Atheists, those one time bastions of "reality" have completely thrown up their hands and devolved into making noises - anything - as long as they don’t have to deal with scientific evidence. This group at one point, not that many years ago, rose and fell by the creed, “If it can’t be observed, tested and verified, we won’t believe it.”
That’s a good creed. It has moved civilization farther than each preceding generation ever dreamed possible. And now? Imaginary time, Material infinities and the most disturbing, at least for me, Beginnings without a cause, are now standard fair in the minds of atheists.
I asked, on a post “If God doesn’t exist, why does anything exist?”
This is a deeply meaningful question. One that touches the very base of both science and philosophy. From both science and philosophy we know two things:
1. The material infinite does not and cannot exist - Whether you believe that this is the only universe to exist or whether you believe ours is the latest of a bzillion or just one of a bzillion universes, at one point there was a beginning, a "first" singularity, a definitive space / time boundary.
2. At one point there was literally nothing -
Not energy
Not matter
Not space
Not time
Not material life
These are two things that we know. At one point there was nothing material in existence. Can literally nothing cause everything to come into being?
The question, “If God doesn’t exist, why does anything exist?” is absolutely relevant. Here are two very typical responses that atheists now give and this is what I find heart breaking. The first is from the mind of a child. It means, I have nothing of value to say so I'll just say anything.
1) “If magic ain't real how come the universe exists?”
Whatever intelligence brought the universe into existence, it was the farthest thing from magic that you can imagine. It was pure, unadulterated science, intelligence, power.
The second response completely turns its back on the scientific method of knowing. It clings to a desperate desire and longing to believe in causeless beginnings, not because of evidence, but in the total absence of observable, testable, verifiable evidence.
2) “...The question is nonsensical, it assumes that a reason is applicable to space/time."
The question is nonsensical? Because of clear scientific (observable, repeatable, verifiable) evidence, we know that Whatever begins to exist has a cause. This is absolutely the basis of science, for science at its base is a search for cause.
That we consistently observe this to be true (Whatever begins to exist has a cause) is critically important because scientific naturalists demand that nothing can be believed without consistent observation and verification. Every single attempt to promote alternatives to this premise (Whatever begins to exist has a cause) have only reinforced its truth. Therefore, atheists have the highest motivation to accept this premise.
Even Hume, one of the Patron Saints of atheism has said, "I've NEVER suggested something so ridiculous as to say that something could begin to exist without a cause." Sorry sir, your tribe has left you far, far behind and as the first atheist suggested, they have entered into the world of magic and atheist generated Origin Of The Universe Mythologies.
And this is what breaks my heart. While I fundamentally disagree with atheists that everything can come from nothing without a material cause (because at one point nothing material existed and now everything material exists) but they could always be counted on to deal with reality; to speak in realistic terms.
Sadly that day is gone - probably forever.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The question, "If God doesn’t exist, why does anything exist?" is absolutely relevant.
ReplyDelete[...]
"...The question is nonsensical, it assumes that a reason is applicable to space/time."
The question is nonsensical? Because of clear scientific (observable, repeatable, verifiable) evidence, we know that Whatever begins to exist has a cause. This is absolutely the basis of science, for science at its base is a search for cause.
Whatever begins to exist has a cause? No! that's the whole point.
We don't know that, because we do not observe anything to literaly begin to exist. We only see things change. As you were reminded, I asked you to give me ONE example of something that was literaly created, just one... and you failed. You gave examples of things that can be describe in terms of matter/energy, which we never see being created.
(except at the quantum level for periods of time shorter than 10^-34 seconds I think, but that is way too advanced for us non-physicist to even get close to discussing)
So, no matter what caused our current space-time framework to exist, what cause matter/energy to exist, it does not even make sense to talk about it as a cause per se, because, for us humans, a cause is something that influences one or many other things during a period of time, in order to produce some result.
For a cause to be a cause, it requires a period of time during which it causes something. That's our definition of causality no? Or perhaps you have another definition?
So if you were to say that 'X' caused time to start, 'X' being timeless, it means that it caused time to exist during a 0 period of time, or an undefined period of time actually.
It means that 'X' caused something at an infinite speed, during a 0 period of time. In other words, you get the equivalent of dividing by 0...
(No Rod, dividing by 0 does not equal 0 :P)
Now I am not saying that this proves 'X' does not exist, that would be silly, I am simply showing that it's pointless for us humans to even discuss 'X' as being a cause.
Not that it's pointless to try to figure out, but it's pointless to argue about something that is conceptualy similar to infinity!
So can we even ask if 'X' exists in that context? I dunno, it seems pointless to me... and I would never claim to know anything about it. So that's why I certainly do not believe anybody who claims to do know the answer, as THAT would contradict scientific obeservations.
What you are doing is only applying a label, "God", to 'X'. You are not proving what it is, or that it exists in the form of a personal loving god, because you cannot prove that.
"If God doesn’t exist, why does anything exist?"
'X'
What you are doing is only applying a label, "God", to 'X'."
ReplyDeleteFor the purpose of this discussion, I don't care what you call it. It amounts to the Greatest Conceivable Being. Call it X if you like but this we know from logic. X was
immaterial,
possessed an intelligence far beyond anything that we can conceive, and
existed outside of and transcendent to energy, matter, time and space.
I asked you to give me ONE example of something that was literaly created, just one... and you failed. You gave examples of things that can be describe in terms of matter/energy, which we never see being created."
ReplyDeleteDon't be so stupid Hugo. Energy, matter, space and time did NOT exist. Then they did exist. What do you call that if not beginning to exist?
Things do not bring themselves into existence, Hugo.
Energy, matter, space, and time were brought into existence by something that existed prior to and transcendent to these entities. Saying that you don't understand the concept of "prior to" won't change reality.
This is exactly the point that I'm making in my post. Atheists revert to woo in an effort to hide from realiy.
"we never see being created."
Well, duh! We don't usually see anything that happened for the first time in the past, do we? We didn't see the arrival of first life. Does that mean to you that it didn't happen?
Again, this is exactly what I'm talking about in this post. Atheist comments completely devolve into useless crap.
Don't be so stupid Hugo. Energy, matter, space and time did NOT exist. Then they did exist. What do you call that if not beginning to exist?
ReplyDeleteThat's where you make your mistake imo. What makes you think that "Energy, matter, space and time did NOT exist" at some point?
How can you know that?
Please, don't reply that science points to a universe with a beginning, because that is not, at all, synonym to 'energy, matter, space and time not existing'.
I am not sure we agree on that though?
What we agree on however, as you said, is that it does not matter whether 'X' is called 'God' or not. My point is that it is only a concept, a label, like infinity.
Your point is that it's a real entity, that exists and influences our world. That's what you need to demonstrate.
To make an analogy, what would you reply to the question: What does 5 divided by 0 yields?
You can say infinity, or say that it's impossible to define. Both answers are valid because both answers do not pretend that we can divide 5 by 0.
Same thing with the cause of our universe. You can say that it's "God", or you can say that's it's impossible to define. Either way it's more of the same; we don't know and apply a label on that 'don't know' to be able to discuss it.
Infinity does not exist per se, it's a human construct used to explain many things; and as an atheist I consider gods to be the exact same thing. In a way, I do agree that they do exist, but only in the minds of human.
Big Bang cosmology explains that everything came from nothing? How do you define "that" nothing Hugo?
ReplyDeleteTHE BOOBQUAKE - 911!
ReplyDeletehey, atheists don't even BELIEVE IN BOOBIES!!!
they thought BOOBIES had no effect... WRONG!
see, I just want to make it clear to the rest of you:
jen is unable to see that there is a CONFLICT BETWEEN EROS & SCIENCE....
________________
http://www.blaghag.com/2010/04/in-name-of-science-i-offer-my-boobs.html
ETA: follow-up
http://www.blaghag.com/2010/04/quick-clarification-about-boobquake.html
see how we take a term and convert it into its AUTHENTIC POLITICAL DIMENSION - THAT
OF LIBERATION - not just merely harmless expression...
they thought BOOBIES had no effect... WRONG!
____________
the really SHARP END OF OCCAM’S RAZOR…
they mix SKEPTICISM with ATHEISM…
KABOOM…
Now I want you to listen to this little f*cker...
http://www.ted.com/talks/james_randi.html
Randi:
When I see your UGLY FACE I understand why you are an atheist
_________________________________
Visit for the BOOBQUAKE
http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22932
Big Bang cosmology explains that everything came from nothing? How do you define "that" nothing Hugo?
ReplyDeleteWhat I understand is that Big Bang cosmology explains how the universe expanded from a singularity. That's not nothing.
It's not something real either though, because a singular point is, again, an abstract mathematical concept, just like infinity.
Not sure if that's what you wanted to clarify though?
DM, I'm a pretty tolerant person. I'm able to put up with a lot. I'm even willing and able to put up with you - if I have to. I'm not going to monitor this blog. I'm not going to ban anybody from posting comments. But I am going to ask you to go away and not come back. I find you more annoying than all of the atheists put together and that's saying something buddy. Just read Hugo's junk and you'll get some idea of what I'm dealing with. So, I'm just asking. Please go away and don't come back.
ReplyDeleteI find you more annoying than all of the atheists put together and that's saying something buddy. Just read Hugo's junk and you'll get some idea of what I'm dealing with.
ReplyDeletelol, being insulted never made me laugh so much!
From what I read on other sites, DM has been doing that for months now (if not years...) so don't expect too much cooperation from him...
Anyway, I hope you'll come back to tou discussion because there was no junk in my comments on this particular post, so I hope you were refering to older comments... like when I accuse you of believing in a man in the sky who will spank you for being naughty... THAT was junk, lol.
Hey I just thought of a particular point that I would like you to explain, when you say something like this:
ReplyDeleteEnergy, matter, space, and time were brought into existence by something that existed prior to and transcendent to these entities.
What does "prior to" means when you talk of time itself? How can anything be "before" time where there was no time to refer to? What does "before", a time-relative word, means in a timeless context?
Hugo, I believe that, re: Big Bang cosmology you are deliberately avoiding what you know that it teaches i.e. when the expansion of the universe is reversed, you wind up, NOT with a really densly packed speck of matter / energy, but no matter or energy whatsoever. When you reverse the expansion back to the singularity, you wind up at a point where literally nothing became everything.
ReplyDeleteI believe you know that but can't bring yourself to say it. Instead, you've invented your own, more digestable version of events. And that, son, is junk.
Well I am glad that we did short posts and focus on that point; after so many long exchanges on this topic, it all boils that to this:
ReplyDeleteYou're saying that if we take all the matter/energy in our universe, and condense it as much as we can, we get... nothing?
You say I invented my own version of the event so please expand more on yours because in my version, when we condense everything together, we get, well... everything together, not nothing...
I don't know what caused the universe to exist or created everything from nothing way back whenever that happened, but I do know what he (or she or it) looks like. He looks like . . . . . Me!!
ReplyDeleteHow do I know this? Genesis Chapter 1, where God created Man in His image.
"God looks like me this I know, for the Bible tells me so . . ."
It would be nice if God creating man in His image would squelch these arguments about God being a super-intelligent mind, or life-force, or whatever. The Abrahamic God is like most of the other gods invented by ancient people. He's supposed to be a physical, human-like "being" with supernatural powers who lives somewhere humans can't observe. But I'm sure the apologists will say God's powers mean he can choose how he appears to us humans, and he chose to appear human-like to the ancient people so they could relate to him and communicate like they would to another human.
My version? I don' have a version. I believe what BBC says: At the singularity energy, space, time and matter came into existence out of literally nothing.
ReplyDeleteThese things didn't come into being from already being. These things aren't just a bigger version of a previous existence. They came into being from nothing and expanded into the present universe in an instant.
That is what BBC proposes.
I would part ways with most BBC scientists, I think, on why this happened but we are in complete agreement THAT it happened.
Brap -
ReplyDeleteGod is spirit, and His worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth." John 4:24
If God is spirit, and he made Man in His image, then humans shouldn't be able to see their reflections in a mirror, should they?
ReplyDeleteAnticipated reply: The human body is just a temporary shell. It's the spirit (some call it the soul) that makes us human, and that human spirit is what God created to make humans different from the animals.
Actually it means that we possess portions and degrees of His attributes and characteristics.
ReplyDeleteEg. Intelligence, ability to think and feel and reason and explore and contemplate our own existence.
We have the ability to create, to love, to forgive.
Our existence will not end. As you stated, we are spirit beings, who have purpose and meaning to our lives. We are moral beings capable of recognising right and wrong. We can experience love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.
We can know Truth.
I'm sure there are more but you get the idea.
If you want to know the character of God, learn about Jesus who said, "If you have seen Me, you have seen Father God."
Can you give me the source, your BBC source, so that I can explain to you what it really means? I don't trust your interpretation, sorry.
ReplyDeleteI would part ways with most BBC scientists
You mean scientists that happen to have contributed to a BBC documentary or what? Is there such a thing as a BBC scientist...?
So you do believe in the material infinite. You know that it doesn' exist but you believe in it anyhow. Talk about faith.
ReplyDeleteSo you do believe in the material infinite. You know that it doesn' exist but you believe in it anyhow. Talk about faith.
ReplyDeleteNo, why do you say so?
I don't believe something infinite exists because the term infinite is an abstract construct.
Please provide me with your BBC source by the way, since you claim that I deny science observations... I am always interesting in learning about cosmology, and BBC documentaries are always great!
Now, let's read that last long post of yours...
Hugo:
ReplyDeleteIf you don't believe that everything material came from nothing, and
If you believe that only the material exists, then
You believe that everything material came from a different form of material which had to have existed forever.
Which is it?
Nope,forget it, you'll just buzz around and around in circles on and on into the future. Don't bother answering.