[Dandaman1]

(Original post by tammie123)
So how is it possible that a whole universe arose from nothing? If that is the assertion that you're making then that would mean that you accept that there's a small probability that an elephant can just materialise in the middle of the streets out of nowhere. Do you accept that? Just as there's no evidence to prove my idea of God there is also no evidence to disprove it. I just think my theory of God explains how he came into existance because we can acknowledge that he has always been there as he is an infinite cycle. He doesn't necessarily have to be 'energy' as such, but like I stated in my previous post I believe that his form is an unimaginable one, not that of a human.

While in quantum mechanics it is technically possible for something to arise from nothing, a universe-from-nothing is not the generally held view of the natural origin of the universe. The Big Bang for example was an expansion of a singularity, i.e. not nothing. It is also possible that the universe has always existed (in one form or another).

Not being able to disprove something should lend no credence to it - you can't disprove the magic ghost in my attic , but this shouldn't be a reason to believe me when I say it's really there; I need proof of it.

[ccfcadam36]

I am not a religious person and I believe in the big bang theory but in my view there could have been a greater form of life that exists in this universe that put life on our planet. I only believe this could be possible due to how vast the universe is and I find it difficult to believe that we are the most complex form of life in the universe


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[Hypocrism]

(Original post by tammie123)
So how is it possible that a whole universe arose from nothing? If that is the assertion that you're making then that would mean that you accept that there's a small probability that an elephant can just materialise in the middle of the streets out of nowhere. Do you accept that? Just as there's no evidence to prove my idea of God there is also no evidence to disprove it. I just think my theory of God explains how he came into existance because we can acknowledge that he has always been there as he is an infinite cycle. He doesn't necessarily have to be 'energy' as such, but like I stated in my previous post I believe that his form is an unimaginable one, not that of a human.

Ridiculous. Firstly we don't comprehend nothing - we no nothing about its properties - so are in no position to say that outside our universe, the same laws apply. Logic might not apply, conservation of matter/energy might not apply. So there's nothing to say that we can't cause the universe to occur out of nothing.

In addition, you ignore the possibility that the universe has existed infinitely, in which case, it needs no creator, it is just something that is and always has been.

[tammie123]

(Original post by Hypocrism)
Ridiculous. Firstly we don't comprehend nothing - we no nothing about its properties - so are in no position to say that outside our universe, the same laws apply. Logic might not apply, conservation of matter/energy might not apply. So there's nothing to say that we can't cause the universe to occur out of nothing.

In addition, you ignore the possibility that the universe has existed infinitely, in which case, it needs no creator, it is just something that is and always has been.

If the universe has always existed, then the same laws that apply in our universe now must also apply to that 'nothing' that used to be our universe. And if it has always existed, then what caused it to suddenly expand 14.6 billion years ago?

[Hypocrism]

(Original post by tammie123)
If the universe has always existed, then the same laws that apply in our universe now must also apply to that 'nothing' that used to be our universe. And if it has always existed, then what caused it to suddenly expand 14.6 billion years ago?

If it's always existed, there was no "nothing" before the universe. One theory is that the universe is in an infinite loop of expand -> contract -> expand etc.

[Gofre]

(Original post by tammie123)
So how is it possible that a whole universe arose from nothing? If that is the assertion that you're making then that would mean that you accept that there's a small probability that an elephant can just materialise in the middle of the streets out of nowhere. Do you accept that? Just as there's no evidence to prove my idea of God there is also no evidence to disprove it. I just think my theory of God explains how he came into existance because we can acknowledge that he has always been there as he is an infinite cycle. He doesn't necessarily have to be 'energy' as such, but like I stated in my previous post I believe that his form is an unimaginable one, not that of a human.

What I believe is irrelevant, you completely missed the point I was making, that to assert everything has a creator/cause except god is a fallacy. I don't know how the universe was created, I was just pointing out the flaw in your argument.

Your theory is not a theory without evidence.

[Keckers]

(Original post by tammie123)
And if it has always existed, then what caused it to suddenly expand 14.6 billion years ago?

The expansion was before time. So asking what caused the singularity to not expand before (a term with implies something changed state over time) the big bang makes no sense; since the big bang started time. Asking what came before the big bang (and therefore time) is like asking what is taller than height, it doesn't mean anything.

[Lord Hysteria]

(Original post by Dandaman1)
While in quantum mechanics it is technically possible for something to arise from nothing, a universe-from-nothing is not the generally held view of the natural origin of the universe. The Big Bang for example was an expansion of a singularity, i.e. not nothing. It is also possible that the universe has always existed (in one form or another).

Not being able to disprove something should lend no credence to it - you can't disprove the magic ghost in my attic , but this shouldn't be a reason to believe me when I say it's really there; I need proof of it.

Haven't developments of M-Theory really changed the way we see the big bang. From my understanding, it seems terribly uneventful ...

[Newday]

I was trying to answer this question for a long time. At some point I realised that it doesn't matter, I just started shifting my goals. I'm not living for a god, I'm just living for the fun of it.

[Fingersmith]

(Original post by Newday)
I was trying to answer this question for a long time. At some point I realised that it doesn't matter, I just started shifting my goals. I'm not living for a god, I'm just living for the fun of it.

True. If there is an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent god, he certainly doesn't need affirmation from a self important species of clever primate. Believe in a god, or the tooth fairy or a magic ghost in the attic if you choose; it makes no difference except to you and your motivation.

[MrBlueMo0n]

Can I tie in other arguments about different Bible teachings? If they are wrong then something is wrong with the whole god thing.

People say that Jesus sacrificed himself, for us. How? He died on the cross... So did others... So how is it for us, and what difference would it have made if he wasn't sacrificed? Maybe 'god' is angry with us because the entity lost it's only son. Well, why not just skip the sacrifice, it wouldn't be that hard for for 'god'!

[wilko1991]

I didn't want to start a new thread because I am sure this has been discussed a million times before. However I was wondering how smart intelligent thinking people can believe in God? I am not an fundamentalist atheist but I struggle to understand how so many can people can believe in something that there is little chance and no evidence of being true. My mum goes to church every week and she is fairly smart. I just don't understand how she can believe in a God? I'd like to make it clear I am not slagging off this view but I really don't understand it.

My mum often said she has "faith" but what does that even mean? I am amazed by the whole universe and world and there is many aspects that we don't understand of it. However this doesn't mean that you have to "fill in the blanks" by what is, meaning no disrespect to religious folk, a human creation.

[chickenonsteroids]

(Original post by wilko1991)
I didn't want to start a new thread because I am sure this has been discussed a million times before. However I was wondering how smart intelligent thinking people can believe in God? I am not an fundamentalist atheist but I struggle to understand how so many can people can believe in something that there is little chance and no evidence of being true. My mum goes to church every week and she is fairly smart. I just don't understand how she can believe in a God? I'd like to make it clear I am not slagging off this view but I really don't understand it.

My mum often said she has "faith" but what does that even mean? I am amazed by the whole universe and world and there is many aspects that we don't understand of it. However this doesn't mean that you have to "fill in the blanks" by what is, meaning no disrespect to religious folk, a human creation.

How much reading have you done into philosophical theism?

[Pink lipstick]

I believe he does.

[WhatsHisFace]

(Original post by chickenonsteroids)
How much reading have you done into philosophical theism?

Most philosophical theists are dualists, believing that the mind and body are two separate things. Modern science is closing the gap between the two, and it's fair to say that there will come a time where this philosophy doesn't hold true, possibly in our lifetime. The only other version of philosophical theism that I'm aware of is "evolution can't possibly be true", which is a very lazy way of arriving at the conclusion that God exists.

[chickenonsteroids]

(Original post by WhatsHisFace)
Most philosophical theists are dualists, believing that the mind and body are two separate things. Modern science is closing the gap between the two, and it's fair to say that there will come a time where this philosophy doesn't hold true, possibly in our lifetime. The only other version of philosophical theism that I'm aware of is "evolution can't possibly be true", which is a very lazy way of arriving at the conclusion that God exists.

I don't get your point. You can't really attack the point that dualism is false then say god doesn't exist. Philosophical theism isn't constrained to creationism and dualism.

[WhatsHisFace]

(Original post by chickenonsteroids)
I don't get your point. You can't really attack the point that dualism is false then say god doesn't exist. Philosophical theism isn't constrained to creationism and dualism.

You're absolutely right, however Darwinian evolution as well as current theories for the origins of life/ the universe explain our world well enough to not have to throw a god into the picture.

Not to mention that most organized religions do in fact base their beliefs on dualism and creationism, but like you said it isn't required for belief in a diety.

[chickenonsteroids]

(Original post by WhatsHisFace)
You're absolutely right, however Darwinian evolution as well as current theories for the origins of life/ the universe explain our world well enough to not have to throw a god into the picture.

Not to mention that most organized religions do in fact base their beliefs on dualism and creationism, but like you said it isn't required for belief in a diety.

Not necessarily. God could be involved in our world even with the theory of evolution being correct.

Philosophical theism doesn't really need to bother itself with the views of organised religion. It attempts to establish that a theistic god exists and the religion bit comes afterwards.

[WhatsHisFace]

(Original post by chickenonsteroids)
Not necessarily. God could be involved in our world even with the theory of evolution being correct.

Philosophical theism doesn't really need to bother itself with the views of organised religion. It attempts to establish that a theistic god exists and the religion bit comes afterwards.

Would you care to state your reasoning for what God would be needed to be involved in our world to explain current theories? Apart from abiogenesis, as I'm sure that has been debated enough in this thread.

[chickenonsteroids]

(Original post by WhatsHisFace)
Would you care to state your reasoning for what God would be needed to be involved in our world to explain current theories? Apart from abiogenesis, as I'm sure that has been debated enough in this thread.

I just don't understand the leap of logic that states, evolution is true therefore a theistic god is false. How does that work?