You do, because these basic properties need to have a reason for existing. Why do you ascribe these basic properties to the spiritual and physical?
Neither did I.
I didn't see a second question.
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.
You do, because these basic properties need to have a reason for existing. Why do you ascribe these basic properties to the spiritual and physical?Come on their just basic properties of each, can't believe i hafta explain that.
Neither did I.I didn't say i had seen anything from nothing
I didn't see a second question.And you didn't answer my second question.
Yes, I will agree with you here.When I said something cannot come from nothing I should have been more careful with my words. What I meant was that for me the universe had to have an outside cause (which many call God) because reason and basic thinking says to many people that something cannot come out of nothing without a cause.
If God is not a created thing, why does the universe need to be a created thing? My question to you is, why do you feel that the universe had to have a beginning when God does not?God is not a created thing and is outside of time so he/she/it does not need to have a cause. Everything that had a beginning has a cause.
Certainly, it's not. We see many instances of very different organisms evolving together in symbiosis. It doesn't require divine intervention, though. Reason should be telling you, in this case, that supernatural action isn't necessary to show you these things.When I consider order in the universe and how there is so much harmony in nature - e.g. this kind of plant cant live without this kind of bee - reason tells me that this cannot all be an accident.
If God is not a created thing, why does the universe need to be a created thing? My question to you is, why do you feel that the universe had to have a beginning when God does not?
Certainly, it's not. We see many instances of very different organisms evolving together in symbiosis. It doesn't require divine intervention, though. Reason should be telling you, in this case, that supernatural action isn't necessary to show you these things.
Not quite. Scientific consensus is that the current incarnation of our universe had a beginning - that is to say, the Big Bang happened and the universe began to expand to its current state. We have no clue what it was like prior to the Big Bang. The universe may have contracted to the size seen at the Big Bang, and then expanded and contracted many times. It's therefore plausible that the universe has always existed in a series of contractions and expansions.Based on the widespread belief of scientists that the universe had a beginning.
An interesting belief. It remains to be seen if it turns out to be true. Either way, though, this thread concerns the use of reason, and since you used reason to justify your belief in God you cannot in turn use that same belief in God to justify reason.I realise that this is not a universal belief and I also realise that I could be wrong but so many of our beliefs are based on judgments we make on less than perfect evidence. However, since I became a Christian I also have the Bible to guide me and my understanding of it is that it teaches that the universe had a beginning.
I have seen countless mounds of evidence, and the thin arguments that the ID movement uses to defend their position are quickly dismantled by scientists. Perhaps you would consider coming to the Origins Theology board to discuss it?Here again we differ in opinions. I have not seen any evidence that would convince me that the natural world I see around me evolved. When I see symbiosis for me is has the fingerprint of a wise creator.
Spiritual on the otherhand, that stuff comes from nothing all the time.
Why do you ascribe these basic properties to the spiritual and physical?
Hi all,
The other day I read a post that someone was offended by my use of the following quote.
Martin Luther: "Reason is the devil's harlot".
They seemed to feel the need to defend reason.
I would like to explore that more on this thread as I believe that there are those who have misunderstood this quote, IMHO. I think it is very important to dig deeper and fully understand a quote by considering context and time. Luther is not referring to mathematical reasoning which is sound, he is referring, I believe to the human condtion and spirit.
Here is what it means to me and what I thought Luther was trying to say:
We can always find a reason to support our decisions, comments, logic, actions, etc. even if they are the wrong reasons. Reason will do whatever a clever person wills it to do, just as, presumably, a harlot would.
We can find reasons why something may not be true in the bible. We can find reasons to allow our anger to surface. We can find reasons not to go to work. We can find reasons for many things. It does not make reason superior to faith nor does it mean that reason is always good or bad. Ultimately, this is why I trust faith more than reason.
By using faith instead of reason we know that the truth is in the bible, we rely upon prayer and God to quell our anger, we can rely upon God to give us a sense of responsibility to go to work, etc.
It can go either way unless we rely upon prayer and obedience to God, reason has a mind of it's own and will do as it pleases according to its owners faith and character.
Does anyone else have any comments to share? I would love to hear what you think?
Blessings, Fortuna
An interesting belief. It remains to be seen if it turns out to be true. Either way, though, this thread concerns the use of reason, and since you used reason to justify your belief in God you cannot in turn use that same belief in God to justify reason.
In what sense?Were does faith and hope and love come from?
Assuming you're right, what does this have to do with the possibility of the universe always existing? It doesn't need to be "brought from nothing" by an omnipotent God if it was always there.Physical things can not be destroyed or brought from nothing except by the hand of an omnipitent God.
Why do you say this? What are you basing this idea on?Spiritual things are above decay.
In my experience, it is usually the Bible that serves as the evidence being evaluated through reason. I'm not sure I've ever heard of reason and the Bible being used to evaluate God's existence. An interesting thought.Actually I can say this. I was explaining how reason helped lead me to faith in God and then how the Bible added to the evidence. I did not say anything about God justifying reason (not sure where you got that idea from). It is not a circular argument of any kind.
In what sense?
Assuming you're right, what does this have to do with the possibility of the universe always existing? It doesn't need to be "brought from nothing" by an omnipotent God if it was always there.
Why do you say this? What are you basing this idea on?
In my experience, it is usually the Bible that serves as the evidence being evaluated through reason. I'm not sure I've ever heard of reason and the Bible being used to evaluate God's existence. An interesting thought.
Except chemical releases in your brain that impart the sensation of hope.Hope is a seed that blossoms from nothing else but its own energy. Nothing physical can do that.
Please define "perfect", and explain how it is in decay. The universe is under the effects of the second law of thermodynamics, which states that heat entropy in a closed system will tend to increase. Is that what you mean by decay?The universe is in decay, it does not move tword a more perfect form that is just a law of the universe. a fact if you would.
Really? God's attitude shifted pretty dramatically between the Old Testament and New Testaments of the Bible.God has been the same God for as long as anyone can remember and for as long as anyone will last.
Actually, I don't. I just want people to examine why they make the assumptions that they make.I assume you have a theory? Please do tell.
As my faith icon indicates, I believe in God. I believe in God because I choose to believe in God, and I do so because it makes me feel more comfortable to believe that a higher power exists. This is, I feel, a very honest answer on my part. God has never demonstrated a miracle to me, nor have I ever asked God to do so. I have never witnessed a shred of evidence for God's existence, but that's okay with me. It is reasonable to come to the conclusion that God may or may not exist, and I choose to believe that God does.Hi!
Can I ask why you believe or disbelieve in the existance of God(s)? It would help me understand where you are coming from. Thanks
As my faith icon indicates, I believe in God. I believe in God because I choose to believe in God, and I do so because it makes me feel more comfortable to believe that a higher power exists. This is, I feel, a very honest answer on my part. God has never demonstrated a miracle to me, nor have I ever asked God to do so. I have never witnessed a shred of evidence for God's existence, but that's okay with me. It is reasonable to come to the conclusion that God may or may not exist, and I choose to believe that God does.
Very easy. Imagine being offered a choice: you can either enter a lottery for $50 million, or you can choose to not enter. The analogy isn't perfect, but it's close enough. Simply put, I find no benefit behind choosing to not believe in the existence of God.How easy is it for you to 'choose' to believe in God if you know there is a good chance that he/she/it might not exist?
I'd probably be more scared of the thought of death. Aside from that, not much. I don't think I would be any less morally inclined, for instance.Also, how does this chosen belief affect your daily life; how different would life be if you chose not to believe in God?
This is, quite simply, the essence of faith.I'm partly asking as I was wondering a few weeks ago about to what degree can we 'choose' to believe things without a shred of evidence.
In all likelihood, not much at all. Aside from you perhaps being disappointed when he doesn't actually bring you any presents, that is.Can I simply choose today to believe that Father Christmas, reindeers and all, is real. Would a choice based on zero evidence affect me very much.
For some it may not be.I realise that many will say that we believe in God / Jesus / Bible etc based on faith without evidence, but I'm convinced that it is not true.
There are those who are certainly convinced that an event or series of events important to them was guided by divine power, and they cite this as evidence of God's existence. To be fair, it's not actually evidence in any way shape or form, but if they believe it seriously enough it becomes their rationale for faith.If a Christian is asked why they believe in Jesus they will give a 'reason' even if it is something personal and subjective rather than based on hard scientific facts. I already gave some of my 'reasons'.
I hope my answers are of help, then. If you'd like further clarification, let me know.If you could answer some of my questions in the second paragraph I'd be pleased to learn more about your position and how reason and beliefs work for you.
It wouldn't be hard at all.Thanks for your reply as again it helps me understand more about your belief system. You hold that believing things without a shred of evidence is "the essence of faith" but think that this faith would probably not have any affect on a person, though in your case it affects you by easing your fear of death. This seems to be the gist of your last reply?
Wouldn't it help a person even more to choose to believe in Jesus and his Gospel? You say you have chosen to believe in God why should it be harder of of less benefit to believe in Jesus using the same "essence of faith" you mentioned?
Er...you didn't have to explain the laws of physics. I was the one who mentioned the second law of thermodynamics. If you're going to extrapolate that to mean decay, you're going to have to define "decay", and how it relates to the "perfect" state you mentioned earlier.I'm done it's like talking to a kindergartener, if I have to explain the laws of physics to someone....
...I already know what the second law states.Go look it up.
Except chemical releases in your brain that impart the sensation of hope.
Please define "perfect", and explain how it is in decay. The universe is under the effects of the second law of thermodynamics, which states that heat entropy in a closed system will tend to increase. Is that what you mean by decay?
Really? God's attitude shifted pretty dramatically between the Old Testament and New Testaments of the Bible.
Actually, I don't. I just want people to examine why they make the assumptions that they make.
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?