Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Secular Elation · 05-15-2002, 12:05 PM

Returning to an argument from a theist in a previous thread...

Quote:

Atheists have also countered the cosmological argument by claiming that the universe is eternal (occasionally invoking the long-debunked Steady State Theory to make their case), and therefore doesn't require a first cause to account for its existence...

...if time stretches infinitely into the past, then we never would have arrived at this moment today. For to reach this moment today, we would have had to pass through an infinite series, which is impossible.

This argument backfires on god. If god is eternal, then he has always existed, so he has existed an infinite amount of time before the univserse began. Therefore, using the theist's logic above, god could not have reached the point in time where he created the universe, for to do so he would have to "pass through an infinite series, which is impossible."

To refute this, the universe would indeed have to be eternal or without diving cause. Or, god is not eternal, and came into existence at some point. But then what is his first cause? If god exists, he is incomprehensible to us. God would indeed need an explanation for himself, but one cannot be concocted unless he himself came out and delineated to humanity the details of his own being. This, of course, has yet to occur. Doesn't look like it will occur anytime soon, either.

Therefore, it is rational to reject god.

[ May 15, 2002: Message edited by: Secular Elation ]

Ron Singh · 05-15-2002, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Secular Elation:

This argument backfires on god. If god is eternal, then he has always existed, so he has existed an infinite amount of time before the univserse began. Therefore, using the theist's logic above, god could not have reached the point in time where he created the universe, for to do so he would have to "pass through an infinite series, which is impossible."

To refute this, the universe would indeed have to be eternal or without diving cause. Or, god is not eternal, and came into existence at some point. But then what is his first cause? If god exists, he is incomprehensible to us. God would indeed need an explanation for himself, but one cannot be concocted unless he himself came out and delineated to humanity the details of his own being. This, of course, has yet to occur. Doesn't look like it will occur anytime soon, either.

Therefore, it is rational to reject god.

Trying to be philisophical, I'll say you commited a ad ignonasea paramecium fallacy. 'Time' is dependant on the universe. Since this is not an accurate term, I'll dubb it change. Change is dependant upon physical matter. Ergo, there is no use in considering 'time', or more accurately change before the universe. Change is an aspect of naturalism, but naturalism is based on the universe. God, being a being, and doing nothing but being, as far as I know, before the universe, time can be considered a point. If you're familiar with basic geometry, this would be analogous the point of a ray. Ofcourse, you can not have a ray without without a point.

Now, since I have posited a scenerio that evades your supposed contradictions, it is now your turn. Now you get to tell me how it is possible for teh Universe to be eternal.

Quote:

Therefore, it is rational to reject god.

What is it with atheists and the term 'rational'?
<a href="http://www.aiksaurus.com/online/index.php?lookup=rational" target="_blank">The truth will set you free</a>. It is not rational to REJECT God. You may say that it can be considered rational to have a lack of faith in God, or belief in God. To reject that of what you have no evidence against is itself not rational.

~Your friendly neighborhood 15yr old Sikh.

Clutch · 05-15-2002, 01:07 PM

Is it churlish to quote oneself? I've explained this a couple of times before, but apparently nothing is less desired than a straightforward point.

Quote:

There is no problem with the idea that the past is infinite. Supposing the series of past events to be structured like the natural numbers, this is just the view that, before each event, there was exactly one immediately preceding event. (We can individuate events to make this so; it isn't a thesis about the discreteness of time.)

Here's the important thing about this series of past events/instants: Every member of the series is at most finitely distant from the present. So the thesis that the past is infinite does not entail a completed infinity of events before the present. No element of the series is more than a finite number of instants from now; hence the past contains no instant -- no instant -- such that traversing the "distance" between that event and the present requires completing an infinity.

Or, in brief,

Quote:

The issue is whether the infinite-past thesis implies the existence of an event or instant with the following property: getting from that event to the present required the completion of an infinite series of instants. There is *no* such event or instant, however, on the infinite-past thesis. So, no problem.

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas · 05-15-2002, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Secular Elation:
Returning to an argument from a theist in a previous thread...

This argument backfires on god. If god is eternal, then he has always existed, so he has existed an infinite amount of time before the univserse began. Therefore, using the theist's logic above...

The obvious thing to point out here is the commonly held viewpoint that God exists outside (or transcendant of) time.

Time IS part of the universe he created. Thus
saying 'God existed an infinite amount of time' and 'god could not have reached the point in time where he created the universe' are meaningless.

Thoughts and comments welcomed,

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Automaton · 05-15-2002, 03:11 PM

What about heaven? Is there time in heaven? Isn't heaven defined as infinite (temporal) existence with God? If what sikh claims is true, and time is dependent on the universe, then does that mean heaven is in the universe?

Vorkosigan · 05-15-2002, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sikh:

What is it with atheists and the term 'rational'?
<a href="http://www.aiksaurus.com/online/index.php?lookup=rational" target="_blank">The truth will set you free</a>. It is not rational to REJECT God. You may say that it can be considered rational to have a lack of faith in God, or belief in God. To reject that of what you have no evidence against is itself not rational.

~Your friendly neighborhood 15yr old Sikh.

Hi sikh,

In hypothesis testing, it is normal and rational to speak of rejecting a hypothesis. Therefore, it is normal and rational to reject "gods" -- the hypothesis that there are such beings.

Vorkosigan

Ron Singh · 05-15-2002, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Automaton:
What about heaven? Is there time in heaven? Isn't heaven defined as infinite (temporal) existence with God? If what sikh claims is true, and time is dependent on the universe, then does that mean heaven is in the universe?

No, it just means that there is no 'time' in heaven. This isn't the heaven where there's a bunch of clouds or angels playing harps. It's a conjunction of mind and soul with God. Just how god transcends time, those in heaven do too.

~Your friendly neighborhood 15 yr old Sikh

Secular Elation · 05-16-2002, 07:04 AM

Trying to be philisophical, I'll say you commited a ad ignonasea paramecium fallacy. 'Time' is dependant on the universe. Since this is not an accurate term, I'll dubb it change. Change is dependant upon physical matter. Ergo, there is no use in considering 'time', or more accurately change before the universe. Change is an aspect of naturalism, but naturalism is based on the universe. God, being a being, and doing nothing but being, as far as I know, before the universe, time can be considered a point. If you're familiar with basic geometry, this would be analogous the point of a ray. Ofcourse, you can not have a ray without without a point.

1)Well, perhaps I wasn't attempting to be philosophical.

But really, the post was comprised of my initial, amateur thoughts on the theist argument.

2)If time before the universe is to be considered merely a point, then how can we know how long this god existed before the beginning of the universe? Why wouldn't he create the universe the moment he began? But if he is eternal, then this couldn't be. Why would he exists on a 'point' before time, waiting to create his universe?

Now you get to tell me how it is possible for teh Universe to be eternal.

I do not contend that the universe is eternal. I mentioned it in my post as simply something to add. I think I've heard something about a 'big crush' which will be the opposite of the big bang. Whether this is legitimate I do not know.

Time IS part of the universe he created. Thus
saying 'God existed an infinite amount of time' and 'god could not have reached the point in time where he created the universe' are meaningless.

Yes, but if he created the universe, then he existed before it was created, and therefore there is distance of 'time' to measure between the point in which he began to the point in which he made the universe.

But it is always said that god is eternal. Well, if the universe is not eternal, and he is, then he has existed infinitely before the universe began. It doesn't make sense.

No, it just means that there is no 'time' in heaven. This isn't the heaven where there's a bunch of clouds or angels playing harps. It's a conjunction of mind and soul with God. Just how god transcends time, those in heaven do too.

So, if I went to heaven, there is no length of time? So I cannot stand around in heaven and count five minutes of passing time?

What's always been absurd to me is the superpowers of god. Transcending time, matter, etc. I know one thing he can't do--violate mathematics. For example, 2+2=5 is impossible, even god could not accomplish that.

tronvillain · 05-16-2002, 08:05 PM

Well, I always argue that there is ultimately no problem with an infinite regress, so arguments against either atheism or theism based upon it fail. It is possible for the universe to be eternal in the sense that time is a part of the universe, and the universe itself exists as a four dimensional object.

Kenny · 05-16-2002, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Secular Elation:
If time before the universe is to be considered merely a point, then how can we know how long this god existed before the beginning of the universe?

If God transcends time, then the question of how long God existed before the universe is meaningless. To ask it is to make a category mistake. Time is not a category that applies.

Quote:

Originally posted by Secular Elation:
Returning to an argument from a theist in a previous thread...

Atheists have also countered the cosmological argument by claiming that the universe is eternal (occasionally invoking the long-debunked Steady State Theory to make their case), and therefore doesn't require a first cause to account for its existence...
...if time stretches infinitely into the past, then we never would have arrived at this moment today. For to reach this moment today, we would have had to pass through an infinite series, which is impossible

Hello Secular Elation. I am a Christian theist, but I agree with you that this argument is flawed, though not for the reasons you think. I think the problem with the this argument is that it assumes that time is something which “passes” or “flows” from one moment to another in a liner fashion. I believe there are good reasons to think this view is false, and the most likely view of time to me would be one that sees every moment in time as simply existing as part of a single space-time manifold with the passing of time being a illusion.

Quote:

This argument backfires on god. If god is eternal, then he has always existed, so he has existed an infinite amount of time before the univserse began.

Actually, when theologians say that God is eternal, they usually don’t mean that God has existed for an infinitely long period of time. They mean that God transcends time all together.

Quote:

Therefore, using the theist's logic above, god could not have reached the point in time where he created the universe, for to do so he would have to "pass through an infinite series, which is impossible"

Actually, God would not need to traverse any amount of time at all. For God, all moments in time could simply be present to His awareness in an eternal subjective present.

I have dealt with these issues in considerable detail on another thread. It’s <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=50&t=000009" target="_blank">here</a> if you are interested.

God Bless,
Kenny

[ May 16, 2002: Message edited by: Kenny ]

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-15-2002, 03:11 PM	#5
Automaton Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 717	What about heaven? Is there time in heaven? Isn't heaven defined as infinite (temporal) existence with God? If what sikh claims is true, and time is dependent on the universe, then does that mean heaven is in the universe?

05-16-2002, 07:04 AM	#8
Secular Elation Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: California Posts: 6,196	Trying to be philisophical, I'll say you commited a ad ignonasea paramecium fallacy. 'Time' is dependant on the universe. Since this is not an accurate term, I'll dubb it change. Change is dependant upon physical matter. Ergo, there is no use in considering 'time', or more accurately change before the universe. Change is an aspect of naturalism, but naturalism is based on the universe. God, being a being, and doing nothing but being, as far as I know, before the universe, time can be considered a point. If you're familiar with basic geometry, this would be analogous the point of a ray. Ofcourse, you can not have a ray without without a point. 1)Well, perhaps I wasn't attempting to be philosophical. But really, the post was comprised of my initial, amateur thoughts on the theist argument. 2)If time before the universe is to be considered merely a point, then how can we know how long this god existed before the beginning of the universe? Why wouldn't he create the universe the moment he began? But if he is eternal, then this couldn't be. Why would he exists on a 'point' before time, waiting to create his universe? Now you get to tell me how it is possible for teh Universe to be eternal. I do not contend that the universe is eternal. I mentioned it in my post as simply something to add. I think I've heard something about a 'big crush' which will be the opposite of the big bang. Whether this is legitimate I do not know. Time IS part of the universe he created. Thus saying 'God existed an infinite amount of time' and 'god could not have reached the point in time where he created the universe' are meaningless. Yes, but if he created the universe, then he existed before it was created, and therefore there is distance of 'time' to measure between the point in which he began to the point in which he made the universe. But it is always said that god is eternal. Well, if the universe is not eternal, and he is, then he has existed infinitely before the universe began. It doesn't make sense. No, it just means that there is no 'time' in heaven. This isn't the heaven where there's a bunch of clouds or angels playing harps. It's a conjunction of mind and soul with God. Just how god transcends time, those in heaven do too. So, if I went to heaven, there is no length of time? So I cannot stand around in heaven and count five minutes of passing time? What's always been absurd to me is the superpowers of god. Transcending time, matter, etc. I know one thing he can't do--violate mathematics. For example, 2+2=5 is impossible, even god could not accomplish that.

05-16-2002, 08:05 PM	#9
tronvillain Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 5,658	Well, I always argue that there is ultimately no problem with an infinite regress, so arguments against either atheism or theism based upon it fail. It is possible for the universe to be eternal in the sense that time is a part of the universe, and the universe itself exists as a four dimensional object.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.