. You would also feel like you lived out a normal number of years... but to everyone around you: your life would be much shorter. Time is completely relative... the action of time occurs separate from the other three dimensions... but depending on location: time is relative in how much it affects you.

Anyway, don't you think it is interesting that he made us to disappoint him at sometimes? And this from a being who created each one of us, and knows everything about each on of us, and knows everything that we will ever say or do... and then wants to hold a 'personal' relationship to us? ^_^ Even odder... he is disappointed by something he designed to happen: what kind of nutcase is this? I could never be disappointed by something I did perfectly

[solarwave]

There is no "before time". For the word "before" to have any kind of meaning, time must already exist. If time didn't exist at some point (which the Big Bang theory points to), there was no "before". People ask "well what happened before the Big Bang?" erroneously, since if time didn't exist prior to the Big Bang, the question makes no sense.

Ok then, to be literally correct, God existed at the instant time began and was the cause of it by His nauture and power.

If he/it/thing is beyond any scientific method of research then why should I believe in it's existence? If it cannot be proven to exist and have no supporting evidence either then what reason is there to believe it? Should you believe in the easter bunny despite total lack of evidence? Of course not, well its the same for god. Your god is only a concept, an assertion that is unprovable. There is no reason to take the whole god claim seriously, and so I don't.

Im not saying there should be no reason to believe in God, I'm just saying that reason doesn't have to be just scientific, you can open your mind up to knowing things other ways. I don't think you can know God through strick tests but you can use reason and experience to know there is a God.

Honestly... time for us is similar to time for him. Otherwise he could not interact so well with us.

With the whole relativity stuff you were on about, I believe moving faster means time slows down for you therefore it is everyone who would be going to fastforward and you would seem slow to them, part from the fact you are physically moving fast yet aging slow.... I think. If it is relativity you ment. Why do you think God wouldn't be able to interact with us if He is outside time? He would know everything that ever happen on earth at once and at once 'act' on everything and make certain things happen on earth.

Anyway, don't you think it is interesting that he made us to disappoint him at sometimes? And this from a being who created each one of us, and knows everything about each on of us, and knows everything that we will ever say or do... and then wants to hold a 'personal' relationship to us? ^_^ Even odder... he is disappointed by something he designed to happen: what kind of nutcase is this? I could never be disappointed by something I did perfectly

You seem to talk as if I believe God makes us do everything we do. I think God made the best world of most value, but that includes the potential to sin, but even with sin the world is worth making and good, even though there are small bad events in it which on their own are disappointing. I think its more being sad that there has to be sin at this point for the over all good.

---

Let's rearrange those verses a little so that you can see my perspective on this solar. From those same verses I am going to pull out key passages to illustrate my point. Man has inherited sin through Adam.

14.Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, (even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam),.....

When it says 'death' reigned over those who did not sin by breaking a command it doesn't mean they didn't sin, just that the Law hadn't been written yet so there was no written command broken, but they still sinned. I would like to point out that I see death here as meaning spiritual death.

18.Consequently, just as the result of one trespass (Adams disobedience) was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness (Jesus sacrifice) was justification that brings life for all men.
19.For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners

I'll explain how I read this. Adams sin didn't directly condemn all, but indirectly. In the same way you can say Robert J Oppenheimer (creator of the nuclear bomb) killed tens of thousands of people, you can say Adam's sin condemned all. But the fact is that Oppenheimer didn't actually kill those people but made the potential possible for it to happen (I think the same can be said of Einstein as I believe E=mc^2 lead to the bomb too). Also Adam's sin gave the potential for everyone after him to sin (the sinful nature). The fact is though that that in that potential everyone failed and sinned, but this is our fault even though Adam make it possible it we are condemned because it is our acting on that potential. So the result of Adam's sin is our condemnation but indirectly not directly.

This also makes more sense when you look at the end of that sentance. It says the sacrific of Jesus brings lifes to all men. This is again another potential as seen above since Jesus' death makes it possible for all people to be saved, but not all people will be saved.

[Violet]

With the whole relativity stuff you were on about, I believe moving faster means time slows down for you therefore it is everyone who would be going to fastforward and you would seem slow to them, part from the fact you are physically moving fast yet aging slow.... I think. If it is relativity you ment. Why do you think God wouldn't be able to interact with us if He is outside time? He would know everything that ever happen on earth at once and at once 'act' on everything and make certain things happen on earth.

That's the thing. Time does not exist to him, therefore unlike the person moving extraordinarily fast or slow: he is rendered incapable of movement. In fact... he can be no more than frozen energy. Time is a requirement for actions to occur... for change to occur. Without it: there is no time in which to act, no time in which to change, no time.

You seem to talk as if I believe God makes us do everything we do. I think God made the best world of most value, but, that includes the potential to sin, but even with sin the world is worth making and good, even though there are small bad events in it which on their own are disappointing. I think its more being sad that there has to be sin at this point for the over all good.

If he is omniscient, omnipresent, non-temporal, omnipotent and omniloving (or even a single one of these...): he cannot exist. If your god is not any of those: then I can discuss these points without contradictory attributes getting in the way

[Ace Otana]

Im not saying there should be no reason to believe in God, I'm just saying that reason doesn't have to be just scientific, you can open your mind up to knowing things other ways. I don't think you can know God through strick tests but you can use reason and experience to know there is a God.

I'm just saying that reason doesn't have to be just scientific,

I'm not interested then. God must be testable in order to be believable...for me at least.

you can open your mind up to knowing things other ways.

I am, just not to anything superstitious, baseless assertions and a magical invisible flying man way up in the sky.
I cannot believe in something that cannot be proven.

I don't think you can know God through strick tests

Then I'm going to reject the claim and see it as nothing more than a joke.

but you can use reason and experience to know there is a God.

Let me guess....personal experiances? Please, I go by science not superstition. It can only work if you already believe it but I don't.

[littlegrimlin1]

Only if everybody could think in logics like this. I love everything you all are saying! Its about time to change our ways to the good of man instead of for the good of an imaginary being made for self confidence.

[Tiberius]

If time did not exist before the 'Big Bang'... then the Big Bang could never have happened There is no time in which the actions of the Big Bang could take place... so essentially there would have to be time behind the Big Bang. They do not ask this question erroneously, because there would have had to be a 'before the Bang' for the Bang to have taken place. Unless "nothing became something and exploded into everything" is "true" to the theory of the Big Bang ^_^

Unless the Big Bang was the start of time and space, which is the current theory. Essentially all of space was contained within an infinitely small, infinitely dense point with no time. Time began, and the point expanded rapidly.

Pretty much a layman's explanation of the Big Bang idea.

[Violet]

If time did not exist before the 'Big Bang'... then the Big Bang could never have happened There is no time in which the actions of the Big Bang could take place... so essentially there would have to be time behind the Big Bang. They do not ask this question erroneously, because there would have had to be a 'before the Bang' for the Bang to have taken place. Unless "nothing became something and exploded into everything" is "true" to the theory of the Big Bang ^_^

Unless the Big Bang was the start of time and space, which is the current theory. Essentially all of space was contained within an infinitely small, infinitely dense point with no time. Time began, and the point expanded rapidly.

Pretty much a layman's explanation of the Big Bang idea.

Then the layman's explanation is completely bunk sounding. Time could never have 'begun', because it would never have happened without time in which to begin. I disagree with 'the current theory' in that case... because it is no more sensical than a God 'beginning' at some point, and creating everything from nothing. How'd the 'speck' get there?

[theVOID]

If time did not exist before the 'Big Bang'... then the Big Bang could never have happened There is no time in which the actions of the Big Bang could take place... so essentially there would have to be time behind the Big Bang. They do not ask this question erroneously, because there would have had to be a 'before the Bang' for the Bang to have taken place. Unless "nothing became something and exploded into everything" is "true" to the theory of the Big Bang ^_^

Unless the Big Bang was the start of time and space, which is the current theory. Essentially all of space was contained within an infinitely small, infinitely dense point with no time. Time began, and the point expanded rapidly.

Pretty much a layman's explanation of the Big Bang idea.

Then the layman's explanation is completely bunk sounding. Time could never have 'begun', because it would never have happened without time in which to begin. I disagree with 'the current theory' in that case... because it is no more sensical than a God 'beginning' at some point, and creating everything from nothing. How'd the 'speck' get there?

You clearly need to study physics more...

Time is a single dimension of measurement related to causality and is individual to each (at-least) 4-Dimensional universe and as such does not need to exist prior to the big bang (infinite singularity, God), or may exist in the form of some higher-dimensional causality (infinite regress, multiverse).

You need to remember most importantly that the 4th Dimension is a a single dimension of measurement within a single 4-dimensional universe (each universe has it's own, independent dimension of time) and as such it is impossible for time (in the sense of the 4th dimension) to exist outside the limits of space time, including at the singularity which gave rise to space time. This does not mean that there aren't other dimensions that measure causality in the way our dimension of time does, which is what i roughly think you got caught up in. Causality can exist outside of the 4th dimension.