So what do we believe here? Creatio ex nihilo or eternalism?
Printable View
So what do we believe here? Creatio ex nihilo or eternalism?
Neither. Just Creatio. There wasn't a Creatio ex nihilo, a creation out of nothing, because there wasn't even enough to call it a nothing. Nothing eludes the human mind as it can only concieve of it as the absense of something. :sweatdrop:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigurd Fafnesbane
Edit: well that doesn't make any sense, does it?
https://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gifhttps://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gifhttps://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gifhttps://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gifhttps://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gif
https://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gifhttps://img11.imageshack.us/img11/6907/freakout1fq.gifhttps://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gif
https://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gifhttps://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gifhttps://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gifhttps://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gifhttps://img202.imageshack.us/img202/...inghead5aj.gif
surely there is nothing that can be created out of nothing, unless nothing is something!
:dizzy2: :dizzy2: :dizzy2: :dizzy2: :dizzy2: :dizzy2: :dizzy2:
No scientist choosing his words carefully would ever present as theory as a fact. One of the ironies of the religious assaults that you and Gawain (thankfully) disavow is that they imagine that the scientists make the sorts of claim to "know" that in fact are the exclusive province of the religious. If they understiood the scientific process beter they could feel a lot more relaxed about it (as you and big G clearly do)Quote:
This is a theory that is often presented as fact, i would rather that we didn't know what caused the creation of the universe then believd an incorrect theory
But I'm afraid your second sentence is a manifesto for defeat. If I refused to believe in anything I didn't understand completely and wasn't sure was correct I wouldn't have much to believe in. I'm not even sure I could believe in 2+2=4, since I have had dreams in which I have completely settled some impossibly difficult mathematical problem, only to realise on waking that I had obviously done no such thing. I MIGHT be similarly deluded about even simple maths.
And my final point, perhaps reading too much into your words, is the big bang theory will never tell us what CAUSED the universe, only how it happened. Why things were that way is not an answerable question (the anthropic principle aside, and that has always seems unpersuaive to me). So you can readily put God in there, and who knows, depending on what you mean by god why not?
And how was God created...~;)Quote:
surely there is nothing that can be created out of nothing, unless nothing is something!
Ah, and so the impossibility of death in the mind of something living. These are deep waters, Watson.Quote:
Nothing eludes the human mind as it can only concieve of it as the absense of something.
Seriously, does anyone have a link or an answer to this question? I have oftenly thought about how the universe was created, but never about how God started to exist. Or do Christians believe that God has always existed, even billions of billions of years into the enternity of the past?Quote:
And how was God created...
Edit: thank God for Google :grin:
(continue as you were)Quote:
A number of sceptics ask this question. But God by definition is the uncreated creator of the universe, so the question ‘Who created God?’ is illogical, just like ‘To whom is the bachelor married?’
So a more sophisticated questioner might ask: ‘If the universe needs a cause, then why doesn’t God need a cause? And if God doesn’t need a cause, why should the universe need a cause?’ In reply, Christians should use the following reasoning:
1. Everything which has a beginning has a cause.1
2. The universe has a beginning.
3. Therefore the universe has a cause.
It’s important to stress the words in bold type. The universe requires a cause because it had a beginning, as will be shown below. God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so doesn’t need a cause. In addition, Einstein’s general relativity, which has much experimental support, shows that time is linked to matter and space. So time itself would have begun along with matter and space.
Since God, by definition, is the creator of the whole universe, he is the creator of time. Therefore He is not limited by the time dimension He created, so has no beginning in time — God is ‘the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity’ (Isaiah 57:15). Therefore He doesn’t have a cause.
Funny, the reply why God doesn't need a cause can just as well be used be applied to the statement "the universe doesn't need a creator', without the Bible quotes of course.
It's funny how people seem to need the notion of a sentient being creating the universe.
Oh, i didn't mean don't believe any theory thats not completely certain, just always allow for the possibility that it is not true. I see all the theories that now include the big bang and wonder what if the big bang didn't happen or occurred in a way different from the way we now think it happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by English assassin
Im only saying that the big bang shouldn't be presented as the only possibility as it seems (on the whole) that it is, to those outside the scientific community.
To clarify even more i still think that the big bang is the best existing model for the universes creation, im just open to other possibilities.
As for your question about god being created from nothing i don't think there necessarily ever was nothing, thats my point, as duke John's Quote has said time is as linked to our universe as the other dimensions, god is outside of time.