What is the difference between your God and mine?

[SA Huguenot]

This one goes to the Atheist who 'believes' they dont believe in any creator.
I love reading scientific publications, (and hopefully understand most of its content) and somehow learned that the Atheist likes to say they are sure there is no such a thing as a God.
Some will say, due to the abscence of evidence, they can conclude that there is no such a thing. Others simply just say, there is not, period.

The Christian, on the other hand 'believes' in a supernatural Creator. Note I say BELIEVES.

For some reason or another, the Atheist just hates such a prospect, and from experience I found that the Atheist just hates the thought of the existance of a Creator God!
To themit is sacred scientific blasphemy, and anyone saying there is a God, must be set on their place to display to the world that not only are such believers wrong, but totally in disregard of science, and somehow not so intelligent.

And, again out of experience, I find that the atheist wont hesitate to turn vulgar towards the Christian believer, forcing institutions, organisations, and even law to silent such people of this belief.

Why they are so arrogant against the Christian believer is beyond my understanding, but again, when I was an Atheist, I also thought it wize to verbally attack anyone who spoke about God in my presence.

However, Now that I learned that there is God, I find the Atheist is actually not so sincere about their facts and beliefs.

It is the old story of who was first, the egg or....
Lets look at what the facts show:
The Christian God

• The Atheist normally claims that there is no scientific method to determine the existance of a Creator, such as the Christians' God.
• This Christian God exists outside the realm of Time and Space, is everlasting, and does not have an end. (exactly what it means to exist outside of Time)
• This God does not exist in space, He is not bound by an outline, area, or physical entity. (exactly what it means to exist outside of Space)
• This Creator was the cause of everything we know exists today, from the smallest of particle, to the grandest of Universes.
• Before all this, only God was.

The Scientific God (which the Atheist adores)

• Before the Big Bang, only the laws of physics existed, and with the forces of natural gravity, somehow a vacuum bubble appeared, and through this uneven gravitational fields, more bubbles grew to exponentional sizes.
• Particles, much smaller that what we can immagine, even smaller than the Higgs Bousson particles, popped up in more vacuumes in this false vacuum, and matter came into being.
• This matter then, with the help of gravitational fields, increased so spectacularly, that it formed the centrepoint of the universe as we know it, and exploaded into what we know as the universe today.

This is the consenses of scientists such as Lindae, Hawkins, etc.

OK, now the angle.
The scientist believes that the whole of creation came into being due to "gravitational forces and the laws of physics.
If the Laws of Physics and Gravity kick started the universe, where did this gravitational fields bound by the laws of physics came from?

The scientist claim, it was there before anything existed, in a state external from space and Time, IOW, it always existed before there was space and time.

Why does it mean that this gravitational field was bound by the laws of physics?
Because without any intellectual regulations, and natural laws, this gravitational fields would not be able to kick start this Big Bang that contains laws and rules to abide by.

Therefore, even the atheist believes the whole creation was Created by a Creator, that existed forever, has intellect, and are not contained within the known space of the universe.

Now, what is the difference between your god, and the Christian God?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

OK, now the angle.
The scientist believes that the whole of creation came into being due to "gravitational forces and the laws of physics.
If the Laws of Physics and Gravity kick started the universe, where did this gravitational fields bound by the laws of physics came from?

The scientist claim, it was there before anything existed, in a state external from space and Time, IOW, it always existed before there was space and time.

Why does it mean that this gravitational field was bound by the laws of physics?
Because without any intellectual regulations, and natural laws, this gravitational fields would not be able to kick start this Big Bang that contains laws and rules to abide by.

Therefore, even the atheist believes the whole creation was Created by a Creator, that existed forever, has intellect, and are not contained within the known space of the universe.

This is a HUGE non-sequitur.

What makes you think "intellectual regulation" (whatever that means) is required for gravitational forces to result in the formation of the early Universe, and how on earth can you reach the conclusion that it is believed that such a thing "existed forever", much less "not contained within the known space of the Universe"?

As far as differences between the two propositions go, even if I were to accept that all atheists believed in the existence of the "atheist god", as you put it, it's pretty clear that the claims made about them are wildly different. In general, Christians tend to make very specific claims not only about the existence of God, but God's nature, God's actions, God's desires, God's rules, God's interactions with earth and with humans, God's power, God's son, the actions of God's son, the beliefs of God's son, the followers of God's son, the beliefs that resulted from God's son, and the correct proper way to action, accept and come to know all of these things (varying depending on denomination, of course). So, there's quite a big difference there.

 

[Rival]

Therefore, even the atheist believes the whole creation was Created by a Creator,

I think this is a weird conclusion to draw from what you've said before it. It doesn't logically follow imo.

 

[ratiocinator]

The Scientific God (which the Atheist adores)

• Before the Big Bang, only the laws of physics existed, and with the forces of natural gravity, somehow a vacuum bubble appeared, and through this uneven gravitational fields, more bubbles grew to exponentional sizes.
• Particles, much smaller that what we can immagine, even smaller than the Higgs Bousson particles, popped up in more vacuumes in this false vacuum, and matter came into being.
• This matter then, with the help of gravitational fields, increased so spectacularly, that it formed the centrepoint of the universe as we know it, and exploaded into what we know as the universe today.

This is the consenses of scientists such as Lindae, Hawkins, etc.

OK, now the angle.
The scientist believes that the whole of creation came into being due to "gravitational forces and the laws of physics.
If the Laws of Physics and Gravity kick started the universe, where did this gravitational fields bound by the laws of physics came from?

The scientist claim, it was there before anything existed, in a state external from space and Time, IOW, it always existed before there was space and time.

No idea where you got all this from. Looks like some sort of muddled misunderstanding of multiple different hypotheses - all totally irrelevant to the existence or otherwise of any god(s).

Why does it mean that this gravitational field was bound by the laws of physics?

No idea, you made it up.

Because without any intellectual regulations, and natural laws, this gravitational fields would not be able to kick start this Big Bang that contains laws and rules to abide by.

Massive, unsupported assertion (even if your weird mishmash of science terms made sense).

Therefore...

What preceded this was way too confused for there to be a 'therefore'.

...even the atheist believes the whole creation was Created by a Creator, that existed forever, has intellect, and are not contained within the known space of the universe.

Which atheist is this? This atheist believes no such thing.

Cosmology really is irrelevant to the existence or otherwise of any god(s). Nobody needs to believe some alternative scientific 'origin story' to dismiss any god claim that comes with no supporting evidence or reasoning.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Why they are so arrogant against the Christian believer is beyond my understanding, but again, when I was an Atheist, I also thought it wize to verbally attack anyone who spoke about God in my presence.

That explains a lot.

Apologies for accidentally snipping out the rest of your rubbish.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Not all atheists have animosity toward Christians. Most probably don't even care about what you believe.

It appears to me that in creating this thread, or rather in the demeanor with which you presented your argument, it's you, @SA Huguenot, that is feeding any animosity that may exist.

 

[SA Huguenot]

This is a HUGE non-sequitur.

What makes you think "intellectual regulation" (whatever that means) is required for gravitational forces to result in the formation of the early Universe, and how on earth can you reach the conclusion that it is believed that such a thing "existed forever", much less "not contained within the known space of the Universe"?

As far as differences between the two propositions go, even if I were to accept that all atheists believed in the existence of the "atheist god", as you put it, it's pretty clear that the claims made about them are wildly different. In general, Christians tend to make very specific claims not only about the existence of God, but God's nature, God's actions, God's desires, God's rules, God's interactions with earth and with humans, God's power, God's son, the actions of God's son, the beliefs of God's son, the followers of God's son, the beliefs that resulted from God's son, and the correct proper way to action, accept and come to know all of these things (varying depending on denomination, of course). So, there's quite a big difference there.

Sure, you are only continuing on fact the Christian God has a written history of interacting with His creation.
Therefore, the Atheist might think they are using this historical events to disprove the Christian God, which they are well oilled to do.

However, this was not what I referred too at all!
I am speaking about the origins of the creation, or as the atheist would call it, the cause of the Universe.

I say, a God who is eternal, with intellect, was the kick start.
The scientist, from who's publicatios I took this "cause", says it was a force ruled by the laws of physics that kick started everything.

And take into consideration that eveh Stephen Hawking said that in his last book, the grand design.

Therefore, the Atheist scientists got the answer to explain to the contrary of a God, and made something nothing. (eg gravity should be regarded as nothing.)

Well, in the Christian concept of an eternal God, that has intellect, the Atheist has eternal Gravity ruled by the laws of physics.

Any atheist that wants to go deeper into the historical interactions of the Christian God as described in the Bible, will have to prepare to answer to the historical writings of Sakai, Lindae en all the other scientists that gives a descritption of their cause of the Universe.
Then you will find ridiculous physics equations that is frowned upon by many other scientists, but applauded by the new atheist movement.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Not all atheists have animosity toward Christians. Most probably don't even care about what you believe.

It appears to me that in creating this thread, it's you, @SA Huguenot, that is feeding any animosity that may exist.

Funny that our observation is as such.
Perhaps you are one of the people that dont mind a street preacher sperading the gospel, or you are not against Christian groups who wants to bring the Bible back into schools?

If this is the case, why so silent against the atheists that tells Christians on this forum that their beliefs are nothing more than fairytales.
Or did you stop them from making a mockery of their God and their Bible?

 

[SA Huguenot]

That explains a lot.

Apologies for accidentally snipping out the rest of your rubbish.

OK, so tell me your wisdom instead of reminding me of my rubbish.
Quite a simple answer that demand from you.

What do you believe was the cause of the Universe?

 

[SA Huguenot]

No idea where you got all this from. Looks like some sort of muddled misunderstanding of multiple different hypotheses - all totally irrelevant to the existence or otherwise of any god(s).



No idea, you made it up.



Massive, unsupported assertion (even if your weird mishmash of science terms made sense).



What preceded this was way too confused for there to be a 'therefore'.



Which atheist is this? This atheist believes no such thing.

Cosmology really is irrelevant to the existence or otherwise of any god(s). Nobody needs to believe some alternative scientific 'origin story' to dismiss any god claim that comes with no supporting evidence or reasoning.

OK, so my simple quaestion to you:
How did the Universe came into existence?
Seing that you know more than Stephen Hawking is will be a simple answer I presume.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Funny that our observation is as such.
Perhaps you are one of the people that dont mind a street preacher sperading the gospel, or you are not against Christian groups who wants to bring the Bible back into schools?

If this is the case, why so silent against the atheists that tells Christians on this forum that their beliefs are nothing more than fairytales.
Or did you stop them from making a mockery of their God and their Bible?

First, I'm not an atheist.

I don't mind a street preacher spreading the Gospel. No one is making me stand there and listen to them.

Bibles are fine in parochial schools, but have no place in a public school that has students with diversity in worldviews. Would you have any issue with Hindus bringing their scripture into public schools? What about parochial schools?

I will take the same approach with an atheist who tries to make a mockery of a religion as I am with you, a theist to tries to make a mockery atheism.

 

[ratiocinator]

OK, so my simple quaestion to you:
How did the Universe came into existence?

I don't know. I don't even know if it did (came into existence). Why is this at all relevant to the existence or otherwise of any god(s)?

Seing that you know more than Stephen Hawking is will be a simple answer I presume.

Stephen Hawking didn't know either. He presented at least one hypothesis (the no boundary proposal). I have no idea why you think I know more than he did.

 

[Twilight Hue]

This one goes to the Atheist who 'believes' they dont believe in any creator.
I love reading scientific publications, (and hopefully understand most of its content) and somehow learned that the Atheist likes to say they are sure there is no such a thing as a God.
Some will say, due to the abscence of evidence, they can conclude that there is no such a thing. Others simply just say, there is not, period.

The Christian, on the other hand 'believes' in a supernatural Creator. Note I say BELIEVES.

For some reason or another, the Atheist just hates such a prospect, and from experience I found that the Atheist just hates the thought of the existance of a Creator God!
To themit is sacred scientific blasphemy, and anyone saying there is a God, must be set on their place to display to the world that not only are such believers wrong, but totally in disregard of science, and somehow not so intelligent.

And, again out of experience, I find that the atheist wont hesitate to turn vulgar towards the Christian believer, forcing institutions, organisations, and even law to silent such people of this belief.

Why they are so arrogant against the Christian believer is beyond my understanding, but again, when I was an Atheist, I also thought it wize to verbally attack anyone who spoke about God in my presence.

However, Now that I learned that there is God, I find the Atheist is actually not so sincere about their facts and beliefs.

It is the old story of who was first, the egg or....
Lets look at what the facts show:
The Christian God

• The Atheist normally claims that there is no scientific method to determine the existance of a Creator, such as the Christians' God.
• This Christian God exists outside the realm of Time and Space, is everlasting, and does not have an end. (exactly what it means to exist outside of Time)
• This God does not exist in space, He is not bound by an outline, area, or physical entity. (exactly what it means to exist outside of Space)
• This Creator was the cause of everything we know exists today, from the smallest of particle, to the grandest of Universes.
• Before all this, only God was.

The Scientific God (which the Atheist adores)

• Before the Big Bang, only the laws of physics existed, and with the forces of natural gravity, somehow a vacuum bubble appeared, and through this uneven gravitational fields, more bubbles grew to exponentional sizes.
• Particles, much smaller that what we can immagine, even smaller than the Higgs Bousson particles, popped up in more vacuumes in this false vacuum, and matter came into being.
• This matter then, with the help of gravitational fields, increased so spectacularly, that it formed the centrepoint of the universe as we know it, and exploaded into what we know as the universe today.

This is the consenses of scientists such as Lindae, Hawkins, etc.

OK, now the angle.
The scientist believes that the whole of creation came into being due to "gravitational forces and the laws of physics.
If the Laws of Physics and Gravity kick started the universe, where did this gravitational fields bound by the laws of physics came from?

The scientist claim, it was there before anything existed, in a state external from space and Time, IOW, it always existed before there was space and time.

Why does it mean that this gravitational field was bound by the laws of physics?
Because without any intellectual regulations, and natural laws, this gravitational fields would not be able to kick start this Big Bang that contains laws and rules to abide by.

Therefore, even the atheist believes the whole creation was Created by a Creator, that existed forever, has intellect, and are not contained within the known space of the universe.

Now, what is the difference between your god, and the Christian God?

Au contraire'

I happen to believe in the existence of video game God's. Not only do they exist whenever my character comes across them, but you will find incredibly uncanny and accurate prophecy among the Most Holy Developers of the Immaculate Program of the Divine Dev Kit of the Holy Code.

Take this prophecy for instance, foretelling Trump, the capital invasion, and California declaring itself a nation from the years of the orginal X box.

Watch and believe and let thine eyes be opened!

 

[Unveiled Artist]

This one goes to the Atheist who 'believes' they dont believe in any creator.
I love reading scientific publications, (and hopefully understand most of its content) and somehow learned that the Atheist likes to say they are sure there is no such a thing as a God.
Some will say, due to the abscence of evidence, they can conclude that there is no such a thing. Others simply just say, there is not, period.

The Christian, on the other hand 'believes' in a supernatural Creator. Note I say BELIEVES.

For some reason or another, the Atheist just hates such a prospect, and from experience I found that the Atheist just hates the thought of the existance of a Creator God!
To themit is sacred scientific blasphemy, and anyone saying there is a God, must be set on their place to display to the world that not only are such believers wrong, but totally in disregard of science, and somehow not so intelligent.

And, again out of experience, I find that the atheist wont hesitate to turn vulgar towards the Christian believer, forcing institutions, organisations, and even law to silent such people of this belief.

Why they are so arrogant against the Christian believer is beyond my understanding, but again, when I was an Atheist, I also thought it wize to verbally attack anyone who spoke about God in my presence.

However, Now that I learned that there is God, I find the Atheist is actually not so sincere about their facts and beliefs.

It is the old story of who was first, the egg or....
Lets look at what the facts show:
The Christian God

• The Atheist normally claims that there is no scientific method to determine the existance of a Creator, such as the Christians' God.
• This Christian God exists outside the realm of Time and Space, is everlasting, and does not have an end. (exactly what it means to exist outside of Time)
• This God does not exist in space, He is not bound by an outline, area, or physical entity. (exactly what it means to exist outside of Space)
• This Creator was the cause of everything we know exists today, from the smallest of particle, to the grandest of Universes.
• Before all this, only God was.

The Scientific God (which the Atheist adores)

• Before the Big Bang, only the laws of physics existed, and with the forces of natural gravity, somehow a vacuum bubble appeared, and through this uneven gravitational fields, more bubbles grew to exponentional sizes.
• Particles, much smaller that what we can immagine, even smaller than the Higgs Bousson particles, popped up in more vacuumes in this false vacuum, and matter came into being.
• This matter then, with the help of gravitational fields, increased so spectacularly, that it formed the centrepoint of the universe as we know it, and exploaded into what we know as the universe today.

This is the consenses of scientists such as Lindae, Hawkins, etc.

OK, now the angle.
The scientist believes that the whole of creation came into being due to "gravitational forces and the laws of physics.
If the Laws of Physics and Gravity kick started the universe, where did this gravitational fields bound by the laws of physics came from?

The scientist claim, it was there before anything existed, in a state external from space and Time, IOW, it always existed before there was space and time.

Why does it mean that this gravitational field was bound by the laws of physics?
Because without any intellectual regulations, and natural laws, this gravitational fields would not be able to kick start this Big Bang that contains laws and rules to abide by.

Therefore, even the atheist believes the whole creation was Created by a Creator, that existed forever, has intellect, and are not contained within the known space of the universe.

Now, what is the difference between your god, and the Christian God?

We are?
We do?

What's an intellectual regulation?

All things I know run by chaos. Beauty in lack of design and order.

Scientists aren't atheists because of their study no more is an atheist christian because he studies christian theology.

But, still... Sounds like drawing conclusions without logical connections.

Take the earth being in the perfect spot for humans to exist. How does one see a creator in this outside ones belief, conclusions, opinions, and such?

Deriving a creator without any logical fallacy

 

[McBell]

OK, so tell me your wisdom instead of reminding me of my rubbish.
Quite a simple answer that demand from you.

What do you believe was the cause of the Universe?

The answer to the question is simply "Do Not Know"

That you fancy yourself superior because you can throw out "GodDidIt" as though it is anything other than wishful thinking is a YOU problem.
That there are a bunch of others that agree with your non-answer reply of "GodDidIt" simply means there are a lot of people who suffer the same condition.

Now I understand you spent a lot of time and effort on your OP strawman, so you go right ahead and attack with all the vigor you got.
Then fly on home and claim your empty victory.

 

[Mock Turtle]

OK, so tell me your wisdom instead of reminding me of my rubbish.
Quite a simple answer that demand from you.

What do you believe was the cause of the Universe?

I have no idea, and I have the humility to realise such, rather than choose to believe one set of propositions that don't tend to make much sense to me but might just appeal to many others.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Sure, you are only continuing on fact the Christian God has a written history of interacting with His creation.
Therefore, the Atheist might think they are using this historical events to disprove the Christian God, which they are well oilled to do.

However, this was not what I referred too at all!
I am speaking about the origins of the creation, or as the atheist would call it, the cause of the Universe.

I say, a God who is eternal, with intellect, was the kick start.
The scientist, from who's publicatios I took this "cause", says it was a force ruled by the laws of physics that kick started everything.

And take into consideration that eveh Stephen Hawking said that in his last book, the grand design.

Therefore, the Atheist scientists got the answer to explain to the contrary of a God, and made something nothing. (eg gravity should be regarded as nothing.)

Well, in the Christian concept of an eternal God, that has intellect, the Atheist has eternal Gravity ruled by the laws of physics.

Any atheist that wants to go deeper into the historical interactions of the Christian God as described in the Bible, will have to prepare to answer to the historical writings of Sakai, Lindae en all the other scientists that gives a descritption of their cause of the Universe.
Then you will find ridiculous physics equations that is frowned upon by many other scientists, but applauded by the new atheist movement.

...

Whelp! I give up.

I have literally no idea what any of this means.

 

[Estro Felino]

That's a very good thread.
Nevertheless I am not sure atheists are a monolithic group, and not all of them believe in certain scientific dogmas.

 

[SalixIncendium]

...scientific dogmas.

Can you please give an example of a "scientific dogma?"

 

[Estro Felino]

Can you please give an example of a "scientific dogma?"

Like for example the Big Bang theory.
It is just a theory...many people do not consider it that probable.