Jump to content


Photo

Proof Of An Intelligent Uncaused Cause - God


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
278 replies to this topic

#21 goldliger

goldliger

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Minnesota

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:19 AM

Your argument actually works against the idea of a eternal god that created a single non-eternal universe, just replace 'book' and 'page turning' with 'god' and 'creating universes' and see if you still think the logic works. I've taken your argument and reworded to be applicable to god. I've underlined places where I made edits.

Imagine a eternal something, like a God. The creation of a universe is a physical event. Either the creation of universes would have been endlessly occurring, or not. If not endlessly occurring, then at some fixed point in eternity, the first creation of a universe must have occurred. But this is impossible, because it would mean that for an eternity prior (for an endless period of time), no universe was created. An endless period of no universe can never end, by definition! So god must have always been creating universes (in a eternal existence)......

Basically, if you are going to argue that it's logically impossible by definition to have a first universe after an infinite past, then it must also be logically impossible by definition for your god to create a first universe after an infinite past. Either god's past is not infinite, or god created the universe an infinite amount of time ago, or your logic is flawed.

From a physics perspective you might find the concept of eternal inflation interesting. It's one way to address your concerns about an endless series of universes. My understanding of the idea is that it boils down to an eternal inflation field constantly producing universes where the universes are unable to interact with each other.
http://en.wikipedia....ernal_inflation


It doesn't work against God in any way, actually. The difference is that God, Himself being eternal, operates "outside of" that which He creates. So while God is eternal, nothing that He creates is eternal (endless from beginning to end), because it began to exist. Imagine that you are an eternal, all powerful being. You simply "exist". Could you create a universe at any given point in your eternal existence? Of course! And clearly, the event itself would not depend on an eternity prior. What this demonstrates is that no endless period in direct physical connection with the universe, came before it. God came before, but again, He operates outside of the physical realm.

In a mindless existence, a totality of energy and matter do not operate "outside of" (or separate from) the physical events that they cause. Rather, it is energy and matter that have to be in a constant state of change (unlike God), such that physical events can occur. So for example, if it were claimed that energy remained "frozen" (producing no physical change) for an eternal period prior to a supposed "first" change, this endless period would be directly connected to the energy itself. And this leads back to the problem: In a mindless existence, an endless period of zero physical change can never end, by definition! This negates the possibility of a "first change", and leads to the fact that a mindless existence would beg an infinite regress of physical events, which is impossible.

//My understanding of the idea is that it boils down to an eternal inflation field constantly producing universes where the universes are unable to interact with each other.//

This would actually compound the issue. You'd have the problem of infinite regression with infinite, separate universes.

#22 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 01 November 2012 - 12:29 PM

@Jonas5877 //You are assuming that the eternal thing is unchanging. What if the eternal thing was changed by a non-eternal part of itself, meaning that the cause does not have to be eternal?//

What I'm saying is that an eternal thing must be able to produce change, or no change would ever occur. And there could not be a non-eternal part of an eternal thing, as that would mean the non-eternal part began to exist at some point. If it began to exist, then the only mechanism that could cause it to come into being would be the eternal "part" (since the eternal thing existed prior).

It looks like I didn't explain my thought very well. What I mean is that the eternal thing could have a part of it that causes change to occur to the eternal thing. The event that causes the change can be temporary. For instance, changes in the quantum vacuum have been shown to cause matter to "come into existence". This is an event that has been observed and documented. The matter/energy existed prior to the event and still existed after the event just in a different form. In such a way, the universe could have existed in a particular, maybe unrecognizible, form then a temporary interaction occurred in its constituent parts that caused the universe to change forms to the universe we see today.
Since this whole discussion is a logical exercise trying to prove the existence of a God, you have to include the possibility that the universe is the eternal thing that merely changed forms to become the space-time we live in.

That is, unless you have a logical argument for excluding a changing eternal universe.


//This possibility merely requires a changable eternal universe and a part of it that can cause changes. Logically, a God does not have to be the cause.//

Imagine a mindless eternal something, like a cosmic book. The pages of this book, when turned, represents physical events. In a mindless existence, either the pages of this book would have been endlessly turning, or not. If not endlessly turning, then at some fixed point in eternity, the first page must have turned. But this is impossible, because it would mean that for an eternity prior (for an endless period of time), no pages turned. An endless period of no pages turned can never end, by definition! So the pages must have always been turning (in a mindless existence). And further, whatever caused the pages to turn must have always existed, or the pages wouldn't be able to turn! So you cannot separate the eternal pages, from the cause that turns them as you're attempting to do. And finally, the problem is that it's impossible to turn an infinite number of pages, since the present "page" would never be reached if endless pages in the past had to first be turned.

Logically, an eternal, intelligent being with a will, has to be the cause. And this can only be God, quite obviously.

?? Why can't the pages have been endlessly turning? You may never reach the end of the pages but you would reach some page which could be the page we happen to be on right now. Endlessly turning pages do not have to be turning fast. Maybe the pages only turn once every 50 billion of our years. You seem to be assuming that the page we are on is the last page. What if the thing that causes the page to turn is a cyclic event that only happens once every 100 billion years. Sounds like a long time, and it is to us, but not to eternity. The book is then eternal and the thing that causes the page to turn is eternal but it only affects the book occasionally. You cannot rule out this possibility by saying it is impossible. You must logically show it to be impossible in order to conclude that a God is the only possibility left.

In eternity, all possible things happen because in that period of time the probability of them occurring is always 1.

#23 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 01 November 2012 - 12:54 PM

//You are equating the eternal thing with the cause. Why must the cause be eternal?//

Something cannot come from absolute nothingness, which therefore means an eternal something that is able to cause physical events.

//You say that if something has not occurred in eternity past that it will never occur given a mindless existence. How do you know it had not occurred sometime in the past? To logically conclude it has not happened before you have to assume that the current condition of the universe is the only condition that can exist. How do you know that? Perhaps the cause has occurred in eternity past, many other changes happened which resulted in a condition where the cause occured again. Can you logically exclude this possibility?//

It seems you're misunderstanding, no offense. I'm actually saying that in a mindless existence, it must be said that physical changes (events) were happening all along (for eternity). And yet, this would beg an infinite regress of physical events, which is impossible. Refer to my book analogy above.

So in a mindless existence, I'm not saying that for an eternity past, no physical change would have occurred. I'm demonstrating the opposite, that endless physical change must have occurred (but which is impossible).

Why is endless physical change impossible? Even if the universe is only 10,000 years old, it continually undergoes physical change. Why then would it be logically impossible for physical change to be occurring continually for an eternity past? Saying it is impossible does not make it impossible any more than my saying there is no God would make that God cease to exist. I cannot show that God does not exist so I don't say that. You cannot show that continual physical change is logically impossible so you cannot claim that God must exist based on that assumption.

There is a simple solution to the impossible problems that I've laid out. God can turn a page (cause a physical event) whenever he wills. An infinite regress of physical events is not an issue, because no such chain of events would have to transpire to "reach" the creation of our universe, for example. Our universe happened at the moment that God decided.

It's never too late to repent and believe! Now is the time to turn your life over to the Lord. Amen. Posted Image

The possibility of my believing in a God, much less a particular flavor of God, is another subject from logically showing that there must be a God. I cannot conjure up belief out of thin air. I need more than the evidence shown so far, especially given the fact that your God is said to want everyone to avoid eternal punishment.

#24 miles

miles

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 227 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 35
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • america

Posted 01 November 2012 - 01:21 PM

It doesn't work against God in any way, actually. The difference is that God, Himself being eternal, operates "outside of" that which He creates. So while God is eternal, nothing that He creates is eternal (endless from beginning to end), because it began to exist. Imagine that you are an eternal, all powerful being. You simply "exist". Could you create a universe at any given point in your eternal existence? Of course! And clearly, the event itself would not depend on an eternity prior. What this demonstrates is that no endless period in direct physical connection with the universe, came before it. God came before, but again, He operates outside of the physical realm.

The bolded part is where I think you contradict yourself.

I as an eternal being would have existed for an eternal duration before I reached that 'any given point' in my existence. Your argument states that something eternal could never reach 'any given point' in an eternal.existence because it would in essence require counting down from infinity. Think of it this way, if I was an eternal being and I at some point made a universe, would you agree that there was a prior 'given point' in my existence where I hadn't yet made a universe? As an eternal being, was there a finite or infinite number of 'prior given points' in my existence where I hadn't yet made a universe? Assuming you answer infinite, then if your argument is valid it's impossible for me to create a universe since it would involve reaching the end of an infinite set of moments where I hadn't yet made a universe.

Either there are only a finite number of moments in my/god's existence before the creation of the universe or your suggestion that a infinite series of moments can't be traversed is incorrect.

#25 goldliger

goldliger

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Minnesota

Posted 01 November 2012 - 01:23 PM

Why is endless physical change impossible? Even if the universe is only 10,000 years old, it continually undergoes physical change. Why then would it be logically impossible for physical change to be occurring continually for an eternity past? Saying it is impossible does not make it impossible any more than my saying there is no God would make that God cease to exist. I cannot show that God does not exist so I don't say that. You cannot show that continual physical change is logically impossible so you cannot claim that God must exist based on that assumption.


The possibility of my believing in a God, much less a particular flavor of God, is another subject from logically showing that there must be a God. I cannot conjure up belief out of thin air. I need more than the evidence shown so far, especially given the fact that your God is said to want everyone to avoid eternal punishment.


Endless physical change (endless physical events) leads to an impossible infinite regress of events. Refer back to my book analogy.

#26 goldliger

goldliger

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Minnesota

Posted 01 November 2012 - 01:35 PM

The bolded part is where I think you contradict yourself.

I as an eternal being would have existed for an eternal duration before I reached that 'any given point' in my existence. Your argument states that something eternal could never reach 'any given point' in an eternal.existence because it would in essence require counting down from infinity. Think of it this way, if I was an eternal being and I at some point made a universe, would you agree that there was a prior 'given point' in my existence where I hadn't yet made a universe? As an eternal being, was there a finite or infinite number of 'prior given points' in my existence where I hadn't yet made a universe? Assuming you answer infinite, then if your argument is valid it's impossible for me to create a universe since it would involve reaching the end of an infinite set of moments where I hadn't yet made a universe.

Either there are only a finite number of moments in my/god's existence before the creation of the universe or your suggestion that a infinite series of moments can't be traversed is incorrect.


An immaterial being (God) would have no physical events to traverse, being immaterial and therefore able to span eternity. God exists beyond the physical realm. What you really need to do is picture two separate timelines, instead of one - and then go back and read my previous reply. God exists on an infinite timeline. He just "is". And at any point, he can create a physical event (apart from Himself), at which point a separate timeline occurs. God does not depend on any past series of changes or events in order to cause an event. Again, if you were all-powerful God, it would not matter how "long" you've existed. At any given point, you could make the choice to create a universe, and there it would be regardless of your own eternal past. What you're implying is that somehow you'd be "bound" by the past, and it is easy to see that's not the case. However, a mindless, material something *would* be bound by the past because it exists on only one timeline and does not create events "outside of itself". Rather, it is the mindless matter and energy that is changing along a single timeline.

#27 miles

miles

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 227 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 35
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • america

Posted 01 November 2012 - 04:33 PM

An immaterial being (God) would have no physical events to traverse, being immaterial and therefore able to span eternity. God exists beyond the physical realm. What you really need to do is picture two separate timelines, instead of one - and then go back and read my previous reply. God exists on an infinite timeline. He just "is". And at any point, he can create a physical event (apart from Himself), at which point a separate timeline occurs. God does not depend on any past series of changes or events in order to cause an event. Again, if you were all-powerful God, it would not matter how "long" you've existed. At any given point, you could make the choice to create a universe, and there it would be regardless of your own eternal past. What you're implying is that somehow you'd be "bound" by the past, and it is easy to see that's not the case. However, a mindless, material something *would* be bound by the past because it exists on only one timeline and does not create events "outside of itself". Rather, it is the mindless matter and energy that is changing along a single timeline.


Here's an infinite timeline. 'n(number)' represents a decision to not create a universe at that point on the timeline. 'c' represents a decision to create a universe.
n(infinity)<--n(3)---n(2)---n(1)---c--------->
Here's a separate timeline started at the moment of creation 'c'
c---6000years----| present

How does this fix the problem of moment c on the infinite timeline occurring after the end of an endless series of 'n'? Your argument says that moment c can never arrive since an eternal being that chooses a point in it's existence to make a universe would have first gone through a infinite and unending stretch of decisions to not create a universe.

What does being intelligent or non-intelligent have to do with existing on infinite timelines or the creation of separate timelines? If a non-intelligent eternal force on it's own infinite timeline spit out a infinite number of universes on separate timelines or simply a finite number before ending up in a state that prevented it from producing any more, how is that any different from what you are proposing for god?

#28 goldliger

goldliger

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Minnesota

Posted 01 November 2012 - 10:44 PM

Here's an infinite timeline. 'n(number)' represents a decision to not create a universe at that point on the timeline. 'c' represents a decision to create a universe. n(infinity)&lt;--n(3)---n(2)---n(1)---c---------&gt; Here's a separate timeline started at the moment of creation 'c' c---6000years----| present How does this fix the problem of moment c on the infinite timeline occurring after the end of an endless series of 'n'? Your argument says that moment c can never arrive since an eternal being that chooses a point in it's existence to make a universe would have first gone through a infinite and unending stretch of decisions to not create a universe. What does being intelligent or non-intelligent have to do with existing on infinite timelines or the creation of separate timelines? If a non-intelligent eternal force on it's own infinite timeline spit out a infinite number of universes on separate timelines or simply a finite number before ending up in a state that prevented it from producing any more, how is that any different from what you are proposing for god?


//Your argument says that moment c can never arrive since an eternal being that chooses a point in it's existence to make a universe would have first gone through a infinite and unending stretch of decisions to not create a universe.//

That's a complete strawman of my argument, of course... Let's review: My argument says that an eternal being can choose a point in its existence to make a universe without having to traverse infinite physical events. There are two factors here. One is the fact that we know endless physical events cannot be traversed, while we cannot say that immaterial decisions by God cannot be traversed. The very fact that we're here, considered along with the other elements of my argument, reveals that in fact the immaterial realm can be traversed. Nothing physical has to be crossed over. God is immaterial, and "spans" the immaterial realm. He already knows past, present, and future (omniscience) and does not need to "traverse decisions", as you suggest. Secondly, there are (still) two different timelines here. It seems you're still imagining everything happening on one timeline, where God leads directly "into" physical events. But no, God exists eternally, and He created separate physical events "outside of" His spiritual realm (dimension).

//If a non-intelligent eternal force on it's own infinite timeline spit out a infinite number of universes on separate timelines or simply a finite number before ending up in a state that prevented it from producing any more, how is that any different from what you are proposing for god?//

Intelligence and will have everything to do with it.

First off, you can't just grant a separate timeline in a mindless, material existence. There is no separate timeline in such a scenario. I covered the reason for this, earlier:

In a mindless/material existence, a totality of energy and matter do not operate "outside of" (or separate from) the physical events that they cause. Rather, it is energy and matter that have to be in a constant state of change (unlike God), such that physical events can occur. So for example, if it were claimed that energy remained "frozen" (producing no physical change) for an eternal period prior to a supposed "first" change, this endless period would be directly connected (same timeline) to the energy itself. And this leads back to the problem: In a mindless existence, an endless period of zero physical change can never end, by definition! This negates the possibility of a "first" change, and leads to the fact that a mindless material existence would beg an infinite regress of physical events, which is impossible.

Secondly...

In a mindless eternal existence, a "first physical change" would mean an eternity (endless period) of no physical changes prior...

If a "mindless something" has not produced physical change for an endless (eternal) period, that is its default eternal nature, and thus it can never produce a first physical change. Conversely, if God has not produced a physical change, it is a matter of choice; the ability to choose is God's eternal nature, meaning He can create a fixed number of changes throughout eternity (on a separate, physical plane of existence).

It might help if you're willing to read my full argument, here:

http://www.silverwea...osmicproof.html

#29 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 02 November 2012 - 05:53 AM

Endless physical change (endless physical events) leads to an impossible infinite regress of events. Refer back to my book analogy.

Endless physical change (endless physical events) leads to an impossible infinite regress of events. Refer back to my book analogy.

It is an infinite regress of events but they are events none-the-less. One of those events could be the event that is the begining of our spacetime. Simply repeating that an infinite regress of events prevents a particular event is not adequate to remove the possibility I have put forth. You must show why, logically, an infinite regress of events prevents any particular event from occurring.

#30 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:30 AM

An immaterial being (God) would have no physical events to traverse, being immaterial and therefore able to span eternity. God exists beyond the physical realm. What you really need to do is picture two separate timelines, instead of one - and then go back and read my previous reply. God exists on an infinite timeline. He just "is". And at any point, he can create a physical event (apart from Himself), at which point a separate timeline occurs. God does not depend on any past series of changes or events in order to cause an event. Again, if you were all-powerful God, it would not matter how "long" you've existed. At any given point, you could make the choice to create a universe, and there it would be regardless of your own eternal past. What you're implying is that somehow you'd be "bound" by the past, and it is easy to see that's not the case. However, a mindless, material something *would* be bound by the past because it exists on only one timeline and does not create events "outside of itself". Rather, it is the mindless matter and energy that is changing along a single timeline.

It sounds like a very special being, this God of yours. So special, in fact, that God is the only thing that is not bound by the logic you are using to prove He exists.

Back to the mindless material something.
I am not proposing that the mindless material something is creating events "outside of itself". I am saying the something similar to the thing you just said. The mindless matter and energy is changing and one recent change is the change to become the current spacetime we are in. Logically, if change is occurring throughout eternity to this mindless matter and energy what logical step rules out the possibility that the particular change causing the "Big Bang" occurred 14 billion Earth years ago?

Another problem with your infinite regress is the fact that space and time are actually woven together and a "timeline" like you suggest may not have always existed. It is entirely possible that the universe exists similar to your description of God...spanning eternity. Then the timeline we experience only started with this spacetime right after the "Big Bang". This is another possibility that you cannot logically rule out especially since you have decided to give your God this same property for no other reason than because it prevents His capabilities from having to submit to your logic.

#31 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,989 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:23 AM

It sounds like a very special being, this God of yours. So special, in fact, that God is the only thing that is not bound by the logic you are using to prove He exists.

Back to the mindless material something.
I am not proposing that the mindless material something is creating events "outside of itself". I am saying the something similar to the thing you just said. The mindless matter and energy is changing and one recent change is the change to become the current spacetime we are in. Logically, if change is occurring throughout eternity to this mindless matter and energy what logical step rules out the possibility that the particular change causing the "Big Bang" occurred 14 billion Earth years ago?

Another problem with your infinite regress is the fact that space and time are actually woven together and a "timeline" like you suggest may not have always existed. It is entirely possible that the universe exists similar to your description of God...spanning eternity. Then the timeline we experience only started with this spacetime right after the "Big Bang". This is another possibility that you cannot logically rule out especially since you have decided to give your God this same property for no other reason than because it prevents His capabilities from having to submit to your logic.


God is a being with God-like qualities, such qualities reach beyond physical laws therefore your attempt to relegate God to mere physical law is futile and irrational.

There is no infinite regress.... Miles claim in post 27 is really quite silly since he is merely claiming that an infinite amount of time can pass before God chose to create the world.... And? How does this do anything for assisting the atheist? Consider that one quality claimed of God is to be timeless, outside of time, therefore the amount of "time" it takes God to create the world really is irrelevant and doesn't constitute an infinite regress....

On another note, still waiting for you to demonstrate to me, (on the other thread) how a chemical reaction can take place when the reactants are NOT close together....

#32 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,989 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:28 AM

1. It is an infinite regress of events

2. but they are events none-the-less.

3. One of those events could be the event that is the begining of our spacetime.

4. Simply repeating that an infinite regress of events prevents a particular event is not adequate to remove the possibility I have put forth.

5. You must show why, logically, an infinite regress of events prevents any particular event from occurring.


1. An infinite regress is logically impossible

2. Yes an INFINITE regress of events

3. If that is the case then the regress is not infinite... That is the point!... If there is an INFINITE regress there will never be a begining.

4. No it does, you've demonstrated here that you do not comprehend what an infinite regress actually is. An infinite regress is not traversable since infinity never ends therefore being infinite in the past literally means that there is no begining.

5. No demonstration is required since that is what an infinte regress is, it prevents the beginning due to its very nature. As I said you do not comprehend what an infinite regress actually is.



In fact the infinite regress is used by atheists to deny the creation event of the world. Scientists the world over admit to a creation event and dubbed it the big bang. Additionally from this it was found that there can NEVER be an infinite regress in the past, in that there is a finite past thus a creation event.
  • goldliger likes this

#33 goldliger

goldliger

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Minnesota

Posted 02 November 2012 - 08:00 AM

It is an infinite regress of events but they are events none-the-less. One of those events could be the event that is the begining of our spacetime. Simply repeating that an infinite regress of events prevents a particular event is not adequate to remove the possibility I have put forth. You must show why, logically, an infinite regress of events prevents any particular event from occurring.


Again, we know that infinite physical events cannot be traversed. Refer back to my book analogy, where in fact I have already shown logically why traversing physical events is impossible. It should be quite obvious though, shouldn't it? If you were told to do endless physical tasks you'd never get to the last task (the "last task" representing our present time). It doesn't help your case to keep parroting that you disagree. You would need to demonstrate how infinite physical events could be crossed, to get to the present moment - or why my logic is not valid. So I await your explanation. And here's something else you must consider: In an eternal existence (where something exists forever), there are only two types of realities... Immaterial, and material. Since we're here in the present, and since we know that an infinite number of material events cannot be crossed, we can logically conclude that there is no such issue with so-called immaterial "events" (which obviously aren't physical events at all). When there are only two options, if one doesn't work, the other option must logically be true.

#34 goldliger

goldliger

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Minnesota

Posted 02 November 2012 - 08:20 AM

//It sounds like a very special being, this God of yours. So special, in fact, that God is the only thing that is not bound by the logic you are using to prove He exists.//

There is no special pleading here. I'm showing logically that an intelligent being with a will, is the only possibile "uncaused cause" of all. Labeling it "special pleading" without showing why, is a meaningless label.

//Back to the mindless material something. I am not proposing that the mindless material something is creating events "outside of itself". I am saying the something similar to the thing you just said. The mindless matter and energy is changing and one recent change is the change to become the current spacetime we are in. Logically, if change is occurring throughout eternity to this mindless matter and energy what logical step rules out the possibility that the particular change causing the "Big Bang" occurred 14 billion Earth years ago?//

If the mindless material something is changing, and has been changing forever, that is your problem - as this is precisely what leads to an impossible infinite regress of physical events. Now, you can attempt to escape this by claiming that your mindless material something only changed a fixed number of times. But here's the problem with that scenario. A fixed number of events would require that there be a FIRST event (as opposed to a mindless something that has always changed by its very nature). However, if we imagine that this eternal something has "gone along" for an endless period, and then at some point it produced that first physical change, this leaves a prior infinite/endless period of zero change. Something that has not changed for an infinite period of time (not by will or by choice, but by its default eternal nature), cannot then "begin" to change by causing a "first" change.

God escapes this dilemma for several reasons, one reason being that He's an immaterial being in a separate (eternal) dimension (on a separate plane of reality), causing physical events outside of that dimension. So, on a separate timeline. Matter and energy, on the other hand, do not cause physical events outside of matter and energy. Rather, it is matter and energy which would need to change (in constrast to God producing external change), in order for physical events to occur. So there is no separate plane and no separate timeline.

Now, what if one suggest's that a "mindless something" from another dimension caused our universe? Well first, it would have to be an immaterial something, because if it was a material something we'd again have the problem of infinite physical regress. But if a mindless immaterial something came before our universe (such that this mindless something could cause our universe), you'd again have a "first event" problem:


Imagine that this mindless, immaterial something has always existed. And we'd have to say that it existed before any and all physical events (such that it could cause them), which by default would mean that a first physical event had to occur at some point - or there could not be a "before". (In this scenario, the first event would be relative to the pre-existing immaterial reality.) Now, if a first physical event were able to come about, it would mean that the mindless immaterial something had an infinite history (prior to the first event) of producing no physical events whatsoever. But because this infinite, unchanging past would not be the result of will or choice, it could only result from the default nature of the mindless something. And if this default nature has been fixedfor eternity, there is zero probability that it could ever change! In other words, the default nature of "unchange" could never end, such that a first physical event could then occur.

//Another problem with your infinite regress is the fact that space and time are actually woven together and a "timeline" like you suggest may not have always existed. It is entirely possible that the universe exists similar to your description of God...spanning eternity. Then the timeline we experience only started with this spacetime right after the "Big Bang". This is another possibility that you cannot logically rule out especially since you have decided to give your God this same property for no other reason than because it prevents His capabilities from having to submit to your logic.//

This can be logically ruled out very easily, in fact. Time and space to do not cause physical events. Time itself does nothing. And empty space does nothing. So, time and space do not offer any mechanism by which to produce physical change. Sure, you could suggest that they exist eternally. But you end up with no physical change, for eternity.

#35 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 02 November 2012 - 08:34 AM

God is a being with God-like qualities, such qualities reach beyond physical laws therefore your attempt to relegate God to mere physical law is futile and irrational.

There is no infinite regress.... Miles claim in post 27 is really quite silly since he is merely claiming that an infinite amount of time can pass before God chose to create the world.... And? How does this do anything for assisting the atheist? Consider that one quality claimed of God is to be timeless, outside of time, therefore the amount of "time" it takes God to create the world really is irrelevant and doesn't constitute an infinite regress....

On another note, still waiting for you to demonstrate to me, (on the other thread) how a chemical reaction can take place when the reactants are NOT close together....

I was not trying to relegate God to mere physical law. I was pointing out that it was quite convenient that this logical exercise imbued the God with properties that made It immune to the limits placed on an eternal mindless universe. That would be called special pleading.

Are you saying that infinite regress of events is an impossibility? Why is it impossible? Is eternity impossible? If eternity is possible, then is it possible that events can occur throughout eternity? If not, then how is it you plan on worshiping God in heaven throughout eternity. Isn't worshiping an event?

In regard to the other thread, I didn't claim that reactions occur when the reactants are not close together. In fact, in an earlier post in that thread, I said that reactions occur spontaneously if the reactants are close together. You stated that spontaneous reactions don't occur in nature. In the post that you questioned, I asked you to define spontaneous reaction and sarcastically stated that you probably believed that spontaneous chemical reactions were ones that occurred without the chemical reactants close together.
Your reply to that post made me realize that we are not communicating effectively and it would be best if I tried to figure out how to write a post that you could understand. When I do figure it out, I will reply to that post.

#36 goldliger

goldliger

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Minnesota

Posted 02 November 2012 - 09:13 AM

//I was not trying to relegate God to mere physical law. I was pointing out that it was quite convenient that this logical exercise imbued the God with properties that made It immune to the limits placed on an eternal mindless universe. That would be called special pleading.//

No, because we're logically showing that there must be an uncaused cause, and one with the qualities of God (intelligence/will, etc.), such that we exist.

//Are you saying that infinite regress of events is an impossibility? Why is it impossible?//

We've already covered this multiple times. If you wish to keep asking the same question over and over, it would make sense to first address our answers. Otherwise, you're just wasting time and attempting to make it appear as if sufficient answers have not already been given, without having to directly address them. (This is a sign of denial.)

#37 miles

miles

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 227 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 35
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • america

Posted 02 November 2012 - 09:14 AM

The very fact that we're here, considered along with the other elements of my argument, reveals that in fact the immaterial realm can be traversed.

Later post:
Since we're here in the present, and since we know that an infinite number of material events cannot be crossed, we can logically conclude that there is no such issue with so-called immaterial "events" (which obviously aren't physical events at all)

I haven't been talking about physical vs immaterial, merely infinity/endless spans in either case. What's the difference between infinity in a immaterial realm vs infinity in a physical realm? You seem to be saying infinity can be traversed in one but not the other, yet something endless is endless by definition, regardless of physical or non-physical status.


Nothing physical has to be crossed over. God is immaterial, and "spans" the immaterial realm. He already knows past, present, and future (omniscience) and does not need to "traverse decisions", as you suggest. Secondly, there are (still) two different timelines here. It seems you're still imagining everything happening on one timeline, where God leads directly "into" physical events. But no, God exists eternally, and He created separate physical events "outside of" His spiritual realm (dimension).

I think the question comes down to whether god has an past, or does spanning a realm mean that there is no past/future for god, merely a experience of a single instantaneous moment of 'now' where all decisions are simultaneous.

//If a non-intelligent eternal force on it's own infinite timeline spit out a infinite number of universes on separate timelines or simply a finite number before ending up in a state that prevented it from producing any more, how is that any different from what you are proposing for god?//

Intelligence and will have everything to do with it.

First off, you can't just grant a separate timeline in a mindless, material existence. There is no separate timeline in such a scenario. I covered the reason for this, earlier:

You've added the condition of material existence. My question was solely related to mindless or not mindless. Why is a mindless, non-material entity incapable of producing separate timelines?

I read your webpage and you say it would contradict the 1st and 2nd premises. However your 1st and 2nd premises are specific to material entities. In fact your 2nd premise is contradicted by your assertion above that a infinite number of immaterial events can be crossed in a immaterial realm.

Your website also says that it would violate the nature of the mindless thing. Imagine a eternal coin that could flip itself with one special property. After 10,000 heads in a row it produces a physical universe and stops flipping. This would produce a single universe over a infinite time span without violating it's nature.

You also switch from discussing a immaterial thing to talking about a material thing (i don't know if this is intentional or just a mistake)

Question 2. ....But couldn't a mindless immaterial something do so (rather than God)?
(third paragraph) Imagine that this mindless, material something

#38 goldliger

goldliger

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Minnesota

Posted 02 November 2012 - 09:24 AM

//I haven't been talking about physical vs immaterial, merely infinity/endless spans in either case. What's the difference between infinity in a immaterial realm vs infinity in a physical realm? You seem to be saying infinity can be traversed in one but not the other, yet something endless is endless by definition, regardless of physical or non-physical status.//

Yes, that is what I'm saying...

Again, we know that infinite physical events cannot be traversed. Refer back to my book analogy, where in fact I have already shown logically why traversing physical events is impossible. It should be quite obvious though, shouldn't it? If you were told to do endless physical tasks you'd never get to the last task (the "last task" representing our present time). It doesn't help your case to keep parroting that you disagree. You would need to demonstrate how infinite physical events could be crossed, to get to the present moment - or why my logic is not valid. So I await your explanation. And here's something else you must consider: In an eternal existence (where something exists forever), there are only two types of realities... Immaterial, and material. Since we're here in the present, and since we know that an infinite number of material events cannot be crossed, we can logically conclude that there is no such issue with so-called immaterial "events" (which obviously aren't physical events at all). When there are only two options, if one doesn't work, the other option must logically be true.

//You've added the condition of material existence. My question was solely related to mindless or not mindless. Why is a mindless, non-material entity incapable of producing separate timelines?//


I've addressed both material and immaterial. Here again:

Now, what if one suggest's that a "mindless something" from another dimension caused our universe? Well first, it would have to be an immaterial something, because if it was a material something we'd again have the problem of infinite physical regress. But if a mindless immaterial something came before our universe (such that this mindless something could cause our universe), you'd again have a "first event" problem:

Imagine that this mindless, immaterial something has always existed. And we'd have to say that it existed before any and all physical events (such that it could cause them), which by default would mean that a first physical event had to occur at some point - or there could not be a "before". (In this scenario, the first event would be relative to the pre-existing immaterial reality.) Now, if a first physical event were able to come about, it would mean that the mindless immaterial something had an infinite history (prior to the first event) of producing no physical events whatsoever. But because this infinite, unchanging past would not be the result of will or choice, it could only result from the default nature of the mindless something. And if this default nature has been fixedfor eternity, there is zero probability that it could ever change! In other words, the default nature of "unchange" could never end, such that a first physical event could then occur.

//I read your webpage and you say it would contradict the 1st and 2nd premises. However your 1st and 2nd premises are specific to material entities. In fact your 2nd premise is contradicted by your assertion above that a infinite number of immaterial events can be crossed in a immaterial realm.//

No, please read the premise again, which refers to a mindless existence. There is a very big distinction there between events which happen as an act of chance (i.e., as per the default eternal nature of a mindless something), and events which happen as a matter of choice (the choice-enabled eternal nature of a supreme intelligent being).

//Your website also says that it would violate the nature of the mindless thing. Imagine a eternal coin that could flip itself with one special property. After 10,000 heads in a row it produces a physical universe and stops flipping. This would produce a single universe over a infinite time span without violating it's nature.//

10,000 flips is a finite number of flips, which by default requires a first flip (first change). This leaves an infinite/endless amount of time prior to the first flip, and we're right back to my premises. Also, as you have probably noticed, physical events have not stopped happening just because the universe is here. Posted Image

//You also switch from discussing a immaterial thing to talking about a material thing (i don't know if this is intentional or just a mistake)//

It was a typo, which I'd already fixed. Thanks for reading the website.


#39 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 02 November 2012 - 10:13 AM

//It sounds like a very special being, this God of yours. So special, in fact, that God is the only thing that is not bound by the logic you are using to prove He exists.//

There is no special pleading here. I'm showing logically that an intelligent being with a will, is the only possibile "uncaused cause" of all. Labeling it "special pleading" without showing why, is a meaningless label.

It is special pleading because you have claimed that this God you constructed has special powers that make him immune to the logic you use to eliminate the possibility of an eternal but changing universe.

//Back to the mindless material something. I am not proposing that the mindless material something is creating events "outside of itself". I am saying the something similar to the thing you just said. The mindless matter and energy is changing and one recent change is the change to become the current spacetime we are in. Logically, if change is occurring throughout eternity to this mindless matter and energy what logical step rules out the possibility that the particular change causing the "Big Bang" occurred 14 billion Earth years ago?//

If the mindless material something is changing, and has been changing forever, that is your problem - as this is precisely what leads to an impossible infinite regress of physical events. Now, you can attempt to escape this by claiming that your mindless material something only changed a fixed number of times. But here's the problem with that scenario. A fixed number of events would require that there be a FIRST event (as opposed to a mindless something that has always changed by its very nature). However, if we imagine that this eternal something has "gone along" for an endless period, and then at some point it produced that first physical change, this leaves a prior infinite/endless period of zero change. Something that has not changed for an infinite period of time (not by will or by choice, but by its default eternal nature), cannot then "begin" to change by causing a "first" change.


Then you are claiming that if the universe existed eternally, that no events could occur at all because there was no first event? Why is an infinite regress of physical events impossible?

God escapes this dilemma for several reasons, one reason being that He's an immaterial being in a separate (eternal) dimension (on a separate plane of reality), causing physical events outside of that dimension. So, on a separate timeline. Matter and energy, on the other hand, do not cause physical events outside of matter and energy. Rather, it is matter and energy which would need to change (in constrast to God producing external change), in order for physical events to occur. So there is no separate plane and no separate timeline.


Again with the special God thing. In order for matter and energy to change they do not need to cause physical events outside of matter and energy. The Sun changes matter into energy without causing any physical events outside of matter or energy. If this is occurring now, so what would prevent it from happening if the universe were an eternal thing?

//Another problem with your infinite regress is the fact that space and time are actually woven together and a "timeline" like you suggest may not have always existed. It is entirely possible that the universe exists similar to your description of God...spanning eternity. Then the timeline we experience only started with this spacetime right after the "Big Bang". This is another possibility that you cannot logically rule out especially since you have decided to give your God this same property for no other reason than because it prevents His capabilities from having to submit to your logic.//

This can be logically ruled out very easily, in fact. Time and space to do not cause physical events. Time itself does nothing. And empty space does nothing. So, time and space do not offer any mechanism by which to produce physical change. Sure, you could suggest that they exist eternally. But you end up with no physical change, for eternity.

What makes you think an eternal universe would have only empty space? Time and space contain matter and/or energy. Matter and energy can cause physical change.

#40 jonas5877

jonas5877

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 214 posts
  • Age: 54
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Salisbury, MD

Posted 02 November 2012 - 10:22 AM

//I was not trying to relegate God to mere physical law. I was pointing out that it was quite convenient that this logical exercise imbued the God with properties that made It immune to the limits placed on an eternal mindless universe. That would be called special pleading.// No, because we're logically showing that there must be an uncaused cause, and one with the qualities of God (intelligence/will, etc.), such that we exist.

//Are you saying that infinite regress of events is an impossibility? Why is it impossible?// We've already covered this multiple times. If you wish to keep asking the same question over and over, it would make sense to first address our answers. Otherwise, you're just wasting time and attempting to make it appear as if sufficient answers have not already been given, without having to directly address them. (This is a sign of denial.)


My apologies if I missed your explanation. I have looked again and still cannot find it. Could you point out the message and the explanation to me?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users