Dave Ellis
Contributor
- Dec 27, 2011
- 8,933
- 821
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
But we have no contemporary records of such a thing.
So what are you referring to?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The witness of the saints.
Stars are "caused into existence". In a word, gravity.It is not even clear that anything can even be "caused into existence".
That's the point. Our current observation that the universe was created from nothing allows us to deduce a pre-existing entity - God.Causes involve interactions between (or within) pre-existing entities that change the entities in question.
This is a faith based statement on your part.Nothing is created, only changed in some way.
So what. An explanation is still worth seeking.It is also not clear that "nothing" can be subject to change in order to become something,
The creating entity is God which is the causing agent - Efficient Cause. No one is claiming He is the Material Cause.since nothing is not itself an entity, and causes pertain to entities.
Stars are "caused into existence". In a word, gravity.
That's the point. Our current observation that the universe was created from nothing allows us to deduce a pre-existing entity - God.
This is a faith based statement on your part.
So what. An explanation is still worth seeking.
The creating entity is God which is the causing agent - Efficient Cause. No one is claiming He is the Material Cause.
Ergo, "they are caused" into existence.That's not an equivalent example. Stars are created from pre-existing matter, your assertion is saying something came from nothing.
Recently Guth has worked with Alex Vilenkin (Tufts) and Arvind Borde (Southampton College) to show that the inflating region of spacetime must have a past boundary, and that some new physics, perhaps a quantum theory of creation, would be needed to understand it.Except our current observation isn't that the universe was created from nothing... We know the big bang happened, and we don't know anything about what would have preceded it. We have no reason to assert a state of nothingness ever existed.
Ergo, "they are caused" into existence.
Recently Guth has worked with Alex Vilenkin (Tufts) and Arvind Borde (Southampton College) to show that the inflating region of spacetime must have a past boundary, and that some new physics, perhaps a quantum theory of creation, would be needed to understand it.
MIT Department of Physics
Just because the idea of a true nothing causes you problems in internet debates does not mean that real Physicists do not genuinely entertain and admit to the concept and problem of true nothingness preceeding the singularity.
This does not justify a positive claim that "Nothing is created", unless you are saying what he meant to say was "We have never observed anything created."Well, not really.... We have no examples of something being created from nothing, so his statement is correct.
Then he should have chosen his words more carefully.Also, by definition "nothingness" doesn't exist. If it existed, then it would be something, and not nothing.
We exist therefore we know without any doubt an explanation exists.Not if it doesn't exist.
This does not justify a positive claim that "Nothing is created", unless you are saying what he meant to say was "We have never observed anything created."
Then he should have chosen his words more carefully.
Cold is a lack of heat. Nothing is the lack of Physics. This is a perfectly legitimate definition and allows Creation to be defined as a logical two state system. The initial state is no physics. The end state is the existence of physics.
We exist therefore we know without any doubt an explanation exists.
We exist.
If you are satisfied with such gruel, then I pity you.
Stars are "caused into existence". In a word, gravity.
That's the point. Our current observation that the universe was created from nothing allows us to deduce a pre-existing entity - God.
This is a faith based statement on your part.
So what. An explanation is still worth seeking.
The creating entity is God which is the causing agent - Efficient Cause. No one is claiming He is the Material Cause.
Strictly speaking, no saints witnessed the resurrection.
I could say the same thing to you about mysticism.
What do you mean by that? No witnesses of a disappearing body? I suppose that's true, but belief in a disappearing body is not the substance of the Christian faith in the resurrection.
P1: Whatever begins to exist has a causeWhat observation would that be? I'm not aware that we have observed the universe created from nothing.
Yes, I know....I'm not talking about what is worth seeking.
No, take the time to understand. That's why I gave you the links. Of course God created matter.If God is the efficient cause and not the material cause, are you suggesting that God never created matter?
So what. An explanation is still worth seeking.
Not if it doesn't exist.
We exist therefore we know without any doubt an explanation exists.
The subject was an explanation. We exist therefore we know an explanation exists, and explanations are always worth seeking.How do you figure? Just because we exist has nothing to do with if there was ever a state of pure nothingness.
Let me ask you a question.
If in some remote part of the world, if a few people came forward and claimed, someone had risen from the dead after three days, and then a bunch of people in that area claimed they saw the person alive later on, would you believe them?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?