Is God a space waster?

Post Reply New Topic

Have you ever wondered, if God really created earth, so we then built his kingdom, in earth. Why did he waste so much space AND time? I mean, there are not only millions of stars out there, there are actually s*hitloads of galaxies out there... we are not even sure whether this is the only universe or not. Just the size of a galaxy is incredibly large, we would take years to go from this planet to the closest star if traveling in light speed!.

We are a incredibly small point in space... And we are also an incredibly small point in time... nevertheless the universe is so big that there is a "light horizon" meaning that there are parts of the universe we cannot see, because they are so far away that the light from them didn't reach us yet...

So my question is, why would God bother creating all so much space and taking so long just so we had a planet in which to build a kingdom of Christian values?

Because God is just pretend.

If god or the gods exist he/they are not as the Christians, Jews and Muslims imagine. If god or the gods don't exist then it does not make any difference.

ruveyn

there is nothing out there. the planets, stars, galaxies etc are just sparkly illusions that god made to test our faith.

space can not be wasted because it can not be destroyed or mutated into anything else.
space will always remain when it's contents have long gone.

Educate yourself. The material is available. You have a lot to learn about space and time and matter.

What is Out There is real. Our faith is nonsense and balderdash, stuff we made up to help us feel better.

ruveyn

the devil maid you think that. you are weak.

Unless of course it wasnt a waste of space or time.

Unless of course it wasnt a waste of space or time.

It's possible the original idea to God was that - for us to come from somewhere, we must be created. Cutting to the chase and trimming this down - God.

Only seeing what we can, makes us think that the universe was probably trillions of times smaller than we originally thought.

Why should we believe something from a bygone age where it was thought that the earth revolved around the Sun...

I did a search for "Three Kings" and it is a constellation, probably even older than the origins of Christianity itself.

Should God exist, why would it create life only in this section of the universe, why not other places?

I'll park my car in the same spot every time - even though there is a free one spare closer to where I need it

It is funny you double posted THAT message

I always wondered that, all that space nothing happens in and noone sees (except aliens).

They always talk about how divine it is that Earth is in just the right place for life, with all the over population why coulnt he drag a few more over into the Goldilocks ring for the space, and transport us over there.

and having said that, why make people so horny when it leads to so much overpopulation and so many hurt feelings with bad relationships and unwanted children. I thought a real god would make people less horny and purberty less severe.

bump

i never made any reference to "time" or "matter".

i think i know what you are referring to as to the inaccuracy of my statement about space.

i know that it is theoretically and conceptually valid that space can be warped and distorted. it can be compressed depending on the objects (matter (which is only bound energy)) that are within it.

i know the "trampoline" analogy of a bowling ball on a trampoline that flexes the surface fabric into a concavity, and flinging a marble at the right angle to that concavity will result in the marble orbiting the bowling ball. when i first heard that analogy, i thought that always the marble would orbit in a relatively rapid decay and soon hit the bowling ball. then i realized that in frictionless space, the motion would be eternal and not diminishing like a marble that experiences friction on the trampoline fabric on earth in that crude analogy.

i know that it is not "gravity" that is pulling me toward the earth, but it is "space" pushing me toward it.

but i said that space was immutable. i did not say that space was featureless.

like if i say about an indestructible elastic sheet "it is indestructible and immutable", then it is a true statement even though the dynamic reality of the sheet is changeable. it can be stretched and pulled and crunched up, but it always remains essentially the same elastic membrane no matter what distorting forces are applied.
that is a 2d description. imagine it on a 3d scale.

it is all very well to rely on the speculation of scientists and "thinkers of note" to provide the educational substance that people feed upon to understand the universe.
i like to read lots of things.

i also like to ponder reality in isolation from anything i have ever read or heard. even though i am sure i have no special insight or talent, it is interesting to ponder things in the quietude of sterile, relaxed, and idle speculation.

i do not have to prove what i say if it is just an idea i have.
i do not quote things i have read or learned externally. that would be kind of parroting i guess i think.

i see "space" as an infinite amount of points.
points have no width or depth or height. they do not exist in physical reality, yet all space is composed of them.
they are only theoretical, and yet the "room" in which all manifestation occurs is due to them.

i see "points" as "coordinates" on an infinite 3d cube grid of "potential location" .i see "points" as "possibilities of occupancy by singularities of reality".

there are an infinite amount of "points" in even the space occupied by a neutrino, and so it is absurd to even try to "quantify" space.

i think that the presence of matter in space makes space look like it is effected by the matter. in the trampoline analogy, space is the "helpless membrane" that has to yield to "mass".
i think it is a 2 way street. i think that if "points" of "possibilities of occupancy by reality (substance)" were compressed for any other reason (one that is not dreamed of yet), then "reality" (substance) would automatically migrate to the areas of highest possibility compression for their occupation.

this means that ripples in space probably create matter (by rolling energy into itself) rather than matter creating ripples in space possibly.

so for that reason i still believe that space (comprised of "points"(that are theoretical and thus indestructible (in the same way that the truth of 1+1=2 is indestructible))) is the eternal overlord of all manifestation and it is endless and timeless and no energy is required for it to be. it is inevitable in a universe where inevitability exists.

space can not be changed into anything else because it is composed of nothing but potential locations for the occupation of every bit of all reality.

i am sorry i posted in this thread as i did not notice it was in the PPR section. i thought i was just giving a quip like answer in the general area of the forum.

i have my own ideas of space and i have them because i am happy to think about it.
i also have read lots of stuff and i think it is not worth exchanging internet articles that i have read as a debate in this thread.

i like to try to talk from my own wobbly feet.

anyway that is all.

As long as you're happy, what else could matter?