Yay, score one for Christians!

[The Candy Store Massacre]

Well, I was just with my freind, and while I was talking to him, he said the damnest thing. "What if God was the Big Bang? Then he really would have created everything, then he really would be everywhere, and since he is everything, that'd keep in line with the big 3; Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and above time. Not only that, he'd also be whatever plane of existence 'Heaven' is in".... Now this kid's kind of an idiot, and he said something that I've never heard of, or even considered before. So a little props to the Christian, for the good thought. pirate  

[Crooked_Lamb]

I don't really think so...there doesn't seem to be proff to the argument...


Its just..an idea?..........But granted i had never heard this before..but there are morre..thought out ideas...pity saint choas is on vacation....  

[The Candy Store Massacre]

Of course theres no proof, why do you think you're an Atheist? I just thought it was an interesting thought. On the well thought out part, you might be right, I couldn't tell if he just thought of it, or had been working on it for awhile. Like I mentioned, he's a tad slow sometimes.  

[Theophrastus]

Well that makes a fine case for a gnostic approach to life. Now we have that whole "whence cometh evil" thing to deal with.  

[hachimitsugirl]

I'm sorry to say I can't share your enthusiasm over the cunning nature of your acquaintance's big idea. . .

It simply exemplifies the believer's common response -
What if everything is god?
OR
What if everything is created by god?

Since there isn't a way to respond to either of these falacious statements that appears to satisfy them, those of a spiritual inclination will continue to use them to "stump" the unbeliever.

Of course, those with balls can always run them to ground. If you have the time.  

[Baron von Turkeypants]

I've thought about that, and it makes sense if you want to ascribe certain properties to God--just not benevolence, intelligence, or conscience.


EDIT: I'd also like to point out that some of you are assuming a predefined version of "God" in order to refute the idea of the universe as god, while that idea is seeking to redefine "God" entirely. Those arguments don't work. It's kinda like "Hey guys, since X is hard to think about, let's scrap our current concept of X and redefine it as X'." "But you can't do that because there's no proof of X as X'!"

 

[Six Billion of Spades]

That's the problem with pantheistic worldviews: if God is the universe, then the word "God" is redundant, and it really doesn't give us any new insight into the way things are.

Then again, who says the followers of a religion don't get to vote on its central tenets? Hey, it worked in the Council of Nicea. Doesn't make them right by any stretch, but you get the picture.  

[God of lunchboxes]

Then the big bang was sentient? Ow.  

[ra-miew]

Funny, I said the same thing to my christian friend. I told her, "What if God was the big bang." She just sprouted some speach which left me wondering what the heck she was talking about. Quite literally.
Anyways, my definitian of god is and would always be: A term used to explain the unexplainable.
In all honesty, that's what it is. We're not sure of earth's creation, so many religions would just give the credit to god(s). We don't have enough proof to make the theory of evolution a law, so many would just say god put so and so critters on the land. Heck, back in the old days when we didn't know what thunder was, many would just say that god was angry.
Oh well, unfortunately many people disagree with my definition of god. Though, I must say that this particular christian is smart for coming up with such a way to define God. Though, many christians do tend to be smart. Just the minority of them are dumb U.U  

[Baron von Turkeypants]

Soy un hombre muy honrado,
que me gusta lo mejor

Quote:

We're not sure of earth's creation,

Yes we are.

Quote:

We don't have enough proof to make the theory of evolution a law

Yes we do.

Las mujeres no me faltan,
ni el dinero ni el amor

 

[ProjectOmicron88]

Actually, Baron, laws have to, thus far, have perfect correlations in their data. For example, the law of gravity. It's a law because at no point in history has someone tossed an object in the air and not had it come back down again. The correlation is absolutely perfect, and it is therefore a law. Evolution may still be simply a theory (due to outliers in the data), but it's important to remember that "theory" does not mean "guess".  

[Baron von Turkeypants]

Soy un hombre muy honrado,
que me gusta lo mejor

You're implying there are data that contradict the theory of evolution. Is my inference correct?

Las mujeres no me faltan,
ni el dinero ni el amor

 

[Karla Marx]

Evolution cannot be law because a law has to be in the form of an equation. Evolution cannot be simplified into one. Thats the only reason why it is "Theory" and not law.  

[Baron von Turkeypants]

Soy un hombre muy honrado,
que me gusta lo mejor

How are you so sure it can't?

Las mujeres no me faltan,
ni el dinero ni el amor

 

[ProjectOmicron88]

Baron von Turkeypants

Soy un hombre muy honrado,
que me gusta lo mejor

You're implying there are data that contradict the theory of evolution. Is my inference correct?

Las mujeres no me faltan,
ni el dinero ni el amor

I'm saying there are outliers in the data. Same reason relativity is a theory and not a law. It's not nearly enough to warrant disproof, since the correlation is too strong. They're anomalies, is all.