I know all about the first cause paradox but as Stephen Hawking once said, "The Universe just is" In an infinite universe, there is no beginning. There was no actual starting point. Of course for us, we live in the most recent "cycle" of life for the universe. That the big bang is just the most current "birth". That the universe is in an infinite series of expansions and contractions. If this was really the case, how can you have a creator? When there is no need for one.
2006-08-19 16:55:30 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Another question, why does there have to be a creator?
2006-08-19 17:01:11 · update #1
I don't think you can hypothesize a physical universe of infinite age. No matter how many "cycles" our universe had been through, it would still be ruled by physical laws, one of which is time. God is spirit; He lives outside of time. No physical laws apply to Him, because He invented them.
2006-08-19 17:12:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your FAITH in Hawking is impressive. It is odd that the same people who often criticize believers for not being able to prove the existence of God, then so willingly accept a theory that not only cannot be proved, but which will surely have to change again and again and again. Hawking's theory is B.S. It is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. When ID proponents used the laws of science to refute the prevalent scientific theory, the champion of all atheist dreamed up this latest scheme. but it is not based on anything more than FAITH. At least our side admits it.
2006-08-19 17:08:55 · answer #2 · answered by unicorn 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
To say the 'Universe just is' is to give up on all probability. In my opinion, that is. If you believe in science then all things have an origin. There are things that we will probably never figure out but there is no reason to simply say there is no answer- and therefore no creator.
You could say the will to believe without physical proof is your ultimate test to overcome when weighing in the existence of God. Which is why we call it 'faith'.
2006-08-19 17:05:19 · answer #3 · answered by Sheyenne M 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I like Hawking, but many physicists suspect "there IS NO infinite anything", other than in human concepts, such as math
things are in patterns ... yet you dont see an infinite ocean, or an infinitely old cloud, or an infinite rock ... why should the universe itself be any different?
let me add ... contrary to what ken ham (above) says, belief in god is not "logical" ... any physicist will tell you that.
christians operate in FAITH for their beliefs, not "evidense" ...thats fine! .. lets just NOT mix the two up
2006-08-19 17:04:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it really is strictly the position faith turns right into a detriment to technology, at the same time as those of religion call for that questions be spoke back through their faith and that clinical learn might want to end. At it really is center, it really is taking earnings of the logical fallacy of puzzling the unexplained with the unexplanable. In different words, it assumes that because that 40-60% of the universe is lacking that it seriously isn't got here upon. It receives taken slightly further and concludes that because the 40-60% seriously isn't got here upon, that it really is "data" that their faith (and easily their faith) is a common reality. it really is this form of wondering that held decrease back clinical progression for thus long. imagine of the position we'd want to be if medical doctors nevertheless held that ailment is led to through sin. the classic lifespan might want to nevertheless be 30 years, baby mortality might want to be very extreme, we'd want to conflict through from many more desirable minor (and curable) diseases. Even the fundamentalists take earnings of clinical progression on some factor.
2016-11-26 19:16:47 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There doesn't have to be a beginning, or a creator. Humans have a nasty capacity for the need to come up with questions and put answers to them. Its a good mental exercise if you can focus on the right questions.
2006-08-19 17:03:58 · answer #6 · answered by Billy W 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Theists could still claim that it's a timeless, infinite "god" that makes this whole thing work.
Nope, "god as creator" is not falsifiable, and therefore creation is not by definition scientific.
2006-08-19 17:10:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would not prove the nonexistence of a god, because theists would still claim that god is what sustains the universe and is in that sense its perpetual creator.
2006-08-19 17:00:44 · answer #8 · answered by lenny 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
there were couple of theories about evolution of life, earth and about this planet , once we admit those theories then we will be at the stage to think about , that every thing some 1 some where must create that the invisible power is must be GOD that's all i think about it
2006-08-19 17:07:00 · answer #9 · answered by RAMBO 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Has it ever occurred to you that the "Creator" is simply that which is? If you appreciate that existence exists, and that you exist, you should say "thanks", even if you don't know the exact origins or nature of the universe.
2006-08-19 17:07:37 · answer #10 · answered by presidentofallantarctica 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋