You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Oops. Why God Did Not Create the Universe
- Thread starter Optionpro007
- Start date
Actually, it was no good when Bertrand Russell first wrote it.
Quote from Ricter:
The teapot metaphor is no good anymore. NASA engineers, as an inside joke, secreted one aboard a Mars probe. It was "accidentally" ejected during a stage separation or panel extension, I can't remember which.
Quote from jem:
I find it interesting that someone would compare a teapot to a Creator after a physicist who sat in Issac Newtons chair as the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University in England just explained how incredibly designed our universe appears.
Does that not penetrate through the skulls of those who are atheists?
Do you realize that the best minds in science are telling you are universe appears designed....
how does that happen?
You are taking the fact that Hawking stated the universe APPEARS to be designed way too far. You are only comprehending what you want to comprehend...
The real statement goes like this "The universe appears to be designed, BUT........."
Hawking does not argue that the universe is designed so stop taking him out of context.
Gayfly and Stewie, you seem to not realize that your view is no better until/unless you can explain how spontaneous creation from nothing is any more "sensible, rational, reasonable or correct."
Quote from Gayfly1:
Stu, you must realize that Trader666 is fighting for his immortal life here in these arguments. If there is no God, then that greatly reduces the chances of there being a heaven or a hereafter. Meanwhile, Trader666 has plans. Big plans. Long term plans.
More "sensible, rational, reasonable or correct" than a Sky Daddy? Hmm. The finest minds in physics and other sciences versus ancient superstitions and mythology. What to do, what to do...Quote from Trader666:
Gayfly and Stewie, you seem to not realize that your view is no better until/unless you can explain how spontaneous creation from nothing is any more "sensible, rational, reasonable or correct."
How about trying to dispute the substance of what I'm saying instead of arguing that a philosophy "god" like Bertrand Russell and a science "god" like Stephen Hawking must be correct? Answer: you can't.
Quote from Gayfly1:
I think it's magical how deftly and summarily you dismiss the finest minds of both both today and the past. You're special.
The important thing is that you can outthink any recognized expert in his field at the drop of a hat and between setups. As I noted earlier, you're...special.Quote from Trader666:
How about trying to dispute the substance of what I'm saying instead of arguing that a philosophy "god" like Bertrand Russell and a science "god" like Stephen Hawking must be correct? Answer: you can't.
Not a "sky daddy," a creator. Explain how spontaneous creation from nothing is any more "sensible, rational, reasonable or correct."
Quote from Gayfly1:
More "sensible, rational, reasonable or correct" than a Sky Daddy? Hmm. The finest minds in physics and other sciences versus ancient superstitions and mythology. What to do, what to do...
1. What is the difference?Quote from Trader666:
Not a "sky daddy," a creator. Explain how spontaneous creation from nothing is any more "sensible, rational, reasonable or correct."
2. And if there is a difference, how did either of them come about? "From nothing?" or did that creator have his own creator, and so on? Perhaps you could answer that question in a "sensible, rational, reasonable or correct" manner.