God as a self-generating entity makes perfect sence to me. The universe self-generating? Not so much sence.
27 comments
Yeah, okay, so only invisible sky men can self-regenerate now? If I were the universe, I'd be pretty pissed at this diss of my powers....
"I thought Christians believed that God=Universe. Isn't he everywhere?"
In describing the same phenomenon, if you identify it as "A," it makes sense, as "B" it makes no sense. Wow!
Ask and ye shall recieve...Ok.... self-generating God varies a bit. But here's a core to the idea. Should be enough of a reader to catch most people up on the idea. The full thing is about as complicated as the "unified field theory" that physicists are working on right now. Interestingly, the core proponents of this idea ARE physicists.... and the various astro-scientists. You know, the guys working on "fabric of the universe" studies.... "big bang" echoes. That afformentioned "unified field" stuff. So they like to use big fancy words about quantum mechanics when describing this stuff. I dumbed it down a bit for the laymen (and myself- that stuff gives me a headache if I stare at it too long).
The first premise is the infinite universes theory. That there exists infinite universes, each one with different fundamental laws and properties. Some would be life-sustaining. Most would be incapable of anything but raw chaos or entropy. And at least one would possess exactly the right properties to turn the entirity of the universe into a single thinking entity- with the obviously incomprehensible power that'd come with that. In the case of infinite realities, something to the descriptor of God is an inevitability.
The second is the finite universe. In which case, something as perfectly prepared as our reality is fundamentally impossible. Or, I should say, infinitely improbably- which means the same thing. Any number divided by infinity, except infinity, is equal to zero. So, let's say we have a singular universe.... in this case both God *and* a viable universe are impossible. Something created from nothing is also impossible. So, the only way for something to exist is for a moment when causality is ignored, and something happens BEFORE the event that caused it. Time Paradox, for lack of better terms.
Now, a proper paradox actually requires *all* the power of a universe to create. If a universe doesn't exist, this is impossible. If a universe does exist.... it'd have to create itself. And we're left with three possibilities.... this happens infinite times, thus bringing me back to theory #1. .... this happens finite times, thus making a life-bearing universe impossible .... this happens with a sentience guiding the process, thus guarenteeing both the existence of a lifebearing universe *and* its own sentient existence.
So, in conclusion- infinite universes, God has to exist by nature of infinite realities, one of which fits the process. Or finite realities- God has to exist because there's no other way for *us* to exist. Or the third possibility- none of us exist- and that's just outside the realm of discussion.... seriously.... how would one go about debating that....
There you go.
So, for no good reason, you asume that one entity can be self-generating and the other not?, logic award.
<< So, the only way for something to exist is for a moment when causality is ignored, and something happens BEFORE the event that caused it. Time Paradox, for lack of better terms.
"So, in conclusion- infinite universes, God has to exist by nature of infinite realities [...] how would one go about debating that...."
Multiple universes may make sense if they vary allowing some to have the components for the eventual development of life, which would have happened with ours. It also echos discoveries at other scales in our own universe, when we realized for instance that there are many suns in our own galaxy, that there then are many galaxies and clusters of them. So why not many universes. It's still hypothetical and there are plenty of "multiverse"s some actually doctrines more than science, others even part of conspiracy theories, similar to universe simulation ideas.
What I perceive here is a need to justify the fact that despite things normally having originating causes (sentient or not), to be perceived as superior and all-powerful, humans tend to imagine their gods to be outside the constraints of physics and causality. Afterall, it's an argument for the supernatural, afterlife fantasies, etc. So logically one may ask: but what/who created your deity? In polytheism, one might have a family tree to go through until the paradox is reached. In reality, humans created it, but to deny that and claim the reverse (i.e. "in the image of God", to deny "human anthropomorphic deity"), more metaphysical arguments are needed, so there's a tradition of such.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
