Can we handle not being alone?

[Timber Loftis]

Ah, but science has discovered a beginning to the known universe - hence it has a finite point of origin.

Not true. As John D. mentions, science has been able to go back to a point. Science has not discovered what happened prior, but that doesn't mean there was nothing. For my part, I think the Big Bang has happened before a number of times and is followed by a Big Crunch, only to occur again.

And, the matter in the universe is expanding, but the space is infinite.

And, we may not be alone. But, that would be determined by chance, just as our own existence was.

That's how I see it. I just don't see filing in the blank spot left by one unknown with another unknown.

So, now that I've stated my belief, I don't really think I have anything to add. Cheerio, all, it was fun til the thread got locked.

[edit] Yeah, I was Pantheist for a while. Then I decided the universe is all there is. If there is any religion I would try to ascribe to these days, it would probably Taoism -- but I need to learn a lot more about it first.

[ 09-03-2004, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Well, I just can't let this go on. As I predicted, this thread went straight to the heart of religion. Since the fray has begun, I'm going to give you my two cents. quote: The creator, by nature is the one infinite eternal uncreated thing in the universe. The question "who created the creator" is irrelevent, because it is not believed that the creator I am speaking about HAS a beginning at all. Infinite as in: no beginning, no end, no limit physically, no restriction, beyond time, beyond limitation, beyond human comprehension.

Well, here's how I see it Yorick. I see no need to abstract and anthropomorphize the infinite that I cannot comprehend. Thus, to represent my view, I would edit your statement thusly:

The UNIVERSE, by nature is the one infinite eternal uncreated thing. The question "who created the UNIVERSE" is irrelevent, because it is not believed that the UNIVERSE HAS a beginning at all. Infinite as in: no beginning, no end, no limit physically, no restriction, beyond time, beyond limitation, beyond human comprehension.

Imposing some "creator" behind the veil only answers a question with a question. Why you can't look at the world around and see the infinite end-all-be-all is beyond me. Why you need some sentient creature watching over all moving the stings behind things I will never understand.

My 2 cents.

And this thread is totally about a banned topic. [/QUOTE]Well the rest of the supporters of it just happened testify agianst you, remember the 10^-43 sec after the event, the event being the forming of the Universe, a finite thing. You can not have 10^-43 sec after the event without there being an event call it big bang/creation/forming of the universe/call it "Bob" for all I care. The fact is it is a finite thing, definied by finite laws, it is not Infinite defined by finite laws that would make it finite not infinite.

[Yorick]

However, if pantheism is really truth, then the question "are we alone" is answered by "I am alone"

Just to bring it back on topic.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: quote: Ah, but science has discovered a beginning to the known universe - hence it has a finite point of origin.

Not true. As John D. mentions, science has been able to go back to a point. Science has not discovered what happened prior, but that doesn't mean there was nothing. For my part, I think the Big Bang has happened before a number of times and is followed by a Big Crunch, only to occur again.

And, the matter in the universe is expanding, but the space is infinite.

And, we may not be alone. But, that would be determined by chance, just as our own existence was.

That's how I see it. I just don't see filing in the blank spot left by one unknown with another unknown.

So, now that I've stated my belief, I don't really think I have anything to add. Cheerio, all, it was fun til the thread got locked.
[/QUOTE]I did say "the KNOWN universe. Anything prior to the big bang is total speculation beyond our experience. Knowing the Creator is by contrast something many have experienced firsthand.

Yeah, I was Pantheist for a while. Then I decided the universe is all there is. If there is any religion I would try to ascribe to these days, it would probably Taoism -- but I need to learn a lot more about it first.

I could go into the reasons why I've rejected pantheism, and find monotheism followed by panenthism more likely, but that would be going against the morotorium.

Chewbacca got most offended when I used a comparative analogy of masturbation (a pantheistic God-Man realationship) and sex ( a monotheistic God-Man relationship).

I do apologise for that Chewbacca if you're reading. For the record I meant no disrespect and regret upsetting you more than you know. I have absolute respect for your beliefs even if it comes across as the opposite..

[ 09-03-2004, 03:08 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

[frudi_x]

Yorick, i never said we humans understand all the natural laws that govern the behavior of the universe. but not knowing something that exists doesn't mean that something doesn't exist, you said so yourself. whether or not we know all the natural laws doesn't affect the universe obeying them.

and on the nature of the creator Timber has already posted pretty much what i would have.
i would only add, that the fact that most people believe in a creator doesn't prove his existence, as many of these beliefs cotradict eachother. they can't all be right, if they believe different things, can they? and it's not like popular belief has always been guaranteed to be right...

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by frudi_x: Yorick, i never said we humans understand all the natural laws that govern the behavior of the universe. but not knowing something that exists doesn't mean that something doesn't exist, you said so yourself. whether or not we know all the natural laws doesn't affect the universe obeying them. and on the nature of the creator Timber has already posted pretty much what i would have. i would only add, that the fact that most people believe in a creator doesn't prove his existence, as many of these beliefs cotradict eachother. they can't all be right, if they believe different things, can they? and it's not like popular belief has always been guaranteed to be right...

I would agree to the above statements.

My question is how can something that does not require time to exsist be defined in terms of time? the words how was Creator created, When is the creator's begining etc. all require time ie: create/begining denote a point in time, no matter where that point is in time, it is a point of time.

[Nightwing]

So what do ya think, can we handle another intelligent civilization? Would we try and make them conform to our way of life? Would they try and conform? Would this result in war? Hopefully by the time we make contact we will all be able to get along.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by frudi_x: Yorick, i never said we humans understand all the natural laws that govern the behavior of the universe. but not knowing something that exists doesn't mean that something doesn't exist, you said so yourself. whether or not we know all the natural laws doesn't affect the universe obeying them. and on the nature of the creator Timber has already posted pretty much what i would have. i would only add, that the fact that most people believe in a creator doesn't prove his existence, as many of these beliefs cotradict eachother. they can't all be right, if they believe different things, can they? and it's not like popular belief has always been guaranteed to be right...

The point is you haven't factored in peoples experiences with the creator in your assertions. You've just completely disregarded human accounts.

As to whether they are all right, well of course they disagree... on some issues. All agree on a cognisant being creating the world. It is the character and makeup of who or what that being is that begats disagreement. Every culture had a creation myth. Every culture. Coincidence, or remnants of collective memory?

In a trial, do lawyers only present scientific evidence, or do they also take the word of witnesses? If you go to a doctor, does he just examine the physicality or does he/she get information from your descriptions? Especially eye doctors, psychologists and ear doctors. Human testimony is vital in ascertaining facts about a situation. In ascertaining whether there is a creator or not, the billions of humans swearing black and blue that there is - even dying for him in some cases - surely makes something in your head say "hang on... maybe there's something in this."

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Nightwing: So what do ya think, can we handle another intelligent civilization? Would we try and make them conform to our way of life? Would they try and conform? Would this result in war? Hopefully by the time we make contact we will all be able to get along.

I don't think humanity could handle an alien civilisation given where we are at the moment, no.
But then again, maybe we could.
Nah...

but maybe yeah..

I don;t know.

[chimaera]

Originally posted by Yorick: You cannot see sound, you have to hear it. You cannot hear cold, you have to feel it. You cannot taste love, you have to give it. Being unable to see sound, hear cold or taste love, doesn't mean they don't exist.

Synaesthesia.

[ 09-04-2004, 02:26 AM: Message edited by: chimaera ]