[dwashbur]

ok well maybe i wasnt entirely truthful when i asked the question. the friend is actually me. im ashamed that i dont believe in god cause i was raised catholic and was involved in alot of activities in college and all my friends are really religious, but im not. i more or less just go through the motions cause its what ur suppose to do. i can't wrap my mind around the idea of god and all that he could have done enough to actually believe in him. like i can't imagine something like that. like all the stuff just seems more like stories to me. like u know when we were little and we believed in santa clause, and he was the guy that brang us presents on christmas if we were good, well sometimes thats almost what it seems like with god. that its all a big story. kind of like a story to try to make everyone be better people. and i want to believe in god...but i just can't make myself.

and now that ive made myself sound like a horiable person, especially on a religious forum, i hope that what i said kinda makes sense and someone can give me some advice as what i should do or help me in any way

thanks

Hi Stacky,
I can't wrap my mind around the idea of God either, but believe it or not, that's a good thing. A being big and transcendent enough to have created all this, including you and me, is going to be beyond my finite comprehension. But, regardless of what the science-only types try to tell us, all this had to get here somehow. One of the basic rules of physics is that, from nothing, you get nothing. So the universe can't just have spontaneously appeared out of nothing. We can see mechanisms, like the Big Bang and all that, but none of it tells us where the original singularity came from or anything else. The only explanation is that somebody or something put it there. Where did that being come from? As I said, it doesn't matter. We're answerable to our creator, and that's all. That's what counts.

Beyond that, we really can't give you much. I understand why you're having a problem. But as Fr. Chuck said, the best thing to do is put aside any preconceived notions of what you think God should be like, and start looking around to understand as much as you can about what he/she/it is like. Too often we're tempted to create God in our own image, so to speak; "a loving God wouldn't do this, that or the other thing," that sort of thing. "Why doesn't God do something about X?" Answer: I don't know. He's beyond my comprehension. But he has to exist; there's no way around it. That gives you a starting point on which to build a viable faith that can hold up under scrutiny.

And no, you're not a horrible person. You're not even a bad person. You're a normal person just like the rest of us. Take comfort in that.

Hope this helps.

[Synnen]

*I* removed the advertising posts, and anything referring to them.

We don't allow advertising at AMHD.

[sawsall02]

O.K. can I post link's to other sites where people can get information?

[NeedKarma]

O.K., can I post link's to other sites where people can get information?

As long as no one is required to pay for anything.

[sawsall02]

Thank You!

[sawsall02]

Please go to this link:http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=9&article=2106

This should give you scientific proof of a creator! Yes it's FREE!

[NeedKarma]

Please go to this link:Apologetics Press - God and the Laws of Thermodynamics: A Mechanical Engineer?s Perspective

This should give you scientific proof of a creator! Yes it's FREE!

Can you give us a short synopsis in your own words what that scientific proof shows? It's a rather long block of text.

[ScottGem]

Please go to this link:Apologetics Press - God and the Laws of Thermodynamics: A Mechanical Engineer?s Perspective

This should give you scientific proof of a creator! Yes it's FREE!

There is NO scientific proof of a creator. There are factual indications that lead some people to believe in a creator but nothing that constitutes scientific proof. One can prove gravity by dropping an object and observing that it falls. But there being a sentient creator is an issue of faith, not scientific proof.

So please don't waste our time with links to sites that pretend to offer proof of something that cannot prove.

[sawsall02]

If you stay within the bounds of science, and find the "Laws Of Thermaldynamics" to be true; it only further proves that something outside of these laws acted and thus created everything from nothingness. If you use logic. You can also see it's easier to have faith in God, than to believe or have faith that everything came from nothingness.

[NeedKarma]

If you use logic.

If you don't know the answer to something and you immediately attribute it to a god that's not science - that's living like the ancient romans and greeks who attributed a god to every event they didn't understand.

[Synnen]

And I'll go back to the static argument against the "created it from nothingness" point:

If it was NOTHINGNESS, who created the Creator? You can't have a Creator that "always existed" and then deny that the laws of nature "always existed" too. If ONE can exist prior to the other, then the OTHER can exist prior to the other as well.

So.. if you believe a Creator has ALWAYS existed, you have to allow for the belief that the Universe itself has ALWAYS existed. If the Universe was created, then you have to allow for the idea that the Creator was created.

Neither is FACT. BOTH are BELIEF

[southamerica]

Where did it all come from? How did it happen?

I'm not a scientist, I admit, but I am very hopeful that there's an afterlife in which I will be able to learn the greatest mysteries of the Universe from much more qualified beings than exist in our mortal world.

If not, then I'll just die a romanced girl who always prayed for something more-and ultimately I'll never know the difference.

[NeedKarma]

If not, then I'll just die a romanced girl who always prayed for something more

Why? Are you not having any fun now? :(

[southamerica]

Why? Are you not having any fun now? :(

Oh that's not what I meant. I meant I hope that I get to find out all the answers someday and I pray that after I die I will.

I'm having an absolute blast right now! Living it up mortal style ;)

[NeedKarma]

Living it up mortal style ;)

That's all you really need. :)

[ScottGem]

If you use logic. ...

The only logic here is the Holmesian logic, that 'if you eliminate all other possibilities, what's left has to be the answer'. The problem here is you can't eliminate all other possibilities.

I'm a deist. I do believe that some intelligent force created the Universe for the reasons you cite. But I don't believe that intelligence is watching over us guiding our lives or waiting for our deaths to reward us for living a good life etc. I so nothing concrete to support that.

[TUT317]

Can you give us a short synopsis in your own words what that scientific proof shows? It's a rather long block of text.

Hi NK

This is my take on the first bit.

The argument firstly centres on two scientific principles, i.e the first and second laws of thermodynamics. The principle being explored here is that within any closed system energy will always remain constant. The example given was burning a piece of wood. Energy is not created and/or destroyed in the process. Provided we don't throw petrol on the fire, it will work out that the amount of energy stored in the wood will be equal to the amount of heat energy given off.

The argument in relation to the first law seems to be centred on the idea that the universe cannot function as a closed system in its very early states of development. In other words, the universe could have only come into being if there was some one or something creating an 'input' from outside the system.

This is a pretty good argument, but like any theory it is not ironclad. The problem is that the first law applies to a closed system. No one know if the beginning universe was a closed system. The other possibility, is that the early universe was an open system. In other words, open to another system. No one knows how or even if the first law applied in those early stages.

Until there is some type of agreement about how quantum mechanics applies to the early universe then anything said on both sides of the debate is pretty much speculation.

Tut

[sawsall02]

God has always existed. He never had a beginning. Also, the theory that the universe has always existed, go against the second law of thermaldydamics.

[NeedKarma]

God has always existed.

Once again this is a belief. As I mentioned just because you don't have an answer for an observation is not a proof that a god exists. See my previous response to you.

[dwashbur]

Once again this is a belief. As I mentioned just because you don't have an answer for an observation is not a proof that a god exists. See my previous response to you.

You are correct. A better more scientific postulation would be that God exists outside of time as we know it. But again, this is not a proof. Thing is, as you know, arguments from silence always cut both ways. Not having an answer for an observation doesn't prove that a god exists, but it also doesn't prove that a god doesn't exist.

As I already said, assuming the God who made this universe had a creator of his/her/its own, the significance of that is moot for practical purposes. If there's a creator who made me, then I'm answerable to that creator for what I do with my life. Whether that God had a creator of its own doesn't matter, because I'm answerable to my creator, not God's. So when we get down to brass tacks, speculation about where God came from is pointless and distracting from the real issue.