If there were no God

  • Thread starter Thread starter clarkgamble1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Steady State theory was debunked decades ago. About the only holdover is Einstein’s cosmological constant, which at the moment shows the expansion is speeding up.

At any rate, the point I’m making is you can’t apply the physical laws of the universe to a period where such laws did not exist. Thermodynamics is an attribute of the universe. Whether you believe the universe began with a quantum fluctuation or God created it, invoking thermodynamics is an invalid complaint that really cuts both ways.

And all the Big Bang says is that the universe was once incredibly dense and hot, and then began to expand and cool, and from that comes all the matter and energy, and through symmetry breaking probably all the fundamental interactions we know today. Sadly it can’t (at least yet) tell us anything about where the universe came from.
 
You know that’s actually how science works, it looks for evidence, but credible and rational hypothesis normally come first, and one very good starting point is “what seems to make sense?”, it’s very easy to see how that could lead to agnosticism/atheism, since it’s a credible hypothesis given the data.

All those who know me on CAF know that I actually post a lot of controversial stuff about God, but believe it or not I’m not trying to offend Christians here.
 
Exactly, it explains how the universe got to where it is now, but it starts at the moment of the initial explosion, it makes no attempt to explain how it got there. That’s not to say there are no theories about HOW the Big Bang for started, Stephen Hawking famously did some of that, concluding physical laws can account for it with no need for an intelligent designer.
 
Last edited:
Complaint?

I was merely puttering about in my thought kitchen.

I was not trying to prove anything for or against belief. This thread is merely an academic exercise for me.

By the way, I have heard rumors that the Steady State theory may be making a comeback with a few alterations. I know some astronomy grad students.
 
Last edited:
It is possible to believe that human morality has grown from the empathy which evolving Man has acquired as a characteristic of consciousness. If you believe evolution is the work of God, then morality and the meaningfulness of the universe are connected. If you don’t …
 
It’s possible to explain morality that way, yes, but why would you be bound by morality if it is only a byproduct of a random process of nature? Couldn’t you use the fact that you now understand all those silly moral rules to “transcend” them and live as selfishly as possible?
 
Theban said:
It’s possible to explain morality that way, yes, but why would you be bound by morality if it is only a byproduct of a random process of nature? Couldn’t you use the fact that you now understand all those silly moral rules to “transcend” them and live as selfishly as possible?
Click to expand...
Of course you could. And for a limited time, you might even succeed. But we live in a society - like it or not - and reality does not care about us. If and when the proverbial substance hits the fan, it is much better if you can count on others who can help you. It is much better to spread good will, and rely on the old principle: “what goes around, comes around”. This is a simple result in “game theory”, which was not known in the times of Jesus, and it also proves (mathematically) that a good balance of selfishness / selflessness is the optimal strategy in the “survival game of life”. Moreover, it also proves that Jesus was NOT God, since God would know the intricacies of game theory, and thus would know that total selflessness is a very bad strategy.
 
Hahaha, are you kidding?

You don’t seriously think an individual is better off in this world by acting morally and selflessly? If you had meant better off spiritually you might have had a point, but in worldy affairs? Really?
 
Not ready. What’s happening is that the expansion is speeding up, so the cosmological constant, which Einstein inserted to get rid of the expansion inherent in General Relativity is now used as the value of that expansion. So a piece of the old steady state theory has made a reappearance, as it were.
 
In any social species, there are rules of conduct. You wouldn’t have societies at all without moral and ethical codes.
 
PickyPicky said:
Because empathy drives us.
Click to expand...
Maybe some people are so full of empathy that they are compelled to act squarely with others. But then again, if that is the case, aren’t you just acting out of self interest and selfishness, gaining an emotional reward every time you do something good?

As for me I am not capable of feeling empathy for others, along with 2 percent of the world population. Are we not required to abide by the moral law then?
 
Well of course we get an emotional reward from acting well. Can you possibly disagree? What I don’t believe is that this emotional reward extends to the gift of everlasting life. There we will need to disagree.
 
Correct. But why care about society, if it’s just another meaningless aspect of the universe? Isn’t your own comfort more important? And if you do care still, why not exploit the rules of conduct as much as possible for your own gain, and make sure you don’t infringe on society?
 
Unfortunately I can disagree, because I am robbed of that emotional reward. I don’t think Heaven can accurately be explained as an emotional reward, either.
 
As it is with most atheists, you completely misunderstand the Creator Spirit Whom we call God.
 
Theban said:
Hahaha, are you kidding?

You don’t seriously think an individual is better off in this world by acting morally and selflessly? If you had meant better off spiritually you might have had a point, but in worldy affairs? Really?
Click to expand...
No, I am serious. But you did not really comprehend what I wrote. The optimal behavior is a good balance between selfish and selfless behavior. Both extremes are sub-optimal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top