How do we explain to believers that God could not have created the universe without time as God would not have had the TIME to create the universe without TIME itself?
It should say in Genesis that God created the universe in six days and rested on the seventh. That sure looks like the use of time, especially considering the term "day" is used there.
Very good point.
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."
You will also notice there the writer thought the universe was the heavens.
I wonder about that considering the concept of a "universe" then being the same as we think of it now is unlikely. Their universe was probably not much more than what they could see with the naked eye and appears to be from a reference frame at the surface of the Earth.
Hmm. Well, I always took Genesis to mean the universe already was. Sooo, it would follow that during that time time was in motion.
You do realize that, if the multiverse is true, then it is possible that time was marching along prior to this universe, as we perceive it, coming into existence.
Sure Emile, but not in this universe. Imagine a cup of Jello and universe poping into existence like a grain of sand in the Jello. They don't overlap, so somewhere else time may exist, but not here where we are without said universe. All or most matter existed in one single spot just like a black hole only much more dense. No God needed.
All speculation, my good man.
I think, if we exist within a multiverse then the greater reality of the multiverse trumps the smaller reality within our universe. The fact that we can't see it, doesn't negate it. But, that's just me. No speculation required.
I ask you once again to attempt to understand time and what happens without it and why we know when time started in our universe.
I have always gotten what you are saying. I simply think, at this juncture, presenting it as undeniable fact is premature.
But, that's just me.
There is direct evidence of when time started and evidence of what happens without time. There is no evidence for the existence of any Gods, but I don't see you telling that to people, instead you prefer to tell me I shouldn't rely on evidence that we do have.
Please enlighten me as to the direct evidence of what happens without time. We can certainly imagine it, but we can't see it. And, we don't have direct evidence of when time started. The data implies.
You know, if you want to believe something, feel free. I don't point out that one can't prove God simply because believers can't understand the difference between belief and fact. Somewhat like you.
It's pretty heavy stuff, but even you should be able to get through it.
http://sci.esa.int/planck/51551-simple- … to-planck/
As for what happens without time, I'll take Einstein's and Hawking's word for what happens without time. Perhaps a little light reading will help.
Ok. But, you obviously don't understand what I'm saying. You can believe what someone says. You can believe you know something. This does not make it fact. It is your belief. We can use our imaginations as much as we want to. We can do any thought experiment we like. But, you, me, Hawking, Einstein and everyone in between cannot state, definitively, that we know. There is wide consensus within the scientific community on the current working model. Not everyone agrees and the fact that disagreement exists proves you wrong in assuming you are in possession of an unarguable fact.
Except for things which I have read about, time did not exist in my world until 1949.
I choose to believe some of the things which I have read as proof of those things having happened and I choose to be skeptical as to whether some of those things did in fact happen (as does everyone.)
I believe time was before I came into existence. Time existed before any means were created to measure it. Time was before anyone became aware of its passing.
If a star is born today, Time was before this star came to be. If a planetary system were to develop around this star, it is most likely there would be no evidence within this new planetary system of time existing before it came into existence.
In this same manner, there is no way for us to know if anything existed (in time) before this system which we are a part of.
So apparently believers don't respect a thread for unbelievers only, but the unbelievers are supposed to respect and stay away from threads for only believers. Interesting.
Did I mention what my beliefs concerning Atheism , Theism, or God in any way shape or form? NO, I don't think so!
And was I being disrespectful to Atheist or Theist in any way ? No ! I don't think so!
This would be like someone starting a thread which says, "How Americans cook beef on a grill the best" and expect Europeans to not offer their opinion.
Should the line in the sand keep getting wider ???
Jerami, you are absolutely right, however this thread was started in response to another thread that was for believers only.
Your objection to the exclusion is respected.
Thank you RAD Man. I knew what you were responding to, and I made a comment the other day stating that I understood (and agreed with a large portion of) what both sides to that argument was saying when it was posted.
I really don't understand or agree with the radical element contained within the radical fundamentalist or radical Atheists. If anyone is looking for answers or a real discussion I don't think it will be found on the FArrrrrr right or FArrrr left ; overlooking everything which lies between.
Let me add, I don't think that you are radical in your point of view. From what I have seen, You have posted reasonable questions which can be respected.
It was a simple observation. Not a criticism or a personal attack of any kind. I apologize if you took my observation personally.
Do you think the other thread would respect exclusions in this manner?
I didn't take your comment personally, or to be critical. I think I took it for what it was, as you explained it.
As for your question, I quit trying to guess how other people will react. I spend most of my time figuring out how I should react.
Maybe that is what you were expecting of me, when you posted your observation ????
by uszealot8 years ago
Does any sane person believe that humanity has learned all there is to learn about the universe? I sincerely doubt it. Yet when unbelievers dismiss as impossible those things which superficially appear incompatible with...
by yolanda yvette8 years ago
How are you at witnessing of Christ to your family, friends, neighbors and co-wokers who don't believe?
by earnestshub7 years ago
What would happen if non-believers left the religious to their own devices.
by SwordofManticorE5 years ago
This may also include sinners or homosexuals. How many times have we read signs from those who call themselves christians that "God hates sinners"? So is it wrong for them to hate God back?
by Alexander A. Villarasa3 years ago
The Copernican Principle as a philosophical notion posits that humans occupy NO privileged or exceptional position in the universe. This has been the prevailing/reigning paradigm of scientific and societal...
by William R Bowen Jr7 years ago
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) looked for a reasonable explanation for why anything exists at all. He said that God was that reasonable explanation. W.L Craig has formulated the Leibnizian argument this way:P(1)...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.