The Universe has always existed

Not a christcuck, famalam. Though I have come around on Christianity over time. I used to resent it, but now I know why it's important and should be treasured for what it did for European/White civilization.
I don't know the nature of god. I don't know answers to any of the great mysteries. But I know that pure materialism is a failed concept, and that scientific materialists have adopted a worldview that they can't argue themselves out of, because they believe anything that exists must fit within the rules they've decided to play by. It's literally no different than a Christian saying "I know the bible is true because it says so in the bible." Except they've systematized it around observation and prediction. As if saying "this provides all the answers we need, see I can use it to predict the movements of the planets" is enough.
Well it isn't. You don't live in a purely materialistic world. You are not a robot. You live in a world of emotion, experience, perspectivalism. You care about things. You value things that may not be objectively valuable. You do things that make no sense from outside your own perspective.
If your mom dies, it means nothing to science. It means nothing objectively. But it means everything to you. Why? Are you flawed because you value your mother? Is that something you should fix? No.
Then why do you only accept answers that come from within such a cold, calculating, materialistic system? Why not admit that it's not enough to describe the deeper truths of our existence?

>evolution always existed too! Look at this, I’m smart so I believe in le epic science that’s why I know for a FACT evolution is real!

Attached: C5761D39-EFD1-4927-86EB-1F5FEE86C831.gif (346x195, 1.56M)

God here. I can prove to you that I exist.

eternal =/= infinite
the universe exists as it exists, the existents are limited - there is no creation or destruction. a good way to see this is that the universe is not an ongoing process of creation/maintanence but a static group of existents.

>nothing is infinite

The Mandelbrot set is infinitely complex niggerbrain.

Attached: mandelbrot.gif (200x200, 897K)

So you admit most anti Christian threads come from you shills? You guys are pretty gay. God loves you you freak

Not an argument: this is an isolated concept of ontology we're talking about. and generally, the few rational people here don't blindly believe in evolution (i scarely believe in modern scientific findings nowadays, at least that which i have not tested myself - directly or not)

All of those thoughts and feeling occur in the brain, which a a material thing. The material world is the only world.

concepts are not precepts and are susceptible to errors, systems of irrational numbers - though can be used to explain things/ or have use

The truth is we don’t and probably can’t know. We can only guess at probabilities, put faith in certain beliefs etc.

>Now you have to prove the universe is cyclical and can somehow defeat entropy.
the amount of matter is infinite, while large regions of space have nothing because they burned out long ago, "most" of space is filled with stuff
time is not relevant to the universe, it has always existed and will always exist

>no god
yeah
>no big bang
now you’re just being silly

proof?

don't confuse terms, what you are stating is specifically called mechanism( a hard cause and effect premise), it is possible for consciousness to exist in a one material/physical world.

to postulate that there is another world, unless with the same laws as ours, (making the concept unnecessary) is to arbitrate and act on the unknowable(neither true or false)

Attached: 1546203960321.png (540x297, 284K)

Valenkin’s theory proves that any universe in a state of expansion has a beginning.

Do you deny science, science denier?

the eternality of existence is not mutually exclusive with a big bang. it just states that what there is was always there, and the big bang states an explosion of what there was.

like quantum level theorems, the big bang relates to knowledge which excludes light(leading to light-form information destruction)

He is the Alpha and the Omega, meaning he IS the universe you brainlet.

Attached: 1526072737842.png (400x508, 287K)

in that you cannot use logic to disprove logical axioms, you cannot use science to deny reality.

Quantum fields are part of the expanding universe which Valenkin proved had a beginning you ignorant ignoramus

Attached: Screenshot_2018-12-06-21-26-33-494_com.adobe.reader.png (1080x5653, 1.39M)

Are you fucking retarded? Valenkin’s theory scientifically proves the universe had a beginning , fucking hell I knew it was bad over there but Brit education is shockingly awful

You won't go anywhere working with time. You need a meta-time, a time that ticks by even in voids where change is immeasurable. Such a thing as meta-time can only exist conceptually. Conceptual existence exists within the void of nothingness. Voids form anomalies and these anomalies burst into existence and become universes. Physical laws like conservation of energy DO NOT APPLY to the void/nothingness.

Nothingness also exists conceptually. Conceptual existences within the infinite potential of the nothing, are something you'll have to accept before we can move forward with God and science.

Conceptual existences exist.

I’m almost positive this universe is some sort of Sims-like experiment to create life. Nothing adds up the deeper you go, but everything has fallen into place perfectly. Evolution is some advanced AI-like system to keep everything going. When the heat death of the universe occurs, the guy who made it will jump start it again, or just stop it.

Then act like it. Shut yourself down. Shut down your whole family. They're just squishy robots, right? It has no objective value, so shut down.
Stop eating. Stop breathing. Show me that materialism is all that matters by denying your 'subjective' experience altogether. Prove you mean it.
If the idea seems abhorrent to you, then you have to admit there's something else there. An 'emergent property' that may have been spawned from material, but is greater than it's constituent parts. Whatever you call that. Consciousness, soul, ego, whatever - it's MORE IMPORTANT than material. Why?
Does the universe care if a planetoid smashes into us and sterilizes the Earth? Nope. But you do. And that's your first clue that we're all keyed into something more than pure materialism. You are a subjective entity with values, emotions, worries, loves, etc. And those can't be explained through science. Yes, they can be broken down into pieces and described as some complex process, but the end result will forever remain outside the grasp of understanding. It's simply far too complex to be predictable. And if you can't predict it, you don't understand it.

then HE will have to obey the instances of existencve itself, an unconscious, static group of existents.

there is no need for religion, supernaturalism all you have is a unnecessary name for existence that has mystical connotations

>the amount of matter is infinite,
I know lots of scientists that would disagree with you

you can not use systems that depend on axioms to deny those same axioms.
what is, is. there isnt a necessary beginning unless you rely on mechanistic premises which again is self refuting as it leads to infinite regress. you unwashed illiterate

can you stop taking things as a given?
state your premises, see where your mechanistic theorem leads to

Circular reasoning you fucking idiot

>the universe is eternal because it’s eternal

Britbong education, fml.

Fucking idiot. Logically fallacious MORON!

Based

>No. I'm just doing the same thing that religious people do when they claim God always existed. They don't have to justify their God existing, so why would I have to defend the Universe existing? At least we can see the Universe. Unlike your God it's clearly visible and not made up.
>Check mate, Christfags.

Unmoved mover: Aristotle (The Philosopher)

Where are the Scholastics?

>denying the universe is eternal by proving it’s not eternal

No wonder we wiped the floor with you 200 years ago

I thought fedora fags were a dead movement

I wonder which god is true...

Indeed, I care about stuff. The brain is a truly powerful, but purely physical thing. There doesn't have to be something else there.

>made-up Semitic

More Ad Homs nice
No it is not circular reasoning it is to make coherent what your theorem suggest which leads to a logical infinite regress, for example
see the quantum vaccum from which creation supposedly starts - that IS what existence IS.
you cannot use mischaracterize the meaning of words just to make a fallacious statement of creation when there is existence beside your starting point

"First, “popped out of nothingness” is a tendentious way to describe the option of Big Bang minus God. If time began with the first event, then there never was a time when nothing existed, and so there was never any nothingness to pop out of. The existence of the universe – be its past finite or infinite – is explanatorily basic. "

aaeblog.com/2009/04/12/ten-answers-from-an-austro-athenian/

Such logic. Damn. Do you work at McDonalds?

This. Aside from dopey people who play the victim card on Jow Forums for their beliefs, you're just giving them a reason not to listen

>No. I'm just doing the same thing that religious people do when they claim God always existed
youtube.com/watch?v=RVzeojdXbpQ

You do know that the Big Bang can live in-line with an eternal universe, right? i.e. the theory that the universe expands then contracts to reform itself ad infinitum.

>Such logic. Damn. Do you work at McDonalds?

Who knows, but it's clear that you do.

>Except they've systematized it around observation and prediction.
Correction, they’ve systemized it around faith. Faith in scienctists who they never meet, who tell them things they don’t understand and can’t test. Faith in scientists, all of whom are educated at institutions which believe there are no biological differences between men and women. Atheism is just intellectual-flavored Christianity. A Christian espouses their beliefs to look virtuous to others, where an atheist espouses their beliefs to look smart to others. And in both cases, it’s somebody else’s beliefs, anyway.

Attached: A5C3D610-8C72-4280-BD35-255F07282E90.jpg (483x724, 51K)

Your argument is literally that the eternality of the universe is axiomatic - it’s NOT.

>inb4 matter is neither created nor destroyed
>is
>NOT was never

Fucking idiot

Therefore your argument is circular reasoning.

Quantum vacuums are part of the expanding universe which means they had a beginning you fucking retard

Nothing is the absence of ANYTHING you retard.

not what i said,
i gave a reason as to why it isnt possible for a mechanistic process (creation) to be possible because it is ----self refuting---- in that nothing and nothing does not create something and something creating something begs the question which and how is the starting something.

>no u
Sick bantz

>"purely physical"
Nope. It yields something non-physical. Consciousness.

Out of nothing, nothing comes

Which means there has to be a creator you self-refuting dolt.

Congrats, you played yourself.

you are not even explaining your fucking premise.
let me try to LOGICALLY explain
you are depending on a false premise that things MUST come into being which i state again and again is not logically sound ^^

>the universe has a finite beginning, the Big Bang, when time started.
>the universe is flat and will extend forever, so there's no chance we will ever see a "big crunch" (map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html)

Don't be a science denier.

Attached: 1547825977391.png (688x418, 585K)

Catholic here, this argument is retarded. Won't convince anyone with it. Just because people don't think the long run (afterlife) exists means they want to destroy what they enjoy in the short run. To them that's all they have.

w h a t
OP literally answers this... (and i elaborated)
the infinite regress which is solved by an uncaused cause (out of nothing, nothing comes) does not have to be a conscioussness beyond the Universe but the Universe itself. I E why add another step and add god?

no i didnt play myself, check your premises

they're stupid then since they have no way of disproving it
the current limitations of the known universe are solely because of our limitations in technology, not because we can actually see an end

Fair enough. There's that whole angle to the "I fucking LOVE SCIENCE!!!" crowd too. I love learning about science, but I keep myself grounded with it. Lots of people have replaced the spiritual part of themselves with a part that's "In awe" of the universe, as if that's a more rational perspective, lol. They're just looking for the sense of something greater, more majestic, but mapping modern sensibilities onto it.
And half of them don't even realize they're looking at colorized images from Hubble, and they think the universe actually looks like a rainbow swirl. "Wow so beautiful". Yet there's a galaxy in our night sky that's visible with the naked eye. Andromeda. And it doesn't look like that at all. Even this close, we can barely see it. We're in the middle of a galaxy, and it just looks like a faint smudge on the night sky.
But they get so awed at falsified images of galaxies even though if one was right in front of you, you couldn't even see it.

Scientifically proven by Valenkin’s theory

You can deny science though, that’s ok.

>To them
Precisely. That's my point. What matters TO YOU is what matters period. Nobody can break free of their own consciousness. Consciousness is prime.

Or maybe things only appear to be fine-tuned for life because if it weren’t, we wouldn’t be here to observe it. It could be that the “universe” has gone through many different iterations, the vast majority of which didn’t have these oddities that make you assume it’s fine-tuned for life. Thus, nobody was ever there to see it. Or you can substitute one universe with many iterations with a multiverse, if you’re a sci-fi loving, cum gargling basedboy.

Science proves there is a beginning.

But you can deny science, that’s ok!

time is a concept denoting motion over a quantization of our consciouss. and big bang merely states a process from which a singularity of existents expanded.

again the mischaracterization to make 'space' an existent causes this fallacy of expansion.
things are moving away from each other is a better statement

neither nasa nor a consensus of scientists count as an authority on ideas. state the refutation of the big crunch (if its even relevant)

2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
2Pe 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

Attached: 371d52ff1df8946829f298a337f91312bef4a67738d9d25e384368828946200d_1.jpg (600x608, 55K)

from whence does science depend?
what im elaborating on is meta-physics

all matter condenses into supermassive black holes, then explodes outwards

Argument from authority

why make an argument from a premise in which OP doesn't believe (or most people here)?

You didn’t rise from the grave with thousands of witnesses. You are nobody.

radicaluncertainty.com/2019/01/19/the-negative-reality/

>The Universe has always existed
It exists only because we can perceive it as such. It's both real and unreal at the same time yet it's neither based on individual or group perspective. Also take into account even though humanity is the apex organism on our planet our sensory organs aren't that superior to perceive and know absolutely everything that goes around us or far away from us.

Saved

god if you've ever been near this fuckers,
'consensus' is their authority, its frustatingly asinine.

theres this little anecdote of a guy who may have gotten experimental results that deny einsteins theories and the scientists scoffed at him.

It's turtles all the way down.

>Nothingness also exists conceptually
In what way? What even is it?

Entropy doesn't prove the universe is finite thought. It just proves shit breaks down. A pile of trash isn't going to magically disappear it's just going to breakdown for fucking ever and keep getting shittier.

Also how is entropy incompatible with infinity?

You’re implicitly arguing for the existing of God without realizing it

I’m lol’ing

That is to say, the laws of logic exist outside of time and space, and were never created. This is easily proven by saying that before the universe, there was nothing (law of identity), and that nothing cannot be something (law of non contradiction), thus the laws of logic existed before the Big Bang.

And the laws of logic are the mind of God.

Congrats, you played yourself.

It is simple logic. In an infinite and unbounded universe, their is some layer where there is an actual God, and many lesser gods. Right now all the physical evidence points to the universe being infinite and unbounded.

you cannot both percieve parts of reality without perceiving all of reality.
a colorblind man and a normal man will both come to the same conclusions of color.
if we can see part of reality, we see reality.
to say otherwise is arbitrary because:

an 'unseen' reality will in effect not interact with us or anything we interact with or even postulate.

see

>state the refutation of the big crunch
Basically the critical density of the universe needs to be greater than the density of the universe for a big crunch to occur. Current measurements show the converse, so the universe will extend forever and never come back into a single point.

may i ask what your background is?

So why it's continually expanding?
What about MBR which proves that universe was in many states, starting at highly energetic state with enormous temperature and mostly hydrogen? It clearly implies, that universe was once small and became universe that we know it after many years

The current thinking is that a black hole is just an incredibly violent explosion, just because of the time dilation it causes it takes trillions of years to play out.

>you cannot both percieve parts of reality without perceiving all of reality.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

does this relate to the premise that OP made?

Completely agree, it’s all so tiresome. You can go to every corner of the internet and find people angrily yelling at each other that they know for certain how the universe came about. Meanwhile, 90% of what they’re saying is incomprehensible mumbo-jumbo to them, and it usually doesn’t even answer the question of where the fucking universe came from.
>it started with the Big Bang!
>and what happened right before that
>it uh... it started with the Big Bang!
Vs
>God created everything
>right, and how did God come about?
>g-God created himself before he even existed? I guess?
And all because their afraid to admit that they can’t answer the un-answerable question.

>The Universe has always existed. Nothing created it
That means there's an infinite number of events in the past, so how did we reach the present?

Scientific consensus may not be an argument from authority if paired with some substantive facts, but the statement that was made definitely was fallacious.

> the eternity of space has always existed
aight, now how did the primordial structure of matter become existing if it wasn't through act of God?