The Return of My Ex Nihilo Challenge

[AV1611VET]

It is Day One of the Creation Week and God creates Earth ex nihilo (from nothing) by speaking it into existence.

Heretofore the level of mass/energy in the physical universe is zero; since the physical universe didn't exist yet.

Afterwards, the level of mass/energy in the physical universe is now equal to the earth.

Here's my question:

What physical evidence would convince you this happened?

I submit there isn't any.

What say you?

 

[dlamberth]

It is Day One of the Creation Week and God creates Earth ex nihilo (from nothing) by speaking it into existence.

Heretofore the level of mass/energy in the physical universe is zero; since the physical universe didn't exist yet.

Afterwards, the level of mass/energy in the physical universe is now equal to the earth.

Here's my question:

What physical evidence would convince you this happened?

I submit there isn't any.

What say you?

The only thing I'd change is that the mass/energy of the physical universe would now be equal to God's mass/energy. It couldn't be less nor could it be more.

 

[AV1611VET]

The only thing I'd change is that the mass/energy of the physical universe would now be equal to God's mass/energy. It couldn't be less nor could it be more.

Nope.

I made it clear that we are talking about the physical universe.

God is transcendent from the physical universe.

Meaning He is outside of it.

 

[NxNW]

It is Day One of the Creation Week and God creates Earth ex nihilo (from nothing) by speaking it into existence.

Heretofore the level of mass/energy in the physical universe is zero; since the physical universe didn't exist yet.

Afterwards, the level of mass/energy in the physical universe is now equal to the earth.

Science tells us that the level of mass/energy in the universe is and always has been zero.

What physical evidence would convince you this happened?

I submit there isn't any.

Well, you'd need a nonzero mass/energy level, for starters.

 

[AV1611VET]

Science tells us that the level of mass/energy in the universe is and always has been zero.

Yes they do.

But they're inside the fishbowl looking out (so to speak).

Well, you'd need a nonzero mass/energy level, for starters.

Correct.

 

[dlamberth]

Nope.

I made it clear that we are talking about the physical universe.

God is transcendent from the physical universe.

Meaning He is outside of it.

I was talking about the physical universe. Remember, I'm a Panentheist, meaning that God is not outside of the physical universe.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

It is Day One of the Creation Week and God creates Earth ex nihilo (from nothing) by speaking it into existence.

Heretofore the level of mass/energy in the physical universe is zero; since the physical universe didn't exist yet.

Afterwards, the level of mass/energy in the physical universe is now equal to the earth.

Here's my question:

What physical evidence would convince you this happened?

I submit there isn't any.

What say you?

................. if I begin existentially and then decide that some form of Evidentialism is required for my understanding about the nature of the world around me, then according to your intuitional reading of the Bible, I'd have to infer that God has left us epistemologically in an obtuse lurch. I'd have to become a full on fideist to shape my beliefs so that I could have faith.

 

[Shemjaza]

It is Day One of the Creation Week and God creates Earth ex nihilo (from nothing) by speaking it into existence.

Heretofore the level of mass/energy in the physical universe is zero; since the physical universe didn't exist yet.

Afterwards, the level of mass/energy in the physical universe is now equal to the earth.

Here's my question:

What physical evidence would convince you this happened?

I submit there isn't any.

What say you?

You might be right... but at least I would expect there to not be significant counter evidence.

I've always conceded that any particular structure or pattern of creation is possible for an omnipotent God... but that means there being clear evidence for another conclusion is absolutely intentional, which does raise questions.

 

[AV1611VET]

................. if I begin existentially and then decide that some form of Evidentialism is required for my understanding about the nature of the world around me, then according to your intuitional reading of the Bible, I'd have to infer that God has left us epistemologically in an obtuse lurch. I'd have to become a full on fideist to shape my beliefs so that I could have faith.

Do you agree that -- for evidence to have been generated -- the laws of nature would not exist as we know them today?

 

[AV1611VET]

You might be right... but at least I would expect there to not be significant counter evidence.

I'd say that's a pretty fair assessment.

Personally though, I don't think any counter evidence exists -- except on paper.

 

[trophy33]

It is Day One of the Creation Week and God creates Earth ex nihilo (from nothing) by speaking it into existence.

If you are referring to Genesis 1 mythological drama, then it is not "ex nihilo", but from primordial waters/abyss.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Do you agree that -- for evidence to have been generated -- the laws of nature would not exist as we know them today?

I can't say that I readily agree. But, fortunately, I don't think this is a primary historical issue of concern among Christians, so I'm not going to violently contest your interpretation of Genesis 1.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you are referring to Genesis 1 mythological drama, then it is not "ex nihilo", but from primordial waters/abyss.

Well, for the record, I wasn't.

 

[jacks]

What physical evidence would convince you this happened?

I submit there isn't any.

What say you?

I agree there is probably no current physical evidence, that this happened.

If however, if it was to happen again; say the world woke up to a new planet (or even a Pluto type celestial body ) orbiting the sun that would be pretty convincing evidence, it had happened before.

 

[AV1611VET]

I can't say that I readily agree. But, fortunately, I don't think this is a primary historical issue of concern among Christians, so I'm not going to violently contest your interpretation of Genesis 1.

I'm just wondering what you think evidence should consist of.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I'm just wondering what you think evidence should consist of.

There's no short answer to that because it would involve a long discussion on what evidence is, how it can be interpreted, and how well and to what extent some amount [X] of evidence establishes a person's attempt at asserting a factual statement, or even a scientific statement.

As you can probably tell, the whole idea of "evidence" can get dicey, especially if we have different epistemic frameworks or definitions for what evidence is and how and when it can be appealed to from inside our respective frameworks.

 

[Shemjaza]

I'd say that's a pretty fair assessment.

Personally though, I don't think any counter evidence exists -- except on paper.

I'm expecting a 1 Corinthians 3:19 response, but the issue is that scientific understanding of physics and geology isn't simply a theoretical hypothetical, they have been supported by very successful and consistent abilities to interact and predict the natural world.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm expecting a 1 Corinthians 3:19 response, but the issue is that scientific understanding of physics and geology isn't simply a theoretical hypothetical, they have been supported by very successful and consistent abilities to interact and predict the natural world.

That's fine.

Predicting the natural world is an undertaking into the future.

But I'm talking about the past.

Specifically the Creation Week.

 

[Shemjaza]

That's fine.

Predicting the natural world is an undertaking into the future.

But I'm talking about the past.

Specifically the Creation Week.

Once you accept omnipotence then that trumps any evidence, but the evidence is absolutely still real and the reasoning behind the investigation of the past is still reasonable.

 

[AV1611VET]

Once you accept omnipotence then that trumps any evidence,

What specific evidence is being trumped?

If you can answer that, it will answer my challenge.

What evidence was hanging around the day God spoke the earth into existence and trumped that evidence?