Do you believe It's possible for the universe to have been created?
回答 (29)
2017-01-27 3:07 am
Absolutely it was...Genesis 1:1
2017-01-27 2:49 am
It makes more more sense to see a purpose behind all this than to think it magically poofed into existence for no reason
2017-01-27 3:10 am
Yes. Rev 4:11; Rom 1:20; Psalms 147:4; Psalms 8:3; Psalms 19:1,4.
參考: jw.org read the brochure Was Life Created? pgs 24-28
2017-01-27 3:04 am
Obviously
2017-01-27 3:22 am
Yes, I believe God created all things! I don't believe the world just magically appeared and then things started popping up. Think about it, how would the first thing really have gotten here? If you really think about it, there's no excuse and no explaination besides God. Yes science is cool, but really look into the picture and see only God could do it.
2017-01-27 3:07 am
It WAS created.
2017-01-27 3:15 am
Yes. God exists and is the Creator of the Universe. A person can better know this and many other truths by practicing true devotion to St. Philomena, an early Christian virgin and child-martyr.
2017-01-27 3:13 am
YES !!!
2017-01-27 3:01 am
Yes. Not for any specific purpose, though. It could be the accidental result of some experiment. It's too large and chaotic to have been intelligently designed.
2017-01-27 3:36 am
Possible? Yes.
Probable? No.
Probable? No.
2017-01-27 2:54 am
Well we're here......go figure....!
2017-01-27 2:50 am
With quantum mechanics, anything is possible.
2017-01-28 2:58 pm
No. So-called "experts", investigate the origins of existence, through the "big bang", using the exact same science that tells them that the nature of our universe is to 'conserve itself', by Cosmic Law. Science repeatedly demonstrates that "something cannot come from no-thing". If energy and matter cannot be created or destroyed, only made to change form, it would suggest that our existence is eternal and uncaused (without "beginning and end"). This is why I favor the Steady State Theory, which was arbitrarily passed over and accepted by the scientific community for the BBT, in the early to mid 20th century.
Scientist have had a very bad habit of ignoring the science that does not suit their assumptions and preconceived notions, of how they "think" the universe works. The SST has recently made a resurgence and the ever-popular BBT hasn't gotten any closer to explaining the expansion of super hot radiation from a single point. The BBT is probably better explained through the SST, which hypothesizes the endless cycle of expansion and contraction of innumerable universes, where I believe the "big bang" is merely a transition period between phases. How the "eggheads" of the scientific community missed this for so long, is beyond me,
The "big bang" is as far back as our material models of the universe can trace. It is unlikely that we will detect any remnants of the previous universe because they exist as the energy and matter of this one. The word, 'create', is misleading and is limiting. It implies "out of no-thing", and that existence is not already made as it is supposed to be, therefore in need of "repair or correction". Creation and evolution are different terms, describing the same thing, through the linear paradigm of sequential observation, as a 'this' becomes a 'that', as it appears to the mind's perception.
Scientist have had a very bad habit of ignoring the science that does not suit their assumptions and preconceived notions, of how they "think" the universe works. The SST has recently made a resurgence and the ever-popular BBT hasn't gotten any closer to explaining the expansion of super hot radiation from a single point. The BBT is probably better explained through the SST, which hypothesizes the endless cycle of expansion and contraction of innumerable universes, where I believe the "big bang" is merely a transition period between phases. How the "eggheads" of the scientific community missed this for so long, is beyond me,
The "big bang" is as far back as our material models of the universe can trace. It is unlikely that we will detect any remnants of the previous universe because they exist as the energy and matter of this one. The word, 'create', is misleading and is limiting. It implies "out of no-thing", and that existence is not already made as it is supposed to be, therefore in need of "repair or correction". Creation and evolution are different terms, describing the same thing, through the linear paradigm of sequential observation, as a 'this' becomes a 'that', as it appears to the mind's perception.
2017-01-27 8:06 pm
Define created. Certainly things can be 'created' from other materials, but is a mountain 'created' when it is formed or is it simply the end result of movement of particles according to physics. What I mean is that if you start with a basic concept like H2 and O2, is water a creation or is it simply an eventual aspect due to presence of those two fundamental items.
What, in other words, would be the result if the Universe never came into being? If you start with space and nothing, there is either the continuation of nothing or an eventual expansion. Thus, the universe, and its expansion, is the only logical outcome once you have contracted as much as you can.
What you are really asking is to what extant that expansion is done consciously or with intent. But that falsely assumes science and consciousness are somehow in conflict. Again, start with the basic premise of being as contracted as much as you can be and what other option is there? If the physical laws of existence want to expand and that coincides with what you want, aren't you and the laws of existence in agreement? Wouldn't a conscious being not say "I and existence are one. I and this movement agree?"
Why take conscious control over something that agrees with you to begin with. Why make water run uphill when there are so many benefits to just letting it flow downhill? Then you can sit at the beach and save all of your energy to make sand castles (which don't occur naturally.)
What, in other words, would be the result if the Universe never came into being? If you start with space and nothing, there is either the continuation of nothing or an eventual expansion. Thus, the universe, and its expansion, is the only logical outcome once you have contracted as much as you can.
What you are really asking is to what extant that expansion is done consciously or with intent. But that falsely assumes science and consciousness are somehow in conflict. Again, start with the basic premise of being as contracted as much as you can be and what other option is there? If the physical laws of existence want to expand and that coincides with what you want, aren't you and the laws of existence in agreement? Wouldn't a conscious being not say "I and existence are one. I and this movement agree?"
Why take conscious control over something that agrees with you to begin with. Why make water run uphill when there are so many benefits to just letting it flow downhill? Then you can sit at the beach and save all of your energy to make sand castles (which don't occur naturally.)
2017-01-27 1:35 pm
ABSOLUTELY...........
2017-01-27 9:49 am
Of course it is possible.
Until and unless it is PROVED to be impossible, it is possible.
Until and unless it is PROVED to be impossible, it is possible.
2017-01-27 8:54 am
Yes. It was created by a Jewish guy who sits up there in the sky.
2017-01-27 8:05 am
I know of no technology with which a universe could be created, but it may be possible. But we have no good reason to believe that our universe was intentionally created.
2017-01-27 4:28 am
Yeah I believe the universe is created by God
2017-01-27 4:04 am
Of course not.
2017-01-27 4:03 am
Created is an extremely loaded question
2017-01-27 3:28 am
Science explains the big bang was not from nothing but from a singularity that was all the matter and energy in the universe compressed into a single point that then expanded rapidly!
So it was always here!
But why are Christians always claiming the big bang came from nothing? Are they that ignorant? Did they sleep through school or is it that they know the truth but think they can twist it because everyone is gullible?!
Claiming something cannot come from nothing argues not against the big bang but against creationists claims!
Recent research suggests the universe has contracted into a singularity and then expanded a number of times!
So it was always here!
But why are Christians always claiming the big bang came from nothing? Are they that ignorant? Did they sleep through school or is it that they know the truth but think they can twist it because everyone is gullible?!
Claiming something cannot come from nothing argues not against the big bang but against creationists claims!
Recent research suggests the universe has contracted into a singularity and then expanded a number of times!
2017-01-27 3:07 am
Possible?
I couldn't even begin to speculate.
Probable?
I see no reason to think so.
I couldn't even begin to speculate.
Probable?
I see no reason to think so.
2017-01-27 2:57 am
God underlies all reality. Science cannot use this in its search for the truth because it is an answer that stifles further questions.
All the questions that Creation inspire are religious. Note that Creationism even stifles religious questions. Double trouble.
All the questions that Creation inspire are religious. Note that Creationism even stifles religious questions. Double trouble.
2017-01-27 2:55 am
It could have been, but there has never been any evidence to suggest a deity
2017-01-27 2:52 am
I would like to because believing that it was created seems logical. But the tiny bit we think we know about our universe proves that logic is flawed.
2017-01-27 3:18 am
Probable.
2017-01-27 3:14 am
Beliefs are stupid, we shoudlnt believe in anything, we should trust science and its facts because it can be repeated over and over again, and with facts we feel safe and our species keeps living.
2017-01-27 2:56 am
Truth IS STRANGER than fiction.
If you ever care to look into FLAT EARTH theory, you will learn of
all the hoaxes that have occurred that work to move mankind
away from God.
The bible teaches flat earth. Real science which even I can follow
shows flat earth. There is a lot of advanced physics in flat earth also,
but enough is easy to follow.
There's just no other reason for us to be here at all.
I'd call it 'the heavens'.
If you want an interesting thing to do, look up 'Gematria of
Genesis 1:1 in the Hebrew'....remembering that the OT
was written in Hebrew. You will look for the youtube video
that explains the groupings of numbers. It is supernatural
completely.
If you ever care to look into FLAT EARTH theory, you will learn of
all the hoaxes that have occurred that work to move mankind
away from God.
The bible teaches flat earth. Real science which even I can follow
shows flat earth. There is a lot of advanced physics in flat earth also,
but enough is easy to follow.
There's just no other reason for us to be here at all.
I'd call it 'the heavens'.
If you want an interesting thing to do, look up 'Gematria of
Genesis 1:1 in the Hebrew'....remembering that the OT
was written in Hebrew. You will look for the youtube video
that explains the groupings of numbers. It is supernatural
completely.
收錄日期: 2021-04-24 00:10:05
原文連結 [永久失效]:
https://hk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20170126184851AAD7ak1