Debunking a Creator

[RongzomFan]

First off, this universe is completely equivalent with illusion, like a lucid dream. So to speak of a Creator is meaningless.

 

If you can't fathom that, think about this. There is an ad infinitum regression of cause and effect. Logically the Big Bang has causes, which in itself has causes, which in itself has causes etc.

There is no place for a Creator in an ad infinitum regression of cause and effect.

[adept]

First off, this universe is completely equivalent with illusion, like a lucid dream. So to speak of a Creator is meaningless.

 

If you can't fathom that, think about this. There is an ad infinitum regression of cause and effect. Logically the Big Bang has causes, which in itself has causes, which in itself has causes etc.

 

There is no place for a Creator in an ad infinitum regression of cause and effect.

 

The universe is real my friend. 100%.

The Creator is beyond time and space and the laws which govern it. He is beyond comprehension.

 

Qur'an 59:24 'He is God: the Creator, the Originator, the Shaper. The best names belong to Him. Everything in the heavens and earth glorifies Him: He is Almighty, the Wise'

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/31512-a-sovereign-god-question/?p=501488

[RongzomFan]

The universe is real my friend. 100%.

 

Well you are probably not ready to understand that its not.

 

Go with the second line of reasoning.

 

There is an ad infinitum regression of cause and effect.

 

Logically the Big Bang has causes, which in itself has causes, which in itself has causes etc.

 

There is no place for a Creator in an ad infinitum regression of cause and effect.

[RongzomFan]

Qur'an 59:24 'He is God: the Creator, the Originator, the Shaper. The best names belong to Him. Everything in the heavens and earth glorifies Him: He is Almighty, the Wise'

 

 

Come on now.

 

Even on NPR they were talking about how Muhammed thought he was possessed by djinn, and wanted to commit suicide.

 

And even Muhammed's scribe, Abdullah ibn Sa‘ad, thought he was fraud. Abdullah ibn Sa‘ad actually wrote some of the verses of the Koran.

[adept]

You haven't had time to watch any of the videos !

[adept]

Well you are probably not ready to understand that its not.

 

Go with the second line of reasoning.

 

There is an ad infinitum regression of cause and effect.

 

Logically the Big Bang has causes, which in itself has causes, which in itself has causes etc.

 

There is no place for a Creator in an ad infinitum regression of cause and effect.

 

 

God is beyond cause and effect. The laws of the universe came into being because of God. He is beyond compare and comprehension. We have Him to thank that we're here at all.

[RongzomFan]

I skimmed through the second video, resulting in this thread.

 

If Creator is beyond all cause and effect, he would have no way of interacting with this universe. Thanks for debunking yourself.

[SonOfTheGods]

just by that one word in your quote displays the erring ways in "creator"

 

He

[Stosh]

Needs be, that once the universe was created a god would be moot ,

he would have to circumvent his own universal laws in order to be manifest in it

and thereby create chaos of his creation, to the extent that he had effect.

Why worship chaos ?, its not like it would be a 'good' thing, or give a darn whether it was worshipped.

If the universe always existed then a god again is moot since it doesnt require creation.

 

( he,she, they , its all not anything anyway)

Edited December 4, 2013 by Stosh

[adept]

I skimmed through the second video, resulting in this thread.

 

If Creator is beyond all cause and effect, he would have no way of interacting with this universe. Thanks for debunking yourself.

 

I haven't. Not sure why you think that.

Watch the first video please. This is not the realm of fundamentalist religion. It is backed up by science and reasoning.

[Jeff]

First off, this universe is completely equivalent with illusion, like a lucid dream.

 

Let's start with your first point listed. Can you prove the above statement in any way?

[RongzomFan]

Adept,

 

If a creator is beyond cause and effect, how does it interact with our physics?

 

Yes you did debunk yourself.

 

I will skim through the first video.

[gatito]

Original post moved to my Personal Practice Forum (PPF) - here :-

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32844-debunking-a-creator/?p=502857

(thetaobums.com/topic/32844-debunking-a-creator/?p=502857)

Edited December 16, 2013 by gatito

[adept]

Adept,

 

If a creator is beyond cause and effect, how does it interact with our physics?

 

Yes you did debunk yourself.

 

I will skim through the first video

 

Because God is the cause.

Don't skim the videos, watch them in full, then you'll understand my point of view.

[RongzomFan]

Because God is the cause.

 

LMAO, you just said God is beyond cause and effect:

 

God is beyond cause and effect.

[RongzomFan]

Don't skim the videos, watch them in full, then you'll understand my point of view.

 

I saw enough of the idiots in the second video talking about cause and effect.

[RongzomFan]

I just realized what Adept's first video in the other thread is.

 

Those types of views were completely debunked in American federal court in 2005:

 

PBS documentary on the trial:

 

Original Link at PBS:

http://video.pbs.org/video/980040807/

Edited December 4, 2013 by RongzomFan

[dawei]

If the universe always existed then a god again is moot since it doesnt require creation.

 

I agree, if what your saying is that a 'creation' does not equate with a creator; thus there is not a 'need' or there is no necessity of one.

 

While it may be valid to say one cannot debunk a creator nor no-creator scenarios, the issue of necessity is how I tend to look at the issue. To have a creator is to need to prove the necessity of one. To not need a creator is a simpler/base scenario and until necessity is established, then no creator is established.

Edited December 4, 2013 by dawei

[adept]

http://www.darwinsdoubt.com/

http://www.amazon.com/Darwins-Doubt-Explosive-Origin-Intelligent/dp/0062071475

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/12/darwins_doubt_c079771.html

http://www.intelligentdesign.org/

 

http://www.19.org/482/the-background-and-chronology-of-the-discovery/

 

Amazing stuff !

Edited December 4, 2013 by adept

[RongzomFan]

I agree, if what your saying is that a 'creation' does not equate with a creator; thus there is not a 'need' or there is no necessity of one.

 

While it may be valid to say one cannot debunk a creator nor no-creator scenarios, the issue of necessity is how I tend to look at the issue. To have a creator is to need to prove the necessity of one. To not need a creator is a simpler/base scenario and until necessity is established, then no creator is established.

 

You can debunk a Creator.

 

Logically the Big Bang has causes, which itself has causes, which itself has causes etc.

 

There is no place for a Creator in an ad infinitum regression of cause and effect.

 

And then if you counter by saying a Creator is beyond cause and effect, you are trapped again.

 

If a Creator is beyond cause and effect, it cannot interact with our physics.

[RongzomFan]

http://www.darwinsdoubt.com/

http://www.amazon.com/Darwins-Doubt-Explosive-Origin-Intelligent/dp/0062071475

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/12/darwins_doubt_c079771.html

http://www.intelligentdesign.org/

 

http://www.19.org/482/the-background-and-chronology-of-the-discovery/

 

All these type of views were debunked in American federal court in 2005, after a very lengthy and complete trial.

[adept]

All these type of views were debunked in American federal court in 2005, after a very lengthy and complete trial.

 

 

And of course that makes them correct !!

I prefer to undertake my own research, based on experience, science and reasoning.

[RongzomFan]

And of course that makes them correct !!

I prefer to undertake my own research, based on experience, science and reasoning.

 

Watch the PBS video above. The Intelligent Design people got completely destroyed.

[Rara]

Can't prove either argument...it's of little importance.

 

BUT, we do have perception. That's all we have. So we create this perception...a dream or reality...both the same in the sense that all we can do it perceive and see images/have physical and emotional feelings.

[Aetherous]

Atheism is a sign of overconfidence in one's limited perspective and intelligence. Basically, we haven't even seen the entire tip of the iceberg much less what's beneath the surface. We see a small part of one planet...we haven't even met everyone even in our own city, and the ones we do meet we don't know everything about.

The only way to honestly claim there is no God is to be absolutely omniscient and all-seeing. The key here is honesty...be honest about what you know and what you don't.

Considering what we know as reality, this world and universe, to be an illusion, is just a method for relinquishing attachment to things and is not absolute truth. Why? Because the illusion is real. Unless you can eat mountains for breakfast, fly through the sky and walk on water, you can't honestly say "it's just an illusion". Do you believe that because someone tells you it's true? That's the same as believing blindly in God. But considering it as such can be a good technique, until the point where a person could possibly do those things. If that's possible. Once again it comes down to honesty about what you actually know.

Agnosticism, or "I don't know" is very understandable.