Beliefs About What Caused the Universe

by Perry 160 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Perry

    And something from nothing isn't magic? At least with magic you start with a magician. Materialists start with literally nothing. Why isn't this happening now?


    The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing, and then nothing magically exploded for no reason creating everything and everywhere. Then, a bunch of the everything magically rearranged itself for no apparent reason into strands self-replicating bits of a mind-boggling four-letter coding system which then turned into you, which has no eternal purpose or accountability whatsoever.

  • bohm

    I know this is properly in vain but..

    And something from nothing isn't magic? At least with magic you start with a magician. Materialists start with literally nothing. Why isn't this happening now?

    this is false and it is not the conclusion of the Vilenkin articles (2003 and 2012 versions).

  • bohm

    Just to clarify, materialists starts with the assumptions we are here, now in a universe that is at least partly understandable through reason and experience. Reason and experience gets us back to about 13.7 billions years ago in the very early big-bang phase of our universe where we have no relevant experience and reason gives contradiction results. The logical conclusion is then not "it sure all came from nothing" but "we don't know".

    Perry, YOU are the one who claims to know what lies outside reason. Stop projecting your arrogance onto others.

  • cofty

    In the history of mankind rigorous application of the scientific method is brand new. Methodological naturalism has transformed our knowledge in a heartbeat.

    Theists are in a panic as they watch their god retreat into ever-decreasing gaps.

    What we already know for a certainty makes christian theism an impossibility.

  • OnTheWayOut

    There's one thing for certain: There's no evidence of intelligence creating Perry's thought processes.

    If it is valid to say "Everything has a cause except God," it is more likely that everything has a cause except for the matter/energy of the universe. If God doesn't need a cause because it is infinite, it is more likely that the matter/energy of the universe has existed forever and therefore doesn't need a cause. Starting with the matter/energy being infinite, instead of God, makes fewer assumptions and causes fewer puzzles if you admit that you believe in one uncaused entity, and that entity is the universe itself or the matter/energy of said universe.

    We cannot fall back on "Were you there?" because that is true no matter what you believe. There are theories about the "cause" or "start" (almost meaningless terms in the science, but important in our limited philosophies) of the singularity that contained the stuff of our universe. Regardless of whether those are sound in our minds, the default answer "God did it" is the stuff of primitive man and we need to get past that.

  • Perry

    bohn, your false assumptions were already refuted pages ago. And you know it.

    The universe had a beginning. You  can't change that. 

    Beginnings have causes. You can't change that either. 

    Since our space/time universe was caused, the cause is outside of space & time, otherwise its own cause would precede it, placing it back in the space time universe, it is still yet to create... an illogical impossibility. So, the whole notion of what is "natural" is placed beyond our space/time universe, quite effectively destroying Materialism/Naturalism. 

    No one has ever seen something from nothing appear. As already addressed, a vacuum is far from "nothing" . Don't confuse the two. Additionally, when virtual particles momentarily appear within a vacuum, they are appearing in a space that already exists, because space itself is part of our universe. 

    Our understanding of the laws of physics is based on observation. We are in territory here well beyond observation.

    Atheists speculate freely on yet unknown laws of physics that would allow a universe to pop into existence from nothing. Even if discovered, the atheist is still left with the serious question; Where did those laws came from? This is usually not included in their speculations. 

    Just another illustration of the many failures of Materialism / Naturalism to explain our existence. 

  • Anders Andersen
    Anders Andersen
    Lastly, no one has ever seen something from nothing appear.

    As opposed to: we have seen God. Your God no less.

    And you still haven't answered the question how we get from 'there must be a Cause' to 'worship Jehovah for he is God'. Lacking any evidence of your God's existence, you have to resort to juggling flawed arguments even if it's just to convince yourself.

  • Fisherman
    Perry, even with a purely sterile theological position your reasons appeal to logic.
  • Finkelstein

    All of nature is causative , that doesn't mean that nature was created by a supernatural being.

  • cofty

    Perry just as you have never read a single book that presents the scientific evidence for evolution I bet you haven't read single physics book either have you?

    Have you read Krauss' book for example?

    This afternoon I was having a coffee in Costa with Mrs Cofty and bearded, sandal-wearing man came around with his collecting tin for some "animal shelter". His t-shirt gave him away as a member of some Eastern Hindu cult commune. He was most insulted when I asked if he was hare krishna.

    So I ask him what he is about and within seconds he sounded just like you. Wittering on about theoretical physics and singularities and quantum cats and double-splits etc.

    It all amounts to the same thing. Superstitious people desperately trying to find a rational pretext for their irrational delusions.

    Typical of all theists he misquoted scientists to try to support his woo but as soon as I referred to actual science he was dismissive of everything science knows.

    Christian, Hindu, Hare Krishna, Scientologist, JW - they are all just different flavours of the same hoax.

Share this