The War on Religion

[KingNothing]

Always existing means it has existed for an infinite amount of time. This is impossible.

Says you.

Drop some acid, or something. Your ability to think outside the box is ridiculously limited, man.

 

[jmdrake]

Says you.

Drop some acid, or something. Your ability to think outside the box is ridiculously limited, man.

Still waiting for your answer about the multiverse theory.

 

[Origanalist]

Says you.

Drop some acid, or something. Your ability to think outside the box is ridiculously limited, man.

Now there is some great advice.

 

[KingNothing]

So then you reject the quantum mechanics theory of the multiverse.

Why do you say that? A multiverse doesn't by necessity imply a finite universe.

And for what it's worth, I don't confirm or reject any theory on the creation of everything.

 

[KingNothing]

Now there is some great advice.

He could just watch a documentary on Netflix or a science channel about this stuff, crack open a book, or surf around on the internet, but we know he won't do any of that. The next best thing would be mind-expanding drugs. Maybe he'd do those.

 

[jmdrake]

Why do you say that? A multiverse doesn't by necessity imply a finite universe.

And for what it's worth, I don't confirm or reject any theory on the creation of everything.

You said:

If the Universe is infinite and still expanding, it means that there is nothing beyond the universe.

The multiverse theory implies that there is something beyond the universe. And I didn't say it implied a finite universe. Why did you go for that straw man?

 

[KingNothing]

You said:

If the Universe is infinite and still expanding, it means that there is nothing beyond the universe.

The multiverse theory implies that there is something beyond the universe. And I didn't say it implied a finite universe. Why did you go for that straw man?

A multiverse doesn't imply there is something beyond a universe that may or may not be expanding to infinity. It can imply that there are several, or an infinite, number of universes expanding infinitely, though.

 

[jmdrake]

A multiverse doesn't imply there is something beyond a universe that may or may not be expanding to infinity. It can imply that there are several, or an infinite, number of universes expanding infinitely, though.

What is your definition of the word "beyond"?

 

[KingNothing]

What is your definition of the word "beyond"?

Apparently different than yours. An infinite universe means that there isn't what amounts to a box beyond the universe, which would prevent it from expanding further.
Multiple universes doesn't require them to finite in nature. They just have different initial conditions.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Understanding the universe is impossible but we try anyway. We even make up stuff "like God" to fill in the blanks.

That's an argument from ignorance. You are saying that because we can't possibly understand the universe, it is safe to assume that God does not exist.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

PaulConventionWV didn't really even have to try. He knows cause and effect, so, therefore, God did it all. THAT is how smart PaulConventionWV is. The rest of us just can't wrap our tiny brains around his abstract, highly evolved thought process.

You don't have to be smart to understand this. You just have to be able to leave your bias behind. There is no such thing as an infinite regression of causes. Therefore, the universe cannot have existed for infinity. If it did, then it would take an infinite amount of time to get to this point, and nothing would ever get done because it would take infinity. It's not very hard to understand.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Says you.

Drop some acid, or something. Your ability to think outside the box is ridiculously limited, man.

I thought you were putting me on ignore?

Anyway, it is impossible for the universe to exist for an infinite amount of time because that would mean there was an infinite amount of time before this point in time. Since you cannot cross an infinity to get to a certain point, it is illogical to conclude that the universe had no beginning and has always existed because otherwise, we would not be here. If it took an infinite amount of time for us to be here, then we would never be here.

 

[tttppp]

Before time existed nothing physical existed, the physical universe did not exist. Of course the laws of physics had to be broken to start the universe, you don't say? That's why its "super natural" since it broke the natural laws of physics.

I don't know why its so hard to accept this argument as a coherent argument to how and why the universe started. It really isn't that hard to understand. I'm not even saying you have to ascribe to this explanation but I'm tired of people straw-manning this explanation like tttppp clearly has many times in this thread.

It is my explanation / understanding / belief about how the universe came into existence. You obviously don't have to believe in it, I'm not even trying to persuade you to it. Believe what you want. I'll believe what I want.

I've said my peace. I won't be returning to this thread.

This is a typical response from you. Come in, bash other people, state nothing of relevance, then say you are leaving so don't bother replying.

 

[jmdrake]

Apparently different than yours. An infinite universe means that there isn't what amounts to a box beyond the universe, which would prevent it from expanding further.
Multiple universes doesn't require them to finite in nature. They just have different initial conditions.

My understanding of multiverse theory is that you would have to move in a different dimension to experience another universe. A line extends forever in one dimension (two directions), but there are things beyond a line. A plane extends in two dimensions (three directions), but there are things that are beyond the plane. A universe expands in 3 dimensions. That doesn't mean there isn't something beyond the universe.

 

[KingNothing]

You don't have to be smart to understand this. You just have to be able to leave your bias behind. There is no such thing as an infinite regression of causes. Therefore, the universe cannot have existed for infinity. If it did, then it would take an infinite amount of time to get to this point, and nothing would ever get done because it would take infinity. It's not very hard to understand.

Leave bias behind? Holy moses, I've said repeatedly that I won't rule anything out -- even God. You're the one with the bias, speaking definitively about things in which no definitive words should be spoken because an infinite universe would imply that everything could, or would or will, happen. Even things that can't happen, given the initial conditions that our universe presupposes, could (would, necessarily) happen. I have no dog in this fight, and no bias. All I am saying is that your refusal to stop making assumptions based on a set of conditions that don't necessarily have to exist is silly.

 

[tttppp]

Then explain to me why God must be constrained by the laws of the universe.

Your the one who said God was infinite. You're the one who placed special rules for infinity to exist.

 

[tttppp]

That's an argument from ignorance. You are saying that because we can't possibly understand the universe, it is safe to assume that God does not exist.

I think he's saying the opposite. I've heard many times from religious people that we can't explain everything, therefore God exists.

 

[matt0611]

This is a typical response from you. Come in, bash other people, state nothing of relevance, then say you are leaving so don't bother replying.

That's where you are wrong. I do understand it. You're just wrong. There's a difference.

I've heard probably every argument out there for religion and I understand everyone of the, except the ones that debate verses of the bible. Out of all their arguments, none of them works. That's why I don't believe in God...not because I don't understand your argument.

You used to be an athiest, but were somehow converted to religion? How stupid are you?

If you want to have a discussion, so be it. Don't tell me I don't understand your argument simply because I disagree with you. If you were right, I would believe you.

It's very clear who is doing the bashing and personal attacks to anyone with any reason that is reading this thread. Why would I want to stay in a discussion where I'm going to be personally attacked? Both by you and kingnothing. Just thought I'd point that out before I leave.

Sorry, I'm not going to do it.

 

[KingNothing]

It's very clear who is doing the bashing and personal attacks to anyone with any reason that is reading this thread. Why would I want to stay in a discussion where I'm going to be personally attacked? Both by you and kingnothing. Just thought I'd point that out before I leave.

Sorry, I'm not going to do it.

I don't believe that I've attacked you.

 

[tttppp]

Because there had to be an uncaused cause. An impersonal cause would require a spontaneous arising of order. Also, the universe always existing is impossible because, if the universe is infinite, that means it has already existed for infinity. Therefore, there are 2 objections we must raise when we are told the universe is infinite.

1. Why hasn't the energy run out by now, according to the 2nd law of thermodynamics?
2. If the universe is infinite, that would mean you would have to cross infinity to get to this point. That is impossible. If there is no first event, then there can be no second or third because infinity is logically impossible in the natural world. God, not being constrained by the natural laws of the universe, exists outside of space and time and therefore does not need to exist "for infinity" for us to be here. He is the uncaused cause. Again, there must have been an uncaused cause because you can't have an infinite regression of causes.

Something that does not exist cannot bring something into existence, so the idea that the universe brought itself into existence has been realized to be absurd. Now it is time to realize the absurdity of an infinite universe. If there was not a personal cause, a decision, in the past, that brought us to this point, then we cannot exist. Watch the video in my above post.

I have already stated the reason the universe exists without a cause is because zero equals infinity. That's the only rational explanation I've ever seen for why stuff exists.

As I have already stated, the laws of the universe are only appartent. They are not required for something to exist. Additionally, that's a poor explanation for why God doesn't have the same constraints. You are basically because I said so.