Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
October 18, 2017, 05:47:22 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: In response to 10 pints: Can a rational argument be made for a Creator?  (Read 13551 times)
OB1
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3223


"Happiness equals reality minus expectations."


WWW
« Reply #25 on: February 19, 2016, 07:27:00 AM »

Why is it hard to believe that something outside of space and time always existed.

Doesn't it need space and time for something to exist?
Or at least space?
Report to moderator   Logged

pellius
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 14355

RIP Keith Jones aka OnlyMe/NoWorries. 1/10/2011


« Reply #26 on: February 19, 2016, 07:31:34 AM »

What "time"? There's no such thing as time, only constant change/"happening", movement of electrons, quarks and whtever the hell else there is. If there's no time - speaking about the "begining" is futile. More likely it was just a phase of an infinite cycle, no clear boundaries, just a non ending transition of energy, a gigantic fluctuation/vibration, whole universe is one big vibration (they call it "string theory").
 If notion that we are the universe doesn't sound rational, than I don't what what does. Our physical bodies make us think that we are "separate", but it's the same matter, a material of space that's interwoven and one as a whole, so yeah... we are the universle itself, it's universe "thinking" about itself,  we are trying to calculate vibrations by using the same vibrations, it's a zero zum game, a finite calculation and if/when we get there - there won't be anything more to calculate. Universe is PROBABLY a lot more simple than we would like it to be and that is saddening for many people, because them they doesn't find a reason to suffer, they doesn't see a point to fight another day for their life... Believeing in god is better, it gives a hope, a meaning for this intelligent ape we call homo sapiens. At our core we are still just a collection of atoms, working based on core physical principles, a collection of single replicators called "genes" (which are pretty primitive one by one) working in company to help each other to survive (so creating a body).

As in our last discussion, you ignore a simple straight forward question.

"There is no such thing as time."

OK, you can believe that. But science says otherwise. My purpose of this thread is to show an argument can be made using science and reason to argue for the existence of a Creator.

If you are going to appeal to arguments outside of science and reason then that is best left to another thread.

Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 19096


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #27 on: February 19, 2016, 07:36:59 AM »

Why is it hard to believe that something outside of space and time always existed.

Easier to suppress the truth than follow it....for many life is less fun with God's rules.....can't watch porn, can't use rec drugs, can't abuse alcohol, etc...pick your poison. 

Of course all this disguised with "we have no evidence or proof" so better to pretend God isn't there and call him a foolish waste yet argue about him everyday all day.  

People invent other excuses to suppress accountability, but that's the core and everything I said will be challenged, mocked or ignored.
Report to moderator   Logged

SuperTed
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 5684


Rebirth


« Reply #28 on: February 19, 2016, 07:40:21 AM »

Why is it hard to believe that something outside of space and time always existed.

The thought of something that has no beginning and no end, is something that is impossible to comprehend. Even putting God into the equation doesn't really solve the problem because it just leads to the following question - "What came before God?"
Report to moderator   Logged
pellius
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 14355

RIP Keith Jones aka OnlyMe/NoWorries. 1/10/2011


« Reply #29 on: February 19, 2016, 07:40:53 AM »

The Aquinas argument is simply a variation of the Aristotelian argument for an ultimate cause.  You should check out the book "The five ways" by Anthony Kelly for a refutation. On that note- there is a reason modern biology is not Aristotelian.

The Big Bang argument is not valid either- the universe/multiverse could be an endless loop of big bangs- expansions and contractions to new big bangs, thus it could have no start or end- only cycles.

Finally, if nothing starts without a cause, why is there an exception for the "Big Banger"? This makes no sense and for me it invalidates the whole argument.

NN



You can believe that but, again, my purpose was to prove that an argument based of science and reason can be made for the existence of God. Modern day science is overwhelming in agreement that the universe had a beginning -- a Big Bang.

You can dispute modern science but for the purposes of this thread I will not. Disproving modern day science is best left for another thread but is perhaps beyond the scope of this board. I'm not sure how many professional cosmologist and astrophysicist we have on this board.

And again, I can't prove anything. You might be right. But your reasoning is not based on modern day, near universal acceptance, of modern day science. I want to keep arguments confined to modern day science.
Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 19096


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #30 on: February 19, 2016, 07:46:06 AM »

The thought of something that has no beginning and no end, is something that is impossible to comprehend. Even putting God into the equation doesn't really solve the problem because it just leads to the following question - "What came before God?"

Essentially everything that begins has a cause, but God transcends time and space (even if we don't fully comprehend the boundaries of either).  If we subject God to the boundaries he transcends then we imply something greater before him that existed and that becomes "God".  It's an infinite regression that doesn't work.  God has always existed from everlasting to everlasting.  We're created beings bound by time and have only existed within a state of time.  God stands outside time, initiated time and can comprehend all facets of time (past, present and future) at once.  God is essentially causeless and therefore has no beginning...he's timeless.  We can't comprehend that idea, but our ignorance doesn't make it untrue.  We can't comprehend the divinity of God anymore than an ant can comprehend our humanity.
Report to moderator   Logged

sync pulse
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4055



« Reply #31 on: February 19, 2016, 07:57:54 AM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5mWQFGF7w8" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5mWQFGF7w8</a>


A Catholic seminarian told me this joke once.
Report to moderator   Logged
pellius
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 14355

RIP Keith Jones aka OnlyMe/NoWorries. 1/10/2011


« Reply #32 on: February 19, 2016, 07:58:52 AM »

The Aquinas argument is simply a variation of the Aristotelian argument for an ultimate cause.  You should check out the book "The five ways" by Anthony Kelly for a refutation. On that note- there is a reason modern biology is not Aristotelian.

The Big Bang argument is not valid either- the universe/multiverse could be an endless loop of big bangs- expansions and contractions to new big bangs, thus it could have no start or end- only cycles.

Finally, if nothing starts without a cause, why is there an exception for the "Big Banger"? This makes no sense and for me it invalidates the whole argument.

NN



I forgot to address this last statement. The most important one in your post.

The premise is that the Creator is the Big Banger. The Creator always existed outside of space and time. That the casual chain has to eventually end and come to a First Cause.

Now you can reject that and you can reject Einstein's theory of General Relativity but then you would have reject science. Remember, science shows that the universe and time had a beginning. And if you reject that then there would have had to be an infinite number or previous Big Bangs and then one would have to ask why is this anymore rational than the proven General Theory of Relativity.

Again, I can't prove anything. I can only present arguments and leave to you to determine what is more likely and unless you can argue otherwise you should be honest enough to admit that you are now arguing outside the realm of science which was the purpose of this thread.
Report to moderator   Logged
NordicNerd
Getbig III
***
Posts: 900



« Reply #33 on: February 19, 2016, 08:00:21 AM »

You can believe that but, again, my purpose was to prove that an argument based of science and reason can be made for the existence of God. Modern day science is overwhelming in agreement that the universe had a beginning -- a Big Bang.

You can dispute modern science but for the purposes of this thread I will not. Disproving modern day science is best left for another thread but is perhaps beyond the scope of this board. I'm not sure how many professional cosmologist and astrophysicist we have on this board.

And again, I can't prove anything. You might be right. But your reasoning is not based on modern day, near universal acceptance, of modern day science. I want to keep arguments confined to modern day science.

I did not try to refute Big Bang, but tried simply to state that we know nothing about what was, if anything, before Big Bang or if there even was a "before" the Big Bang. It may not make any sense.

At present, we do not know whether the universe will expand forever or if it eventually will contract and implode. You can see where the "cycling universe" hypothesis comes from if the universe in fact will implode some time in the future(?)

NN
Report to moderator   Logged
SuperTed
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 5684


Rebirth


« Reply #34 on: February 19, 2016, 08:02:15 AM »

Essentially everything that begins has a cause, but God transcends time and space (even if we don't fully comprehend the boundaries of either).  If we subject God to the boundaries he transcends then we imply something greater before him that existed and that becomes "God".  It's an infinite regression that doesn't work.  God has always existed from everlasting to everlasting.  We're created beings bound by time and have only existed within a state of time.  God stands outside time, initiated time and can comprehend all facets of time (past, present and future) at once.  God is essentially causeless and therefore has no beginning...he's timeless.  We can't comprehend that idea, but our ignorance doesn't make it untrue.  We can't comprehend the divinity of God anymore than an ant can comprehend our humanity.

I agree that human ignorance makes us unable to comprehend the scale and infinity of the universe/God. It just appears to be something too vast to fully understand (at least now).
We are only familiar with things that have a beginning and an end and cannot comprehend something that transcends that.

I'm not religious/spiritual but I do think of Revelation 22:13 when I ponder the origins of the universe, partly because it sounds pretty cool. Cheesy
Report to moderator   Logged
pellius
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 14355

RIP Keith Jones aka OnlyMe/NoWorries. 1/10/2011


« Reply #35 on: February 19, 2016, 08:03:56 AM »

Doesn't it need space and time for something to exist?
Or at least space?


The belief is that the Creator is not compose of matter. The Creator is outside of space and time. A very difficult concept to conceive.

Remember, as that funny book "Flatline" pointed out. We can perceive our dimension and the dimensions below us, but not the ones above us. Science has show that there exist a dimension at least one above us.
Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 19096


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #36 on: February 19, 2016, 08:04:14 AM »

I agree that human ignorance makes us unable to comprehend the scale and infinity of the universe/God. It just appears to be something too vast to fully understand (at least now).
We are only familiar with things that have a beginning and an end and cannot comprehend something that transcends that.

I'm not religious/spiritual but I do think of Revelation 22:13 when I ponder the origins of the universe, partly because it sounds pretty cool. Cheesy

That's the essence of God!  

I appreciate how you dialogue in these threads.
Report to moderator   Logged

OB1
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3223


"Happiness equals reality minus expectations."


WWW
« Reply #37 on: February 19, 2016, 08:04:24 AM »

I did not try to refute Big Bang, but tried simply to state that we know nothing about what was, if anything, before Big Bang or if there even was a "before" the Big Bang. It may not make any sense.

At present, we do not know whether the universe will expand forever or if it eventually will contract and implode. You can see where the "cycling universe" hypothesis comes for if the universe in fact will implode some time in the future(?)

NN

Agreed.
We really know nothing.

All is just believing in one theory or another.
Only is it sad people need to kill other people for their belief in different theories.
It's absurd.

Report to moderator   Logged

NordicNerd
Getbig III
***
Posts: 900



« Reply #38 on: February 19, 2016, 08:06:48 AM »

I forgot to address this last statement. The most important one in your post.

The premise is that the Creator is the Big Banger. The Creator always existed outside of space and time. That the casual chain has to eventually end and come to a First Cause....

Again, I can't prove anything. I can only present arguments and leave to you to determine what is more likely and unless you can argue otherwise you should be honest enough to admit that you are now arguing outside the realm of science which was the purpose of this thread.

Your position is self-referentially inconsistent. You have no evidence of any "Creator" outside of space and time whatsoever, yet you are perfectly willing to postulate the existence of this hypothetical entity as the creator of the universe. That is not science- it metaphysical speculation, which is fair enough, but please do not try to take the high ground regarding science.

NN



Report to moderator   Logged
dr.chimps
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 28314


Chimpus ergo sum


« Reply #39 on: February 19, 2016, 08:10:02 AM »

'I can't, nor can anyone else, prove the existence of God, but I can present some rational arguments, some based on science, that the belief in God is not based on just blind faith and emotion.'


Nice. Laugh of the day.  Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
sync pulse
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4055



« Reply #40 on: February 19, 2016, 08:11:05 AM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw7AYJikDJE" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw7AYJikDJE</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
pellius
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 14355

RIP Keith Jones aka OnlyMe/NoWorries. 1/10/2011


« Reply #41 on: February 19, 2016, 08:11:32 AM »

The thought of something that has no beginning and no end, is something that is impossible to comprehend. Even putting God into the equation doesn't really solve the problem because it just leads to the following question - "What came before God?"

I don't have any difficulty comprehending the concept of eternity and infinity. I majored in Math/Applied science and the thought that numbers go forward and backwards forever wasn't a concept I struggled with.
 
I remember when my niece, who was six at time, once told me that it doesn't make sense that numbers go on forever. That everything has to come to an end. I just told her to think of the biggest number she can possibly conceive and then just add one to it.

She had an "Aha!" moment.

Report to moderator   Logged
SquidVicious
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2801



« Reply #42 on: February 19, 2016, 08:19:46 AM »

I happen to agree with the OP. To believe that the creation of matter or the existence of atoms can come from nothing is foolhardy. To believe that this glorious planet of ours is the result of two lifeless meteors striking each other is absurd. To think that a single explosion gave us flowers, insects, fish, zebras, gorillas, and smoking hot chicks with warm and cozy vaginas and that we all evolved from a tadpole is more unbelievable than anything the bible can come up with. God is smart and sneaky. He knew that our scientific efforts to disprove Him would coincide with our ability to destroy ourselves en masse.

If this were a movie, the moment the astrophysicist created life from two inanimate objects would be the moment that a nuclear holocaust begins.
Report to moderator   Logged
pellius
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 14355

RIP Keith Jones aka OnlyMe/NoWorries. 1/10/2011


« Reply #43 on: February 19, 2016, 08:20:29 AM »

I did not try to refute Big Bang, but tried simply to state that we know nothing about what was, if anything, before Big Bang or if there even was a "before" the Big Bang. It may not make any sense.

At present, we do not know whether the universe will expand forever or if it eventually will contract and implode. You can see where the "cycling universe" hypothesis comes from if the universe in fact will implode some time in the future(?)

NN

Science has determined that the universe is 13.7 years old. Einstein tells us that all time is relative to matter. So no matter, no time. So because science has shown that the universe had a beginning there is nothing before the Big Bang if you are going to base your arguments on modern day science which is the purpose of this thread.

It's like asking where you were before you were born.

And I don't see the cycling that you speak of. It will implode and end or it will expand until all the stars have fizzled/exploded out of existence and then, I don't know, empty dead space. Either way the universe ends.
Report to moderator   Logged
OB1
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3223


"Happiness equals reality minus expectations."


WWW
« Reply #44 on: February 19, 2016, 08:21:52 AM »

The belief is that the Creator is not compose of matter. The Creator is outside of space and time. A very difficult concept to conceive.

Remember, as that funny book "Flatline" pointed out. We can perceive our dimension and the dimensions below us, but not the ones above us. Science has show that there exist a dimension at least one above us.

I know there are different dimensions.
Still they need to exist in some kind of space.
Also there is some kind of time present. But it might be different.

Higher dimensions can be seen as matter only less dense.
Just like water.
Down below you got the frozen dense water, ice.
When you go higher things will be less dense.
Regarding water increase the temperature (vibration of molecules) and you will get liquid eventually.
Then steam eventually. (vibration frequency is even higher)
Going hand in hand with the expansion of said "water".
->Higher dimensions are basically still matter only less dense and higher in vibrational frequency.

So...
Everything existing in those (higher) dimensions will not exist eternally.
Since every appearance came into existence at one point in "time" and must therefore vanish later on.

Blabla wall of text...

Nothing will/can exist "outside" those dimensions.
There is no time, no space.

For god to exist "inside" those dimensions...
He/she/it will not be eternal and require additionial creators beforehand.

For god to exist "outside" those dimensions...
He/she/it will be basically "nothing".

 
Report to moderator   Logged

pellius
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 14355

RIP Keith Jones aka OnlyMe/NoWorries. 1/10/2011


« Reply #45 on: February 19, 2016, 08:22:57 AM »

I happen to agree with the OP. To believe that the creation of matter or the existence of atoms can come from nothing is foolhardy. To believe that this glorious planet of ours is the result of two lifeless meteors striking each other is absurd. To think that a single explosion gave us flowers, insects, fish, zebras, gorillas, and smoking hot chicks with warm and cozy vaginas and that we all evolved from a tadpole is more unbelievable than anything the bible can come up with. God is smart and sneaky. He knew that our scientific efforts to disprove Him would coincide with our ability to destroy ourselves en masse.

If this were a movie, the moment the astrophysicist created life from two inanimate objects would be the moment that a nuclear holocaust begins.

You have just given me an idea but it involves math and statistics. And that requires books. Not sure if I'm up to it.
Report to moderator   Logged
pellius
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 14355

RIP Keith Jones aka OnlyMe/NoWorries. 1/10/2011


« Reply #46 on: February 19, 2016, 08:29:45 AM »

Your position is self-referentially inconsistent. You have no evidence of any "Creator" outside of space and time whatsoever, yet you are perfectly willing to postulate the existence of this hypothetical entity as the creator of the universe. That is not science- it metaphysical speculation, which is fair enough, but please do not try to take the high ground regarding science.

NN


Can you please give an example of my self-referential inconsistent position? 

Again, I never claim to be able to prove anything and specifically stated that I will present arguments, not evidence, based on modern day science.

Now if you believe it is not science then can you point out a specific argument I made that you believe is based not on science and reasoning but on metaphysical speculation.
Report to moderator   Logged
pellius
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 14355

RIP Keith Jones aka OnlyMe/NoWorries. 1/10/2011


« Reply #47 on: February 19, 2016, 08:33:40 AM »

'I can't, nor can anyone else, prove the existence of God, but I can present some rational arguments, some based on science, that the belief in God is not based on just blind faith and emotion.'


Nice. Laugh of the day.  Grin

But, as usual, as you always do, you present not a single argument to support your claim. Point out one single argument I made that you feel is invalid and not supported by modern day science.

I won't hold my breath. You just throw a stone and retreat.

 
Report to moderator   Logged
pellius
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 14355

RIP Keith Jones aka OnlyMe/NoWorries. 1/10/2011


« Reply #48 on: February 19, 2016, 08:36:27 AM »

I know there are different dimensions.
Still they need to exist in some kind of space.
Also there is some kind of time present. But it might be different.

Higher dimensions can be seen as matter only less dense.
Just like water.
Down below you got the frozen dense water, ice.
When you go higher things will be less dense.
Regarding water increase the temperature (vibration of molecules) and you will get liquid eventually.
Then steam eventually. (vibration frequency is even higher)
Going hand in hand with the expansion of said "water".
->Higher dimensions are basically still matter only less dense and higher in vibrational frequency.

So...
Everything existing in those (higher) dimensions will not exist eternally.
Since every appearance came into existence at one point in "time" and must therefore vanish later on.

Blabla wall of text...

Nothing will/can exist "outside" those dimensions.
There is no time, no space.

For god to exist "inside" those dimensions...
He/she/it will not be eternal and require additionial creators beforehand.

For god to exist "outside" those dimensions...
He/she/it will be basically "nothing".

 

Thank you for your participation in this thread.

BTW, ice floats.
Report to moderator   Logged
dr.chimps
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 28314


Chimpus ergo sum


« Reply #49 on: February 19, 2016, 08:40:20 AM »

But, as usual, as you always do, you present not a single argument to support your claim. Point out one single argument I made that you feel is invalid and not supported by modern day science.

I won't hold my breath. You just throw a stone and retreat.

 
'Present some rational arguments, some based on science, that the belief in God is not based on just blind faith and emotion.'

Please do, tough guy.  
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!