(January 29, 2017 at 12:50 pm)OGestas Wrote:(January 29, 2017 at 12:46 pm)Alex K Wrote: Yes we can know they are likely wrong, because modern physics has shown us that the old intuitive notions of a fixed linear timeline are incorrect.
If we assume time is an inseparable part of nature, your hypothetical can't be answered because of there is no time, the is no notion of "there was no natural world, and *then* there was". The sentence doesn't make sense and therefore cannot be answered.
So do you think the natural world always existed or do you think that it didn't always exist?
Please note that I'm not asking if you know. I'm asking what you think given logic and contemporary scientific evidence. Just like you don't know if gravity will be here tomorrow, but you think it will be given logic and evidence.
Again, you are presenting a false dichotomy here. How have you determined there are only two distinct possibilities for how the natural world came about? Where is your Nobel for narrowing down the origins of matter to "either/or"? That is a claim which demands evidence before being considered seriously. We don't get to put the nature of existence into a neat, orderly box just because it's convenient for US.
And, if matter has always existed in some state, infinitely, what does this have to do with the existence of a god? Or atheism in general? It seems as though you think that if an atheist believes, "matter/the universe must have always existed in some form or another," this is somehow also a comment on the existence of God. It's not.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.
