Simple question?

Quote: FrGamble

Dalex you cannot read an article that is based on the reality of a "multiverse" and pass it off as something that is true. At best it is a theory that has not and maybe cannot be proven and worst it is an atheistic attempt at apologetics to explain the fine tuning of the universe by giving the universe many, many chances to get it right. Has anyone seen these pocket universes popping into existence and then collapsing again? If universes can do this why don't we see this behavior all around us and have other material things like giraffes and chairs just popping into existence randomly?

Your strawman about what that theory says its possible is not useful. Your plea for eyewitness testimony about the creation of the universe and universes is laughable. Who watches god create the universe?

Your entire religion is based on theory and hypothesis, created by groups of people sitting around and thinking and writing down what they thought must be true.

I have said many times that geocentrism is an example of what you can come up with by just observing and thinking.

Without physical evidence and without proof, it is just a hypothesis.

But like it was just said - YOU are allowed to use logic and thinking to demonstrate the possibility of the untestable, so is science!

Prove that there can't be another universe with different physical properties from our own.

That scientist has demonstrated how it is possible. Perhaps you could prove him wrong too?

What about all of those other religions? There are no atheist apologists there. They have different hypothesis and theories about the way things are. Prove them wrong. Can't do that either?

Are you asking people to stop the knowledge train, to stop theorizing and TESTING because you think you already know the answers to all of the important questions?

I have posted over time several different theories about why things are the way they are, and some of them contradict eachother. They can't all be true. But they are possible.

Again I ask - where is your open mind? Where do you accept that there are other possibilities about the way things are that might be true?

No one watches God create the universe. That's why He wrote it down. You don't have to believe it if you don't want to.

Quote: FrGamble

Come on do you have evidence that energy did create itself?

Of course not.

But neither do I have a belief contrary to all known evidence that everything requires some form of ex-nihilo creation.

Quote:

Why we are on this line of questioning can you kindly show your evidence that God did not create the universe?

Glad you asked. Here's a lovely photo of Jehovah creating the universe:

Quote:

And here's a cute photo of Jehovah playing catch with Jesus:

Quote:

Quote:

The point is that if all energy was not created and is eternal then why an expanding universe at all?

I don't know. But if ignorance is all that's required to support an argument, then certainly because an Egyptian deity, which was known to exist ages before we even hear rumors of Jehovah, masturbated himself and the universe into existence (very efficient).

Quote:

Why is there a law of entropy leading to a state of heat death.

These are two different things. Natural laws are not like legal laws which are formulated and enforced. They're mathematical descriptions of how aspects of the universe behave. Legal laws have a purpose, natural laws do not. Entropy doesn't exist because there's some need to drive the universe to heat-death.

Quote:

If energy was truly eternal than we would already be at this state of heat death since we would have had an eternity of time to reach such a state of death.

Eternal means it has always existed and always will exist. it does not imply a long time in existence, but an indefinite time.

Quote:

See above. If the universe is expanding and has not reached the complete state of entropy then it is not eternal but had a beginning at some point.

We know when the universe began. We know also energy preceded it.

Quote:

So your argument is that because we don't know the answer to why we are conscious we need just to wait to figure it out before we can make any claims on the existence of God or not?

No. Your argument is because we don't know X, therefore Jehovah.

My argument is that what we know or don't know about a specific aspect of the universe does not necessarily imply certainty about aspects we have no actual knowledge of. In other words: I cannot claim that because I don't know who stole some money from the petty cash box, then pink unicorns run the GOP from a base around Sirius B

Quote:

I am saying that God is the ultimate source of life and consciousness and that whatever science discovers it cannot rule on if there is a God or not.

You're failing to make sense.

Quote:

Why do you continue to think that science will ever prove or disprove the existence of God?

It won't prove it.

But here's the thing. There are literally thousands of beliefs, if not more, which make claims about nature without much evidence, but plenty of arguments, to back them up. In the case where specific predictions are made by these beliefs, it's easy to disprove them. When the predictions are vague, or absent, straight refutation is not possible. But we can see what science discovers about these claims, and whether there is any reason to suppose them to be true.

So, the world was not created in six days, less so the universe. Things did not appear on earth in the order claimed by Genesis, even if the time scales were off. There was never just one pair of h. Sapiens humans alive. There was never a place on Earth where humans did not need to work at making a living, be it hunting, gathering, or farming. There is no evidence of any large presence of Israelite slaves living in Egypt, much less of a massive exodus. There's no record of Moses outside of the Bible. There is no corroborating testimony of any kind of resurrection outside the New Testament, plus we know that resurrection from real death (ie cessation of all brain activity, heartbeat and respiration for days) is simply not possible. Back to Genesis, we know species evolved through aeons, and that many became extinct. there's also no evidence whatsoever of a global flood, nor would it even be possible if you melted all the ice on Earth. And if there had been one, few land species would have survived at all (and no, you couldn't have fit, or even gotten, two of every kind of animal into any kind of ark we could build today,. much less some primitive desert dwellers in the very dawn of the bronze age).

The list is more extensive. The bottom line is nothing claimed by the Bible or New Testament is even remotely likely. And if many of those events had taken place, then the world would be very different. For example, if we all descended from one breeding pair of h. Sapiens, why do we have Neanderthal genes, and why aren't we all inbred mental defectives?

So the incredible preponderance weight of science, of knowledge we are certain of, says there's no reason at all to believe there is any kind of deity anywhere in this vast universe.

Quote:

As you said above, Ignorance is a poor crutch on which to support an argument.

Yes, but I realize it's all you have. And without the crutch of ignorance, your arguments fall flatter than a pancake.

Quote:

I promise I won't dismiss it. I also promise you it will have nothing to do with the logical conclusions your atheism would lead you to.

Ah, so that's a what a promise written on water looks like.

Quote: Dalex64

Your strawman about what that theory says its possible is not useful. Your plea for eyewitness testimony about the creation of the universe and universes is laughable. Who watches god create the universe?

I know that no one is watching God create a universe and multiple universes. I think you are too quick to dismiss my question. If universes can pop in and out of existence then why cannot other material things? I don't see that as a strawman.

Quote:

Your entire religion is based on theory and hypothesis, created by groups of people sitting around and thinking and writing down what they thought must be true.

My entire religion is based on a man named Jesus Christ of Nazareth who the incarnate second person of the Most Holy Trinity. He was crucified, died, was buried, and rose again. It was not created by uneducated fishermen, zealots, and tax collectors all sitting around thinking and writing down what they thought to be true. Can you imagine what they would have come up with? Not, the texts and teachings that have informed and shaped Western Culture, our morality, and made a huge impact on the entire face of the world. This is what makes Christianity unique. It is not about a philosophy or way of living, it is about a real person Jesus Christ.

Quote:

I have said many times that geocentrism is an example of what you can come up with by just observing and thinking.

Yes to come up with the deep and lasting truths we find in the teachings of Jesus Christ you need more than just someone observing and thinking.

Quote:

Without physical evidence and without proof, it is just a hypothesis.

There is so much physical evidence of the impact that Christ has in the lives of people that it rivals the evidence we have for gravity. Following Christ leads one to peace, love, hope, and respect for all people. It means treating everyone as a child of God and a brother or sister in the Lord.

Quote:

But like it was just said - YOU are allowed to use logic and thinking to demonstrate the possibility of the untestable, so is science!

Prove that there can't be another universe with different physical properties from our own.

That scientist has demonstrated how it is possible. Perhaps you could prove him wrong too?

Science is NOT philosophy! Surely every discipline can use logic, but logic only works to prove something when it can show something is necessary. That it follows unmistakably and uniquely from true premises. Scientists can dream about and think about how it is possible for there to be a multiverse but if they are claiming to make a truth claim based on science then they need evidence. Logic shows us all very clearly that a multiverse while possible is not necessary and does not have to exist. Logic however does show us that even with a multiverse there still needs to be a spiritual, non-contingent being that is all-powerful and eternal.

Quote:

What about all of those other religions? There are no atheist apologists there. They have different hypothesis and theories about the way things are. Prove them wrong. Can't do that either?

These other religions are kind of set up more to be a philosophy aren't they? It is only the brave and true that step into real history and face that scrutiny like Christianity does.

Quote:

Are you asking people to stop the knowledge train, to stop theorizing and TESTING because you think you already know the answers to all of the important questions?

NOT AT ALL! I'm a little offended you would even ask this question. You need to test and look at the evidence so that you can step onto the knowledge train and it can move you forward. Once you get your ticket to take off with Christianity you will experience the truth of the answers and be challenged to continue to learn and most importantly practice the faith.

Quote:

I have posted over time several different theories about why things are the way they are, and some of them contradict eachother. They can't all be true. But they are possible.

Again I ask - where is your open mind? Where do you accept that there are other possibilities about the way things are that might be true?

Again I acknowledge that there are many possibilities, our imaginations and desires for how things should or could be is endless. However, as you said they can't all be true and they don't all have the logical and physical evidence that Christianity has so I have come to believe that Christianity is true and the other possibilities are not.

Quote: FrGamble

Dalex you cannot read an article that is based on the reality of a "multiverse" and pass it off as something that is true. At best it is a theory that has not and maybe cannot be proven and worst it is an atheistic attempt at apologetics to explain the fine tuning of the universe by giving the universe many, many chances to get it right.

Now, you see, this is where you keep committing to the same mistake over and over. Science isn't a conspiracy set up by atheists to discredit religion (religion does a wonderful job discrediting itself, thank you very much). And any theories and hypothesis you find within science, are not attempts, either by atheists or others, to engage in apologetics (a peculiarly Christian concept, but then the Pope has emptily said Christianity as much to apologize for).

Put in simple terms: no one hands out prizes, Nobel or otherwise, for disproving Jehovah (or Athena, or Diana, or Aphrodite, or Thetis, or Eris, or Persephone, or Hera).

The multiverse hypothesis is an outgrowth of cosmology and quantum mechanics. If it was brought up to begin with in order to "explain" something, it was gravity.

Quote: Nareed

Of course not.

But neither do I have a belief contrary to all known evidence that everything requires some form of ex-nihilo creation.

Creation ex-nihilo is not contrary to evidence. In fact the same evidence that leads us back to a beginning of our universe can point us in a direction that using sound reason and logic shows that creation ex-nihilo is true. Now, before you call me bad names and such please note well that I am NOT saying the Big Bang Theory proves creation ex-nihilo. I am only pointing out that the Big Bang Theory leads one to ask why energy if it is eternal was compressed into an infinitely dense point in the first place? Could it be that what we can observe and discover is just the explosion of creation and that before that moment there really was nothing? That would make sense wouldn't it being that science can only learn what is observable and since nihilo is just that, nothing, there is nothing to observe. We also know using logic that if energy is material then it must have a cause because it would be contingent and not necessary. Therefore it is certain that energy has a creator who is not contingent and is necessary in that He has being in itself and is the first cause of all things.

Quote:

Eternal means it has always existed and always will exist. it does not imply a long time in existence, but an indefinite time.

Nope. Eternal means that there has never been a time when it was not. An eternal being or force would not have a past, present, or future. This is why you will always run into problems if you continue to claim a material thing like energy is eternal. Knowing what we know about energy if it was eternal it would always and forever have been in the state that the law of entropy shows us it is going. You cannot claim that energy is eternal and then claim it has only been around for an indefinite amount of time. You cannot even say that something eternal has been around for a definite period of time, eternal means something is outside of time. So you see energy simply could not be eternal.

Quote:

We know when the universe began. We know also energy preceded it.

And we know something preceded energy and that we all commonly refer to as God.

Quote:

No. Your argument is because we don't know X, therefore Jehovah.

Not even close.

Quote:

My argument is that what we know or don't know about a specific aspect of the universe does not necessarily imply certainty about aspects we have no actual knowledge of.

Sounds like a good argument to me. My argument is that what we know about the universe does necessarily imply certainty about some aspects we have no physical observations of, but through reason and logic can have true and actual knowledge of.

Quote:

It won't prove it.

But here's the thing. There are literally thousands of beliefs, if not more, which make claims about nature without much evidence, but plenty of arguments, to back them up. In the case where specific predictions are made by these beliefs, it's easy to disprove them. When the predictions are vague, or absent, straight refutation is not possible. But we can see what science discovers about these claims, and whether there is any reason to suppose them to be true.

So, the world was not created in six days, less so the universe. Things did not appear on earth in the order claimed by Genesis, even if the time scales were off. There was never just one pair of h. Sapiens humans alive. There was never a place on Earth where humans did not need to work at making a living, be it hunting, gathering, or farming. There is no evidence of any large presence of Israelite slaves living in Egypt, much less of a massive exodus. There's no record of Moses outside of the Bible. There is no corroborating testimony of any kind of resurrection outside the New Testament, plus we know that resurrection from real death (ie cessation of all brain activity, heartbeat and respiration for days) is simply not possible. Back to Genesis, we know species evolved through aeons, and that many became extinct. there's also no evidence whatsoever of a global flood, nor would it even be possible if you melted all the ice on Earth. And if there had been one, few land species would have survived at all (and no, you couldn't have fit, or even gotten, two of every kind of animal into any kind of ark we could build today,. much less some primitive desert dwellers in the very dawn of the bronze age).

The list is more extensive. The bottom line is nothing claimed by the Bible or New Testament is even remotely likely. And if many of those events had taken place, then the world would be very different. For example, if we all descended from one breeding pair of h. Sapiens, why do we have Neanderthal genes, and why aren't we all inbred mental defectives?

So the incredible preponderance weight of science, of knowledge we are certain of, says there's no reason at all to believe there is any kind of deity anywhere in this vast universe.

That is one of the strongest and best arguments you have ever made and it is worth quoting again in full. I'm afraid though that so much of what you say wounds, but does not strike the core of what I believe. I find myself in some of your strong critiques about the existence of Adam and Eve falling back into your own line of defense that ignorance of that time is not enough to base a disbelief in something. We do know we are all related and can trace everyone back to two individuals who may have never met, but there is so much we don't know. How can we be certain that there wasn't this original couple who while still living in the midst of other developing human beings were very different and which we haven't discovered yet? You know how tough history is and we know that the Bible is not written as a history book. Were the numbers of people in the Exodus exaggerated and have the shifting sands covered over their evidence that we will discover one day? Are you certain that just because Moses is not attested to in other ancient documents he did not exist? I'll concede Noah and the great flood was not how the author of Genesis pictured it. In regards to the Resurrection and other supernatural miracles or phenomenon I think it is fair to say that there is a lot of evidence of the unexplainable. Anything in regards to and relating to the ministry of Jesus Christ is also going to obviously be very unique because He was the Only Begotten Son of God. You also have the witness of the Apostles and disciples who gave their life to spread the truth of Jesus' Resurrection. Then you have billions of people like myself who continue to have a personal life giving relationship with the very much alive and living Lord.

So for all the difficulties you lay in the path of faith in every detail of the Bible, some of which does not have to be believed, others that do, it does not lead me to doubt nor should it do so for any thinking person who must realize that any belief grounded in history will have difficulties to overcome and require faith.

Quote:

Yes, but I realize it's all you have. And without the crutch of ignorance, your arguments fall flatter than a pancake.

Correction it is all you have.


I'm actually serious and curious as to what brings you the purpose, meaning, and significance of your life. Even more than giving a detailed history of the Ancient Near East (which of course is not at all what the Bible is about) the Bible is meant to pass on God's revelation of His love and our purpose, meaning, and significance. Without anything bigger than yourself to ground your purpose and the meaning of life, where do you find it? Do you ever doubt it or feel like you wish you could change it? Do you have to consciously put aside your belief that we are just a random accident of nature and that ultimately nothing is significant or lasting forever?

Quote: FrGamble

Do you have to consciously put aside your belief that we are just a random accident of nature and that ultimately nothing is significant or lasting forever?

There's your Christian ego driven religion again,
rearing it's ugly 'me me me' head. It's all about
your ego, you feel so small and so insignificant
you just have to believe you're the most important
thing in some fictional gods eye to even force
yourself out of bed in the morning.

The self worship in the guise of god worship in
the personal god religions is astounding. Your
whole life revolves around your self importance.
Where do you fit in, what plan does your god
have for you, are you significant, do you matter,
and most important, it has to go on forever. Your
reward has to be eternal or what's the point of
it all.

To think like this on a daily basis must be a huge
burden to drag around with you every day, your
self importance must weigh a ton. I can't even
imagine thinking of myself this way. I would be
a basket case of doubt and self loathing trying
to live up to the impossibility of it all.

Bob, the hallmark of a Christian is humility. It is actually to recognize how big and important God is and how insignificant we are compared to Him. Now granted when compared to cockroaches and stuff we are pretty awesome, but compared to God we are helpless. I believe pretty much the opposite of what you are saying here. I like what John the Baptist says, "He must increase and I must decrease." It is not about me at all, it is about God. Having this view of myself as a humble servant of the Lord is what helps me not become a basket case full of doubt and guilt. Knowing that ultimately I am not that important and no more important than any other human being on Earth is freeing. God knows that it is impossible for me to be perfect that is why He sent His Son, one like us in all things but sin. It is Him that I worship and Him alone.

Quote: FrGamble

Creation ex-nihilo is not contrary to evidence.

Since there's no evidence of any creation ex-nihilo, other than stories or lies being made up "of whole cloth," then your belief in it is contrary to evidence.

Quote:

I am only pointing out that the Big Bang Theory leads one to ask why energy if it is eternal was compressed into an infinitely dense point in the first place?

There are literally dozens of possible reasons, none of which involves the one true god Amun creating it out of his act of self-gratification.

Quote:

Could it be that what we can observe and discover is just the explosion of creation and that before that moment there really was nothing?

Could it be there was a purple dinosaur? Could it be there was a formal tea with Hera and Diana? could it be there was a tiny little man looking for the off switch?

When there is no observational data, nor any certain theoretical foundation, you can't just make up a logical argument and assume it to be the explanation. using that method, Astronomers as recently as the mid-XX century assumed Venus to be teeming with life, based on the fact all they could see were the tops of clouds.

Quote:

Eternal means that there has never been a time when it was not.

Yes, but if we know existence spans a certain amount of time, then that's how much time something eternal can have existed. If the notion of "time before the Big Bang" makes sense, then energy has existed longer than the universe.

Quote:

An eternal being or force would not have a past, present, or future.

Of course it does. What it did yesterday is not what is doing now and both differ from what it will do tomorrow.

Quote:

And we know something preceded energy and that we all commonly refer to as God.

Show me actual evidence or STFHU.

Quote:

Sounds like a good argument to me. My argument is that what we know about the universe does necessarily imply certainty about some aspects we have no physical observations of, but through reason and logic can have true and actual knowledge of.

When Venus was revealed by spectrographic analysis of the visible clouds, thermocouple readings and radar imaging, to be a hot, corrosive hell-hole, we realized the value of "pure" logic (ie, logic detached from verifiable data) in making conclusions about nature. Namely zero.

Quote:

That is one of the strongest and best arguments you have ever made and it is worth quoting again in full.

That's the argument I've been making here for years.

Quote:

We do know we are all related and can trace everyone back to two individuals who may have never met,

All life is related. All of it. So saying humans are related is not quite groundbreaking. Further, we can trace earliest known ancestors. Not common descent of every human being to two people. And these earliest known ancestors were NOT one of a kind each. They were part of larger communities. Theirs are only the most complete remains we have found.

Quote:

How can we be certain that there wasn't this original couple who while still living in the midst of other developing human beings were very different and which we haven't discovered yet?

Because all humans are related. And because if we were descended from only two people, we'd be inbred to such a degree as to make the genetic diversity we can see completely impossible. As it is, it seems at one point h. Sapiens was reduced to only a few thousand people, and that accounts for a genetic sameness not seen in other species. But that's from thousands, not two people. We have a degree of genetic diversity we would not see from a single breeding pair.

Quote:

In regards to the Resurrection and other supernatural miracles or phenomenon I think it is fair to say that there is a lot of evidence of the unexplainable.

That's why in a province full of people who were so bothered by Jesus' trouble-making as to have him executed, no one else took notice of the fact the dead man was walking around a few days later. Not any of his enemies, not a single Roman legionary, not any local or Roman bureaucrats, nor any artists, intellectuals or philosophers. Just four people who didn't even bother to write about it until years had passed.

Say, would you be interested in this bridge I could be persuaded to sell at a low, low price? It has a lovely view of the Manhattan skyline.

Quote:

I'm actually serious and curious as to what brings you the purpose, meaning, and significance of your life.

I've no doubt of it.

Quote: FrGamble

Bob, the hallmark of a Christian is humility. .

That's what you all say, but what you
preach about is me me me. Am
I pleasing god, what does he think about
me, am I sinning too much, am I going
to heaven, am I feeling enough shame
and guilt for my actions. It goes on and
on, this obsession with self. This is why
people go to church, it's all about them.
Catholics are so into self worship you
have to confess what you did wrong on
a regular basis. The religion forces you
to think about yourself constantly, which
isn't a healthy place to be.