First cause of the universe.

[RestlessSoul]

To be a bit cheeky.... by definition of the space-time continuum.

Time is an inherent part of the universe.
At ANY given point IN TIME, there was a universe.

Always = for all of time.

At ANY point IN TIME, the universe existed.

Aka, the universe always existed.

This presupposes that a) particular points in time exist, and b) that a measure of time is infinitely divisible, into the past.

In point of fact a) contradicts b). If time is granular, progressing in infinitesimally small quanta known as Planck units, then a) is confirmed but b) is denied; there can indeed be a first point, a temporal singularity before which time did not exist.

If, on the other hand, the flow of time is continuous and unbroken, the past infinitely divisible, then while the first point in time moves mercurially away from identification, so does any other point in time; the present becomes as immaterial as the past (or future) and time itself eludes us completely.

 

[joelr]

This question is more aimed at atheists. What do you think caused the Big Bang? Like, where did all the matter of the universe come from? If not God, then what?
I have let go of theistic beliefs, but I don’t think I am feeling inclined to become an atheist because I cannot fathom where the universe came from if not God.
What are your thoughts on where the universe comes from / why it exists?

Why would you sell nature so short? We see the universe self assembling all kinds of amazing things. Quantum mechanics shows that given enough time any probability can happen. Like a big bang that also produces fundamental forces that work together.
It is likely that our local big bang and universe is just a very small part of a much larger universe. There could be all types of other universes or wonders that are unimaginable. There could be big bangs happening all over a multi-verse, each with different laws. There is so much we don't know beyond the local universe that to just say "A God did it" is really selling yourself short?
Remember 2 thousand years ago people didn't yet know what outer space was. They thought the stars and planets were one of the 7 heavens above Earth. The top was heaven and a cosmic ocean was above heaven. This was the reason for a blue sky.
Now we know a bit more. But the amount we can't yet know could be staggering. The big bang is just a current point we cannot get past. No theories or experiments can get us any way past this event. But that doesn't mean it's likely to be a mythical character, right at that point?
The original Christians thought heaven was right above us in outer space. Astronomy/telescopes did away with that. No need to keep repeating that mistake.

Does the idea that a God existed first, a conscious being, where would that come from? Fundamental things like space, energy, time have to exist first.

 

[viole]

To be expected as a reponse.
Typical dodging when challenged.

Next anticipated (condescending) response is "great." or "cheers".

Don’t forget “irrelevant”

ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

Whereas other religious books present a set of rules and regulations to follow

Are you sure you have read the Bible? It is literally packed with rules and regulations. The one where a rapist must marry his victim comes to mind, among hundreds of others, looking equally ridicolus.

ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

the universe is finite.

It is probably not.

ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

So are you saying that although
the universe appears to be structured rationally, logically, with mathematical precision and predictability there is no consciousness, nor knowledgeable understanding behind it?

We cannot even predict the spin of an electron, and without any hope to ever be able to do that, since it is inherently random. So, what predictability are you addressing here?

ciao

- viole

 

[InChrist]

It just is.
The "information" in the DNA molecule is no different from the "information" in a water molecule.



The "instructions" bit is a metaphor.
In reality, it's a chemical reaction.

Quite a complex molecule, don’t you think?

Francis Crick who received the Nobel prize for discovering DNA, in a Nobel lecture on October 11, 1962 used the terms information and code in reference to DNA ...

“Part of the work covered by the Nobel citation, that on the structure and replication of DNA, has been described by Wilkins in his Nobel Lecture this year… I shall discuss here the present state of a related problem in information transfer in living material – that of the genetic code- which has long interested me, and on which my colleagues and I, among many others, have recently been doing some experimental work…”


And Richard Dawkins has said in his book The Blind Watchmaker:

“Every single one of more than a trillion cells in the body contains about a thousand times as much precisely-coded digital information as my entire computer.

“Each nucleus, as we shall see in Chapter 5, contains a digitally coded database larger, in information content, than all 30 volumes of the Encyclopaedia Britannica put together. And this figure is for each cell, not all the cells of a body put together.”

How did a chemical reaction occur which brought about a code necessary to direct each cell of all living organisms, without intelligence or a mind behind it?

 

[InChrist]

Information is generated by any causal event. In the case of DNA, the chemicals are information. They interact chemically, which produces more information. The feedback through natural selection adds information.

No intelligence is required to produce or transfer information. It is a natural process that happens without a conscious agent.

You are focusing on one way information is produced (by intelligence) and ignoring the far more common ways it is produced (through casual interactions).

So you are saying no intelligence is required to produce or transfer information, but how is useful information such as, genetic code preserved? For it to bu useful, must it not be preserved? So what preserves useful genetic code and prevents it from being wiped away by the same natural forces which generated it in the first place? Isn’t it only intelligence and knowledge of what constitutes the usefulness or meaningfulness of a code that would then preserve it?

Isn’t saying...life was not caused by God ( Mind, Intelligence), but by natural processes ...

like saying... the cake was not made by a person, but rather by the baking process?

 

[InChrist]

Why would we care about a "biblical perspective"? I would saying going by a reality based perspective would be much more convincing.

Who is “we”? I thought I was responding to an individual poster. I wasn’t responding to you. Or do you mean “we” similar to the guy Jesus had an encounter with?

Then He asked him, “What is your name?” And he answered, saying, “My name is Legion; for we are many.”Then He asked him, “What is your name?” And he answered, saying, “My name is Legion; for we are many.” Mark 5:9


Since you brought it up though, I think the biblical scriptures provide the ultimate perspective on reality, especially concerning what matters most; eternal reality.

 

[InChrist]

Are you sure you have read the Bible? It is literally packed with rules and regulations. The one where a rapist must marry his victim comes to mind, among hundreds of others, looking equally ridicolus.

ciao

- viole

If that is what you think; the scriptures are all about rules, then I think you don’t know how to read the Bible.
The entire theme is concerning the damage and bondage of human sin, yet the freedom to be found in Jesus Christ alone... not rules.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Who is “we”? I thought I was responding to an individual poster. I wasn’t responding to you. Or do you mean “we” similar to the guy Jesus had an encounter with?

Then He asked him, “What is your name?” And he answered, saying, “My name is Legion; for we are many.”Then He asked him, “What is your name?” And he answered, saying, “My name is Legion; for we are many.” Mark 5:9


Since you brought it up though, I think the biblical scriptures provide the ultimate perspective on reality, especially concerning what matters most; eternal reality.

"We" should be any rational thinker. The Bible is only the claim. It is not the evidence. Since the Bible can be shown to be wrong again and again in science matters it is not a reliable source.

 

[viole]

If that is what you think; the scriptures are all about rules, then I think you don’t know how to read the Bible.

I did not say it is all about rules. I just defeated your claim that it does not have a lot of them. Which was a no brainer, really.
And it could be that I do not know how to read the Bible, but when it says: the rapist of a virgin should give some money to dad and marry her. how else would you read it?

What would you think of a law in your country that allows rape of young girls as long as the rapist pays some money and marry her?

i ask because Christians insist that the Bible is their moral compass. If it is, I hope they do not come round here.

The entire theme is concerning the damage and bondage of human sin, yet the freedom to be found in Jesus Christ alone... not rules.

Well, then I suggest that you take your Bible, rip the entire OT off, and throw it into the garbage bin.

as long as you leave it there, and still call it “the Word of God”, or whatever, you will be permanently exposed to sheer logical and moral absurdities. So, why don’t you do it?

ciao

- viole

 

[InChrist]

I did not say it is all about rules. I just defeated your claim that it does not have a lot of them. Which was a no brainer, really.
And it could be that I do not know how to read the Bible, but when it says: the rapist of a virgin should give some money to dad and marry her. how else would you read it?

What would you think of a law in your country that allows rape of young girls as long as the rapist pays some money and marry her?

i ask because Christians insist that the Bible is their moral compass. If it is, I hope they do not come round here.


Well, then I suggest that you take your Bible, rip the entire OT off, and throw it into the garbage bin.

as long as you leave it there, and still call it “the Word of God”, or whatever, you will be permanently exposed to sheer logical and moral absurdities. So, why don’t you do it?

ciao

- viole

I suggest you read the OT ( if you are interested in understanding at all, rather than just parroting the attacks of skeptics) and ask ...
“ who, what, where, when and why?”, as you read. First, the accounts of OT scripture are very specific in their application. The Bible is not meant to be read as if every command, every account, etc. applies to every person anywhere or at any time in history. When the passage or verse does apply to everyone the Bible is very clear, such as saying...” all have sinned “ or “ that whoever believes shall be saved “. The OT commands and regulations are specifically given to the nation of Israel...no other.
There is a matter of reading in context. So your question is irrelevant because other countries are not Israel. Besides, you are not asking the appropriate questions I listed above, but have superimposed your own ideas about rape onto the passage which are completely off.
The passage is actually about the penalty a rapist must pay for the violation and crime against a virgin and her family.

Does Deuteronomy 22:28-29 command a rape victim to marry her rapist? | GotQuestions.org

 

[viole]

suggest you read the OT ( if you are interested in understanding at all, rather than just parroting the attacks of skeptics) and ask ...
“ who, what, where, when and why?”, as you read. First, the accounts of OT scripture are very specific in their application. The Bible is not meant to be read as if every command, every account, etc. applies to every person anywhere or at any time in history.

Cool. Moral relativism. Welcome to the club.
So much for absolute, eternal and unchanging morality.

There is a matter of reading in context. So your question is irrelevant because other countries are not Israel. Besides, you are not asking the appropriate questions I listed above, but have superimposed your own ideas about rape onto the passage which are completely off.
The passage is actually about the penalty a rapist must pay for the violation and crime against a virgin and her family.

Even more relativism. Not only time, but also belonging to a cultural group is relevant.

so, we know the penalty. Pay some money to dad, and let the kid marry her rapist.
If someone raped your daughter, would you call that justice?

ciao

- viole

 

[Subduction Zone]

I suggest you read the OT ( if you are interested in understanding at all, rather than just parroting the attacks of skeptics) and ask ...
“ who, what, where, when and why?”, as you read. First, the accounts of OT scripture are very specific in their application. The Bible is not meant to be read as if every command, every account, etc. applies to every person anywhere or at any time in history. When the passage or verse does apply to everyone the Bible is very clear, such as saying...” all have sinned “ or “ that whoever believes shall be saved “. The OT commands and regulations are specifically given to the nation of Israel...no other.
There is a matter of reading in context. So your question is irrelevant because other countries are not Israel. Besides, you are not asking the appropriate questions I listed above, but have superimposed your own ideas about rape onto the passage which are completely off.
The passage is actually about the penalty a rapist must pay for the violation and crime against a virgin and her family.

Does Deuteronomy 22:28-29 command a rape victim to marry her rapist? | GotQuestions.org

Oh that apologetics article is still so weak! It still treats women as property. Basically, you broke her you bought het. Rape or not the person bought her and she was then his wife, or one of his wives.

 

[Polymath257]

So you are saying no intelligence is required to produce or transfer information, but how is useful information such as, genetic code preserved? For it to bu useful, must it not be preserved? So what preserves useful genetic code and prevents it from being wiped away by the same natural forces which generated it in the first place? Isn’t it only intelligence and knowledge of what constitutes the usefulness or meaningfulness of a code that would then preserve it?

No, it is NOT only intelligence that can do this. This is the main impact of the feedback loop of natural selection.

Once you have a self-replicator that can mutate, there *will* be an increase of information over generations. Those replicators that cannot maintain information flow die out. So any that manages to achieve such flow will soon dominate.

I suspect that before the first 'life' there were many self-replicators that did get dispersed and had no effect on subsequent events (or very little).

Isn’t saying...life was not caused by God ( Mind, Intelligence), but by natural processes ...

like saying... the cake was not made by a person, but rather by the baking process?

No. it is more like saying that stars can form by natural processes, or rivers, or mountains. Chemicals react without needing an intelligence to put them together. The actual forces between the different atoms carry the information you are concerned about.

 

[InChrist]

Oh that apologetics article is still so weak! It still treats women as property. Basically, you broke her you bought het. Rape or not the person bought her and she was then his wife, or one of his wives.

No, it’s not. It accurately addresses the situation in light of the sinful culture of the day. The OT accounts are historical narratives and plainly reveal the sinful activities of humanity. Treating women as property was the mindset of that time. The Bible does not hide that degenerate attitude, it does not condone it, but records it with the purpose of pointing to the need of a promised Savior, where all are valued equally in Christ. Within Israel’s culture of that day, the requirement for a man who violated a woman was a protection for the woman who would have otherwise been ostracized by the community.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, it’s not. It accurately addresses the situation in light of the sinful culture of the day. The OT accounts are historical narratives and plainly reveal the sinful activities of humanity. Treating women as property was the mindset of that time. The Bible does not hide that degenerate attitude, it does not condone it, but records it with the purpose of pointing to the need of a promised Savior, where all are valued equally in Christ. Within Israel’s culture of that day, the requirement for a man who violated a woman was a protection for the woman who would have otherwise been ostracized by the community.

That implies that God is either not omnipotent or else not omnibenevolent. God supposedly gave all sorts of "laws". Why not tell people to do the right thing from the start?

 

[InChrist]

Cool. Moral relativism. Welcome to the club.
So much for absolute, eternal and unchanging morality.



Even more relativism. Not only time, but also belonging to a cultural group is relevant.

so, we know the penalty. Pay some money to dad, and let the kid marry her rapist.
If someone raped your daughter, would you call that justice?

ciao

- viole

No, I would not call it justice because I live in the US with different laws. I don’t live in the confines of ancient Israel or the surrounding cultures of that time where women were treated as property. Nevertheless, considering that culture and the flawed attitudes, the requirements of a man who violated a woman, were given for her protection and provision, in a culture where she would otherwise be ostracized by the community or have no future opportunity for marriage.

 

[Polymath257]

How did a chemical reaction occur which brought about a code necessary to direct each cell of all living organisms, without intelligence or a mind behind it?

The first thing to realize is that DNA is most likely *not* the original genetic material. Instead, RNA was.

There is a lot of evidence for this, but if you look, you see RNA (and the nucleic bases) at the center of many life processes. RNA has the ability to self-replicate, and it also has the ability to act as a catalyst for other reactions. In particular, it is RNA and NOT DNA that actually assembles proteins based on the genetic information seen in the RNA molecules.

So, we have a molecule that we *know* can produce self-replicating molecules, can do most of the jobs that proteins do in modern organisms, and can act as genetic material as well. Furthermore, we have seen long, complex sequences of RNA spontaneously form from simpler strands and these are subject to selection.

Where is the intelligence required? Not in the formation of the RNA: that happens spontaneously. Not in the formation of self-replicators: that happens when the strands get long enough. Not in the formation of enzymatic activity: that also happens when the strands get long enough.

The subsequent transfer to a protein/DNA cycle (which still includes RNA) was more of a matter of consolidation that anything else.