Evidence for God from Science

Byblos wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:Anyway, how is god as the uncaused cause of the universe any more reasonable than the universe as the uncaused cause for itself?

Because it violates the law of non-contradiction whereas God does not.

He blinded me with metaphysics!

edwardmurphy wrote:

Byblos wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:Anyway, how is god as the uncaused cause of the universe any more reasonable than the universe as the uncaused cause for itself?

Because it violates the law of non-contradiction whereas God does not.

He blinded me with metaphysics!

Here. FIFY

He blinded me with metaphysics logic!

Ed,

Stay with us. We're not talking God of the gaps. We are talking logic.

edwardmurphy wrote:

Byblos wrote:

edwardmurphy wrote:Anyway, how is god as the uncaused cause of the universe any more reasonable than the universe as the uncaused cause for itself?

Because it violates the law of non-contradiction whereas God does not.

He blinded me with metaphysics!

To the contrary my friend, I am attempting the exact opposite.

Let me save you a ton of time and tell you where conversations like such will always, always end up. But first a clarification (of my position) and a stipulation. I'm not an advocate of the cosmological argument at all because I see huge gaps in it. Some of these gaps are theistic in nature but the canyon-sized ones are actually scientific, precisely because science does not (or cannot, rather) define metaphysics. So my stipulation is this, the universe (i.e. matter and energy, in all its forms, including parallel, oscillating, bubbling, muti-verses and the myriad entailed laws of physics) always existed. Fair enough?

edwardmurphy wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:What science does know is that in THIS UNIVERSE, nothing comes into being without an " outside force acting upon it" in some fashion.
This is one of the LAWS of physics in this universe.

The formation of this universe can't have happened within this universe. Furthermore, the law of physics are just human constructs based on our observations of how things work within our universe. Who's to say what conditions existed prior to the formation of the universe...?

Anyway, how is god as the uncaused cause of the universe any more reasonable than the universe as the uncaused cause for itself?

You are not making any sense here.
Of course this universe could not have been formed in THIS universe, that is a given and leads us to that Which means that the creation of this universe was a supernatural event by definition ( outside of the nature of THIS universe).

su·per·nat·u·ral
ˌso͞opərˈnaCH(ə)rəl/Submit
adjective
1.
(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.

Now, as to your statement:

Anyway, how is god as the uncaused cause of the universe any more reasonable than the universe as the uncaused cause for itself?

Well, for one thing we know that the universe HAD a beginning in time And we know that the universe can't cause itself to come into being because NOTHINg that comes into being can cause itself to come into being.

If you understood the premise of God being the uncaused cause and the unmoved mover, you would realize that for the universe to exist and for us to see what we KNOW happens, means that the universe can NOT be it's own cause.

And no, the multiverse hypothesis doesn't answer the issue at all either and what it does imply actually can make the case for God greater.

Here are some facts was we know them,a s best as we know them:

The universe as we know it came into being by a singular event called "the big bang".
This event cause the AT THE VERY LEAST an expansion of a stagnant "existence" of "cosmic energy" IF we ASSUME that this "cosmic energy" somehow had always existed.
This event MUST have had to have been CAUSED by SOMETHING because energy, as we know it, does NOT change/move or do anything other than exist in its same-state UNLESS acted upon by something else.

In short, the universe could NOT have caused itself to "expand" from its stagnant state anymore than life could come into being from a stagnant cell existing in a vacuum with nothing to act upon it.
And all that assuming that there was actually something in existence prior to the big bang which we have NO EVIDENCE to believe that there was.

We can't with one hand say science and scientific principles are our best bet to learn things and then deny those very principles and make things up that counter than and call it "science".

Guess Ed skipped my comment... And don't want to play. Oh well

zacchaeus wrote:Guess Ed skipped my comment... And don't want to play. Oh well

Quote it, he might have missed it.

Ed First off you must understand that God is all-powerful and eternal. I know it might be hard to believe but he is therfore you cannot just ignore it make up a straw man god and claim God was a created or caused thing however everything in our universe and world applies to the facts ALL things have a cause and ALL things that have a cause are caused by something else,ALL things are willed into existence and infinite regression cannot be broken.

These are facts based on logic,reason,reality and everything in our world and universe. These are not just made up things. You know based on logic,reason and reality and everything around you in our world and universe that these are facts. But if somebody rejects God? They are outside logic,reason and reality in their own imagined world just to reject God. And yet they often look to science hoping and believing science can oneday prove these facts of logic,reason and reality wrong,oneday based on pure imagination.

And yet science has no answer and is nowhere even close to showing by peer reviewed science that we don't need God as a cause for the universe,yet some people who deny God actually latch on to non-peer reviewed scientific hypothesis's like multi-verses,eternal universe,because there is a law of gravity the unverse can and will create itself,etc. Yet these kinds of scientific hypothesis's are outside logic,reason and reality but moreso is they are not even peer reviewed science and not all scientists agree,there are competing scientific hypothesis's in science and they must go through peer review before anything changes based on cosmic background radiation or the Big Bang theory that is peer reviewed science.

No matter what scientific theory we look at ALL things have a cause,ALL things that have a cause are caused by something else,ALL things are willed into existence and infinite regression cannot be broken. If you reject these facts of logic,reason and reality then I challenge to name anything in our world and universe where these facts don't apply. I meanlook all around you right now at everything around you and I think you'll realize that everything in our world and universe applies to these facts but if you disagree you are choosing to defy the facts of reality in order to simply accept God,which is easy to do.

Genesis 1:1 still makes more sense than anything I've heard some atheistic scientist come up with - "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Name something else that you've heard that makes more sense.

edwardmurphy wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:What science does know is that in THIS UNIVERSE, nothing comes into being without an " outside force acting upon it" in some fashion.
This is one of the LAWS of physics in this universe.

The formation of this universe can't have happened within this universe. Furthermore, the law of physics are just human constructs based on our observations of how things work within our universe. Who's to say what conditions existed prior to the formation of the universe...?

Anyway, how is god as the uncaused cause of the universe any more reasonable than the universe as the uncaused cause for itself?

Edward, you are almost there BUT I don't think you will take that final step.
You have just stated that the laws of physics are subjective and, possibly, have no bearing on what happened before this universe or what happens in any other universe. You state that these laws are only observations based on how we THINK things work, that they are human constructs.
Well said.
Welcome to the first step of believing in God.
Now, to understand why it MUST have been God that caused the universe into being rather than the universe being itself uncaused and somehow causing itself to expand, you need to understand the nature of the universe and then after you understand that, you can BEGIN to try and understand the nature of God.

Here is a hint:
The nature of the universe tells us, explicitly, that nothing can cause itself to come into being.
Because of that, the universe can NOT go against it's own "nature", it can't go against itself ( not anymore than a circle can be square).

In short, the very fact that the universe is CHANGING means that it is NOT UNCHANGING.
The fact that it is moving means that it is NOT unmoveable.
The fact that it was CAUSED into being ( which we know), means it can NOT be uncaused.

edwardmurphy wrote:

B. W. wrote:Ed, one thing about a discussion forum is that no one can read body language. The words you wrote come across as anti-Jewish, therefore, let it be known that this forum will not tolerate that sort of thing. Maybe you did not mean at all to come across as anti-jewish/Israel but fact is, you did. So I questioned you on this matter.

Treating the Jews as if they were just another group of people and Israel as if it were just another nation isn't anti-Semitic. Obviously the Holocaust was horrible, but the Jews aren't the only group that's ever been on the receiving end of horrific violence, and being numbered among the victims of the Nazis doesn't get their decedents a permanent pass to do anything they feel like without fear of criticism. The Israelis - note that I'm talking about a nation here, not a religion - are not blameless and our longstanding policy of taking their side no matter what is poorly conceived.

I have no opinions about the Jewish people as a whole, because that would be ridiculous. They're people. A few of them are exemplary, a few of them are horrible, and the vast majority fall somewhere in between, just like every other group of people. Disdaining any group because of their religion would be asinine. Unless they were Muslim, I mean. Those guys are evil. Even the babies are plotting to kill us all and start a new Caliphate with Omaha as the capital. Terrifying.

Well that is good to hear that you are not anti in this matter. Need to be sure about that due to an open forum and folks that come on it does make us questions motives concerning racism. Hope you understand that.

edwardmurphy wrote:

B. W. wrote:How come the Holocaust could not the instrument God used to move the nations o except the Jewish people back into their homeland as prophesied in bible as well as the events leading to return which speak of the events that happened to the Jewish people being hunted and killed before the return as mentioned in the bible?

Because that's insane. You're seriously telling me that I should honor a god who would do something like that? It's breathtakingly cruel, not to mention really inefficient. It's the act of a sociopathic monster.

Not at all. There is free moral agency involved. In fact, several prominent Nazi's during the 1930's proposed resettling all Jews to Madagascar. See the link. This was rejected by Hitler who had other ideas. So it wasn't God that caused it, it was human beings.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/js ... ascar.html

What you cannot grasp is how God works in the affairs of humanity without violation to the gifts, dominion, free moral agency he gave humanity and can turn the worst that humans can do to each other into a future good. That is something you fail to see.

It is prophesied in the bible that God would return his own covenant people back into their own land a second time and this happened. It was not coincidence nor a long shot that an ancient people scattered into the nations of the world for 1,878 years who kept their faith in God, traditions, customs alive all these years and not assimilate into another dominate culture as is the norm with other ancient peoples who were conquered and removed from their lands by force.

That in itself speaks volumes. However, why folks can't see this remains a mystery to me. Even during m atheist days, the survival of the Jewish people and culture puzzled me and their survival against all odds in the wars that sought their extermination amazed me. The odds for this happening on a consistent and measurable basis confounded me. Back then, I was honest about it and did not pass this off to chance - it simply defies the odds.

God exposes evil and will ride all of it in a manner far greater and far more just and equitious than any one of us could ever fully understand. All the nuances of this is staggering. Yes, it is far easier to act superior and base ones own opinion upon presupposition without really looking into a matter more deeply. I discovered that militant atheism has no desire to examine its presuppositions with any form of logical reason and actual investigation. Instead it is all based on talking points and spin.

edwardmurphy wrote:

B. W. wrote:Ed everyone has a reason why to their life why they become this or that. It is called a root cause. If you are not willing to share on the real reason you became an - unbeliever - then it demonstrates a objective unwillingness to actually reason with anyone as you are the only objective source for morality which says... endless talking point dribble...

I recall that you had a reason for what you erroneously* think of as your atheist period. Is that why you think that I must have one, too? The fact is, I don't.

I was baptized Lutheran, if I recall correctly. When I was a kid we went to the Second Congregational Church of Christ. The Pastor, Reverend Barron, was a nice guy who never molested me, ran over my dog, or seduced my mom. The building was clean, dry, and not haunted, spooky, or otherwise off-putting. There was always ample parking. Sunday school was irritating - far too much time spent gabbling on about Jesus, the Kool-aid was always watered down, and the cookies were stale - but it was never traumatic. My biggest issue with the whole experience, apart from having to go when there were better things to do, was that it all just seemed like a load of crap. There were too many holes in the narrative, and too many places where I felt like I could have done a better job than god did. Long story short, the presentation was unappealing, the material was unconvincing, and I put it all in the rear-view mirror as soon as I could.

*If you're mad at god then it follows that you believe in him and are therefore an angry theist, not an atheist.

So Lutheran background, that actually explains much and trust me dry Lutheranism would turn me off as well too.

This comic link does reveal the truth of my point:Lutheran quips

Yes, dry and formal does turn people off. Cold and aloof does too. so what I am hearing you say is that your view on Christianity was largely formed by your Lutheran background.

Interesting

edwardmurphy wrote:

B. W. wrote:However you at least revealed that you don't like people getting into your head. In that you are correct, Jesus is a person who desires you to inside your head and help you.

Jesus isn't judging me - he's been dead for 2,000 years. That said, being judged by people who worship him and look down on those who don't is irritating. And just to clarify, I don't feel that I'm being judged by the majority of Christians that I know in real life, or even the majority on this forum. But when I sense that I am, yes, it's irritating.

Yes, all folks don't like that sort of judgment and criticizing. So how do you think Christians feel when they are criticized and judged by FFRP and even yourself? Ever thought about that?

Beside that Jesus isn't dead, he is alive and now you are going to criticized that and judge that? Why, what harm has it done to you besides growing up in dry formalism?

edwardmurphy wrote:

B. W. wrote:So I take this to mean that somewhere along the line of your life hate came into your life as a guiding factor of your personal morality because you feel you are being criticized and judged.

That, sir, is an extraordinary leap. You're reading way too much into that comment. What I said was that I don't care for a particular rhetorical trick that I've seen many, many times over the years. I don't sit here telling you all what it means to be Christian because 1) I don't really know, and 2) I recognize that it means different things to different people, so there's no answer that's going to be true for every Christian. When Christians start telling me that I don't understand what it means to be an atheist I tend to be annoyed by their disregard of those two points.

No we are getting somewhere. Glad to hear that 1) you don't really know, and 2) recognize that it means different things to different people.

Therefore, when atheist start telling Christians that we don't understand what it means to be an Christians we too can tend to be annoyed by their disregard of those two points too.

Have you considered that?

edwardmurphy wrote:

B. W. wrote:So you hate to be criticized and judged wrongly as anyone would but how are you not being that critical and judgmental towards others here on this forum?

I'm doing my best to treat others as they treat me. If you look at my comments to various people you'll see that.

I'm fine with criticism where it's due, but I don't care to be criticized for positions that I don't hold and statements that I never made. As far as judgement goes, I do my best to judge people by their comments while assuming good intentions. And often - really often - I read a comment, sigh, and keep my thoughts to myself.

Let's see, you make statement regarding that Jesus is just a dead guy and do criticize Christianity and condemn God and support FFRP, hmmmm...

So are you claiming that Christians cannot and should not defend themselves?

I know myself that I often read a comment, sigh, and keep my thoughts to myself.
-
-
-

Ed, go and study theoretical physics. You may be mystified even more?
Not just why the heck Christians believe in God (you may be mystified less) but mystified by the universe and its laws.



I recently spoke with my schoolfellow who was in the past total skeptic.
But then he realized that heck, when one particle at one side of the universe 'knows' in some way about another particle on the other side of the universe...

He said, we are restricted.

We see what we see while there may be greater things beyond us.

Hi Nessa,

I thought about that for a day or two, and no, there is not.

Hi Nessa,

I thought about that for a day or two, and no, there is not.

AUDIE!!! Where have you been? We've missed you around here!

Hope all is well with you, Min!

Audie wrote:Hi Nessa,

I thought about that for a day or two, and no, there is not.

Audie

I have thought of you often.

So, so good to see you.

xx

Audie wrote:Hi Nessa,

I thought about that for a day or two, and no, there is not.

Hi Audie,

Thanks for taking the time to really think about this question. It was good to hear your thoughts.