Hypothetical Question

User45701

I read the charter

As religious people i was wondering what would be your spiritual reaction to the discovery of extraterrestrial life? I was wondering because im not religious and i was thinking how religious people would react to such a discovery.

Would you make up your own mind on how this relates to your gods grand scheme or would you await to see what the head of your church says?

I don't know allot about religious writings ect but from what i know we are gods creation right? special and all so would the discovery of a extraterrestrial life form make you think that perhaps your god does not exist? or would you believe that it has created other species on other planets besides our own? or perhaps your god is not all powerful perhaps the other species was created by a rival being/god?

Ill make my question more clear. If the discovery of an extraterrestrial life form was announced and proved tonight on the news what do you think would be your thoughts on your own gods involvement

JimiTime

As someone who considers themselves very much a christian, but very much non-religious, I'd have to see the facts. Just discovering extra terrestrial life proves or disproves nothing in relation to God. There is no mention of life anywhere else in scripture, but that does not necessarily mean it doesn't exist. I very much doubt it does exist, but its not really an issue.

User45701

So would you say that humans are the only intelligent life forms in the universe?

JimiTime

User45701 wrote: »

So would you say that humans are the only intelligent life forms in the universe?

The only answer I could give to that is, I don't know. Personally I don't think there is, but thats just a personal opinion. It's really a case of, I don't know, but I don't think so. Its not really of any consequence.

Asiaprod

Nice question.
I would think it would matters not--in a negative way--for believers, and could even be used to enhance the greatness of God. Why would there be any reference in Christian text to the existence of ETs, you refer to texts written a long time ago. That kind of stuff would not have been acceptable at that time, in the same way as the guy standing on the corner in 2007 with a sign telling us the world will be destroyed in 2009 would be seen as a fool. Now if the ETs produced a copy of a Bible based in their world talking about the same God, I for one would sit up and pay attention.
The idea of a different God is interesting, but is just speculation, or trolling:)
The ways of God are mystical, but bear in mind this is not my faith, I just try to keep the peace.

pinksoir

Why do you not think that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe?

JimiTime

pinksoir wrote: »

Why do you not think that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe?

Simply because i see nothing that says there is. As i said, I don't know, but why should I believe there is?

Rev Hellfire

JimiTime wrote: »

Simply because i see nothing that says there is. As i said, I don't know, but why should I believe there is?

The ironing is delicious ...

Asiaprod

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

The ironing is delicious ...

Oooo, I would so love to smack you, but the Rev in your name puts me off;)

JimiTime

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

The ironing is delicious ...

I'm quite aware of the perception that such things are ironic. Don't really mind. people see what people see. Its up to them to look into it.

BrianCalgary

It would certainly cause me to think. We are a unique creation, offered salvation through the act of Jesus Christ.

If there was life on other planets, how do they receive salvation?

Did Christ go there as well and offer himself up as a sacrifice on other occasions?

Those would be the first questions I would have.

ALthough I do love Star Trek and always enjoy meeting new life forms.

User45701

JimiTime wrote: »

Simply because i see nothing that says there is. As i said, I don't know, but why should I believe there is?

Well i just dont understand how pointless god is if there is no other life then that means that either god wants us to have a playground so large no matter how fast we reproduce and how fast we advance in tech and how much we explore the human race does not have and never will have the ability to explore the entire universe.

EDIT: unless god did create the universe but we where an accident, i could perhaps accept that but the idea that a god created us? and for some reason people follow this .. this.. thing? whatever form of life said hypethical god is .... why would anyone follow something on faith alone?

The universe is so large why would anyone create such a thing unless there was a purpose because due to its size and due to the fact that all the elements that have allowed life to evolve on earth exist outside of out planet/soler system.

so everything life needs to live IS outside our planet and there are are countless trillions of stars with an incomprehensible amount of planets in the universe and we, Terra are the only form of life?

Fanny Cradock

User45701 wrote: »

EDIT: unless god did create the universe but we where an accident, i could perhaps accept that but the idea that a god created us? and for some reason people follow this .. this.. thing? whatever form of life said hypethical god is .... why would anyone follow something on faith alone?

I struggle to comprehend why you can conceive that there is a god only if we are the consequence of a mistake. Can you expand on this?

User45701 wrote: »

The universe is so large why would anyone create such a thing unless there was a purpose because due to its size and due to the fact that all the elements that have allowed life to evolve on earth exist outside of out planet/soler system.

Well, the obvious answer to that would be that there are definite purposes to the universe. I'm not the man to tell you what they are, though.

Again, I struggle to understand another of your points. What possible bearing could the size of the universe have on the argument for/ against the existence of God? Are you saying that if the universe was smaller (though I don't see how we could have any knowledge of this) would it make the concept of God more believable? How small would it have to be? You seem to be basing your belief of the non-existence of God on the assumption that the universe could have existed in a different form as to how it actually is - irrespective of our current level of understanding.

User45701 wrote: »

and we, Terra are the only form of life?

Has anyone here claimed this for definite? The Bible says nothing on the matter of life outside our planet, so whatever decision someone arrives at it is simply a matter of personal choice.

Speaking of life - the fact that the earth is populated with countless species doesn't impact negatively on my belief in God - indeed, it's quite the opposite.

JoeB-

Intelligent alien life would sound a death knell for religion for me... but then I don't believe now and I reckon theists would continue to believe in God despite the new negative evidence (of intelligent aliens).

(The theory of) Evolution should have sounded a death knell for religion, it has for many people but even still many deny the truth of evolution and prefer to believe in creator gods. That was the greatest reason for religious belief in my opinion, the question 'How did creatures such as ourselves end up on Earth'... but now we know how such complexity can arise from simplicity by simple methods... however there never has been a good explanation as to how a being as powerful as God could arise from nothing.

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Again, I struggle to understand another of your points. What possible bearing could the size of the universe have on the argument for/ against the existence of God? Are you saying that if the universe was smaller (though I don't see how we could have any knowledge of this) would it make the concept of God more believable? How small would it have to be? You seem to be basing your belief of the non-existence of God on the assumption that the universe could have existed in a different form as to how it actually is - irrespective of our current level of understanding.

I see the huge expanse of the universe as evidence against the existence of God and creation as described in the Bible. After all if you are baking a cake you don't make a mountain sized piece of dough and then seperate out a small amount to cook, you only make what is required.

I would be more likely to believe in God if the universe was the size of Earth or the solar system, there is no need for the huge expanses if the universes only purpose is to house us.

Quote '....that the universe could have existed in a different form as to how it actually is - ....'
I don't believe in a omnipotent God but if I did I would definitely expect that the universe could have been created in any way he chose, I don't understand why you are arbitrarily limiting Gods power in this way?

JimiTime

I had a feeling this would turn this way. TBH, its all conjecture and speculation. Just because you don't see a purpose to the universe doesn't mean there isn't one. God may have a plan for the future for all we know. What we actually 'know' is. Life on other planets is not mentioned in scripture. Life on other planets has never been found. So, i have absolutely no reason to believe there is. If some is found, i'll say, 'Oh right, guess there was so'. Thats really it.

PDN

Whether life exists elsewhere in the universe would, IMO, be totally irrelevant to the question of God's existence.

Fanny Cradock

JoeBallantine wrote: »

I don't believe in a omnipotent God but if I did I would definitely expect that the universe could have been created in any way he chose, I don't understand why you are arbitrarily limiting Gods power in this way?

Lets face it, in these matters all personal opinion is arbitrary - yours included. I've stated nothing as fact. Instead, I've merely suggested that it is possible that this is the way it had to be, or the way God saw best. But what do I know?

However, looking at it from a different perspective, what difference would the size of the universe make to an omnipotent being? After all, as we all know, size doesn't matter;) So if God is outside time and space (including any notion of 'big' or 'small') then our temporal understanding of the universe is an utterly incommensurate plane to attempt prove or disprove His existence.

After accusing me of arbitrarily limiting God's powers - something which I haven't expressly done - you then go on to apply limitations to Him based on our place in the universe. To paraphrase yourself: 'The universe is really, really big, therefore there is no God' is hardly water tight reasoning.





As an aside, you should be aware that not all Christians (and that would be the majority in my anecdotal experience) believe in the young earth or ID theories. Though I feel it suits some people down to the ground to ignore this. It all goes back to the tiresome viewpoint that God and science are incompatible.

However, this is not the thread for such discussions. You can have a pop at those who don't subscribe to evolution or an old earth in the massive thread dealing with such issues.

JoeB-

I reckon the size of the universe is only one piece of circumstantial evidence that tends to deny the existence of the God as described in the bible... another piece would be the tiny amount of time we have existed for in comparision to the age of the universe... i.e we occupy less than .0000001% of the universe and we have occupied it for less than .0000001% of the time it has existed.. this is hardly consistent with the bible which tells us the universe was created for us alone.

But evolution (and the anthropic principle) allows for both of these 'facts'... it takes billions of years for heavy elements to form (and we are made from them) and evolution is a slow process.

Other reasons I don't believe in God include..
the multiplicity of incompatible religions...
the problem of evil...
paradoxes including concept of heaven, concept of original sin, disparity of an omniscient being and supposed free will, angels choosing to deny a God who they knew and who had created them...
earthly priests not being very nice..
wars fought in religions name...
bible condoning slavery, rape, gang rape, deliberate pestilence, women being second class citizens, people guilty by association, everyone punished for sins of the few, babies punished for sins of the parents

etc
etc

SubjectSean

JoeBallantine wrote: »

I reckon the size of the universe is only one piece of circumstantial evidence that tends to deny the existence of the God as described in the bible... another piece would be the tiny amount of time we have existed for in comparision to the age of the universe... i.e we occupy less than .0000001% of the universe and we have occupied it for less than .0000001% of the time it has existed.. this is hardly consistent with the bible which tells us the universe was created for us alone.

But evolution (and the anthropic principle) allows for both of these 'facts'... it takes billions of years for heavy elements to form (and we are made from them) and evolution is a slow process.

Other reasons I don't believe in God include..
the multiplicity of incompatible religions...
the problem of evil...
paradoxes including concept of heaven, concept of original sin, disparity of an omniscient being and supposed free will, angels choosing to deny a God who they knew and who had created them...
earthly priests not being very nice..
wars fought in religions name...
bible condoning slavery, rape, gang rape, deliberate pestilence, women being second class citizens, people guilty by association, everyone punished for sins of the few, babies punished for sins of the parents

etc
etc

What's the 'problem' with evil? It's just the best of all possible worlds like Liebnitz philosophised. You seem to be confusing the failings of humanity and their inability to escape from the monkey we are with arguments against the existence of God. It's funny but the anthropic principle you mention is used to support the argument for a finely tuned universe which is one of the clinchers in favour of God IMHO

IMO there's thousand of worlds out there where life seeded and convergent evolution here on Earth shows that the laws of the universe produce similar design solutions. Somewhere else other than Earth I think sentient creatures are praising God

Excelsior

PDN wrote: »

Whether life exists elsewhere in the universe would, IMO, be totally irrelevant to the question of God's existence.

I second this. But I'd like to add that whether life exists elsewhere in the world would, IMO, be totally dependent on the question of God's existence.

JoeB-

SubjectSean wrote: »

What's the 'problem' with evil? It's just the best of all possible worlds like Liebnitz philosophised. You seem to be confusing the failings of humanity and their inability to escape from the monkey we are with arguments against the existence of God. It's funny but the anthropic principle you mention is used to support the argument for a finely tuned universe which is one of the clinchers in favour of God IMHO

The problem with evil is that the evil we experience every day is incompatible with a loving omnipotent God who only wants the best for us, why doesn't he simply wave a finger and cause it to go away? Why doesn't he silence the devil and so prevent him from tempting us? Why didn't he prevent Hilter from killing six million innocent Jews? etc etc.

The anthropic principle doesn't support the argument for a finely tuned universe, there is no argument for a finely tuned universe, it is a fact according to the best of current understanding. The anthropic principle is used to say WHY the universe should be so finely tuned, not because God did it but because, since we are here, the universe must be capable of supporting us.. if it wasn't we wouldn't be here to ask why... alternatively since we are here the universe must be capable of supporting us, no matter how likely that may seem according to other facts.

God didn't create us from monkeys, he simply made us (according to Genesis).. it is evolution which says we developed from monkeys, not theists.

SubjectSean wrote: »

IMO there's thousand of worlds out there where life seeded and convergent evolution here on Earth shows that the laws of the universe produce similar design solutions. Somewhere else other than Earth I think sentient creatures are praising God

I don't understand this... but presumabily the aliens wouldn't look like us, so we can't all be made in Gods image.... religious belief is very common on Earth, it may be unheard of to an alien race, they may have no concept of a creator God.

My other points stand, the God of the old and new testament is an evil monster, he participates in, condones and requires brutal violence.

JoeB-

Excelsior wrote: »

I second this. But I'd like to add that whether life exists elsewhere in the world would, IMO, be totally dependent on the question of God's existence.

Hmmm... and what if humans succeed in creating 'living' matter in a lab from 'dead' matter? Would this change your opinion that a God is required to seed life? What if life can develop from 'dead' matter?

This has already happened as far as I know... in the case of a white crystalline substance which is effectively dead... produced in a lab using chemicals and chemistry. However if it was to be injected into a living being it would replicate itself like a virus, it is indisguishable from a living virus.

If certain chemicals are mixed in a test tube, and then energy is supplied in the form of mini lighting strikes, this can create self replicating matter, the precusor to living creatures. So I don't believe a God is required to produce life, it can happen as a result of natural processes. So God is reduced to a single action in creating the universe and the laws of nature, this is a far cry from the God of the bible. Even I as an unbeliever can accept that such a God could exist but this isn't the God as described in the Bible....

We are made of the same things as the computer you are reading this message on, the only difference is configuration... the line between living and dead things can become blurred. Some day we may have a recipe for life... along the lines of 'just add water' or 'just add energy'...

Also can you define what it means to be 'alive', is the white crystalline substance I mentioned earlier which can replicate itself 'alive'?

Cheers
Joe

User45701

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I struggle to comprehend why you can conceive that there is a god only if we are the consequence of a mistake. Can you expand on this?

Not really im heading into town to pick up a copy of Forged Alliance.
Ill try to explain it another short way though.

I don't believe in a god, i believe in evaluation, let me ask you something, what is your definition of a god? is it to create life because if it where to turn out that our planet is just another races failed teraforming effort?
Would they be gods? they created us?

i dont think that some all powerful being just created us into existence? it would be so pointless, i like having mystery not knowing how my universe works but for the answer to be so stupid and unlikely that we where created by a all powerfull god would be like watching a tv show and then it turns out it was all a dream because our entire civilisation is pointless if there is a god.

If there is heaven/god and all that wouldn't a short life at one with nature be the way? medicine extends your life, if there was a god and if you are so sure and if you are a good person wouldn't you and all your friends/family who believe the same be on a rush to get to heaven/everlasting happiness?

JoeBallantine wrote: »

I don't understand why you are arbitrarily limiting Gods power in this way?

I have no explenation for the big bang, i have heard a few theroeis, i have one of my own. 2 ive heard of where (cant remember the scientific name but in ST) it was called the omega particle, one particle that had infinite complexity and power, it destableised releasing all its energy causing the big bang, i quite liked the theroy that the univerce is expanding but would eventually reach its expansion limits and then would not expand anymore, gravity would then pull it back together and crush the entire universe into a unimaginably small spot, all that energy in one spot would destablise and another big bang would occour and the the universe goes though simmilar cycles to stars just over a time frame more along the line of every 500,000,000,000 billion years, but that theory was proven wrong. The universe will destroy itself and every single thing every aton nothing absoutly nothing will be left. I dont think god created the universe but since evulation has proven that god did not create the human race then (i was argueing with a priest in school in 3rd class and when i put evulation to him we started to back track. I asked how humans came to be, the priest responded with)

Priest: god created the earth/man ect
I disproved with evulation

Priest: where did humans come from
Me, Evulation from monkeys (i was 9 (actually was i 10? what age are you in 3rd class?)
Priest: where did monkeys come from
Me: evulation from more primitive life forms
Priest: where did those come from
Me: More basic things like bacteria and microscopic life
Priest where did they come from?
Me: They evolved from basic promodial ooze
Priest: where did that come from
Me: Ameno acids would have combined to form the first proton

Actually is thing ringing any bells with anyone? if anyone remembers who i am youl never guess who from out class ended up in jail! pm me

anyway....

Priest: where did they come from?
Me: Impacts from metorites h20 molocules molten rock ect ect

Ye my taxi will be here in 2 mins, it went on for 5 more mins and we got back as far as the big bang and he had me beat, i couldent explain it but i did well for 10 or whatever i was.

Anyway

priesty said: Maybe god created the big bang
Me: i said nothing, i just sat down, anyone that indoctrinated into a religion has no hope of being free. ill answer the other questions later - taxi here

EDIT

PDN wrote: »

Whether life exists elsewhere in the universe would, IMO, be totally irrelevant to the question of God's existence.

Excelsior wrote: »

I second this. But I'd like to add that whether life exists elsewhere in the world would, IMO, be totally dependent on the question of God's existence.

What Joe said

I thought id have more to say when i got back but i said most of what i wanted and i cant think of any more. Would be interesting though because if some magical being 1000 meters high appeared in every city, spoke every language, explained that it was god. I wouldn't believe, Only a few decades ago that would be undeniable proof that god exists but now im not the only person who would think hollywood trickery, mankind has succeeded in creating a three dimensional projection, we are only going to expand on the tech in years to come.

i dont think there can be a god, it boggles the mind that there would be because none of it makes sense.

Explain this to me. (and my facts on the bible might be off so please correct if i make a error)

god created us
an angel defied god
god cast this angel down
this angel became satan
anyone who goes to heaven will be happy
anyone who goes to hell would be unhappy.

This makes no sense whatso ever to me.

I would not be happy in heaven, I wouldent know anyone there and all the people would have no sense of fun. But i also dont understand how hell works, i know its not under the earth but if bad people go there? what? if all bad people, ie. people who don't do what god wants get send to hell, which is ruled over by Lucifer, why would Satan a enemy of god do gods bidding by punishing gods enemys? it makes no sence. If people who disagreed with god and where blasphemous went to hell why would satan who did the same punish me?

I don't believe in either but if they did exist i don't think hell is anything like you where conditioned into thinking it is, i think it would be different but suffering? pain? for all eternity?
No.

Hell would be full of the fun things that allot of people go there entire empty lives without experiencing because of there devotion to something that does not exist.

... I do understand that in the past religion was necessary to explain what we as a species could not or to help those deal with loss, but with what we now know as a species to still believe in magical beings like gods who created you and all life on your planet is madness.

Let me ask you all this.

This should be planarity law but sadly its not.

No Human being should under any circumstances be exposed to religion at any stage before the age of 18, no longer should religions be able to condition children and indoctrinate them from such a young age to believe such bollox, but some people are conditioned so well they pass the conditioning onto there own children as in most cases there parents did with them.

If no child had ever heard of religion and on every child's 18th birthday they spend 1 hour in a room, where a religious figure and a scientist both have 30 mins to argue there points. Then the mature brain decided for itself without conditioning?

How many people would follow your god then?

SubjectSean

User45701 wrote: »

I don't believe in a god, i believe in evaluation,

i dont think there can be a god, it boggles the mind that there would be because none of it makes sense.

Explain this to me. (and my facts on the bible might be off so please correct if i make a error)

god created us
an angel defied god
god cast this angel down
this angel became satan
anyone who goes to heaven will be happy
anyone who goes to hell would be unhappy.

This makes no sense whatso ever to me.

My friend you are excellent. None of it makes much sense to me either.

gillyfromlyre

It wouldn't affect my beliefs at all, bring on the aliens (once they are an alright bunch).

User45701

SubjectSean wrote: »

My friend you are excellent. None of it makes much sense to me either.

then p[lease give me a short gist of the story of how god cast the devil down or whatever and ill correct my previous post

Rev Hellfire

I for one welcome our new alien overlords.

It seems rather egocentric to me that the existence of a god (or gods if that’s your thing) would be somehow dependent on us and our exclusive occupancy of the universe (and some might add an additional ‘s’).

As for the question of alien gods that would certainly be an interesting one since it is highly unlikely that such creatures would look much less think like us, the ideas and impressions of their deities would be so markedly different from our own concepts.
It is here that the idea of god been beyond human understanding would come into effect here, if an entity was responsible for the creation (and possible guidance) of vastly differing creatures (and their cultures) it simply wouldn’t have the sort of human values and motivations that we attribute to god(s).

JoeB-

User45701 wrote: »

Ye my taxi will be here in 2 mins, it went on for 5 more mins and we got back as far as the big bang and he had me beat, i couldent explain it but i did well for 10 or whatever i was.

Great post, post of the year for me....

Your priest was wrong when he said a God was required for the big bang... although the origins of the big bang are complex and obscure it is ridiculous to postulate the existence of an infinitely more complex creator God to explain it, this simply creates more problems than it solves... after all who created God? Nobody? Well that is completely inconsistent with the priests view that everything needs a cause.

The universe simply is, it is infinite in time... alternatively what we percieve as time isn't a fundamental property of the universe, there may not have been a big bang, it is simply the closest thing we can percieve.

Stephen Hawkins talks about the 'no boundary' condition for the universe, in other words time is something humans perceive but the universe existed before the big bang and will exist after the big crunch, it is just humans haven't yet conceived how this may work.

Stephen Hawkins is one of a rare breed who can conceive these things, he uses the analogy of the surface of the earth for the universe, what we perceive as time is like a journey from the North pole to the South pole along a line of longitude, the big bang was the North pole and the big crunch is like the South Pole, there aren't problems with infinities at these points any more than the Earth ends at the poles.. it is simply that what humans perceive as time may come to a sticky end but the universe may / will continue.

I reckon people should read 'A Brief History of Time', it's all in there....

User45701

JoeBallantine wrote: »

Great post, post of the year for me....

Your priest was wrong when he said a God was required for the big bang... although the origins of the big bang are complex and obscure it is ridiculous to postulate the existence of an infinitely more complex creator God to explain it, this simply creates more problems than it solves... after all who created God? Nobody? Well that is completely inconsistent with the priests view that everything needs a cause.

Hmm i was in a rush typing this and it was a long time ago but i got the feeling he was more trying to show me that science can not explain everything and that there must be some "high power" involved somehow. He was elderly and im sure that gave him comfort

JoeBallantine wrote: »

The universe simply is, it is infinite in time... alternatively what we percieve as time isn't a fundamental property of the universe, there may not have been a big bang, it is simply the closest thing we can percieve.

Stephen Hawkins talks about the 'no boundary' condition for the universe, in other words time is something humans perceive but the universe existed before the big bang and will exist after the big crunch, it is just humans haven't yet conceived how this may work.

Stephen Hawkins is one of a rare breed who can conceive these things, he uses the analogy of the surface of the earth for the universe, what we perceive as time is like a journey from the North pole to the South pole along a line of longitude, the big bang was the North pole and the big crunch is like the South Pole, there aren't problems with infinities at these points any more than the Earth ends at the poles.. it is simply that what humans perceive as time may come to a sticky end but the universe may / will continue.

I reckon people should read 'A Brief History of Time', it's all in there....

Em. Using gravitational info and several other factors like light radiation emitions ect and the speed that galaxys are traveling ect. we have been able to deduce that the universe was once VERY VERY VERY small. Everything we know all that is came from a point so small we cant even begin to comprehend.

The universes expansion will end when the big rip/tear occurs in several hundred billion years, every price of matter in the galaxy everything EVERY single atom will be gone, torn apart and there will be nothing that we can comprehend left, unless there is something beyond the subatomic.

Let me ask you this question. IF the human race will exits (ye i know its madd question, i think that the human race will evolve in that time because look how far we have come in 10,000 years and we are talking 100's of 1,000,000,000's oif years) and there must be religious people who think the end will come before that as well.
So this is a real what if question. I think baring us destroying ourselves or some natural disaster i think we as a species will survive but after hundreds of billions of years do you think that your religion will still be around? any religion for that matter. Look at the last 150 years and how much influence your religion has lost. How much life do you think orginised religion has left? Will it last as long as our race? or will religion come to a end?

EDIT: Ok. Here is a good question for anyone who knows both religion and a little bit of temporal mechanics.

Correct me if i am wrong but god is all powerful right? there are some that might argue that this thing/being/creature/god could even survive the end of the universe.

If a person or anything for that matter suscessfully made a trip too the past and even if EVER so slightly altered our history, and i mean even the slightest as in they moved one pebble or ate a apple or made a footprint anything small that would not change our history in a way that would be notacible.

This would create a 2nd timeline, one where the was no footrpint there, one where there was a footprint, the one without the footprint is the original universe/timeline and the new one is 100 identical except for the small difference, but any difference would create a new timeline, i don't believe its possible to change the past, altering a event in the past would result in the creation of another identical universe/space time continuum/timeline not the alteration of an existing one.

So if this where done and a 2nd timeline was created, an identical (copped if you will) universe. Everything would be the exact same in this alternate timeline (except for the one little difference which noone would even know about). My question is this. If we where living in a slightly altered timeline do you think a temperal incursion could copy god? or would this new/falce/copied timeline/universe have no god?

And who is to say its us who changes our past, maybe future us studying histroy? an alien race? who knows we know that graviational events in the universe can distort time and space like black holes perhaps some sort of special event we have never witnissed, we know the power of the universe we know a gamma ray burt could effect earth even if one occoured 100's of billions of times away from earth as our son. The power is unimaginable but perhaps one of these unknowns of the universe could have allowed an asteroid/meteorite to impact the earth about 2 hundred billion years ago (a small one, again something that makes no difference that anyone would notice (just say it was small and only made a crater an inch wide) noone would ever know ) but it would be a temporal event that would have created a 2nd universe/timeline that we are now living in, everything else the same. So, Copying a timeline/universe via temporal event/incusrion, would god be copied as well?

Fanny Cradock

User45701 wrote: »

So this is a real what if question. I think baring us destroying ourselves or some natural disaster i think we as a species will survive but after hundreds of billions of years do you think that your religion will still be around? any religion for that matter. Look at the last 150 years and how much influence your religion has lost. How much life do you think orginised religion has left? Will it last as long as our race? or will religion come to a end?

If you are talking about Christendom losing its influence in the last '150 years', then it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I don't believe that those institutions' primary focus was God.

Unless we somehow manage to travel across unimaginably vast tracts of space, I would think that after about 5 billions years mankind would have to worry about our imminent vaporisation by the exploding sun. I'm sorry, but your question is so improbable and hypothetical that it can't be answered.

JoeBallantine wrote:

The universe simply is, it is infinite in time... alternatively what we percieve as time isn't a fundamental property of the universe, there may not have been a big bang, it is simply the closest thing we can percieve.

I always thought that most physicists subscribed to the idea of an initial singularity - the big bang. It would seem that you subscribe to a very contentious view of our universe. Still, we all need to believe in something...

Out of curiosity, what do you suppose happens to time at the point of infinite density of a black hole?

Fanny Cradock

User45701 wrote: »

a temperal incursion

You've been watching too much Star Trek, mate. Besides, we all know that the temporal prime directive would forbid such a thing. You are getting hung up on the hypothetical.

Qapla!

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=qapla

User45701

i was going to use a different word because i knew id get a response like that. oh well next time ill use temporal event

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Out of curiosity, what do you suppose happens to time at the point of infinite density of a black hole?

Each black hole is different in size so each would have a slightly different effect, time does get distorted around a black hole so one would assume that at the center there is such a high density that time either does not move or moves and a inconceivability small speed.