Thought Experiment

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: Fonceai Exactly. You never look at the middle domino and say "that one caused the next one to fall". You always look for that first domino. If that first domino isn't a being of some kind, then a being didn't create the universe.

You have created food, yes?

You are a middle domino in the process that led to that food's creation. That does not mean that you did not create the food.

[Jack]

I can't create food. I can use that which already exists to make a meal, but I can't initially cause food to be created. If I want meat, I can kill a pre-existing animal and cook it. I can't make that animal appear out of thin air for my pleasure.

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: Isherwood I can't create food. I can use that which already exists to make a meal, but I can't initially cause food to be created. If I want meat, I can kill a pre-existing animal and cook it. I can't make that animal appear out of thin air for my pleasure.

Well...

That is a matter of semantics. If I build I house, I would feel comfortable saying that I created it out of existing materials.


Personally, I do not believe in entities that can create something from nothing - just as I do not believe in a first cause for the same reason.

[Jack]

Since the subject is gods, then we should use create in its theological sense, to make something out of nothing. Nearly every modern god I'm aware of is postulated as a first cause, the creator of all that is. This would suppose its ability to create something out of nothing while at the same time failing to account for the pre-creation presence of the god itself.

I do not believe in entities that can create something from nothing - just as I do not believe in a first cause for the same reason.

I would agree. Yet this could easily be credited to our limited imaginations and inability to conceive of such a thing. We only know in our current universe we have yet to discover a way to create something from nothing. Energy and matter are neither created or destroyed, they just change states.

[Kamehameha34]

Quote by: Isherwood Since the subject is gods, then we should use create in its theological sense, to make something out of nothing. Nearly every modern god I'm aware of is postulated as a first cause, the creator of all that is. This would suppose its ability to create something out of nothing while at the same time failing to account for the pre-creation presence of the god itself.

Ok, and what is our universe?

Our universe is a collection of energy and matter.

All a god would have needed to do to "create" our universe is take existing energy and matter and make it a "collection".

I could get into a semantical tennis match, but I'd prefer not to define the concepts we're talking about into impossibility. In doing that, we're talking about another concept. This thread is about the one that I proposed, and if you want to change the words surrounding the OP, then don't apply it to the topic of the thread.

I would agree. Yet this could easily be credited to our limited imaginations and inability to conceive of such a thing. We only know in our current universe we have yet to discover a way to create something from nothing. Energy and matter are neither created or destroyed, they just change states.

Not only would energy and matter need to arise out of nothing for "singularity" to be accurate - effects would need to be able to exist without a cause.

[Jack]

All a god would have needed to do to "create" our universe is take existing energy and matter...

So energy and matter pre-exist this god?

This thread is about the one that I proposed

We already mentioned the flaws in the OP proposition.

[Kamehameha34]

Quote by: Isherwood So energy and matter pre-exist this god?

All I've said is that, according to the laws darts has cited, energy and matter would have to pre-exist the god's creation of our universe.

We already mentioned the flaws in the OP proposition.

Can you read replies?

[Jack]

Can you read replies?

Can you understand I didn't accept them?

energy and matter would have to pre-exist the god's creation of our universe.

So this god creates universes one at a time, and at different times?

[Fonceai]

The replies suck.

If God is one of a series of events that result in the creation of the universe, then God didn't "create" the universe, God is just one of many steps.

But you also defined God as having created the universe.

That only means God is the cause (one cause) and the universe was created (one effect).

The two are clearly contradictory from even a logical standpoint.

Sorry, Captain Chaos, I don't accept that kind of loose fluff in an opening post.

[Kamehameha34]

Quote by: Isherwood Can you understand I didn't accept them?

Cite the flaw, and the reply, and what you didn't accept about it. Don't continue on saying that you've "cited the flaws".

So this god creates universes one at a time, and at different times?

How do you get this from what I said?

[Fonceai]

Quote by: Kame Cite the flaw, and the reply, and what you didn't accept about it. Don't continue on saying that you've "cited the flaws".

The answer to this is in my posts.

[Jack]

Cite the flaw

We did. If you missed it or don't agree with us, too bad. I'm not reposting it. Go look.

How do you get this from what I said?

If energy and matter pre-exist this creator god, and you refer to our universe, then other universes made of energy and matter supposedly exist. Who created them? Who created the energy and matter?

[Kamehameha34]

Quote by: Isherwood We did. If you missed it or don't agree with us, too bad. I'm not reposting it. Go look.

Then I can only assume that it's been accurately refuted.

If energy and matter pre-exist this creator god, and you refer to our universe, then other universes made of energy and matter supposedly exist. Who created them? Who created the energy and matter?

1. I never said that energy and matter pre-exist this "god", I said that according to the laws Darts cited, it would have had to pre-exist our universe.

2. It matters not who created the energy and matter. All we know is that it exists. It could have existed forever - I'm not presuming to know. My supposition has only to do with the creation of our universe.

3. If other universi exist, then according to this proof, "god(s)" played a part in their existence.

[Kamehameha34]

Quote by: Fonceai The answer to this is in my posts.

And the refutations to the flaws you cited are in my posts.

Great. Glad that's settled.

[Jack]

universi is not a English word. It's universes.

Then I can only assume that it's been accurately refuted.

You lack grounds for that assumption.

[Kamehameha34]

Quote by: Isherwood universi is not a English word. It's universes.

It feels weird typing "universes". I'm going to say universi.

You lack grounds for that assumption.

Prove it.

[Jack]

Then every time you say universi, you're saying all together in Latin.

[Kamehameha34]

You know what I'm referring to.

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: Fonceai The replies suck. If God is one of a series of events that result in the creation of the universe, then God didn't "create" the universe, God is just one of many steps. But you also defined God as having created the universe. That only means God is the cause (one cause) and the universe was created (one effect). The two are clearly contradictory from even a logical standpoint. Sorry, Captain Chaos, I don't accept that kind of loose fluff in an opening post.

Fonce, have you created anything?

[Jack]

You know what I'm referring to.

And here I thought you were Mister Literal-Definition guy.
Well then, all those times you refused to accept my definition of a concept, you knew what I meant.