Ping
OK. That article made my head hurt. I think that there is an intelligent designer.
Is God limited as to his instruments? Mine isn’t...
>I vote for multiverse
Are the two mutually exclusive? I mean if God says it’s His will that none should perish, who am I to say that He can’t have other Universes where He gets to save those? Likewise, who am I to berate God if THIS is the ONLY universe that exists?
So wrong on so many levels.
The possibility that the universe has directionality or purpose, even if self-contained – that is, not making any appeal to an external deity – has been forcefully rejected by most of modern science. But maybe the extraordinary phenomenon that is an evolving universe containing conscious observers is itself forcing science to reconsider.
We probably don't get to choose. We were not even consulted.
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline (Proverbs 1:7)
i dont see how a choice needs to be made. if you say the universe is unlimited in size or there are an unlimited number of universes (multiverse), then theoretically you could make the argument that every possible combination of everything has to happen - which leads to other earths with you living on them somewhere out there in the cosmos. but i can see someone thinking there is no God and there is a finite universe.
Why couldn’t God have created the multiverse?
The silliness begins with the assumption that God and a multiverse is an exclusive “or”. It smacks of denying God because platypuses exist, and they are just too weird to have been created except randomly. Bad logic.
Let’s define terms. Say you take a coin from your pocket, and for no particular reason, you flip it. It is a “heads”, but it could just as likely have been a “tails”. In addition to what it was, the possible other outcome was created, an energetic possibility, a “microverse” in which “tails” was the outcome. But then you put the coin back in your pocket, and the two possibilities collapse back together.
So the term possibility, in this case, means a temporary division of reality.
Later that day, however, you decide to select your career from two choices: either the US Marine Corps, or to become a ballet dancer. Again, whichever one you choose, the other one is also chosen, but the divergence is so great, it transcends a “possibility” and becomes a true “alternative” reality. You essentially create an identical twin in a parallel reality, so you can experience both alternatives. And the alternate reality doesn’t collapse back together with this reality until you are both dead.
Possibilities and alternatives lend themselves to the “bubble membrane” theory of reality, in which events are contained in reality bubbles, that behave a little bit like bubbles in soda. Each bubble defines its own “microverse”, which contains event variables, but is in turn defined by the larger bubbles it is inside. Physical objects continually pass between bubbles with no loss of continuity, as they, along with events, actually make the bubbles in the first place.
I vote for God AND multiverse.
They are in no way mutually exclusive.
Read “Star Maker” by Olaf Stapledon. Written in 1937, before the modern age of cosmology, he posits an ultimate creative force that creates cosmos after cosmos.
The idea of multiple universes is generally driven by a notion of how many universes and how many life-spans of universes you’d have to have for even the simplest animals to evolve, i.e. by the basic probabilistic impossibility of macro-evolution. Dealing with reality as it lies is simpler.
The multiverse has serious problems. Check out ‘Reasonable Faith’ by William Lane Craig, a philosophy who is renowned for consistently winning debates with atheists. Or if you prefer a mildly heretical atheist, check out ‘The Road to Reality’ by Roger Penrose. He has penetrating criticisms of both major theories of the multiverse (eternal inflation and cosmological natural selection).
I must be in one of the other universes where Occam’s Razor doesn’t exist. The idea of the multiverse, in my opinion, gives the phrase “mental masterbation” it’s definition.
Why not both? If God is supernatural, by definition, he exists beyond our understanding of space/time. For God, it cold be that all options exist and He is not constrained human view of the progression of time (ie, past, present, future, and all probable outcomes exist to Him at the same moment.)
Neither.
Does modern cosmology force us to choose?
Uh. False choice.
The multiverse theory is absurd. Talk to me when you can test it.
Is it the case that the apparent fine-tuning of constants
Not that sh-t, again.
I'm done.
I’ll go with both...or even more or anything.
I believe God can do anything, even manifest Himself in each of us differently, any way He chooses.
To confuse the two is the fundamental theological mistake made by ID. It is also why you could have God and a multiverse without creating any significant theological problems. Believers don't have to choose. They can have both if they want.”
No accountability that way.