(February 28, 2013 at 7:29 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: The answer is that God is outside of time and space, i.e. He's always been there.

But if it's possible for god to have just always been, then why couldn't the universe have just always existed in some manner or form?

(February 28, 2013 at 10:54 am)Chas Wrote:

(February 28, 2013 at 10:44 am)FallentoReason Wrote: I feel like I'm going to start a series of threads where I openly talk about the thoughts I have on Deism. Since there's no doctrine for Deism telling me what to do, I think it would be good for me to figure it all out through discussion.

I was wondering today about the foundations of Deism and whether there's reason to think Deism is more than a hypothetical philosophy. Why does our universe exist, but exist with a certain structure? Could it have been possible for matter to appear from nowhere but remain a meaningless blob floating about for eternity? Not only did the universe appear, but it appeared with specific "laws" that we have now identified and they served to shape what we have to the extent that a collective consciousness (us) could be sustained and then able to wonder about its existence.

I'm not saying that life is in anyway proof of a Creator/God. We are here now, which simply means we can bring up questions like "why didn't the universe start off as a blob of matter and stay a blob of matter for all eternity"? The universe quite clearly has some pretty amazing properties and within it are embedded some elegant truths such as those found in mathematics & physics. Why did such complex things get created along with the matter itself at the dawn of spacetime?

I think the major problem with deism is that it doesn't actually answer any of your questions.
If you ascribe the creation of it all to a creator, from whence the creator?

Simplify and leave out the creator.

The standard view since the dawn of monotheism is that "GOD" is the first uncaused cause.

---

(February 28, 2013 at 11:09 am)Baalzebutt Wrote: Fallen, I am going to direct you to a book that I am currently reading that addresses these very issues. It is by Laurence Krauss and it is called A Universe From Nothing: Why there is something rather than nothing.
A Universe From Nothing

Check it out. I think it will be very enlightening for you.

I'll get it from the book depository! Thanks for the recommendation.

---

(February 28, 2013 at 12:12 pm)Norfolk And Chance Wrote:

(February 28, 2013 at 10:44 am)FallentoReason Wrote: I feel like I'm going to start a series of threads where I openly talk about the thoughts I have on Deism. Since there's no doctrine for Deism telling me what to do, I think it would be good for me to figure it all out through discussion.

I was wondering today about the foundations of Deism and whether there's reason to think Deism is more than a hypothetical philosophy. Why does our universe exist, but exist with a certain structure? Could it have been possible for matter to appear from nowhere but remain a meaningless blob floating about for eternity? Not only did the universe appear, but it appeared with specific "laws" that we have now identified and they served to shape what we have to the extent that a collective consciousness (us) could be sustained and then able to wonder about its existence.

I'm not saying that life is in anyway proof of a Creator/God. We are here now, which simply means we can bring up questions like "why didn't the universe start off as a blob of matter and stay a blob of matter for all eternity"? The universe quite clearly has some pretty amazing properties and within it are embedded some elegant truths such as those found in mathematics & physics. Why did such complex things get created along with the matter itself at the dawn of spacetime?

So you fell to reason...

...and then lost your reason again, because you shit your pants and decided to believe that there is something after all. For no good reason other that there are unanswered/unanswerable questions.

It isn't so much the questions but rather the observations of nature. I don't know how else to answer you but to point to quotes that explain much better how I think:

"That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God." ~ Albert Einstein

"The Creation speaks a universal language that does not depend on any human speech or language. It is an eternal 'original copy' that all men can read. It cannot be faked or counterfeited. It cannot be lost or changed. It cannot be kept secret. It does not depend on man deciding whether to publish it or not. It publishes itself from one end of the earth to the other. It preaches to all the nations, and all the worlds. This natural word of God reveals to us all that man needs to know of God." ~ Thomas Paine

Quote:You might as well go back to church.

That place is against reason. I'll die.

If one wishes to play semantics, then one can use the same argument as Stephen Hawkins, who says that to ask how did the beginnning begin is a foolish question because one cannot ask what happened just before since there was no "before". And so God could not have caused the beginning.

To say that "God always was" is to play the same game, since there cannot be a "was" without time.

(February 28, 2013 at 11:52 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Enlighten me.

You already should be - given your statement about "A Universe from Nothing".

(February 28, 2013 at 11:52 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Admittedly that statement was poorly worded. Aquinas said it much better. I'm paraphrasing..."God is not in time. God is the cause that time is. Nor is God in space. God is the cause that space is." Something to that effect.

Equally meaningless. Cause and effect are spatio-temporal by definition. Talking about causes outside the context of space and time makes no sense.

---

(March 1, 2013 at 12:31 am)FallentoReason Wrote:

(February 28, 2013 at 10:54 am)Chas Wrote: I think the major problem with deism is that it doesn't actually answer any of your questions.
If you ascribe the creation of it all to a creator, from whence the creator?

Simplify and leave out the creator.

The standard view since the dawn of monotheism is that "GOD" is the first uncaused cause.

---

(February 28, 2013 at 11:09 am)Baalzebutt Wrote: Fallen, I am going to direct you to a book that I am currently reading that addresses these very issues. It is by Laurence Krauss and it is called A Universe From Nothing: Why there is something rather than nothing.
A Universe From Nothing

Check it out. I think it will be very enlightening for you.

I'll get it from the book depository! Thanks for the recommendation.

---

(February 28, 2013 at 12:12 pm)Norfolk And Chance Wrote: So you fell to reason...

...and then lost your reason again, because you shit your pants and decided to believe that there is something after all. For no good reason other that there are unanswered/unanswerable questions.

It isn't so much the questions but rather the observations of nature. I don't know how else to answer you but to point to quotes that explain much better how I think:

"That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God." ~ Albert Einstein

"The Creation speaks a universal language that does not depend on any human speech or language. It is an eternal 'original copy' that all men can read. It cannot be faked or counterfeited. It cannot be lost or changed. It cannot be kept secret. It does not depend on man deciding whether to publish it or not. It publishes itself from one end of the earth to the other. It preaches to all the nations, and all the worlds. This natural word of God reveals to us all that man needs to know of God." ~ Thomas Paine

Quote:You might as well go back to church.

That place is against reason. I'll die.

Didn't I address all this already?

(March 1, 2013 at 12:08 am)Ryantology Wrote: The Big Bang is the beginning of the universe as we know it. There is no indication what was going on prior to that event, assuming that time operated in any way we would recognize.

It is only theists who take 'something from nothing' literally seriously. The accurate way to describe it would be 'something from we have no idea what'.

Good point, well made.

I once heard a theory about God the Creator from a fellow Deist. I don't actually ascribe to it, but it's interesting enough to present to these intellectual minds.

He thought/believed that God was likely a multi-dimensional traveler and happened upon a void in his many travels. Using the technology of his race, he created a massive explosion with all the elements necessary to create life. He of course, did not actually know whether or not his little experiment would create intelligent life, nor would he ever see or know humans as we are today. Basically, he believes God was an alien who died billions of years ago and we are just one of many many universes.

Now of course, he has absolutely no evidence for such a theory, but than again, neither does the Bible. If he wrote down and heavily embellished this theory of his and then said it was divinely presented to him, could it not be the religion of the day 2000 years from now?

(March 1, 2013 at 12:48 pm)Cinjin Wrote: I once heard a theory about God the Creator from a fellow Deist. I don't actually ascribe to it, but it's interesting enough to present to these intellectual minds.

He thought/believed that God was likely a multi-dimensional traveler and happened upon a void in his many travels. Using the technology of his race, he created a massive explosion with all the elements necessary to create life. He of course, did not actually know whether or not his little experiment would create intelligent life, nor would he ever see or know humans as we are today. Basically, he believes God was an alien who died billions of years ago and we are just one of many many universes.

Now of course, he has absolutely no evidence for such a theory, but than again, neither does the Bible. If he wrote down and heavily embellished this theory of his and then said it was divinely presented to him, could it not be the religion of the day 2000 years from now?

It would be interesting to see if any theist or deist was satisfied with a deity of this sort. I suspect many will insist one intimiately concerned with each and every moral choice you confront, who celebrates your victories and keeps tabs on you guffaws.

The nothing is coming....

(March 1, 2013 at 3:51 pm)whateverist Wrote: It would be interesting to see if any theist or deist was satisfied with a deity of this sort. I suspect many will insist one intimately concerned with each and every moral choice you confront, who celebrates your victories and keeps tabs on your guffaws.

True, most don't want to face the reality that if a god is responsible for the creation of this universe than he is very likely NOT human and thus not remotely predisposed to the emotions and fragile concerns that we assign him.

Here's what we do know:
Every religion of the world works on the same basic premise, eternal reward and/or punishment.
Every religion has a really old book and/or set of ancient writings.
Every god of every religion has human emotions assigned to it.
All the worlds most popular religions incorporate blood sacrifice.
Every religion admonishes it's devotees to fear its god(s).
Every religion claims that they serve the one true god(s).

Sound a lot alike? My thought is this:
If I assume that there is indeed a God that created this universe, there's no fucking way that he's going to have anything to do with any religion thought up by the idiots on this planet. My point: If every religion claims they alone serve the one true god(s), despite the fact that they are all the same, than it seems painful obvious that all religions are fraudulent and there are no limitations on who God is.

(March 2, 2013 at 1:27 am)Cinjin Wrote: True, most don't want to face the reality that if a god is responsible for the creation of this universe than he is very likely NOT human and thus not remotely predisposed to the emotions and fragile concerns that we assign him.

Here's what we do know:
Every religion of the world works on the same basic premise, eternal reward and/or punishment.
Every religion has a really old book and/or set of ancient writings.
Every god of every religion has human emotions assigned to it.
All the worlds most popular religions incorporate blood sacrifice.
Every religion admonishes it's devotees to fear its god(s).
Every religion claims that they serve the one true god(s).

Sound a lot alike? My thought is this:
If I assume that there is indeed a God that created this universe, there's no fucking way that he's going to have anything to do with any religion thought up by the idiots on this planet. My point: If every religion claims they alone serve the one true god(s), despite the fact that they are all the same, than it seems painful obvious that all religions are fraudulent and there are no limitations on who God is.

Not really addressing the point you made, but the statements you listed as facts are, in fact, not true.

Here's what we do know:
Not every religion works on the concept of eternal reward/punishment, especially the ones with reincarnation.
A lot of well known religions are new and therefore do not have ancient writings.
Not every religion has a god. Buddhism and Jainism come to mind.
Quite a few of the popular religions do not require blood-sacrifice. Again, Buddhism and Jainism.
And finally, given that not every religion has a god, the last two statements wouldn't apply either.