How to defend creation against "matter and energy have just always existed"?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was referring to the ‘they’ that claims matter and energy have always existed. I gave my response to it, too. Not sure what you mean by ‘what must they’.
 
Beryllos said:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
However, how do we defend against the proposition that “it wasn’t created, it has just always existed and it always will exist, it just does , there is no creator to have created it”? How can this be disproved?
Click to expand...
You have opened quite the Pandora’s Box here in the CAF/Philosophy forum. I’m glad to see a wide variety of responses.
Click to expand...
Well, I guess I did, didn’t I? That happens sometimes with my questions. I just about broke the interwebs a few months back when I dared to step on the “third rail” and ask how people handle the confession thing when they use contraceptives and don’t intend to stop. I was found to be so “judgmental” that I felt like picking up the phone and asking the Justice Department if they had a job open for me anywhere! I heard about one such opening recently… 👩‍⚖️

Seriously, though… there is a lot of good material here, more than I could ever possibly reply to, and it’s going to take me a while to sort through all of it, and distill it down to the level of a very inquisitive Grade 8 student who is almost preternaturally skilled at the art of debate and argumentation. I just found it kind of facile for the Apologia text to say, in effect, “the First Law of Thermodynamics proves creation, because it says that matter and energy can never be created or destroyed, and we know there was a Creator”. That doesn’t make a lick of sense. The Catholic mind cries out for a better explanation… even if that explanation is “we don’t know”.

Thanks to everyone for their good responses, and please play nice, y’all 🤼‍♂️
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top