The Most Fundamental Question of Existence

  • Thread starter Thread starter Counterpoint
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Counterpoint

Guest
If there were nothing, then there would be nothing to explain. But the fact is that there is something, and that requires an explanation. So, why is there something rather than nothing? Or, if you like, how is it that there is something rather than nothing?

The believer would argue that God is the only satisfactory explanation. The skeptic would counter by arguing that God explains nothing. What sayeth you?
 
The believer has an explanation. The skeptic doesn’t. Criticising others is cheap/easy when you don’t have a better explanation.
 
Counterpoint said:
If there were nothing, then there would be nothing to explain. But the fact is that there is something, and that requires an explanation. So, why is there something rather than nothing? Or, if you like, how is it that there is something rather than nothing?

The believer would argue that God is the only satisfactory explanation. The skeptic would counter by arguing that God explains nothing. What sayeth you?
Click to expand...
lol. This is my specialty.

Nothing is real
Nothing exists
Nothing is something, and it exists.

Nothing. Also called nothingness or, pre-existence. The Universe actually does explode into existence, and it comes from that place called nothing.

Pre-existence is a permanent temporary place. What that means is that this nothingness exists, and always will, but we are only in that condition temporarily. In that time and place, there is nothing (no universe, no galaxies, no stars, no planets, no human beings). But what there is, is consciousness and thought.

We, some of us, *are *those thoughts. We communicate by thinking with each other. We have no physicality, and we have no brains, but we do exist.

What brings the Universe into existence is, primarily, a memory. When I remember, a very specific thing, the emotion (love) explodes. That energy is so super-compressed that it nearly “doesn’t exist”. There are many people who think and believe that the Universe is brought about by some sexual energy. They are incredibly mistaken. In fact, there is an intense, extreme* urgency to protect* which is something that only Love has the motivation to do. evil is the opposite of Love. evil seeks to harm, not protect.

The life cycle of the Universe is called Eternity. We live from Eternity to Eternity (the world we are in now is *not *the first instance of this world, and it will not be the last). Just as the Universe is “born” (explodes into existence), it will “die” (end). Then, it begins all over again. Eternal life, Eternally.
 
I’m not espousing this, but the skeptic would argue that there doesn’t HAVE to be a “why.” The Christian finds a way to come up with a reason for existence. The skeptic says there simply doesn’t HAVE to be a reason. It’s futile and pointless, but it’s possible, they say.
 
ericc said:
The believer has an explanation. The skeptic doesn’t. Criticising others is cheap/easy when you don’t have a better explanation.
Click to expand...
You’re expressing one of the more common fallacies in apologetics: “I have an answer and you don’t, so I’m right.”
 
bingbell484 said:
I’m not espousing this, but the skeptic would argue that there doesn’t HAVE to be a “why.” The Christian finds a way to come up with a reason for existence. The skeptic says there simply doesn’t HAVE to be a reason. It’s futile and pointless, but it’s possible, they say.
Click to expand...
YHWH actually *is *why. The *exact *translation of YHWH is why.

What is the answer to the question why? The answer is be cause (to cause to be). The only question that can ever bring Understanding is why.

Knowledge is not the highest form; Understanding is. God is Most High, Understanding is Most High.

You can know something but not understand it. When you understand something, you cannot not know what you understand.

Reasons, meanings and purposes. All of that is a product of why.
 
gmx2014 said:
lol. This is my specialty.

Nothing is real
Nothing exists
Nothing is something, and it exists.

Nothing. Also called nothingness or, pre-existence. The Universe actually does explode into existence, and it comes from that place called nothing.

Pre-existence is a permanent temporary place. What that means is that this nothingness exists, and always will, but we are only in that condition temporarily. In that time and place, there is nothing (no universe, no galaxies, no stars, no planets, no human beings). But what there is, is consciousness and thought.

We, some of us, *are *those thoughts. We communicate by thinking with each other. We have no physicality, and we have no brains, but we do exist.

What brings the Universe into existence is, primarily, a memory. When I remember, a very specific thing, the emotion (love) explodes. That energy is so super-compressed that it nearly “doesn’t exist”. There are many people who think and believe that the Universe is brought about by some sexual energy. They are incredibly mistaken. In fact, there is an intense, extreme* urgency to protect* which is something that only Love has the motivation to do. evil is the opposite of Love. evil seeks to harm, not protect.

The life cycle of the Universe is called Eternity. We live from Eternity to Eternity (the world we are in now is *not *the first instance of this world, and it will not be the last). Just as the Universe is “born” (explodes into existence), it will “die” (end). Then, it begins all over again. Eternal life, Eternally.
Click to expand...
How can "nothingness’ exist if the word “nothing” means non-existence? Also, you say that in pre-existence nothing existed except our consciousness and thought. How was it pre-existence if something (our consciousness and thought) existed?
 
christus_vincit said:
How can "nothingness’ exist if the word “nothing” means non-existence? Also, you say that in pre-existence nothing existed except our consciousness and thought. How was it pre-existence if something (our consciousness and thought) existed?
Click to expand...
Existence consists of physicality (a physical universe, with physical galaxies, stars and planets, and physical life forms). Pre-existence is non-physicality. There is no Universe. There is no light, or stars, or planets.

Consciousness is like the air. Try to make air concrete, but you won’t be able to. There is no physical representation of air. I am typing on a keyboard, which is a physical object. There is no physical object for what we can hold in our hands and call air. It’s the same thing with consciousness. You cannot hold consciousness in your hands, because it isn’t physical. It is *like *air.
 
gmx2014 said:
Existence consists of physicality (a physical universe, with physical galaxies, stars and planets, and physical life forms). Pre-existence is non-physicality. There is no Universe. There is no light, or stars, or planets.

Consciousness is like the air. Try to make air concrete, but you won’t be able to. There is no physical representation of air. I am typing on a keyboard, which is a physical object. There is no physical object for what we can hold in our hands and call air. It’s the same thing with consciousness. You cannot hold consciousness in your hands, because it isn’t physical. It is *like *air.
Click to expand...
To me, it seems that you are equivocating terms. Existence does not only incorporate physicality. I think if we disagree on that, then we probably can’t really debate this because we are starting from different definitions of what constitutes existence.

An example I’ve always heard to demonstrate that existence goes beyond physicality are the laws that govern the universe. These laws had to pre-exist the physical universe in order for the universe to form according to them.
 
Counterpoint said:
If there were nothing, then there would be nothing to explain. But the fact is that there is something, and that requires an explanation. So, why is there something rather than nothing? Or, if you like, how is it that there is something rather than nothing?

The believer would argue that God is the only satisfactory explanation. The skeptic would counter by arguing that God explains nothing. What sayeth you?
Click to expand...
Many believers have given not just the statement that God is the only satisfactory explanation, but reasons for why they believe that to be true. Two of the most prominent have been the Greek philosopher Aristotle with his concept of a prime mover, and the Christian theologian St. Thomas Aquinas with his Five Ways.

What say I? I say that, since you state that an explanation is required, then the skeptic must, by necessity, give an explanation. It’s required, after all.

So where is it?

“God explains nothing” is not an explanation. It’s nothing more than an assertion of disagreement, void of any reasons for said disagreement.

So… what explanation does the skeptic have to offer?
 
christus_vincit said:
To me, it seems that you are equivocating terms. Existence does not only incorporate physicality. I think if we disagree on that, then we probably can’t really debate this because we are starting from different definitions of what constitutes existence.

An example I’ve always heard to demonstrate that existence goes beyond physicality are the laws that govern the universe. These laws had to pre-exist the physical universe in order for the universe to form according to them.
Click to expand...
We can embody Laws, but that only means that we give physicality to that which is not physical. Remember, Christ was Word in the flesh. God, by the way, is a word. In all of what God is, the very least that can ever be said about God is that it is a word.

There isn’t anything to debate, anyway. I’m the one that brings the Universe into existence, so there are things that only I can know.

Some people say that the Universe is *inside *of us, and they even say that all existence is illusion (it doesn’t really exist, we just think it does). On one mental level, they are correct. But on another mental level, they are not correct. It’s a paradox; true and not true, at the same time.
 
gmx2014 said:
lol. This is my specialty.

Nothing is real
Nothing exists
Nothing is something, and it exists.
Click to expand...
You’re employing the term “nothing” in a different than I have; your “nothing” is actually something, while my “nothing” is really nothing. Also, your words sound somewhat reminiscent…

“Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.
Herein lies the peace of God.” - A Course in Miracles
 
bingbell484 said:
I’m not espousing this, but the skeptic would argue that there doesn’t HAVE to be a “why.” The Christian finds a way to come up with a reason for existence. The skeptic says there simply doesn’t HAVE to be a reason. It’s futile and pointless, but it’s possible, they say.
Click to expand...
That’s one of the reasons why I rephrased the question from a “why” question to a “how” question.
 
gmx2014 said:
We can embody Laws, but that only means that we give physicality to that which is not physical. Remember, Christ was Word in the flesh. God, by the way, is a word. In all of what God is, the very least that can ever be said about God is that it is a word.

There isn’t anything to debate, anyway. I’m the one that brings the Universe into existence, so there are things that only I can know.

Some people say that the Universe is *inside *of us, and they even say that all existence is illusion (it doesn’t really exist, we just think it does). On one mental level, they are correct. But on another mental level, they are not correct. It’s a paradox; true and not true, at the same time.
Click to expand...
To the skeptic, all explanations sound like this.
It is by the grace of the Holy Spirit that we understand and gain in knowledge.
While it is important ot spread the Good News, we are limited in what we are able to do.
God sent His only Son and people did not believe.
 
Counterpoint said:
You’re employing the term “nothing” in a different than I have; your “nothing” is actually something, while my “nothing” is really nothing. Also, your words sound somewhat reminiscent…

“Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.
Herein lies the peace of God.” - A Course in Miracles
Click to expand...
Nothing: no universe, no galaxies, no stars, no light, no planets. There is NOTHING (nothing physical). What there is, is consciousness, and thought.

Now, you understand nothing (also called nothingness or pre-existence). Take it directly from the source (me!).

I’ve never read A Course in Miracles. I also never went to college, and I didn’t graduate from high school, either. Judge it how you want, if you feel the need to judge it.
 
Aloysium said:
To the skeptic, all explanations sound like this.
It is by the grace of the Holy Spirit that we understand and gain in knowledge.
While it is important ot spread the Good News, we are limited in what we are able to do.
God sent His only Son and people did not believe.
Click to expand...
Some people have this disbelief, where they say Spirit isn’t real and does not exist. They think Spirit is a disease of the mind.
 
Counterpoint said:
You’re assuming for something to exist that it must be physical. This is not true.
Click to expand...
I never assume anything.

The definition of existence is reality. Physicality. Anything outside of that has *other distinctions.
*

Thoughts are real, and can be physical. The keyboard I am typing on first existed in the mind as a thought. It was created, and became real. Physicality is the distinction of reality, and existence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top