Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Evolution is a myth? Please explain:

Sure you did.

To ask where was he requires that there exist somewhere to be. And somewhere to be implies a dimensional point in our universe, where else is there to be? And to occupy a dimensional point in our universe requires a physical presence.

Again I made no specific reference to a physical presence for God, but keep spinning.

most christian www. sites about 'where is God' just say He is omnipresent,

but you have decided that I was referring to a 3D physical presence for God to suite yourself.




A point in geometry has no dimensions, but it can have co-ordinates.

and surely an omnispresent God has a presence at all points?

omnipresence

1 - present everywhere at the same time: the omnipresent God.

omnipresence
/ˌɒmnɪˈprɛz(ə)ns/


1- the state of being widespread or constantly encountered.
"the omnipresence of the Internet in society today"

2 - the presence of God everywhere at the same time.
"how does God's universal action prove His omnipresence?"

Interesting point. He sure lets a lot of bad things happen then - wonder what his excuse might be.

Starman, let's try it this way. You ask where is God. Where can he be? France? the Moon? Somewhere in the Milky Way? Next galaxy over? Those are all places in our universe. Where else? So of course asking the question implies somewhere in our universe. (And to exist in a place with dimensional coordinates you must have a physical presence at those coordinates) We have no "place" outside our universe for Him to be. We know of no place outside of our universe.

And omnipresence necessarily means unbound by physical laws, how else can the presence of God be everywhere? And what is the nature of his presence? As one smartass little kid being broken of a bad habit said on hearing the hand of God is everywhere, "It isn't in his nose."

If somehow you and I were transported in time to before the Flood we would be stuck in a metal institute for the handicap. You have no idea about what you speak so confidently.

Back to, "I'm the center of the universe" type of thought. Because you have not recognized any experience with God does not eliminate other's experience with God.

You obviously don't understand gas mechanics. The gas pressure to prevent the formation of stars is at least fifty times stronger than the gravitational pull on that same gas.

By the way, after the Big Bang how did the individual gas molecules overcome the equilateral dispersion momentum to even make a "gas cloud"?

He doesn't need an "excuse". But if you appeal to the Bible for the answer, you discover He cursed the entire universe because Adam disobeyed.

Check the actual history of creation myths in ancient cultures. Don't just accept what the church and bible study tells you about the world. Try to widen your horizons.

As the story goes, Yawheh being described in the bible as being the creator of both good and evil, set Adam up to fail.

Try reading a basic textbook on astrophysics instead of creationist propaganda, just a friendly suggestion.

Some of Ringman's arguments are so bad even the creationist propagandist say not to use them.

"Cursed the entire universe because Adam disobeyed".

That about that claim for a few minutes and what that says about your alleged god. What kind of petty being would do such a thing?

Does that even make sense, or it does it make more sense that the whole story is just an allegory?

the whole story, if that's what it is, and i suspect it is, is being told from one or more versions of the human side of the story(s).

in other words, given our consciousness and imagination, no wonder the theologians and the quantum physicists come up with the stories that they do.

and as long as they hold up, & work, who's to disagree? as time goes on, ideas have a way of expressing themselves as long as there's a human body that serves as a carrier.

The story of The Garden of Eden holds up as a coming of age story. It doesn't hold up as a scientific explanation for the origins of our universe.

As for "who's to disagree", we are all free to make that evaluation for ourselves. Just because a stories old doesn't make it true in a literal sense, and it's literary value may have been distorted or rendered obsolete over time.

my point is that ideology exists, and is carried in the minds of men, and in their writings, artifacts, etc. the living are the ones who express various stories, ideologies, beliefs, etc.

when an old idea dies off there is left less competition for an existing idea, which may die off sooner or later it's very self.

look how the old newtonian physics was once the golden child, but now the quantum people are taking reign, and it's showing the products that humans mfg.

similarly, lot's of old gods have mostly fallen away, while newer gods emerge and even flourish.

there's nothing wrong with searching for the ultimate truth, but would most folks recognize it if they met it coming down the street?

Most folks, probably not.

Look at how many can't even comprehend The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection.

Gus, Western philosophy would hold that Truths, capital T, are eternal. Just what those Truths are is the question.

It's hard to find the Truths, not so hard to find the not-Truth. The scientific method comes from Philosophy.

the human mind, consciousness, intellect does it's best to identify and understand the truth. well, in some cases people try to understand.

plato allus thought there was a higher pattern, or reality. humans could only try to trace it, or be feeble in it's expression on earth.

kinda like living in the shadow of the sun or some such stuff?

anyways, i like a verse in eclesiastes about vanity.

practiced it a bit while hoeing corn.

i'd give the cockleburs hell.

Plato is tough. Us students thought maybe he was dipping into the hemlock a little.