Could God Be A "Type 4" Being?

[Silas]

I have heard a theory that we are part of a multiverse and big bangs are happening continually. It is very possible that the universe had no beginning and will have no end. If this is the case then the universe would have eventually created a God somewhere on it's own.

Er - Brutus, is that the God you worship?

 

[Brutus1964]

Silas

No

Just like I wrote earlier in this thread.

My purpose of this thread was to examine ways that an atheist could still believe in a higher power, and could still accept some form of intelligent design whether it is a God or an infinitely advanced being.

The things I am speculating in this thread have nothing to do with my own personal religious beliefs.

 

[Lemming3k]

My purpose of this thread was to examine ways that an atheist could still believe in a higher power, and could still accept some form of intelligent design whether it is a God or an infinitely advanced being.

Of course they'd accept it, but you'd have to prove it existed.

 

[Silas]

Oh, well, in that case a Universe-created God would not meet the definition of God by my standards. I do accept the possibility of God-like beings (particularly if proof were forthcoming), but they are not the God in whose existence I do not believe.

 

[Brutus1964]

Silas

So you believe there could be Gods out there just not the one you don't believe in? Huh? :bugeye:

 

[Silas]

No, Brutus - you've been speculating about alien beings who may have influenced the creation of Humanity, but I'm assuming such Beings came about through natural processes. Those Beings are tenable. Even a God who somehow came about through the operation of the Big Bang, a Consciousness that exists between the quarks, the strings, the Universal Forces and which manages to manipulate matters to create intelligent life (but only to the extent of influencing the force of Gravity, say - not creating life per se) is conceivable - but that is not the God I do not believe in. I do not believe in an eternal, timeless, supernatural God, who caused the Big Bang, who set up the laws of physics just so, and who demands our worship through the contradictory writings of an old Book (or any old Book).

 

[Silas]

Actually, the Federation on Star Trek is an example of a type 2 civilization. The Borg would be a type 3, and the Q continuum would be a type 4.

So you agree with me that the mention of it in that link is not a very good one?

These types of civilizations are based on actual scientific theory, not just science fiction. Steven Hawking, and Michiu Kaku routinely discuss these possibilities in their books.

My book citation was also from science fact - Asimov wrote many many more non-fiction books than fiction ones, I assumed everybody here knew that - if not, apologies. My mention of Star Trek was just to an easily recognised equivalent. Of course, I'm fully aware that the civilisation level theories are not science fiction.

You know, if you had bothered to think about it for a second, it would have occurred to you that the only difference between Scientific Theory and Science Fiction is ascendency and proximity. The Scientists scam the Universities for employment by conjuring up mathematical models that only they can explain, which sound endlessly important but when examined at the end of the day are rather good for nothing.... I'm sure when they get together in their private parties they all laugh and find it a good joke they've been able to play on the World. But the Sci Fi Writers are there right behind them. They read the Journals and the next day they are out with their very derivative screenplay or new Video Game.

I'm quite surprised at your level of delusion here, Leo. The Video Game, the tv it appears on (alongside the screenplay you mentioned), the computer you are typing on, the light that you see by - not to mention thousands of other facets of every day 21st Century life are the result of apparently "good for nothing" scientific research. That "joke" they are playing on the world has so far saved millions of lives through improved medical and hygienic discoveries not to say higher levels of general safety. Scientific progress has also moved humanity closer to destruction - by nuclear war or environmental degredation, so I'm so happy that God stepped in and told us what was what. Oh, no, my mistake - it's actually the process of science which has told us of the dangers of excessive consuming and alerted humanity to mend its ways; something that actually seems to be happening, slowly and surely.

The problem with many atheists is they have locked themselves into a closed dogma that they accuse us theists of being in. If you base your entire belief system on "if I can't see it, then I won't believe it" then you close yourself off to a lot of knowledge. I have much more respect for an agnostic than a flat out atheist, because at least the agnostic will entertain the idea that there might be a higher power out there.

I fail to see what knowledge I've closed myself off to. From my point of view I understand your experience of God better than you do. In fact, it is the atheists (in my humble opinion) who are more willing to entertain ideas, whether they lead to acceptance or not, because by declaring themselves atheist at least they demonstrate that they have thought about it - whereas in my experience many people who describe themselves as agnostic simply haven't looked into either religion or atheism or indeed any kind of philosophy.

 

[Prester John]

Silas

So you believe there could be Gods out there just not the one you don't believe in? Huh? :bugeye:

Come on Brutus, surely you can do better than that, its not like it wasn't obvious that you've been waiting for the opportunity to say this line since you started the thread!