Problems with both Creationism and Evolution

So your entire evidence for the existence of God is a book
written by men ?Oh, sorry, I forgot, God wrote it himself

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
Again, the PROBLEM is that there is good evidence that the universe had a beggining. If you want to blindly believe that the universe has always existed on faith- that's fine with me.

---

Keep it in context. You argued that 'God, by DEFINITION....'
so I argued by DEFINITION as well, and see what fit you had?

quote:

---

If the God of the Bible was described as having a beginning, then there would be a problem.

---

The PROBLEM is that there is no good evidence of the God of the Bible. If you want to blindly believe that god has always existed on faith- that's fine with me.------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

"Keep it in context. You argued that 'God, by DEFINITION....'
so I argued by DEFINITION as well, and see what fit you had?"Ok, but the universe HAS NOT NECCESARILY always been, by definition. You can BELIEVE that it always has been if you wish to, but this unfortunately flies in the face of science which you claim to have great respect for. Sorry if it seems like I'm having a fit, but what you're saying doesn't make much sense to me. You can say that the universe, by definition, has always been- but that is simply untrue.The original question asked of me was this:"god was supposed to have created life and just about everything else, but who created god? If god always existed then why could life and the universe not have already existed?"Octipice was clearly referring to God, and the God I believe in, BY DEFINITION, always has been and always will be, and thus He is not subject to the laws of cause and effect. That answers the first question.The second question was "If god always existed then why could life and the universe not have already existed?" The reason is, there is good evidence that the universe DID have a beginning. It is true that the universe COULD have already existed, but again, this flies in the face of scientific knowledge."The PROBLEM is that there is no good evidence of the God of the Bible. If you want to blindly believe that god has always existed on faith- that's fine with me."I don't feel like getting into a discussion about the existence of God in this forum. I answered the original questions completely and fully.

quote:

---

Sorry if it seems like I'm having a fit, but what you're saying doesn't make much sense to me.

---

I object to you using an argument for your cause on one hand then changing the terms and using the SAME ARGUMENT against another claim. What don't you understand?A 'by definition' argument is nothing but 'cause I said so' ie. meaningless.------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

"A 'by definition' argument is nothing but 'cause I said so' ie. meaningless."Alright, I understand where you are coming from. I should have said that the Christian God of the Bible is by definition always existing. It is true that God does not have to neccesarily always have been, but the God of the Bible is clearly described as having always existed.

Odd that you would bring up evidence...
You may have evidence for the universe having a beginning, but that doesn't mean that god created it. Just because you can't think of a better explanation doesn't count. So don't try it.

"god was supposed to have created life and just about everything else, but who created god? If god always existed then why could life and the universe not have already existed?"
--God always existed is what I would argue for, and the universe could not have 'already existed' (implying an infinite or everlasting time-span(?)) because the universe would have been at a thermal equillibrium. Thats my best guess at least. You could argue that the universe has gone through processes of colapse and regeneration, but then you would have to admit that that is just a guess.------------------

​

[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 07-07-2002]

how i see it, which is of course all i can offer, god is our creator. the power behind everything. the designer of my brain capable of creating and thinking things never before imagined. hes the provider of my conscious telling me when im wrong and reminding me that i should be humble. he is the sole owner of my existence and i owe him everything, but i created my own fate and made my own decisions for better or worse. i alone have my own emotions, feelings, and thoughts. i know that if i can trust and have faith in him i will never fail or fumble for long. i also know that it is not for me to decide the future only to act upon it and make the best of it. i know that he has always been and will always be since he is the power behind everything and shaped the world and universe that i am in. to me god is everything.------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

quote:

---

god was supposed to have created life and just about everything else, but who created god? If god always existed then why could life and the universe not have already existed?

---

Because for an eternally existing universe means that there are an infinite number of steps before you get to a certain step-no matter what step you take into the past there is always one before that. So, by inference, you can never get down to a point in which, say, the big bang happened, as it would require an infinite number of steps previously to be completed-which requires infinite time and so is impossible.

quote:

---

Originally posted by blitz77:

quote:

---

god was supposed to have created life and just about everything else, but who created god? If god always existed then why could life and the universe not have already existed?

---

​

Because for an eternally existing universe means that there are an infinite number of steps before you get to a certain step-no matter what step you take into the past there is always one before that. So, by inference, you can never get down to a point in which, say, the big bang happened, as it would require an infinite number of steps previously to be completed-which requires infinite time and so is impossible.

---

1) Same argument could hold for God.2) This is essentially Xeno's paradox, and it has been solved. It isn't actually paradoxical, it just plays one on TV.------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

1) Same argument could hold for God.

​

2) This is essentially Xeno's paradox, and it has been solved. It isn't actually paradoxical, it just plays one on TV.

---

Its actually the kalam cosmological argument. Xeno's paradox is

quote:

---

If you travelling from point A to point B, you necessarily must travel half of the distance to point B before travelling all of the distance. Now from that point you must again travel half of the remaining distance. If you continue to do so (travel half of the distance) you will never reach point B.

---

Which isn't really about what we are talking about.While for the kalam cosmological argument is this:--

quote:

---

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its
existence.
2. The universe began to exist.

​

2.1 Argument based on the impossibility of an
actual infinite.

​

2.11 An actual infinite cannot exist.
2.12 An infinite temporal regress of
events is an actual infinite.
2.13 Therefore, an infinite temporal
regress of events cannot exist.

​

2.2 Argument based on the impossibility of
the formation of an actual infinite by
successive addition.

​

2.21 A collection formed by successive
addition cannot be actually infinite.
2.22 The temporal series of past events
is a collection formed by successive
addition.
2.23 Therefore, the temporal series of
past events cannot be actually
infinite.

​

3. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its
existence.

---

God exists out of time; he made time. He was there before the beginning of time, and thus there is no infinite temporal regress argument you can level against God.If you want a more detailed argument using this, quote:

---

If, in order to reach a certain end, infinitely many steps had to precede it, could the end ever be reached? Of course not--not even in an infinite time. For an infinite time would be unending, just as the steps would be. In other words, no end would be reached. The task would--could--never be completed.

​

...In fact, no step in the sequence could be reached, because an infinity of steps must always have preceded any step; must always have been gone through one by one before it. The problem comes from supposing that an infinite sequence could ever reach, by temporal succession, any point at all.

​

...if the universe...is infinitely old, then an infinite amount of time would have to have elapsed before (say) today. And so an infinite number of days must have been completed--one day succeeding another, one bit of time being added to what went before--in order for the present day to arrive. But this exactly parallels the problem of an infinite task. If the present day has been reached, then the actually infinite sequence of history has reached this present point: in fact, has been completed up to this point--for at any present point the whole past must already have happened. But an infinite sequence of steps could never have reached this present point--or any point before it.

​

So, either the present day has not been reached, or the process of reaching it was not infinite. But obviously the present day has been reached. So the process of reaching it was not infinite...

---

​

--Kreeft, Peter and Ronald Tacelli

​

[This message has been edited by blitz77, 08-20-2002]

​

[This message has been edited by blitz77, 08-20-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by blitz77:

God exists out of time; he made time. He was there before the beginning of time, and thus there is no infinite temporal regress argument you can level against God.

---

If I remember correctly, time was created (for lack of a better word) by the BB (or something like that). If this is correct then the Universe has both existed for all time, and had a begining. How would this be different from God as described above?------------------
compmage

quote:

---

Originally posted by blitz77:
Its actually the kalam cosmological argument.

---

And it rests on the same wierd properties of infinity as Xeno's paradoxes.

quote:

---

Which isn't really about what we are talking about.

---

So yeah, it is what we are talking about.But since you have given a more detailed formulation...

quote:

---

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its
existence.

---

Quantum theory suggest that this is not the case.Strike one.

quote:

---

2. The universe began to exist.

​

2.1 Argument based on the impossibility of an
actual infinite.

​

2.11 An actual infinite cannot exist.

---

This is a conclusion based upon an incorrect formulation of a reductio ad absurdam argument. It is fallacious.Strike two.

quote:

---

2.2 Argument based on the impossibility of
the formation of an actual infinite by
successive addition.

---

Same as before. Incorrect reductio ad absurdam.Strike three.

quote:

---

3. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its
existence.

---

Wait a minute. Wasn't this premise one?Strike three, again.The whole thing revolves around the wierd mathematical properties of infinity, and the incorrect inference that "if it doesn't make sense then it is fallacious"

quote:

---

God exists out of time; he made time.

---

Prior to the big bang, if such can be at all, is effectively outside of time. Causality as we know it doesn't apply.

quote:

---

He was there before the beginning of time, and thus there is no infinite temporal regress argument you can level against God.

---

How can God exist before time when there was no "before" before time existed?------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com[This message has been edited by John, 08-21-2002]

Possibly off-topic, but does time objectively exist
anyhow? Or is it just a convenient shared reference frame based
upon our perception of our surroundings?

Hi everyone, this is my first post. I found this BBS by accident and loved reading through it.I would like to respond to the post tearing apart the kalam argument.Despite your trying to strike out the previous points about infinity, even scientists believe the universe began to exist and is not infinite or eternal(big bang). So all of your points are irrelevant to the kalam arguments premisses. Its the implications of the kalam arguments conclusions that seem to be the important thing.the big bang expanded from a singularity. Time was created when the singularity expanded, creating space/time.If time did not exist before the expansion created it, then nothing could happen, since it takes duration for an event to occur in. So, what caused the singularity to expand? If it existed eternally (without time) then it should logically remain in that state, since nothing could happen without time for it to occur in. Further, since the singularity was infinitely dense, it is equivelant to nothing. Nothing should have remained nothing.The only way to get an action from a static eternal singularity would be from something acting deliberatly to cause the action. This points to an intelligence that exists in eternity.In the kalam argument article that the previous poster referred to the conclusion states what I tried to convey above much better than I can. I am including it below:=======
Quoted from http://www.leaderu.com/truth/3truth11.html"In fact, I think that it can be plausibly argued that the cause of the universe must be a personal Creator. For how else could a temporal effect arise from an eternal cause? If the cause were simply a mechanically operating set of necessary and sufficient conditions existing from eternity, then why would not the effect also exist from eternity? For example, if the cause of water's being frozen is the temperature's being below zero degrees, then if the temperature were below zero degrees from eternity, then any water present would be frozen from eternity. The only way to have an eternal cause but a temporal effect would seem to be if the cause is a personal agent who freely chooses to create an effect in time. For example, a man sitting from eternity may will to stand up; hence, a temporal effect may arise from an eternally existing agent. Indeed, the agent may will from eternity to create a temporal effect, so that no change in the agent need be conceived. Thus, we are brought not merely to the first cause of the universe, but to its personal Creator."
=====John