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.
But surely there had to be a beginning to time and space.
Before what exactly? Before the big bang, before what created the big bang, before what created the thing that created what came before the big bang? And so on.I guess the beginning of existence as we know it, time and space. What else could there be. Before that there was nothing and when I mean nothing I mean absolutely nothing otherwise there would have been something. But even for all that to start there had to be something great.
Read what I was replying to.What do you mean I think the earth is dead matter.
As you point out that don't know yet and some are saying the ideas of others are wrong. some are saying we may never know. That's the beauty of science, they argue, debate and grow. Ancient man couldn't understand how Earth, Man and all the animals arrived here. Now we know, something the miracle came from dead matter on the Earth, but that's ignorance. There was no dead matter on the Earth. Life evolved over billions of years from live volcanic matter. That was always here.The problem is when you read what scientists think caused it or more specifically what they think happened before the big bang it seems to be similar to what they claim God as an explanation is. So its not that they haven't found an answer yet but that the type of answers they are already trying to come up with show that they have to appeal to things beyond the boundaries of the logic and science they use to explain everything else. So this shows that whatever the answer is going to be its going to be outside the normal parameters of our reality and existence.
For example from your links.
In this realm, the solution, whatever it is, will seem very strange to us, and it will almost certainly make no sense to our brains because here, it is possible to have an event with no cause.
http://www.deepastronomy.com/what-caused-the-big-bang.html
Fortunately, the thinky types have come up with some ideas, and they’re all one part crazy, one part mind bendy, and 100% bananas.
http://www.universetoday.com/116835/what-came-before-the-big-bang/
So as you can see even the scientists will have to appeal to crazy and far fetched ideas that step outside the ways in which we explain things to be able to come up with an answer. So no matter how you look at it scientists will have to do the very thing they claim believers in Gods creation do which is to appeal to a force or occurrence beyond our reality.
How do you know there wasn't "something".
Thats right and we could keep going back. But where do we stop. By appealing to some unknown power or mechanism or reality that is different to what we know and how we measure things to explain things is doing the same as what you are saying believers do with God. You are stepping outside the natural and normal ways we see things to be able to explain it. And I agree because thats what we have to do because e cant use the laws of physics that rule our world to work this out. So thats why God as one possibility is not so far fetched. At least with Him we have an agent who claims to be made of the things that we cannot explain and of always being there by saying "I AM WHO I AM". He states that He spoke existence into reality and that He was there before time began.Before what exactly? Before the big bang, before what created the big bang, before what created the thing that created what came before the big bang? And so on.
Read what I was replying to
No that is not proven. Bacteria has an amazing ability to adapt and can live in many different environments. But that doesn't men this is how life started. Evolution takes something and then imagines all sorts of things that have not been validated. They havnt proven this in lab test so why should we believe this from the stories they make.As you point out that don't know yet and some are saying the ideas of others are wrong. some are saying we may never know. That's the beauty of science, they argue, debate and grow. Ancient man couldn't understand how Earth, Man and all the animals arrived here. Now we know, something the miracle came from dead matter on the Earth, but that's ignorance. There was no dead matter on the Earth. Life evolved over billions of years from live volcanic matter. That was always here
Yes we will have to go back to something. Thats something will have to be pretty amazing.So the creationists have nowhere to go but backwards to what created the big bang. If we find out that, they will go back to what created, what created the big bang.
Heres some more to ponder.Neither of the sites you pointed to give any credence to the god theory. One says it's the answer for people who can't grasp the possibility of not knowing the answer. Simple answer for simple people, to an impossible question. Maybe one day we will be able to get our head and the question or answer.
Why?But at the end of the day at one point there had to be really really really nothing.
Wouldn't that rule out an eternal god?How can there be an eternal existence of something. This would break all the laws that are in existence.
Think about it. If there was something then that something either had to be created or was always there. If it was always there and that something was the catalyst for the big bang then its suggests time. If it suggests time then it couldn't have always been there. The big bang required certain things to happen. They came together and created the right conditions for the big bang. Those things would have had to have been there before the big bang. If we appeal to some sort of other dimension and other conditions o explain what was before the big bang then that is no different to God.Why?
If God is the creator then He is an agent outside all the conditions of existence. If He is the creator then He is greater than anything we would try to describe and explain about existence.Wouldn't that rule out an eternal god?
You didn't answer my question. To clarify, my question concerned your claim that "nothingness" is somehow a necessity.Think about it. If there was something then that something either had to be created or was always there. If it was always there and that something was the catalyst for the big bang then its suggests time. If it suggests time then it couldn't have always been there. The big bang required certain things to happen. They came together and created the right conditions for the big bang. Those things would have had to have been there before the big bang. If we appeal to some sort of other dimension and other conditions o explain what was before the big bang then that is no different to God.
"Outside the conditions of existence"? You mean like nonexistence? That's the only way I can interpret the sentence "outside the conditions of existence."If God is the creator then He is an agent outside all the conditions of existence. If He is the creator then He is greater than anything we would try to describe and explain about existence.
The way I learned it, whatever happened is what God intended. However random, however flawed, the end goal was us, and here we are.Natural selection, which is proven. Isn't intelligent. It's hit and miss, creatures evolve and become extinct as climates change, continents shift, and even asteroids hit the Earth. Or even one animal, Man, develops faster than others and kill off other species.
To claim that was gods work or remotely intelligent is, in my opinion, ignoring the obvious.
So the idea is that if something is incredibly intelligent and advanced and complex that it requires an intelligent creator, right? It would be impossible for it to occur naturally and develop all on its own? So anything that is complex, intelligent, and advanced was created. So then God was created by Mega-God? God is more intelligent, advanced, and complex than humans, so he requires creation more than even us. Why is it more likely that something complex came first, and then something more basic? Does that ever happen in nature?
And I reject the idea that because the statistical probability for the conditions necessary for life to occur being as low as it is makes it impossible either. If the universe is infinite in size, and that means that there are an infinite number of atoms crashing together simultaneously, then it is not just likely, but absolutely certain that life will exist.
If I tell you that I am thinking of a number and I tell you to guess it, but I give you all of eternity to guess, and you can make an infinite number of guesses per second, how quickly will you guess that number?
Not really. When they talk about the multiverse, they postulate that either each universe is a bubble unto itself, or spacetime is infinite and a new universe pops up here and there and sort of makes a bubble from popping up.I don't think many astrophysicist think the universe is infinite. Didn't the Big Bang dispell that idea?
Apologies for the late reply, but though I agree with your overall thrust, this part is incorrect. 'The fittest' in this context means the best suited to produce viable offspring in their environment; it doesn't mean gym fit. Whether it's because they are big and strong, or small and weak; whether they hide & burrow, or they require less food, or they are simpler, whether they have more offspring, or they have fewer offspring, they're fit if they're able to persist, generation to generation, in their environment.... Research how we got from a single cell being and by a process of survival of the fittest, which doesn't mean what you think it does. It wasn't always the fittest that survived, sometime is was the weakest, who could hide in a burrow and escape. Or the less fit who required less food, etc.
Not necessarily; spatially, the observable universe (i.e. as far as we can see) would have been very small at the big bang, but there's nothing in the physics that prevents it being a tiny part of a spatially infinite universe (all very hot and dense) at the big bang.With regard to the Big Bang as being the origin of our universe is considered pretty conclusibe within the realm of science. And as such it is finite since it had a beginning.
The beginning part isn't totally accurate either though. There was a state of really low entropy at one point, which is what people consider the time right after the big bang, and we can't look back past that. That doesn't necessarily constitute a beginning though.Agreed but all that as you said is just
postulation. With regard to the Big Bang as being the origin of our universe is considered pretty conclusibe within the realm of science. And as such it is finite since it had a beginning.
I just did by explaining the consequences. If there is something then we have to deal with that somehow ie how did it get there, how long it was there (eternity), was there a beginning to it. Does the same conditions that we know of apply to what was before the big bang and if so does this mean that there are other dimensions that are involved in our existence or non existence. All these factors would have to be dealt with if there is something rather than nothing.You didn't answer my question. To clarify, my question concerned your claim that "nothingness" is somehow a necessity
When I say outside the conditions of our existence that is exactly what I mean outside our reality. Outside the things we know such as our physical laws, logic, cause and effect that is compared to conditions before the big bang. It is different to conditions of non existence as that may mean after death. Thats unless you want to acknowledge that there may be some sort of condition after death. I guess if some scientists want to acknowledge that there is really something rather than nothing before existence and life then I guess it stands to reason that there is something rather than nothing after life."Outside the conditions of existence"? You mean like nonexistence? That's the only way I can interpret the sentence "outside the conditions of existence."
Sorry, steve, you still aren't addressing my question. You claimed that nothingness was somehow necessary. I asked you how you knew that that was the case.I just did by explaining the consequences. If there is something then we have to deal with that somehow ie how did it get there, how long it was there (eternity), was there a beginning to it. Does the same conditions that we know of apply to what was before the big bang and if so does this mean that there are other dimensions that are involved in our existence or non existence. All these factors would have to be dealt with if there is something rather than nothing.
"Outside reality"? You mean like unreal? Is this an intentional attempt at humour?When I say outside the conditions of our existence that is exactly what I mean outside our reality. Outside the things we know such as our physical laws, logic, cause and effect that is compared to conditions before the big bang. It is different to conditions of non existence as that may mean after death. Thats unless you want to acknowledge that there may be some sort of condition after death. I guess if some scientists want to acknowledge that there is really something rather than nothing before existence and life then I guess it stands to reason that there is something rather than nothing after life.
Sorry, steve, you still aren't addressing my question. You claimed that nothingness was somehow necessary. I asked you how you knew that that was the case.
"Outside reality"? You mean like unreal? Is this an intentional attempt at humour?
This shows the difference between the two sides, creationist v evolutionists.Thats right and we could keep going back. But where do we stop.
You see, you can never be wrong because Stone Age men knew it all. You're assuming evolution is a non fail process, it fails all the time. Species don't fit and die, new born don't fif, don't reproduce and the flaw gets removed. Look at how most dinosaurs died out, too big to survive in the new environment. Some smaller ones evolved into birds, not in one giant leap, in small steps by DNA adapting. Which we can now replicate in a lab. As we learn more, we grow.No that is not proven. Bacteria has an amazing ability to adapt and can live in many different environments. But that doesn't men this is how life started. Evolution takes something and then imagines all sorts of things that have not been validated. They havnt proven this in lab test so why should we believe this from the stories they make.
We dont know at the moment and perhaps will never know. But we are older and wiser and can realize what it takes to explain something. We have the benefit of accumulated knowledge. The problem is with all this knowledge the descriptions that scientists place on what happened before existence is pretty well as far fetched as they claim what Christians say with God. Yet they are allowed to come up with all their ideas as valid possibilities.
As I said before they may not know exactly what occurred but we can get an idea along what lines they are thinking by the type of ideas they are promoting. So far they have all been out of this world. Thats because they have to be because we are dealing with matters that are out of this world and into realms of something greater. This is where God comes in as one of those possibilities.
Yes we will have to go back to something. Thats something will have to be pretty amazing.
Heres some more to ponder.
At an absolute minimum, the inconceivable self-formation of DNA and the inability to explain the incredible information contained in DNA represent fatal defects in the concept of mutation and natural selection to account for the origin of life and the origin of DNA.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3246854/
Self-organization vs. self-ordering events in life-origin models
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064506000224
Evidence Of Design In Bird Feathers And Avian Respiration
http://www.witpress.com/elibrary/dne-volumes/4/2/399
If a god exists, and I'm open to the possibility.The way I learned it, whatever happened is what God intended. However random, however flawed, the end goal was us, and here we are.
It's a completely self-fulfilling prophecy, to be sure, but I do think it's possible to believe in ID without contradicting science.
We have evidence of us, and we're intelligence in the universe. Why isn't that evidence that there should be more? We're one star in a galaxy with 100 billion stars. There are 100 billion galaxies out there, just in the part of the universe we can see. Why would you assume that our intelligence is special and unique?We still have no real evidence of intelligence in the universe.
This relates to something some scientists have said that the mind is what gives meaning and reality and the things we see. This goes back to the thought experiments made in quantum physics. The observer is what makes things come into reality.This is getting a bit esoteric for me. How about this one that I sometimes think about. I think the latest estimate of the age of the universe is 13.7 billion years. We still have no real evidence of intelligence in the universe. That says the uinverse may have existed all this time for all we know without even any awareness of the existence of the universe. Suddenly we come into existence and thought comes into existence. With thought we begin to understand and find there are laws of physics and all sorts of things even technologies that might never have been known. Knowledge is nonexistent without us. Why are all these things possible? Why has it been possible all this time? Of course we couldn't ask that if we didn't happen to be here. But it just seems so incredible considering all the possibilities wondering after all this time now that thought has finally come into existence what might happen next.
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?