(February 4, 2012 at 6:55 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:No one designed the designer. God is an eternal being.

Forgive me for saying this but you have to be a fucking lunatic to believe in such utter nonsense.

Is your trouble in believing in something eternal? What is your view of origins?

You keep saying "If the universe had a beginning... ". Stop right there, it didn't. At least not from scratch.

What I say is that while the universe as we know it had a beginning, it certainly did not come from nothing. Think about how much energy and the laws of the universe evolved in just the first few micro seconds of the big bang. It is not known that the singularity which gave rise to the big bang popped into being out of nothingness. I suspect a limitless regression of prior states of something which eventually gave rise to the universe as we know it today.

The universe is, in that sense, eternal but your god is not. You have defined him as such and have found him ever so handy for explaining every vexing question. But that doesn't mean you're correct.

(February 4, 2012 at 7:03 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: No one designed the designer. God is an eternal being.

So we have this on your authority? You xtians are the ones making Him up so I suppose you should be able to define him as you like. But if you want to base any argument on the fact that god is eternal then you're just being circular. God is an eternal being? You're sure about this .. how? DON"T QUOTE SCRIPTURES!!! They mean even less than what you've been saying and I won't read them anyway.

If an eternal universe is unimaginable to you then you don't get to assume an eternal being who pulls universes out of his hat. Or if you do, you're just being silly and we will all have to laugh at you some more.

(February 4, 2012 at 9:38 pm)whateverist Wrote: You keep saying "If the universe had a beginning... ". Stop right there, it didn't. At least not from scratch.

What I say is that while the universe as we know it had a beginning, it certainly did not come from nothing. Think about how much energy and the laws of the universe evolved in just the first few micro seconds of the big bang. It is not known that the singularity which gave rise to the big bang popped into being out of nothingness. I suspect a limitless regression of prior states of something which eventually gave rise to the universe as we know it today.

The universe is, in that sense, eternal but your god is not. You have defined him as such and have found him ever so handy for explaining every vexing question. But that doesn't mean you're correct.

So you're talking about an infinite regress of causes, but what we know from infinite set theory is that infinite numbers of things don't exist in reality. A classic example is Hilberts Hotel. Let's say you have a hotel with an infinite number of rooms, and every room has a guest, so it's full. Yet, even though it is full you can have infinitely many new guests, because when you have a new guest come by, you can simply have the guest in room 1 move to room 2 and the guest in room 2 move to room 4 and so on. This shows the impossibility of an occurrence of an infinite series. There must be an uncaused cause to begin the series.

(February 4, 2012 at 9:38 pm)whateverist Wrote: So we have this on your authority? You xtians are the ones making Him up so I suppose you should be able to define him as you like. But if you want to base any argument on the fact that god is eternal then you're just being circular. God is an eternal being? You're sure about this .. how? DON"T QUOTE SCRIPTURES!!! They mean even less than what you've been saying and I won't read them anyway.

If an eternal universe is unimaginable to you then you don't get to assume an eternal being who pulls universes out of his hat. Or if you do, you're just being silly and we will all have to laugh at you some more.

1 The universe was brought into being either by a mechanically operating set of necessary and sufficient conditions or by a personal, free agent.

2 The universe could not have been brought into being by a mechanically operating set of necessary and sufficient conditions.

3 Therefore, the universe was brought into being by a personal, free agent.

In cause and effect relationships, and if the cause is a timeless state, but the effect is in time, this does not mesh, because the state that created the effect needs to have the state as its effect. Essentially, that the problem for your naturalistic explanation is that there is nothing to set the dominoes up or get them going. This makes a free agent more likely than the mechanistic process you believe happened.

(February 4, 2012 at 10:23 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: mumbo jumbo

I'm not impressed and I'm certainly not convinced. You say that the idea that something always came before something else is impossible and based on that you conclude a magic being did it in a manner that can't be comprehended let alone explained. Why even bother with logic if in the end you're going to hand it over to magic anyway.

(February 5, 2012 at 1:54 am)whateverist Wrote:

(February 4, 2012 at 10:23 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: mumbo jumbo

I'm not impressed and I'm certainly not convinced. You say that the idea that something always came before something else is impossible and based on that you conclude a magic being did it in a manner that can't be comprehended let alone explained. Why even bother with logic if in the end you're going to hand it over to magic anyway.

You're not impressed by logical arguments? What I said wasn't mumbo-jumbo, but something easily comprehensible to anyone who is familiar with analytic philosophy and formal argumentation. So, if you're claiming what I said is nonsense, it is showing that you do not understand either of these things.

I'll give you this to chew on while you're pondering your reply:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21...event.html

(February 5, 2012 at 1:54 am)whateverist Wrote:

(February 4, 2012 at 10:23 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: mumbo jumbo

I'm not impressed and I'm certainly not convinced. You say that the idea that something always came before something else is impossible and based on that you conclude a magic being did it in a manner that can't be comprehended let alone explained. Why even bother with logic if in the end you're going to hand it over to magic anyway.

Do you want to explain to this moron what an editorial is or shall we let him go on in ignorant bliss?

(February 5, 2012 at 4:51 am)Phil Wrote:

(February 5, 2012 at 1:54 am)whateverist Wrote:

(February 4, 2012 at 10:23 pm)brotherlylove Wrote: mumbo jumbo

I'm not impressed and I'm certainly not convinced. You say that the idea that something always came before something else is impossible and based on that you conclude a magic being did it in a manner that can't be comprehended let alone explained. Why even bother with logic if in the end you're going to hand it over to magic anyway.

Do you want to explain to this moron what an editorial is or shall we let him go on in ignorant bliss?

Do you ever read things which disagree with your preconceived notions? Since you apparently dont, I'll direct you: It's referring to this paper that Alexander Vilenkin gave on Hawkings birthday:

http://www.ctc.cam.ac.uk/stephen70/talks...lenkin.pdf

Everything must have a creator... except the creator. Makes perfect sense.

Nah... let's leave the schmuk in ignorant bliss...his dildo/ priest works better that way.

Quote:No one designed the designer. God is an eternal being.

According to some versions of the Hindu belief, God came from a fire (Sada-Shiva [the supreme godhead] was born out of a single flame of fire; who then gave birth to other primary gods). So something did come before god, which rules out your idea of an eternal god. Now will someone explain how this flame came into being before the god himself.

(And before you go ahead can claim that Hinduism is wrong and Christianity is right, here is some facts for you:
1) Hinduism is much much older than Christianity
2) The Hindu scriptures, though many, are almost all in sync while trying to explain the origins of the universe. Far better piece of literature than the contradictory, evil and adult's only bible used by you Christians)

Disclaimer: I personally believe Hinduism as a pile of shit, though better quality shit than Judaism, Christianity and Islam.