Felgar, you are right, it's infinite regression to the point of something came from nothing. And there is no current scientific law that demonstrates that something can come into existence from nothing.
And even if it could be postulated, what would be the catalyst for that happening, other than something supernatural?
If there is nothing, then nothing can happen...
Theories - Creation & Evolution Cancel Each Other Out?
-
August
- Old School
- Posts: 2402
- Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 7:22 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Day-Age
- Location: Texas
- Contact:
Acts 17:24-25 (NIV)
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. [25] And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else."
//www.omnipotentgrace.org
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. [25] And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else."
//www.omnipotentgrace.org
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com
-
August
- Old School
- Posts: 2402
- Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 7:22 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Day-Age
- Location: Texas
- Contact:
BobSmith,
Please expand on your statement, I'm not sure I understand.
Please expand on your statement, I'm not sure I understand.
Acts 17:24-25 (NIV)
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. [25] And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else."
//www.omnipotentgrace.org
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. [25] And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else."
//www.omnipotentgrace.org
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com
If the early universe was outside our natural laws and logic then the early universe can be called "supernatural". Because this early universe is supernatural it requires no cause, for the same reason as God requires no cause.
The natural universe we see today requires a cause. So where did it come from? It could have been created by a supernatural God, or it could have been caused by the early supernatural universe. Ie the supernatural universe became the natural.
In otherwords the early universe was without rules and laws such as causality. As soon as those rules came into place it became the bounded universe we see today.
The natural universe we see today requires a cause. So where did it come from? It could have been created by a supernatural God, or it could have been caused by the early supernatural universe. Ie the supernatural universe became the natural.
In otherwords the early universe was without rules and laws such as causality. As soon as those rules came into place it became the bounded universe we see today.
-
Mastermind
- Esteemed Senior Member
- Posts: 1410
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 3:22 pm
-
Anonymous
There is nothing in science and scientific observation which concludes that the universe came from nothing; or for that matter, that anything has magically sprung forth from nothing. There is plenty of evidence that matter and energy are in a constant state of transformation, but no more.
Science cannot say what happened before the big bang; science cannot say exactly what happened at the moment of the big bang, and science cannot say what the ultimate fate of the observable universe will be, or even if the concept of ultimate fate even makes sense.
It is also not correct to conclude that physical laws break down anywhere in the universe; it is only correct to conclude that our understanding of physical law breaks down. The history of science is filled with such examples.
It is a misuse of science to claim a first cause, or that there is no rational explanation for an observation. Both of these may in fact be true, but science does not show this.
Science cannot say what happened before the big bang; science cannot say exactly what happened at the moment of the big bang, and science cannot say what the ultimate fate of the observable universe will be, or even if the concept of ultimate fate even makes sense.
It is also not correct to conclude that physical laws break down anywhere in the universe; it is only correct to conclude that our understanding of physical law breaks down. The history of science is filled with such examples.
It is a misuse of science to claim a first cause, or that there is no rational explanation for an observation. Both of these may in fact be true, but science does not show this.