|
|
Post by endtimesnow on Mar 1, 2021 3:47:57 GMT
If it weren't for God there'd be NOTHING at all.
Wouldn't even be Space & Time !.....Try not to think about that, i'm not
responsible if you do.
There NEVER would have been anything
|
|
|
|
Post by hakutaku on Mar 1, 2021 18:57:41 GMT
If it weren't for God there'd be NOTHING at all. Wouldn't even be Space & Time !.....Try not to think about that, i'm not responsible if you do. There NEVER would have been anything Why not? What would have caused the state of nothingness? |
|
vz71
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by vz71 on Mar 14, 2021 13:52:55 GMT
If it weren't for God there'd be NOTHING at all. Wouldn't even be Space & Time !.....Try not to think about that, i'm not responsible if you do. There NEVER would have been anything Why not? What would have caused the state of nothingness? A state of nothing requires no cause. |
|
|
|
Post by adamcsc on Mar 14, 2021 20:51:20 GMT
If it weren't for God there'd be NOTHING at all. Wouldn't even be Space & Time !.....Try not to think about that, i'm not responsible if you do. There NEVER would have been anything You're not going to find any argument from me on this topic. A multitude of other topics, but not this one. |
|
|
|
Post by hakutaku on Mar 15, 2021 0:46:20 GMT
Why not? What would have caused the state of nothingness? A state of nothing requires no cause. Why not? Is it a brute fact of the universe? |
|
vz71
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by vz71 on Mar 15, 2021 1:04:15 GMT
A state of nothing requires no cause. Why not? Is it a brute fact of the universe? Because nothing is exactly that... nothing. It requires no cause because there is no thing there to be caused. |
|
|
|
Post by hakutaku on Mar 15, 2021 4:12:41 GMT
Why not? Is it a brute fact of the universe? Because nothing is exactly that... nothing. It requires no cause because there is no thing there to be caused. But we're talking about the "state of the universe where nothing exists." If such a state denies its own existence, then it seems that it might be self-contradictory. If it is indeed self-contradictory, then it makes no sense to say that it would exist if we didn't have God. It can't exist no matter what if it is self-contradictory.
But lets ignore the potential self-contradiction and use "obtain" to describe the state of everything. The assertion here is that without God serving as an external cause, we would obtain "State A" whereas with God, we obtain "State B". Now you asserted that in "State A" there is nothing to require an explanation. But I am not speaking about things "inside" of State A, I am speaking about State A itself. Why is it that State A is the natural state of affairs absent any external cause? We could just as easily assert that State B is the natural state of affairs, and conclude that there is no need for an external cause to explain it.
|
|
vz71
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by vz71 on Mar 15, 2021 4:22:41 GMT
Because nothing is exactly that... nothing. It requires no cause because there is no thing there to be caused. But we're talking about the "state of the universe where nothing exists."
No. We are talking about nothing. The universe is something, not nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by Beryllos on Mar 15, 2021 4:45:52 GMT
Empty set vs. non-existent set (... vs. non-existence of any set?)
It is said that God is not an entity that exists alongside other entities that exist, but rather God is existence itself. Looking at it that way, if there is no God, then not only does nothing exist, but there is no such thing as existence.
|
|
vz71
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by vz71 on Mar 15, 2021 20:00:48 GMT
Empty set vs. non-existent set (... vs. non-existence of any set?)
It is said that God is not an entity that exists alongside other entities that exist, but rather God is existence itself. Looking at it that way, if there is no God, then not only does nothing exist, but there is no such thing as existence.
I think of nothing as not even a set. An empty set is still a set. |
|
|
|
Post by hakutaku on Mar 16, 2021 0:55:54 GMT
I think of nothing as not even a set. An empty set is still a set. So logic itself wouldn't exist. So there would be nothing to prevent nothing from becoming something. |
|
vz71
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by vz71 on Mar 16, 2021 1:51:47 GMT
I think of nothing as not even a set. An empty set is still a set. So logic itself wouldn't exist. So there would be nothing to prevent nothing from becoming something. Except there would have to be something to cause this. That is not nothing. And again, we are talking about nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by hakutaku on Mar 16, 2021 1:56:49 GMT
Except there would have to be... What would exist to enforce that requirement? Indeed, if the requirement exists, then something exists. |
|
vz71
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by vz71 on Mar 16, 2021 2:04:40 GMT
Except there would have to be... What would exist to enforce that requirement? Indeed, if the requirement exists, then something exists. No, nothing comes from nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by hakutaku on Mar 16, 2021 2:19:40 GMT
No, nothing comes from nothing. There are rules or laws that make it such that nothing comes from nothing. Those rules or laws could not exist if nothing existed. |
|
