The Case for Theism

by FusionTheism 182 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Ruby456

  guys get a room - so much dark energy going on around here - I can hardly think anymore. Faye you are a lovely girl.

  back to the thread

  interesting hypothesis doltologist

  Doltologist: with that interesting statement and no movement through time, the concept of an un-created creator becomes a possibility.
  

  If God were understood metaphorically as activity (I tend to favour this idea but am not sold on it) and we incorporate the idea of process then if there have been several big bangs that preceded the big bang that we are part of then we have the recipe for a number of theological narratives intersecting independently of us yet producing effects that become the cause for another world.
• 

  prologos

  Ruby456 : "then if there have been several big bangs that preceded the big bang that we are part of then we have the recipe for a number of theological narratives"

  Ruby, you are echoing the work of Dr. Penrose. He teaches that the big bangs (at least the last one was "big" enough to let through instructions for the present universe). point being, that the idea of time not existing* before OUR big bang (yes even Vivian's energy was there) is not universally accepted. As doltologist mentioned, once you consider time static and perhaps eternal, and energy as part of the void, why is it so outlandish to think that this realm could house a master worker? caveat: this deist narrative did not arise from the pen of Dr. Penrose.* what did not exist was our Movement THROUGH time, Time is like that sheet of paper that we make time-lines on.
• 

  Ruby456

  prologos, interesting but mind boggling - shades of Sisyphus too - enjoy

  https://www.nyu.edu/classes/keefer/hell/camus.html
  
• 

  prologos

  Ruby456, that Greek legend is not a good case for theism, or deism. I am glad that we have become adept to use the stored energy of the big bang to make our lives so much easier. Particularly if the Universe really is the "ultimate free lunch" served up by the "father" thank you and--enjoy.
• 

  Ruby456

  prologos, I don't like the father metaphors that peppers religion. I prefer to get my kicks and rewards from great literature myths like many enlightenment thinkers. Religious narratives almost always totally exclude people like me - its a bloody disgrace.
• 

  MagicMItchJensen

  Fusion, do you know the difference between the definition of "agnostic" and "atheist" under the best Philosophical dictionaries?

  Once you read up on that, I was curious what's the best evidence or proof you have come across from someone trying to convert you from "theism, deist, agnostic" to the atheist view?

  What changed the former agnostic's mind, she or he had to come across something big evidence wise, something your missing or can't see? To change views, the evidence or well done arguments to make that transition, you think? Fusion, can you share the best arguments against God and why you think it has a strong merit? The person trying to convince you must show you why your position is not as strong as theirs. The example of evil and suffering, the person trying to prove their position to you must provide evidence there's no possible good reason in the Universe why suffering or evil is totally unnecessary.

  The person you debate is not in a position to sit back and enjoy while you explain your position if their positing their ideas. They must provide you with the best reasons why your wrong, don't let them sit back like some religious person claiming "I have faith in what I believe", you want reasons and proof why. The schools of philosophy are recognizing each party must bring their fair share to the debate, it's not a one sided issue.
• 

  Doltologist

  Ruby456

  Doltologist: with that interesting statement and no movement through time, the concept of an un-created creator becomes a possibility.
  

  And so does the case for a universe without a creator.

  MIT, last year performed an experiment whereby all the matter in a largevessel was pumped out. The vessel is surrounded by 18 inch thick aluminium to ensure that cosmic rays and the like are excluded. The process took a week (approx.) after which elemental particles were seen to be spontaneously created within the vessel. Investigation determined that the particles were created in particle/anti-particle pairs which self destructed by recombining.

  The process did not compromise any known physical laws eg. conservation of mass and energy since the matter created consists of particle/anti-particle pairs.

  It is this process that the press term 'the free lunch' and the 'something from nothing'.

  Does this mean that the universe was created by this mechanism?

  Maybe but there is an issue and it's a biggie. In the MIT experiment, the vessel exists in a pre-created universe. When our universe was created, there wasn't a pre-created universe.

  What this seems to indicate is that there is some kind of natural unknown force/driver which will create matter where none exists.
• 

  OneGenTwoGroups

  Cofty/Outlaw

  If anyone I debate this topic with has yet to learn that:

  1. agnosticism is about knowledge

  2. atheism is about belief

  3. knowledge is a subset of belief

  then I find all conversations about the topic are futile

  Cofty, it seems Outlaw is rather jealous of your former elder status.
• 

  Doltologist

  OGTG

  Cofty/Outlaw

  If anyone I debate this topic with has yet to learn that:

  1. agnosticism is about knowledge

  2. atheism is about belief

  3. knowledge is a subset of belief

  then I find all conversations about the topic are futile

  Cofty, it seems Outlaw is rather jealous of your former elder status.

  I really have to take exception to item 2 above. Atheism isn't about belief, ffs. It is merely a response to an unproven assertion that god exists.
• 

  prologos

  Doltologist: "Maybe but there is an issue and it's a biggie. In the MIT experiment, the vessel exists in a pre-created universe. When our universe was created, there wasn't a pre-created universe."

  Not only that, but all these advanced experiments require extraordinary knowledge, skills and effort. and these are only experiments. Who dare say that the original we are probing required less? Do you see the people at MIT CERN as accident investigators?

  Ruby456: "I don't like the father metaphors --. I prefer to get my kicks and rewards from great literature myths" Are many of these myth not steeped in theism roots? and I used "Father" loosely, not meaning any of the known "gods" at all. I am fond of my grandfather's work, that is now under heritage monument protection in one of the cities with an interesting history.