No Possibility of God

[Thief]

So time didn't exist before the Big Bang?

no

time is a measurement
nothing more

a measure of movement
nothing more

without movement
no time

 

[Thief]

Or, is there some workaround which allows God to exist/create in a timeless state?

Spirit First
then substance.....as creation

otherwise....substance is self creating
and self motivated

and science would say 'no'...to that

 

[Hellbound Serpiente]

And how does raising such arguments as "perhaps this, perhaps that" do anything to help solve a conundrum? What's wrong, for example, with "perhaps the Great Pumpkin" or "perhaps fairies" or "chocolate pudding?" The list of "perhaps" situations is infinite, by the way.

As I said before, there are always possibilities, what we should worry about is probabilities. I am giving a possible counter-reason to explain away your objection. Sure, this is just a hypothesis, but most of what we say regarding something as abstract, unverifiable, immeasurably our of our comprehension as God usually is.

Your objection was also a hypothesis, a possibility, albeit a very probable one. I personally feel the same about the point I raised. The same cannot be said about the list of other infinite possibilities you mentioned [unless, of course, we bring them all to the table and independently assess them all]. I personally feel like Godly realm being devoid of laws and logic of our material world is more probable than existence fairies and other improbable possibilities. It is a well-formed hypothesis backed-up and given weight by our own personal experiences [like how dream world devoid of laws and logic of our material world].

Yes, there are infinite possibilities, but what should matter is how probable these possibilities are.

 

[Thief]

Yes, there are infinite possibilities, but what should matter is how probable these possibilities are.

so you anticipate…..?
leaving this life and escaping into a dream world?

 

[Hellbound Serpiente]

It's just an example. I can use quantum world as an example if dream world is too imaginary

 

[VoidoftheSun]

Perhaps everything happens all at once in Godly realm? Like, all the events occur as compound events at the same time without an interval between them? Perhaps because there is no change at all because everything happens at simultaneously in form of fused events?

This is definitely very close, as God is a singularity to all things (Universe and beyond), it is that meeting point of all existences, the root of all existences, material and immaterial.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Thanks for playing Mr. Hawking, next time stick to what you know.

Clearly you have no idea who he was. Stick to what he knows? What you say he does not know he was aming the worlds foremost minds researching it.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

They're just simplistic and mostly addressing dumb fundie interpretations and not even considering more nuanced views. He is no theologian. People need to stay in their lane when it comes to their studies. True polymaths are very rare.

Considering there are those who push religious based political and social agendas against the sort of work and research he did, it was in his lane to address them. Also, and of course, people ask scientists like hin their views. Einstein took some very long winded ways to catefully explain his non-theism. Tyson is adamant he is an agnostic, not an atheist, because people ask him. People ask Hawking, he replied (and, indeed his amswers did evolve and change over the course of his life).

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Considering there are those who push religious based political and social agendas against the sort of work and research he did, it was in his lane to address them. Also, and of course, people ask scientists like hin their views. Einstein took some very long winded ways to catefully explain his non-theism. Tyson is adamant he is an agnostic, not an atheist, because people ask him. People ask Hawking, he replied (and, indeed his amswers did evolve and change over the course of his life).

That doesn't mean their opinions on the subject are informed. Dawkins is pretty much irrelevant now, anyway, as he has made a fool of himself on social media. He sounds like someone's grumpy, bigoted grandfather.

 

[Super Universe]

Clearly you have no idea who he was. Stick to what he knows? What you say he does not know he was aming the worlds foremost minds researching it.

I know who he was. You guys are too easily impressed.


The big bang DID NOT HAPPEN. All of your science hero's are wrong and they should have known they were wrong from the very beginning because gravity does not allow a big bang to happen.

You cannot accept a scientific theory that VIOLATES your most fundamental physical law, gravity.

That is not science. It's make believe. These guys should be stripped of every medal and have to repay their earnings for every class they taught and for every book they published. Just a bunch of jokers...

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

That doesn't mean their opinions on the subject are informed.

This. Hawking is one of my favorite people. But to use an analogy, I would tell an engineer they made a mediocre painting if it was open to opinion, they did, and I was asked about it.

Key words being painting isn't typically an engineer's specialty.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Dawkins is pretty much irrelevant now, anyway

Dawkins has pretty much been immortalized among our species aling with those such as Einstein, Darwin, Newton, and Copernicus.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

According to thermodynamics....energy has always existed.

 

[sealchan]

Hawking wrote. "For me this means that there is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to have existed in."
Stephen Hawking's Final Book Says There's 'No Possibility' of God in Our Universe | Live Science

So time didn't exist before the Big Bang?
There seems a lot of certainty that prior to the BB time did not exist at least by people certainly smarter than me.

Has science finally provided an answer to the age-old question of God's existence?
Is Hawking wrong about time?
Or, is there some workaround which allows God to exist/create in a timeless state?

In fact, according to Hawking, nothing existed prior to the Big Bang and it is perfectly ok to accept that.

Nothing yet existed...but that nothing had the potential to become what has become...apparently. It is more likely, IMO, that this universe arose out of an unknowable reality which is mostly unobservable and unknowable but whose presence leaves its mark on our universe as this universes arbitrary qualities which developed historically from the big bang onwards.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Dawkins has pretty much been immortalized among our species aling with those such as Einstein, Darwin, Newton, and Copernicus.

Okay, so you're a fangirl. Personally I'd wait a few centuries to see how that checks out.

 

[sealchan]

According to thermodynamics....energy has always existed.

Yes and one type of energy is potential energy. If we look at the universe as a whole does it contain a non-zero amount of energy? And if so then the universe is an expression of that once potential energy.

Maybe we can say that the universe is not a closed system but has energy and matter "entering" and "leaving" it.

 

[atanu]

Hawking wrote. "For me this means that there is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to have existed in."

How is this? Hawking writes "No possibility of a creator". And your thread title says "No possibility of God". Why? The creator is a role. God is the truth. I do not find that the thread title correctly depicts what Hawking said, from what I have read in the OP.

 

[blü 2]

Hawking wrote. "For me this means that there is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to have existed in."

So time didn't exist before the Big Bang?
There seems a lot of certainty that prior to the BB time did not exist at least by people certainly smarter than me.

Has science finally provided an answer to the age-old question of God's existence?
Is Hawking wrong about time?
Or, is there some workaround which allows God to exist/create in a timeless state?

In fact, according to Hawking, nothing existed prior to the Big Bang and it is perfectly ok to accept that.

I'm slow to disagree with the late, great, Steve, but in the end I do.

On this basis.

The contents of the Big Bang at Time Zero were Mass-Energy pure and simple. [Even if evidence is found to suggest they might have been a salad, the monist view remains the simpler, Occam;s choice; but the only price if I'm wrong is that I've oversimplified.]

It follows, to my mind if not to Steve's, that mass-energy pre-existed the universe, and indeed that the dimensions, space and time, are qualities or effects of mass-energy, so some version of them, perhaps not necessarily ours, also pre-existed.

If God is real, as distinct from purely conceptual / imaginary, then [he] exists in the universe (or the metaverse, which this idea directly implies), thus is made of mass-energy. That's what 'real' means, after all.

If [he]'s not made of mass-energy then the only thing [he] could otherwise be is purely conceptual / imaginary.

There are many reasons to thing that, at the least, the Abrahamic versions of God can't be real; but I'm not presently persuaded that Steve got this bit right.

Mind you, we're both hypothesizing.

 

[atanu]

The contents of the Big Bang at Time Zero were Mass-Energy pure and simple. [Even if evidence is found to suggest they might have been a salad, the monist view remains the simpler, Occam;s choice; but the only price if I'm wrong is that I've oversimplified.....

Hello sir

Let me point out a couple of points. One. There is no properly defined 'zero time' and there is no 'mass-energy' at zero time. Second. To tide over this difficulty various flavours of inflationary universe theory have come up.

 

[Hellbound Serpiente]

You cannot accept a scientific theory that VIOLATES your most fundamental physical law, gravity.

I am not scientifically well-versed, but I am fairly sure Newton's law of gravity violates special relativity, yet it is accepted in scientific community. Scientist use Newton's theory when dealing with microscopic level and Einstein relativity when dealing with macroscopic level.