Rational Response Requested

No_Foolin
Theist
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Rational Response Requested

Piper2000ca
Piper2000ca's picture
Posts: 138
Joined: 2006-12-27
User is offlineOffline
No_Foolin wrote:

No_Foolin wrote:
Was there ever nothing?

Simple answer, no, there was always something. The simple reason for this, was that time itself started with the big bang, so there was no such thing as before the big bang, hence there was always something. I hope that didn't sound too confusing Eye-wink


No_Foolin
Theist
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-01-23
User is offlineOffline
How was time created, and

How was time created, and where did it come from?


Vessel
Vessel's picture
Posts: 646
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
No_Foolin wrote: "Before"

No_Foolin wrote:
"Before" is a temporal term, i.e. time-related, and therefore your implying that time did not exist "before the big bang" makes no sense.

This is true, which should make it obvious. If there was a before the big bang (or singularity), then there had to be something/could not be nothing, if there wasn't a before the big bang, then we have to stop right there as we have no means by which to consider an absence of time and space.  

“Philosophers have argued for centuries about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but materialists have always known it depends on whether they are jitterbugging or dancing cheek to cheek" -- Tom Robbins


No_Foolin
Theist
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-01-23
User is offlineOffline
I apologize for the

I apologize for the confusion -- I initially misread the first reply, and was editing my reply when the last response was made.


Vessel
Vessel's picture
Posts: 646
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
No_Foolin wrote:

No_Foolin wrote:

How was time created, and where did it come from?

Time is part of the universe. It began with the universe, as did space, and therefor could not have come from anything.

*edit - No problem. Its not that confusing when the quote function is used.

“Philosophers have argued for centuries about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but materialists have always known it depends on whether they are jitterbugging or dancing cheek to cheek" -- Tom Robbins


No_Foolin
Theist
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Are you saying the universe

Are you saying the universe did not come from anything?  The singularity of the Big Bang Theory supposedly contained everything in existence today, including time.


Vessel
Vessel's picture
Posts: 646
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
No_Foolin wrote: Are you

No_Foolin wrote:
Are you saying the universe did not come from anything? The singularity of the Big Bang Theory supposedly contained everything in existence today, including time.

The only thing we can say about any start of or pre big bang/singularity cause, existence, what have you,  is that no one knows. It is likely no one will ever know. It would seem the human mind is incapable of formulating a concept of true nothingness and therefor anything we say regarding such a state is wild assumption.

If, on the other had, something else existed pre-universe then perhaps we will someday find an answer.

“Philosophers have argued for centuries about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but materialists have always known it depends on whether they are jitterbugging or dancing cheek to cheek" -- Tom Robbins


No_Foolin
Theist
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-01-23
User is offlineOffline
An eternal, uncreated God

An eternal, uncreated God who created all that we experience -- time, space, matter, etc... -- is quite rational, after all.  If anything exists, logic requires that something or someone be self-existent.  Otherwise, all that exists would have to be self-created, which is illogical/irrational.  In light of this, I fail to see how believing in an eternal God is not rational.

Thanks for reading and responding.


Noor
Posts: 250
Joined: 2006-11-18
User is offlineOffline
No_Foolin wrote:

No_Foolin wrote:

An eternal, uncreated God who created all that we experience -- time, space, matter, etc... -- is quite rational, after all. If anything exists, logic requires that something or someone be self-existent. Otherwise, all that exists would have to be self-created, which is illogical/irrational. In light of this, I fail to see how believing in an eternal God is not rational.

Thanks for reading and responding.

Use Occam's Razor.

God is eternal and uncreated. He created everything. Apply Occam's Razor and you get:

Matter is eternal and uncreated.

The simpler explanation is that matter is eternal and the simpler one is more likely to be correct.


Piper2000ca
Piper2000ca's picture
Posts: 138
Joined: 2006-12-27
User is offlineOffline
No_Foolin wrote: An

No_Foolin wrote:

An eternal, uncreated God who created all that we experience -- time, space, matter, etc... -- is quite rational, after all. If anything exists, logic requires that something or someone be self-existent. Otherwise, all that exists would have to be self-created, which is illogical/irrational. In light of this, I fail to see how believing in an eternal God is not rational.
Thanks for reading and responding.


Is it really that rational?  I used to think the exact same thing, but then I realized something.  If God can be self-existent, and eternal, so can the universe itself.

One of the reasons I see people going towards the idea of a God, is that for something to be self-existent, it needs to exist outside of time.  And of course, we are told God exists outside of time.  However, despite the fact that time exists inside the universe, the universe as a whole exists outside of time.

I know, it sounds odd that the universe can contain time, but be outside of time as well.  But I'm sure you can agree that the properties of a box aren't necessarily the same as what is inside the box.


No_Foolin
Theist
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-01-23
User is offlineOffline
It's rational to believe

It's rational to believe that the universe could be eternal.  The requirement of a self-existent entity for the existence of anything certainly could include the universe as that self-existent entity. 

Entropy (open/closed systems aside for the moment since the extent of the universe is not well understood), as we understand it on planet earth, would require, however, that the order of the universe be reduced to maximum entropy (everything turned Gaussian), or something akin to noise, over an infinite period of time.  This can be shown using the Central Limit Theorem as well, which also goes against Darwinian Evolution.  The more random processes that are combined, the more random (less order) things get.   Anyway, there's still plenty of order left, so it would seem that the universe is not eternal.


Piper2000ca
Piper2000ca's picture
Posts: 138
Joined: 2006-12-27
User is offlineOffline
No_Foolin wrote: It's

No_Foolin wrote:

It's rational to believe that the universe could be eternal. The requirement of a self-existent entity for the existence of anything certainly could include the universe as that self-existent entity.

Entropy (open/closed systems aside for the moment since the extent of the universe is not well understood), as we understand it on planet earth, would require, however, that the order of the universe be reduced to maximum entropy (everything turned Gaussian), or something akin to noise, over an infinite period of time. This can be shown using the Central Limit Theorem as well, which also goes against Darwinian Evolution. The more random processes that are combined, the more random (less order) things get. Anyway, there's still plenty of order left, so it would seem that the universe is not eternal.

The problem with using entropy in this method, is that entropy is a property of time, which does have a begining (its the universe in its entirety that doesn't have a beginning). As for Darwinian Evolultion, it doesn't work there since evolution is not a closed system, it is an open system. Think of it like any endo-thermic reaction (like a cold-pack). Entropy inside the system decreases, and entropy outside the system increases.

Entropy decreases with life (and hence, evolution), but where does the energy needed for the decrease in entropy come from? After you follow throw the food chain, you of course see that life gets all of its energy from the sun (in the form of heat and light), and the entropy in the sun increases substantially more then the entropy of life on Earth decreases.

To put it simply, the increase of entropy in the sun, is what powers the decrease in entropy from evolution.


Vessel
Vessel's picture
Posts: 646
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
No_Foolin wrote: It's

No_Foolin wrote:
It's rational to believe that the universe could be eternal.

 If time is contained within the universe then it has necessarily existed for all of time. Eternal is as sadly lacking as an understandable concept as nothingness is. The human mind has no way to understand such things in anything other than a superficial way.   

NoFoolin wrote:
The requirement of a self-existent entity for the existence of anything certainly could include the universe as that self-existent entity.

It is, in fact, as far as we can even consider possibilities with any likelihood of truth at this point in our knowledge. To consider anything to be the truth as to the origins of the universe/singularity is at this point, basically irrational. There is not near enough evidence to lead to any rational conclusions aside from "We don't know".

There certainly is nothing pointing to some entity, force, what have you, with the astounding capability to exist outside of time and space (whatever that is supposed to mean) and create ex nihilo (again, whatever that means).This concept is so far removed from anything that can even be held as a viable concept by a human brain, much less rationally proposed as existing, that it is basically meaningless. 

NoFoolin wrote:
Entropy (open/closed systems aside for the moment since the extent of the universe is not well understood), as we understand it on planet earth, would require, however, that the order of the universe be reduced to maximum entropy (everything turned Gaussian), or something akin to noise, over an infinite period of time.

Yes, infinite time seems quite unlikely, as does any existent infinite. 

 

NoFoolin wrote:
This can be shown using the Central Limit Theorem as well, which also goes against Darwinian Evolution.

Could you explain what you mean by this? I have seen people state that evolution defies the second law of thermodynamics but it is usually because of a flaw in their understanding of either evolution or thermodynamics. I have never seen a valid objection based in entropy.

Or were you stating that only the central limit thereom and not thermodynamics, goes against evolution? I don't know much of the central limit thereom and would be interested on hearing why you seem to think it causes a problem for evolutionary theory. I am unaware of this objection to evolution.

“Philosophers have argued for centuries about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but materialists have always known it depends on whether they are jitterbugging or dancing cheek to cheek" -- Tom Robbins


No_Foolin
Theist
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-01-23
User is offlineOffline
So, in your view, time had

So, in your view, time had a beginning but the universe did not?  You believe time, matter, and space can exist independently?  Well, I can't accept that, or do I find anything in science to support it.

You didn't give an answer to my question regarding belief in an eternal, uncaused, self-existent God being rational, but answered it with the question, "Is it really rational?"  It certainly is rational.  If you disagree, please provide a rational answer.  I think we agree that a self-existent entity must exist if anything exists -- logic demands that.  If we don't agree on that, please explain why not.  Otherwise, the main difference between your athiestic views and my Christian views are in Who/what that entity is.  There are so many other reasons to believe in the one true God, scientific and otherwise, but I won't go into them here.  You may want to look into Information Theory for other uses of the concept of entropy.  I studied it in grad school -- appied to digital comunication, but nonetheless applicable to many other disciplines.  The more I study science, the stronger my faith in God becomes.  In fact, this website and its associates do the same thing.  This is precisely predicted in the Bible, and is most certainly one of the many signs of the times.  I pray that you come to your senses.  One comment I read regarding an unrelated, but anti-Christian video on YouTube stated that the author really hoped that the Rapture would occur soon (though he/she didn't believe in Christ) so the world would be rid of all of those "stupid Christians."  As the old saying goes, "Be careful what you wish for."

It seems that the average age of the members here is somewhere in the mid-twenties.  That puts me at about twice the average.  When I was in my mid-twenties, I wrestled with many of the same issues presented here, but over the years came to a diametrically opposite conclusion.  Maybe in time some here will see the Light.  I certainly pray that that is the case.  Yes, God does answer prayer.  You don't have to believe that, I know, but I know it's true.

Anyway, my time here is up.  Take care.


No_Foolin
Theist
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-01-23
User is offlineOffline
See Papoulis for a good

See Papoulis for a good treatment of the Central Limit Theorem.


Vessel
Vessel's picture
Posts: 646
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
No_Foolin wrote:

No_Foolin wrote:
So, in your view, time had a beginning but the universe did not?

No. I clearly stated that we can say nothing about the beginning of the universe with the knowledge we now have. Time, however, since it would appear to be a part of the universe, can only exist if the universe exists. Is that really that difficult to understand? I had hope for you being honest, but you are beginning to look like the typical theist I encounter itrying to construct strawmen from my statements.

Quote:
You believe time, matter, and space can exist independently?

No. I don't even know how you could have come to that conclusion from anything I wrote. I have no reason to believe such a thing.

Quote:
Well, I can't accept that, or do I find anything in science to support it.

Neither do I. Hello...Hello... Is this thing on?

Quote:
You didn't give an answer to my question regarding belief in an eternal, uncaused, self-existent God being rational, but answered it with the question, "Is it really rational?"

If by god all you mean is something that is eternal uncaused and self existent then it is not irrational. It also is not a god by any definition of god I am familiar with except, perhaps, for Spinoza's "god". I am certain you ascribe more characteristics than that to your god.

Quote:
It certainly is rational. If you disagree, please provide a rational answer. I think we agree that a self-existent entity must exist if anything exists -- logic demands that.

Actually logic doesn't 'demand' that, but reason would seem to lead us in that direction. If you know logic to demand such a thing I would be highly interested in seeing the supporting argument. An infinite regress of caused existences, for instance, would preclude this necessity. But, if you think you have the argument to show your self-existent entity as a logical necessity please bring it out and let us have a look.

Quote:
There are so many other reasons to believe in the one true God, scientific and otherwise, but I won't go into them here.

Where will you go into them? Kind of hard for me to come to realize your god is real if I don't know where you are going to go into the reasons. I especially look forward to the scientific ones.

Quote:
You may want to look into Information Theory for other uses of the concept of entropy. I studied it in grad school -- appied to digital comunication, but nonetheless applicable to many other disciplines.

Let's look into it here. I studied creative writing in grad school so I'll have to let you start. Bring out the Information Theory as it applies to the concept of entropy and to your god. Let us examine this in the light of reasoned rationality.

Quote:
The more I study science, the stronger my faith in God becomes.

Well, you are the defier of odds, aren't you? However, I hardly see this as pertinent to the actual exsistence or non-existence of your god.

Quote:
In fact, this website and its associates do the same thing. This is precisely predicted in the Bible, and is most certainly one of the many signs of the times.

?

Quote:
I pray that you come to your senses.

Please, if you are going to do anything for me, make a homeless person a sandwich. It takes about the same amount of time as praying, but does some actual good in this world. So from now on make a homeless person a sandwich in the hope that I come to my senses.

Quote:
One comment I read regarding an unrelated, but anti-Christian video on YouTube stated that the author really hoped that the Rapture would occur soon (though he/she didn't believe in Christ) so the world would be rid of all of those "stupid Christians." As the old saying goes, "Be careful what you wish for."

Uhm, yeah... Gotta say, I'm not reeally losing a whole lot of sleep over that whole rapture thing. Though, the fact that we have people wanting the rapture to occur who also have the ability to start nuclear wars is somewhat bothersome.

Quote:
It seems that the average age of the members here is somewhere in the mid-twenties.

I'm thirty-eight.

Quote:
That puts me at about twice the average.

The longer people live, the older they seem to get. ?

Quote:
When I was in my mid-twenties, I wrestled with many of the same issues presented here, but over the years came to a diametrically opposite conclusion.

I'm sorry to hear that.

Quote:
Maybe in time some here will see the Light.

If the light doesn't exist, I have serious doubts they'll see it (short of psychosis, that is). However, if you can show that the light does exist, I am sure many are more than welcome to take a gander.

Quote:
I certainly pray
sandwich
Quote:
that that is the case. Yes, God does answer prayer. You don't have to believe that, I know, but I know it's true.

Just provide the scientific evidence that prayer works and we can all believe it.

Quote:
Anyway, my time here is up. Take care.

Bye.

“Philosophers have argued for centuries about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but materialists have always known it depends on whether they are jitterbugging or dancing cheek to cheek" -- Tom Robbins


Vessel
Vessel's picture
Posts: 646
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Vessel wrote:

*double post delete*


triften
Silver Member
triften's picture
Posts: 591
Joined: 2007-01-01
User is offlineOffline
The entropy argument is

The entropy argument is based on a misunderstanding of entropy (as was pointed out by piper.)

When water freezes, it forms crystals. Thus order from disorder. Does this require god's hand whenever it happens?

No_Foolin wrote:

So, in your view, time had a beginning but the universe did not? You believe time, matter, and space can exist independently? Well, I can't accept that, or do I find anything in science to support it.

I suggest you read Steven Hawking's A Brief History of Time. It is written very well and explains many things fairly simply (My first time through was at age 8.)

No_Foolin wrote:

You didn't give an answer to my question regarding belief in an eternal, uncaused, self-existent God being rational, but answered it with the question, "Is it really rational?" It certainly is rational. If you disagree, please provide a rational answer. I think we agree that a self-existent entity must exist if anything exists -- logic demands that. If we don't agree on that, please explain why not.

Your original statements were based on the logical fallacy known as "Proof by Incredulity" which goes something like this "I can't believe P is true, therefore P is false." Working off of a fallacy is not rational.

You claim that life is complex so someone must have designed it but then the designer must be complex as well, therefore he must have been designed as well, leading to an infinite regress of designers.

No_Foolin wrote:

Otherwise, the main difference between your athiestic views and my Christian views are in Who/what that entity is. There are so many other reasons to believe in the one true God, scientific and otherwise, but I won't go into them here. You may want to look into Information Theory for other uses of the concept of entropy. I studied it in grad school -- appied to digital comunication, but nonetheless applicable to many other disciplines.

The "entropy" of Information Theory is not the same as the physics concept and so the 2nd law of thermodynamics does not apply.

No_Foolin wrote:

The more I study science, the stronger my faith in God becomes. In fact, this website and its associates do the same thing. This is precisely predicted in the Bible, and is most certainly one of the many signs of the times. I pray that you come to your senses. One comment I read regarding an unrelated, but anti-Christian video on YouTube stated that the author really hoped that the Rapture would occur soon (though he/she didn't believe in Christ) so the world would be rid of all of those "stupid Christians." As the old saying goes, "Be careful what you wish for."

Ah, threats. "Argument by Force." "Believe or you shall burn." Not rational.

-Triften