What are the minimum requirements for a Creator of the universe?

[paarsurrey]

paarsurrey said:
" sometimes. I don't know if I always think "reasonably," but I always try to think rationally "

Did one apply the same reason/rationale of arguments to "Atheism" which one applies to other religions or since others could not stand one's criticism one came to the perception that Atheism is or must be true, right, please?

No, not at all. I examined everything I had ever been told about gods or God, and came to realize that everything, all of it, was so full of holes that it couldn't possibly be true. And if there are no gods, then that leaves atheism (no god) as the default.

So, isn't it an admission on one's part that one's methodology was biased towards "Atheism", right from the start, please, right?

Regards

 

[Heyo]

Unless the intent was to create something else,

Black Holes. The universe is exceptionally good at creating those. And there is a hypothesis that Black Holes are universes.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

This thread speaks, in part, from the perspective of Occam's Razor -- the idea that if you have two competing ideas to explain the same phenomenon, you should prefer the simpler one.

1. Omnipotence: The ability to exert unlimited power and control over all aspects of existence, at the most macro- and microscopic levels, including the creation of the universe itself.
2. Omniscience: Complete knowledge and understanding of everything, including the intricate workings of the universe and all its components.
3. Transcendence: Existing beyond the limitations of time, space, and physical laws, allowing the deity to create the universe from nothing or from a state beyond our comprehension.
4. Immanence: The ability to be present and active within the created universe, sustaining and guiding its development and functioning.
5. Creativity: The capacity to conceive of and bring into being something entirely new, such as the universe, with its vast complexity and diversity.
6. Intentionality: Purposeful action or will directed towards the creation of the universe, implying a desire or plan for its existence.

Question 1: Can any refine this list, or add to it (or perhaps subtract from it)?

Question 2: When looking at your completed list (if you refine, add or subtract), how do you explain the existence of something so immensely complex?

Question 3: Is the notion of the birth of matter/energy from a tiny "singularity," eventually resulting in the elements and properties we know today without guidance, more or less complex than your concept of a Creator deity?

If a lab technician slips on a banana peek while playing with the twister field control knobs, and a universe is accidentally created, there is no guarantee that the lab technician has any of the above properties.

 

[Heyo]

@beenherebeforeagain
It's not my idea, so I can't take credit for the creativity of the concept.

If you like it a bit more scientific, here's Professor O'Dowd explaining it:

 

[paarsurrey]

Black Holes. The universe is exceptionally good at creating those. And there is a hypothesis that Black Holes are universes.

" Black Hole "

How could a "black hole" and or " Big Bang" happen, except if G-d had intended to, please, right?

Regards

 

[YoursTrue]

Black Holes. The universe is exceptionally good at creating those. And there is a hypothesis that Black Holes are universes.

So far as humans know, the planet Earth has green grass and humans on it.

 

[Heyo]

" Black Hole "

How could a "black hole" and or " Big Bang" happen, except if G-d had intended to, please, right?

Regards

Black Holes just happen as a function of the natural laws. No intention or magic necessary.

 

[YoursTrue]

Black Holes just happen as a function of the natural laws. No intention or magic necessary.

Of course that would lead into a discussion of laws. I suppose some would think laws set themselves.?

 

[Pogo]

Of course that would lead into a discussion of laws. I suppose some would think laws set themselves.?

No, physical laws are just consistent observations of reality like when you let go of an object it falls down not up.
Test it, see if you can find a violation, until then we will accept it.;

 

[YoursTrue]

No, physical laws are just consistent observations of reality like when you let go of an object it falls down not up.
Test it, see if you can find a violation, until then we will accept it.;

So then, are you saying that laws do not set themselves? Or that they're just there (like gravity).

 

[Pogo]

So then, are you saying that laws do not set themselves? Or that they're just there (like gravity).

Yup from a scientific standpoint, they are just there with no judgement as to why, that is for philosophers and theologists to contemplate along with their navels.

 

[paarsurrey]

Yup from a scientific standpoint, they are just there with no judgement as to why, that is for philosophers and theologists to contemplate along with their navels.

" to contemplate along with their navels "
Isn't to Contemplate here a privilege ,if not a right , "reserved" for the " science" people only, please?
So, what they say about the navels, please?

Right

 

[Pogo]

" to contemplate along with their navels "
Isn't to Contemplate here a privilege ,if not a right , "reserved" for the " science" people only, please?
So, what they say about the navels, please?

Right

oh yes contemplating one's navel is a time honored intellectual endeavour. Just look at all of the discoveries made by navel gazers.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yup from a scientific standpoint, they are just there with no judgement as to why, that is for philosophers and theologists to contemplate along with their navels.

As I get older and older I am beginning to be rather judgmental of gravity. I can prove that it was much weaker in the past.

 

[Pogo]

As I get older and older I am beginning to be rather judgmental of gravity. I can prove that it was much weaker in the past.

Controversy, teach it, I say it is mass and it is a conspiracy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Controversy, teach it, I say it is mass and it is a conspiracy.

Hmm, could be. I do not believe it but I have heard that the food industry may be involved.