disciple Clint
Well-Known Member
- Mar 26, 2018
- 15,259
- 5,997
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
There can only be one uncaused cause, that is God and not the universe.
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.
There can only be one uncaused cause, that is God and not the universe.Why can it not be that the matter of the universe and the basic forces of the universe always existed?
"Because I said so" is not an answer.
God needs to be able to know everything knowable in the simulation. The simulation might be imagined as a computer program running on a computer, so God's brain probably needs to be more capable than the minimal computer required to run the simulation? God's brain probably needs at least enough memory to remember the initial conditions he chose for the simulation, and then he needs to be able to derive answers to any questions instantaneously (from the perspective of somebody within the simulation).What does it mean for a mind to be greater than a simulation?
very simple, all I have to do is consider what they are saying, the Holy Spirit is never going to ask me to anything against the will of God, the Bible tells us what the will of God is and is not. I can simply command in the name of Jesus depart from me satan.
God needs to be able to know everything knowable in the simulation. The simulation might be imagined as a computer program running on a computer, so God's brain probably needs to be more capable than the minimal computer required to run the simulation? God's brain probably needs at least enough memory to remember the initial conditions he chose for the simulation, and then he needs to be able to derive answers to any questions instantaneously (from the perspective of somebody within the simulation).
I wonder if a person could measure the "greatness" of God's mind and the simulation with Kolgomorov compexity in some way? Anyway, hopefully that explains what I mean even if it isn't fully fleshed-out.
I'm imagining that God's brain might simply know the initial conditions of the universe and know how the universe works and know that the universe is deterministic. If somebody asks God about the state of the universe at some arbitrary time then God can merely recall the relevant initial conditions and deduce the state at the later time. God would need to be able to give instantaneous answers from the perspective of some human within the universe to qualify as omniscient. I don't think it is good enough for God to answer "come back in a week after I do some thinking". But God might exist in transcendent time so that he could spend some time thinking yet appear to give an instantaneous answer, and that would be o.k.I'm unfamiliar with Kolgomorov complexity, but I like everything you said here except God's brain needing to know the initial conditions. Why those?
We know a lot about how stuff inside the universe works. We don't know much at all about how the universe itself as a structure works.What evidence do you have that it just exists and is an exception to everything we know about the way the universe works.
And how exactly do you know that there cannot possibly be two uncaused causes?There can only be one uncaused cause, that is God and not the universe.
Ah, so you use the proof from flying balls.The universe cannot be uncaused because it is a reaction. A ball does not just fly through the air, someone or something caused it to fly.
That’s all well and good, but the problem occurs when apologists try to use these definitions to extrapolate facts about reality. That’s not how logic works.
Logic tells us how to make coherent statements about reality, not what reality is obligated to be.
In reality, we can’t actually determine causal relationships with metaphysical certainty.
3. Of all the possible causes of the universe, I pick God.
Given that Big Bang Theory falsified Steady State theory, the universe (nature) did have a cause from outside itself.
Thus, cause rationally supersedes nature. Or is simply known as "supernature."
To account for ultimate cause, the only options* are as follows:
- Chance
- Intent
- A material cause.
^ Material cause invokes an infinite regress, which is completely irrational, because it ultimately never concludes anything. "Turtles All The Way Down" applies equally to cosmological claims as it does to theistic claims.
"Chance" is not a thing-in-itself. Voltaire argued that chance is a placeholder for "we don't know." You need material dice to actually roll them to begin with. Thus, chance is eliminated.
Thus, deductively speaking, "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." -AC Doyle (lol)
Conclusion: It was done intentionally on purpose. Q.E.D. (double lol)
*Until you can actually bring a fourth option (or more), then all rational options have been cited.
How does that prove that the universe was not an uncaused cause?1. Because Steady State was falsified.
What do you mean when you refer to the universe? Are you referring to just the observable universe? Or are you referring to the universe that started with the Big Bang, which could be much larger than the observable universe? Or are you referring to the total state of reality, which could include the results of an infinite number of Big Bangs in an infinite space-time of many dimensions?2. Due to #1, the universe begs the question of its own existence. Question-begging fallacies are never rational.
How did you prove there can only be one possible uncaused cause?No, it is deductively eliminated instead.
How does that prove that the universe was not an uncaused cause?
For all we know, there could have been matter and forces similar to what we now call the universe that go back forever.
What do you mean when you refer to the universe? Are you referring to just the observable universe? Or are you referring to the universe that started with the Big Bang, which could be much larger than the observable universe? Or are you referring to the total state of reality, which could include the results of an infinite number of Big Bangs in an infinite space-time of many dimensions?
How did you prove there can only be one possible uncaused cause?
And if there is only one uncaused cause possible, how did you deductively eliminate the flying spaghetti monster?
I'm imagining that God's brain might simply know the initial conditions of the universe and know how the universe works and know that the universe is deterministic. If somebody asks God about the state of the universe at some arbitrary time then God can merely recall the relevant initial conditions and deduce the state at the later time. God would need to be able to give instantaneous answers from the perspective of some human within the universe to qualify as omniscient. I don't think it is good enough for God to answer "come back in a week after I do some thinking". But God might exist in transcendent time so that he could spend some time thinking yet appear to give an instantaneous answer, and that would be o.k.
Sorry, that is probably kind of disorganized and confusing, but hopefully you can decipher the intent.
^ @Nihilist Virus , I had another thought regarding God's omniscience: God's own future interventions need to be considered when he is simulating the universe to answer questions about future states. For example, in the Garden of Eden story God gives a prophecy about the Eve's offspring crushing the head of the serpent, and that prophecy is understood by Christians to predict Jesus (born of a virgin) defeating Sin and Satan. God needs to know all his interventions between the time of the Garden of Eden and the time of Jesus - essentially all God's activities in the Old Testament. God needs to decide on his script and stick to that script as he interacts with the universe.
Many of God's interventions are tips about future events. So taking the prophecy mentioned above (where God told Adam and Eve about Jesus), God needs to run his simulation of the universe forward until his next prophecy - maybe that is the prophecy of the Flood given to Noah. God would need to set aside the calculations he is doing for the prophecy of Jesus and work on the calculations for the Flood. Then after God knows what he will tell Noah he can return to his calculations for the prophecy of Jesus until he reaches another intervention such as the prophecy given to Abraham about the birth of Isaac.
The problem is that God can't know exactly what he will tell Adam and Eve about Jesus until he determines what he will tell Noah and Abraham and Joseph and Moses and Elijah and so on. And the information God gives to Adam and Eve might be a factor making all his calculations for Noah and Abraham and Joseph and Moses and Elijah change. And of course those changes might change the calculations for Adam and Eve so that the process must start again.
It might be an impossible problem for God to solve. (Again, sorry this is probably hard to follow.)
If you are truly trying to discern the "nuts and bolts" of how God works, recall that we're talking about a God who chose to take the form of a human being billions of years before human beings evolved, or potentially an eternity before human beings evolved.
It doesn't have to be infinite regress. It could just be that the fundamental cause of existence always was.Infinite regress is a non-answer, and just as irrational.
When I speak of all of reality, I am referring to what well could me much more than just that which came from the Big Bang.If you're referring to "reality" in a purely naturalistic sense, then you mean the universe that started with the Big Bang, which could be much larger than the observable universe, yet still begs the question of its existence.
Huh? You say this in response to a simple line of questions:^ Which is also an appeal to infinite regress. It's truly the effort to evade "God" by any means necessary.
It doesn't have to be infinite regress. It could just be that the fundamental cause of existence always was.
When I speak of all of reality, I am referring to what well could me much more than just that which came from the Big Bang.
I notice that you did not answer the questions, or even make the slightest attempt to answer them.
In your previous posts you have referred to the universe. Can you not tell me what you mean by "universe"? You seem to be taking statements that apply to the observable universe, and saying that these statements apply to any possible multi-verse of all of existence. You cannot do that.
So to make any sense of your word salad, you are going to need to tell us what you mean when you use the word "universe". Can you answer the question, please?
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?