The existence of the universe requires a god

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 136 here:

...
The universe could not exist in the form that it is in unless there was an omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient God.
...

For debate:

Please offer some means to confirm the referenced claim is true and factual.

[Athetotheist]

being eternal means that there was no beginning, which means a supernatural entity would have to experience an infinite amount of existence before getting around to creating this universe. But there is no end to infinite existence, so there is no way to get to the moment in it's existence where it creates a universe. Eternal beings can't do something in the middle of their existence because there is no middle to their existence. It's illogical.

That argument assumes that a universe would have to be created. But since there was no beginning to past eternity, there was never a moment before an eternal being could cause a universe to exist.

There is no reason to think that a being that has always existed would automatically be able to create a universe. Why does eternal existence confer that particular ability? For the sake of discussion, why can't we posit that a supernatural entity that has always existed can't create a universe?

Why should we have to?

There is nothing that makes eternal existence a pre-requisite for the ability to create a universe, and there is nothing about creating a universe that requires that the creator of that universe be an eternal being.

Unless it's something we don't know.

If a god knows everything, than it knows the future. If it knows the future, it already knows all the changes to the future. If it already knows all the changes to the future, it can't change the future because it would have already known that. So either it can't change the future (not all powerful), or it can't be all knowing (but can change the future).

Such a being might know all possible changes in the future, but the future could exist as a state of uncertainty until it "collapses" into the concrete present. Beyond that, there wouldn't be any certainty about the future to be known.

[Tcg]

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #1]

You know, if I step out on my front lawn and look down I see blades of grass which are a little bitty bit of the universe. If I step outside at night and look up I see a little bit more of the universe. That is clear evidence of the universe. And yet no matter where I look, this claimed omnipresent God ain't there.

This must be evidence of omnishyness or something. Perhaps it's evidence of omninonexistence. In any case, ain't it odd that the universe, even in its smallest parts, ain't shy at all about displaying its existence. On the other hand, this omnipresent God has to piggyback on the existence of something else given that it is too shy to show itself for itself.


Tcg

[William]

[Replying to Tcg in post #13]

This must be evidence of omnishyness or something. Perhaps it's evidence of omninonexistence. In any case, ain't it odd that the universe, even in its smallest parts, ain't shy at all about displaying its existence. On the other hand, this omnipresent God has to piggyback on the existence of something else given that it is too shy to show itself for itself.

It depends upon the form as to whether one sees things which exist within creation or not. Our forms allow us to see certain things which exist and prevent us from seeing other things which also exist.

Light Is Information.



The idea of "a Creator" and being within "a creation" becomes distorted when theism attempts to explain what said "Creator" 'looks' like, [personality etc] and thus why non-theists ask for evidence to support those images and claim the creator is "shy".

Rather when we understand that it is 'we' who created the creation, and are "hidden" by the creation itself, part of the 'god-game' is in realizing that in order to 'find ourselves' - and once doing so, expand on that understanding of self in relation to the experience that self is having.

[Kenisaw]

being eternal means that there was no beginning, which means a supernatural entity would have to experience an infinite amount of existence before getting around to creating this universe. But there is no end to infinite existence, so there is no way to get to the moment in it's existence where it creates a universe. Eternal beings can't do something in the middle of their existence because there is no middle to their existence. It's illogical.

That argument assumes that a universe would have to be created. But since there was no beginning to past eternity, there was never a moment before an eternal being could cause a universe to exist.

So you are saying that the universe was not created? Somehow I don't think that is what you meant by your first sentence. But, if you are saying that universes don't have to be created, I am in total agreement.

Your second sentence contradicts itself I believe. This is a true statement: If there is no beginning to eternity, there is an eternity of moments before an eternal being could cause a universe to exist. Put another way, if one thing is eternal, and another thing is finite (has a beginning), the eternal thing cannot create the finite thing because the eternal thing will never reach a point in its existence where it can create something that is finite.

There is no reason to think that a being that has always existed would automatically be able to create a universe. Why does eternal existence confer that particular ability? For the sake of discussion, why can't we posit that a supernatural entity that has always existed can't create a universe?

Why should we have to?

Gotta consider all the possibilities, that's why. You claim that an eternal god being would automatically create a universe. I'm pointing out that there's nothing about eternal existence that means you have to create a universe. You do realize that you are limiting your god, right? You are saying that your god has to something because it is eternal. Your god can't decide that it doesn't want to create a universe?

There is nothing that makes eternal existence a pre-requisite for the ability to create a universe, and there is nothing about creating a universe that requires that the creator of that universe be an eternal being.

Unless it's something we don't know.

That's true. So why should we assume being eternal means a universe has to be created, until we do know? We are explaining the existence of this entire universe on the assumption that a creature being eternal makes it create universes. Pretty shaky ground.

If a god knows everything, than it knows the future. If it knows the future, it already knows all the changes to the future. If it already knows all the changes to the future, it can't change the future because it would have already known that. So either it can't change the future (not all powerful), or it can't be all knowing (but can change the future).

Such a being might know all possible changes in the future, but the future could exist as a state of uncertainty until it "collapses" into the concrete present. Beyond that, there wouldn't be any certainty about the future to be known.

If the al knowing being knows everything there can't be any possible futures. There can only be one future, and the god knows exactly what that future is, because it knows all. Uncertainty = not knowing, which doesn't jive with an all knowing being.

[Athetotheist]

Your second sentence contradicts itself I believe. This is a true statement: If there is no beginning to eternity, there is an eternity of moments before an eternal being could cause a universe to exist. Put another way, if one thing is eternal, and another thing is finite (has a beginning), the eternal thing cannot create the finite thing because the eternal thing will never reach a point in its existence where it can create something that is finite.

I should clarify. What I'm saying is that since there was no beginning to eternity, there was no moment before which an eternal being could have been causing a universe to exist. Having always existed, an eternal being could always have been engaged in the act of giving a universe existence, thus said universe wouldn't have to have a beginning either.

There can only be one future

If we "gotta consider all the possibilities", as you say, then we have to consider it possible that there is more than one future, that an omniscient being would know them all and that an omnipotent being would play them all out in a multiverse-sort of way.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 13:

...
Light Is Information

I note your use of the caps there may indicate a concept that goes beyond the mere words, but if not...

Light is electromagnetic radiation that can be seen with the eye (and some man-made devices). It only contains such "information" that we apply to it.

If a photon falls in the forest, and nobody is there to see it, does it make an information?

Sure, we can examine light, and deduce it's properties, but that's just us creating terms, creating our information, based on that bit of light. We can also use light to transmit information, of course.

So I think it's wrong to say that light is information. Except maybe just in a philosophy class.

[Kenisaw]

[Replying to Kenisaw in post #7]

Omniscience: You don't know what you don't know. Explain to me how any supernatural being can be sure, with 100% certainty, that it knows everything. It can't. There is no way to know about the things you don't know about, and no way to be sure that you don't know something. This necessary fact about knowledge means that no matter how much is known, a god creature can never be sure it actually knows all. If it can't be sure it knows all then that is...an unknown! Furthering that, it doesn't know how much it doesn't know. There could me more that it doesn't know than it does know. There's no way to be sure. There's no knowledge gauge (like a gas gauge) with an indicator pointing to "F".

How can a being not know everything if He is omnipresent? If He is at every point in space and at every moment in space from eternity past to eternity future all at the same time He has to know everything. There is no place or no point of time in which He does not exist.

How can a being know that it is everywhere all at the same time? What if there is someplace that the being doesn't know that it doesn't know about? The problem of omnipresence is the same as omniscience. One can't know what it doesn't know. No matter how powerful the being, it can never be sure that it exists everywhere, and that it knows everything, because there could be something it doesn't know and/or someplace that exists that it doesn't exist. This is true no matter what. And, no matter how powerful the being, it can't know how MUCH it doesn't know, or how MANY places exist that it doesn't inhabit.

Omnipresent: Same problem as Omniscience. How can a being know it is everywhere? It can't. It can't know about the places that it isn't present.

We are bound by a single locus because we are creatures of this universe. God does not need space to exist. That is why the Bible even talks about God being made of a different substance than man. God has to be able to exist outside of space and time to have created this universe. If God does not need space to exist then He does not need to exist as a being bound by a single locus. Objects and beings in this universe have to exist with a single locus because they need space and the quantum field in space to exist.

Even if that is all true, no being can be sure that that it knows all there is to know and inhabits every place. This is irrefutable, and necessarily shows that no being, eternal or not, can ever be omniscient or omnipresent.

It's a moot point, but I would still like to ask some questions regarding your statements. How do you know your god doesn't need space to exist? Why is it a requirement that a being has to live outside space and time in order to create a universe?

Eternal: If a being is eternal it can never get to the point in it's existence where it creates a universe. It would take an eternity before it did that, and of course there is no end to eternity. The attempt to sidestep this by claiming that a supernatural being exists in all moments at once isn't logical either. It exists both with the universe existing, and not existing? That is irrational.

Your mathematical argument of infinity is incorrect. The only thing that can cross infinity is infinity. Infinity + or - any number is still infinity. But Infinity - infinity is 0. God has to be infinite to create this universe. God exists in the present tense from infinity past to infinity future. He can see it and experience it all at the same moment.

Although time started with this universe so that is why God also does not need time to be moving to exist, so He can exist at all times.

To be mathematically accurate infinity minus infinity is undefined, not zero. No matter how much eternal existence your god has, it can't reach the amount of existence necessary to create a finite universe with a starting point. An eternal being cannot create a finite universe logically.

You then went on to do the sidestep excuse that I specifically mentioned doesn't work any better, for the reason I already stated. It is also a mathematical conundrum that I just thought about while writing this. If god exists in all of the present tense, that means that it existence is essentially zero. It basically does not exist. This moment in an eternal beings existence can be represented as 1/infinity. 1/infinity is zero. All the present tense moments are the same size sliver of existence (1/infinity), and no matter how many of them there are the summation of all those moments of existence adds up to zero. So existing in the present tense is to exist for, basically, no existence at all.

Omnipotent: At this point a supernatural critter that doesn't know all, isn't everywhere, and isn't eternal can't be considered all powerful either. But even if all knowing was possible, that would still negate being all powerful. A being that knows everything would know what happens in the future, and if it knows what happens in the future than the future cannot be changed, and if the being cant change the future than it can't be all powerful.

The Bible says that God is unchanging. Which would also be a natural result of being omnipresent? He does know the future. To God, the future is happening at the same time the present and the past are happening. And why would He change the future when He created the future at the same time He created the past and the present. This is why it has to be because Einstein's theory of relativity says that the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously.

You may not like the idea of an omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient God but it is not illogical, for the Creator God to exist He has to have these qualities.

If a god is unchanging, you would agree that there is no point to prayer then, correct?

Einstein did not say that. Here is where people get that from, in a letter he wrote to someone about the death of someone close (Michele Besso). “Now he has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. For us believing physicists the distinction between past, present, and future only has the meaning of an illusion, though a persistent one.” He was not stating that the past, present, and future all exist at the same time. Einstein proved that time is relative, so that it can be experienced at different rates by different people, relative to each other. Each person would still experience time the same way, but it would appear that others were experiencing it either faster or slower. Everyone would still experience it though, and experience it in a certain direction. If it were possible for a person to travel at light speed then time would stop for that person, relative to others, but the trip (no matter how long) would be over the instant it began. At no point, however, do you experience BEFORE the trip at the same time AS the trip. Einstein knew this all too well since he figured out relativity.

[William]

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #17]

Think of it this way.

If this universe existed without consciousness within it, the light would still be information. Just as the tree falling in the forest would still make a sound - [sound is also information and it is possible that light exists because of sound.]

So where consciousness come into play, it is that which decodes the information. But the information exists regardless.

The main point of my previous post is that the human form only picks up certain information within a certain range in which it can do so.
It may be that if there are alternate universes, they are all superimposed upon one another but we do not see the information from those other universes, because we are tuned into only this universe [as our dominant reality experience] due to the forms we currently occupy.

On occasion some of us experience alternate realities due to some glitch in the form we occupy which allows for that to occur.

[JoeyKnothead]

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #17]

Think of it this way.

If this universe existed without consciousness within it, the light would still be information. Just as the tree falling in the forest would still make a sound - [sound is also information and it is possible that light exists because of sound.]

In physics, sound is a vibration that propagates as an acoustic wave, through a transmission medium such as a gas, liquid or solid.
A drum produces sound via a vibrating membrane.

In human physiology and psychology, sound is the reception of such waves and their perception by the brain.
Until it is heard a propagation of waves in a medium, physicists notwithstanding, is not sound. It's a propagation of waves in a medium.

So where consciousness come into play, it is that which decodes the information. But the information exists regardless.

"That which decodes the information".

I can get with that, but you gotta play me a song

The main point of my previous post is that the human form only picks up certain information within a certain range in which it can do so.
It may be that if there are alternate universes, they are all superimposed upon one another but we do not see the information from those other universes, because we are tuned into only this universe [as our dominant reality experience] due to the forms we currently occupy.

On occasion some of us experience alternate realities due to some glitch in the form we occupy which allows for that to occur.

Included here for clarity and full understanding of what you were getting at when I came along.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to Kenisaw in post #18]

How can a being know that it is everywhere all at the same time? What if there is someplace that the being doesn't know that it doesn't know about? The problem of omnipresence is the same as omniscience. One can't know what it doesn't know. No matter how powerful the being, it can never be sure that it exists everywhere, and that it knows everything, because there could be something it doesn't know and/or someplace that exists that it doesn't exist. This is true no matter what. And, no matter how powerful the being, it can't know how MUCH it doesn't know, or how MANY places exist that it doesn't inhabit.

If God exists from eternity past til eternity future any such place would be a fabrication of someone's imagination because it could not be proved to exist and it will never be proved to exist because God is at all points time.

Even if that is all true, no being can be sure that that it knows all there is to know and inhabits every place. This is irrefutable and necessarily shows that no being, eternal or not, can ever be omniscient or omnipresent.

If God exists everywhere and at all times then any place that exists outside of God's knowledge would be a fabrication of someone's imagination because its existence will never be proved to exist.

It's a moot point, but I would still like to ask some questions regarding your statements. How do you know your god doesn't need space to exist? Why is it a requirement that a being has to live outside space and time in order to create a universe?

Because space and time are characteristics of this universe, space and time started when this universe came into exitance.

Eternal: If a being is eternal it can never get to the point in it's existence where it creates a universe. It would take an eternity before it did that, and of course there is no end to eternity. The attempt to sidestep this by claiming that a supernatural being exists in all moments at once isn't logical either. It exists both with the universe existing, and not existing? That is irrational.
Your mathematical argument of infinity is incorrect. The only thing that can cross infinity is infinity. Infinity + or - any number is still infinity. But Infinity - infinity is 0. God has to be infinite to create this universe. God exists in the present tense from infinity past to infinity future. He can see it and experience it all at the same moment.

Although time started with this universe so that is why God also does not need time to be moving to exist, so He can exist at all times.
To be mathematically accurate infinity minus infinity is undefined, not zero. No matter how much eternal existence your god has, it can't reach the amount of existence necessary to create a finite universe with a starting point. An eternal being cannot create a finite universe logically.

You then went on to do the sidestep excuse that I specifically mentioned doesn't work any better, for the reason I already stated. It is also a mathematical conundrum that I just thought about while writing this. If god exists in all of the present tense, that means that it existence is essentially zero. It basically does not exist. This moment in an eternal beings existence can be represented as 1/infinity. 1/infinity is zero. All the present tense moments are the same size sliver of existence (1/infinity), and no matter how many of them there are the summation of all those moments of existence adds up to zero. So existing in the present tense is to exist for, basically, no existence at all.
Omnipotent: At this point a supernatural critter that doesn't know all, isn't everywhere, and isn't eternal can't be considered all powerful either. But even if all knowing was possible, that would still negate being all powerful. A being that knows everything would know what happens in the future, and if it knows what happens in the future than the future cannot be changed, and if the being cant change the future than it can't be all powerful.

Your infinity argument is a moot argument because as I have expressed before God exists outside of time, so there would actually be no infinite time to cross. The passage of time is a construct of this universe.

The Bible says that God is unchanging. Which would also be a natural result of being omnipresent? He does know the future. To God, the future is happening at the same time the present and the past are happening. And why would He change the future when He created the future at the same time He created the past and the present. This is why it has to be because Einstein's theory of relativity says that the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously.

You may not like the idea of an omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient God but it is not illogical, for the Creator God to exist He has to have these qualities.

If a god is unchanging, you would agree that there is no point to prayer then, correct?

You are missing the point of prayer. Prayer is not to align God's desires with ours. It is to align our desires with His. We pray the way we do because we are temporal beings. We are the ones bound by the flow of time. We are the ones that do not know what will happen in the future and we take assurance in the fact that God is already in the future and directing the events of men.

Einstein did not say that. Here is where people get that from, in a letter he wrote to someone about the death of someone close (Michele Besso). “Now he has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. For us believing physicists the distinction between past, present, and future only has the meaning of an illusion, though a persistent one.” He was not stating that the past, present, and future all exist at the same time. Einstein proved that time is relative, so that it can be experienced at different rates by different people, relative to each other. Each person would still experience time the same way, but it would appear that others were experiencing it either faster or slower. Everyone would still experience it though, and experience it in a certain direction. If it were possible for a person to travel at light speed then time would stop for that person, relative to others, but the trip (no matter how long) would be over the instant it began. At no point, however, do you experience BEFORE the trip at the same time AS the trip. Einstein knew this all too well since he figured out relativity.

No the past present and future all do exist according to modern physics.



(this is a good one that explains past present and future have to exist) this saves me from having to write a book to you on this subject.

https://www.pbs.org/video/nova-the-fabr ... n-of-time/ This one is from Brain Greene and is very interesting.

Sean Carroll in lecture form.