Ask a Catholic

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Vampyr

I actually don't have "faith" that science will uncover the beginnings of the universe. I'm OK with the idea that we may never know - I'm simply saying that if we ever DO discover how the universe was created, the answer will be scientific in nature. I'm basing this on the fact that every other event in nature can be explained scientifically. Perhaps the Universe has just always existed, as you believe God has always existed? Maybe it was not formed by any one or any event - it just Is.

I'll touch on the rest of your post at a later date, but I wanted to discuss this part specifically. How is it not faith to believe that the answer to the existence of the universe will be explained scientifically? You state that every other event in nature can be explained scientifically, but this is self defeating. Nature has not produced evidence of anything coming into existence from nothing. Further, everything we have observed in nature has at least a defined beginning if not a currently observable end. Nature has yet to produce evidence that either of these explanations is possible.

Isn't it the common atheistic definition of faith that it is the belief in something without evidence?

[Vampyr]

Originally Posted by jeepnut

I'll touch on the rest of your post at a later date, but I wanted to discuss this part specifically. How is it not faith to believe that the answer to the existence of the universe will be explained scientifically? You state that every other event in nature can be explained scientifically, but this is self defeating. Nature has not produced evidence of anything coming into existence from nothing. Further, everything we have observed in nature has at least a defined beginning if not a currently observable end. Nature has yet to produce evidence that either of these explanations is possible.

Isn't it the common atheistic definition of faith that it is the belief in something without evidence?

I don't believe that something came from nothing - that's your belief. It's not that I have faith in science's ability to come up with proof - it's that I'm not going to believe anything without proof.

I am not putting forth any hypothesis for how the universe came to be - you are. Therefore, the burden of proof is on you. I reject the idea that God created everything because there is no basis for it and not a shred of evidence to support it. You are putting forth that idea, so you must provide the proof.

So far your only proof is "You don't have a better idea, so my side is most likely correct." That's not proof or a valid argument by any stretch of the imagination. Scientists can't just come up with any crazy hypothesis they want and support it with the argument of "The other side doesn't have anything to refute it." They need evidence.

The Bible isn't evidence. It's a book of unsubstantiated stories. Some probably happened, a lot of them probably didn't.

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Vampyr

I don't believe that something came from nothing - that's your belief. It's not that I have faith in science's ability to come up with proof - it's that I'm not going to believe anything without proof.

I'm ignoring most of your post because I feel we have an active discussion along those lines in another post. I hope that's okay. If you want me to specifically address these points again, I will.

However, I want to latch on to the above.

I'm am not claiming to believe that the universe came from nothing. I'm stating that that is the case. It is not scientifically possible for there to be any other explanation. Everything we observe has a natural explanation. That's the definition of natural. Everything we observe, (which we have already defined as natural) has a cause. Since everything has a cause, that cause must have occurred at a place in time. In other words, everything has a beginning. At some point, there must have been a time when the first thing (whatever that may be) came into existence. Before the first thing, there was nothing. I'm not talking about nothing as in there were formless atoms and matter, but that there was literally no thing. The total absence of anything. No atoms, no matter, no energy, nothing. Since we exist, we know that that first thing (whatever that may be) came into existence from nothing. We know that this is not naturally possible as science (the study of the natural world) tells us so. Therefore, the very fact that the universe exists is evidence that God exists. That is my proof.

God is the supernatural cause of our natural universe. The supernatural cause that is required for a natural, finite universe to exist.

You mentioned a couple posts ago about regrowing limbs. Why didn't you say "What if science finds a way to create limbs from nothing?" The reason is, is because you understand that there is no scientific explanation for something to be created from nothing.

[Vampyr]

Originally Posted by jeepnut

I'm ignoring most of your post because I feel we have an active discussion along those lines in another post. I hope that's okay. If you want me to specifically address these points again, I will.

However, I want to latch on to the above.

I'm am not claiming to believe that the universe came from nothing. I'm stating that that is the case. It is not scientifically possible for there to be any other explanation. Everything we observe has a natural explanation. That's the definition of natural. Everything we observe, (which we have already defined as natural) has a cause. Since everything has a cause, that cause must have occurred at a place in time. In other words, everything has a beginning. At some point, there must have been a time when the first thing (whatever that may be) came into existence. Before the first thing, there was nothing. I'm not talking about nothing as in there were formless atoms and matter, but that there was literally no thing. The total absence of anything. No atoms, no matter, no energy, nothing. Since we exist, we know that that first thing (whatever that may be) came into existence from nothing. We know that this is not naturally possible as science (the study of the natural world) tells us so. Therefore, the very fact that the universe exists is evidence that God exists. That is my proof.

God is the supernatural cause of our natural universe. The supernatural cause that is required for a natural, finite universe to exist.

You mentioned a couple posts ago about regrowing limbs. Why didn't you say "What if science finds a way to create limbs from nothing?" The reason is, is because you understand that there is no scientific explanation for something to be created from nothing.

I've mentioned it a bunch of times already, but that's not proof. Your only proof is that science doesn't have any proof...yet. Like I said, I'm not putting forth any facts as to how the universe was formed. I acknowledge that at this point in time, we do not know. We do know that it probably has something to do with an explosion near the center of the universe, as everything in the universe is moving outward at a great speed.

But somehow you are making the jump in conclusions from science hasn't come up with a reasonable answer yet, so the only possible solution is god. No. It's not like the origin of the universe is the last thing we don't know. There is an infinite number of things we do not know. You can't take all those things, and just say, "well, science hasn't found an answer in the brief time humans have existed...so it must be supernatural!"

That is not proof, and it never will be. You need proof that supports your side - I not need proof to dispute your side, because you are the one making the claim.

We do not really know that the first thing came from nothing. There's no evidence to suggest that. We do not know that there was a first thing. Like I said, that's your theory, not mine.

When you get into the science of the Universe - with space, gravity, and time, things get very bizarre. What if time is a thing, the same way gravity and space are things? What if this isn't the only universe? What if time itself came into existence at the same moment as the universe, so that essentially there is no "before"? It simply does not exist.

There are so many theories and possibilities out there, and that's why limiting ourselves to saying a god must be the only plausible solution is just silly.

As for your other question, striving to be "good"...I believe that what is "good" is a set of laws and commonsense derived by people over the course of humanities existence. Religion does not define what is good and bad - people do, and there are grey areas.

My own moral code is the sum total of the experiences in my life up until this point. I don't think God mandated that murder was bad, and then people thought, "You know, murder is bad." I think people figured out that murder, rape, thievery, jealousy, anger, etc were bad on their own.

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Vampyr

I've mentioned it a bunch of times already, but that's not proof. Your only proof is that science doesn't have any proof...yet. Like I said, I'm not putting forth any facts as to how the universe was formed. I acknowledge that at this point in time, we do not know. We do know that it probably has something to do with an explosion near the center of the universe, as everything in the universe is moving outward at a great speed.

I agree that you haven't put forth any facts. But I disagree that I haven't put forth any proof (Since I have proven that the beginning of the universe cannot have occurred by natural means). You have repeatedly stated that you believe that the origin of the universe has a scientific explanation but have not provided proof for this belief. Science is the study of the natural world through observation and experimentation. The natural world obeys the laws of nature. The laws of nature do not explain the creation of the universe.

By the way, the understanding that the universe likely began with an explosion near the center of the universe is a theory first proposed by Monseigneur Georges Lemaître; a Catholic priest.

Originally Posted by Vampyr

But somehow you are making the jump in conclusions from science hasn't come up with a reasonable answer yet, so the only possible solution is god. No. It's not like the origin of the universe is the last thing we don't know. There is an infinite number of things we do not know. You can't take all those things, and just say, "well, science hasn't found an answer in the brief time humans have existed...so it must be supernatural!"

That is not proof, and it never will be. You need proof that supports your side - I not need proof to dispute your side, because you are the one making the claim.

We do not really know that the first thing came from nothing. There's no evidence to suggest that. We do not know that there was a first thing. Like I said, that's your theory, not mine.

When you get into the science of the Universe - with space, gravity, and time, things get very bizarre. What if time is a thing, the same way gravity and space are things? What if this isn't the only universe? What if time itself came into existence at the same moment as the universe, so that essentially there is no "before"? It simply does not exist.

OK, let's investigate the possibilities.

1. The universe (or universes) had a beginning at some point. (In this possibility, time definitively came in to existence at the same time as the universe since time is rendered in relation to the universe and cannot exist without it.)

2. The universe (or universes) has always existed. - If this is the case, we must then also state that the universe is never ending as well, since no beginning necessitates an infinite universe.

Which is scientifically possible? We have observed decay and change in our universe. All observations point to the understanding that the universe will someday cease to exist. We observe this as entropy or the second law of thermodynamics. Without the input of energy, things will move from an ordered state to a disordered state. An infinite universe would not do this for it must constantly renew itself.

Originally Posted by Vampyr

There are so many theories and possibilities out there, and that's why limiting ourselves to saying a god must be the only plausible solution is just silly.

OK, let's not call it God. It is still a transcendent cause which is necessitated by the fact that the universe came into existence at a definitive point in time before which nothing existed.

Originally Posted by Vampyr

As for your other question, striving to be "good"...I believe that what is "good" is a set of laws and commonsense derived by people over the course of humanities existence. Religion does not define what is good and bad - people do, and there are grey areas.

My own moral code is the sum total of the experiences in my life up until this point. I don't think God mandated that murder was bad, and then people thought, "You know, murder is bad." I think people figured out that murder, rape, thievery, jealousy, anger, etc were bad on their own.

I would agree that people discovered that murder, rape, etc. are bad on their own. The Catholic Church agrees as well. Catholics call this natural law. Natural law is written on men's hearts and does not rely on the revelation of God. In other words, even someone who has never heard of God can observe that murder is wrong.

But why did we come to this conclusion? If life is meaningless and nothing we do matters, then there is no concept of good. What is good is up to each person to decide and would likely revolve simply around "what advances my desires at this moment." If murder solves a problem or provides an advantage, then it is good for the person who is committing the murder. Since life is meaningless, the feelings of the one being murdered are also meaningless. Good is relative.

Why is this not the case then? Why do we have objective wrongs? A meaningless universe presents no requirement for this to be the case.

[Combine 017]

Originally Posted by jeepnut

I'm am not claiming to believe that the universe came from nothing. I'm stating that that is the case. It is not scientifically possible for there to be any other explanation. Everything we observe has a natural explanation. That's the definition of natural. Everything we observe, (which we have already defined as natural) has a cause. Since everything has a cause, that cause must have occurred at a place in time. In other words, everything has a beginning. At some point, there must have been a time when the first thing (whatever that may be) came into existence. Before the first thing, there was nothing. I'm not talking about nothing as in there were formless atoms and matter, but that there was literally no thing. The total absence of anything. No atoms, no matter, no energy, nothing. Since we exist, we know that that first thing (whatever that may be) came into existence from nothing. We know that this is not naturally possible as science (the study of the natural world) tells us so. Therefore, the very fact that the universe exists is evidence that God exists. That is my proof.

God is the supernatural cause of our natural universe. The supernatural cause that is required for a natural, finite universe to exist.

You mentioned a couple posts ago about regrowing limbs. Why didn't you say "What if science finds a way to create limbs from nothing?" The reason is, is because you understand that there is no scientific explanation for something to be created from nothing.

Youre talking as if there cant possibly be any more scientific discoveries. Just because it hasnt happened yet, doesnt mean it wont.

Heres a little piece about a giant super laser in development.

Capable of producing a beam of light so intense that it would be equivalent to the power received by the Earth from the sun focused onto a speck smaller than a tip of a pin, scientists claim it could allow them boil the very fabric of space – the vacuum.

Contrary to popular belief, a vacuum is not devoid of material but in fact fizzles with tiny mysterious particles that pop in and out of existence, but at speeds so fast that no one has been able to prove they exist.

The Extreme Light Infrastructure Ultra-High Field Facility would produce a laser so intense that scientists say it would allow them to reveal these particles for the first time by pulling this vacuum "fabric" apart.

Science is working on it, just give it some time.

And lets say, just for fun, that they do prove that these particles exist, would you stop believing in god? Or would you then claim that these particles are god?

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Combine 017

Youre talking as if there cant possibly be any more scientific discoveries. Just because it hasnt happened yet, doesnt mean it wont.

Heres a little piece about a giant super laser in development.

Science is working on it, just give it some time.

And lets say, just for fun, that they do prove that these particles exist, would you stop believing in god? Or would you then claim that these particles are god?

I'm not stating that science can't make any new discoveries. We make new discoveries every day. However, there are some things that science tells us are impossible. One such thing is explained by the first law of thermodynamics, which states that energy can neither by created nor destroyed. Or do you believe that we will one day find a way to create energy from nothing? You better have some proof for that belief!

By the way, the statement you quoted, "Contrary to popular belief, a vacuum is not devoid of material but in fact fizzles with tiny mysterious particles that pop in and out of existence, but at speeds so fast that no one has been able to prove they exist." Proves my point. A vacuum is not nothing. Before the universe, even these mysterious particles did not exist.