• 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!

Who Created the Universe? God or Mathematics?

Skwim

Veteran Member
.

CHEERFULLY ASSUME.png

.
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
Now Jumi, quit yer quibblin'. You know better than that. I could just as easily have said "Who or What Created the Universe?", but I thought "who" was sufficient for people to get my meaning, and therefore "what" was unnecessary. Is it really necessary to explain this?
Not necessary, but I think if it's not a person, talking about creating is misleading. I personally think the universe, math and god have existed for an infinite amount of time.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
For the purposes of this thread, please cheerfully assume that there exists an ultimate layer of reality, "above" space and time, which is the first or primal cause of the universe.

Further assume that layer must either be god or mathematics, but cannot be both.

If so, are there any rational or reasonable grounds whereby we can determine that first cause is god, as opposed to the possibility it is mathematics --- or mathematics, as opposed to the possibility it is god?

I expect your answers to be on my desk by 5:00 PM Friday.




________________________
Please Note: Apart from defining "god" as sentient, and "mathematics" as non-sentient, it's up to you to define those terms in this thread. If necessary, please make clear either in context or by explicit definition how you are using those terms.
There must be sentience to create. If mathematics is the source of the universe, then it is NOT the ultimate source, for there would have to be a source for math. God BY DEFINITION is the uncreated creator, the unmoved mover, the first cause. This makes sense because he exists outside of space and time -- he is the creator of space and time and all of its rules, just as he is the creator of math.
 

robocop (actually)

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
For the purposes of this thread, please cheerfully assume that there exists an ultimate layer of reality, "above" space and time, which is the first or primal cause of the universe.

Further assume that layer must either be god or mathematics, but cannot be both.

If so, are there any rational or reasonable grounds whereby we can determine that first cause is god, as opposed to the possibility it is mathematics --- or mathematics, as opposed to the possibility it is god?

I expect your answers to be on my desk by 5:00 PM Friday.




________________________
Please Note: Apart from defining "god" as sentient, and "mathematics" as non-sentient, it's up to you to define those terms in this thread. If necessary, please make clear either in context or by explicit definition how you are using those terms.
Math can describe the Universe, and wherein it results in a love-filled Universe, it becomes apparent that it is a God.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
e terms.[/QUOTE]

I have to go with math created God, who is a force creating in the universe. Logic implies reason, and thus humans are a natural result of logic. The universe is otherwise aimless baggage. Highly deterministic, and beyond ultimate prediction. The universe is a creator, eternal, and everflowing change. Infinitesmals come together to form new infinitesmals.
Mathematics. I don't see a reason to assume god would be in the question regardless how important this existence is to people. Why would it be a part of the questions, really.

But, god is more personal than mathematics. I'd like the word science better into choose words.
Science created the universe, really ?
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Sorry, waiting for proof that an uncaused cause is a thing.
Until then, I'm willing to assume the universe has always existed in some form or another.
That is a poor assumption, based upon cosmological discoveries. The universe began, it is rapidly expanding and separating , never to reconstitute itself, ultimately all itś energy from itś first cause will burn out and be gone
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure



Science created the universe, really ?[/QUOTE]

The universe had no ultimate beginning. The universe creates all that is. And what a haphazard savage, violent universe it is.
Its a universe of mystery, and brute indifference. Math describes its workings.
Cold logic is how it operates. Intelligence emerges from infinite possibility and potential. The word God may describe the mental aspect of the universe. But i see no perfection in what the universe makes.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Yes.

Science isnt a god.

If its god, explain how and where we can see god outside of our religious affiliations, biases, and beliefs.
I asked first. Please tell me how science created the universe.[/QUOTE]

Im finding it hard to understand the point of your question. Unless you are ignorant of science in relation to creation of planets and starts etc, Im not following you.

I cant think of another word but evolution. The forming of planets, stars, and so forth to create galazies within one universe. However its done, Im not an expert. But we can observe things like the role of matter, conceiving a child, curing ilnesses, physics, chemistry. Nothing was created out of thin air.... everything is in transformation, forms, rebuilds, dies, and is born into life again.

Creation isnt a good word to describe how the universe came to be..

but instead of focusing on something we both probably dont know beyond basics, exactly how does god create the universe? I mean, I can see how a mother and father create a baby. Im sure we know a good detail of how to create medicines to cure and treat illnesses. But these things didnt pop from thin air. Our computers didnt nor did our cars.

So.... how did god, as a deity, create the universe?
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Without evidence of god one can only "assume" god magic as a cause

Maths is a method of describing something, in this case the universe, not the cause.

Who? Not likely... What more likely

There are many hypothesis of what created the universe, all have the benefit of being mathematically feasible or having some artifact or artifacts observed in this universe (or both). None of them rely on god magic.

So I'll opt for neither maths or god
Please, share these many hypotheses about what created the universe. Since the solid state universe ( always existing) was the standard scientific model of the universe, creation of it was rarely spoken of till the 1920´ś. Then, based on the work of Hubble and others, and the resultant big bang theory, creation of the universe became the new norm. There are a few other ideas, that have absolutely no evidence.

The big bang is both mathematically sound and has strong observable evidence to support it.

Yet, it never really addresses the big gorilla in the theory, that first cause. It postulates a singularity, a point of infinite density, that ¨exploded¨ into pure energy. This, of course, begs the question ¨where did the singularity come from ?¨

Actually, the singularity is an assumption, a necessity of the scientific method.

Mathematically describing the big bang, in retrograde, doesn´t get to the singularity, since all laws of physics break down before it is reached.

So, you tell me, what caused it, the first cause ?
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Science created the universe, really ?

The universe had no ultimate beginning. The universe creates all that is. And what a haphazard savage, violent universe it is.
Its a universe of mystery, and brute indifference. Math describes its workings.
Cold logic is how it operates. Intelligence emerges from infinite possibility and potential. The word God may describe the mental aspect of the universe. But i see no perfection in what the universe makes.[/QUOTE]
Are you familiar with the big bang theory ? That certainly postulates an ultimate beginning, sorta like the book of Genesis.

Logic is a human construct for verifying the truth of ideas. I am not sure that ascribing it to the universe is warranted.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
I asked first. Please tell me how science created the universe.

Im finding it hard to understand the point of your question. Unless you are ignorant of science in relation to creation of planets and starts etc, Im not following you.

I cant think of another word but evolution. The forming of planets, stars, and so forth to create galazies within one universe. However its done, Im not an expert. But we can observe things like the role of matter, conceiving a child, curing ilnesses, physics, chemistry. Nothing was created out of thin air.... everything is in transformation, forms, rebuilds, dies, and is born into life again.

Creation isnt a good word to describe how the universe came to be..

but instead of focusing on something we both probably dont know beyond basics, exactly how does god create the universe? I mean, I can see how a mother and father create a baby. Im sure we know a good detail of how to create medicines to cure and treat illnesses. But these things didnt pop from thin air. Our computers didnt nor did our cars.

So.... how did god, as a deity, create the universe?[/QUOTE]
I haven´t a clue, He is God, I am not. No, I am not ignorant of the creative forces in the universe, we are speaking of the creation of the universe.

The big bang theory is currently held as describing how the universe was created. In many ways it is like the Genesis account of the Bible, it works for me.

The real bottom line is this, scoffers may scoff all they want about God creating the universe, however, they haven´t a clue as to what the first cause of the big bang was. At least we have a name, they have nothing.

We have faith it was God, as it was described for 1000ś of years. Science, until itś own methods proved it wrong in the 20th century, believed it had alway existed, and always would, the steady state theory.

No one in this life can prove what the ultimate first cause was, science says it hasn´t a clue, so why is one position considered so superior to another ?
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
The universe had no ultimate beginning. The universe creates all that is. And what a haphazard savage, violent universe it is.
Its a universe of mystery, and brute indifference. Math describes its workings.
Cold logic is how it operates. Intelligence emerges from infinite possibility and potential. The word God may describe the mental aspect of the universe. But i see no perfection in what the universe makes.
Are you familiar with the big bang theory ? That certainly postulates an ultimate beginning, sorta like the book of Genesis.

Logic is a human construct for verifying the truth of ideas. I am not sure that ascribing it to the universe is warranted.[/QUOTE]


Before t1 of the first second of the big bang no one knows what happened. Our particular region of existence had a beginning from a singularity.

There is no reason to assume that our universe is not eternal. The BVG theorem says that inflation had a beginning, but what came before the big bang is a big unknown.

Its just as reasonable to think that existence itself is eternal and infinitesmal. Space is currently accelerating and galaxies are traveling further and further apart. Scientists see no end to the inflation process.

Its perfectly reasonable that we live in an infinity of infinite infinities. But what if everything had an absolute beginning? What would that mean in a poorly designed universe?
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
I haven´t a clue, He is God, I am not. No, I am not ignorant of the creative forces in the universe, we are speaking of the creation of the universe.

I respect your belief; but, when you express it as fact in comparision to science, we will challenge you on what you do know not what you dont.

Creative forces?? Im not aware of a creative force outside of "creation". How do you know the nature and factual presence of this source apart from science? (Science: psychology, psyiology, biology, chemistry, phystics, material studies of the outside world and human experience to their environment and self)

Is it a force? A deity? What is it?

The big bang theory is currently held as describing how the universe was created. In many ways it is like the Genesis account of the Bible, it works for me.

Shrugs. I dont believe the bible at all; and, I dont know enough about the big bang theory (not interested in that type of science) to challange whether it happened or not. Best I can do is live with what I was born with and develop my spirit in self growth etc.

But, Im serious. Why do you question us about the validity of science creating the universe but when we ask you about god, you "dont know"?

There are a lot of non-ignorant people on RF who knows science but how can you question them when we ask you similar questions that you cant support? One sided debate.

We have faith it was God, as it was described for 1000ś of years. Science, until itś own methods proved it wrong in the 20th century, believed it had alway existed, and always would, the steady state theory.

The nature of the universe has been around and is the universe way before jesus set foot on the earth. In other words, the earth and sun existed before christ.

1000 years isnt that far away compared to over a billion before humans even came into being. Christianity is pretty modern compared to other beliefs like paganism.

No one in this life can prove what the ultimate first cause was, science says it hasn´t a clue, so why is one position considered so superior to another ?

There was no first cause. But some people want to believe in a first cause because it gives them purpose and origin. Nothing wrong with that.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Not to make the assumptions politely requested in the OP is to effectively change the topic of the thread.
But "cheerfully" is critical? Really?

Would it not be more polite to start your own thread, rather than to try to hijack this one?
Let's see: Within the space of 27 posts I asked an innocuous question whose only value lies in its humor, and Curious George commented on it. And, although these two posts only amount to 7% of the 27, you feel this threatens your thread with hijacking. Gotta say, this almost borders on paranoia, Sunstone. And considering the obvious, wouldn't it have been prudent to have remained silent about it all instead of inviting an off-topic reply such as mine here, which only extends your feared hijacking? Just askin'. :shrug:

.


.
 
Top