Originally posted by ahosyney
If you really read my posts you will understand what I'm talking about.
These laws are OUR laws! They did come from somewhere, they came from [b]US! Our perception of the Universe is limited by our senses so we construct elaborate ways to understand the things that we can't see. These 'laws' aren't Universal at all, they don't really exist excep ink this endless chain is possible?
I will stop here waiting fo your opinion...[/b]
If you really read my posts you will understand what I'm talking about.
Ok, i re-read your post. I originally said to you.. (sorry if you wanted me to go back further, i'm trying to get on with the conversation without writing for days...)
"Because there's nothing to suggest he (God) is in the picture. Give me one good reason
(that isn't based on superstition) why you think there is a God and i'll accept he's in the picture."
To which you responded...
1- My mind tell me that this universe didn't come from no where.
2- My mind tells me that every thing has a cause to do it.
3- Human tried to explain the cause of every thing, but it always leads to a change of reasoning.
I fail to see how i am misinterpreting. I asked you a question and you didn't give me an answer. You told me what your mind feels about it, you told me what your mind tells you, you even told me about the constant regression of the argument, but you
didn't provide me with any reason to believe God is responsible. I'll give you your due, you didn't attempt to quote or use any religious texts in your argument, that is something people are fond of using as 'evidence' around here, i applaud you for that!
If i am still misunderstanding (which i suspect i am) then you need to spell out exactly what it is you are taking issue with, i have done my best to repeat the discussion so far...
To continue...
I said... "These laws are OUR laws! They did come from somewhere, they came from
US! Our perception of the Universe is limited by our senses so we construct elaborate ways to understand the things that we can't see. These 'laws' aren't Universal at all, they don't really exist except as a means to an end. If we observe something in the Universe that refutes these laws, we change the law! No where, at any point, have you given me anything approaching a reason to believe in God. Maybe you should consider the possibility that you're letting your imagination run away with you..."
To which you replied..
I don't agree with you. These laws do exist long before we got evolved, our rule as human was to discover them. They were there before we discover them and formulate them. So actually we didn't create those laws. You statement is not correct.
Ok, first off, how do you know they existed before we evolved/documented them? We know nothing of the sort. We use these 'laws' to try and understand the Universe as it is
now, there is nothing to say they will stay the same for ever, or to say they have always been the way they are since the dawning of time (if there is such a thing)
Secondly, you are misunderstanding my intentions in my original statement ("These laws are OUR laws! They did come from somewhere, they came from US!" )
What i mean by this is, 'law' is a human word. It has a meaning to us as humans, but its meaning isn't set in stone. Over time, the meanings of our words change. When we use language, it is inexact. Newton, the brilliant scientist that he was, 'discovered' gravity. He gave it a name. Gravity meant something before he coined it into the use we have it for today. However, over time the meaning of this word is totally entwined with his theory/discovery. The Laws of Physics, particularly quantum theory, etc.. are changing constantly, people come up with laws all the time, only a select few become mainstay parts of our reasoning.
Going back to God, where does he fit? He started 'the laws,' is that what you're saying? I would assume you believe this as you've already said you believe in science/evolution. If you can't put God at the wheel here i'm starting to wonder where God fits into your philosophy...
So I assume you agree with me in the following:
Lets say there is a being X (could be anything we see or know), and we know that X is caused , or emerged from Y.
And because every thing has a cause then Y must have some cause, source lets call it Z. So we will do that for ever,
Z caused by XX , and XX caused by YY , and so on.
One of the Islamic sciences called "Tawheed" (you can translate it Oneness of GOD, you can understand it as the philosophy of Islamic faith) we call this endless chain of cause and effect.
Do you think this endless chain is possible?
I really don't know what my beliefs are in this regard. My brain is not designed to deal with such infinite possibilities. I have existed in a Universe where everything is going through a constant cycle of creation and destruction. It is the nature of things, but not necessarily the nature of God (if there is one, which i seriously doubt...)
This, i believe, makes us unfit to answer this question meaningfully. Can there be infinity regress? My mind says no, it 'feels' wrong, there must be 'a beginning.' I do not base my beliefs on my feelings though, not when dealing with ultimate questions of existence like this one.
In a nutshell, i don't have enough information to make an informed decision, so i say i don't know.
Think about this. If God created the Universe, then he would have to exist before it was created. That either means there is somewhere else, or it means there was a time before he became the creator. This gives rise to two paradox's.
'That means there is somewhere else'
If he was somewhere else before, then he can't be the creator as that somewhere else is part of the whole of existence.
'There was a time before he became the creator'
This is interesting, don't you think? If he exists, he can't exist 'no where' as his existence gives a point of reference, which makes where ever he is 'some where'
Here our language breaks down. He cannot exist in a place that is no where can he? That place is not a place (by definition).
If God existed before the Universe, he must have existed somewhere else, or else he would be existing in his own creation which puts the cart before the horse.
There is only one way i can possibly wriggle out of this catch 22 and that is by redefining what i understand time to be.
Time, in a literal sense, is the measurement of moving bodies in space. Our time is developed to deal with the spinning of the Earth around our sun. Now if God existed in the Universe alone (ie with nothing else there) then there is no time as there is nothing by which to measure one moment to the next. Once he has created the big bang (as an example method of creation, fill in with which ever theory you like) then time begins as there is a point of reference by which to denote one moment from the next.
None of this seems feasible to me. If God created the Universe, then he was created at the same moment.
I have heard it said "God is the creator and the created" and i am not so inclined to disbelieve this for a couple of reasons.
If God comes into being with the Universe, then there is no reason to say he is not still coming into being. If, somehow, we managed to leave this planet and populate the Universe with life (assuming it isn't already teaming with it) then evolution would continue indefinitely. Who knows how evolved it is possible to become. Maybe life will evolve to mirror what we currently perceive as God? If this was the case, then would God still be God? If this life form, the end product of Evolution was to go on and create another Universe, starting the whole process off again, would there be need for the living things it creates to worship this new God? How about the old one?? ...yet more paradox's
I've gone off on a missive tangent so i'll try to come back to the point. DO i believe in infinite regression. I don't know for sure, but whenever i think about it, no matter what different line of reasoning i use, i always end up going round in circles. All i know is God couldn't exist before the Universe, as that implies he was somewhere, which means we are not talking about the beginning. If he came into being with the Universe, then it is hard to separate him from it. I'm inclined to say that God
is the Universe. If this is the case, then i am God, you are God, my laptop is God, etc... as we are all part of the Universe and not separated from it (ultimately if you look at it on an atomic level this is definitely the case)
In all this mussing, I can find no argument for God. Perhaps you can help me... 🙂 (I hope this is what you were after, it's taken me AGES to write all this!!)
EDIT: I've just had an after thought! It's basis is in mathematics so my interpretation is almost certainly wrong but i'll continue...
The atheist view is that it is impossible for God to create the Universe as it is feasibly impossible for something as complex as a God to exist before the simplest thing.
When we are talking about regression (as i have been in this post) we face the possibility of infinate regression.
In Mathematics (i believe) we deal with zero in the same way we deal with infinity. To times something by zero, we get zero, to times something by infinity, we get infinity. To this purpose infinity and zero amount to the same thing. (I could put this much better but like i said, i'm no mathematician...)
If nothing and infinity are the same thing (effectievely) then the Idea of an infinately complex being coming out of nothing is not so impossible. In fact, i think it could be argued that it is more likely than something 'simple' coming out of nothng. I'm not sure if this makes sense, or even if it is a logical argument at all, perhaps someone can develop it...?
Is Christianity the only way to prove GOD?
27 Jun '07 19:27
Back to Top