If god created the universe, then who created god? (question for theists)

[TheStrangest]

@sumof1 said in If god created the universe, then who created god? (question for theists):

@thestrangest Do you really want to do this here? Fine.

Why not?

.'
Firstly, 'Good to know' not 'Good to now'. And you're welcome.

Did i really say that?

[TheStrangest]

@thestrangest said in If god created the universe, then who created god? (question for theists):

@sumof1 said in If god created the universe, then who created god? (question for theists):

@thestrangest Do you really want to do this here? Fine.

Why not?

.'
Firstly, 'Good to know' not 'Good to now'. And you're welcome.

Did i really say that?

Oh wow i did, ok

[TheStrangest]

If you want to talk about scientists then let's talk about scientists. Do you have any idea how many scientists believe in a (inactive) creator?

Well i can only find trustworthy polls from the states

So in the states

51% of all scientists believe in god, but only 7% of astrophysicists and 13% of biologists according to a 2009 poll i remember

Albert Einstein believed in the God of beauty his reasoning was that "the universe didn't have to be beautiful but it is"

Lol that's taking what he meant really out of context. Einstein was 100% atheist:

Dr Clifford Wilson believed in God and many others that you can look up for yourself

Bitch he's a PhD in medicine, wtf does that have to do with the origins of the universe? I don't care about him because his opinion on the origins of the cosmos doesn't matter just like a guy with a PhD in Gender Studies. Only do Biologist's/Cosmologist's/Astrophysicist's... opinions matter on these topics because THAT'S what they study

But wait, what are scientists trying to achieve in science? It's one thing, A unified theory of everything (Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking dreamt of the day when a unified theory would prevail). Why have a unified theory? This is what Stephen Hawking said : 'To read the mind of God'

Lololololololololololololllllll. Stephen Hawking is also 100% atheist:

That's from his documentary "on grand design"

What he meant by that is to understand the cosmos as if it's a conscience, just like what Einstein said, it's metaphorical.

Here's another comment he made on God : This contrasted with his 2010 book The Great Design, in which he said that the idea of God was "not necessary" to explain the origin of the universe as the laws of physics offer enough of an explanation

Yeah that's true.

That statement that was seen as a change from his previous position on God and the universe as, in an interview with Reuters in 2007, Hawking said “I believe the universe is governed by the laws of science,” conceding that “the laws may have been designed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws.” > What? He just said that there IS the need for a God to create the universe itself.

YEAH, that's because the guy he was talking to was an atheist and he didn't want to say that religious people either have to not believe in god or not be interested in science, god MAY have created designed the laws of the universe but we can perfectly explain everything without the concept of god, that isn't a contradiction

Now for this 'Lawrence Krauss' you mentioned (i've never even heard of him). What i'm going to say right now is considered to be a fact, There is NO quantum scientist out there who is better than Hawking

HAWKING IS NOT A QUANTUM SCIENTIST, HE'S AN ASTROPHYSICIST and that doesn't change with his contributions to quantum gravity, his degree is in astrophysics and cosmology and Lawrence Krauss's degree is in Quantum Physics

So the best quantum scientist believes in God

HE IS AN ATHEIST, HE MADE A WHOLE DOCUMENTARY EXPLAINING WHY THERE IS NO GOD AND THE CLIP I SHOWED YOU IS OF HIM IN THAT DOCUMENTARY, here is the documentary:

this is someone who deals with the universe and it's wonders everyday looking for an explanation (Dr. Hawking produced a lot of papers that gave a lot of answers, specifically on a matter (pun intended) that even Einstein failed to decipher, I'm talking about Black Holes. So if he believes in a God, do you?

He doesn't and even if he did i wouldn't, not to even mention that you should GO FUCK YOUUUURRRRSEEEELLLFFFFF for neglecting Lawrence Krauss's contributions to Science. His statements are just as valuable as Stephen Hawking's and it's the same for all peer reviewed research

Do you believe in the Big Bang Theory? Where nothing becomes something. tell me where or when in nature does a process take place where something is created out of nothing. There isn't one.

There is very, very solid evidence there was a Big Bang. https://www.schoolsobservatory.org/learn/astro/cosmos/bigbang/bb_evid , There is NO evidence about what caused it. We cannot see back before it. In fact, since spacetime seems to have emerged from it, we have no reason to believe there even WAS time before it. What was before the Big Bang may be a nonsensical question. It may be like asking, "What is north of the North Pole?". Not to mention THAT I FUCKING UPLOADED THIS VIDEO ON YOUTUBE MYSELF:

So you can understand what professor Lawrence Krauss's book talks about, you even have the whole book here:

Now to that picture about 3000 gods, Those 3000 are not gods, all Greek mythological gods are not gods, they are embodiments of characteristics. Gods like Venus they are what the Greeks admired and worshipped, this similar to what Einstein believed he believed in multiple 'characteristics' and claimed them to be his god. Things like victory (nike) they used these terms to 'describe' or attempt to explain what it is by giving it a personality that is why all their gods have human-like features and a human body

No, all those gods are no longer practiced(except by a couple insane people) there are about 4000 religions being practiced today all with their own version of god, and don't even fucking try to explain why your god is somehow more likely to exist than their's because he isn't

'Islam is in no way a good religion' and why is that?
Do I think Islam is a religion of terrorism?
Sure it is we kill for fun, i mean don't you believe all religions to be more or less the same,

No i don't. Islam is significantly more violent than Jainism for example

if you believe Islam to be a religion of terrorism then why aren't other religions like judaism, christianity, buddhism, hinduism religions of terrorism?

I don't believe it to be a religion of terrorism to be exact but i do believe it to be a Sexist, Violent, Homophobic not to even mention it being proslavery. Same goes for Judaism and Christianity but I'm not sure about Hinduism. For Islam this is scripturally and historically true but not all Muslims believe this/follow this ideology (but more Muslims than Christians and Jews do)

is Islam different?

Yeah

Just like any other religion it has a God that the followers ship, so what's your reasoning for saying that?

Unlike other religions there is not as much recognition by muslims who know of the verses i mentioned that they're wrong or a view that they're not meant to be taken literally

[TheStrangest]

@sumof1 wow it took me a whole hour to reply to you? Shit

[adios]

You do realize that asking this is illogical if you mean by god an ultimate uncreated being that creates things...
Also, your backdrop says “believe in science” that’s like believing in alternative facts. Science is evidence not a faith and you should never believe it but verify or falsify it depending on your position on the role of the scientific method.
I understand the frustration your question is underlining. Because there is no exact proof of an ultimate creator and then people who believe in one ask you a question similar to what is outside of your system of thought? And expect you to prove their belief for them. Belief is rational and reasonable at times but there is no evidence for it.

[TheStrangest]

@joewindsurf said in If god created the universe, then who created god? (question for theists):

You do realize that asking this is illogical if you mean by god an ultimate uncreated being that creates things...

No, it isn't illogic, it is a question that points out the special pleading fallacy in the religious argument saying that no-one created god

Also, your backdrop says “believe in science” that’s like believing in alternative facts. Science is evidence not a faith and you should never believe it but verify or falsify it depending on your position on the role of the scientific method.

You can disbelieve in the scientific method, that's what the "believe in Science" statement discourages. For example a lot of religious people don't believe in Evolution nor the Big Bang which if we go back in their past far enough, eventually we'll find that they don't because of a lack of understanding and belief in the scientific method. Btw are you suggesting that somehow faith can be used at the same time as alternative fact?

When we use the 2nd meaning(from the definition of faith in the dictionary):strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.

Do you NEED faith to believe in your religion, as in, can you believe in your religion without faith?

Usually the answer is no

i didn't chose to be an atheist, it happened because i saw no sufficient evidence behind the religious claims, if there was evidence i would believe and of course faith is not a reliable pathway to truth since it can lead you to true and wrong conclusions with incredible inaccuracy so using it is useless

Why use an UNRELIABLE PATHWAY TO TRUTH to believe that something is TRUE. I don't thank that's a good idea

I understand the frustration your question is underlining. Because there is no exact proof of an ultimate creator and then people who believe in one ask you a question similar to what is outside of your system of thought?

Outside my system of thought? I have never heard such a question not do i even know what it means

And expect you to prove their belief for them. Belief is rational and reasonable at times but there is no evidence for it.

I don't see how it can ever be without proof, by the way you're being really vague

[SUmof1]

@thestrangest You’re the one who thinks that he doesn’t believe in God, why would he even mention God when he was being interviewed on the beginning of the universe why would he bring up something so controversial. His claims are a bit contradictory but that i think is because he doesn’t want it to be true. Astrophysicists are scientists so i don’t know why you would separate them. And Stephen Hawking played a very big rolein quantum physics, he’s the one who invented quantum chess. Not to mention he specialized in black holes, which is branched as ‘quantum mechanics’ ‘quantum’ ‘q u a n t u m’ which makes him a quantum scientist, the same way you call someone a mathematician because they use a lot of maths in their work.

[TheStrangest]

@sumof1 said in If god created the universe, then who created god? (question for theists):

@thestrangest You’re the one who thinks that he doesn’t believe in God

YOU CUNTTTTTT. HE SAID IT HIMSELF YOU RETARD:

Did you not watch the video?

why would he even mention God when he was being interviewed on the beginning of the universe why would he bring up something so controversial

Because the question involved the role of god in the universe, i watched that interview too you know.

His claims are a bit contradictory but that i think is because he doesn’t want it to be true

HIS CLAIMS ARE NOT CONTRADICTORY, what argument can you give for that assertion? And something can't be "a bit" contradictory, it either is or isn't.

Astrophysicists are scientists so i don’t know why you would separate them

Because in science there are different fields and Astrophysics and Quantum Physics are completely different. All scientific contributions are equal and you shouldn't dismiss someone's findings because they're less knowm

And Stephen Hawking played a very big rolein quantum physics

In quantum gravity m8, what Lawrence Krauss's work focusses on is completely different, they work in different fields

he’s the one who invented quantum chess. Not to mention he specialized in black holes, which is branched as ‘quantum mechanics’ ‘quantum’ ‘q u a n t u m’ which makes him a quantum scientist

M8, his degree is in cosmology and astrophysics, the point is that they work on completely different things which are not interconnected

The same way you call someone a mathematician because they use a lot of maths in their work

LOL, that's exactly what you don't do, you call someone by their profession not what they can or can't do, if so then everyone should be called a philosopher

[SUmof1]

@thestrangest Definition of a mathematician: A mathematician is someone who uses an extensive knowledge of mathematics in his or her work, typically to solve mathematical problems. Mathematics is concerned with numbers, data, quantity, structure, space, models, and change

[TheStrangest]

@sumof1 said in If god created the universe, then who created god? (question for theists):

@thestrangest Definition of a mathematician: A mathematician is someone who uses an extensive knowledge of mathematics in his or her work, typically to solve mathematical problems. Mathematics is concerned with numbers, data, quantity, structure, space, models, and change

Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists

[SUmof1]

@thestrangest Definition of a mathematician: A mathematician is someone who uses an extensive knowledge of mathematics in his or her work, typically to solve mathematical problems. Mathematics is concerned with numbers, data, quantity, structure, space, models, and change

[TheStrangest]

@sumof1 said in If god created the universe, then who created god? (question for theists):

@thestrangest Definition of a mathematician: A mathematician is someone who uses an extensive knowledge of mathematics in his or her work, typically to solve mathematical problems. Mathematics is concerned with numbers, data, quantity, structure, space, models, and change

Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths

[TheStrangest]

@sumof1 that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field

[SUmof1]

@thestrangest Definition of a mathematician: A mathematician is someone who uses an extensive knowledge of mathematics in his or her work, typically to solve mathematical problems. Mathematics is concerned with numbers, data, quantity, structure, space, models, and change

[TheStrangest]

@sumof1 you do understand that repeating the same thing over and over again doesn't make you right

[TheStrangest]

@sumof1 Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths. that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field
Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths. that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field
Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths. that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field
Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths. that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field
Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths. that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field
Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths. that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field
Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths. that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field
Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths. that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field
Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths. that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field
Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths. that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field
Every scientist is a mathematician but that's not what you should call them, because mathematicians do more advanced math than scientists. Scientists focus on different problems than mathematicians, mathematicians these days focus on pure maths and scientists focus on applied maths. that's why, to avoid confusion, you should call a scientist with the name of their field

[TheStrangest]

@sumof1 i can do the same

[TheStrangest]

@sumof1 but if you continue I'll just ignore you because you're a waste of my time in such a case

[SUmof1]

@thestrangest do you understand that copying someone makes you a copycat

[SUmof1]

@thestrangest i am right, it’ll take too long to get you to understand, i’ll go head to head with you on debates after the 7th of June, right now i don’t have a lot of free time everyday