Nothing. The philosophical conversation around "God" is about the nature of the beginning. If something created or came before what is being contemplated, then you aren't thinking of God.
Upvote
0
God exists outside of time?
- Thread starter Ken-1122
- Start date
Insane_Duck
Because ducks are just awesome like that.
Here is your problem. Why can't I make up another solution that is also infinite? Can I give it whatever qualities I want? FSM is also eternal and infinite.
Upvote
0
You can make up whatever you want, with whatever qualities you would like. The issue is dealing with the scale of a number that isn't possible. An infinite amount of anything seems impossible to achieve. You need to explain your reasoning behind how you think it could be possible for a universe or FSM to have existed an infinite amount of years.
Upvote
0
Yes I believe God still exists and acts today. During the conversation I have been arguing for his activity being constant since the beginning of the universe.
No, I don't believe in a magic being. The stories in the NT were considered acts of faith, not acts of a magic man in the sky granting wishes. Same thing with the virgin birth. That was about faith, not a genie banging a virgin and making a super baby.
Would you please respond to the question I asked about the nature of the laws? Or is that something you need to dodge since you haven't thought it out yet?
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote
0
I didnt respond to your red herring because it is irrelevant to this discussion. This discussion is about your claims that the Christian God is outside time, constant and unchanging and now youve claimed that it caused the Big Bangnone of which youve supported with a single shred of sound evidence or a single sound argument. Please stop dragging red herrings through the conversation and start establishing the validity or truth of your claims. You continue to evade every request to do that.
You asked, What is the nature of these laws and how do they have control over matter? If you want to learn about physical laws then do some reading yourselfit doesnt belong in this discussion. The first misunderstanding you need to correct is that they are not prescriptive, but descriptive.
So do you believe it answers prayers? Doing so would be magic.
During this conversation, youve done nothing but evade requests for you to establish the validity or truth of your claims.
Religious faith is nothing more than belief without sound evidence or sound reasoning, unless, of course, you can provide some sound evidence or sound arguments to establish the validity or truth of those claims. Can you do that? If so then please do. Prove that the Christian God created the Big Bang, the Earth and life. Prove that it fathered a son. Prove that it performs miracles and answers prayers. But before you do any of that, prove that it exists at all. If you cant do that then your religious beliefs are no better than superstitionbelief resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or a false conception of causation.
Upvote
0
Lord Emsworth
Je ne suis pas une de vos élèves.
- Oct 10, 2004
- 51,745
- 421
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
world - Wiktionary
First entry:
1. (with the) Human collective existence; existence in general.
Second entry:
2. The Universe.
Note the capital U. Definition of Universe (capital U):
1. The sum of everything that exists in the cosmos, including time and space itself.
Universe - WiktionaryAlso, your own words:
I define the Universe as "all that exists"
(Ken reply) I looked up your definition of universe, and again I saw nothing that contridicts my claim that the Universe is"all that exists"; again fail.[/quote]
If you expect to be contradicted that is your problem. I said that I would refer to "all that exists" as world. The word universe I would use to refer ideally this space-time continuum. Other such entities would be called parallel universe, or some such. Then there is also the word multiverse. But again, that's just me.
What you do, on the other hand ...
You does not necessarily mean you, you know.
That follows from the definition. There is nothing to prove.
Upvote
0
GrowingSmaller
Muslm Humanist
Maybe God is something with super-symmetry but zero entropy and not subject to an arrow of time.
Upvote
0
Yes I pointed out to you early that there wouldnt be any proof. But you are working with such flawed understandings of these concepts, why that would be, hasnt gotten thru to you yet. Thats mainly due to I cant explain anything if I dont know what you already believe but figuring that out is red herring questions to you.
I wasnt misunderstanding. I was asking you what your opinion was and you think they are just representative of the behavior of matter correct? They dont actually exist? All you believe in is stuff that can move in the universe. And has it been in movement for an infinite amount of years, that are also an infinite amount of days long?
I have done some reading. This is what I read from Heisenberg.
I think that modern physics has definitely decided in favor of Plato. In fact the smallest units of matter are not physical objects in the ordinary sense; they are forms, ideas which can be expressed unambiguously only in mathematical language.
And longer versionIn the philosophy of Democritus the atoms are eternal and indestructible units of matter, they can never be transformed into each other. With regard to this question modern physics takes a definite stand against the materialism of Democritus and for Plato and the Pythagoreans. The elementary particles are certainly not eternal and indestructible units of matter, they can actually be transformed into each other. As a matter of fact, if two such particles, moving through space with a very high kinetic energy, collide, then many new elementary particles may be created from the available energy and the old particles may have disappeared in the collision. Such events have been frequently observed and offer the best proof that all particles are made of the same substance: energy. But the resemblance of the modern views to those of Plato and the PythagoreansNewton is not a configuration or a geometrical form, but a dynamic law. can be carried somewhat further. The elementary particles in Plato's Timaeus are finally not substance but mathematical forms. "All things are numbers" is a sentence attributed to Pythagoras. The only mathematical forms available at that time were such geometric forms as the regular solids or the triangles which form their surface. In modern quantum theory there can be no doubt that the elementary particles will finally also be mathematical forms but of a much more complicated nature. The Greek philosophers thought of static forms and found them in the regular solids. Modern science, however, has from its beginning in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries started from the dynamic problem. The constant element in physics since The equation of motion holds at all times, it is in this sense eternal, whereas the geometrical forms, like the orbits, are changing. Therefore, the mathematical forms that represent the elementary particles will be solutions of some eternal law of motion for matter. This is a problem which has not yet been solved.
Now who says the opposite of this that you think has it correct?Nope. It is faith that is being explained as the source of the miracles in the NT, not a guy in the sky doing requests.
If you understood the concepts in discussion you would know why proof hasnt been provided.
Maybe for many today on many issues but Christian faith in the eternal side back then initially came from reason. The reason was that our senses were limited to show us only what was in flux but reason told us that there were aspects that were constant in the universe.
Your understanding of the word God needs to be updated from a childs understanding of a guy in the sky to a philosophers understanding of the source of the universe. I dont need to provide proof of anything other than point out to you that you sound ridiculous with the understanding of the concepts you are working with and you need to educate yourself on the conversation that was going on within philosophy centuries before and after Jesus birth.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Eudaimonist
I believe in life before death!
- Jan 1, 2003
- 27,482
- 2,733
- 57
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
You can use the buzz phrases, but do they even mean anything sensible when put together in this way? I could use a technobabble generator to put together phrases like this.
eudaimonia,
Mark
Upvote
0
GrowingSmaller
Muslm Humanist
Well AFAIK stuff can exist outside of time at least, as in heat death (I only "know" this through a TV show where it said increase in disorder of the universe would max out and time would come to a standstill, there being no more basis for change).
Aso secondly I view knowledge as potentially a form of symmetry or isomphism - for instace in perceptual knowledge there is I believe some such form of correspondence between the representation and reality.
So the sentence has a logical basis to it, it is just pimped out a bit.
Aso secondly I view knowledge as potentially a form of symmetry or isomphism - for instace in perceptual knowledge there is I believe some such form of correspondence between the representation and reality.
So the sentence has a logical basis to it, it is just pimped out a bit.
Upvote
0
I’m not asking about the NT, I’m asking you what you believe right now. Do you believe this God of yours answers your prayers? Do you believe the Christian God answers other Christians’ prayers in the present?
Please spare me your misplaced condescension. I find it particularly ironic that you accuse me of childish beliefs when you are the one who believes in what is effectively an imaginary friend despite a complete lack of sound evidence or sound arguments.
Do you really expect us to believe that Christians today think of their God only in purely philosophical terms? Are you serious? You need to look at the actual data (2.5 MB PDF) and see how Christians today actually think and behave.
In the U.S. today, 80% of Christians are absolutely certain—not just fairly certain, but absolutely certain—that their God is real despite a complete lack of any sound evidence or sound arguments to support their belief. Over two thirds of them are convinced that their God is a person with whom they can have a relationship not just some impersonal force that caused the Big Bang. The vast majority of Christians hold the comforting belief that they will never really die. Over 95% of Christians pray to this God of theirs and 80% of them really believe they receive definite answers to specific prayers. Over 80% of Christians believe that miracles still happen today as they did in the past and over three quarters of them actually believe that angels and demons are active in the world today.
So despite a complete lack of sound evidence, the great majority of Christians today believe they have a personal relationship with an invisible, intangible God that answers their prayers, performs miracles and grants them eternal life. They also believe there are angels and demons running around in the world today. Tell us again how this isn’t a belief in magic.
In all of human history, no one has ever provided a single shred of sound evidence or a single sound argument to support a belief in the Christian God. Despite millennia of trying, there is nothing but innumerable failed attempts to prove the Christian God is real. Based on those facts, what is the reasonable conclusion a mature person would reach?
Upvote
0
No. Again, the miracles are brought about by faith.
I apologize about the condensation but it isn't misplaced. You have the same understanding of God you would find in a child of seven years at Sunday school. I'm not sure of your actual age but you haven't updated your understanding of the word God since childhood.
Link didn't work for me but what the majority thinks about God is irrelevant. 95 percent haven't read the Bible. 99 percent haven't read any of the Church Fathers. And 99.9 percent haven't read enough Plato to have an understanding of the philosophy of the time. (just a guess, not formal survey.) If you want to argue against God then it needs to be against the most informed and rational understanding. Not the common superstitions found amongst the uneducated because then you aren't actually arguing against God, just those particular understandings of God.
Did you ever find someone responding to the ideology presented in those Heisenberg quotes that you agree with?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Time is not simply a system we came up with to measure one moment to the next. Space and time are not separate entities, but are one thing: space-time. Time is one of the four dimensions we exist in. To say that god is outside of time is to say that it exists outside of the real world.
Upvote
0
I have been trying to. Have you been following the conversation and have some questions I should clarify?
Upvote
0
I asked you do you believe this God of yours answers your prayers or the Christian God answers other Christians prayers in the present. From your answer above, I take it that you dont believe the Christian God answers your prayers or any other Christians prayers. What other Christian beliefs dont you hold? Do you believe the Christian God created all things? Do you believe the Christian God fathered a son? Do you believe miracles still happen today as they did in the past? Do you believe angels and demons are active in the world today? Im guessing from your comments below that you dont believe these things, but could you please confirm it one way or the other.
Your condescension is misplaced because it is directed at me, but what I gave you isnt my understanding of God. As I just showed you, the understanding of God that you describe as being that of a seven-year-old is not my understanding, but the understanding of the vast majority of Christians in the U.S. today and many who contribute to these forums.
My understanding of the Christian God is that it is imaginary and that goes for the Muslim, Hindu, Greek, Roman, Norse, Egyptian, Aztec and all other gods as well. I understand gods to be imaginary entities that insecure and credulous people use for emotional comfort. Gods comes in many shapes and forms from the vague, distant impersonal force of the deists to the petty, vindictive and all-to-human personal gods of Christianity and Islam. However, the one thing they all have in common is that there isnt a single shred of sound evidence or a single sound argument to prove that any one of them is real.
The link is to a PDF. Do you have Acrobat Reader correctly installed? If you are interested in reading about how the majority of Christians think and behave then go here. Click on the tab below the Reports heading to go to Report 2: Religious Beliefs & Practices / Social & Political Views then download the Full Report from the column on the right.
However, what the majority thinks about God is not irrelevant at all. What the majority thinks about God influences their decisions and affects their behaviour. They think their church should have a say in the government. They think homosexuality should be discouraged so they oppose gay rights. They reject the theory of evolution and some try to have creationism taught in public school science classes. In other countries, what people think about their God motivates them to attack and kill people for making drawings or anything else they consider blasphemous and for the purely religious crime of apostasy.
By the way, I dont need to argue against your God or any other god. What you need to do is prove that it is real.
I dont think Ive ever found someone responding to the ideology presented in those Heisenberg quotes. Explain how that would prove the Christian God is real.
Upvote
0
world - Wiktionary
First entry:
1. (with “the”Second entry:Human collective existence; existence in general.
2. The Universe.Note the capital U. Definition of Universe (capital U):
1. The sum of everything that exists in the cosmos, including time and space itself.Universe - Wiktionary
Also, your own words:
I define the Universe as "all that exists"
(Ken reply) I looked up your definition of universe, and again I saw nothing that contridicts my claim that the Universe is"all that exists"; again fail.
If you expect to be contradicted that is your problem. I said that I would refer to "all that exists" as world. The word universe I would use to refer ideally this space-time continuum. Other such entities would be called parallel universe, or some such. Then there is also the word multiverse. But again, that's just me.
What you do, on the other hand ...
You does not necessarily mean you, you know.
That follows from the definition. There is nothing to prove.
(reply) Please explain this space-time continuum that you speak of and explain exactly how the concpet of time can't be applied to the universe; as you said earlier
Ken
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Davian
fallible
I have. I agree with you on many points, such as the many different working definitions of "God" seen on this board, from vaporous to comical.
From an ignostic perspective, a robust definition of "God" would be nice. Necessary, even.
Falsifiable would be better.
I will understand if you decline.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
