Quantum Creationism -- Is It Science Or Is It Religion?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Eugene Shubert said:
You seem to not understand that there is greater woo in the belief that quantum creationism is a legitimate scientific theory and not a merely credible religious doctrine.
Click to expand...
No, I am suggesting it is neither a religion nor a theory.

It is merely a belief.

And that's OK. Nothing wrong with beliefs.
 
Eugene:

Eugene Shubert said:
Not only did I coin the term quantum creationism, but I formulated a thoughtful theology about it. It's true. I believe in my own theology.
Click to expand...
Your definition of quantum creationism doesn't say anything about God. Where does God come into it?

Is it that you believe that God caused the universe to spontaneously materialise out of nothing? What about God himself, then? Did he also spontaneously materialise out of nothing?

Article 1 of The Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Shubertians, Circa 2018, affirms:

1. God is the most thrilling thing in the universe. He is the greatest being that could exist without contradiction with maximally infinite divine attributes. Thus, it's inconceivable that God could be more wonderful, more holy, more righteous, more loving, more merciful, more gracious, more powerful, more knowledgeable, more infallible, etc. etc. than He already is.

The first line is what I learned from a vision. What follows is a definition of God.
Click to expand...
What does "maximally infinite" mean? Infinite is infinite, isn't it? What does it mean to maximise infinity?
What are "divine attributes"? Which ones are you thinking about? The ones in the list in the following sentence?

Your definition of God doesn't seem to me to be any different from how the average Christian might define God.

As for my uniqueness theorem: When I was a child, I realized that there could only be one all-knowing God. My reasoning was as follows: If two Gods were all-powerful and all-knowing, then both Gods would know what each other would be thinking and Their minds would be intertwined with each other's deepest thoughts and emotions. If so, then They would be essentially just one mind in two different bodies.
Click to expand...
Knowing what somebody else is thinking doesn't imply that you automatically think the same thing, as far as I can tell.

I have a left-hemisphere and a right-hemisphere but that doesn't make me two persons.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure. How much do you know about split-brain studies?
 
James R said:
Your definition of quantum creationism doesn't say anything about God. Where does God come into it?
Click to expand...
Most of my thoughts on this topic are limited to subscribers of The Seventh-day Millerite / Adventist / Shubertian Forum. It would take too much work for me to summarize it all here.
 
Eugene Shubert said:
It is well known and easy to prove that infinities come in different sizes. For brevity, I refer you to the mathematical discipline called set theory.
Click to expand...
I'm familiar with all that. I just don't see how it applies to God's "divine attributes".

Eugene Shubert said:
Most of my thoughts on this topic are limited to subscribers of The Seventh-day Millerite / Adventist / Shubertian Forum. It would take too much work for me to summarize it all here.
Click to expand...
So would it be fair to say that the only purpose of this thread is to advertise your personal belief in "quantum creationism"?

Is there anything else you want to discuss regarding quantum creationism?
 
James R said:
So would it be fair to say that the only purpose of this thread is to advertise your personal belief in "quantum creationism"?
Click to expand...
Everyone even mildly informed believes in quantum creationism. But is it science or is it religion? I haven't seen that challenge debated anywhere. I most certainly haven't seen it answered yet in this thread.
 
Last edited:
Eugene:

Eugene Shubert said:
Everyone even mildly informed believes in quantum creationism.
Click to expand...
I don't. Not as you've defined it.

As I said, I'll need you to show (1) there was an initial "nothingness", and (2) that there was a "spontaneous materialisation". Then I might be a believer. Having said that, though, it seems that you have tacked on various ideas about a version of the Christian God, for reasons that aren't clear to me at this point and which are likely to be very problematic.

But is it science or is it religion?
Click to expand...
As you've defined it, it is clearly religion. Your God isn't scientific, as defined. If that God is required for your quantum creationism, then your quantum creationism is religious.

Eugene Shubert said:
You have every right to be angered for being exposed in having an undeniably religious belief.
Click to expand...
See above. I do not believe in your quantum creationism, as defined.
 
James R said:
I do not believe in your quantum creationism, as defined.
Click to expand...
Then all I need to do is show my hand and declare victory. High ranking cosmologists already teach that a highly ordered physical reality can spontaneously materialize out of nothingness and then become increasingly disordered and decay into inevitable extinction and non-existence. That's the view of all mainstream physicists. You can hear Sir Roger Penrose express that very orthodox belief at exactly 5:00 to 7:05 minutes into the following Hard Talk interview with Stephen Sackur.

 
Eugene Shubert said:
Then all I need to do is show my hand and declare victory. High ranking cosmologists already teach that a highly ordered physical reality can spontaneously materialize out of nothingness and then become increasingly disordered and decay into inevitable extinction and non-existence. That's the view of all mainstream physicists. You can hear Sir Roger Penrose express that very orthodox belief at exactly 5:00 to 7:05 minutes into the following Hard Talk interview with Stephen Sackur.
Click to expand...
But they don't have absolute faith in that conclusion. They just think it's possible. So it's not a religion, and it's not creationism since there is no creator. And it's ironic that you seem to be attempting to insult science by calling it a religion when you are one of the most religiously motivated people here.
 
spidergoat said:
But they don't have absolute faith in that conclusion. They just think it's possible. So it's not a religion, and it's not creationism since there is no creator. And it's ironic that you seem to be attempting to insult science by calling it a religion when you are one of the most religiously motivated people here.
Click to expand...
Yes it is a hypothesis, essentially from applying the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics to the universe as a whole.

Of course this tells us nothing about local order in the universe, for example in the growth of a living organism.
 
Eugene Shubert said:
Absolute faith isn't required to be a quantum creationist. Furthermore, there's no point in trying to move the goalposts since the game is already over.
Click to expand...
Restating a common big bang hypothesis as a religion didn't win you anything except my contempt.
 
spidergoat said:
Restating a common big bang hypothesis as a religion didn't win you anything except my contempt.
Click to expand...
You didn't refute my argument with either fact or reason. Furthermore, your sad song and dance is no rebuttal. I demonstrated that there is more science in my theology than there is science in the outrageously empty pre-big-bang physics that I cited.
 
Eugene Shubert said:
You didn't refute my argument with either fact or reason. Furthermore, your sad song and dance is no rebuttal. I demonstrated that there is more science in my theology than there is science in the outrageously empty pre-big-bang physics that I cited.
Click to expand...
It is understandable that you are resorting to personal attacks after your theology has collapsed. Indeed, it is a common outcome for creationists in this forum. Good luck with dealing with your anger.
 
billvon said:
It is understandable that you are resorting to personal attacks after your theology has collapsed. ... Good luck with dealing with your anger.
Click to expand...
You are projecting. Your slaphappily unscientific religious dogma has been exposed.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top