Existence of God

If nothing else, if one imagines God as existing, at the very least, in the fifth dimension, it actually explains many of his traits, such as omniscience and timelessness. Now, this is something that I always considered. String theory suggests that there are ten dimensions. Three dimensions is space, six dimensions is time, and nine dimensions is possibility. A single point on the tenth dimension is absolute infinity. In order to get an eleventh dimension, we need at least two more points on the ten dimension. However, if a single point is absolute infinity, then we cannot have more points on the tenth dimension.

So what exactly is the eleventh dimension? If God were to exist in the eleventh dimension, it would explain why he basically takes a steaming dump on all the laws of physics.

Furthermore, isn't one of the precepts of String Theory that there is a sort of force guiding the universe that we cannot explain or understand?

dragoon9105 wrote:There is only one god

There can only be one!! /McCloud

I never got why the universe had to have a beginning... or ending for that matter. It seems strange we've cottoned on to the notion of space being infinite - even if we're not 100%; but when you suggest it with time, people wig out and get confused. It's especially strange considering religion has already let us deal with time as an eternity anyway.

Couldn't it just be an ongoing sequence of Big Bangs and Big Crunches? Rinse and repeat.

ReconToaster wrote: Further more, under his assumption that the world stated as nothing, a place void of Space, Time, and matter... where did this god of his come from?

thats funny, because our world is still devoid of time!!!


cause time doesn't exist

Rotaretilbo wrote:If nothing else, if one imagines God as existing, at the very least, in the fifth dimension, it actually explains many of his traits, such as omniscience and timelessness. Now, this is something that I always considered. String theory suggests that there are ten dimensions. Three dimensions is space, six dimensions is time, and nine dimensions is possibility. A single point on the tenth dimension is absolute infinity. In order to get an eleventh dimension, we need at least two more points on the ten dimension. However, if a single point is absolute infinity, then we cannot have more points on the tenth dimension.

So what exactly is the eleventh dimension? If God were to exist in the eleventh dimension, it would explain why he basically takes a steaming dump on all the laws of physics.

Furthermore, isn't one of the precepts of String Theory that there is a sort of force guiding the universe that we cannot explain or understand?

from what i have seen about demisions some arent proved scientifically or mathmatically just theorized
i dont believe there are different lines of time and we are simply in one line

if i am given a certain amount of information and am who i was created no matter how many times you put me in that scenario i will pick the same thing because i am in the same mindset so there cannot be different lines of time only one

Ah, but that is coming from the you that already made all of those choices. A 6D graph really represents all possibilities, assuming the same starting point. So, on a 6D graph, at any one point, there are infinite branches out from that point, representing choice and chance. Now, personally, as a theist, I believe that while there are infinite branches, there are not infinite parallel universes representing these branches, and that, rather, we are a single line that simply doesn't move in a straight line along 6D space. For example, if someone were to travel back in time and change the past, all this would do would cause them to branch out into a parallel universe that I believe would wink out of existence when that person died or attempted to travel back to the future.

Rotaretilbo wrote:Ah, but that is coming from the you that already made all of those choices. A 6D graph really represents all possibilities, assuming the same starting point. So, on a 6D graph, at any one point, there are infinite branches out from that point, representing choice and chance. Now, personally, as a theist, I believe that while there are infinite branches, there are not infinite parallel universes representing these branches, and that, rather, we are a single line that simply doesn't move in a straight line along 6D space. For example, if someone were to travel back in time and change the past, all this would do would cause them to branch out into a parallel universe that I believe would wink out of existence when that person died or attempted to travel back to the future.

Going back in time is impossible. Time is one continuous line. Not a frame that can be switched on and repeated. But if going back in time were possible, then a new line would be created. One that overlaps the old one.

So basically what Rot said.

Anyway, what VenomFang X said was:

1. God made the universe. ( Btw, there is only one universe. Being the fact that a universe has everything inside)
2.The universe is not infinite.
3.God existed outside the universe, so that he was able to be an actual infinite.
4.There are no actual infinite visible to humans because all infinite things can not exist in the universe.

I feel like yelling in his face. What if some kinda of infinite matter came from out of the universe came into the universe.

What happened to no new posts?

but rot a computer program given the exact same information the exact same mindset will make the exact same choice no matter what

in fire emblem sacred stones on the same difficulty if i make an opening move and make the same opening move every time the computer ai will make the same move every time

unless it is a smart ai but then the ai will not have the same mindset as it did the first time it will remember

if i am given no prior knowledge of a situation and come upon it at one point in my life i will make a choice but later on the same situation i will change because my mindset is different

but if you are saying no prior knowledge and it happens the same way i will react in the same manner every time

because think of it like this the past is constantly repeating itself because God is throughout time because he is not bound by time
so the past cannot have happened in any different way because we have not changed
and you may say that does not affect the future but i would argue since god is already in the future he is looking upon our future as the past and that it happened how it will happen no changing it
that doesnt mean we should stop enjoying what he has given us though

i have given this idea much though i may have not conveyed my ideas well but i have already happened upon your argument before and thought through it

as a theist if you believe there are not parallel universes cannot believe that their are multiple futures

and even if you didnt believe that how can you say that something done in the exact same manner with the exact same thing at the same time in the same place will not yield the same thing
what would make it different
what would be the variable
unless there is a variable there can be no difference

2+2 always =4
unless there is a variable, but then the question is where did the variable come from
to be multiple futures there must have always been multiple pasts making parallel universes from the start

Zaki90 wrote:Going back in time is impossible. Time is one continuous line. Not a frame that can be switched on and repeated.

But if going back in time were possible, then a new line would be created. One that overlaps the old one.

So basically what Rot said.

Traveling through time is possible by bending the fourth dimension through the fifth dimension. Time is not a straight line, but appears so to those observing it from the third dimension.

kslidz wrote:but rot a computer program given the exact same information the exact same mindset will make the exact same choice no matter what

in fire emblem sacred stones on the same difficulty if i make an opening move and make the same opening move every time the computer ai will make the same move every time

unless it is a smart ai but then the ai will not have the same mindset as it did the first time it will remember

if i am given no prior knowledge of a situation and come upon it at one point in my life i will make a choice but later on the same situation i will change because my mindset is different

but if you are saying no prior knowledge and it happens the same way i will react in the same manner every time

because think of it like this the past is constantly repeating itself because God is throughout time because he is not bound by time
so the past cannot have happened in any different way because we have not changed
and you may say that does not affect the future but i would argue since god is already in the future he is looking upon our future as the past and that it happened how it will happen no changing it
that doesnt mean we should stop enjoying what he has given us though

There are infinite possibilities, and not all of them involve the decision you make. Do not forget chance. However, at any one point, if you come upon it with no prior knowledge, any outcome is possible. That doesn't mean every outcome occurs.

kslidz wrote:i have given this idea much though i may have not conveyed my ideas well but i have already happened upon your argument before and thought through it

as a theist if you believe there are not parallel universes cannot believe that their are multiple futures

and even if you didnt believe that how can you say that something done in the exact same manner with the exact same thing at the same time in the same place will not yield the same thing
what would make it different
what would be the variable
unless there is a variable there can be no difference

2+2 always =4
unless there is a variable, but then the question is where did the variable come from
to be multiple futures there must have always been multiple pasts making parallel universes from the start

If God exists in the 11th dimension, as I theorize, then he can view not only time, but all possibility, simultaneously. This can be seen when God issues warning. If you do this, this will happen, but if you do this, this will happen. Those are the marks of a being that, at the very least, exists in the seventh dimension.

no not really proof at all

you said the way to change it is through chance

where does chance come from

last time i checked every thing has laws and the only time those change are for god and since when does god change

im not saying that what i choose dictates but if any individual or computer program (animals are basically just complex programs so are we but we have a soul) comes across the exact same situation and is the exact same thing having the exact same thing happen prior it will do the same thing

it cant change cause it wont change cause it hasnt changed
if it had changed then we wouldnt be here

there is a slim possibility of parallel universes
i belive that is a little logical but i cannot see that while we travel through time their were chances of us doing something different

its like the scientific method we always go forward we cannot go back and from our past perspective we might have seen possible different futures but that is just us not knowing the real only future


from your stand point i see no evidence against my argument but i would love to mull over the possibility of parallel universes
from what i can logically conclude their can only be multiple universes or only one single line universe

Kslidz wrote:im not saying that what i choose dictates but if any individual or computer program (animals are basically just complex programs so are we but we have a soul) comes across the exact same situation and is the exact same thing having the exact same thing happen prior it will do the same thing

Now this is what I find strange. The same people who think that we, as humans, are somehow special, and find the idea of their being no after-life completely unacceptable, believe the same way as I do about humans, in the context of animals.

They think that when an insect dies... it simply dies. When a dog dies... it's dead. It is not floating around in doggy heaven. Why then is the concept of death so hard to accept in term of humans? If we can accept that our pets are simply ceasing to consciously exist, why can we not accept the same of ourselves? Why can we not accept that when we die, that's all there is to it?

Why is the idea so repulsive to some people? I'd call it fear of death. You believe in what sounds like more of a convenient idea. It seems that you believe in it, simply because you would prefer it to be true.

I would love it if there were an after-life, but I really have absolutely no evidence to even suggest that there's more to death than just dying.

I believe in conclusions that can be logically made. If you want to say "I'm hoping there's an after life," Go ahead. I'd go with Occam's Razor. The simples answer is usually correct. However, maybe there is an afterlife.

But don't act like you know it to be true. Don't state that "humans have souls" as fact, when I'm sure you have no real reason to think that, other than mere personal preference.

its not hard to accept if it was like that then i wouldnt care would be a afraid of death and livin up

but im prepared for what god has prepared for me

and it doesnt make sense what created time

the idea is not repulsive

its not preference and i cannot give you expierience that god has given me

it is not scientific in any way and i do not claim it is
but current science is not the end all be all and if i personally have been enlighten then i will try to lead others to the light the best way i can

there is no scientific proof for an after life but i have personally met(not friends or anything) a man, (he wrote a book) who should be dead his brains were on the concrete (this didnt convince me i was already a christian) but he came back to life ( look him up on google) and he talked of a biblical afterlife

i can accept that their is no scientific proof but i also know that science has nothing to do with it so why try to make it

good for those if they find a way but the point of faith is faith not that i have all the evidence here but that for me personally have enough to at least tip the scales

Cheese wrote:Sorry. I'd just like to say that I'm in this not to cripple your belief in a God, Civ; but because I'm enjoying myself and a good debate is always a good way to get to the bottom of yours and others' beliefs. You probably knew this, but apparently 90% of text communication is misinterpreted.

If you were trying to, you wouldn't succeed lol. I've been through several of these debates on here and I still hold strong.

Cheese wrote:Hypothetical The question still stands.

I gave you a hypothetical answer, so it doesn't really stand...

Cheese wrote:I don't really see the difference once their is an eternity. If there is a God, heaven and hell, then we're still all those things - just we end up in a different place. And as I said before, and I think Recon has also, is that the human mind has expanded to make all those things all the more important.

Possibly, but at least, with a spirit, there is actual life (not just organized partials).

Cheese wrote:Who knows why it is that vibrations in the air can cause our hearts to swell with joy or dispondancy. Who knows why a flourish of red on a white canvass can conjure up such strong sentiments. But the important thing is that they do. And when you think of it like that, isn't it amazing that molecules can come together to make this? Not only to form a working human mind, but the mind of humanity of a whole! A mind that can develop, or ignore concepts such as religion or art. That such powerful emotion can be stirred from these molecules' beliefs? That survival, the ultimate sacrifice for these molecules can be sacrificed for the survival of not only others, but the perpetuation of a concept?

But at this point, what is joy? What is happiness? Just a release of chemicals.

Cheese wrote:If you ask me, that's just as bloody marvellous as any other concept in this thread. I never rally cared about this kind of thing before, even if it has always interested me. But if I am nothing but a swirling mass of electrons, mostly nothingness, then that is simply awe inspiring.

Perhaps.

ReconToaster wrote:Um, no. I didn't tell myself "STOP BELIEVING IN GOD!" Actually, it really just took a single day of pondering, at the age of 12, to come to the conclusion that "I have no reason to believe in these things," and I stopped praying. I didn't decide to be atheist, or force myself to think the way I do. I came to the conclusion after thinking about it for a while, and I didn't force myself to ignore Atheistic ideas.

And I'm sure you thought it through more than I have forced you into doing on this thread. (sarcasm)

My point is, after that conclusion at the age of twelve, you have been trying to convince your self, knowingly or not, that your idea is true, just as I have with Christianity. So, as I said, of course you'd think that God is illogical, even though there is no evidence that suggests so.

ReconToaster wrote:Why is it that you follow Christianity?

Why not?

It was what I was raised to believe in, it doesn't subtract anything from my life, it gives me joy and happiness, and, when all else fails, it at least gives me a chance of getting into heaven.

ReconToaster wrote:Oh yes, that's right. You were forced to believe it as a child.

No, but that's how I was taught, so that's why I chose that religion in particular.

ReconToaster wrote:And who hear believes "Evolution" to be an absolute truth?

Where did you say anything about absolute truth? I find that evolution fits under all of the following:

ReconToaster wrote:It seems that the fact that all the "events" of the bible occurred thousands of year ago, really helps it to seem realistic to you. The disconnect makes it seem less absurd.

That would be evolution (but millions instead of thousands)

ReconToaster wrote:That, and the fact that it was probably injected into you from a very young age...

That too.

ReconToaster wrote:No, I'm saying that if you're going to believe in one religion "just in case," Why not believe in all of them "just in case?"

Because
1. That's not the reason for my believing in Christianity. That's just a reason I gave for agnostics.
2. Because that would involve believing in several Gods, which would be a one-way ticket out of most religions. How could I call myself a Christian and pray to Allah?

ReconToaster wrote:You did not state it as your reason, but you offered it as a good reason for others to believe.

And it is.

ReconToaster wrote:Should the entire scientific community stop trying to search for answers because it could be possible that maybe they'll be sent to some outer-dimensional world called hell? Should they just bow down to scripture and give up?

When you say that, you act like they're fighting against Christianity. Well, I'm not saying that they should give up. Many scientists are religious. Besides, why would believing in God force them into giving up their work? They can find things and analyze them and come to all of the conclusions they want. However, just because they would believe in God doesn't mean they have to search for only evidence that points towards such a belief.

You constantly claim that I am ignorant, but here you seem to be ignorant to the possibility that God is a logical answer.

civ wrote:Where did you say anything about absolute truth? I find that evolution fits under all of the following:

When I said something about christianity, you said that the same was true about evolution. The difference is that I don't undoubtedly believe in evolution the way that you undoubtedly believe in your religion.

Civ wrote:So, as I said, of course you'd think that God is illogical, even though there is no evidence that suggests so.

It's not that the idea of a god is illogical, it's that the assumption of it being true is unprovoked by any form of evidence. I'm not trying to claim that it is impossible, or even, totally "illogical" for there to be a god. I'm just saying that, given what we know so far about the universe, and how little we don't know, concluding that there must be a god is quite a broad jump, and a Christian, or Muslim god, specific to the religion of man, an exponentially wider jump at that.

Civ wrote:And it is.

No, fear of going to hell is not a good reason for an agnostic to be Christian. That's called fear tactics. It can be employed by anyone. I'm not going to give some guy on the street everything I own simply because he tells me that I'll go to hell if I don't.

What reason do I have to believe that?

ReconToaster wrote:When I said something about christianity, you said that the same was true about evolution. The difference is that I don't undoubtedly believe in evolution the way that you undoubtedly believe in your religion.

Christians can be open. This is something you fail to see. Remember a while ago? The Church wanted to celebrate evolution weekend.

While Christians may undoubtedly believe this, they have no reason not to. They might not if you give them such a reason, but as of now such a reason is non-existent.

ReconToaster wrote:It's not that the idea of a god is illogical, it's that the assumption of it being true is unprovoked by any form of evidence. I'm not trying to claim that it is impossible, or even, totally "illogical" for there to be a god. I'm just saying that, given what we know so far about the universe, and how little we don't know, concluding that there must be a god is quite a broad jump, and a Christian, or Muslim god, specific to the religion of man, an exponentially wider jump at that.

But what's wrong with it? Just because it seems like a jump, doesn't mean it has to be wrong or illogical. As I said, until there is a reason to not believe in God, why not?

ReconToaster wrote:No, fear of going to hell is not a good reason for an agnostic to be Christian. That's called fear tactics. It can be employed by anyone. I'm not going to give some guy on the street everything I own simply because he tells me that I'll go to hell if I don't.

Whether it's a tactic or not is a conflict of interests that, just like the clash of religious beliefs, cannot be proved one way or the other. I am not trying to scare anyone into becoming a Christian, but I answered a question.

ReconToaster wrote:What reason do I have to believe that?

I gave you won. Why not? Why take the risk? It's a good reason, no matter what my or anyone else's motivation might be.

Civbase wrote:Christians can be open. This is something you fail to see. Remember a while ago? The Church wanted to celebrate evolution weekend.

So they're open to competition? Well I'm open to competition with Steam, That doesn't mean I'm not a huge steam fanboy who worships Gabe Newell.

Civbase wrote:While Christians may undoubtedly believe this, they have no reason not to. They might not if you give them such a reason, but as of now such a reason is non-existent.

so because they have no evidence that directly disproves their ideas, they should jump to conclusions about the creation of life?

This is where I disagree. Yes, there is no evidence, and probably never will be, that directly disproves their beliefs. However, they don't have much reason for believing it in the first place.

When I say reasons, I mean reasons that would make that conclusion in their head. I don't mean benefits. You don't decide what you believe based on weighing pros and cons. You decide based on what seems like the most sound theory, and what has the most logical backing. Otherwise you are lying to yourself, and telling yourself that you believe in something because you hope to reap the benefits of such a faith.

As I've said, I'm not atheist because I don't like the ideas of Christianity. Even if I wanted to, I could not simply believe in it. This is why your whole "you might go to hell" argument is completely irrelevant. The idea of hell might cause someone to pretend to believe in God, but that's not true faith. Internally, they still doubt the existence of a god.

Wow! You actually sifted through all that! I'm impressed

CivBase wrote:I gave you a hypothetical answer, so it doesn't really stand...

Are you calling all Vikings liars?! Odin's Ravens will not be best pleased!!

CivBase wrote:Possibly, but at least, with a spirit, there is actual life (not just organized partials).

I think sentience, creativity (hell, especially creativity) and self-awareness is what we have dubbed spirit.

CivBase wrote:But at this point, what is joy? What is happiness? Just a release of chemicals.

Maslow did a test on mice. He rigged up electrodes to their brain to release these chemicals, and they did - over and over again until they would have died. So yeah, you're right; but I still don't see the problem so long as it's triggered by good things (like accomplishment or friendship, as opposed to button pushing or drug taking). Atheism is an understanding that all these things can still be amazing without God - maybe even more that it got that way without design. What is joy with the introduction of religion? Doesn't it still stem from the same chemical release, only through a different trigger?

CivBase wrote:Perhaps.

My electrons are mildly hung over... Let me push the happy button.

Oh, it's my turn, isn't it? I'll get a response up by tonight.

If only we could prove that one side was right in some way/shape/form, that'd be awesome..

Too bad its not going to happen, maybe we should change this misleading title. Something that would correctly explain what is going on here, a debate on Christianity.

x Gauz x wrote:If only we could prove that one side was right in some way/shape/form, that'd be awesome..

Too bad its not going to happen, maybe we should change this misleading title. Something that would correctly explain what is going on here, a debate on Christianity.

It's a debate on the logical existence of God.

That is going nowhere...

There is no god, only chuck norris...

Awesome gaiden, awesome vid on youtube.

GOD CAN'T HELP YOU NOW!!

x Gauz x wrote:a debate on Christianity.

That's only because Christianity is the one we (ok... I) know best.

I just started watching the Awesome Series the other week. They're... awesome!

CivBase wrote:

x Gauz x wrote:If only we could prove that one side was right in some way/shape/form, that'd be awesome..

Too bad its not going to happen, maybe we should change this misleading title. Something that would correctly explain what is going on here, a debate on Christianity.

It's a debate on the logical existence of God.

It's really more of a debate as to whether or not the assumption that there is a god is a reasonable conclusion to come to. As of yet, I really don't think it is.