Kaleb debates cosmogeny

[StarStuff]

Sorry, almost forgot this one.

COSMOGENY: The origin of the universe. The most popular scientific theory at the moment is that of the big bang.

Kaleb, (or others), if you wish to discuss and debate various cosmogenic theories, please do so here.

[Huitaca]

Quote:There is certain criteria that must be met for first cause
1/ the thing/ one responsible for 1st cause must be all powerful
2/ immaterial. Not bound by space or time.
3/ uncaused. It itself can not have a beginning, but must be eternal.

1. This is the only one that we may be able to semi-agree with. The only difference is that you believe the first cause must be powerful in itself. I believe the first cause was a powerful event.
2. Why?
3. Why? - and how can this be demonstrated?

Quote:Why do we need to apply these criteria?
Because that is the best way to judge whether a thing or entity can be accepted or dismissed as being a candidate for first cause.

I disagree. Why is it not possible for the first cause to be a god that has since died?

Quote:I believe many are too quick to dismiss God as first cause based on bad reasoning.
Religion also does it's level best to turn people away from God by it's disgusting behavior, past and present, but if we are to take emotion out of the debate, & think about what best suits the criteria, IMO, that's the best way to make a decision one way or the other, in regards this issue.

I believe god as first cause can only be asserted and never demonstrated.

[Hamza Abdulhakim]

Hello,

I think it is quite clear that our universe has a finite beginning in the past. To start of is there anybody who would dispute this and adopt an eternal model of the universe?

[Jayhawker Soule]

(10-25-2011 12:01 PM)Hamza Abdulhakim Wrote:  Hello,

I think it is quite clear that our universe has a finite beginning in the past. To start of is there anybody who would dispute this and adopt an eternal model of the universe?

I'm wondering why that is relevant. The theological question is whether or not there was a First Cause.

---

(10-25-2011 12:44 AM)Huitaca Wrote:  

Quote:There is certain criteria that must be met for first cause
1/ the thing/ one responsible for 1st cause must be all powerful
2/ immaterial. Not bound by space or time.
3/ uncaused. It itself can not have a beginning, but must be eternal.

1. This is the only one that we may be able to semi-agree with. The only difference is that you believe the first cause must be powerful in itself. I believe the first cause was a powerful event.

There is no reason to think so. In fact, there is no reason to believe that the category/quality "powerful" has any meaning before 1 Planck time.

[Hamza Abdulhakim]

(10-25-2011 12:37 PM)Jayhawker Soule Wrote:  

(10-25-2011 12:01 PM)Hamza Abdulhakim Wrote:  Hello,

I think it is quite clear that our universe has a finite beginning in the past. To start of is there anybody who would dispute this and adopt an eternal model of the universe?

I'm wondering why that is relevant. The theological question is whether or not there was a First Cause.

Hmmm, I thought this thread is not about the first cause but the origin of our universe. ;-)

[Jayhawker Soule]

My apologies. I thought it was a shallow attack on theism.

[EqualAtheist]

(10-25-2011 12:01 PM)Hamza Abdulhakim Wrote:  Hello,

I think it is quite clear that our universe has a finite beginning in the past. To start of is there anybody who would dispute this and adopt an eternal model of the universe?

I would. I have. See my thread in the philosophy section.

[Hamza Abdulhakim]

Hello,

(10-25-2011 01:00 PM)EqualAtheist Wrote:  

(10-25-2011 12:01 PM)Hamza Abdulhakim Wrote:  Hello,

I think it is quite clear that our universe has a finite beginning in the past. To start of is there anybody who would dispute this and adopt an eternal model of the universe?

I would. I have. See my thread in the philosophy section.

Which Thread you mean exactly?

[EqualAtheist]

Kaleb's First Cause. This thread here.

[Huitaca]

(10-25-2011 12:37 PM)Jayhawker Soule Wrote:  There is no reason to think so. In fact, there is no reason to believe that the category/quality "powerful" has any meaning before 1 Planck time.

Right, being that after 13.7 billion years the event is still occurring powerful is an unreasonable word to describe it.