Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 78
  1. #1

    Default Evidence Of Nothing

    What evidence outside of religious text is there that "nothing" has ever existed? Who has ever experienced "nothing"? If "nothing" existed then no longer existed doesnt that mean it was a finite "something" due to it having multiple states - namely, existing vs not?

  2. Sponsored Links


  3. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    The State of Independence
    Posts
    18,463
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lbo[Rv10] View Post
    Except that God (and that being the Lord God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel) has more evidence for His being than the big bang and evolution, aliens and global warming combined ever will.
    Provide the evidence outside of the religious texts that talk about the God of Abraham.
    • The unexamined life is not worth living.
    • Wisdom is knowing how little we know.
    • The arguments stay the same...only the sides making those arguments change.


  4. Sponsored Links


  5. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Age
    56
    Posts
    5,687
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ImRightYoureWrong View Post
    If 'W' always existed and God simply modified it or appended properties to it, did God create 'W'?
    The key here is that this question is not the point of the story. We are looking at key basic concepts here; how did dry land form; how did the seas get into a basin; how did the waters above (where the smart scientists of the day insisted all the rain came from) come to be separated from the salty waters below.

    Creation from nothing is a Greek notion. Out of the void comes the earth; out of the earth comes the sky. (Earth female and Sky is male by the way) and they fool around and from that comes the Titans.

    But in the Babylons started out creation as the combination of salt water and fresh water (Apsū (or Abzu) who represents fresh water and Tiamat representing oceanic waters) and this is the more proper standard for looking at the story in Genesis.

    So let's look at the executive summary of the Enūma Eliš. You got this fresh water and this chaotic water. Some gods were spontaneously generated and lived in the chaotic water and did party hearty to an extent that the the chaotic water and the fresh water were pissed. The fresh water wanted to kill them, but the chaotic water but the chaotic water warns the gods and one apparently uses his magic to kill the fresh water and become the chief god; has a son who is given the wind to play with and makes even more of a racket so that none of the gods can get a good night sleep.

    At this point if you think Genesis is confusing ... this is coming from the "scientists" of the middle east at the time. Understanding this before you even consider the story of Genesis is critical here. It's not supposed to be rocket science. It's supposed to be a rebuke to the "smart" guys in the land.


  6. Sponsored Links


  7. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Tornado Alley
    Age
    47
    Posts
    15,635
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ImRightYoureWrong View Post
    You're suggesting the Bible is saying that the universe we live in always existed? If that's the case then there simply is no reason for the personified biblical God. And let's not pretend "the universe can't come from nothing" isn't a staple of Christian religion.
    It sounds like you are referring to the doctrine of Creation Ex-Nihilo. However, if we use some simple logic and the logic goes something like this. If we assume that God is eternal (having always existed) then the premise that something came from nothing is false. Why? Because God is something. And, if God is the Creator, then surely what we call "something" must have come from Him (forgive the non-gender neutral term). Ergo, God is something (having an eternal existence). He is the Prime Mover (first cause) and therefore, everything else originates from that source (God). Which, imo, proves that Creation Ex-Nihilo is either patently false or simply misunderstood and misstated.
    The great enemy of truth is not so much the lie (deliberate, contrived and dishonest) but the myth (persistent, persuasive and unrealistic).

  8. Sponsored Links


  9. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Age
    56
    Posts
    5,687
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JayJay View Post
    Provide the evidence outside of the religious texts that talk about the God of Abraham.
    There are three basic problems here.
    1) The historical connections to the first books of the Bible are not really all that solid so dates are just not there.
    2) People didn't write much about "other people" back then.
    3) People often erased writings when things fell out of favor.

    What we do know is that around 1350BC during the 18th dynasty, Amunhotep IV moved Egypt to a monotheism state and changed his name to Akhenaten. Among the new "sun god" features is the complete lack of human features; Aten was only represented by the disk of the sun.

    Since the timelines tend to be nonexistent, it's impossible to determine cause or effect but with some modern scholars placing the Exodus at 1250 BC, whi(ch falls under the reign of Ramesses II) it might be an interesting indicator of the influence of the moving of the new tribes who brought with them their own tribal god.


  10. Sponsored Links


  11. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    The State of Independence
    Posts
    18,463
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian View Post
    It sounds like you are referring to the doctrine of Creation Ex-Nihilo. However, if we use some simple logic and the logic goes something like this. If we assume that God is eternal (having always existed) then the premise that something came from nothing is false. Why? Because God is something. And, if God is the Creator, then surely what we call "something" must have come from Him (forgive the non-gender neutral term). Ergo, God is something (having an eternal existence). He is the Prime Mover (first cause) and therefore, everything else originates from that source (God). Which, imo, proves that Creation Ex-Nihilo is either patently false or simply misunderstood and misstated.
    But that just puts us back to arguing the premise that the eternal “something” had to be a personified deity, rather than just “existence” or “reality” itself being primary.
    • The unexamined life is not worth living.
    • Wisdom is knowing how little we know.
    • The arguments stay the same...only the sides making those arguments change.


  12. Sponsored Links


  13. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JayJay View Post
    But that just puts us back to arguing the premise that the eternal “something” had to be a personified deity, rather than just “existence” or “reality” itself being primary.
    Yep. And the common reason is....bible says so.

  14. Sponsored Links


  15. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian View Post
    It sounds like you are referring to the doctrine of Creation Ex-Nihilo. However, if we use some simple logic and the logic goes something like this. If we assume that God is eternal (having always existed) then the premise that something came from nothing is false. Why? Because God is something. And, if God is the Creator, then surely what we call "something" must have come from Him (forgive the non-gender neutral term). Ergo, God is something (having an eternal existence). He is the Prime Mover (first cause) and therefore, everything else originates from that source (God). Which, imo, proves that Creation Ex-Nihilo is either patently false or simply misunderstood and misstated.
    Then why do people assert that the nature of our reality requires a personified, conscious deity?

  16. Sponsored Links


  17. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Tornado Alley
    Age
    47
    Posts
    15,635
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ImRightYoureWrong View Post
    Then why do people assert that the nature of our reality requires a personified, conscious deity?
    Well, it beats an impersonal, unconscious deity. IMHO, of course.
    The great enemy of truth is not so much the lie (deliberate, contrived and dishonest) but the myth (persistent, persuasive and unrealistic).

  18. Sponsored Links


  19. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tzor View Post
    The key here is that this question is not the point of the story. We are looking at key basic concepts here; how did dry land form; how did the seas get into a basin; how did the waters above (where the smart scientists of the day insisted all the rain came from) come to be separated from the salty waters below.

    Creation from nothing is a Greek notion. Out of the void comes the earth; out of the earth comes the sky. (Earth female and Sky is male by the way) and they fool around and from that comes the Titans.

    But in the Babylons started out creation as the combination of salt water and fresh water (Apsū (or Abzu) who represents fresh water and Tiamat representing oceanic waters) and this is the more proper standard for looking at the story in Genesis.

    So let's look at the executive summary of the Enūma Eliš. You got this fresh water and this chaotic water. Some gods were spontaneously generated and lived in the chaotic water and did party hearty to an extent that the the chaotic water and the fresh water were pissed. The fresh water wanted to kill them, but the chaotic water but the chaotic water warns the gods and one apparently uses his magic to kill the fresh water and become the chief god; has a son who is given the wind to play with and makes even more of a racket so that none of the gods can get a good night sleep.

    At this point if you think Genesis is confusing ... this is coming from the "scientists" of the middle east at the time. Understanding this before you even consider the story of Genesis is critical here. It's not supposed to be rocket science. It's supposed to be a rebuke to the "smart" guys in the land.
    Why did you snip my post? The question remains, either 'W' is an inherent part of God, or 'W' has always existed in parallel. And it looks like Genesis is just another ancient story of natural events being personified. Just like we don't personify the seas anymore due to more precise and predictable naturalistic frameworks, we also shouldn't jump to personifying the universe, fundamentally, without a good reason.

  20. Sponsored Links


  21. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian View Post
    Well, it beats an impersonal, unconscious deity. IMHO, of course.
    "Beats" by what metric?

  22. Sponsored Links


  23. #41
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Tornado Alley
    Age
    47
    Posts
    15,635
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ImRightYoureWrong View Post
    "Beats" by what metric?
    It was a joke.
    lighten-up-frances_t268.jpg
    The great enemy of truth is not so much the lie (deliberate, contrived and dishonest) but the myth (persistent, persuasive and unrealistic).

  24. Sponsored Links


  25. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christian View Post
    Didn't catch the joke. Was just a general question....

  26. Sponsored Links


  27. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Age
    56
    Posts
    5,687
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ImRightYoureWrong View Post
    Why did you snip my post?
    Because the question is MOOT. Genesis doesn't talk about the creation of the water. It only states that when the world was in this condition that happened.


  28. Sponsored Links


  29. #44
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Cheyenne
    Posts
    4,003
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ImRightYoureWrong View Post
    "Beats" by what metric?
    That of emotion.
    "Let joy and innocence prevail."

  30. Sponsored Links


  31. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tzor View Post
    Because the question is MOOT. Genesis doesn't talk about the creation of the water. It only states that when the world was in this condition that happened.
    That's a complete copout to what I was asking. I was asking about the creation precisely because there was no answer. This whole thread premise is built on the question if there is any evidence that "nothing" can exist. So if Genesis doesn't say whether or not the water was created by God, then a Christian can't make any assumptions about whether or not a universe necessarily requires a creator, yes? Unless you make the assumption that the water was created by God. This isnt a thread about what only Genesis says. Its a thread about the nature of "nothing", if it can exist, and any implications regarding the necessity of a creator. There's a lot more religions and beliefs outside of Genesis. People here seem to act like we are only allowed to talk about the Bible and what it says.

  32. Sponsored Links


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •