SuperGod

**Genjyo** · 03-16-2006 08:03 AM

Hi Universal Mind! Indeed, that kind of reasoning goes nowhere. To be fair, I think I misjudged the intelligent design movement thinking it was unscientific and not offering much explanation. After my interaction with proponents though, I can see their arguments are not baseless. I would like to comment on your original post though.

Let's consider that God was created by SuperGod and so on. It would be a neverending regression. If that were the case, we'd never know when or if we should stop. The Bible is an ancient book that relates a universe with a beginning that is continually expanding. For example, Isa 44:24 The LORD, your Redeemer and Creator, says: "I am the LORD, who made all things. I alone stretched out the heavens. By myself I made the earth and everything in it.

If God was constrained to the physical laws of the universe, then God too must have had a beginning. Since the God of the scriptures brought everything into existence, he is outside of this, thus having no beginning.

This explanation seems more reasonable then to think we've got an infinite numbers of Gods...still roaming around somewhere!

**bradybaker** · 03-16-2006 11:41 AM

But if God didn't necessarily have to be created, why did the universe?

EDIT: In the spirit of recents posts....

What's better than winning gold at the Special Olympics?

Not being retarded.

**Genjyo** · 03-16-2006 03:45 PM

Originally posted by bradybaker
But if God didn't necessarily have to be created, why did the universe?

Aside from an expression of power and beauty, the most important reason is he wanted us to exist. The scriptures make it evident that God purposefully created this universe with salvation in mind.

Titus 1:2 A faith and knowledge resting on the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time

That reveals preparation and foresight as acts of love.

**Boris** · 03-16-2006 04:45 PM

Originally posted by universal parasite
Dark humor is absolutely hilarious. It doesn't have to be taken seriously. It is about playing around with twisted thoughts and not necessarily agreeing with them.

Did you like my twisted name I gave you. It was a bit of dark humour I thought you would enjoy it. I don't agree with it but I still called you a universal parasite.

What dumbfuck goes around laughing about things he doesn't understand but he thinks he knows why they are 'wrong'. Thinks he does not agree with them. Yet he finds them funny. If you think its funny you obviously have no real idea why it is twisted or dark in the first place. Either that or your mind has being chewed up like a video from a broken VRC. It doesn't seem to work very well.

dark humour is boring for this very reason. It's dark. And therefore relies on the ignorance of the person who finds it funny. Those who truly see the insignificance of it. Don't really see what is so funny about it in the first place. You'll notice that intelligent people don't really find it funny at all.

If someone jokes to me to push a person in a wheel chair down the stairs. I would laugh at them but not with them. because of what they said.

When they laughed about it back, I would most likely tell them to push themself down the stairs. Even then I would say it's not funny. Just dumb.

**Boris** · 03-16-2006 05:11 PM

If it was a movie like naked gun. Then that would be funny but not extremely funny.
If it was monty python, it would be a bit more funny. But still not the best humour.

See the highest humour does not involve ignorance.

it can make fun of ignorance. But if it is the highest humour. It will not have ignorance in it.
Thats what makes it really funny.

**bradybaker** · 03-17-2006 01:48 AM

[quote]The scriptures make it evident that God purposefully created this universe with salvation in mind.

Titus 1:2 A faith and knowledge resting on the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time

That reveals preparation and foresight as acts of love.
See this thread.

**Genjyo** · 03-17-2006 04:35 PM

Originally posted by bradybaker

See this thread.

I did my best to respond!

**Seeker** · 03-31-2006 06:04 PM

At the request of some members posting in this thread, it was split at this point to form a new topic named: Apostle Paul Discussion.

**darklordofall** · 05-11-2006 07:34 PM

God is nothing like that and he is just a single dentity made from high energy amounts like the planets in the big bang, their are hundreds of these dentitys and none are good or beautiful etc

**wasup** · 05-11-2006 10:22 PM

Dentity? Is that like a dentist?

**ignatz** · 05-15-2006 03:34 AM

I just keep coming to the conclusion that it doesn't matter if there is a god or not, or what that god's role may or may not be in the big scheme of things. . .

Are we all just part of the Red King's dream? Do we have an existence outside of his dream?

Some people find it useful to get in touch with the harmony of the universe by relating to god.

What is disturbing about many theists is that god isn't used to help them get in tune, but to allow them to judge and condemn other people. But it sounds as though atheists do that as well. . .

Wotthehell. Tourjours gai.

**sephiroth clock** · 05-18-2006 02:42 AM

Originally posted by ataraxis
Dentity? *Is that like a dentist?

**.jared.** · 06-21-2006 08:07 PM

Originally posted by Universal Mind
God is so absolutely phenomenal. He's so incredibly complex, powerful, and beautiful. There is no way something that great just happened by itself. Somebody had to have created him. He had to have been created by a SuperGod. Therefore, SuperGod exists. By the same logic, UltraSuperGod exists. Etc.

Haha. If you are going to bash Christianity, please do it with elegance rather than just contradicting yourself.

If there is no god. Then we can assume that something either always existed or popped out of nothing.

So if you don't believe in god then you don't believe in creationism...correct?

So then going by the standard that things do not have to be created you have just proved your own argument invalid. Without any god.....things don't have to be created.

If you don't believe things have to be created....are you honestly saying that god had to be created if he exists?

I'm not saying that you have to believe in god. But your argument sucks.

To clarify.... i have not proved god here in any way. Just stated that this logic that you have used is flawed and does not disprove a god.

**Universal Mind** · 06-23-2006 12:55 AM

Originally posted by .jared.+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(.jared.)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-Universal Mind

God is so absolutely phenomenal. *He's so incredibly complex, powerful, and beautiful. *There is no way something that great just happened by itself. *Somebody had to have created him. *He had to have been created by a SuperGod. *Therefore, SuperGod exists. *By the same logic, UltraSuperGod exists. *Etc.

Haha. If you are going to bash Christianity, please do it with elegance rather than just contradicting yourself.

If there is no god. Then we can assume that something either always existed or popped out of nothing.

So if you don't believe in god then you don't believe in creationism...correct?

So then going by the standard that things do not have to be created you have just proved your own argument invalid. Without any god.....things don't have to be created.

If you don't believe things have to be created....are you honestly saying that god had to be created if he exists?

I'm not saying that you have to believe in god. But your argument sucks.

To clarify.... i have not proved god here in any way. Just stated that this logic that you have used is flawed and does not disprove a god.[/b]

Wow, I haven't been to this forum in months, and just yesterday somebody came at me very rudely with that stupidity. There must be a God.

My argument was deliberately flawed. However, the satire I used was logically sound in its use as a reductio ad absurdum of general creationism reasoning. It was NOT meant to disprove the existence of God, which you falsely assumed. It was only meant to prove that the general creationism reasoning does not prove the existence of God. Do you understand the difference? Furthermore, it was not a bashing of Christianity. It was a challenge to it (which is what disturbed you), particularly the notion that because anything exists God must therefore exist. My satire illustrated the illogic of such reasoning. Now that you know (I will give you the benefit of the doubt for now.) what I was actually saying, do you have a direct counter argument? Try harder this time, and act like a Christian when you do it.

**.jared.** · 06-23-2006 01:35 AM

Originally posted by Universal Mind

Wow, I haven't been to this forum in months, and just yesterday somebody came at me very rudely with that stupidity. * There must be a God. * * *

My argument was deliberately flawed. *However, the satire I used was logically sound in its use as a reductio ad absurdum of general creationism reasoning. *It was NOT meant to disprove the existence of God, which you falsely assumed. *It was only meant to prove that the general creationism reasoning does not prove the existence of God. *Do you understand the difference? *Furthermore, it was not a bashing of Christianity. *It was a challenge to it (which is what disturbed you), particularly the notion that because anything exists God must therefore exist. *My satire illustrated the illogic of such reasoning. *Now that you know (I will give you the benefit of the doubt for now.) what I was actually saying, do you have a direct counter argument? * Try harder this time, and act like a Christian when you do it. * * *

I did not mean to insult you, or be rude. I do understand completely what you are saying, and i did understand that you said it jokingly. However you did say it so i figured i would respond.

Also you haven't disproved anything. So there isn't really anything to respond to. what i see that just a "its wrong because i obviously see the flaws in it. prove me wrong now!". You could elaborate as to why you don't think that existence proves god. Then i will try to respond to the best of my ability.

**Universal Mind** · 06-23-2006 01:43 AM

Originally posted by .jared.

You could elaborate as to why you don't think that existence proves god. Then i will try to respond to the best of my ability.

The general argument is that because the universe is so amazing, it could not have happened by itself. However, the argument goes on to say that therefore something even more amazing must have created it. I am saying that such an argument contradicts itself. If the amazing nature of something proves that something created it, then the even more amazing nature of God would prove that something like a SuperGod created him. However, that is not the belief of Christianity, and that is why I see a logical flaw in it in those terms.

**.jared.** · 06-23-2006 01:50 AM

Originally posted by Universal Mind

The general argument is that because the universe is so amazing, it could not have happened by itself. *However, the argument goes on to say that therefore something even more amazing must have created it. *I am saying that such an argument contradicts itself. *If the amazing nature of something proves that something created it, then the even more amazing nature of God would prove that something like a SuperGod created him. *However, that is not the belief of Christianity, and that is why I see a logical flaw in it in those terms.

I completely agree with you on that. I disagree with a lot of the logic that most Christians use, even though i am a Christian myself. It often holds no water. I thought you were addressing a different topic.

It is 8:45 on the night before my English and physics exams. Topics like this tend to grab my attention and distract me. So i will not be returning to this forum until tomorrow.

Sorry to get off on the wrong foot there.

**Universal Mind** · 06-24-2006 12:01 AM

Originally posted by .jared.

I completely agree with you on that. I disagree with a lot of the logic that most Christians use, even though i am a Christian myself. It often holds no water. I thought you were addressing a different topic.

It is 8:45 on the night before my English and physics exams. Topics like this tend to grab my attention and distract me. So i will not be returning to this forum until tomorrow. *

Sorry to get off on the wrong foot there. *

Cool. I hope you did well on your exams.

**juroara** · 07-06-2006 05:55 PM

Originally posted by Universal Mind

The general argument is that because the universe is so amazing, it could not have happened by itself. However, the argument goes on to say that therefore something even more amazing must have created it. I am saying that such an argument contradicts itself. If the amazing nature of something proves that something created it, then the even more amazing nature of God would prove that something like a SuperGod created him. However, that is not the belief of Christianity, and that is why I see a logical flaw in it in those terms.

good point!

but your argument to remain an argument the God who is created by a SuperGod can not possibly be an omnipresent God