Originally posted by Tassman
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
What Is Man?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostYou keep referencing this many times to no avail. There is no direct physical evidence for either a finite nor an infinite universe. I have read Strinhardt, no problem, it does not change anything. Your bias has a religious agenda. I have not claimed there is 'direct evidence for either, and that these are among the open questions for the future of science. This simply basic state of the knowledge of science. Where is the bias on my part????Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by firstfloor View PostInterpretations of QM are attempts at visualising what is going on behind the mathematics but the truth is that nobody knows why the mathematics is what it is. So, in my understanding at least, QM is not evidence of many worlds or wave function collapse or the reality of the wave function and so on. The other thing to watch out for is that the Multiverse predicted by cosmological inflation is a different concept altogether from the ‘many worlds’ of QM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostHere is your bias Shuny, you think that the universe requires a natural cause. You are almost certain that it does require a natural cause and that science can one day figure it all out one day
I do not assume that they can. Yes, I have a religious bias and you have a non-religious bias. And the fact is, by personal experience, I now know that not every event has a naturalistic explanation.
I believe every event has a natural explanation, because I believe God Created our existence consistent with Natural Law and the physical nature that we observe through science. It would be a problem if God Created our physical existence inconsistent with the Natural evidence.Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-02-2014, 07:37 PM.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostFalse, I do not think the universe requires a natural cause. Please cite me where I stated this.
I believe in a 'Source' some call God(s), but I do not try to prove my religious belief by misusing and misrepresenting science. I accept science as it through Methodological Naturalism, without trying to manipulate it to fit my worldview.
I believe every event has a natural explanation, because I believe God Created our existence consistent with Natural Law and the physical nature that we observe through science. It would be a problem if God Created our physical existence inconsistent with the Natural evidence.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostMake up you mind Shuny, first you say that you don't believe the universe needs a natural cause,then you say you believe it does.
Tell me Shuny, what would be any different without God? If the laws of nature can explain everything then what do we need God for?
Again please cite where I made this claim.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostSo what???Last edited by Tassman; 08-03-2014, 01:19 AM.“He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostNo I did not. Please cite where I made this statement.
I did not say that Natural Law explains everything. Please cite me where I made this claim. From the human perspective the nature of our existence and the Natural Laws, 'Methodological Naturalism,' are consistent with how God Created everything. Unity and harmony of science and how God Created everything, does not equate to the belief that the universe needs a natural cause.
Again please cite where I made this claim.
Then Shuny tell me what would be different about the universe without God. What did God actually do?Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostThen Shuny tell me what would be different about the universe without God. What did God actually do?
Originally posted by seerMake up you mind Shuny, first you say that you don't believe the universe needs a natural cause, then you say you believe it does.
I did not say that Natural Law explains everything. Please cite me where I made this claim. From the human perspective the nature of our existence and the Natural Laws, 'Methodological Naturalism,' are consistent with how God Created everything. Unity and harmony of science and how God Created everything, does not equate to the belief that the universe needs a natural cause.
Again please cite where I made this claim.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThis question does not make sense based on the my previous posts. Please respond in context.
I did not say that Natural Law explains everything. Please cite me where I made this claim. From the human perspective the nature of our existence and the Natural Laws, 'Methodological Naturalism,' are consistent with how God Created everything. Unity and harmony of science and how God Created everything, does not equate to the belief that the universe needs a natural cause.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostYes Shuny the question makes perfect sense.
Ok, then give us an example of something that natural law doesn't explain.
Science, at present, cannot explain nor determine whether our physical existence is finite/temporal or infinite/eternal, nor the nature of the ultimate 'origins' of our physical existence. Nor is it likely that science can ever determine the existence/nonexistence, nor the nature of the Divine worlds of God. Even though I do not put limits on what science can ultimately explain, I do not believe that science can ultimately answer these questions.
I believe that the present barrier of the one planck's time of the expansion of the universe is the present barrier between the physical science knowledge of our universe, ie the expansion of the universe, and the cosmology and theological cosmogony of 'origins,' before this time. In the science of cosmology the present knowledge of science is based on 'possible' models and theorems falsified by our knowledge of the Quantum world and theories like Relativity. Pretty much most models are based on the existence of something like a gravitational singularity prior to the expansion of the universe, therefore the expansion itself is not the beginning. At this point possible models propose such things as the collapse of a black hole, collision of two branes using string theory, and possibly M-theory where multiple universes form from Quantum fluctuations. One alternative without a singularity is the Loop Quantum Gravity model. The above referenced are possible models and theorems for the nature of our universes, and picking one model or selectively citing material form one model is not good science.
I personally believe that the infinite/eternal, or the Hawking timeless view, of the nature of our physical existence are the best present possible conclusions based on the models and theorems concerning the possible existence of the multiverse Quantum World.
Unknowns and unanswered question concerning our physical existence are the driving force behind the Methodological Naturalism methods search for answers.
The above will be the beginning of a new thread.
This in a way relates to 'What is hu(man)?' in that I believe this view relates to the relationship of the limits of human knowledge and the knowledge of the Divine.Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-03-2014, 04:22 PM.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostAgain, quote me directly and ask question based on what I have posted.
Natural Laws we use to understand our physical existence are a product our sciences. Science over time develops the human Natural Laws to explain and understand our physical existence as approximations of the ultimate Laws that determine everything which are only known by God.
Science, at present, cannot explain nor determine whether our physical existence is finite/temporal or infinite/eternal, nor the nature of the ultimate 'origins' of our physical existence. Nor is it likely that science can ever determine the existence/nonexistence, nor the nature of the Divine worlds of God. Even though I do not put limits on what science can ultimately explain, I do not believe that science can ultimately answer these questions.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostI'm just going by the general tenor of our discussions over the years.
Ok, so there are ultimate laws that we can not know? Are these supernatural?
I have no idea what you mean by "Divine worlds," but to your other point - so you agree that science may never be able to explain the universe in a strictly naturalistic model - do I have that right?Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-03-2014, 04:36 PM.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
|
14 responses
42 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Today, 03:30 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
|
21 responses
129 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 03-21-2024, 12:15 PM | ||
Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
|
78 responses
411 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Yesterday, 10:50 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
|
45 responses
303 views
1 like
|
Last Post 03-17-2024, 07:19 AM |
Comment