i found this quote on your profile. "We are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star. But we can understand the Universe. That makes us something very special." - Stephen Hawking
i don't think we can fully understand the universe. in fact there is so many mysteries out there about the earth which is why there is always new theroies(sp) coming out. only G-d can fully understand the universe, which i guess you're athiest so that doesn't prove anything to you. but let me ask you(not breece:P, i want quantum's anwser first:)) how did something come from nothing?
Shalom Alechiem and Barucha! (peace be with/unto to you and blessings!)
Ahh...my quote - I love that quote. It captures both the lack of importance of humanity on the universal scale and it describes what is special. It is humbling and elevating all at once. I agree we will never understand everything about the universe, but we can discover some things. We can wonder. We are conscious. And that is beautiful.
Also, I think I have been persuaded by this forum away from atheism as I cannot disprove God. He may after all exist. I would say I am agnostic.
But I digress. How did something come from nothing?
Answer 1: We don't know. Perhaps it is God.
Answer 2 (the one I am inclined to believe): It didn't. There has always been something. The multiverse of which our universe is a part has always existed and always will exist. I cannot prove this, but it makes sense to me. After all something from nothing is pretty inconcievable (sure there's particles that pop randomly into and out of existance, but those still come from energy which is something...). The big bang was just the start of one universe in a whole infinite landscape of universes (this is a string theory idea that might be able to be proved in the next couple of years with better sensing of cosmic background microwave radiation).
William Lane Craig points out that any multiverse would have to be governed by a set of laws in order to keep things rationally happening and that since there would have been a time in which our universe didn't exist, it would have to exist in time. Conclusion: Multiverse theory only pushes the problem further back in time. Who created the multiverse?
Do you have a link to that argument? I'd be interested in reading it. WLC is an educated and intelligent man.
His book Reasonable Faith has a phenomenal section on current cosmological models and the flaws of the more radical ones. Best $8.00 I ever spent. :)
Or he has a short section in Lee Strobel's The Case for Faith in which he argues the same thing in terms that give you much less of a headache.
I think one of his PhD's (Yes, he has two) is in cosmology, actually. He's a great thinker and an amazing man. Dawkins should be punched in the face for constantly trying to demean him in order to compensate for his own intellectual smallness. *Throws dart at Dawkins poster on wall*
Ahh okay. I better add that to my reading list. I have The Case for Christ down for this summer. Have a feeling it's gonna be a fast read too :)
Seyyed Hossein Nasr studied science (physics) at MIT. And he has a PhD from Harvard on this history of science, I believe.
Thank God for intelligent religious people.
It really is a quick read. I couldn't put it down. Strobel isn't himself the most scholarly guy in the historian/philosopher sense, but he graduated from Yale Law school so he's pretty brilliant and he's a spectacular writer. His stories about writing for the law section of a newspaper in Chicago are awesome. I was kinda disappointed he made the overall thrust of The Case for Faith an argument for Intelligent Design theory. I don't think Craig himself subscribes to it.
And wow. Does he have any relatively short paperback books I can buy? We'll do a book-swap in an attempt to convert each other. ;)
Amen. Without em, I'd've been lost years ago.
I don't buy intelligent design. I'm glad WLC doesn't either. Honestly, he's very sophisticated.
Dude I've only started reading his stuff :( His writing is SUPER dense. But this book is (kinda?) short and easy to read: A Young Muslim's Guide to the Modern World. The second half has criticisms about modernity. Which I know you'd like :) I haven't finished it yet though. Woop woop.
I'm gonna try some Chesterton this summer too. What was that book you recommended of his again?
Collin: Good point I suppose, but who says any of it had to be created?
^ What's the other option? Somethingness doesn't 'evolve' from nothingness...
I agree. I think he's representative of a new wave of Christian thinkers who will force the secular academia to listen to em with respect. Like I said, there's a "Renaissance" going on in philosophy that was at least partially sparked by men like Craig.
And yeah, Modernity sucks. :) Well, is there something you'd recommend over that? I've decided I should give in and let you send me a booklist so I can respect Islam intellectually as well as for its moral Conservatism.
And OOH OOH OOOOH!!!!!! *Jumps up and down with huge grin on face* You should read either The Everlasting Man or Orthodoxy. I'll run up to my room in a bit and look back over each of em to see which one I think you'd like better. Be aware that reading him can be a little confusing, though his insights will literally take your breath away. He references paradoxes a lot and is kinda sarcastic in the old school British kinda way.
Follow this link to get a sneak peak. htt p://www.brainyquote.c om/quotes/authors/g/gilbert_k_chesterton.html
I'm glad. Stupid emotional stuff bugs the heck out of me. I know a Muslim convert who grew up in the South, and when he tells me about the type of Protestantism down there, I'm kinda just like, "Uhhh wow... these people need to read a book..." :P
OMG YESSSSSSSSSSSS AHAHAHAHA FINALLY AT LAST HAPPINESS
Kay let's see... Hmmm. I hope it's possible for you to get these. Also, bear in mind, a lot of stuff is translated into English, so it might seem a bit weird at first. But I'm sure you'll manage :D
1. Even Angels Ask by Jeffrey Lang. The latter half deals with, like, being an American convert, which isn't especially useful to you, but the first half is amazing.
2. The Theology of Unity by Muhammad Abduh
3. Islam: The Way of Revival. it's a compilation.
Duuude I'm taken aback. Okay tell you what, I'll make a list and then create a thread before the month ends (God willing), okay? You want intellectual-y stuff that's not too overwhelming, so I need some time to think!! AHHHH YAY FINALLY
Okay tell me which one! I'm excited!!! :D OOOH are you on Goodreads???? I just became active on there and it's so much fun! We should become Goodreads friends. JOIN!!!
Lastly, should I read Chesterton before Strobel? I have a feeling I'm not gonna like Strobel's book... I need to finish the NT too..
When we were children we were grateful to those who filled our stockings at Christmas time. Why are we not grateful to God for filling our stockings with legs?
Gilbert K. Chesterton
^ LOOOOOL GOOD ONE :D
I have a feeling reading Christian stuff will help me appreciate God more. You better have the same feeling for Islamic stuff! :P
Destinee: The other option is that the universe/multiverse has always existed.
"A room wihout books is like a body without a soul."
"Man is man because he is a creature that forms dogmas. Nothing else does that. For instance, turnips are singularly broad-minded."
"The Bible tells us to love our neighbors, and also to love our enemies; probably because generally they are the same people."
"A good novel tells us the truth about its hero; but a bad novel tells us the truth about its author."
"The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid."
Collin: By the way. I'm going to look up Reasonable Faith and try to give it a read. I tried to read The Case for Faith once, but I couldn't finish it - the science in there was really bad. Maybe Reasonable Faith will be more intellectual and appealing to me.
You've admitted that the multiverse would have to have its own system of time, so it would function on a cause-effect basis. However, philosophy seems to disprove the idea of an infinite regression of causes.
If there have been an infinite number of cause-effect relationships before this point, then "now" would never come to pass, as you cannot reach the end of infinity. :O
And good, I'm glad. I think you'll really like Dr. Craig, even if you disagree with him. Let me know whatcha think, bro. :)
Collin, what was the name of that insanely long thread we had with Ed once?
Collin: You can actually sum up an infinite number of things and get something finite (have you taken calculus?)