Deity Existence

[Vasu]

The difference is that the big bang was arrived at by scientific enquiry. The universe was found to be expanding, therefore it should have started expanding at some point, and therefore, after a little more research, the big bang was found to be the explanation that best fitted the evidence.


When it comes to god, there is no research involved. Just stating that a deity created us is kinda plausible, but stating that it has all these attributes that religion states it does is foolishness.

[Jikanu]

What about the eventual starting point? the first bit of matter, no matter how small, had to have a creator. And how is an omnipotent, omnicient being any harder to think of than some figurative spiritual beast smashing through and creating all existance, if that's what you're suggesting by saying the traits that religion gives the deity?

[Vasu]

Your first statement works against you too.


Okay let's look at the argument.

The big bang happened.
Something had to make it happen.
A certain deity made it happen.

So far it seems okay if you disregard the infinite regression it created. But now, here comes the excess baggage.

The deity is omnipotent. Why hypothesise that?
The deity is omniscient. Why?
The deity is omnipresent. How? Why?
The deity is benevolent. Why?
The deity is intelligent and aware of our existence. Why?

[pigspark]

It is true that the Romans when conquered the lands forced by killing and son to force the people of other places to be christian. There as it is true beeen a lot of bloodshed on religions and the gods u believe in.

[Jikanu]

Your first statement works against you too.


Okay let's look at the argument.

The big bang happened.
Something had to make it happen.
A certain deity made it happen.

So far it seems okay if you disregard the infinite regression it created. But now, here comes the excess baggage.

The deity is omnipotent. Why hypothesise that?
The deity is omniscient. Why?
The deity is omnipresent. How? Why?
The deity is benevolent. Why?
The deity is intelligent and aware of our existence. Why?

The same could be said for your theory.

you claim the Deity is a blind, unknowing force. Why?

we all have theories on the nature of whatever God, Goddess, or Thing created us. The omnipotence and omnicience makes sense if you believe that the being is self aware. and as for benevolence, because he/she created us, and is like a father/mother to us.

[Vasu]

Correction.
As of now, I claim that no such deity exists due to lack of proof.

Why? Because it is far more likely.
A deity created the universe. (3 assumptions)

A deity created the universe and then created us and then appeared some thousands of years ago to a privileged one of us and then gave us a moral code to live by and then sent his "son" to die for our sins (which is stupid since he could have cleared our sins with a snap of his fingers) and still watches over us today and created a "heaven" and a "hell" for after your life, and makes sure we live on after our life and made us in his image even though he is not physical and... and... and... and... (thousands of assumptions).


How is ascribing omnipotence and omniscience valid for a self aware deity? And the mother thing is not sound. There are mothers who hate their kids too. Not everybody likes their creation, and even this rests on the assumption that the deity is self aware.

[Hraesvelg]

Oddly, you seem to be giving the same weight to every interpretation to a deity. I, at one point, thought along the same lines until I realized exactly how lazy that position is. It allows one to just sort of bop along in life without really giving great thought to the matter. There is an answer, there is a truth. We just have to find it. At the end of the day, I'll bring my evidence and you bring yours and we'll see which one holds up to scrutiny.

The easiest way to show that there is an ultimate truth is the ponder on this statement:
"There is no ultimate truth."
For the statement to be true, the statement itself would have to be a universal truth, thus negating itself.

The primary difference in position, again, is that we're able to say "I don't know". We don't shoehorn in fanciful tales of supernatural beings to cover our lack of understanding.

[Jikanu]

i agree that there is an ultimate truth, but we wont really be able to test it till we somehow are able to tell what happens after we die. Till then, we have no proof either way, really. till there's proof towards or against the existance of a deity, there's no point in debating this, since neither side has any conclusive evidence.

And vasu, is it not that God made some rules for himself to abide to?

And that's where benevolence comes in. He/She is a loving parent to us, wanting nothing less than the best for us.

[Hraesvelg]

Either that, or our universe is the byproduct of the digestion of a multiuniversal bacterium. Since we're just throwing wild attributes to something we don't understand. We also might be Thor's foot fungus, or perhaps the multiversal mother's yeast infection. They're about as plausible as a deity that actually gives a two-penny screw about this backwater of a planet.

[Jikanu]

*shrugs* anything's possible, really. while i think those things are a bit less believeable, that's just personal opinion.