The Debate of God.

[apophenia]

Deduction done properly produces infallible truth that cannot be altered by any new proposition. 2+2 always equals 4, and there will never be a rational squareroot of 2.

Fine. Just differentiating the mathematical from the theological in case anyone missed that.

An empty universe (for whatever "empty" means) is just another state. The laws of physics let you handle it just like any other state of the universe.

Aha. But 'prior to' (for want of a better term) the big bang, there was not 'an empty universe'. That gives 'nothingness' the status of an object. Which of course helps your argument because that 'object' could be modelled as a structure of infinite null pointers for example.
And that allows the possibility of a process modelling the attribution of values and functional relationships to those pointers.

But there were no null pointers ! Nor any 'condition' nor 'impulse'. The big bang describes a universe after the magical 'non-moment'-to-'timespace' transition, but no initial conditions or impulses could exist in the nothingness, by definition.

In other words the laws of physics do not in any way describe the genesis of the universe, but must necessarily begin at a point after time 0.

You cannot possibly model time 0, or what happens between time 0 and the arbitrary point in time at which your model 'begins'.

You are saying you can model the absence of timespace "just like any other state of the universe", which is self contradictory.

 

[Tiberius]

I didn't, I know what your point is, but you are missing my point, being a part of the universe what applies to it in the also applies to you, you see difference because you look at everything individually, I see similarities because I look at things as a whole.

No, you have missed my point because you are claiming that what applies to the universe also applies to me when I gave a specific example of something that does not.

 

[meddlehaze]

Logical premises establish logical truths, which are transcendent. Logical deduction is the process of discovering truths.

Wouldn't logical truths precede logic, being that they are transcendent?
And how does this prove logic precedes God?

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

No, you have missed my point because you are claiming that what applies to the universe also applies to me when I gave a specific example of something that does not.

Did you read my post at all, or just the bit where is stated that I get ur point?

And your specific example is just a statement of difference, ok i give you a specific example of how what applies to the universe applies to you,

the Universe undergoes changes, and so do you.

 

[Tiberius]

Just because some things that apply to me also apply to the universe does not mean we have a great deal in common.

Your insistence on looking at the similarities leads to you ignoring the differences, and that is giving you a biased view.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Just because some things that apply to me also apply to the universe does not mean we have a great deal in common.

Your insistence on looking at the similarities leads to you ignoring the differences, and that is giving you a biased view.

I can say the same for you.

 

[godnotgod]

Just because some things that apply to me also apply to the universe does not mean we have a great deal in common.

Your insistence on looking at the similarities leads to you ignoring the differences, and that is giving you a biased view.

You cannot be separate from the universe, even though you have 'differences'. Those differences are only superficial. There is a common energy that runs through everything, with variation. At root, everything is of the same essence. To talk about the universe as if it were an object apart from you is an illusion of the mind. It would be like a wave thinking itself separate somehow from the sea from which it both emerges and to which it must return. Any difference from the sea is only temporal and superficial. In reality, it is the sea itself. Both are made of water.

"You are not just the drop in the ocean, you are the mighty ocean in the drop"
Rumi

 

[PolyHedral]

Wouldn't logical truths precede logic, being that they are transcendent?
And how does this prove logic precedes God?

Because it is not meaningful for God to be anything, if He exists before logic. Logic defines what it means to have properties. (And logic and logical truth come about simultaneously.)

 

[ankarali]

The God exist I believe in him. It is so clear as the sun that's why we can't see him it is like to see the sun we see it but we can't look at it

 

[godnotgod]

The God exist I believe in him. It is so clear as the sun that's why we can't see him it is like to see the sun we see it but we can't look at it

Is God-nature within a humble snail?

 

[godnotgod]

[youtube]JlfVjKzyN5Y[/youtube]
Alan Watts - Fascinated by Maya - YouTube

 

[Daviso452]

Well, this thread has been dead for a while. I've been on such a long Hiatus. But now I'm back. For those who don't know me, I'm an atheist, and I wish to discuss the existence of God with anyone willing. Just post your beliefs, or ask me a question, and we can get started!

 

[Tiberius]

I meant to say logic instead of logical absolutes**

Then prove that logic cannot exist without God.

 

[Tiberius]

You cannot be separate from the universe, even though you have 'differences'. Those differences are only superficial. There is a common energy that runs through everything, with variation. At root, everything is of the same essence. To talk about the universe as if it were an object apart from you is an illusion of the mind. It would be like a wave thinking itself separate somehow from the sea from which it both emerges and to which it must return. Any difference from the sea is only temporal and superficial. In reality, it is the sea itself. Both are made of water.

"You are not just the drop in the ocean, you are the mighty ocean in the drop"
Rumi

Unless you are talking about string theory or something similar, I fear what you are saying is just psychobabble.

 

[godnotgod]

Unless you are talking about string theory or something similar, I fear what you are saying is just psychobabble.

Not sure what it is you are taking issue with. Please be more specific, and why. Thanks. creative psychobabbler

 

[garrydons]

I am simply going to use this thread as a means to discuss the existence of God with anyone. I am constantly discussing this with people, and feel I should have a main thread to post on.

If anyone wishes to argue that god (or whatever deity you believe in) is true, I have questions ready. Thank you.

Okay I believe in a Creator of Heaven and earth and all the things therein. May I know your question?

 

[Daviso452]

Okay I believe in a Creator of Heaven and earth and all the things therein. May I know your question?

Why do you believe our existence is a creation? Do you deny the possibility supported by physicists, such as Stephan Hawking, that the universe was once in a timeless singularity with zero volume and infinite density? And that this singularity blew up, giving birth to time and space and thus the universe itself?

Well, some have used the terminology of "creation" to describe this event, such as "the big bang created time." However I believe we understand the distinct difference between a sentient creator and a singularity.

 

[Tiberius]

Not sure what it is you are taking issue with. Please be more specific, and why. Thanks. creative psychobabbler

Seems to me that you are suggesting that the vast number of statements that can be made about me can also be made about the universe, and vice versa. I disagree.

 

[godnotgod]

Seems to me that you are suggesting that the vast number of statements that can be made about me can also be made about the universe, and vice versa. I disagree.

Since you are 100% ncorporated into the universe, anything that can be said about you is also being said about it. The idea that some of your characteristics are not part of the universe is merely an illusion. There is nothing that you can do, or say, or be, that is never not part of the universe, since it is a uni-verse.

 

[Daviso452]

I think there's a break here somewhere. Seem's like we're talking about the same thing.