Why Creation by an Omnipotent, Omniscient Deity Is Even More Improbable than Pure Chance

[Hockeycowboy]

Not really. Conservation of energy is a consequence of Noether's theorem and is true so long as the laws of physics do not change with time - which is what we empirically observe today and in the past in the observable universe. But if it was not always so, back in time beyond the reach of our observations, then all bets are off.

That "God" is the "source" of all energy is a mere assertion, unsupported by evidence: a purely religious statement.

“If”….that takes us nowhere. Fortunately, the laws of physics aren’t “iffy”. They maintain a constant.

And in fact, it’s those very constants, their uniformity and reliability, that does provide a reasonable basis for saying there is one Creator of the design and finely-tuned parameters we observe. Denying this integrated complexity, and the around 50 ideal tight constraints imposed on them, is imo just reflecting a bias, a hope, which is “unsupported by the evidence”.

Have a great day.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So... you are fine with a universe creating itself before it existed, and for utterly no reason whatsoever?

No known reason. There may be a reason, there may not have been. Ask yourself:

How did your God create itself?

 

[Subduction Zone]

“If”….that takes us nowhere. Fortunately, the laws of physics aren’t “iffy”. They maintain a constant.

And in fact, it’s those very constants, their uniformity and reliability, that does provide a reasonable basis for saying there is one Creator of the design and finely-tuned parameters we observe. Denying this integrated complexity, and the around 50 ideal tight constraints imposed on them, is imo just reflecting a bias, a hope, which is “unsupported by the evidence”.

Have a great day.

Sorry, that is no evidence for a creator. We do not even know if a creator is needed. Do you want evidence for your supposed creator?

Then here is a question that you need to answer: What reasonable test could refute your creator's existence?

 

[Heyo]

No, not me… I believe in a personal God, one who created man “in His image”. (Genesis 1:27) He just has control over all energy. At His discretion.

That is in contradiction with

So God as energy has always existed, being the source of all energy.

So, is god energy or does god control energy?

 

[exchemist]

“If”….that takes us nowhere. Fortunately, the laws of physics aren’t “iffy”. They maintain a constant.

And in fact, it’s those very constants, their uniformity and reliability, that does provide a reasonable basis for saying there is one Creator of the design and finely-tuned parameters we observe. Denying this integrated complexity, and the around 50 ideal tight constraints imposed on them, is imo just reflecting a bias, a hope, which is “unsupported by the evidence”.

Have a great day.

You can't say that. We don't know. The strongest claim we can make is to invoke Ockham's Razor and say that we might as well assume the constancy of the laws of physics until we have evidence to the contrary.

The rest of your post is just the usual, highly unpersuasive, fine-tuning argument, which has been demolished elsewhere, (and famously by Douglas Adams).

 

[Hockeycowboy]

You missed an important factor, "in a closed system"

And just what is the universe, ie., everything? A closed system.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And just what is the universe, ie., everything?

Yes. And the entropy of the universe as a whole is constantly increasing.

Did you not see that it is the universe as a whole that one would need to consider. A piddling decrease in one area does not man that it is not increasing elsewhere.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Sorry, that is no evidence for a creator. We do not even know if a creator is needed. Do you want evidence for your supposed creator?

Then here is a question that you need to answer: What reasonable test could refute your creator's existence?

If a claim can’t be falsified, does that make it wrong. Nope.

Really, facts are something that can’t be refuted. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be facts.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

That is in contradiction with

So, is god energy or does god control energy?

There’s no need for it to be one or the other.
Is there?
No contradiction.

 

[ChristineM]

And just what is the universe, ie., everything?

Is it? Do you have proof of that statement?

First it is arguable whether the universe is open or closed.
Second there are several multiverse hypothesis
Third we are taking of the creation of the universe.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Is it? Do you have proof of that statement?

First it is arguable whether the universe is open or closed.
Second there are several multiverse hypothesis
Third we are taking of the creation of the universe.

What part of “everything“ is so difficult to understand?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Exactly, and also that the deity's existence compounds this improbability because then we would shift the "where did it come from?" question just one step back and ask it about the deity instead of the universe—and an omnimax deity would be far more complex than this universe.

I am familiar with that argument, and that if we are to say that God needn't an origin then why must the universe? I'm always iffy about responding to this type of question, because my ontological views are pretty similar to that of an atheist's.

One thing I can say, though, is that the probability of the universe coincidentally unfolding the way that it did seems unlikely to me. Trillions of vessels experiencing the universe, all of whom are the universe incarnate, and that is just one planet. The universe can be said to be conscious through these vessels, it seems there is a reason for the universe to have formed the way that it did. But I have to admit that it isn't that strong of an argument.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If a claim can’t be falsified, does that make it wrong. Nope.

Really, facts are something that can’t be refuted. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be facts.

You claimed to have "proof". You do not even have evidence.

 

[ChristineM]

What part of “everything“ is so difficult to understand?

No proof then, thanks for be so open about it


What part of it is not know do you find so difficult to understand.

 

[Alien826]

If by ' super race ' one means the ' human race ' then "yes" more important then animal life.

Bear in mind I'm talking about how humans feel about themselves, not how some god feels about them. My point is that humans see themselves as more important that anything else in the universe. We see our own attributes as superior to those of the rest of the animal world because they are ours. Understandable maybe, but not necessarily true.

More important because God offered the 'human race' the opportunity to live forever.
Although Adam blew it, so to speak, we are innocent of what Adam did, so to undo the damage Satan and Adam caused is why God sent pre-human Jesus to Earth for us in order to balance the Scales of Justice for right-hearted people to inherit the Earth as Jesus promised about the humble meek at Matthew 5:5 from Psalms 37:9-11,29

Yah, all that only makes sense to a believer. To me it's just flows from our superiority complex. We think we are hot sh*t, so of course god thinks so too.

No offense intended.

 

[Alien826]

Fair enough, I can see why you would interpret my post to have meant that, but no that’s not what I meant.

I shouldn't try to read your mind, certainly. This is an issue that I'm am sensitive to, so just ignore me.

 

[Heyo]

There’s no need for it to be one or the other.
Is there?
No contradiction.

In conjunction with your other statements it is contradictory. If god is energy, all energy, then the universe is created from gods substance - which would make you a pantheist. But you denied that with the explanation that god only controls the energy - which would make the universe eternal and no creation necessary.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

No proof then, thanks for be so open about it


What part of it is not know do you find so difficult to understand.

So you don’t think “everything “ would be a closed system?
How do you arrive at that conclusion?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

In conjunction with your other statements it is contradictory. If god is energy, all energy, then the universe is created from gods substance - which would make you a pantheist. But you denied that with the explanation that god only controls the energy - which would make the universe eternal and no creation necessary.

Please!
It would only make God eternal….physical matter had a beginning.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you don’t think “everything “ would be a closed system?
How do you arrive at that conclusion?

Actually I have to rethink my earlier claim. The universe may be a "closed system" but it may not be an isolated one. FYI, the "Closed system" has been redefined. A closed system is just one where matter cannot enter nor leave.

And what difference does it make if the universe is a closed or open system?