Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Re: 2 Quick Things

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by nåte on February 7, 1999 21:36:14 UTC

: : Purpose and "Something from nothing". : First of all, there is always this assumption of purpose. Well, we don't really necessarly have a purpose. : And I don't suggest that our universe came from nothing. However, I believe that something larger has always existed, and our "big-bang" universe is merely one aspect of this larger entity. For you its "God", for me its just something natural that we haven't, and may never I'll admit, discover. But I suppose a religious person would insist that its impossible for the "mega-universe" to always have existed, it SIMPLY had to have come from somewhere. But I could make the same argument for your god. Of course, God always existed and thats true because we read it in a book, the bible in Christians case, and we believe it. Neither argument holds any more weight than the other, but I simply can't accept an intelligent creator with all good intentions. Logic goes against that idea.

: H

Let me ask you why is there the assumption of purpose? And then, why do you state that we don't really have a purpose?

So if I understand what your saying, it is that you believe something "larger" has always existed, and that our universe didn't come from nothing. Okay, I certainly buy that.

My question would now be the following:

You stated, "For you its "God", for me its just something natural that we haven't, and may never I'll admit, discover"... It is this statement that seems paradoxical from your earlier assumptions which state that you believe that the universe didn't come from nothing, but rather there has always been something "larger" in existence. Is it not a presupposition to state that this "bigger entity" is natural and not supernatural?

This is the point I run into not just here, but in life with many people and on other web sites. Why is there the assumption that this "bigger" thing (if I can call it that), has to be natural. Is it not outside our space/time continuum? If it is within dimensional boundaries how could it thus create? How can the natural create that what is natural. Natural has boundaries. Natural is confined to law. Ex Nihilo is not natural.

God has always existed because he is outside of what we can comprehend in dimensional characteristics. It would be very presumptuous to assume that God has borders or limits. He has always existed because he is outside of what we observe as time and space. Time and space are tangible by the way. There is nothing more dynamic than space itself. So many people think space is void, or nothingness. There is nothing further from the truth. Space is influenced by gravity and velocity. It warps... It is a creation. Space is something. Time is reality because it can be measured in an objective manor as pure logic and first principals.

I firmly believe that logic actually goes the other way; against both; static existence and natural begetting natural.


Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins