Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Does that really look like to you, ''everything came from everything''?
-
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!
Something from nothing, the big bang, science has it all.
- Thread starter Desert Snake
- Start date
Does that really look like to you, ''everything came from everything''?
This is an interesting post. I've often wondered why many people try to negate one, in order to accept the other. I have come back to a position of atheism, but even so...I don't know with absolute certainty as to what may have caused the BB. Having said that, I'm perfectly okay however, with not inserting an ideology to assuage my ambivalence. You can be in awe of the mysteries of the universe, without assigning a deity to it.
I think that for believers...science and faith can coexist, but only to a point. Depending on your faith beliefs, science may contradict those beliefs. I think I'd put my money on science however, to provide more credible answers than religion.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Maybe you can clarify what you're looking for with this question?
It seems to me that this thread illustrated the deep need for finding "authors" and "causes" that some people have. Even when the situation does not really warrant it.
dust1n
Zindīq
They both seem equally absurd to me.
I don't agree.
I think that the Thor explanation for lightnings requires less magic and it is much parsimonous than those complicated things like electromagnetism
Ciao
- viole
"Came from" entails a pre-existing time context in which things first do not exist and then they do exist (try your question without one).
We know today that causality and "coming from" make sense only within a pre-existing spacetime on which events are marked.
Do you think that the Universe, as a whole, had an external space/time context that justifies your question about it coming from whatever?
Ciao
- viole
Last edited:
hey Viole,
'Time' isn't 'physical', it's mathematical.
It's the difference between two points in distance for a single entity.
Motion results in differences in position of a single entity.
Those differences in position are measured as elapsed inertia.
We call it 'time' as a method to measure those positions.
Everything is in motion,
sometimes without inertia,
but the motion is in the past.
There's no such entity known as 'time'.
But you will argue...and I will hear.
'Time' is always in arrears, it's always a past occurance.
And there's never enough of it, no matter how fast we go.
~
'mud
'Time' isn't 'physical', it's mathematical.
It's the difference between two points in distance for a single entity.
Motion results in differences in position of a single entity.
Those differences in position are measured as elapsed inertia.
We call it 'time' as a method to measure those positions.
Everything is in motion,
sometimes without inertia,
but the motion is in the past.
There's no such entity known as 'time'.
But you will argue...and I will hear.
'Time' is always in arrears, it's always a past occurance.
And there's never enough of it, no matter how fast we go.
~
'mud
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Yes, I do. Since Deity is self created, it goes to figure He created the matter, earth, etc.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
The Bible starts with an 'earth', I assume it to be pre-created at the time the narration in Genesis begins.
How can anything create itself? In order for something to create, it has to already exist.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
How could you possibly know that? I'm old, but even I ain't that old. And logically how could a deity supposedly "self-create"?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
So, what is your theory.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Most religious beliefs cannot be ''proven''; do you question every ones beliefs in this manner? Do you not believe any religious beliefs that cannot be proven? Not sure what your point is, really.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
............^
I clearly state in that earlier post, as if it isn't obvious enough, that what I am presenting is theology. So, my beliefs are neither really a ''hypothesis'', nor stated as ''fact''.
Is religious commentary the only focus of your criticism, here, or all 'hypothesis''? "Theory", like the scientific theory presented in this thread, is also not ''fact''.
By some extremely stubborn criteria, that would be true, I suppose.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Not at all. Especially in the context of this thread.
That only shows how skewed the thread premise is, unfortunately. You are demanding the supernatural to exist.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
It isn't my problem if others have a big question mark, where my religious beliefs have an explanation.