Does science prove the existence of god?

[The Voice of Reason]

common sense. it would be illogical and scientifcally unsound to believe otherwise.

Am I correct in thinking that you believe that God created the universe?

TVOR

 

[HelpMe]

tvor, sorry if this is off topic but, how do you believe the universe came to be?

 

[linwood]

Chronic -
Your syllogism is sound, but many would deny your first premise.
TVOR

I actually deny his second premise.

 

[chronic1634]

pository sir.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

1) whatever begins to exist has a cause for its coming into being.

In response to my question: Do you believe God created the universe?

pository sir.

If, as you say, whatever begins to exist has a cause for its coming into being, at the risk of sounding incredibly stupid, I'll have to ask you who, or what, caused God to come into being?

Remember, to not believe that someone, or something, caused God to come into being would be against common sense and would be illogical and scientifically unsound:

common sense. it would be illogical and scientifcally unsound to believe otherwise.

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I actually deny his second premise.

Ease up, Linwood. I'm still making him defend his first premise. Besides, I called "Dibs".

TVOR

 

[chronic1634]

I actually deny his second premise.

you're what i was expecting - not many people tend to disagree with the first premise.

can an infinite task ever be done or completed? if, in order to reach a certain end, infinitely many steps had to precede it, could the end ever be reached? of course not - even in an infinite time. you could never reach the 'end step' of the infinite task because there would always be and infinite 'one more' task after each one you came to.

what about the step just before the end? could that point ever be reached? well, if the task is really infinite, then an infinity of steps must also have preceded it. and therefore the step just before the end could also never be reached. but then neither could the step just before that one. in fact no one step in the sequence could ever be reached - that's the problem, supposing that you can reach any point in an infinity.

now if the universe never began, then it always was. if it always was, then it is infinitely old. if it is infinitely old, then an infinite amount of time would have to have elapsed before, for example, today. so an infinite number of days must have been completed - one day succeeding another, one bit of time being added to what went before - in order for the present day to arrive. but this exactly parallels the problem of an infinite task. if the present day has been reached, then the actually infinite sequence of history has reached this present point: in fact, has been completed up to this point - for at any present point the whole past must already have happened. but an infinite sequence of steps could never have reached this present point - or any point before it.

another, more simpler way of looking at it is kind of thinking of it as trying to jump out of a bottomless pit - you can bunch up and kick off as hard as you want, but if you don't have something to kick off of, you ain't going nowhere.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

tvor, sorry if this is off topic but, how do you believe the universe came to be?

Good question, HelpMe. I don't really know, because science is still searching for the answer. There are several theories being bounced around right now, from wave to string to goodness knows what. If you truly care, you could buy these three books by Stephen Hawking - "A Brief History of Time" and "The Universe In a Nutshell" and "The Theory of Everything: The Origin and Fate of the Universe". Each of these three books are written so that a normal person can read them. Hawking reduces the mathematics to models that can be visualized by people that are far below his level of intelligence (which is 99.9999999999 percent of the human population). When someone like Stephen Hawking doesn't feel like he KNOWS the answer to a question like yours, I certainly don't think I'm qualified to pontificate on it. Who knows - the answer may be just around the corner, or it may be another 4 or 5 generations before another truly brilliant mind comes along and figures it out. One thing is certain - a mind like his is rare, even in the upper stratosphere of astrophysicists.

TVOR

 

[Mr Spinkles]

can an infinite task ever be done or completed? if, in order to reach a certain end, infinitely many steps had to precede it, could the end ever be reached?

Yes. This is known as Zeno's Paradox, and it was disproved long ago. I have to walk half the distance between myself and the science building infinitely many times to get to class every day, yet somehow I manage to complete this supposedly incompletable infinite task.

The paradox you propose can even be disproved by calculus using limits, in which we find that for some functions the limit as x approaches infinity = a distinct y value. Also, we can disprove it using more basic math by proving that .999... = 1, because 1/3 = .333... and 3 * 1/3 = 1. So yes, infinite tasks can be completed.

now if the universe never began, then it always was.

That's only if we assume that time is an infinite linear continuum, which because of Relativity, we know is not the case. In fact, the very passage of time is an illusion.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

you can bunch up and kick off as hard as you want, but if you don't have something to kick off of, you ain't going nowhere.

See The Universe in a Nutshell by Stephen Hawking,

 

[The Voice of Reason]

you're what i was expecting - not many people tend to disagree with the first premise.

I dare say that a lot more people than you think would deny the first premise. The question, more succintly put is this - If everything has to have been caused to come into existence, who, or what, caused God? I simply used your illogical train of thought against you. Or was that scientifically unsound? Does your non-response indicate that you concede the point, or that you have no answer?

Four paragraphs to explain the concept of infinity? To adults? That, my friend, is overkill! Then again, I think we've all been guilty of this at one time or another - I know I have.

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[chronic1634]

I think not. what you just gave me was theory, buddy. one third + one third + one third = three thirds = one. however, as decimals these equal .333... + .333... + .333.... = .999 != 1. only in theory does .999 equal 1 because of the fact that it's divisional decimal equivelants equal one when added together.

Yes. This is known as Zeno's Paradox, and it was disproved long ago. I have to walk half the distance between myself and the science building infinitely many times to get to class every day, yet somehow I manage to complete this supposedly incompletable infinite task.

mmm thanks for stating what you're you going to do. now... how'd you do it?

 

[chronic1634]

I dare say that a lot more people than you think would deny the first premise.

yay let's play semantics!
we can even start with the next thing you said. woo.

The question, more succintly put is this - If everything has to have been caused to come into existence, who, or what, caused God?

you didn't read what i said very well. everything that BEGINS must have a cause. if god is an atemporal being (again, i stated that this was a presumption i had forgotten to mention) and did not begin, he is uncaused and has no need for one.

1) whatever begins to exist has a cause for its coming into being.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

mmm thanks for stating what you're you going to do. now... how'd you do it?

Easy--I just typed it in the little textbox at the bottom of the page, and clicked "Post Quick Reply".

 

[chronic1634]

hahaha funny

 

[The Voice of Reason]

yay let's play semantics!

Chronic - I never play semantics. I am asking you a direct question, and, to make it clear that your position is indefensible, I used YOUR words to make MY point. Your defense of your first premise is pitiful.

we can even start with the next thing you said. woo.

I have absolutely no idea what this means. Please try to communicate your thoughts with coherent sentences, if you can.

you didn't read what i said very well. everything that BEGINS must have a cause. if god is an atemporal being (again, i stated that this was a presumption i had forgotten to mention) and did not begin, he is uncaused and has no need for one.

So, to be clear, you are saying that I did not read what you said, but that you had forgotten to mention a key part of your defense of your premise (i.e. God is atemporal)? As much as you might wish to think that I am omniscient, it is not so. I cannot read (or misread) what you fail to write.

So, now that you have chastised me for incorrectly interpreting what you intended to say, but failed to write, I would have to ask the obvious question: Does God exist? That is a simple yes or no question. Try desperately to give a clear answer, including anything that you would like to convey - in other words, answer "Yes" or "No", but don't rip me for not understanding a thought that rambled through your mind but never tumbled onto the keyboard.

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[chronic1634]

i said you misread what i did say - i said that everything with a beginning must have a cause.
which you did indeed misread or somehow skip over since you keep on asking me what caused god.
like i said though, i forgot to mention a presumption that is easily assumable seeing as my stance and belief is in a god that exists outside of the universe, which means that said god must therefore exist outside of time since time, space, and matter are what make up our universe. this brings you, a sensible person, to the simple conclusion that god is atemporal, existing outside of time. just requires a little in-reading.

and do i believe that god exists? yes.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

i said you misread what i did say - i said that everything with a beginning must have a cause.

Actually, what you said was "whatever begins to exist has a cause for its coming into being." If you feel that I wronged you by not reading into that statement, the idea that you believe in an atemporal God, you'll have to excuse my narrowmindedness. I'll work on my mindreading skills during lunch today.

like i said though, i forgot to mention a presumption that is easily assumable seeing as my stance and belief is in a god that exists outside of the universe, which means that said god must therefore exist outside of time since time, space, and matter are what make up our universe. this brings you, a sensible person, to the simple conclusion that god is atemporal, existing outside of time. just requires a little in-reading.

I try desperately not to assume anything, especially when involved in debates. The idea of my assuming that you intended your first premise to mean that you believed in an atemporal God that existed outside of the universe and outside of time, space, and matter would require considerably more than "a little inreading" on my part. It would have been a more egregious error on my part to assume that I knew what was in your mind, so I took the path of asking you. My fault - from now on, I'll just assume what your responses will be and will address what "requires a little inreading".
How stupid does this sound? You're killing me. I'll continue to ask specific questions to determine your position, prior to responding to it. Of course, you could speed up the process by actually posting what you intend to say. No wait - that would be logical - never mind.

and do i believe that god exists? yes.

Finally - a direct answer to a direct question.
Okay - now that we have spent 3 pages to establish that point, let's tackle the next question that arises:
What caused God to exist?
I realize that you have (finally) established that you believe God is atemporal, so that moves the question into another realm. What you have done is to formulate an attempt to circumvent the question of what caused God to exist, by simply removing him from the universe. Therefore, I'll modify the question to this:
Is God part of the universe or not? If not, then I would have to ask what drives you to believe in God? Notice that I did not assume your answer!

While I'm at it, how can someone's mind conceptualize something that is not of this universe?

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[chronic1634]

sorry, i realize what you're saying and thanks for not assuming anything, that could turn out bad lol

as to what i said about beginning... cause... yadayadayada- saying "whatever begins to exist has a cause for its coming into being" is the same thing as saying that everything with a beginning must have a cause. if there's any way that the two statements have different meanings, please feel free to show me.

i simply presume that god is uncaused because at some point of the 'chain of causes' so to speak, you have to have an uncaused cause - there's no way to get around it. if what i believe is true, you know it just as well as i do. so my answer to the question "what caused god?" is that i don't believe anything caused god - god is uncaused, god has no cause, god just is.

is god part of the universe or not? i believe that he is integrally part of it, meaning he is active in it - interacting with us, acting as an actual being in the universe - but that he is not a dependent of it, loosely speaking. god created the universe, therefore, he cannot be subject to the laws of it because he has to be outside of the universe to create it in the first place.

how can someone's mind conceptualize something that is not of this universe?
by being told of it from that thing that is not of this universe. which, if you mean god, would mean god telling us who he is, or revealing himself.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

sorry, i realize what you're saying and thanks for not assuming anything, that could turn out bad lol

Not a problem - I've learned that lesson the hard way.

i simply presume that god is uncaused because at some point of the 'chain of causes' so to speak, you have to have an uncaused cause - there's no way to get around it. if what i believe is true, you know it just as well as i do. so my answer to the question "what caused god?" is that i don't believe anything caused god - god is uncaused, god has no cause, god just is.

Now we are at the core of the debate. This is a case of substituting "God did it" for "I don't know". God exists, but nothing caused him. Yet, the universe cannot exist without a cause. Not logical. My rejection of your first premise stands.

is god part of the universe or not? i believe that he is integrally part of it, meaning he is active in it - interacting with us, acting as an actual being in the universe - but that he is not a dependent of it, loosely speaking. god created the universe, therefore, he cannot be subject to the laws of it because he has to be outside of the universe to create it in the first place.

This entire line of debate is beyond rational thought. God is part of the universe, but he cannot be subject to the laws of it, because He created it? That, my friend is a Non-Sequitur of the first order.

how can someone's mind conceptualize something that is not of this universe?
by being told of it from that thing that is not of this universe. which, if you mean god, would mean god telling us who he is, or revealing himself.

Something not in this universe tells you of its existence (reveals itself). How does something not of this universe tell you of its existence? I truly am interested in the answer. I have never been down this road before, so I am geuninely looking forward to your response.

Thanks,
TVOR