User Tag List

First 1050585960616270 Last

Results 591 to 600 of 743

  1. #591
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    I see your "who made the big bang" and raise you a "who made god?"
    A rather silly question since God is the unmoved mover, the first cause. If somebody made God than God isn't really God, and then the question becomes who created the somebody who created "God", and then who created them as well. You're inviting infinite regress.

  2. #592
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Yes, I agree. I'm saying that it's exactly as silly an 'argument' as "who made the big bang?".

    So they cancel each other out, in a manner of speaking.

    edit: being "transcendent and mysterious" is certainly not an argument for increased plausibility by any stretch of the imagination. That's nearly the opposite of occam's razor, in fact. I'm not sure how you would go about quantifying the plausibility of god anyway.
    -end of thread-

  3. #593
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    Yes, I agree. I'm saying that it's exactly as silly an 'argument' as "who made the big bang?".

    So they cancel each other out, in a manner of speaking.
    No they're not the same. "Who made the Big Bang?" is a legitimate metaphysical question; and we can presume the originator of the Big Bang theory, Monsignor Georges Lemaître, asked that very question more than a few times.

  4. #594
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,129

    Default

    The more interesting question is: What did god do 'all the time' before he created everything, including space and time?

  5. #595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    Yes, I agree. I'm saying that it's exactly as silly an 'argument' as "who made the big bang?".

    So they cancel each other out, in a manner of speaking.

    edit: being "transcendent and mysterious" is certainly not an argument for increased plausibility by any stretch of the imagination. That's nearly the opposite of occam's razor, in fact. I'm not sure how you would go about quantifying the plausibility of god anyway.
    No, you dont seem to appreciate the fundamental difference in explaining origins as a big bang or act of God, there is a difference and major logical difference, one is caused and therefore not a true explanation of origins, the other is not caused and therefore is.

    Now you might be disatisfied with the divine/celestial/deity explanation but that's not to say its less plausible as an explanation of origins than a physical event which requires a trigger or prelude which escapes attention or explanation.

  6. #596
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    No they're not the same. "Who made the Big Bang?" is a legitimate metaphysical question; and we can presume the originator of the Big Bang theory, Monsignor Georges Lemaître, asked that very question more than a few times.
    Actually, it isn't. "how did the big bang happen and what did the universe look like before that?" is a legitimate metaphysical question - the one you mentioned presupposes that it was in fact made by an entity, which isn't the only possible explanation. Not knowing the answer doesn't prove that there's a god involved! We may not even have the intellectual capacity to ever understand the true form of the universe.

    Because a bacteria can't understand that the world revolved around the sun, does it mean that there's a god changing the environment from day to night?

    So they are, if not the same, equivalent levels of silliness.
    -end of thread-

  7. #597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    The more interesting question is: What did god do 'all the time' before he created everything, including space and time?
    Which presupposes the existence of time doesnt it? Without sun, moon, stars or any other reference point is there such a thing as time? You sure cant track its passage, the question itself lends itself to all kinds of anthropomorphic mistakes.

  8. #598

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    Actually, it isn't. "how did the big bang happen and what did the universe look like before that?" is a legitimate metaphysical question - the one you mentioned presupposes that it was in fact made by an entity, which isn't the only possible explanation.

    So they are, if not the same, equivalent levels of silliness.
    There's a value judgement to suppose that either question is silly, which I'll not get into, you've not succeeded in making clear why there is equivalence though. Simply because they relate to the same question, ie origins, does not mean they are equivalent, its not a different way of phrasing the same question.

  9. #599
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    Actually, it isn't. "how did the big bang happen and what did the universe look like before that?" is a legitimate metaphysical question - the one you mentioned presupposes that it was in fact made by an entity, which isn't the only possible explanation.
    Yes it is legitimate, you're trying to figure out who or what the first cause is and possibly its nature. I notice often in these discussions people don't so much dispute the existence of a first cause(which is necessary in order for the universe to exist), they just complain about terming the first cause "God", which is a matter of petty semantics.

    Not knowing the answer doesn't prove that there's a god involved!
    Who said that it was?

    We may not even have the intellectual capacity to ever understand the true form of the universe.
    Ironically that's the same thing St. Thomas Aquinas said; there's more than enough evidence of God's existence in the universe but man has limited capacity to understand it all.

  10. #600
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    I'm not going to argue since it's just going to go in circles (much like both of those questions would). There's no point.

    I don't know why I even open these threads.

    As tempted as I am to keep trying to explain my point because "someone is WRONG on the internet!!!!1111" I have work to do.
    -end of thread-

Similar Threads

  1. Let's see how good you guys are
    By Anamalech in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 07-15-2010, 12:50 AM
  2. I don't know how much more I can take.
    By Haphazard in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: 05-20-2010, 11:15 PM
  3. I really don't know how I feel about this...
    By Wade Wilson in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-08-2009, 07:21 PM
  4. Let's see how this goes...
    By whiteraven in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-15-2007, 08:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO