Do You Think All Roads Lead To God? (Poll)

[QUOTE="Crushmaster"]TO: supercubedude64 - I do not think Princeton would allow this man to put up definitions they did not agree with.Funky_Llama

Why on Earth are we arguing over whether or not the Big Bang was a literal explosion? Though it clearly was not, I don't exactly see how that makes any difference, anyhow. Scientists theorize that the Big Bang occurred because of the evidence in its favor, not because they thought it wasn't an explosion.

[QUOTE="domatron23"][QUOTE="Crushmaster"]
Ahh. Thank you for your clarification.

If I am understanding you right, I would probably say yes. To a point, at least.FallofAthens

Can God not judge someone without, say, exactly having said person in his presence? Maybe it means more or less that no sinner can enter the spirtual world (heaven perhaps) or simply where God dwells. Just throwing something out there.

Interesting question by the way, never thought about that.

[QUOTE="-Jiggles-"] In order for something to be chaotic, it would need to be disorderly, unorganized, messy, etc.

The big bang was none of that. The very laws of physics were played out perfectly during the split second the big bang took place in, and nothing that hasn't been explainable by science at that point on has surfaced. In order for the big bang to be logically-labeled as "chaotic", we would have to see the very laws of physics being broken; matter disappearing into thin air, etc.

Also, before this debate rolls on still, I would like some evidence that indicates that all chaotic situations that end orderly are the cause of intelligence. Crushmaster

First off, I already made it clear that the big bang wasn't "chaotic" in any sort of way.

You're assuming that the universe, in some way, shape or form, is orderly in structure. It isn't; far from it, actually. The universe only conforms to the laws of physics that all matter is subject to. The planets are formed by random clouds of dust forming together, the stars are massive balls of hydrogen combustions, galaxies are formed around black holes that attract all bodies towards it's incredibly-dense center, etc.: astronomical facts regarding the formation of celestial bodies, the physics at which matter and energy is subject to, etc. clearly show how random and dangerous of a universe we live in.

Do you consider black holes orderly? What about supernovas or gamma ray bursts?

[QUOTE="-Jiggles-"] Explosion doesn't equate to expansion. The big bang was an expansion of matter and space, and by no means an explosion. Crushmaster

Gonna have to go with GabuEx's reply on this one. Read his post above.

Bah both black and Crush left before they answered my questions (and questions from many others). Funny how that often happens.domatron23

It conveniently happens around the time that their core arguements are refuted by another member of the forum here.

[QUOTE="FallofAthens"][QUOTE="domatron23"] Allright. What happens to an unrepentant sinner when they die then. I read all of the Bible verses you gave that say that they are judged by God but I'm having a hard time reconciling that with what you say about God not letting sinners into his presence and sin being constituted by an absence of God.domatron23

Can God not judge someone without, say, exactly having said person in his presence? Maybe it means more or less that no sinner can enter the spirtual world (heaven perhaps) or simply where God dwells. Just throwing something out there.

Interesting question by the way, never thought about that.

Out of curiosity, since domatron isn't asking the question I thought he was going to, I'll go ahead and ask it. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all taken to be different aspects of the same being - that being God. This tenet that they are all one unified being is necessary to refute the claim that Christianity is a polytheistic religion. It is said that God cannot allow sin into his presence, and that that is why anyone who did not accept Jesus Christ as their savior cannot go to heaven. But, if it is true that Christianity is monotheistic, then the Son - Jesus Christ in human form - and the Holy Spirit must also be God. Jesus Christ existed on Earth alongside men, and the Holy Spirit is said to exist ubiquitously throughout the universe. If we accept the idea that humans are sinners, and thus, being in the presence of humans is the same as being in the presence of sin, then how could it be both that Jesus could have lived alongside humans and that the Holy Spirit could exist ubiquitously in a universe in which sin exists?

[QUOTE="FallofAthens"][QUOTE="domatron23"] Allright. What happens to an unrepentant sinner when they die then. I read all of the Bible verses you gave that say that they are judged by God but I'm having a hard time reconciling that with what you say about God not letting sinners into his presence and sin being constituted by an absence of God.domatron23

Can God not judge someone without, say, exactly having said person in his presence? Maybe it means more or less that no sinner can enter the spirtual world (heaven perhaps) or simply where God dwells. Just throwing something out there.

Interesting question by the way, never thought about that.

I apologize if I misunderstood you but has anyone claimed that both assertions are true? I thought the argument was that, from Crush's point of view, that, "that all roads don't lead to God," as in only through Jesus can you be led to God, but the second one is correct.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"][QUOTE="Crushmaster"]TO: supercubedude64 - I do not think Princeton would allow this man to put up definitions they did not agree with.GabuEx

Why on Earth are we arguing over whether or not the Big Bang was a literal explosion? Though it clearly was not, I don't exactly see how that makes any difference, anyhow. Scientists theorize that the Big Bang occurred because of the evidence in its favor, not because they thought it wasn't an explosion.

Bah both black and Crush left before they answered my questions (and questions from many others). Funny how that often happens.domatron23

Gah, and they leave me here by myself? I'm doomed.:P

[QUOTE="domatron23"][QUOTE="FallofAthens"]

Can God not judge someone without, say, exactly having said person in his presence? Maybe it means more or less that no sinner can enter the spirtual world (heaven perhaps) or simply where God dwells. Just throwing something out there.

Interesting question by the way, never thought about that.

GabuEx

Out of curiosity, since domatron isn't asking the question I thought he was going to, I'll go ahead and ask it. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all taken to be different aspects of the same being - that being God. This tenet that they are all one unified being is necessary to refute the claim that Christianity is a polytheistic religion. It is said that God cannot allow sin into his presence, and that that is why anyone who did not accept Jesus Christ as their savior cannot go to heaven. But, if it is true that Christianity is monotheistic, then the Son - Jesus Christ in human form - and the Holy Spirit must also be God. Jesus Christ existed on Earth alongside men, and the Holy Spirit is said to exist ubiquitously throughout the universe. If we accept the idea that humans are sinners, and thus, being in the presence of humans is the same as being in the presence of sin, then how could it be both that Jesus could have lived alongside humans and that the Holy Spirit could exist ubiquitously in a universe in which sin exists?

Interesting question, one I can't answer, but would like to see answered. (if possible)

[QUOTE="domatron23"][QUOTE="FallofAthens"]

Can God not judge someone without, say, exactly having said person in his presence? Maybe it means more or less that no sinner can enter the spirtual world (heaven perhaps) or simply where God dwells. Just throwing something out there.

Interesting question by the way, never thought about that.

GabuEx

Out of curiosity, since domatron isn't asking the question I thought he was going to, I'll go ahead and ask it. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all taken to be different aspects of the same being - that being God. It is said that God cannot allow sin into his presence, and that that is why anyone who did not accept Jesus Christ as their savior cannot go to heaven. But, if it is true that Christianity is monotheistic, then the Son - Jesus Christ in human form - and the Holy Spirit must also be God. Jesus Christ existed on Earth alongside men, and the Holy Spirit is said to exist ubiquitously throughout the universe. If we accept the idea that humans are sinners, and thus, being in the presence of humans is the same as being in the presence of sin, then how could it be both that Jesus could have lived alongside humans and that the Holy Spirit could exist ubiquitously in a universe in which sin exists?

P1: x and y are identical only if they share each and every property in common

P2: It is claimed that Jesus is identical to God the father

P3: Jesus can enter into the presence of sin

P4: the holy father cannot enter into the presence of sin

Therefore: Jesus is not identical to God the father

Premise 2 may be false and I might be misusing Liebniz in some way but I think its worth thinking over.

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Bah both black and Crush left before they answered my questions (and questions from many others). Funny how that often happens.FallofAthens

Gah, and they leave me here by myself? I'm doomed.:P

That's a good question as well. In fact I think it's deserving of an appeal from Liebniz's law of identity:

P1: x and y are identical only if they share each and every property in common

P2: It is claimed that Jesus is identical to God the father

P3: Jesus can enter into the presence of sin

P4: the holy father cannot enter into the presence of sin

Therefore: Jesus is not identical to God the father

Premise 2 may be false and I might be misusing Liebniz in some way but I think its worth thinking over.

domatron23

Yup, if you say that A is B, then what you are saying is that every quality ascribed to A may also be ascribed to B. Thus, if Jesus is God, then if God cannot be in the presence of sin, then Jesus must also be unable to be in the presence of sin. There are only two ways I can see to reconcile this:

1. Explain how existing alongside humans in our universe is not being in the presence of sin; or

2. Explain how God could only be incapable of being in the presence of sin in heaven, and not on Earth.

I'm actually quite interested in the answer, as this is a question I hadn't thought about until I read your initial statements that started up the cogs in my brain.

[QUOTE="FallofAthens"]

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Bah both black and Crush left before they answered my questions (and questions from many others). Funny how that often happens.domatron23

Gah, and they leave me here by myself? I'm doomed.:P

Thanks, lol, I'll keep that in mind. Really I'm rather passive about religious arguments; I feel I'm not really on either side, because I learn a bit from both and take them both into consideration. I just like the CWU because if I have a Bible question I know I can ask there. Same as if I want to learn something from the perspective of an Atheist, I could ask one of you guys or watch the debates. Today I learned that the Big Bang theory isn't about an explosion but an expansion.:P

Also if YEC means Young Earch Creationist, I wouldn't consider myself that persay, I find myself rather undecided about that.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"][QUOTE="domatron23"] Sure I guess he could judge from a distance and I guess that he could confront sinners outside of heaven. The thing is though that the assertion "All roads lead to God" is mutually exclusive with the assertion that "sin cannot be in the presence of God" given that the core of biblical doctrine involves man's sin nature. The assertions can't both be true.domatron23

Out of curiosity, since domatron isn't asking the question I thought he was going to, I'll go ahead and ask it. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all taken to be different aspects of the same being - that being God. It is said that God cannot allow sin into his presence, and that that is why anyone who did not accept Jesus Christ as their savior cannot go to heaven. But, if it is true that Christianity is monotheistic, then the Son - Jesus Christ in human form - and the Holy Spirit must also be God. Jesus Christ existed on Earth alongside men, and the Holy Spirit is said to exist ubiquitously throughout the universe. If we accept the idea that humans are sinners, and thus, being in the presence of humans is the same as being in the presence of sin, then how could it be both that Jesus could have lived alongside humans and that the Holy Spirit could exist ubiquitously in a universe in which sin exists?

P1: x and y are identical only if they share each and every property in common

P2: It is claimed that Jesus is identical to God the father

P3: Jesus can enter into the presence of sin

P4: the holy father cannot enter into the presence of sin

Therefore: Jesus is not identical to God the father

Premise 2 may be false and I might be misusing Liebniz in some way but I think its worth thinking over.

[QUOTE="domatron23"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Out of curiosity, since domatron isn't asking the question I thought he was going to, I'll go ahead and ask it. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all taken to be different aspects of the same being - that being God. It is said that God cannot allow sin into his presence, and that that is why anyone who did not accept Jesus Christ as their savior cannot go to heaven. But, if it is true that Christianity is monotheistic, then the Son - Jesus Christ in human form - and the Holy Spirit must also be God. Jesus Christ existed on Earth alongside men, and the Holy Spirit is said to exist ubiquitously throughout the universe. If we accept the idea that humans are sinners, and thus, being in the presence of humans is the same as being in the presence of sin, then how could it be both that Jesus could have lived alongside humans and that the Holy Spirit could exist ubiquitously in a universe in which sin exists?

Funky_Llama

P1: x and y are identical only if they share each and every property in common

P2: It is claimed that Jesus is identical to God the father

P3: Jesus can enter into the presence of sin

P4: the holy father cannot enter into the presence of sin

Therefore: Jesus is not identical to God the father

Premise 2 may be false and I might be misusing Liebniz in some way but I think its worth thinking over.

I'll throw in a :|, I usually stray away from these type of if this equals this formula you used here Dom, but if I read CM question, then look at this, I adds up to a bigger question.

I don't believe in Christ, the Bible, Christianity or anything of the sort. But how can anyone deny that there is some greater force that sparked the necessary elements to create life and laws that govern them and our universe? I just don't understand that, it goes against logic. Something must have initiated it.

Deism suits me fine I suppose.

Also if YEC means Young Earch Creationist, I wouldn't consider myself that persay, I find myself rather undecided about that.

FallofAthens

Other. I believe all roads lead to the grave.mattykovax

[QUOTE="FallofAthens"]Also if YEC means Young Earch Creationist, I wouldn't consider myself that persay, I find myself rather undecided about that.

domatron23

No problems, not like I've made an effort to state otherwise.:)

Also, just wondering, did you miss my repsonse to your other post earlier at the end of previous page? Or did you just not repsond, which I can understand.:P

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Sure I guess he could judge from a distance and I guess that he could confront sinners outside of heaven. The thing is though that the assertion "All roads lead to God" is mutually exclusive with the assertion that "sin cannot be in the presence of God" given that the core of biblical doctrine involves man's sin nature. The assertions can't both be true.FallofAthens

I apologize if I misunderstood you but has anyone claimed that both assertions are true? I thought the argument was that, from Crush's point of view, that, "that all roads don't lead to God," as in only through Jesus can you be led to God, but the second one is correct.

This an interesting question; and, I actually agree with it. I heard something from a book which convinced me I, a Christian, can very Biblically say "All roads lead to God." Because, they do. After all: "As it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the Judgment."
All roads do lead to God. Because, at the end, everyone will stand before Him. There's just one catch...
Will He be your Judge, and condemn you to eternal damnation...or will He be your Savior, and welcome you into His Kingdom? Hmm. Something to think about.Crushmaster

[QUOTE="FallofAthens"][QUOTE="domatron23"]

I apologize if I misunderstood you but has anyone claimed that both assertions are true? I thought the argument was that, from Crush's point of view, that, "that all roads don't lead to God," as in only through Jesus can you be led to God, but the second one is correct.

domatron23

This an interesting question; and, I actually agree with it. I heard something from a book which convinced me I, a Christian, can very Biblically say "All roads lead to God." Because, they do. After all: "As it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the Judgment."
All roads do lead to God. Because, at the end, everyone will stand before Him. There's just one catch...
Will He be your Judge, and condemn you to eternal damnation...or will He be your Savior, and welcome you into His Kingdom? Hmm. Something to think about.Crushmaster

Oh, makes sense now. I thought his question was intended as a different meaning. Like how in some religions they believe whichever path you choose you'll still end up in heaven/with God. But I see what he means though. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Out of curiosity, since domatron isn't asking the question I thought he was going to, I'll go ahead and ask it. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all taken to be different aspects of the same being - that being God. This tenet that they are all one unified being is necessary to refute the claim that Christianity is a polytheistic religion. It is said that God cannot allow sin into his presence, and that that is why anyone who did not accept Jesus Christ as their savior cannot go to heaven. But, if it is true that Christianity is monotheistic, then the Son - Jesus Christ in human form - and the Holy Spirit must also be God. Jesus Christ existed on Earth alongside men, and the Holy Spirit is said to exist ubiquitously throughout the universe. If we accept the idea that humans are sinners, and thus, being in the presence of humans is the same as being in the presence of sin, then how could it be both that Jesus could have lived alongside humans and that the Holy Spirit could exist ubiquitously in a universe in which sin exists?

GabuEx

God is one is essence and three in persons, God the Father, God the Son Jesus, and God the Holy Spirit. All though they are part ofwhat is known as the Triune Godhead, there is a subordination in the Trinity. They are all equally God, yet they have different duties within Creation. Within the Triune Godhead, Jesus is subordinate to God the Father and the Holy Spirit is subordinate to Jesus, not in the essence of their being equally God, but in their roles.

Remember God is a spirit. When we speak of God not allowing sin into Hi presence, we speak in eternal spiritual terms in union with our spirit. Remember, we are made in God's image with a spiritual nature. Jesus was God in the flesh, one in person and two in essence. Jesus was in the world and was sinless. Though He lived in the world, His God spirit knew no sin and neither did His flesh. The reason a non-believer cannot be indwelt by the Holy Spirit is because of their sin nature they are spiritually dead. When one accepts Christ, they become spiritually alive and their sins are forgiven. They are born again, a new creature in Christ. Since their sins are forgiven, washed away, they become spiritually pure and alive and the Holy Spirit can indwell them, in union with their spirit.

When we speak of God not allowing sin into His presence we are speaking in eternal spiritual terms in His realm, not in our temporal frame of reference. Sin is the absence of God. The fact that sin exists in the world does not mean that Jesus, who was sinless, and the Holy Spirit who is also sinless, cannot exist in this temporal world where sin exists. They cannot exist in union with the spirit of the spiritually dead non-believer either in this temporal world or eternally, unless, until, and if that non-believer becomes spiritually pure through accepting Christ's sacrifice in payment for their sins.

In closing I will say that some things are a mystery and we will not fully understand them with our finite minds until the Lord returns and those that have accepted Christ are reunited with Him for all eternity.

to foxhound:

God is the creator of the Universe. Christian - a follower of Christ; who died on the Cross to save man. Christianity is a relationship with this Savior, through Him you go to God.

The universe only conforms to the laws of physics that all matter is subject to.

-Jiggles-

And where do these complex and precise laws come from?Did they just "create" themselves? What about the precisely set anthropic factors, which if slightly changed would make the formation of our universe and life as we know it impossible? Who determined their settings?

Do you mean "do I think anyone can go to the afterlife" or do you mean "do I think everyone will find God eventually"?

Because I do not believe the first.

to foxhound:

God is the creator of the Universe. Christian - a follower of Christ; who died on the Cross to save man. Christianity is a relationship with this Savior, through Him you go to God.

ShowStopper102

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"] I can't find the link atm, but I remember reading about scientists who had managed to create amino acids from chemicals under natural conditions. Of course, this does not yet explain how life was created, but it is a big step in that direction.

If anyone has the link, please post it.

Also, Churchmaster, tell me why you believe in God, if you don't mind.

Crushmaster

You missed my point-the point is that the amino acids were created under conditions that could have occurred in nature, which is why this is significant.

Also, I would argue that it is irrational to believe in God, not that it is rational.

[QUOTE="-Jiggles-"]

The universe only conforms to the laws of physics that all matter is subject to.

blackregiment

And where do these complex and precise laws come from?Did they just "create" themselves? What about the precisely set anthropic factors, which if slightly changed would make the formation of our universe and life as we know it impossible? Who determined their settings?

I've already explained this earlier in the thread; life can most certainly exist on conditions that are not identical to Earth's. Go look up extremophiles and the Water Bear.

Nobody currently knows how the universe was formed, if there is/is not a deity present, etc. so I don't know what you're trying to prove by asking, "who created these laws?" We will inevitably learn more about our surrounding physical world as time progresses, but it's too early in human history to make a sound judgementation.

Other. I believe all roads lead to the grave.mattykovax

Ok, say this 'God' existed and created the Universe, he Must have been in existence before Earth, yet you theorise that nothing can come into being without being designed and created by another entity, So what pray tell caused this 'God' you speak of to come into existence?rb2610

[QUOTE="rb2610"]Ok, say this 'God' existed and created the Universe, he Must have been in existence before Earth, yet you theorise that nothing can come into being without being designed and created by another entity, So what pray tell caused this 'God' you speak of to come into existence?domatron23

EDI: Ah you are On our side so it would be the latter ;)

You missed my point-the point is that the amino acids were created under conditions that could have occurred in nature, which is why this is significant.

chessmaster1989

That sounds good but did that really happen. Intelligence was required to design the scientific apparatus used, the apparatus included a trap in its design to trap and separate any amino acids created from the toxic solution that would destroy them if they were allowed to mix, the assumption on the atmosphere they used is now accepted as not being representative of early earth's atmosphere, it does nothing to address the problem of chirality, etc.

Did these conditions really exist in nature?

Here is some more information on the problems with the "origin of life from chemicals" hypothesis.

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/chemlife.html

Ok, say this 'God' existed and created the Universe, he Must have been in existence before Earth, yet you theorise that nothing can come into being without being designed and created by another entity, So what pray tell caused this 'God' you speak of to come into existence?rb2610

Everything that begins to exist must have a cause. God is self-existent. He is eternal therefore requires no cause. He is the first cause.

[QUOTE="blackregiment"][QUOTE="-Jiggles-"]

The universe only conforms to the laws of physics that all matter is subject to.

-Jiggles-

And where do these complex and precise laws come from?Did they just "create" themselves? What about the precisely set anthropic factors, which if slightly changed would make the formation of our universe and life as we know it impossible? Who determined their settings?

I've already explained this earlier in the thread; life can most certainly exist on conditions that are not identical to Earth's. Go look up extremophiles and the Water Bear.

Nobody currently knows how the universe was formed, if there is/is not a deity present, etc. so I don't know what you're trying to prove by asking, "who created these laws?" We will inevitably learn more about our surrounding physical world as time progresses, but it's too early in human history to make a sound judgementation.

You wrote, "life can most certainly exist on conditions that are not identical to Earth's". Really, bring me an example of this "life that can exist in the universe in conditions that are not identical to earth's."

The anthropic factors are much more than just things like enviromental conditions such as the surrounding temperature in which life exists, they are things like the settings for the strong and weak nuclear forces, the strength of gravity, the difference in mass between a proton an neutron, they synthesis of carbon, the nature of water, etc.

Here is some more information

[QUOTE="-Jiggles-"][QUOTE="blackregiment"]

And where do these complex and precise laws come from?Did they just "create" themselves? What about the precisely set anthropic factors, which if slightly changed would make the formation of our universe and life as we know it impossible? Who determined their settings?

blackregiment

I've already explained this earlier in the thread; life can most certainly exist on conditions that are not identical to Earth's. Go look up extremophiles and the Water Bear.

Nobody currently knows how the universe was formed, if there is/is not a deity present, etc. so I don't know what you're trying to prove by asking, "who created these laws?" We will inevitably learn more about our surrounding physical world as time progresses, but it's too early in human history to make a sound judgementation.

You wrote, "life can most certainly exist on conditions that are not identical to Earth's". Really, bring me an example of this "life that exists in the universe in conditions that are not identical to earth's."

The anthropic factors are much more than just things like enviromental conditions such as the surrounding temperature in which life exists, they are things like the settings for the strong and weak nuclear forces, the strength of gravity, the difference in mass between a proton an neutron, they synthesis of carbon, the nature of water, etc.

Here is some more information

The existance of god is meerly humans trying to justify the reasons for them even being alive. if you truely seek why you are alive eventually you would have to look into god as a possibility. I for one dont care and think that the universe is meaningless, but thats just me lol.zarshack

[QUOTE="blackregiment"][QUOTE="-Jiggles-"]

I've already explained this earlier in the thread; life can most certainly exist on conditions that are not identical to Earth's. Go look up extremophiles and the Water Bear.

Nobody currently knows how the universe was formed, if there is/is not a deity present, etc. so I don't know what you're trying to prove by asking, "who created these laws?" We will inevitably learn more about our surrounding physical world as time progresses, but it's too early in human history to make a sound judgementation.

Funky_Llama

You wrote, "life can most certainly exist on conditions that are not identical to Earth's". Really, bring me an example of this "life that can exist in the universe in conditions that are not identical to earth's."

The anthropic factors are much more than just things like enviromental conditions such as the surrounding temperature in which life exists, they are things like the settings for the strong and weak nuclear forces, the strength of gravity, the difference in mass between a proton an neutron, they synthesis of carbon, the nature of water, etc.

Here is some more information

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rossuk/c-anthro.htm

OK, I revised my statement to "can exist" to accomodate this "can exist, science of the gaps speculation". :)

By the way, you are welcome to bring forth examples of this life that "can exist". as well.

Since we are now in the realm of accepting "can exist", if you subscribe to this "can exist" speculation, then to be logically consistent, you should be willing to acknowledge that God can exist as well.