In an infinite multiverse, must the Trinitarian God somewhere exist?

[Eudaimonist]

All thinking, all reasoning, all logic, is mental masturbation.

Reasoning is important for human flourishing. And that depends on reasoning well about reality, not poorly. There is such a thing as reasoning put to a good purpose and in a proper way. I'm not attacking reasoning as such.

Nothing we do matters in the cosmic sense.

I don't care about the cosmic sense.

So what is "pointless reasoning" to you may be stimulating to others, despite the fact that it is indeed, in the end, nothing more than mental masturbation.

It is pointless reasoning because it is flawed for the purpose of learning anything about reality. If you find meaning in it, that's fine, but that's like finding meaning in squirrels equal gravity times cheesecake.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[-57]

One does not follow the other, as time as we conceive it is meaningless prior to the Big Bang. You talk about nothing as though it has the property of existence. Before there was something, there was nothing, as in, no existence as we know it to speak of, period.

It sounds to me you're expressing faith. Good for you.

And yes...before there was something, excluding God that always had to exist, there was nothing.

 

[-57]

That's like saying that God had to have created himself from nothing.

No, physical reality could simply have existed in its own right and developed to what we think of as the Big Bang.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Nope, It's like saying God always existed and never did He not exist. Think about it....there has to be a being that always existed or else nothing would exist...considering you can't create yourself from nothing, that is be and not be at the same time.

Just where did the matter/energy in your physical reality come from?

 

[civilwarbuff]

This is a thread for the more philosphically-minded. Discuss. I'll chime in a little later as I do not have time to parse out my thoughts on this, but I'm interested to get the discussion going.

Not sure what this has to do with apologetics....maybe a science forum....

 

[Eudaimonist]

Nope, It's like saying God always existed and never did He not exist.

That's what I think about physical reality. It has always existed and never did not exist.

Just where did the matter/energy in your physical reality come from?

Where did God come from?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[-57]

That's what I think about physical reality. It has always existed and never did not exist.



Where did God come from?


eudaimonia,

Mark

I do find it intersting how you can believe that physical reality always existed and never didn't exist....then have the audacity to ask "where did God come from".

Well, at least you believe something can be eternal. You're almost not an atheist anymore.
Your problem is this....if physical reality existed from eternity past...the now...would never arrive. But, for the sake of the argument lets say it could arrive to the now....the time period that expired would have been so long your physical reality would be liken to a dead battery or a clock that has run down and stopped. There would be no energy in your big bang to make it go BANG.

So what does that mean? It means you now need to tell me how your "physical reality" existed outside of time and isn't dependent upon time.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I do find it intersting how you can believe that physical reality always existed and never didn't exist....then have the audacity to ask "where did God come from".

I'm making a point about special pleading. If God's existence doesn't require an explanation, physical reality might not need one either.

Well, at least you believe something can be eternal. You're almost not an atheist anymore.

I am exactly as much of an atheist as any other atheist. Atheism isn't about a rejection of something "eternal".

Your problem is this....if physical reality existed from eternity past...the now...would never arrive.

Hold on! I never said that I thought that the past is eternal. I think that the past is finite, and for the exact reason you mention.

you now need to tell me how your "physical reality" existed outside of time and isn't dependent upon time.

It doesn't exist outside of time and isn't independent of time.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[SeraphimSarov]

Reasoning is important for human flourishing. And that depends on reasoning well about reality, not poorly. There is such a thing as reasoning put to a good purpose and in a proper way. I'm not attacking reasoning as such.
[...]
It is pointless reasoning because it is flawed for the purpose of learning anything about reality. If you find meaning in it, that's fine, but that's like finding meaning in squirrels equal gravity times cheesecake.

Well, to backpedal a bit, this thread was meant more as food for thought than serious discussion, as serious discussion of a topic so wildly unscientific is essentially impossible. I just find the idea interesting to ponder. And please do not get me wrong; I highly value logic and reasoning, perhaps above all else in my life, but I simply do not find it to have intrinsic value. I suppose this is completely off-topic and needn't be discussed, as I imagine you'll either agree or we'll spend pages talking circles around each other. I agree with just about everything I've seen you post, so I'll just concede here.

(An aside: there is an interesting linguistic conversation to be had about "squirrels equal gravity times cheesecake!")

 

[SeraphimSarov]

It sounds to me you're expressing faith. Good for you.

And yes...before there was something, excluding God that always had to exist, there was nothing.

You're contradicting yourself here. If, prior to the Big Bang, there was no existence, it does not follow to say that something existed. This isn't faith; it's logic.

 

[-57]

I'm making a point about special pleading. If God's existence doesn't require an explanation, physical reality might not need one either.

My post above explained why physical reality needed a creator.

I am exactly as much of an atheist as any other atheist. Atheism isn't about a rejection of something "eternal".

It's about rejecting God.....in favor of explaining some sort of "physical reality" based upon faith.

Hold on! I never said that I thought that the past is eternal. I think that the past is finite, and for the exact reason you mention.

So, you would now have me believe that time in the past just started and physical reality began? I thought this concept was debunked when you understood that things can't create themselves from nothing.

It doesn't exist outside of time and isn't independent of time.

Your physical reality requires a creator.

 

[-57]

You're contradicting yourself here. If, prior to the Big Bang, there was no existence, it does not follow to say that something existed. This isn't faith; it's logic.

The FACT is this...inorder for there to be anything in our universe....there had to have been an eternal being. A creator. You have no way around that.

 

[SeraphimSarov]

The FACT is this...inorder for there to be anything in our universe....there had to have been an eternal being. A creator.

Why? Something coming out of nothing is just as fantastical with or without some force behind it.

 

[-57]

Why? Something coming out of nothing is just as fantastical with or without some force behind it.

I find you atheist quite interesting...you can easily put faith in stuff self creating from nothing....yet deny the possibility of the existance of God.

 

[SeraphimSarov]

I'm an agnostic atheist. I'm not denying anything. I just see no evidence. If I ever find any, I'll change my mind.

 

[-57]

I'm an agnostic atheist. I'm not denying anything. I just see no evidence. If I ever find any, I'll change my mind.

Thanks for the clarification....I was just reading your faith description under your picture.

Just for the record, what would you consider as evidence?

 

[SeraphimSarov]

If I knew what evidence I'd require, I'd be able to flatly state that as such evidence has yet to surface, it must not exist. However, not knowing what evidence could exist, I'm open to new possibilities. I believe that is the most logical and scientific approach to the matter.

 

[-57]

If I knew what evidence I'd require, I'd be able to flatly state that as such evidence has yet to surface, it must not exist. However, not knowing what evidence could exist, I'm open to newpossibilities. I believe that is the most logical and scientific approach to the matter.

I see motor protiens as great evidence for design by a God that I consider as Trinitarian.

 

[Eudaimonist]

My post above explained why physical reality needed a creator.

Right, and I reject that argument.

It's about rejecting God.....in favor of explaining some sort of "physical reality" based upon faith.

It's not based on faith. It's based on philosophical reasoning. And I admit that I can be mistaken and that the past really is eternal.

So, you would now have me believe that time in the past just started and physical reality began?

You would have me believe that God just exists and magically created the universe. Surely that is not a big hurdle for you.

But to be accurate, physical reality did not begin. Time began. That is, change began. It is in the nature of physical reality to change, just as it changes right now.

I don't believe that there was nothing and then *poof* physical reality just appeared. Time/change is a property of physical reality, not something outside of it.

I thought this concept was debunked when you understood that things can't create themselves from nothing.

I don't think that anything creates itself from nothing. I'm not saying that physical reality was created from nothing. It is uncreated.

Your physical reality requires a creator.

No, it doesn't, any more than God would require a creator.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[-57]

You would have me believe that God just exists and magically created the universe.

eudaimonia,

Mark

Absolutly...you have no other choice. There has to be an uncreated being...God...who supernaturally, not magically created "all" or else there would be nothing.

Considering you're an atheist...I understand your resistance to this truth.

......Then again you would have me believe...and faith is part of it...that physical reality (energy/matter) always existed. I've already addressed several problems for this concept....another question is.....why did it change state?

 

[Eudaimonist]

Absolutly...you have no other choice. There has to be an uncreated being...God...who supernaturally, not magically created "all" or else there would be nothing.

There is your special pleading!

I certainly do have a choice. Physical reality is uncreated, just like you think that your God is uncreated. There is no need for magical or supernatural anything. It's all natural, and no need to complicate things with an invisible entity that I have no reason to think exists.

Considering you're an atheist...I understand your resistance to this truth.

Considering you're a theist...I understand your resistance to my logic.

......Then again you would have me believe...and faith is part of it...that physical reality (energy/matter) always existed.

Faith isn't part of it. It's a philosophical judgment based on what we do know. It's a conclusion I have drawn.

I've already addressed several problems for this concept....another question is.....why did it change state?

It was in its nature to change state, just as it is in its nature to change state now. This shouldn't be surprising.


eudaimonia,

Mark