I remember reading an account in the Older Testament where the Israelites have destroyed a society of idol worshipping people whose religious practise was to sacrifice their children as live burnt offerings to their gods.
As a point of interest, atheists defend those societies and curse the God they say they don’t believe in for bringing punishment against societies that are vile and evil enough to do those kinds of things.
“How dare God destroy those who sacrifice their children and force women to work as temple prostitutes. Why, God must be a monster!”
Average Atheist.
(For comparison purposes check the comments section of the CNN article about the mom who live streamed her sexual abuse of her two-year-old daughter. O the outrage! They want her destroyed, tortured, torn limb from limb, they want her tongue pulled out. But burning your children to death as ritual sacrifices? Subjecting women to ritual prostitution? For those who hate their Creator those things aren't that big a deal. Think about that! Can you imagine how evil a society has to be for those things to be sanctioned as good and normal? To atheists that's no problem. To them it’s God who’s wrong. The God they don't believe in - Snerk!)
I'm off topic - The thing is, after defeating and destroying this particular nation, the Israelites themselves began to worship these very same gods. How dumb can humans be?
Perhaps we shouldn’t be too hard on those Israelites since each and every Christian today faces the same struggles. The pagan culture around us is unceasingly attempting to squeeze us into its mould. And in many cases, the surrounding culture is winning. Rather than being transformed by the renewing of their minds, many of those who call themselves christians take their lead from the culture in areas like marriage / relationships, business dealings and the desire / need to find security and worth in possessions and looks.
It’s not surprising then that rates of divorce and family violence among those who call themselves christians is similar to the secular world in which those christians live. Many christians actually worship the same idols that their neighbours worship.
Paul says that by the renewing of our minds we will be able to work out and approve what God’s will is, what is good, acceptable and right.
Without this renewal of mind, we’re just as dumb as everyone else.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As a point of interest, atheists defend those societies[...]
ReplyDelete"How dare God destroy those who sacrifice their children and force women to work as temple prostitutes.[...]"
Average Atheist.
How can you be so judgemental of people who do not believe in the same God as you!? You are crazy... seriously. If people really say what you wrote, and I doubt that you could find ONE person who actually mean that, well it has nothing to do with Atheism...
You just find random stupid ideas and associate them with Atheism because it's all evil for you.
So DISHONEST, so STUPID...
Bigot ! ! !
"How can you be so judgemental of people who do not believe in the same God as you!? If people really say what you wrote, and I doubt that you could find ONE person who actually mean that, well it has nothing to do with Atheism..."
ReplyDelete[The Christian God is] “Arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it, a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynist, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.
Richard Dawkins
*Sigh*
ReplyDeleteYou are ridiculous. Saying that the God of the OT is bad does not mean that one supports the people he was being bad to.
Let me be even more clear because obviously we need to be slow with you so that you get something out of this. Actually you NEVER acknowledge any points, I guess it's another of your psychological problems. But in any case, here's your mistake.
You wrote that 'atheists defend those societies', and of such societies you said that they 'sacrifice their children and force women to work as temple prostitutes'.
My point was that NOTHING supports that.
Then you come back with a quote of Dawkins saying that God was a monster.
Well duh, anybody who commits genocide IS a monster. No matter who got killed. It does not mean that the people who were killed are to be approved.
Do you understand that?
Probably not... actually I know you don't care, but it's fun to point how retarded you are! lol
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThesauros communicates by feeling. Thus, you shouldn't expect what he writes to make sense.
ReplyDeleteWhat Thesauros doesn't understand, however, is that the nature of what he writes is such that it should be ignored. He hides behind this "emoting = communication" thing because when people reject his words, he translates it into persecution which translates into "Gosh I must be RIGHT!".
He's dishonest. Don't be taken in by it. He's not writing to be understood.
"anybody who commits genocide IS a monster."
ReplyDeleteI see you’re back to the false dichotomies. Eg. If we have one planet with life on it, according to Hugo the universe is not a life supporting universe. If we have five planets . . . or how many was it? Oh, right, you never said how many it takes did you?
So if you kill one person who offers children as live burnt sacrifices it's - um ok? And if you execute 50 people who are guilting of burning their children to death it’s still ok?
But if you execute all the people who take part in burning children to death, well, then it’s genocide. Is that because they're only the children of the temple prostitues?
Or perhaps they should have had counselling?
Check out Genesis 15:16
Hi WEM!
ReplyDeleteI think you are completely right. But no worries, my participation here is for entertainment purposes mainly!
What is interesting is that since it's a small blog, Rod and I do get to interact directly. It can be frustrating because even though it is direct communication, most of my valid points are never granted. Instead, my statements are twisted over to yield posts like what we can see on this page. I guess that's the problem with online discussions... but I don't really care since, as I just said, it's for entertainment purposes :)
Back to you Rod...
ReplyDeleteYou said:
I see you’re back to the false dichotomies.
after I pointed out that anybody who commits genocide is a monster.
It just sounds weird to me. Where is the false dichotomy?
Your explanations that followed are not related to that so I don't see the point, but I will still reply because what you wrote is a misrepresentation. Actually it's not completely misrepresenting what I said; it just shows that you did not get it...
If we have one planet with life on it, according to Hugo the universe is not a life supporting universe. If we have five planets . . . or how many was it? Oh, right, you never said how many it takes did you?
ReplyDeleteCorrect, I did not specify any number of planets because there it's irrelevant. You write with an obvious sarcastic tone but it just shows that you are dumb... sorry. You did not get the point, at all.
I will try to explain anyway. It would be nice if you could admit that you had not understood it, but I won't be holding my breathe.
The point is that if we look at the Earth first, then yes we can see that it is a life-supporting planet. Anywhere we look, we find life, even in the harshest conditions, life still strive on our planet. One obvious explanation is that life evolved here and adapted itself since it had a few billion years to do so.
If we jump to a bigger scale though, let's say the solar system, then the story changes completely. Life as we know it, even if it adapt to incredible environments, still requires a minimum sets of conditions to exists. These conditions do not exists anywhere else in the solar system, except perhaps under the ice sheet of some moons, or deep into the soil of some planets. But the main point remains: life, as we know it, cannot evolve complexity in any other conditions than what we have on Earth. No places are stable enough, have enough oxygen or liquid water, etc... nothing even come close.
Then, let's jump to an even bigger size: the universe. Now the picture is completely different again. At this scale, it's not only life as we know it that is unlikely to exist, it's solar systems as ours that are unlikely to exist. This is why, at this point, we are forced to conclude that the conditions found on Earth are really unusual and life as we know it must be a rare phenomenon, at least in terms of how many stars hosts planets like ours.
Ironically though, this also shows that because of the vast size of the universe, and the billions of galaxies hosting billions of stars, the conditions we see here are meant to happen once in a while. The universe is not good for life as we know it in general, but it is definitely going to produce such conditions once in a while.
ReplyDeleteLet me conclude with that analogy I just thought of. Saying that the universe is fine-tuned for life is like saying that a deck of cards is design to give you a royal flush of spades. Yes, the royal flush is meant to happen, so a deck of card, in a way, is "designed" to give you a royal flush, but at the same time, no sane person would claim that it's sole purpose is to give you royal flush. A deck of card is made to allow you to play games, continuously varying the cards you get. Same thing with the universe: it constantly changes, hence it is not expected to give birth to life constantly, yet it can, and it did... at least once!
***********
ReplyDeleteFinally, I did not even come close to address that:
So if you kill one person who offers children as live burnt sacrifices it's - um ok? And if you execute 50 people who are guilting of burning their children to death it’s still ok?
But if you execute all the people who take part in burning children to death, well, then it’s genocide. Is that because they're only the children of the temple prostitues?
Or perhaps they should have had counselling?
Check out Genesis 15:16
In theory, I agree with you, if you execute, at once ALL the people who take part in burning children to death, then I don't see any problem with that. The problem is that this is ridiculous. This is not what a genocide is. A genocide is killing a whole society, or group of people, just because they belong to that group. It's virtually impossible to find a group of people who would all agree to burn children. If that's what the Bible says, then fine, it was ok to kill all of them, but seriously... you agree that this ever existed!? In any case, a genocide implies killing children, men, women, elders, everybody!
Not EVERYBODY would participate in such actions. It's just a twisted mind game you are trying to play to justify a terrible action that you know is wrong. You only try to justify it because it was done by (or ordered by) God. Since God is all good, it must have been good... and that's why religion does not provide people with a valid moral framework. Something is not good because God did it. We all use our reason to judge, you included, whether you want to admit it or not.
The false dichotomy was not is this statement. This statement was in a post where you said that the universe coming into being out of nothing by either an external cause or by accident was a false dichotomy. I asked you to give me a third option but you never replied.
ReplyDelete==========
“It's virtually impossible to find a group of people who would all agree to burn children. If that's what the Bible says, then fine, it was ok to kill all of them, but seriously... you agree that this ever existed!?”
That’s just embarrassing, Hugo. Those societies are so well documented it makes what you just said preposterous. It’s not just the Bible, Hugo. For the citation in question, we know this from their own records found at Ras Shamra on the North Syrian coast.
If you’re interested in other archeological finds that confirm this type of cultural habits:
Amarna Letter - Canaanite Akkadian
Amenemope’s Wisdom
Atrahasis Epic
Babylonian Theodicy
Stone
Cyrus Cylinder
Ebla Tablets
Enuma Elish
Hammurapi’s Code
Ishtar’s Descent
Lachish Letters
Mari Tablets
Mesha Stele - Moabite
...you said that the universe coming into being out of nothing by either an external cause or by accident was a false dichotomy. I asked you to give me a third option...
ReplyDeleteThe false dichotomy was not exactly the way you just wrote it; because then I would say it could be an external cause.
What you keep saying is that the fine tuning of the universe is either made by a supernatural designer, or it was an accident.
One other option, NOT necessarily the only other one, is that we live in one of multiple universes. You agreed that it's possible, and I agree that it would still be possible for that multi-verse to be designed by a god, or God...
So saying that it's either an accident (pure luck) VS it has to be designed by a supernatural mind, is a false dichotomy. It could be that all combinations of values exist in an infinite number of universes, and we are in one of these universes.
Now, I can almost hear you say that this is exactly like saying that it's all luck, just an accident, but it is not. Think about it before complaining and let me know if you really don't get it because it's self-evident at this point...
Your next point was more interesting in any case, since I need to admit that there was a bit of embarrassment. I will get to that when I have time :)
"... a group of people who would all agree to burn children. If that's what the Bible says, then fine, it was ok to kill all of them, but seriously... you agree that this ever existed!?"
ReplyDeleteThat’s just embarrassing, Hugo. Those societies are so well documented...
You are right, this is a little bit embarrassing as I had no idea that such societies ever existed!
I am still not sure what they were doing exactly though... When you said burning children and making wives prostitutes, I thought it meant that, let's say, all families have to burn their 2nd kid because it's bad luck keep him/her alive, and that all wives are considered prostitutes to be available for all...
If that was the case, then yes, I guess we are forced to say that these people were evil and did not deserve to live. Was it really something that bad however?
More importantly, was it really EVERYBODY in these societies that agreed with that? That participated in that?
Weren't there anybody in that society that was trying to stop such practices? You know, someone who would be like: 'eh guys, I think it sucks to burn kids'. If yes, then was it really necessary to kill these people as well?
What about the kids who were about to be burned? They were also part of these societies so was it justified to kill them since the goal was to save them in the first place?
Perhaps you see now why I wrote it was a "little" embarrassing, because what you taught me is not really important honestly... I still don't see how full scale genocide is ever justified. Sincerely, do you?
If you really think it is justified, then perhaps we could look at some African countries where kids are killed for being suspected of being sorcerers, TODAY. If God ordered to kill such societies back in the days, are we justified into getting rid of the people in these countries?
ReplyDeleteShould we write a letter to our PM to tell him to send the army there and kill EVERYBODY, men, women, kids, to prevent more kids from being killed?
The passage you told me look at, in Genesis, was telling a story of Abraham who communicate with God through a vision; does it mean that we just need to wait for somebody to have a vision in which he learns that yes, God wants us to go to these African countries where kids are burned alive and wipe them off?
By the way, I always read a bit before and after when you suggest a passage, and we see in the following chapter God talking about the slave that Abraham had in his possession. Isn't interesting that God was obviously fine with slavery at that time?
“It could be that all combinations of values exist in an infinite number of universes, and we are in one of these universes.”
ReplyDeleteOh well, as long as we’re adding things for which there is absolutely no evidence material universe could have been brought into existence by Hugo the atheist.
=====
slavery
http://makarios-makarios.blogspot.com/2009/09/sal-and-slavery.html
“It could be that all combinations of values exist in an infinite number of universes, and we are in one of these universes.”
ReplyDeleteOh well, as long as we’re adding things for which there is absolutely no evidence material universe could have been brought into existence by Hugo the atheist.
LOL, very funny, but it's funny for more reasons than you think; because even if it's a joke, that statement tells a lot about your lack of reasoning capabilities.
Look, we both agreed before that it's possible that our universe is one of many. Do you want to retract that?
If yes, then show me why it HAS to be the case, because scientific observations do not point towards that.
If no, then what's your point? I am not adding anything to the current scientific understanding of the Big Bang. You're the one who does that by saying it HAS to be designed...
You're the one who claims (or believes others who claim) that it has to have been started by an intelligent being. I just don't see evidence for that.
The fact that we:
1) don't know how the Big Bang was started...
2) don't know when it happened exactly since time did not exist...
3) don't know if it happened only once...
tell me that we just don't know enough about the exact origin and mechanism behind the Big Bang to conclude anything more than what we see: that the universe, around 14 billions year ago, was compacted into an infinitely small point. That's it. That's my belief.
Then you dare say that it's atheists, people like me, who add to this picture in order to support their worldview!? The irony is so strong; it is freaking hilarious.
Remember, you're the one who then take this picture, and say things like: Oh, you see, it could not be natural, because that's when all natural things started, so it's supernatural, so it's God. THAT is adding to the picture. THAT is FAITH.
So seriously, tell me what I believe on top of all that because you seem to know so much more than myself what I believe! Tell me what part of my belief is faith base. I can assure you that you cannot come up with anything. Any of these "beliefs" that you would list only exist in your head. You make stuff up and then attribute it to others. You always do that, and that's why I keep insisting that you have a light mental disorder in that respect. Sorry if it sounds mean but I don't have a lot of respect for a man who acts like such a bigot!
ReplyDelete****
Concerning slavery: I read very quickly your old blog post. I was not clear enough therefore the post is not related to what I meant.
I find it interesting to read that God supported slavery because it shows how people at the time thought it was Ok so God also thought it was Ok.
It just shows once more how it's obvious that the Bible was simply written by people in order to teach each other lessons. Nothing in it comes from a divine authority... it reflects the mind of the authors; nothing more.
“Look, we both agreed before that it's possible that our universe is one of many. Do you want to retract that?”
ReplyDeleteThere is no evidence for ANY other universe or multi verse. It’s a preposterous speculation that I agreed with only in theory since the real issue is where did the matter / energy come from to create ANY universe.
===========
“don't know how the Big Bang was started...”
That’s right, but we do know how it DIDN’T start and it didn’t start by any natural / material means because nothing NOTHING natural / material existed until the Big Bang Singularity”
Based on what we know from Science, I say:
. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
. Matter and energy cannot precede themselves or preexist themselves either physically or chronologically.
. Matter and energy do not have the ability to create themselves or bring themselves into existence from nothing or ex nihilo.
. Matter and energy cannot exist from infinity past.
. Anything that exists has an explanation of it’s existence, either in the necessity of its own nature (It can’t NOT exist), or in a cause that was / is external to itself.
. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is external to as well as transcendent to the universe.
Because that is true:
. Existing outside of time, the Cause of the universe is infinite or Eternal,
. Existing outside of matter (which is finite), the Cause is immaterial or Spiritual,
. Existing as the Cause of time and energy, space, matter and the laws of physics, the Cause is immeasurably more powerful than the mathematically precise universe and its exquisitely Finely Tuned constants and quantities.
. The Cause cannot be “scientific” because neither matter / energy existed prior to the Singularity, nor did the laws of physics (i.e., the laws that science has observed and identified), have anything material to act upon or govern prior to Singularity.
. Therefore the Cause of the beginning of the universe is not scientific but Personal. That means that the universe is not Deistic but Theistic.
. The transcendent Cause of the universe is therefore on the order of a Mind.
. That Cause is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent.
“For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature - have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made from what is unseen so that people are without excuse.” Paul in his letter to the Romans.
Because of clear scientific evidence, we know that:
. The universe exists.
. Therefore, the universe has an explanation of its existence.
Yes, I believe this based upon FAITH - FAITH that based upon this evidence.
=============
“Tell me what part of my belief is faith base.”
ReplyDeleteOk. You have exactly the same evidence as I stated above. Because of overwhelming scientific evidence, most atheists do grudgingly admit that the universe does indeed have a beginning. And the beginning that came about in a way closely modelled by what we call the Big Bang, a cosmogonic model about which it can be said with absolute confidence, "It has NEVER been:
As repeatedly verified in its predictions,
As corroborated by attempts at its falsification,
As concordant with empirical discoveries, and
As philosophically coherent as the Standard Big Bang Model.
What atheists believe is also believed upon FAITH. That is “Everything came from nothing by nothing.
From Nothing = What you call “an infinitely small point.” Please explain what that means to YOU. And if it means ANYTHING more than literally NOTHING then you can tell me where this point of energy / matter existed.
By nothing = Because the supernatural isn’t allowed in atheist world AND the natural didn’t exist until the singularity.
We both believe what we believe based upon FAITH. However, it takes way more FAITH to be an atheist.
============
“I find it interesting to read that God supported slavery because it shows how people at the time thought it was Ok so God also thought it was Ok.”
I’m Ok with saying that God allowed / commanded slavery as long as you agree that what He commanded was nothing like American style slavery. In fact it was what many Americans today would call a social safety net or even socialism. And as long as you admit that what is documented throughout the Bible - including re: slavery was man's disobedience.
========
it's obvious that the Bible was simply written by people"
When you find something written that humans would never conceive of (eg. grace) the next option is a non human source.
*sigh* so much copy/paste... You asked a question so I'll get to it quickly...
ReplyDeleteThere is no evidence for ANY other universe or multi verse.
Any evidence that there has to be only ONE? The point is that we DON'T know.
The Cause cannot be "scientific" because neither matter / energy existed prior to the Singularity, nor did the laws of physics
You don't understand what a singularity is. Not the first time I tell you that.
What atheists believe is also believed upon FAITH. That is “Everything came from nothing by nothing.
False; I don't believe that. Not the first time I tell you that either.
From Nothing = What you call “an infinitely small point.” Please explain what that means to YOU. And if it means ANYTHING more than literally NOTHING then you can tell me where this point of energy / matter existed.
ReplyDeleteFrom Nothing does NOT equal from an infinitely small point; the small point is a conceptual representation, i.e. a singularity... It is "imaginary", not in the sense that it's fiction, but in the mathematical sense. It's used in Big Bang Theory to explain what the universe looked like the farther we look back.
The only way to talk about that singularity is using mathematics, since we cannot observe it. But, by definition, our equations break at the singularity. Therefore nothing else can be said about what was "before" because "before" is meaningless with respect to our current understanding.
That being said I can finally let you know what 'nothing' means to me. Some claim that all the matter/energy suddenly appeared, out of nothing, and then started the Big Bang. That "nothing", to me, cannot mean literally nothing. Perhaps there is something I don't understand about quantum mechanics but I cannot accept that nothing, literally nothing, can generate something. I am forced to reject that explanation.
For the same reason, I am forced to reject a supernatural explanation. Why? Because the idea that there was nothing natural is a loop hole created to support a pre-conceive idea. To me, that "nothing" essentially means Nothing except God. It's not a sound argument; it's circular, meaningless and has no explanatory power. It only shift the question to God: where does God come from? Why is God infinite if nothing infinite actually exist? Why would he have always existed when that means he has been existing for an infinite amount of time, or non-time since time did not even existed... etc, etc, etc, the questions never end, it's just a cope out to reject the brute reality that no one knows, because it's hard to admit that we don't.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time however, there is something we do know, and it's that all the minds we have even ran into are the product of a brain, a physical brain. Therefore, this gives me one more reason to reject the idea that a mind existed prior to matter and energy. I believe in the primacy of existence, and disbelieve the primacy of consciousness.
Ok, I had told myself I would not comment on religion that much anymore; hopefully I will be able to let go now that we are starting to run in circles again... cheers!
a loop hole created to support a pre-conceive idea.``
ReplyDeleteYa, atheist scientists created a loophole to make science agree with the Bible.
======
It's not a sound argument``
It`s a sound philosophical and scientific fact!
===========
`Any evidence that there has to be only ONE?
Because you`re an atheist, you`re confined to the fact that the we have evidence for only one universe. Anything else is speculation or faith and you of course would never allow yourself to believe anything without evidence.
============
``.. . matter / energy existed prior to the Singularity, nor did the laws of physics``
This is an error. Can we not say, `Neither matter or energy existed UNTIL the singularity. Not your idea of nothing which is based upon wishful thinking but literally nothing UNTIL the singularity. What you`re saying is that, `Nothing natural existed except there actually had to be something natural because the only alternative is something supernatural.``
==============
“Why is God infinite if nothing infinite actually exist?”
That is not what is being said! Are you being deliberately obtuse? It’s like you asking, “How come God doesn’t need a cause if everything needs a cause?”
Anything MATERIAL cannot be infinite / eternal
Likewise
Everything material that BEGINS to exist has a cause.
Even if you want to go down the rabbit trail of “Nothing begins. It only changes from matter to energy or energy to matter,” this transition from one to the other always, always has a cause. We consistently observe this to be true.
The material universe began to exist from literally nothing material by an immaterial cause.
=======
`` ... etc, etc, etc, the questions never end,`
And rejecting Creator God is just a cop out to avoid the brute reality that a Being exists that you cannot understand, or examine or explain and Who presents a reality to which you are going to give an account someday for why you rejected His obvious existence.
Romans 1:18,19
Let's make it simpler; prove this:
ReplyDeleteThe material universe began to exist from literally nothing material by an immaterial cause.
That is what I don't believe.
I don't believe that the fact that the universe has a begin equal the universe came from nothing. You make that up.
I also do not believe that the cause has to be immaterial because we know nothing about the cause. It's false to say that nothing material existed, because we just don't know.
I am not obtuse, I am not trying to hide from anything, I just don't see evidence for what YOU believe.
These are undeniable facts:
- "stuff" exist right now
- This "stuff" is matter/energy
- This "stuff" was compacted in an infinite small point 14B years ago
Do you agree with that? If yes...
Give me ONE more fact that I am suppose to believe. I won't be obtuse. I will tell you why I agree or not.
Just don't copy paste your whole paragraph again. Give me ONE more line. Just ONE.
Your turn...
*REMINDER*
ReplyDeleteYour turn...
Prove this!
ReplyDeleteThe material universe began to exist from literally nothing material by an immaterial cause.
I can’t prove this, I can only go by what Big Bang cosmology points to, i.e. everything came from literally nothing.
As for an immaterial cause, unless you believe that matter / energy is eternal then the cause was immaterial. It's one or the other:
Either matter is eternal or the cause of matter is eternal.
Do you believe that the material is infinite / eternal?
============
“I don't believe that the fact that the universe has a begin equal the universe came from nothing. You make that up.”
I side with philosophy and science, both of which say that the material infinite does not and cannot exist.
=============
“This "stuff" was compacted in an infinite small point 14B years ago.”
If your definition of infinitely small point means that matter / energy existed, then no, I don’t believe that. If infinitely small point means something versus nothing, then where was this matematical point? Surrounded by mathematical space?
Prove this!
ReplyDeleteThe material universe began to exist from literally nothing material by an immaterial cause.
I'm not sure if you mean 'prove this' for what comes right after... but I don't believe that so I won't try to prove it...
I can’t prove this, I can only go by what Big Bang cosmology points to, i.e. everything came from literally nothing.
That's not what Big Bang cosmology says...
As for an immaterial cause, unless you believe that matter / energy is eternal then the cause was immaterial. It's one or the other:
Either matter is eternal or the cause of matter is eternal.
That's not what Big Bang cosmology says...
Do you believe that the material is infinite / eternal?
ReplyDeleteNo
"I don't believe that the fact that the universe has a begin equal the universe came from nothing. You make that up."
I side with philosophy and science, both of which say that the material infinite does not and cannot exist.
Infinity cannot literally exist since it's a concept. However, from our perspective, the universe could appear infinite. I don't think you get that subtlety unfortunately...
Let me try to give an analogy. Picture an ant living on the surface of a balloon. Its world is in 2D, it cannot go higher or lower than the surface. Yet, its world expand if you blow the baloon. From the ant's perspective, the world is infinite in 2D, since it has no edge.
Same for us... we cannot know more than that as of now.
"This "stuff" was compacted in an infinite small point 14B years ago."
ReplyDeleteIf your definition of infinitely small point means that matter / energy existed, then no, I don’t believe that.
Big Bang theory does not prove that nothing existed, and then, BOOM, everything appeared.
So, since you cannot agree with my point #3, we cannot go farther in our discussion as of now.
Please explain to me why you disagree with #3 because I don't understand exactly what part you disbelieve. You seem to misunderstand something of the Big Bang model...
Hello? Missed the update on that post again?
ReplyDelete"So, since you cannot agree with my point #3, we cannot go farther in our discussion"
ReplyDeleteDoing the smartass or you just have real bad reading comprehension skills?
ReplyDeletePlease explain to me why you disagree with #3 because I don't understand exactly what part you disbelieve. You seem to misunderstand something of the Big Bang model...