Who Made God?

Had to google that. Looks like the science is solid...have not found any conclusions yet.I did read this article. Are virtual particles really constantly popping in and out of existence? Or are they merely a mathematical bookkeeping device for quantum mechanics? So as I understand it, one particle briefly becomes two heavier particles? Would that not mean they came from the original particle?Still trying to wrap mind around maths.

Seems to me like you are doing what this cartoon suggests...starting with a conclusion. Which strictly speaking is not science. So tell me what you think about what the cartoon suggests?Just because i believe that God exists does not prohibit me from questioning how believers think.

I CANT, I thought I would share with you an exchange that I had with my own Pastor, recently.He likely thinks much the same way that you do, and I know that his reply will be ridiculed here at EvC, but nobody here is as well known by me as he is, and I value his input.This is our conversation: The reason that I frame my statements that way is to present my belief the way that many people at EvC would understand. jar taught me the idea that God cannot be proven, thus to frame the issue as a belief against reality is more honest than to declare that what I believe is reality.Edited by Phat, : spellingEdited by Phat, : explanation

This article helped me conceptualize the idea of a universe expanding into space.
What is the universe expanding into? (Intermediate) - Curious About Astronomy? Ask an AstronomerEdited by Phat, : fixed broken link

What is the universe expanding into? (Intermediate) - Curious About Astronomy? Ask an Astronomer

When engaging in scholarly debates, being adept at googling is hardly a substitute for actually studying Hebrew and/or having a concordance. Google is full of information but the challenge is to apply the information so as to make a point, rather than simply flooding the discussion with links, articles, and ancient practices.Personally, I find that one is less likely to arrive at wisdom through studying ancient beliefs than from applying what we learn to our daily experience, discipline, motivation, and intention.I believe that GOD exists and is aware of us and our experience, intent, and attitude towards each other. One major question to be resolved is whether GOD (Through Jesus Christ according to Christian Belief) interacts with humanity in any meaningful or relational way.The ancient folks are no closer nor any farther than we are from addressing this today.Edited by Phat, : spellcheck

Can you start a conversation with me here in my new topic? I appreciate your time.

OK, going with your analogy... let's examine 3 models. The first model is who the Jews perceived around the time of Jesus birth and also around the time Saul of Tarsus was afoot. The second model was the one whom Jesus called Father.The third model was the one that allegedly knocked Saul off his high horse and spurned him into becoming Paul and starting a new religion. One could argue that a real God existed amongst these contenders...and I would argue that Jesus knew the real one, only because He worked at the relationship harder than most people. If people had to endure the suffering in life, harsh conditions, and lack of promise that those early people went through, one might see more people praying longer, fasting more, and studying the scriptures more independently yet diligently. People these days place their hope in science and technology to alleviate suffering. While it can go a long way, (my eye operation was a stellar success!) we still seek a source with solutions. I'm hoping one is different. I'm hoping one is actually real. I'm realizing as I get older that there are some problems in life that have no solutions. Do I expect a giant fairy to magically poof a solution? At times I do, but I know better. What I expect is a source of wisdom that will either inspire me to think of a solution or offer me one. God forbid we have a polytheistic universe. I prefer a monotheistic reality. A committee of Gods would more likely turn down my requests. It depends on what you get out of it. There is an employee at work named Tommy. For months I mistakenly called him Troy. He never corrected me, but I heard of my error through others. In that case, I was wrong, but still reaped the benefit of knowing him by a different name for months. If I simply waited for God to reveal His name to me, I would never get an opportunity to begin to get to know Him. So what if people think I'm talking to the air? So what if I hear only my own voice echoing back to me? My point is that you have concluded that God likely isn't here. I have concluded that He likely is. Is either position any worse than the other?

You always go with Leprechauns, dont you? Lets ask Wiki. Note folklore. The tale was spun intentionally as folklore. Can you make the same case for any of the 66 books? To me, the difference is that humans ...though disagreeing...take God seriously...or at least some do. Nobody takes Leprechauns seriously! We all know we are reading folklore. You guys are trying now to convince the believers that they too are reading folklore.I suppose that one can look at it the way one wants. Nobody that I know who is a believer would ever want God to be folklore. Most unbelievers simply assume that He is, I suppose. All I know is that if I pray right now, I do not believe that I am praying to a figment of my imagination. It seems to me that through these arguments, I sense that I am being asked to let go of the spark of hope that philosophers describe as
"springing eternal.". Do you really have an equivalent hope in human survival and science to ensure the survival of our species??

I think I understand your points. The fundamentalist would basically assert that the whole concept of science originates with the "ye shall be as gods" dogma. They would argue that basically, humans have this inborn rebellious desire to understand all of reality without having to bow to a God to tell us about it. We by nature want to figure it out for ourselves. I think that whenever we believers, myself, GDR,ICANT etc...get into science, we try and use the science to convince ourselves that our beliefs are valid.(measurable,provable) but I can really only speak for myself.

I appreciate your input! I know it took a lot to write that long and detailed post. I appreciate you.

OK I read your whole post and contemplated it. It is food for thought.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Apart from the stereotypical "angry atheist" meme, I don't see that much in the way of lies. Enlighten me.

Why do you sound so angry?
I noted the stereotypes. And no they are not true. I guess that makes some people angry. I never really noticed since the characters seemed acceptable though typecast. I'm not trying to defend the movie, apart from the basic arguments which I thought were not lies. Maybe I've led a sheltered life.

I think that believers warm up to the idea of a perfect human who totally does his Fathers will, saves the galaxy, rescues people, and tells us that we too can be like Him eventually. I am quite proficient at math. I also am not a creationist and I hesitate to label myself a fundie. I DO believe in magic, however. My Achilles heel is that I prefer fantasy over reality. God is the one adult belief that hints at magic as a possibility.