Keeping Faith whilst accepting rational evidence.

Page 3 of 6 [ 88 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

26 Jul 2014, 11:50 am

Humanaut wrote:

The presence or absence of an existent determines whether we are dealing with something or nothing.

But we can't agree on said presence or absence. All we can do is make arguments based on unproven assumptions regarding either presence or absence.

It's also easy to move goalposts in defining what exactly is meant by presence or absence. I prefer leaving things like that as indefinables and approach the rest rationally. An algebraic variable, for instance, isn't really anything in a non-Platonic sense. Doesn't mean we don't use it. If you wanted to, you could deconstruct mathematical language into meaninglessness. You're just not going to win any friends whose lives and work depend on that language. They don't have to waste time pondering the nature of a, b, n, x, or y, etc. every time they need to represent functions. Abstractions are fundamental to their work. If they really are nothing, math is a useless discipline.

Humanaut
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,390
Location: Norway

26 Jul 2014, 12:02 pm

AngelRho wrote:

Humanaut wrote:

The presence or absence of an existent determines whether we are dealing with something or nothing.

But we can't agree on said presence or absence.

Existents are self-evident.

LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

26 Jul 2014, 12:02 pm

TallyMan wrote:

LoveNotHate wrote:

Something created the universe, and that thing is a GOD to us, so what is the problem here ?

GOD might be a complicated form of energy, does science prove that wrong ? No.

It is likely the universe appeared from "nothing" as a simple consequence of mathematics and the concepts of creation and creators are purely a human invention.

'

I thought the 'Big Bang' was the prevailing science theory ? Not of nothing, but rather a massive energy explosion ?

Per Einstein, we are energy in the form of matter? So, we are part of that original thing's energy ?

_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.

AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

26 Jul 2014, 12:03 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:

Something created the universe, and that thing is a GOD to us, so what is the problem here ?

GOD might be a complicated form of energy, does science prove that wrong ? No.

Even if God was more than that, science still doesn't prove it wrong. Supernatural forces and events are beyond the scope of science because science depends on repeatability of events under controlled/experimental conditions and the falsifiability of those forces and events. A personal God who doesn't allow himself to be manipulated is by nature unfalsifiable. All science can do is show what is physically possible and make the determination that an event lies beyond the natural. If it is consistent with what God is known to have done, it is likely God is responsible.

I simply choose not to put all my eggs in the basket of falsifiability.

I try keep science and theology separate. There are plenty Christians out there working in science who don't see the two as conflicting, but rather complementary.

AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

26 Jul 2014, 12:05 pm

Humanaut wrote:

AngelRho wrote:

Humanaut wrote:

The presence or absence of an existent determines whether we are dealing with something or nothing.

But we can't agree on said presence or absence.

Existents are self-evident.

To me, God is self-evident. Do we agree on what it means to be self-evident?

Humanaut
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,390
Location: Norway

26 Jul 2014, 12:06 pm

TallyMan wrote:

It is likely the universe appeared from "nothing" as a simple consequence of mathematics and the concepts of creation and creators are purely a human invention.

Something cannot come from nothing.

TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

26 Jul 2014, 12:08 pm

Humanaut wrote:

TallyMan wrote:

It is likely the universe appeared from "nothing" as a simple consequence of mathematics and the concepts of creation and creators are purely a human invention.

Something cannot come from nothing.

0 = +1 + -1

We now have "something" and "anti-something" from nothing.

_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.

Humanaut
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,390
Location: Norway

26 Jul 2014, 12:08 pm

AngelRho wrote:

Humanaut wrote:

AngelRho wrote:

Humanaut wrote:

The presence or absence of an existent determines whether we are dealing with something or nothing.

But we can't agree on said presence or absence.

Existents are self-evident.

To me, God is self-evident. Do we agree on what it means to be self-evident?

Obviously not.

AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

26 Jul 2014, 12:14 pm

TallyMan wrote:

Humanaut wrote:

TallyMan wrote:

It is likely the universe appeared from "nothing" as a simple consequence of mathematics and the concepts of creation and creators are purely a human invention.

Something cannot come from nothing.

0 = +1 + -1

We now have "something" and "anti-something" from nothing.

Good point.

From what I understand, though, everything that begins to exist has a cause. You could have something and anti-something from nothing, but nothing cannot cause a something/anti-something.

Humanaut
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,390
Location: Norway

26 Jul 2014, 12:15 pm

TallyMan wrote:

Humanaut wrote:

TallyMan wrote:

It is likely the universe appeared from "nothing" as a simple consequence of mathematics and the concepts of creation and creators are purely a human invention.

Something cannot come from nothing.

0 = +1 + -1

We now have "something" and "anti-something" from nothing.

Only something exists in reality. Nothing doesn't exist, and neither does anti-something. Something has always existed. There is no beginning or end.

TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

26 Jul 2014, 12:21 pm

Humanaut wrote:

TallyMan wrote:

Humanaut wrote:

TallyMan wrote:

It is likely the universe appeared from "nothing" as a simple consequence of mathematics and the concepts of creation and creators are purely a human invention.

Something cannot come from nothing.

0 = +1 + -1

We now have "something" and "anti-something" from nothing.

Only something exists in reality. Nothing doesn't exist, and neither does anti-something. Something has always existed. There is no beginning or end.

Not necessarily true. There is currently lots of talk about so called dark energy. It wouldn't surprise me that if everything in the universe was "added up" you'd get a grand total of zero / zilch / nothing. This is just speculation of course, just saying it wouldn't surprise me.

Also time started at the moment of the big bang, so it is erroneous to talk about "before" then, so in that sense you can't say that something has always existed (well certainly not "before" the big bang as there was no "before".)

_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.

Spiderpig
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,893

26 Jul 2014, 12:29 pm

What is a cause anyway?

AngelRho wrote:

I think I'd have more to lose if I didn't believe the way I do and I turned out to be wrong, though, and that in part is a plus for Christianity.

Spiderpig wrote:

Not to mention the possibility that there is a God who punishes those who believe in Him.

AngelRho wrote:

Christians do believe that God punishes those who believe in him, so that's not really an issue...unless you're referring to something else.

I was still talking about Pascal?s wager, which DentArthurDent had just mentioned. The existence of a God who rewards belief and punishes disbelief, and the nonexistence of such God are by no means the only possibilities. There could be a God who rewards disbelief and punishes belief, and this negates any strategic advantage of believing just in case.

_________________
The red lake has been forgotten. A dust devil stuns you long enough to shroud forever those last shards of wisdom. The breeze rocking this forlorn wasteland whispers in your ears, “Não resta mais que uma sombra”.

Humanaut
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,390
Location: Norway

26 Jul 2014, 12:31 pm

TallyMan wrote:

There is currently lots of talk about so called dark energy. It wouldn't surprise me that if everything in the universe was "added up" you'd get a grand total of zero / zilch / nothing.

That's not how E = mc² works.

Quote:

Also time started at the moment of the big bang, so it is erroneous to talk about "before" then, so in that sense you can't say that something has always existed (well certainly not "before" the big bang as there was no "before".)

Big Bang could have been a local event, if it ever happened. Rumor has it that the Big Bang theory "was a way to reconcile science with St. Thomas Aquinas' theological dictum of creatio ex nihilo."

AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

26 Jul 2014, 12:35 pm

Humanaut wrote:

AngelRho wrote:

Humanaut wrote:

AngelRho wrote:

Humanaut wrote:

The presence or absence of an existent determines whether we are dealing with something or nothing.

But we can't agree on said presence or absence.

Existents are self-evident.

To me, God is self-evident. Do we agree on what it means to be self-evident?

Obviously not.

Exactly. We end up either moving goalposts or falling back on preferences or biases. We're closer to honesty if we're able to admit that.

Btw, wishful thinking doesn't make something exist/not exist. If God doesn't actually exist, belief in God is a trivial matter since it's "just" a belief. If God does exist, I can't simply wish him away and avoid eternal consequences.

yournamehere
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Oct 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,673
Location: Roaming 150 square miles somewhere in north america

26 Jul 2014, 12:39 pm

What???

Last edited by yournamehere on 26 Jul 2014, 10:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

26 Jul 2014, 12:46 pm

Humanaut wrote:

TallyMan wrote:

There is currently lots of talk about so called dark energy. It wouldn't surprise me that if everything in the universe was "added up" you'd get a grand total of zero / zilch / nothing.

That's not how E = mc² works.

Dark energy is a bit (lot) more complicated than that. We know very little about it.

Quote:

Einstein's famous equation, E = mc2, teaches us that matter and energy are interchangeable, merely different forms of the same thing. We have a giant example of that in our sky: the Sun. The Sun is powered by the conversion of mass to energy.

Something from Nothing

But energy is supposed to have a source ? either matter or radiation. The notion here is that space, even when devoid of all matter and radiation, has a residual energy. That "energy of space," when considered on a cosmic scale, leads to a force that increases the expansion of the universe.

Perhaps dark energy results from weird behavior on scales smaller than atoms. The physics of the very small, called quantum mechanics, allows energy and matter to appear out of nothingness, although only for the tiniest instant. The constant brief appearance and disappearance of matter could be giving energy to otherwise empty space.

http://hubblesite.org/hubble_discoveries/dark_energy/de-what_is_dark_energy.php

_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.

Page 3 of 6 [ 88 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Jump to:

Keeping Faith whilst accepting rational evidence. Post Reply New Topic

Keeping Faith whilst accepting rational evidence.