PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Nice dodge.
The universe had a 'beginning' when space, energy and physical laws
came into being. Prior to this there was no space, energy or physical
laws.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do You Believe In God, Why? Don't You Believe In God, Why?
- Thread starter frbnsn
- Start date
Nice dodge.
The universe had a 'beginning' when space, energy and physical laws
came into being. Prior to this there was no space, energy or physical
laws.
I'm not sure how it wouldn't. It's a yes or no question. Either you do or you don't.
I guess my point is that unless one has knowledge of something based on objective evidence, there is really no point in disqualifying other hypotheses.
Once one has irrefutable evidence as to how the universe came to be, only then can we disqualify God "magic" or anything else.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
It's an obvious question because if you have no explanation as to why your god exists, then we might just as well say that we have no explanation as to why the universe exists. The advantage being that we know the universe does exist.
No, for example, the universe (the four dimensional space-time) might just exist. Time is internal to it, so the manifold as a whole never started to exist.
Again, meaningless unless you have objective evidence of "prior to this" let alone evidence that time has always existed and has always been linear. No time, no "prior to this."
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
You don't know that. That is a metaphysical belief in effect and not science, as you have no observation of there being no space, energy or physical laws.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
'Prior' is a term that implies time - time is not nothing, it requires physics, so your statement makes no sense. Also, whether the universe had a beginning is an open question.
Would that be because the Hindu paradigms are so different to the Christian, and yet so widely accepted and integrated? Buddhism, Shintoism, and various etceteras would be in a similar position too.
I think that's undoubtedly correct for all mainstream religions. It's why I have a Pisco streak in my culture, for instance.
There's a huge aspirational gap between the BVM and Wonder Woman.
As long as you don't think the bible has modern science in it ...
I'm all for decency, respect and inclusion, high quality pubic education, equality of opportunity, proper welfare and public health systems. It'll be remembered that Obamacare survived Trump because Republican Senator John McCain voted against ending it. (I don't think SCOTUS will strike it down ─ if I understand the legal objection correctly, even were that upheld, it's fixable, not the death of the program.)
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
No, you don't! We assume it as per methodological naturalism but that is not knowledge. It is a set of unprovable axiomatic assumptions, for which I hold another set of unprovable axiomatic assumptions.
Further you are not a "we" and you don't speak for all humans and hold Objective Authority over knowledge, unless you are God. But you are not, right?!!
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
We certainly can't rule anything out but talk of a god can only be a blind guess - it is just one of a vast number of stories we could make up about it.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Just as theoretical physics, in that there is no time, space and so on "before " the Big Bang, is a story. You can't observe that, just as you can't observe God.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
The bottom line is that there CAN be 'truths' no matter what the post modernist
says. The same goes for religion IMO.
You can tell even from this thread that how clueless humans are.
We believe history by reading a history book's contents. We believe what are happening in every corner of this world because humans lack the capability to individually confirm an occurrence happening in the different places of this world, we thus have to rely on our media to tell with faith that is. We believe science such as the existence of black holes for the same exact reason. Humans can't individually speculate the truth of black hole. We have to rely on a small amount of human scientists who ever had a direct contact with black holes to get to this truth, by faith again.
If aliens are true and they are far more advanced but choose to hide from us, then the only way left for humans to get to this truth is by means of those small amount encountered them (thus having a direct contact with the aliens). There's no other way round. The truth of God is in a similar fashion. God has all the ability (better than the aliens in this perspective) to hide from humans if He chooses to do so for a reason. The only way left for humans to get to this truth is by means of those encountered Him. There's no other way round. The Bible is a testimony from those eyewitnesses from the Jews as explicitely described as God's chosen people. It's more or less like how superman chooses his girl friend reporter as an exclusive source of info about him.The world knows about superman only through what superman chooses to show in front of his girl friend reporter.
To put it another way, if God is true the only way for this truth to convey (except for God shows up to humans directly) is by means of what is recorded in the Bible as a testimony from those who encountered Him. There's no other way round. People don't believe more often because they don't know the above mentioned about how a truth is conveyed. They don't believe not because they made a reasonable choice. They don't believe because they don't know what truth is and how a truth is supposed to be conveyed. It is so because we are educated since childhood from a secular education system where such a concept on how a truth should be conveyed is not only not taught but also twisted. That's why people often ask for evidence because they are educated to fallacisouly think that a truth is conveyed by evidence, but in reality a truth is more often exclusively conveyed by testimonies from those who have a direct contact with the truth itself.
Last edited:
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
We can't argue about time because we don't know what it is.
But it certainly is a part of the fabric of the universe - a universe
that had to emerge from 'something' when there wasn't something
around.
The Big Bang most likely isn't the beginning of the universe. But
somewhere 'back' before it there must have been a beginning.
Saying it's been here forever is a dodge, and not supported by
current cosmology (which speaks of the death of the universe as
it expands, cools and tears apart.)
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
All "truths" are so far cognitive and falls within this:
Cognitive Relativism | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
So, no, all truths are relative and conditional and that includes the truth that all truths are relative and conditional. That is relative and conditional on you not being God.
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
If that was the case then you invoke an eternal universe.
Such a universe kind of dodges the question of how it
came to be.
If the universe has an end, as we believe today, then a
beginning is in order.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
No, I am a skeptic. I simply don't know!
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
So I say the universe formed from physical laws and the aboriginals
say the Rainbow Serpent created the world. I put it to you that yes,
there ARE truths.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
PruePhillip
Well-Known Member
Please explain more.
Should be simple.
Westerners say that the universe formed by the process of physical laws.
Some postmodernists say that isn't a truth but a belief - there are no truths.
Furthermore the aboriginal Rainbow Serpent creator is a truth also.
I hold that is bollocks. If the West is seduced by such notions then we lose
our science (in Australia some school kids learn 'aboriginal science')
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
We have a very well tested theory, called general relativity, that describes it as part of the space-time manifold. If we take it seriously, we can regard the universe as a four-dimensional object that can't have started or be subject to time because time is internal to it. The manifold just is.
Still doesn't make sense.
How do you know?
It's an entirely open question. There are multiple hypotheses that would have no start to time.