The universe had a beginning.

[William Gaatjes]

I should note that perspective is a big art of religion and of life.
What is great for one person is awful for another. A cat is a very cute animal yet when it captures a cute little mouse, the cat is not that cute for a moment while being the predator it really is.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

If you want to understand your creator, try to understands how the universe is formed. Then you will meet your creator. But be warned, you may not like what you will become or happen to you when you do grasp what might be out there. Everyday life becomes meaningless...

This post is about how science is telling us how improbable it is that our universe came about by random chance. The probability that God created our universe is very high compared to that low odds.

String theory, M theory, inflationary theory, multiverse, branes, eternal expansion of bubble universes, anthropic theory, and quantum mechanic fluctuations are not realistic in that they fail to address the following issues without absurd consequences:

1) Fine tuning of many constants
2) Universe had a beginning
3) Entropy
4) Nothing (not anything) can't spontaneously become anything

 

[William Gaatjes]

This post is about how science is telling us how improbable it is that our universe came about by random chance. The probability that God created our universe is very high compared to that.

String theory, M theory, inflationary theory, multiverse, branes, eternal expansion of bubble universes, and quantum mechanics fluctuation are not realistic in that they fail to address the following issues without absurd consequences:

1) Fine tuning of many constants
2) Universe had a beginning
3) Entropy
4) Nothing (not anything) can't spontaneously become anything

Maybe, the correct answer is that current science has not progressed enough yet to be able to properly explain the 4 points you mention in a unifying theory. Science is progressive.

EDIT :
For example, we still do not have a stable long term functioning fusion reactor.

 

[ThinClient]

That also means that your lack of meaning is a product of your mind, right? If you can assign meaning, you can also remove it.

Make consistent arguments, instead of appealing to your obvious incredulity.

Nothing has inherent meaning. My mind assigns meaning. I AM making consistent arguments, you halfwit.

 

[spittledip]

Nothing has inherent meaning. My mind assigns meaning. I AM making consistent arguments, you halfwit.

Really? You can argue that someone or something is immoral without a reference for meaning aside from what you assign to it? This type of faulty reasoning is why the word "inconsistent" exists.

 

[Exophase]

The fine tuning argument always sounded like this to me:

"Choose a number between one and a billion."
"Okay, I choose 74352436."
"Wow, that's amazing, there was only a one in a billion chance that you'd choose that number!"

This line of reasoning only means anything if the person asking for the number also chose that number. And the universe only producing life under the set of its own exact constraints only means something if you suppose that life has some meaning that precedes the existence of the universe. Assuming the latter is already assuming a god of some sort and the question becomes moot.

 

[Moonbeam]

Nothing has inherent meaning. My mind assigns meaning. I AM making consistent arguments, you halfwit.

But you wouldn't know what your mind does if you don't know yourself. You may only assume you know yourself and what your mind does. It could be that the minds of people who know themselves assign meaning to things that have meaning. It may be that it is your assumptions and lack of experience with mental capabilities you don't know you have that prevent you from seeing what is inherent. Like the fanatically religious you may be a victim of certainty. Perhaps as the Zen master says, no tea can be put in a full cup. Here I would read somebody who is full of themselves, sure about things.

 

[Moonbeam]

The fine tuning argument always sounded like this to me:

"Choose a number between one and a billion."
"Okay, I choose 74352436."
"Wow, that's amazing, there was only a one in a billion chance that you'd choose that number!"

This line of reasoning only means anything if the person asking for the number also chose that number. And the universe only producing life under the set of its own exact constraints only means something if you suppose that life has some meaning that precedes the existence of the universe. Assuming the latter is already assuming a god of some sort and the question becomes moot.

This is a problem that can happen when a mind that is not scientifically unbiased tries to use science to explain what he already believes. It's not unlike the thinking that can believe God is justified to kill babies because a book whose truth can't be disputed says that's what He did and then tries to convince people who know instinctively that killing children can only be done by somebody who is evil and then turns around and flatters their egos that they can believe is something so absurd as proof of the truth of their faith.

 

[spittledip]

This is a problem that can happen when a mind that is not scientifically unbiased tries to use science to explain what he already believes. It's not unlike the thinking that can believe God is justified to kill babies because a book whose truth can't be disputed says that's what He did and then tries to convince people who know instinctively that killing children can only be done by somebody who is evil and then turns around and flatters their egos that they can believe is something so absurd as proof of the truth of their faith.

Haha

 

[ThinClient]

Really? You can argue that someone or something is immoral without a reference for meaning aside from what you assign to it? This type of faulty reasoning is why the word "inconsistent" exists.

Not really, but keep trying. A human infant has no inherent meaning or value beyond the meaning that we give it, right? Well, I happen to give a lot of meaning and value to said infant.

Apparently your god does not because he murders them willy nilly according to the Old Testament and does other immoral and unethical shit like testing Abraham to see if he'll be willing to KILL HIS OWN CHILD because god told him to or destroy entire cities and tribes full of innocent infants for whatever irrelevant reason.

That's fucked up. Go ahead. Defend your god's actions in said matters.

 

[WelshBloke]

This post is about how science is telling us how improbable it is that our universe came about by random chance. The probability that God created our universe is very high compared to that low odds.

String theory, M theory, inflationary theory, multiverse, branes, eternal expansion of bubble universes, anthropic theory, and quantum mechanic fluctuations are not realistic in that they fail to address the following issues without absurd consequences:

1) Fine tuning of many constants
2) Universe had a beginning
3) Entropy
4) Nothing (not anything) can't spontaneously become anything

Prove the bolded. Show me numbers, tell me where you got those numbers from.

 

[ThinClient]

Prove the bolded. Show me numbers, tell me where you got those numbers from.

We have asked him repeatedly.

He repeatedly fails to provide. Every time.

 

[Thebobo]

....

String theory, M theory, inflationary theory, multiverse, branes, eternal expansion of bubble universes, anthropic theory, and quantum mechanic fluctuations are not realistic in that they fail to address the following issues without absurd consequences:

3) Entropy

I'll cover this one because if you are referring to law 2 of thermodynamics it ONLY applies to a closed system. The earth is not a closed system, the solar system is not a closed system, the galaxy is not a closed systems and the Universe according to the theories you are referring to is not a closed systems.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

I'll cover this one because if you are referring to law 2 of thermodynamics it ONLY applies to a closed system. The earth is not a closed system, the solar system is not a closed system, the galaxy is not a closed systems and the Universe according to the theories you are referring to is not a closed systems.

See Video

Entropy
We turn now to cosmology. The problem of the apparently low entropy of the universe is one of the oldest problems of cosmology. The fact that the entropy of the universe is not at its theoretical maximum, coupled with the fact that entropy cannot decrease, means that the universe must have started in a very special, low entropy state.

A homogeneous, isotropic spacetime [our universe] is an incredibly low entropy state.

 

[spittledip]

Not really, but keep trying. A human infant has no inherent meaning or value beyond the meaning that we give it, right? Well, I happen to give a lot of meaning and value to said infant.

The infant has value b/c you choose to give it value? That is irrational. What authority or power do you have that you can magically place "value" on something? Just because you have a feeling about it? If everything is meaningless, the very attempt to place value on something is a meaningless gesture b/c it comes from meaningless you! How can something without meaning (you) grant meaning to something else?

Your dislike of something does not make it any less true if it is indeed true. Nor does any amount of appeals to sentiment make anything less true if it is indeed true. Do you think that I like the fact that God ordered all those people to die? Do you think I like the fact that so many people are going to hell? I hate that thought. But it is not about me and what I like or what I would do... not that I have any idea what I would do if I were God.
And right there is your problem: you think you know better than God. And yet you cannot present a rational argument to support your stances- you throw out a word like "irrelevant" thinking that dismisses the arguments (that were already presented and remain unanswered)- that is not a valid argument and you know it.

Nothing in this post is an insult. You need to think about these things very carefully. I think you are important and worth the headache you can give people and I also have a justification for the value I place on your life.

 

[sandorski]

The infant has value b/c you choose to give it value? That is irrational. What authority or power do you have that you can magically place "value" on something? Just because you have a feeling about it? If everything is meaningless, the very attempt to place value on something is a meaningless gesture b/c it comes from meaningless you! How can something without meaning (you) grant meaning to something else?

Your dislike of something does not make it any less true if it is indeed true. Nor does any amount of appeals to sentiment make anything less true if it is indeed true. Do you think that I like the fact that God ordered all those people to die? Do you think I like the fact that so many people are going to hell? I hate that thought. But it is not about me and what I like or what I would do... not that I have any idea what I would do if I were God.
And right there is your problem: you think you know better than God. And yet you cannot present a rational argument to support your stances- you throw out a word like "irrelevant" thinking that dismisses the arguments (that were already presented and remain unanswered)- that is not a valid argument and you know it.

Nothing in this post is an insult. You need to think about these things very carefully. I think you are important and worth the headache you can give people and I also have a justification for the value I place on your life.

If your "god" can do anything it chooses, then Meaning has no meaning. It all depends on that gods whim and if the Bible teaches us anything it's that "god" is as unpredictable as any human.

 

[ThinClient]

The infant has value b/c you choose to give it value? That is irrational. What authority or power do you have that you can magically place "value" on something? Just because you have a feeling about it? If everything is meaningless, the very attempt to place value on something is a meaningless gesture b/c it comes from meaningless you! How can something without meaning (you) grant meaning to something else?

Your dislike of something does not make it any less true if it is indeed true. Nor does any amount of appeals to sentiment make anything less true if it is indeed true. Do you think that I like the fact that God ordered all those people to die? Do you think I like the fact that so many people are going to hell? I hate that thought. But it is not about me and what I like or what I would do... not that I have any idea what I would do if I were God.
And right there is your problem: you think you know better than God. And yet you cannot present a rational argument to support your stances- you throw out a word like "irrelevant" thinking that dismisses the arguments (that were already presented and remain unanswered)- that is not a valid argument and you know it.

Nothing in this post is an insult. You need to think about these things very carefully. I think you are important and worth the headache you can give people and I also have a justification for the value I place on your life.

Shut up, religiotard. You can't even follow along in a simple thread. Your arguments are being ripped to SHREDS by multiple people. You need to just sit down and stop posting.

 

[LunarRay]

Not really, but keep trying. A human infant has no inherent meaning or value beyond the meaning that we give it, right? Well, I happen to give a lot of meaning and value to said infant.

Apparently your god does not because he murders them willy nilly according to the Old Testament and does other immoral and unethical shit like testing Abraham to see if he'll be willing to KILL HIS OWN CHILD because god told him to or destroy entire cities and tribes full of innocent infants for whatever irrelevant reason.

That's fucked up. Go ahead. Defend your god's actions in said matters.

You all look a gift horse in the mouth.... Why... Wasn't it God who gave us Free Will.... or insisted we have Free Will... and then.... our benevolent guy in the sky created the everlasting barbecue so when we exercised our free will we could be the main attraction therein. Well.... us and the stupid angels.

And remember ... not only are you accountable for every action but every thought as well.... And, you're constantly monitored...

The Universe was created for all life and non life but only that hot spot was created for the human and the bad guy angels... So Rejoice!!! You're loved!!!

 

[Onceler]

Nope, you threw the first insult with regard to you vs me.

Still, you're avoiding the entire question.

What evidence have you seen to prove that the universe had a beginning? What evidence have you seen to prove that god exists?

Stop wasting time. Stop belittling the conversation with petty name calling.

Answer my questions or GTFO of the conversation.

Show me where, I think you got me confused with someone else. I remember you calling me a stupid moron and I replied with the little whiny kid thing after that but I do not recall me insulting you first.

 

[spittledip]

You all look a gift horse in the mouth.... Why... Wasn't it God who gave us Free Will.... or insisted we have Free Will... and then.... our benevolent guy in the sky created the everlasting barbecue so when we exercised our free will we could be the main attraction therein. Well.... us and the stupid angels.

And remember ... not only are you accountable for every action but every thought as well.... And, you're constantly monitored...

The Universe was created for all life and non life but only that hot spot was created for the human and the bad guy angels... So Rejoice!!! You're loved!!!

Yes, freewill to choose to be with God or not to be with God. In the end, people will get exactly what they want. Also, it isn't like it is difficult to choose to be with God in terms of the actual "work" involved. Christ did all the work for you- He fulfilled the law with His life and fulfilled the punishment for breaking the law with his death.

This has been said many times but it bears repeating: God is not just about "love." He is also about holiness and justice.

 

[spittledip]

If your "god" can do anything it chooses, then Meaning has no meaning. It all depends on that gods whim and if the Bible teaches us anything it's that "god" is as unpredictable as any human.

The Bible indicates that God is anything but unpredictable. You and I can both think of many passages where God says to a group of people, "Do this and this will happen, don't do this and this will happen." I have seen you all quote these passages yourself. I can also think of many passages where God explains exactly why He did what He did. If you have any familiarity with the OT prophets, you will know this. I am fairly confident you already knew this though as you all have referenced OT prophets before as well.

The only place where God is unpredictable is where He is merciful. Of course, the ultimate act of mercy was in the very first chapters of the Bible.

 

[stormkroe]

Wait what?

I'm not saying that god has to be subject to anything, only that you have no basis for exempting god from these rules other than a declaration that it is so. It is illogical.

Whether you like it or not, god suffers from every single first cause problem the universe does. As I said in my original post you have simply chosen to square this circle by saying "nuh-uh". You haven't provided a single reason why one entity should be exempt from a requirement for a first cause but not the other except to say that one doesn't because you say so.

If that is a convincing argument to you then you are welcome to it. Don't try and pretend it is rational though.

Ignoring the noise in here, I'd like to explain the rational behind God's exemption from the universe's laws of causality. It's not so much that God is breaking universal laws, just that as the creator of our time and 10+ spacial dimensions, of course he wouldn't be constrained by them. If it helps, assume He's in his own set of dimensions looking perpendicular into ours.
Example: you make a cartoon where the people reproduce by eating chocolate pudding. It starts, it ends, you can view any part of the show with fast forward or reverse, you know how it ends. There IS no chocolate pudding in your workshop, so how did you come to be? The cartoon characters can have no experience to explain where you come from. Heck, it's not even that you DIDN'T have a beginning, just that it's not beholden to the movie you've created.
Now, it very well could be that God had no beginning in the place He exists, and it becomes quite possible with theoretical dimensional equations. Like when you have a 2 directional time dimension, or 2 dimensional time (2 time dimensions perpendicular to each other).
Just because we can't picture it doesn't dismiss it.
In 4 space dimensions a basketball can turn inside out without breaking it's surface. A person able to interact with a fourth dimension could disappear from the perspective of one limited to 3.

I hate to say it, but these are easily-rectified, baby step issues against God compared to the wrestling that comes with years of theological studies.
Hope that's a clearer depiction of an often misrepresented viewpoint.

 

[ThinClient]

You all look a gift horse in the mouth.... Why... Wasn't it God who gave us Free Will.... or insisted we have Free Will...

No, but many idiots claim as much without a shred of evidence to support their claim.

and then.... our benevolent guy in the sky created the everlasting barbecue so when we exercised our free will we could be the main attraction therein. Well.... us and the stupid angels.

Here we are with more completely fabricated, unsubstantiated claims.

And remember ... not only are you accountable for every action but every thought as well.... And, you're constantly monitored...

Says fucking who?

The Universe was created for all life and non life but only that hot spot was created for the human and the bad guy angels... So Rejoice!!! You're loved!!!

More completely fabricated, unsubstantiated claims.

 

[ThinClient]

Yes, freewill to choose to be with God or not to be with God. In the end, people will get exactly what they want. Also, it isn't like it is difficult to choose to be with God in terms of the actual "work" involved. Christ did all the work for you- He fulfilled the law with His life and fulfilled the punishment for breaking the law with his death.

This has been said many times but it bears repeating: God is not just about "love." He is also about holiness and justice.

Sorry, free will to be with whom? Someone who doesn't exist?

 

[Moonbeam]

Shut up, religiotard. You can't even follow along in a simple thread. Your arguments are being ripped to SHREDS by multiple people. You need to just sit down and stop posting.

Not really. He just gets his meaning from a source he calls God and you call something else. You both get meaning from the same place. You just speak different languages. There is one truth and it covers all of us.