If God doesn't exist then how was everything/the earth created?

[Coriolis]

*Protestant Degradation which is a product of the Roman Catholic schism. Vatican II furthering the degradation and conformity of the spiritual with the physical. Rome was rationalistic state. When the state got a hold of Christianity (in the West), (Western) Christianity also turned rationalistic, culminating to the Protestant rejection of all things spiritual, but I digress.

When a religion does not "grow and change," and "clings to the past" it leads to consistency throughout the ages. See: Eastern Orthodoxy. The purest form is the foundation. Mistaking degradation with progression is the killshot of the West. It's a non-sequitur belief that the reformation of anything automatically leads to progress.

It leads to a consistency, whether what is reasonable or not. If we had that sort of consistency in government, we would all still be living under monarchies. With that sort of consistency in medical care, our life expectancy would be much lower than it is now. One can disagree with whether a particular development constitutes progress (i.e. is a positive change), but not with the fact that change is a constant.

 

[Justin of Flavia Neapolis]

It leads to a consistency, whether what is reasonable or not. If we had that sort of consistency in government, we would all still be living under monarchies. With that sort of consistency in medical care, our life expectancy would be much lower than it is now.

I didn't say that, I said:

It's a non-sequitur belief that the reformation of anything automatically leads to progress.

Some things progress, while others regress. Both do constitute change, however.

One can disagree with whether a particular development constitutes progress (i.e. is a positive change), but not with the fact that change is a constant.

Entropy is a constant, which has no effect on the Spirit of Truth because Truth is ineffable. It cannot be physically affected, but Spiritual Truth can affect the physical:

“We see that it is not the task of Christianity to provide easy answers to every question, but to make us progressively aware of a mystery. God is not so much the object of our knowledge as the cause of our wonder.”
― Kallistos Ware, The Orthodox Way

 

[Red Memories]

As a Christian, I can honestly say, no explanation is without holes.

I personally struggle to believe the idea this complex universe was merely a random chance of combinations of gases and stuff over billions of years. I feel the complexity and beauty of the world had an artist behind it, that being God. Nonetheless, God is a personal subject and it is truly how you may define "God." Deist suggest He made everything then left. Pagans suggest many gods were involved. Agnostics suggest they just don't know. So I'll leave what is revealed to you by the spirits of the world up to you.

 

[Norexan]

[video=youtube;A9JtQN_GoVI]

The ladder to God is in our genetic memory right down to the shape of our DNA.

You miss the point. This sentence is about how humans as species forget what they were before.
We were animals and now we are just one step climb on ladder and yet we claim to know everything.
"What is beyond" , "what is unknown" really terrify humans hearths to the point that we want to decorate it.
All gods comes from fears. Fears of nature, fears of density, fears of death, fears of the unknown...
FEAR ESTABLISH FATE. Because only creature full of fears of reality have a need for something to believe

 

[Justin of Flavia Neapolis]

You miss the point. This sentence is about how humans as species forget what they were before.
We were animals and now we are just one step climb on ladder and yet we claim to know everything.
"What is beyond" , "what is unknown" really terrify humans hearths to the point that we want to decorate it.
All gods comes from fears. Fears of nature, fears of density, fears of death, fears of the unknown...
FEAR ESTABLISH FATE. Because only creature full of fears of reality have a need for something to believe/

Perhaps you're right. Perhaps you're just conjecturizing. Yes, we were animals. Now, we have the knowledge of good and evil, but if belief in God = fear of death, why so many martyrs? Because they have no fear of death, because they have something (Heaven/God/Reincarnation/etc) to believe. So, you see how your claim is circular? Even animals have a rudimentary fear of death otherwise they wouldn't fight back for survival, yet they genuinely lack a belief in God. They are "atheists" in the truest sense. I think there's something else involved with us that constitutes our belief in God besides the fear of death. Some call it "spirit." Now, it makes sense that those without the spirit (or rather, argue against the spirit, and as such argue against themselves) would rather us regress into animals while calling it progress (the saying "pissing in your face and calling it rain" comes to mind). This all starts with loosening human standards of behavior using a naturalistic fallacy.

"Animals do it, therefore we should do it." Not every animal behavior is worth doing.

 

[Forever]

Spoiler alert: there is no such thing as nothing.

For the thing that makes up nothing is far more real than what we perceive in our little minds.

 

[Mole]

Perhaps you're right. Perhaps you're just conjecturizing. Yes, we were animals. Now, we have the knowledge of good and evil, but if belief in God = fear of death, why so many martyrs? Because they have no fear of death, because they have something (Heaven/God/Reincarnation/etc) to believe. So, you see how your claim is circular? Even animals have a rudimentary fear of death otherwise they wouldn't fight back for survival, yet they genuinely lack a belief in God. They are "atheists" in the truest sense. I think there's something else involved with us that constitutes our belief in God besides the fear of death. Some call it "spirit." Now, it makes sense that those without the spirit (or rather, argue against the spirit, and as such argue against themselves) would rather us regress into animals while calling it progress (the saying "pissing in your face and calling it rain" comes to mind). This all starts with loosening human standards of behavior using a naturalistic fallacy. "Animals do it, therefore we should do it." Not every animal behavior is worth doing.

Yes, animals eat other animals while they are still alive.

 

[Mole]

Spoiler alert: there is no such thing as nothing. For the thing that makes up nothing is far more real than what we perceive in our little minds.

Yes, nothing is space/time which is not as we perceive it but which is expanding at an accelerating rate, and at the furthest reaches is expanding faster than the speed of light.

 

[citizen cane]

The issue with the "God" argument is that nothing can ever be sufficient enough because no matter what you say, there will always be a question as to ".. But who created that/him/her/it?"

This is why, despite attending church regularly my entire life, philosophically I would say I identify as an agnostic. As I've said before, my relationship with religion is complicated.

 

[Lark]

These questions seem to be besides the point.

 

[Lib]

Why is this question important?

Define important

 

[Polaris]

If the universe is everything, there is nothing outside of it that could have created it. Any being involved in an act of creation is a part of the universe. The only thing that isn't a part of the universe is nothing. Is God nothing? If He is, that amounts to saying He doesn't exist.

 

[Norexan]

Perhaps you're right. Perhaps you're just conjecturizing. Yes,
"Animals do it, therefore we should do it." Not every animal behavior is worth doing.

Who said god has to be standard for belief system?
Every creature start for believing in theirselves, familty etc.
Surviving is ultimate cause of fate. Living. Think about of it.
As Christian what god do you serve? God of the living or god of the dead?

 

[Coriolis]

Perhaps you're right. Perhaps you're just conjecturizing. Yes, we were animals. Now, we have the knowledge of good and evil, but if belief in God = fear of death, why so many martyrs? Because they have no fear of death, because they have something (Heaven/God/Reincarnation/etc) to believe. So, you see how your claim is circular?

It is possible to fear death, while fearing something else more.

I didn't say that, I said:

You wrote: "When a religion does not "grow and change," and "clings to the past" it leads to consistency throughout the ages."

Entropy is a constant, which has no effect on the Spirit of Truth because Truth is ineffable. It cannot be physically affected, but Spiritual Truth can affect the physical:

“We see that it is not the task of Christianity to provide easy answers to every question, but to make us progressively aware of a mystery. God is not so much the object of our knowledge as the cause of our wonder.”
― Kallistos Ware, The Orthodox Way

Fine, but neither here nor there with respect to the present discussion. Neither Christianity nor any other religion has the task of providing answers to questions pertaining to the physical world. This is why we will always wonder at God, and never gain objective knowledge of God.

 

[sLiPpY]

We know the origin of species, including us, so we know God didn't make the individual plants and animals.

We know the origin of chemical reactions in the periodic table, so we know God didn't make the chemical reactions.

We know the origin of the mountains and rivers and seas in the movement of the tectonic plates, so God didn't created our landscape or seas.

We know the origin of the very small in Quantum Mechanics, so God didn't create the very small from which everything else is made.

And we know the origin of the very large in Relativity, so we know the origin of the universe and what will happen to it, so God didn't create the universe.

Might I suggest the preposition highly depends, on the culturally conditioned concept of whatever "god" is...

 

[Mole]

Might I suggest the preposition highly depends, on the culturally conditioned concept of whatever "god" is...

God created the universe.

 

[BlueScreen]

If God doesn't exist then how did this very earth and everything living come into existence?

By another possible means. I'd probably go with some nuclear reactions, gravity, some chemical reactions and chance.

Where conditions succeed for life something gets to see the result and be amazed. All the times it fails, there's no one around to know. I read in the newspaper a month ago that some guy won the lottery twice, pretty ridiculous odds, but I'm guessing he bought lots of tickets. Now acknowledge that there is estimated to be 70 billion trillion stars in the universe, then imagine there are planets around each, and countless molecules on each planet (about 10^50 atoms on Earth for example). Then think how many chances a very low probability event has to happen. Which isn't to say life is low probability, because we really don't know yet. There are suggestions water is quite common in the universe and so are the basic building blocks for life.

In all those places and all that infinite space some molecules somewhere were going to form a structure that self replicates in it's surroundings. With a lab that size and 13 billion years, it really is a matter of what can happen will happen. And obviously life can happen.

 

[1487610420]

infinity gems

 

[Lark]

Define important

If I where to question anything about existence as a created order I'd be more inclined to ask WHY rather than HOW.

Some of these sorts of question trees arise from the posited dichotomy between science and religion, which I think is to misunderstand both, and even if they dont, there's a whole question tree that arises from questions that the positing of the existence/non-existence of God which is generally ignored, people think there's a lot of ideas which are self-evident or are natural and logical consequences of certain beliefs which I think is a mistake too.

More important than questions about origins or destiny are questions about ethics or morals as they govern the present moment which realistically is all that anyone has. I dont think anyone should eschew any future or fail to plan, prepare and provide for a tomorrow when they can but they ought to know, as some of the bigger tales of Jesus ministry do, that its not guaranteed.

 

[Lib]

If I where to question anything about existence as a created order I'd be more inclined to ask WHY rather than HOW.

Some of these sorts of question trees arise from the posited dichotomy between science and religion, which I think is to misunderstand both, and even if they dont, there's a whole question tree that arises from questions that the positing of the existence/non-existence of God which is generally ignored, people think there's a lot of ideas which are self-evident or are natural and logical consequences of certain beliefs which I think is a mistake too.

More important than questions about origins or destiny are questions about ethics or morals as they govern the present moment which realistically is all that anyone has. I dont think anyone should eschew any future or fail to plan, prepare and provide for a tomorrow when they can but they ought to know, as some of the bigger tales of Jesus ministry do, that its not guaranteed.

It's a matter of perspective, I guess. I see both questions in a loop - you have to answer them both otherwise it won't work and there is not an easy way or available formula to do that.

Ethics and morals are for themselves just as 'self-evident' as any other idea that people follow. A representative example would be everything written in the 'trolling' thread - it's a cocktail of moral opinions but not with the same validity... (you can screw moral relativism)

But it's interesting to hear HOW you answer to the WHY?