PDA

View Full Version : Understanding Empty Space



Churchwork
10-02-2010, 11:11 PM
It is absolutely certain now, the universe is expanding exponentially and will never collapse on itself.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-vKh_jKX7Q&feature=grec_index

With electrons, we can send them through wire and light through optical fiber, but with smaller stuff, we still have to go through these mediums.

So how could any of this quantum stuff be practical to us? I think this reaches a limit at some point, that we can know this stuff but we can't actually ourselves manipulate it like we can for atoms.

Near the end of this video are the unobservable particles coming in and out of the known field of existence, though mathematically true nonetheless. I see a causation in everything, so there are two options:

1) those particles coming in and out are God's direct implementation, OR
2) there is yet another naturalistic cause.

In either case, there are all these dimensions, strings, quantities and constants, so it is hard to fathom they just always existed, and I am left with no other option than if there was an infinite regress of cause and effects, we would have had an eternity to have happened already, having had an eternity of causation to do so (with or without time as a factor).

But if you want to say these are irreducibly complex components, that's fine too, but then you have to explain how they got there.

My answer would be since that which doesn't have a mind can't eventually produce a mind. World-consciousness, self-consciousness and God-consciousness are attributes a bunch of strings, 10 dimensions, the Higg's field and the negative energy field alone (to hold everything in place in such a finely tunned manner) could never bring us into being. Even abiogenesis fails empirically.

These constants, laws and variables would come from that which is outside of time and space. You could have your timeless singularity or your point at the bottom of Hawking's badminton shoot, but since these don't have a mind, they don't have free will, and they don't have a conscience, then they fail to stand next to the uncreated Creator of our universe. And this is whom we call God. How can the ultimate cause be less than His creation?

Jesus said He existed before the foundations of the world so before time began, and John said of Jesus, "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made" (John 1.3).

I was really sold at "hello" when I realized all things summed up in Christ, for He is accessible and personal. No other belief system of the world offers the Creator coming into His creation personally and solving our sin problem by becoming sin for us, and then to top it off, raises Himself from the grave, to give resurrection life.

The point of all this to me is since God is no respecter of persons, it doesn't matter how smart you are or not, whether you have figured out the next complex math formula in quantum mechnics. God gives us all the knowledge within to know this universe whether in a complicated or simple fasion to know He exists. Therefore, we are without excuse.

"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" (Rom. 1.20).

Parture
10-03-2010, 01:23 PM
Martin Wagner of the Atheist Experience TV Show linked his blog for show #675 to this thread instead of the thread here (http://biblocality.com/forums/showthread.php?3814-The-Atheist-Experience-TV-Show&p=7883#post7883) for the Atheist Experience Show follow-up comments, so here is the link (http://biblocality.com/forums/showthread.php?3814-The-Atheist-Experience-TV-Show&p=7883#post7883) for my latest responses to Martin Wagner which he has not addressed. Obviously he doesn't want you to see these responses (http://biblocality.com/forums/showthread.php?3814-The-Atheist-Experience-TV-Show&p=7883#post7883).

As he repeats himself like a clanging bell with shallow comments, what can one do but point out his fallacies and misreading?