Why Couldn't the Universe Exist Without a Cause?

[Charlemagne_III]

I think it’s not them who has a problem. Might be time to stop interfering and leave others to make their own walk with God.

God invites all of us to walk together, not alone.

Not sure what any of this has to do with the thread.

 

[NM505StKate]

Not going to read 43 pages of replies. A question that can be brought up is what caused God to exist? Here in lies a problem. If the response is God always existed then why can’t the universe? From what science has learned 4.3 billion years ago an event happened called the Big Bang. Before that the universe may have been a singularity. In our lifetime we may never know the answer but it is exciting to search.

 

[inocente]

Who are you calling a sectarian?

Catholics refer to the Church as the Body of Christ. We consum e the Body of Christ at Mass.

How could Catholics ever want to separate themselves from Christ.

It’s the Protestants who reject the Body of Christ ansd have separated themselves from Christ.

We’re a long way off-topic here.

There are still high separation barriers down the middle of roads between Catholics and Protestants in Belfast, Northern Ireland. The barriers separate the sectarians, who believe Christ is only on their side.

 

[clem456]

Those two posters are both Catholic, and both in the Spirit. That’s how they know, that’s how anyone knows -

What is the nature of this “knowing”?
What if your knowing contradicts someone else’s? If two people claim to know the Spirit, how do you know which is correct?

Maybe a more primary question is, "
“Do you even think it matters which one is truly of the Spirit?”.
Some might be satisfied to be convicted as individuals, so unity is irrelevant then.
It’s good to be convicted as an individual.
But, individualism is not compatible with the nature of Christianity. Do you agree?

Given that individualism is incompatible with Christianity, who determines this knowledge you are pointing to, such that we are united in it?

 

[PRmerger]

Those two posters are both Catholic, and both in the Spirit. That’s how they know, that’s how anyone knows - “But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” - John 14

So you, too??? NOooooooooooooo!!!

Say it ain’t so, inocente!

I can’t believe that you’re actually asserting that God just told you that Hebrews is inspired.

Does the Holy Spirit also speak to you regarding the other over 400 ancient Christian texts and tell you that those texts are NOT theopneustos?

Or, do you just want to acknowledge the most reasonable and TRUE fact: you humbly submit to the authority of the CC each and every time you quote from the NT as theopneustos.

 

[clem456]

There is no “I” in Christianity.
Knowledge of the Spirit has to be held in common.

 

[PRmerger]

I thank you for your confidence in me, but I fear it’s misplaced.

LOL! I shouldn’t have confidence in you, then?

Okey-dokey.

That’s kind of a weird proposition to hear someone make, but, if you say so…

I don’t want to keep labouring this point. Really I don’t. I’d rather give up and move on. But let me just see if I understand you correctly. If I grant God’s existence (i.e. accept that God exists), then I can understand what opening my heart (i.e. being charitable, sympathetic, loving and caring) to God means? Is that it? I don’t think that I need to grant God’s existence to reach this understanding of what this phrase means. It’s not that complicated a concept.

Egg-zactly.



Not. That. Complicated.

As I mentioned before, are you prepared to grant the existence of the God of Sikhism, and open your heart to that god so that you can learn the truth of his existence?

I would be prepared to grant the existence of the God of Sikhism in order to digest the arguments being presented by the Sikh.

I wouldn’t say, “What do you mean that your ‘God loves his handiwork’? How can God, who is immaterial, have hands? Does he have fingernails, too? And if so, who cuts them, then?”

You know why I wouldn’t?

Because it would be embarrassing to know that every mentally sane reader who sees that is going like this:

 

[PRmerger]

Not going to read 43 pages of replies. A question that can be brought up is what caused God to exist? Here in lies a problem. If the response is God always existed then why can’t the universe? From what science has learned 4.3 billion years ago an event happened called the Big Bang. Before that the universe may have been a singularity. In our lifetime we may never know the answer but it is exciting to search.

Science tells us that the universe began to exist.

And so does Philosophy.

And anything that begins to exist MUST have a cause.

It’s just plain common sense and logic.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

youtube.com/watch?v=IayzEWA_o8g

The story of the Big Bang.

 

[DrTaffy]

Science tells us that the universe began to exist.

Evidence? Because a lot of scientists seem happy to entertain the possibility that it always existed. If you mean that one scientist (or a few) suggest that the universe explicitly ‘began to exist’ at a given moment in time, maybe, but that is not what you said.

And so does Philosophy.

Evidence? Because a lot of philosophers (ever heard of Thomas Aquinas? ) seem happy to entertain the possibility of an infinite regress, i.e. it always existed.

And anything that begins to exist MUST have a cause.

Evidence? Because… Oh, fill in the blanks.

It’s just plain common sense and logic.

So far it is all just empty assertion. ‘Logic’ in particular implies stated axioms and an explicit argument.

 

[PRmerger]

Evidence? Because a lot of scientists seem happy to entertain the possibility that it always existed.

A lot of scientists claim lots of things.

Some scientists even are skeptical about global warming

Go figure.

forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/#33ab67e3171b

 

[PRmerger]

Science tells us that the universe began to exist.

And so does Philosophy.

And anything that begins to exist MUST have a cause.

It’s just plain common sense and logic.

Evidence? Because a lot of philosophers (ever heard of Thomas Aquinas? ) seem happy to entertain the possibility of an infinite regress, i.e. it always existed.

Does David Hume count?
(He’s kind of a biggie and all that, but, still, maybe you think for some reason he doesn’t qualify as a philosopher).

“An infinite number of real parts of time, passing in succession, and exhausted one after another, appears so evident a contradiction, that no man, one should think, whose judgement is not corrupted, instead of being improved, by the sciences, would ever be able to admit of it.”–David Hume
web.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/web%20publishing/enquiryXIIii.htm

Corrupted judgement.

His words.
Not mine.

(Again. Kind of like Dawkins. We believers have the Trump Card. His words. Not mine.)

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Why is there something rather than nothing?

youtube.com/watch?v=M5n4mJkVivs&list=PLquBwa3OsivsjDZQTtBcWOCa6tyq2p3lk&index=5

 

[PRmerger]

Why is there something rather than nothing?

youtube.com/watch?v=M5n4mJkVivs&list=PLquBwa3OsivsjDZQTtBcWOCa6tyq2p3lk&index=5

Atheistic answer:

I don’t know.

It just is, son. It just is.

Embrace the unknown.

We don’t need to know the answers to everything.

Sometimes “I don’t know” is a perfectly fine answer.

The above answers are acceptable.

Or rather, they* would *be acceptable.

If they weren’t so often made by Science Lovers.

And Science abhors those answers.

 

[DrTaffy]

A lot of scientists claim lots of things.

My point exactly. For that matter, a lot of Catholic Priests claim a lot of things. Such as supporting SSM or burning gays at the stake.

If you are merely asserting that at least some scientists/philosophers assert X, then yawn, so what?

Why not articulate their best (in your opinion) argument?

 

[Solmyr]

My point exactly. For that matter, a lot of Catholic Priests claim a lot of things. Such as supporting SSM or burning gays at the stake.

If you are merely asserting that at least some scientists/philosophers assert X, then yawn, so what?

Why not articulate their best (in your opinion) argument?

Pssst… she does not have any. So instead of actually arguing she only mis-quotes others as “authorities”. And, of course inserts “otiose” GIF-s instead of arguments.

 

[PRmerger]

My point exactly.

Excellent. We are agreed then.

For that matter, a lot of Catholic Priests claim a lot of things. Such as supporting SSM or burning gays at the stake.

Thank goodness we have a Magisterium (that is, a teaching authority) to speak for all things Catholic.

We need not rely on the acts of sinful men who don’t take the medicine offered by the Divine Physician.

If you are merely asserting that at least some scientists/philosophers assert X, then yawn, so what?

Egg-zactly. So what?

Why not articulate their best (in your opinion) argument?

I’ve already articulated the best one:

Why is there something rather than nothing. (The Trump Card of Believers, as Dawkins asserts).

And its corollary: how can something come from nothing.

 

[ynotzap]

First, I would like to ask you to break down your post into paragraphs. It would be easier to follow what you want to say. Please.

I am simply open to God’s existence. That is all I can offer. I am willing to accept him, if he chooses to reveal himself to me. What else can I offer?

God chooses to reveal Himself to all of us, on His terms and not ours, and it is humbling to accept His will, and subject ours, as it should be, we don’t ask God to do it “My Way” but “His Way”. He can do it immediately or in time. He doesn’t need our obedience, it is for our sakes, because it is the truth. To do it My Way is to impose my will upon God, it will never happen, and it shouldn’t
Solmy:

I am sincere. Humility? What is that for? And repentance for what? I never do anything that would go against my ethical principles. So what is there to “repent”?

I take you at your word. Humility is nothing else but living in the truth, that is, we owe our very existence and sustenance to Him, we are totally dependent upon Him for our very life. This concept is the basis of all virtue, spiritual power that comes from the Holy Spirit, holiness, and wholeness. You may not go against your ethical principals, but can you say that you never go against God’s ethical principles? Humility is acknowledging that we don’t know it all, we are limited, and acknowledging what we know. I already mentioned that one’s conscience may not be informed enough, but that’s O.K., it will be after an encounter, one may not even know what sin is. So not knowing, how can one repent.

Solmyr:

Since God is immutable, there is no reason to pray for anything. And so far he did not initiate anything.

What does God’s immutability have to do with no need to pray? That prayer will change His mind? Did you ever consider that your prayer might already be in His mind or that you will not pray. He is Omniscient, all knowing He knows what you will do, and He will grant your will either way, that’s what free will is all about. You see God forces His will on no one, we must want Him, love Him for who He is. If someone didn’t want you, meaning you don’t accept or love that person, would you force yourself on that person, you would grant that person his desire and probably walk away, drop out of that person’s life.

Solmyr:

Well, he certainly did not do it with me.

If He went to all the trouble to send HIs Son to redeem you and all of us, and being the Son of God, took on human flesh and blood, and suffered by being tortured and giving up His life for us, do you really think that He will never grant you an encounter with Him against such a sacrifice as He has made, even becoming man, and humbling Himself to the sacrifice of the cross, think again. The fact that you have not experienced an encounter yet does not mean you never will, or that He does not will to give it to you.

 

[DrTaffy]

DrTaffy;13634885:

PRmerger;13634814:

A lot of scientists claim lots of things.

My point exactly.
Excellent. We are agreed then.

Well, no. Your assertion was that “Science tells us that the universe began to exist” - quite a different beastie from “some scientists tell us that …”

Thank goodness we have a Magisterium (that is, a teaching authority) to speak for all things Catholic.

Well, only those ‘Catholics’ who agree with you. Which rather contradicts the meaning of ‘Catholic’.

The assertions of dissident Catholic priests are just as representative of Catholicism as the opinions of dissenting scientists are representative of all Science. As you claimed.

I’ve already articulated the best one:

Why is there something rather than nothing.

Why shouldn’t there be? There are infinite ways for something to exist, only one for absolutely nothing to exist. Indeed, what does it mean for something to ‘exist’ ? In the many world interpretation of QM, for example? When you invoke your get out clause for ‘God’, why does that only apply for a sentient supernatural mind existing without a body, space or time, but not for “the laws of physics and logic” (to pick one example)?

(The Trump Card of Believers, as Dawkins asserts).

No he doesn’t. As already pointed out, he merely refers to you lot believing that it us a trump card (although you run screaming to avoid having to defend that point of view) - he himself asserts that it shrivels in the face of Krauss’ arguments.

And its corollary: how can something come from nothing.

Define what you mean by that, and show how the atheist point of view requires it yet yours does not.

 

[PRmerger]

What does God’s immutability have to do with no need to pray? That prayer will change His mind? Did you ever consider that your prayer might already be in His mind or that you will not pray.

One of the reasons we pray is because it gives us, as Blaise Pascal said, the Dignity of Causality.

God has given us the sublime gift of being able to actually CAUSE events by our prayer.

What a great dignity this is indeed!

So just as turnips won’t magically appear on our plate unless we* physically work*—we plant them and harvest these turnips, and then we get mashed turnips on our plate!

…perhaps Grandma’s cancer won’t be healed magically unless we spiritually work–we pray and then we get Grandma’s cure.