jump to last post 1-21 of 21 discussions (89 posts)

Inviting atheists to agree on ideas in the God debate.

  1. profile image52
    Pachomiusposted 5 years ago

    I am a Christian.

    I have this idea that if atheists and Christians will from both sides propose propositions and work to come to agreement on them, then they might come to agree on the big proposition that God exists.

    So, if atheists are reading this message, can you agree with me that we exist, and the universe exist; let me put these two propositions as follows:

    1. We exist.
    2. The universe exists.

    If you don't agree to the proposition 1, you try to revise it as to make it acceptable to both of us.

    Same also with proposition 2.

    If you agree to both propositions, you or I will present another proposition for us both to work out to an agreement.

    Here is my proposition 3:

    3. The universe did not make itself.

    Can you agree to that, or shall we work together to revise it so that we will have a proposition that we will both accept to agree on?

    I guess you know where I am going with this thread, but will you agree with my idea, if not try to revise it and see whether we can both work together to see where we want to go into in this thread.



    Pachomius

    1. autumn18 profile image66
      autumn18posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The universe could have made itself and in my opinion it's just as possible as if a god made it. I actually think the universe making itself makes more sense than a god making it.

      My proposition is that the origins of the universe are unknown.

      1. brycges profile image59
        brycgesposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        lol If the universe made itself than it is a God!

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
          Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Did God make itself?

          1. brycges profile image59
            brycgesposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Good question...

            1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
              Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              No, not really...

              But thanks smile

        2. autumn18 profile image66
          autumn18posted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Why does it have to be a god? Why can't it just be the universe?

          1. brycges profile image59
            brycgesposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            sounded good at the time, smile

      2. profile image52
        Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Here again are my three propositions:

        1. We exist.
        2. The universe exists.
        3. The universe did not make itself.


        You have presented two propositions:

        a. The universe made itself.
        b. I don't know the origins of the universe.

        Proposition b is not allowed, that is one rule I propose seriously that everyone adhere to, because we want to know, not to not know; so if you claim not to know, then you are dispensed from putting forth any propositions on the instant matter.

        So, please choose the proposition a.


        If people claim they don't know something, then they must not talk about that something in any direction, they will just read.

        However, I invite them most earnestly to exercise their imagination to come up with a definite proposition, and not be afraid; because the adoption of a proposition is not anything that will cost you any piece of tissue from your body; on the contrary you might augment your treasury of ascertained knowledge, or enhance your knowledge when your proposition is revised so as to become the commonly accepted proposition among several crucially involved in the God debate.


        Pachomius

    2. A Troubled Man profile image60
      A Troubled Manposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Hurrah!



      The universe did make itself. Looks like a lot of revision is necessary.

      The ball is in your court. smile

    3. kirstenblog profile image80
      kirstenblogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Agreed, you are a christian. On that it is easy to agree.

      I find this as disrespectful as me trying to convince you that there is no God. Just as you would be offended if I tried to force you to believe there is no God, so am I offended that you would propose to change my beliefs and goes a long way to illustrating why I have no respect for religion. I say this as an agnostic, I don't believe or dis-believe in a God but simply don't think it matters. No Gods are needed to be good people. Why do people have to agree with your belief? Is it not strong enough to stand alone, without fellow followers? Why can you not respect the rights of others to not believe in God if they wish?

      Why can't the universe create/make itself? Frankly, I don't think the universe could be anything but what it is, the balance of natural law means no other option could exist, even if God didn't want it to be, and a God that cannot change the balance of matter is no God. Hence, no Gods needed. You believe in God, I get that. If that belief was a deeply personal matter and the only effect that belief had on me was that I could see a person always striving to improve themselves and be a better person, I would deeply respect you for it (no matter what God you pray to and believe in). As it goes what I see is another wanna be preacher trying to convert anyone they can, someone looking at others instead of looking at themselves. Nice try tho... hmm

    4. secularist10 profile image86
      secularist10posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Pachomius:

      You fall into a trap countless believers before you have fallen into.

      That we exist and that the universe exists are straightforward and uncontroversial. Self-evident even.

      You then say: "The universe did not make itself."

      This statement assumes that the universe was made.

      So actually you have more than just 3 propositions, you have at least a fourth: the universe was made. Only if the universe was made does the statement "the universe did not make itself" make sense.

      However, if the universe was not made--i.e. is uncreated--this statement is meaningless.

      So you must explain why you believe the universe was made, as opposed to being uncreated.

      (And don't bring up the Big Bang, that has been dealt with many times over.)

      P.S. And if you will say "it's impossible for something to be uncreated!" then it follows it is impossible for your God to be uncreated too.

      But the main question is: why do you believe the universe was made in the first place?

  2. SimeyC profile image97
    SimeyCposted 5 years ago

    You're going to have a tough time with 3.....it's a leading question and no atheist or agnostic is going to agree to anything even remotely similar.

    1 & 2 seem quite straight forward.

    A better way of approaching 3 is by saying something like:

    3 At some point in time the Universe did not exist.

  3. Pcunix profile image91
    Pcunixposted 5 years ago

    No, I'd never agree.

    Obviously you think that the Universe could not have always existed.  In fact, that's a perfectly logical assumption.

    However, if you must have creation, there is no reason to assume it was by any god.  It could have been the graduate work of a physics student in some other universe.

    You'll get nowhere with this.  There are no gods and "god did it" is a foolish answer to any question.

    1. MelissaBarrett profile image61
      MelissaBarrettposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      See, it has nothing to do with theology or Gods or any mystical thing for me.  I simply cannot wrap my mind around ANYTHING having ALWAYS existed. However, I can't fathom the jump between... "It didn't always exist" and "God made it" either.

      That being said... I find questions without answers to be an interesting diversion, but not something I want to spend my life thinking about.  My official stance on "Who or What Created the Universe" is something very close to IDGAF.  I don't have to know who built my house to live in it.

  4. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    "The universe did not make itself." The universe is making and unmaking itself as we speak.

    1. Pcunix profile image91
      Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      True, but I'd say it is the fabric - strings or whatever the basic thing is - that is, in fact, "the universe".  Stars and dust clouds and all that come and go, but the basic stuff just is.

  5. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    The 'basic thing' that is the question. As I don't have time to consciously operate all the
    complexities of my body, such as every cell and fiber, God doesn't have time or inclination to operate the universe. It is automatic.

  6. profile image0
    Mtbailzposted 5 years ago

    The tough part about saying something had to create the universe is that something had to create that something. Many christians and religious folks would claim "that something" has always existed which is more improbable than this universe creating itself.

  7. Druid Dude profile image59
    Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago

    Would you agree that it is possible that GOD did exist, but not defined by human beings in the proper fashion? That Grad student could qualify as the CREATOR, just not in the way WE define it. And, in the case of Noetics being totally viable, couldn't it then define God as the sum total of all consciousness in the univers (this one, not the alternate universe exclusively. As it were, there is nothing which is in this universe which escapes it. Our dust stays here, our water stays here, and the sum total of all our energy, from conception to, and beyond death, remains in this universe. Energy doesn't die, it can't be born nor created, and it cannot be destroyed.  From the top of our heads, to the tips of our toes, the total sum of our energy, that which binds our atoms, one to another, beats our heart, makes our brains think, and the very thoughts themselves. What was that all up to before we emerged from the placenta? Where does it go when we enter the casket? Is it re-utilizable? Could we be re-cycled? The real answer is that this is indeed, POSSIBLE. Thank you, and have a nice day:)

  8. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    I understand infinity in two ways. Everything in nature continuously duplicates itself infinitely, and if I as say a spirit had no memory, I wouldn't know if I existed for five minutes or five million years.

  9. Ron Montgomery profile image61
    Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago

    Thank you for the invitation.

    I'm afraid I'll have to decline.

  10. profile image0
    Emile Rposted 5 years ago

    1 and 2 are Ok. But 3? Yeh, I've got a problem. As crazy as a god who is billions of years old sounds; the eternal universe idea is no less whacky.  Which is why both Christianity and atheism is a non answer.  I'm waiting for a viable alternative option to consider.

  11. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    Cause it was a good line.

  12. mikelong profile image72
    mikelongposted 5 years ago

    I'll just put it this way....

    If one is inclined to believe in deity, then there is nothing to hold back deities...

    If one god can exist, so can many. There is no evidence anywhere of one god...however, even in the Bible, there are signs of several.. "Let us make man in our image"...just being one of the many phrases that point to other potential beings...

    1. Castlepaloma profile image64
      Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Did the Universe start first or did God Start first

      Wait, LET me ask him. GOD WERE YOU the FIRST IN THE UNIVERSE????

      :His anwer is........................................................Read the book

      No, no no, my mistake, my Christian roommate was telling me to read the book from the other room.

  13. Pcunix profile image91
    Pcunixposted 5 years ago

    Why do you ignore

    4. The universe has always existed
    5.  Our Universe was created by a physics student in another Universe.

    ?

    1. profile image52
      Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Well, we have come to an impasse and we will agree to work together to resolve the impasse, and not allow it to continue to exist.

      Here are the propositions so far and proposition 3 can be divided into two contradictory sub-propositions:

      1. We exist.
      2. The universe exists.
      3. i. The universe did not make itself.
      3. ii. The universe made itself.

      So, everyone, how do we want to resolve this impasse?

      I have an idea, if you have other ideas please produce them here.

      My idea is that we should ask ourselves which proposition in 3 is the intelligent proposition.


      [ I am really not yet conversant with how this forum works, but I think I can express myself adequately, still I am looking for the set of codes being used in this forum. ]


      Pachomius

      1. wilderness profile image98
        wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Well, I don't know about "intelligence", but knowledge is another matter.

        Stephen Hawking, who surely knows more about quantum mechanics and how the universe works than the total knowledge of every hubber on HP is on record as stating that there is no reason the universe couldn't have created itself.

        On the other hand, the only reason I've heard to believe in God is that he had to create the universe.  From people that have no knowledge whatsoever of how the universe actually works and what the laws and rules are.

        Back in your court...

        1. Pcunix profile image91
          Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Well, wait. Hawkins says that  particles come out of the quantum vacuum.  That's not creation.

          Quantum vacuum is just another state for whatever it is that is everything. You could call it just another state.

          See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_state

          1. wilderness profile image98
            wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Perhaps I phrased it poorly; Hawkins has stated that there is no need for God the creator to explain the creation of the universe.

            Not the link I wanted, but:

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/0 … 03179.html

            In Hawking's book Grand Design he apparently states that "God just wasn't necessary".  I conclude that either Hawking is saying that the universe could be eternal OR that it could have created itself.  Either way, God isn't a necessary precursor to the universe and need not have created it.

            1. Pcunix profile image91
              Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Well, Hawkins is apparently  thinking of the Universe as being different than the quantum vacuum. That's his limitation and his problem.  That's like saying that  steam is created by water.  It's a reasonable statement in some contexts, but steam is water and (assuming he's right about the quantum vacuum) elementary particles are the quantum vacuum.

              To me, it's all the same.  Whatever 'it" is, it takes different forms.  Eventually we will understand it. We will break it down into the components and lay them out for inspection. And when we do, there will still be people insisting there must be a god in there somewhere. 

              There isn't.

              1. wilderness profile image98
                wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                I think you've laid out the future very well.  One day we will understand much more and have a really good grasp on what happened (and possible causes, if any, for the big bang).  And there will be people insisting that God did it.

                Personally I find the probability that goddunnit it vanishingly small.  Not zero - we don't know enough yet to claim that, but very, very small.

                1. Pcunix profile image91
                  Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  I'd insist that you haven't thought it through. There is no possibility.  A creator, yes.  A god, no.  No possibility at all.

                  1. wilderness profile image98
                    wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                    What differentiates the two (universe creator and God)?  Spelling?

                    I would say that any entity that can create a universe deserves the title of "God".

                  2. profile image52
                    Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                    You say: "I'd insist that you haven't thought it through. There is no possibility [ of God }.  A creator, yes.  A god, no.  No possibility at all."

                    That is most interesting.

                    I invite you to give readers your distinction between a creator and a god.


                    Pachomius

      2. melbel profile image98
        melbelposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I think the intelligent proposition is that we can't prove it either way. Choosing one over the other and accepting it as fact, to me, sounds like the unintelligent proposition.

        1. Pcunix profile image91
          Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Can't prove what? That there are not and cannot be any gods?  I can prove that. I can't prove that this Universe wasn't created by some intelligence, but I can sure as heck prove that was no god if it did happen that way!

          Oh, not proof the godsoaked would accept, of course, but proof any unbiased observer certainly would.

          1. melbel profile image98
            melbelposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            I meant not being able to prove whether or not it's been created.

            Creation as is not by God, of course... at least not in the biblical sense.

            1. Pcunix profile image91
              Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Debunked for people who are able to override their emotional need to believe, but not for the rest.

              If that's all it is - just a need to believe - I am fine with it.  Believe and be happy.  Don't think about it because you have nothing to gain.

              It's when it becomes justification for more that I get angry - their god says gays must be punished or creationism nonsense must be taught to children or their silly bleatings have to be on our money.. Those are the things that upset me,

              1. melbel profile image98
                melbelposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Or the pledge of allegiance... "one nation... under god... and liberty and justice for all, unless you disagree about the god part"

                1. DoubleScorpion profile image81
                  DoubleScorpionposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  The Pledge was written in 1892 by a Baptist Minister, and the original version didn't contain the phrase "Under God". Congress added the phrase "Under God" in 1954 due to a campaign by the Knights of Columbus.

                  1. Pcunix profile image91
                    Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                    Yes, and I was in grade school when they added it. It ticked me off then and it still does today,

                  2. Pcunix profile image91
                    Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                    And it wasn't on our money until 1864.

        2. A Troubled Man profile image60
          A Troubled Manposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          No, that isn't an intelligent proposition.

  14. Druid Dude profile image59
    Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago

    I keep seeing a pool full of drowning children. There are some who can't swim and know it, those who can't swim but don't seem to know it, then there are those who can swim and just don't realize it. Then one or two who can swim and just got outta the pool to stand here with me. There's no water in the pool.

  15. Pcunix profile image91
    Pcunixposted 5 years ago

    Again, why do you ignore:

    4: the universe has always existed

    ?

    1. Druid Dude profile image59
      Druid Dudeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I believe that. 100%

    2. profile image0
      Emile Rposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Probably because that is as big of a fantasy and as much of a non answer as religion is. It's accepting that you have no answer and assuming you never will.

      1. Pcunix profile image91
        Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Nonsense.  It is perfectly rational.  Unlike silly "god did it" nonsense.

        1. profile image0
          Emile Rposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          I would love to understand how anyone sees it as rational. It sounds the same to me. Minus a god. Nothing simply is. I think we lack the information we need at this point to accept that for an answer.

          1. Pcunix profile image91
            Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Nothing simply is?

            Look around. There it is.  And every day we learn more about physics.

            Look around. No gods.  And every day more people realize that.

            1. profile image0
              Emile Rposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              No. It isn't quite that simple. I wouldn't have any problem with the universe simply eternally existing, if it's explainable as to how that is possible. I don't take anything on faith and faith is required to accept the statement that the universe just is. I'm not afraid to say we don't know yet. No gods required for that either.

              I know you guys all hang on Hawkings words, but he's simply a very intelligent man stuck on this little rock in a tiny part of the universe. To make bold claims without proof feels like religion to me. I have a hard time taking it as gospel.

              1. Pcunix profile image91
                Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                What am I hanging on? I have no particular interest in Hawking. 

                It's hard to speak about the fabric of the Univererse when we really have no clue how it works. But we do have hints and none of those indicate any 'gods". 

                Strings, M theory, braids, whatever it is, it's there and it has always been there.  It is that simple.

  16. Ron Montgomery profile image61
    Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago
  17. melbel profile image98
    melbelposted 5 years ago

    What if the universe has always existed?

    If this is a difficult thing to think about, then did god always exist?

    If not, did god create itself? (I refuse to refer to god as 'he' even though I do not believe it exists.)

    If so, why couldn't the universe have created itself?

    I have no idea how the universe was created (or not created) so I'm not going to be made to make a decision either way. It's nothing that anyone can prove.

    1. A Troubled Man profile image60
      A Troubled Manposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The evidence indicates the universe had a beginning and did not always exist.



      Having no idea how the universe was created and then following up with a statement that it's "nothing that anyone can prove" isn't very honest.

      1. Pcunix profile image91
        Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        That depends upon your definition of "Universe".  If you mean the stars and dust clouds, sure, that's true.  If you mean the fabric that created those things, then no, there is no evidence of a beginning.

        1. profile image52
          Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Thanks, Pcunix, for your interest in my thread.

          -------------------------------

          Addressing everyone:

          Before anything else further, please don't take offense with my words as to experience disrespect for you, nothing personal involved in this thread.

          I am just asking for all of us to produce propositions which we will agree to; if we don't agree to a proposition then we work together to revise it in order that we will agree to it.

          Now the propositions have to do with the God debate, meaning the issue of whether God exists or not.

          If you anyone do not care at all whatever about any God debate, then there is no sense for you to be writing here, except perhaps to say to everyone else here who is interested that they are wasting your time and their time; in which case when you have already said that, please just read if you want to stay here, but please don't feel that you have to write more because you will be adding not contributions to the God debate but distractions.

          If you feel that the paragraph above is showing disrespect to you, then I guess that is your prerogative to feel that way, I can't do anything about that but I am going to continue with my thread and write the way I do in all civility.

          That is not addressed to you, Pcunix, though, and not to anyone else who feels disrespect from my words.

          Now, if anyone really feels disrespect from my words, just let him tell me what words are disrespectful to him, and I will change them if I see them to be genuinely disrespectful to him.

          Next, I am not trying to force anyone to adopt my thinking, if you feel that is what I am doing, in which case no one can say anything to you anymore if it does not agree with you; so, better you avoid that someone instead of that someone avoiding you, when that someone is just into speaking out his mind without any intention to force you to accept his ideas whatever.

          -------------------------

          [ Dear Pcunix, how did you do that, to write in an edit box without having to click on the 'reply' link?

          I am not conversant with the codes used in this forum, and I have not found any page here where the codes are presented with examples of what effects they produce. ]


          This is what you wrote:



          And this is my in a way rounded-up reply to you:



          So, what proposition do you want to put in 3 to replace my presented proposition?

          You seem to be conversant with Hawking's thinking, suppose you and everyone who is conversant with Hawking's thinking produce in a proposition statement: precise, concise, and definite: his thinking on the God debate.

          If you ask me, I will say that the man does not have the correct information of God in the Christian faith in God's fundamental relation to the universe.

          So, Pcunix and everyone else, please produce propositions in concise, precise, and definite statements; so far you all agree to the first two of my presented propositions:

          1. We exist.
          2. The universe exists.
          3. The universe did not make itself.

          In place of proposition 3, what proposition would you like to present, perhaps you want to present the proposition that the universe is eternal, or what?


          Above all we or I invite us all to have a systematic exchange of ideas by presenting propositions and working on them to come to agreement, in re the God debate, i.e., whether God exists or not


          [ Help me, is there a way to see a preview of this message? ]



          Pachomius

          1. Pcunix profile image91
            Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Click the "Formatting" button while replying to learn how to quote and more.

            1. Druid Dude profile image59
              Druid Dudeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              One spontaneous creation is as good as the next, but, having not found the "end" of the universe, it could be premature to say we have definitely found the beginning. If, in fact, it is the beginning, then, there must indeed be an "end". Why is it that what is still undecided by those who work on such things, seems to have already been decided in the public forum. I think it's an incomplete understanding of just what is a theory and what isn't.

          2. profile image52
            Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            [ Well, here is my re-edited message of the above, sorry for the trouble but I can't find any correction link so that I can recall my message to correct it. ]

            [ And I can't find any preview link so that I can preview it before clicking on the submit link, so very sorry. Let's see what will appear now. ]


            Thanks, Pcunix, for your interest in my thread.

            -------------------------------

            Addressing everyone:

            Before anything else further, please don't take offense with my words as to experience disrespect for you, nothing personal involved in this thread.

            I am just asking for all of us to produce propositions which we will agree to; if we don't agree to a proposition then we work together to revise it in order that we will agree to it.

            Now the propositions have to do with the God debate, meaning the issue of whether God exists or not.

            If you anyone do not care at all whatever about any God debate, then there is no sense for you to be writing here, except perhaps to say to everyone else here who is interested that they are wasting your time and their time; in which case when you have already said that, please just read if you want to stay here, but please don't feel that you have to write more because you will be adding not contributions to the God debate but distractions.

            If you feel that the paragraph above is showing disrespect to you, then I guess that is your prerogative to feel that way, I can't do anything about that but I am going to continue with my thread and write the way I do in all civility.

            That is not addressed to you, Pcunix, though, and not to anyone else who does not feel disrespect from my words.

            Now, if anyone really feels disrespect from my words, just let him tell me what words are disrespectful to him, and I will change them if I see them to be genuinely disrespectful to him.

            Next, I am not trying to force anyone to adopt my thinking, if you feel that is what I am doing, in which case no one can say anything to you anymore if it does not agree with you; so, better you avoid that someone instead of that someone avoiding you, when that someone is just into speaking out his mind without any intention to force you to accept his ideas whatever.

            -------------------------

            [ Dear Pcunix, how did you do that, to write in an edit box without having to click on the 'reply' link? I am not conversant with the codes used in this forum, and I have not found any page here where almost all the codes are presented with examples of what effects they produce. ]


            This is what you wrote:



            And this is my in a way rounded-up reply to you:




            So, what proposition do you want to put in 3 to replace my presented proposition?

            You seem to be conversant with Hawking's thinking, suppose you and everyone who is conversant with Hawking's thinking produce in a proposition statement: precise, concise, and definite: his thinking on the God debate.

            If you ask me, I will say that the man does not have the correct information of God in the Christian faith in God's fundamental relation to the universe.

            So, Pcunix and everyone else, please produce propositions in concise, precise, and definite statements; so far you all agree to the first two of my presented propositions:

            1. We exist.
            2. The universe exists.
            3. The universe did not make itself.

            In place of proposition 3, what proposition would you like to present, perhaps you want to present the proposition that the universe is eternal, or what?


            Above all we or I invite us all to have a systematic exchange of ideas by presenting propositions and working on them to come to agreement, in re the God debate, i.e., whether God exists or not


            [ Help me, is there a way to see a preview of this message? ]



            Pachomius

            1. profile image52
              Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              I give up on trying to reproduce your message and my message in reply to yours.

              Guess I just have to invest more time to learn how if any all the codes work in this forum, but first locate them.

              Please help, anyone.


              Pachomius

          3. Pcunix profile image91
            Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            I've already told you.  The Universe (more properly the stuff that made it) has always existed.

            I'm not interested in Hawking.  I think he's a bit of a fool, honestly.  A bright fool, yes, but one who is afraid to come out with what he knows to be true: there are no gods and never were.  He keeps dancing around that, obviously fearful of religious sentiment.

            1. profile image52
              Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              You say: "The Universe (more properly the stuff that made it) has always existed."

              That is most interesting.


              I am trying to find out whether you -- I assume to be an atheist -- can exchange thoughts with me without being flippant.

              So, assuming that you will not be flippant, I am asking you and me to make a listing of the things that are parts of the universe.

              Can you see where I am going?


              I will let you know: I am going to divide things in the universe into things which have a beginning and an ending, for example, extinct species of animals and plants, and things which are always existing, only one example: God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, namely, creator of everything in the universe that is not Himself.

              Let me see your reaction, but please: no flippancy.


              Pachomius

              1. Pcunix profile image91
                Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                I'll be as flippant as I want.

                EVERYTHING is part of our Universe.  Your question makes no sense.

                1. profile image52
                  Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  I have not read the replies from posters here coming after yours, but I am wondering which question you are answering to mine, about my question making no sense to you.

                  Please pinpoint what question you are saying as from me that for you makes no sense.

                  At all costs I want to get a good connection with you.


                  Pachomius

                  1. Pcunix profile image91
                    Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                    Put the page in Chronological view so that you can understand what is being replied to.  Top right - you must be in Threaded view.

  18. psycheskinner profile image83
    psycheskinnerposted 5 years ago

    Whether the universe is eternal is not, it did not have to be made to exist.

  19. Druid Dude profile image59
    Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago

    Pc  something HAS been interferring in the affairs of man...evidently, for a very long time. Checking into strange occurrences which were documented long before the modern age would strongly suggest this, as would, of course, the christian, hebrew, and islamic holy books. One can limit there perceptions to what is steadfastly known to oneself, but to ignore the knowledge of so many over the centuries is pure folly. Do you imagine that all who lived in the past were gullible idiots? Then how did the genius of our time come about?

    1. Pcunix profile image91
      Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I imagine that gullible people existed always and obviously still do.

      1. profile image52
        Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I am asking you about the components of the universe, whether you can agree with me that among the components there are those which had a beginning and an ending like for example extinct species of animals and plants.

        And there is one I suspect which is always existing, no beginning and no ending.


        Pachomius

        1. Druid Dude profile image59
          Druid Dudeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          In the sense of energy, they still exist, and string theory is indicative of just such a property.

          1. profile image52
            Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Extinct animals and plants no longer exist as animals and plants, but you seem to be correct they exist as energy.

            So energy exists.

            And everything is energy and what else?

            All the things that make up the universe which scientists can observe and infer from their observations, in their ultimate compositions of particles which are governed by what scientists call the laws of nature or more in particular for physicists, the laws of physics.

            Laws of nature and laws of physics also make up parts of the universe, and also all kinds of forces and whatever else scientists can come up with like dark matter and dark energy, and strings, and waves, and of course particles.

            So, is it a valid and legitimate question for people to ask where do they all come from, or they have always been there in time and in space?

            And time and space?


            Pachomius

        2. Pcunix profile image91
          Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Whatever is the stuff of particle physics has probably always existed.

          1. Druid Dude profile image59
            Druid Dudeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            DAMN! Now, we just have to convince the christians! They generally don't like me much.

            1. profile image52
              Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Druid Dude posted 7 minutes ago
              DAMN! Now, we just have to convince the christians! They generally don't like me much.


              I like you even though I am a Christian and you are a what, a Druidist whatever.

              And I can accept that the universe is eternal on my understanding of the universe which is not contradictory to the universe of scientists, but it is more expansive.

          2. profile image52
            Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Pcunix posted 13 minutes ago
            Whatever is the stuff of particle physics has probably always existed.

            Is that your suspicion or is it your whatever belief, hypothesis, theory, speculation...?

            1. Pcunix profile image91
              Pcunixposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Somewhere, it has always existed. Doesn't really matter if it here or not.

              There are no gods. Period.

  20. Druid Dude profile image59
    Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago

    Why does someone have to be an atheist to believe that the universe has always been here? Is it because you accept the word of those whose interpretation of what they have read tells them so? They did not comprehend what they were reading. If (Notice that I said "if") God has always been, at what point do you believe he "decided" to create everything. He has always been and that which is, has always been with him. If this is not true, then show me where it says different, and I'll show you what was written to support what I said.

    1. Druid Dude profile image59
      Druid Dudeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The general misunderstanding about the bible is, that it isn't about God. It is about us. It is about the womb, emergence from it, the path away from it we call life, being in community, and living amongst each other with compassion and understanding. Knowing that Jesus (for christians) was just like we are. When it rained, he got wet, and when the sun shone, his skin tanned and weathered. He wasn't apart from us...he was one of us. And the enlightenment which Buddha spoke of, wasn't because Buddha was divine, it was because we are all divine. We are human, and we are divine. If a person does a good thing, does it matter why the thing was done? Does it matter if their belief is different than yours or mine? What matters is that the thing was done.

    2. profile image52
      Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      First, Druid Dude, how did you do that, write a post without having to click on the reply link to get an edit box to write on? I am looking for the page in this website where all the formatting codes and their examples are listed, any help from you?

      -----------------------

      Druid Dude posted 24 hours ago
      Why does someone have to be an atheist to believe that the universe has always been here? Is it because you accept the word of those whose interpretation of what they have read tells them so? They did not comprehend what they were reading. If (Notice that I said "if") God has always been...


      I am a Christian and I say that the universe is eternal.

      I understand universe as was traditional until today when people talk about the observable to man universe of science, implying that there is more to the universe than what is observable in it to man which scientists have access to inspect and to make inferences from their inspections.

      I understand universe as the totality of existence where we humans live in and are parts of, as also everything existing exists in, even imaginable things the subjects of man's discourse.

      So, in the concept of the universe as the totality of existence, in the situation when God had not created the to man observable universe and everything else that is not God but God created, God and the universe are identical because He is the only thing in the universe, and on that basis the universe is eternal.

      In the situation subsequent to God's creation of the observable to man universe and everything else that He created, observable to man universe is not eternal but it is a part of the eternal universe in a way.

      This thought brings in more questions but do these questions demolish the validity of the thought, the idea I have?

  21. Druid Dude profile image59
    Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago

    And consciousness? Why is it that the act of observing changes the outcome of the experiment? Is there something which can not exist then does exist, then doesn't exist, or is everything an illusion with no past, no present, and no future? If everything is a manifestation of energy, and consciousness being part of that, then consciousness, on a way different level than what we consider awareness, is a manifestation of energy, and therefore not separable from it. Membrane theory does seem to point to this. But you were dusted awhile ago. See ya later!!!ZOOOOOOOOOM.

    1. profile image52
      Pachomiusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Well, are we talking about the observable to man universe, or what?

      So there is this caveat that scientists don't seem to want to mention when they talk.

 
working