Atheists ask why is outerspace uninhabitable if God designed the Universe?

Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Atheists ask why is outerspace uninhabitable if God designed the Universe?

My answer: So we can experience it.

 

But what about distant galaxies outside our scope? Fear not, as I am sure there are other civiliations out there to take in the experience.

 

all pics from http://hubblesite.org

[edit:fixed title]


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
I think god may have

I think god may have misplaced a decimal point or something because the closest star is 4.2 ly away. There's no way to possibly get there. Forget about other galaxies, even if you could travel at light speed you would need a lifespan greater than 100,000 years just to go from one end of the milky way to the other. nice pics though.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: I think god

Gauche wrote:
I think god may have misplaced a decimal point or something because the closest star is 4.2 ly away. There's no way to possibly get there. Forget about other galaxies, even if you could travel at light speed you would need a lifespan greater than 100,000 years just to go from one end of the milky way to the other. nice pics though.

 

First the closest star is 8 light minutes away.

 

Second why would we want to go to a star anyway? 


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Cpt_pineapple wrote:
First the closest star is 8 light minutes away.

You got me on that one the sun is 8 light minutes away.

Quote:
Second why would we want to go to a star anyway?

Well, I'm certainly no expert on this but when I was at the pool hall last night somebody told me that habitable planets usuall orbit stars. So if you're going to a planet you have to go near a star and the closest one after the sun is 4.2 ly away.

Did you mean uninhabitable? Because if it's inhabitable I think that means you can live there. That would make my reply not really appropriate.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: Did you

Gauche wrote:

Did you mean uninhabitable? Because if it's inhabitable I think that means you can live there. That would make my reply not really appropriate.

 

Oh yeah. Thanks. I'll change that right now. 


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Ok, I understand now. That's

Ok, I understand now. That's a horse of a different color isn't it?


Krehlic
Krehlic's picture
Posts: 240
Joined: 2006-12-29
User is offlineOffline
So, how many times must god

So, how many times must god sacrifice his son (or himself) before he takes care of all those other civilizations?

 

 

...of course, if you're not a christian then I just made myself look like a dumbass. 

Flying Spaghetti Monster -- Great Almighty God? Or GREATEST Almighty God?


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Krehlic wrote: So, how

Krehlic wrote:

So, how many times must god sacrifice his son (or himself) before he takes care of all those other civilizations?

 

 

See below point 

 

 

Quote:

...of course, if you're not a christian then I just made myself look like a dumbass.

 

^ This 


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
Quote: My answer: So we

Quote:

My answer: So we can experience it.

You've gotta be joking us!

 

Old Negro Space Program: http://www.negrospaceprogram.com/

"Space is one cold mothafucka'!"

Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/


James Cizuz
James Cizuz's picture
Posts: 261
Joined: 2007-02-11
User is offlineOffline
When atheists ask this type

When atheists ask this type of thing, they are refering to theists who believe in a personal religious god. Mainly because most gods, of most religions say specifically they created only the earth.

Example, christian god takes 5 days to create one small, unimpressive planet(Earth(dunno why a lot of people like to argue about this, only thing we got going is life, planet itself sucks)) but took 1 day to create 185 billion+ galaxies. Now theists say a day for god is not 24 hours. Who the fuck cares? It's god, it should take a planck second for the entire universe. Yet he takes 5 units(I don't fucking care how long) to make the earth, and 1 unit to make everything else. Also, he refered to the rest as "lights hung in the sky" he does not mention other planets etc. It's the same with most religions.

 

When talking about a deists god, or other non-religious non-personal god, atheists can not say that. Since a deists god is not perfect, a non-personal god is not perfect. He is not all-loving, he is not all-knowing. By standards, all he did was create the universe. He is not bound by logic to disprove he created other planets then our own. You can hold any claim, because deism is not a religion, it has no dogma. Most deists I know were once religious, they could no longer believe the bullshit and droped it, but they had to hold on to one thing, which was god. I kind of respect deists more then religious, because at least they can see as far as, these silly incohearnt stories are not true, but god still might be true, just not this god. I wish everyone could at the least be deist, then we would not have religious wars. No one would fight for their beliefs. You'd have atheists and deists, both would still argue, but at least deists would not have a reason to justify killing an atheist for argueing etc.

 

Myself, if a deist type god existed, great. He created the universe, left it alone, and does not impose his morality. He let evolution take over on whatever planets it could, and it progressed while he moves onto something else to create. No heaven, no hell, still believe mostly what an atheist believes except for that one thing god.

 

Hope that answered the question, probably not though. :\ 

"When I die I shall be content to vanish into nothingness.... No show, however good, could conceivably be good forever.... I do not believe in immortality, and have no desire for it." ~H.L. Mencken

Thank god i'm a atheist!


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
James Cizuz wrote: When

James Cizuz wrote:

When atheists ask this type of thing, they are refering to theists who believe in a personal religious god. Mainly because most gods, of most religions say specifically they created only the earth.

Example, christian god takes 5 days to create one small, unimpressive planet(Earth(dunno why a lot of people like to argue about this, only thing we got going is life, planet itself sucks)) but took 1 day to create 185 billion+ galaxies. Now theists say a day for god is not 24 hours. Who the fuck cares? It's god, it should take a planck second for the entire universe. Yet he takes 5 units(I don't fucking care how long) to make the earth, and 1 unit to make everything else. Also, he refered to the rest as "lights hung in the sky" he does not mention other planets etc. It's the same with most religions.

 

When talking about a deists god, or other non-religious non-personal god, atheists can not say that. Since a deists god is not perfect, a non-personal god is not perfect. He is not all-loving, he is not all-knowing. By standards, all he did was create the universe. He is not bound by logic to disprove he created other planets then our own. You can hold any claim, because deism is not a religion, it has no dogma. Most deists I know were once religious, they could no longer believe the bullshit and droped it, but they had to hold on to one thing, which was god. I kind of respect deists more then religious, because at least they can see as far as, these silly incohearnt stories are not true, but god still might be true, just not this god. I wish everyone could at the least be deist, then we would not have religious wars. No one would fight for their beliefs. You'd have atheists and deists, both would still argue, but at least deists would not have a reason to justify killing an atheist for argueing etc.

 

Myself, if a deist type god existed, great. He created the universe, left it alone, and does not impose his morality. He let evolution take over on whatever planets it could, and it progressed while he moves onto something else to create. No heaven, no hell, still believe mostly what an atheist believes except for that one thing god.

 

Hope that answered the question, probably not though. :\

 

I'm more taking the Pantheism approach :\ 


James Cizuz
James Cizuz's picture
Posts: 261
Joined: 2007-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote: James

Cpt_pineapple wrote:
James Cizuz wrote:

When atheists ask this type of thing, they are refering to theists who believe in a personal religious god. Mainly because most gods, of most religions say specifically they created only the earth.

Example, christian god takes 5 days to create one small, unimpressive planet(Earth(dunno why a lot of people like to argue about this, only thing we got going is life, planet itself sucks)) but took 1 day to create 185 billion+ galaxies. Now theists say a day for god is not 24 hours. Who the fuck cares? It's god, it should take a planck second for the entire universe. Yet he takes 5 units(I don't fucking care how long) to make the earth, and 1 unit to make everything else. Also, he refered to the rest as "lights hung in the sky" he does not mention other planets etc. It's the same with most religions.

 

When talking about a deists god, or other non-religious non-personal god, atheists can not say that. Since a deists god is not perfect, a non-personal god is not perfect. He is not all-loving, he is not all-knowing. By standards, all he did was create the universe. He is not bound by logic to disprove he created other planets then our own. You can hold any claim, because deism is not a religion, it has no dogma. Most deists I know were once religious, they could no longer believe the bullshit and droped it, but they had to hold on to one thing, which was god. I kind of respect deists more then religious, because at least they can see as far as, these silly incohearnt stories are not true, but god still might be true, just not this god. I wish everyone could at the least be deist, then we would not have religious wars. No one would fight for their beliefs. You'd have atheists and deists, both would still argue, but at least deists would not have a reason to justify killing an atheist for argueing etc.

 

Myself, if a deist type god existed, great. He created the universe, left it alone, and does not impose his morality. He let evolution take over on whatever planets it could, and it progressed while he moves onto something else to create. No heaven, no hell, still believe mostly what an atheist believes except for that one thing god.

 

Hope that answered the question, probably not though. :\

 

I'm more taking the Pantheism approach :\

I think i meant pantheism.. I think deism is actually a religion. Not sure though, I probably meant pantheism. 

"When I die I shall be content to vanish into nothingness.... No show, however good, could conceivably be good forever.... I do not believe in immortality, and have no desire for it." ~H.L. Mencken

Thank god i'm a atheist!


Slimm
Superfan
Slimm's picture
Posts: 167
Joined: 2007-03-15
User is offlineOffline
I can honestly say that the

I can honestly say that the Atheist and Pantheism standpoints are the most Rational that their is.

Puzzled I've got a question though, what role does Agnosticism play in respect to Pantheism? Does Agnosticism only pertain to the swaying / floating between Theism & Atheism? Or could it also mean that your floating between Pantheism & Atheism? The reason I'm stuck on this question is because Pantheism and Theism clearly aren't the same thing... Puzzled

Slimm,

Quote:
"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called Insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion." - Robert M. Pirsig,


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote: My

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

My answer: So we can experience it.

 

But what about distant galaxies outside our scope? Fear not, as I am sure there are other civiliations out there to take in the experience.

 

all pics from http://hubblesite.org

[edit:fixed title]

So the purpose of such a vast universe is so that we can look up and say, "Ooooohhhh, pretty!"?

 Seems like an awful waste of space to me, a nice looking ceiling would serve the same purpose.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Krehlic
Krehlic's picture
Posts: 240
Joined: 2006-12-29
User is offlineOffline
James Cizuz wrote: I think

James Cizuz wrote:

I think i meant pantheism.. I think deism is actually a religion. Not sure though, I probably meant pantheism.

I think you meant deism. A pantheist is pretty much an atheist who uses religious metaphors poetically when describing nature. A deist god is undefined and non-personal, but it is a god. The only criterion it must meet is the ability to create the universe.

Flying Spaghetti Monster -- Great Almighty God? Or GREATEST Almighty God?


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Yellow_Number_Five

Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
Cpt_pineapple wrote:

My answer: So we can experience it.

 

But what about distant galaxies outside our scope? Fear not, as I am sure there are other civiliations out there to take in the experience.

 

all pics from http://hubblesite.org

[edit:fixed title]

So the purpose of such a vast universe is so that we can look up and say, "Ooooohhhh, pretty!"?

Seems like an awful waste of space to me, a nice looking ceiling would serve the same purpose.

 

Don't worry, yellow, I'm sure listening to an Ashlee Simpson CD will serve a similar purpose for you.


Krehlic
Krehlic's picture
Posts: 240
Joined: 2006-12-29
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote: Don't

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Don't worry, yellow, I'm sure listening to an Ashlee Simpson CD will serve a similar purpose for you.

Isn't Ashlee Simpson proof that the universe wasn't intelligently designed? 

Flying Spaghetti Monster -- Great Almighty God? Or GREATEST Almighty God?


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Krehlic wrote: Isn't

Krehlic wrote:

Isn't Ashlee Simpson proof that the universe wasn't intelligently designed?

 

 Fear not the finest pantheistic physicists and psychogists are working on that very problem.

 


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Slimm wrote: I can

Slimm wrote:

I can honestly say that the Atheist and Pantheism standpoints are the most Rational that their is.

Puzzled I've got a question though, what role does Agnosticism play in respect to Pantheism? Does Agnosticism only pertain to the swaying / floating between Theism & Atheism? Or could it also mean that your floating between Pantheism & Atheism? The reason I'm stuck on this question is because Pantheism and Theism clearly aren't the same thing... Puzzled

Slimm,

 

I'm not sure what you mean the floating between Pantheims and Atheism.

Pantheists do believe in a God and that God is merely experiencing everything through the universe. That is the universe has a purpose that God can hold to different experiences. Atheists do not believe in such a God.


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
(Ashlee Simpson is a red

(Ashlee Simpson is a red flag it's time for a thread-jacking)
Threads like this tell me we need to nail down beliefs before beginning any kind of discussion or debate. Without exception, every person on this board with a "Theist" badge has had little in common every other one. (Goes for atheists as well, but that's not counterintuitive.)
Within Christianity, there's a continuum of approaches to the actuality of biblical claims; and myriad responses to individual claims: based either on interpretation, or seemingly determined arbitrarily.
Some people believe in the historicity of all biblical claims, and some reject the stupider ones as they see fit. Some take unappealing or dumb parts of the book, and arbitrarily deem them metaphoric. Then there are the mainstream believers, who couldn't care less about the content of their religious books, following a path of blind obligation to tradition. Then there are the eccentric believers: they arbitrarily alter the defintion of words like "religion," and heap on kludge to support ad hoc positions.
Unlike the existence of deities themselves, we can test what the term "theism" means to individual believers. If we did so, I think there'd be little justification for the portrayal of believers as this big, homogenous glob. 


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
magilum wrote:


(Ashlee Simpson is a red flag it's time for a thread-jacking)
no u

 

Threads like this tell me we need to nail down beliefs before beginning any kind of discussion or debate. Without exception, every person on this board with a "Theist" badge has had little in common every other one. (Goes for atheists as well, but that's not counterintuitive.)


Within Christianity, there's a continuum of approaches to the actuality of biblical claims; and myriad responses to individual claims: based either on interpretation, or seemingly determined arbitrarily.
Some people believe in the historicity of all biblical claims, and some reject the stupider ones as they see fit. Some take unappealing or dumb parts of the book, and arbitrarily deem them metaphoric. Then there are the mainstream believers, who couldn't care less about the content of their religious books, following a path of blind obligation to tradition. Then there are the eccentric believers: they arbitrarily alter the defintion of words like "religion," and heap on kludge to support ad hoc positions.
Unlike the existence of deities themselves, we can test what the term "theism" means to individual believers. If we did so, I think there'd be little justification for the portrayal of believers as this big, homogenous glob.

 

 

I think theists should get a religion badge that says what their religion is so people don't ask me about Adam and Eve and such.

 


James Cizuz
James Cizuz's picture
Posts: 261
Joined: 2007-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

(Ashlee Simpson is a red flag it's time for a thread-jacking)
no u

 

Threads like this tell me we need to nail down beliefs before beginning any kind of discussion or debate. Without exception, every person on this board with a "Theist" badge has had little in common every other one. (Goes for atheists as well, but that's not counterintuitive.)


Within Christianity, there's a continuum of approaches to the actuality of biblical claims; and myriad responses to individual claims: based either on interpretation, or seemingly determined arbitrarily.
Some people believe in the historicity of all biblical claims, and some reject the stupider ones as they see fit. Some take unappealing or dumb parts of the book, and arbitrarily deem them metaphoric. Then there are the mainstream believers, who couldn't care less about the content of their religious books, following a path of blind obligation to tradition. Then there are the eccentric believers: they arbitrarily alter the defintion of words like "religion," and heap on kludge to support ad hoc positions.
Unlike the existence of deities themselves, we can test what the term "theism" means to individual believers. If we did so, I think there'd be little justification for the portrayal of believers as this big, homogenous glob.

 

I think theists should get a religion badge that says what their religion is so people don't ask me about Adam and Eve and such.

 

No, all theists have to do is when making an arguement STATE WHAT RELIGION IT BELONGS TO.

 

When someone states "what if your wrong?" which is the first religion you think of? Someone asked me this and he was a buddhist. I did not expect that in the least.

 

I sometimes forget there is other religions when debating, and always resort to christian god, since the majority where I live is christian. However I have met Islamic people, and they disregarded my arguements 30 seconds into it because I mentioned the christian god, they said I was labeling them. Which I was.

 

If you state pantheism, or deism the arguement applies to people won't think your a fucking moron. Not that anyone thinks that, but if you made this arguement about the Christian god, everyone would stare at the text, laugh and about a couple million of there brain cells would commit hiri-kiri simply trying to understand how you could state such a thing. When however you state deism, or pantheism people step back and say "Yeah I can see what he meants, those don't contridict evolution maybe if god in those terms existed, he might of created the universe for evolved species to co-exist and expierence it.". Although even then it would be a waste of space. I think a lot of atheists have a problem arguing against this, simply because your definition of god is subject to interpretation, while other gods are not since they say they are not in their holy text. 

"When I die I shall be content to vanish into nothingness.... No show, however good, could conceivably be good forever.... I do not believe in immortality, and have no desire for it." ~H.L. Mencken

Thank god i'm a atheist!


ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
My use of the term

My use of the term 'pantheism' is indistinguishable from 'naturalism.' Pantheism means, for me, that god is the universe. If Cpt_pineapple is using a different meaning, then I'm interested to hear it.

If the universe is god, then our experience of god or our theology is natural. And since we already have a name for 'universe,' calling it god seems to be extraneous and adds confusion more than anything. Plus, if the universe is god, then what would it mean for god to have created the universe, if it would then be simply creating itself, which is one possible naturalist's stance.

On the other hand, panentheism, which is similar to pantheism, means (again, my usage) that god is everything and that the natural world is contained within this god. God exists transcendent of the universe but the universe is also part of god.

I'm curious which of these, if either, is an approximate description of what Cpt_pineapple means by 'pantheism' or 'god.'

I ask because I used to consider myself a pantheist, but never believed in a supernatural god.

Shaun

 

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Quote: No, all theists

Quote:

No, all theists have to do is when making an arguement STATE WHAT RELIGION IT BELONGS TO.

 

My idea is better. Then in everytopic I would have to state which God I'm talking about.

 

Quote:

I think a lot of atheists have a problem arguing against this, simply because your definition of god is subject to interpretation, while other gods are not since they say they are not in their holy text.

 

They're atheists, they don't believe in God so should be able to come up with arguments against this God or any other God.

 

Quote:

 I'm curious which of these, if either, is an approximate description of what Cpt_pineapple means by 'pantheism' or 'god.'

 

 

I created a topic about that:

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/atheist_vs_theist/7137

 

 

Hopefully the link actually works this time.  


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Outer space is uninhabitable

Outer space is uninhabitable so that the virus of humanity doesn't infect the rest of the universe. God knows what s(he) is doing.Tongue out


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Bump  

Bump

 


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote: I

Cpt_pineapple wrote:


I think theists should get a religion badge that says what their religion is so people don't ask me about Adam and Eve and such.

 

Hear, hear!


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
But, even if someone has a

But, even if someone has a more specific badge, I won't be able to tell what parts of their religion they actually accept or reject. I once proposed a model for flagging posts to establish the tendencies of posters toward certain ideas. There'd then be a publically viewable table that listed those tendencies, so everyone could know where they stood.
You would be able to look at my profile, for instance, and know that I'm a "weak" or agnostic atheist, so I'm immune to the "ahetsim is teh relgons lol" argument. It might also list that I was raised Catholic in a half-assed way, and dabbled in thought experiments, blah blah blah.
Anyway, nobody wanted to do it.
What religion are you two "Theists," anyhow?


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
I think it's clear to what

I think it's clear to what religion I am.


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Bump

Bump


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
I'm assuming deist or

I'm assuming deist or pantheist, Pineapple, but I wouldn't call anything clear with matters of religion.


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
magilum wrote: I'm assuming

magilum wrote:
I'm assuming deist or pantheist, Pineapple, but I wouldn't call anything clear with matters of religion.

 

Pantheist. However some deist qualities.....

 

What a minute what am I Puzzled 


Krehlic
Krehlic's picture
Posts: 240
Joined: 2006-12-29
User is offlineOffline
So... why the hell are you

Cpt_Pineapple wrote:

Pantheist. However some deist qualities.....

 

What a minute what am I Puzzled

 

So... why the hell are you labeled "Theist" then?

Flying Spaghetti Monster -- Great Almighty God? Or GREATEST Almighty God?


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Krehlic

Krehlic wrote:

Cpt_Pineapple wrote:

Pantheist. However some deist qualities.....

 

What a minute what am I Puzzled

 

So... why the hell are you labeled "Theist" then?

 

Some Pantheists use 'God' as a metaphor for the universe itself. I don't.

 


Krehlic
Krehlic's picture
Posts: 240
Joined: 2006-12-29
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple

Cpt_pineapple wrote:
Krehlic wrote:

Cpt_Pineapple wrote:

Pantheist. However some deist qualities.....

 

What a minute what am I Puzzled

 

So... why the hell are you labeled "Theist" then?

 

Some Pantheists use 'God' as a metaphor for the universe itself. I don't.

So, you believe the universe IS God... as in intelligence? Or are you more of a deist? 

Flying Spaghetti Monster -- Great Almighty God? Or GREATEST Almighty God?


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Krehlic wrote: So, you

Krehlic wrote:

So, you believe the universe IS God... as in intelligence? Or are you more of a deist?

 

See the topic link I posted on the first page. 


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
bump

bump