I need help understanding something - Presuppositional Apologetics

I consider myself a pretty intelligent person. I'm a computer engineer, I've always been at the top of my class back when I was a student (in the stone age ;) ), and I love learning overall - to this day. I am a firm believer in skepticism and the scientific method, and I have an insatiable thirst for knowledge.

I mention all of this because, well, I'm embarrassed to say I just don't understand the (il)logic of Presuppositional Apologetics.

I just have a monstrous problem understanding how the entire basis of someone's approach and understanding of the world can be based on something that is inherently illogical? How can you form the foundation of your analysis and understanding of - well, of anything and everything - on something that is inherently baseless, illogical, and irrational? A foundation that is utterly void of any evidence that even hints at it's validity?

I know that many of you have a background in philosophy, religious history, etc. - and therefore probably have a better understanding of this than I do. Please help me understand how anyone at all can purport to offer this as a valid argument for basically anything at all, much less Christianity.

Thanks in advance.

Tags: Apologetics, Presuppositional Apologetics, Questions, Rationality

Views: 798

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Using the Hubble space telescope we have seen that the Universe is expanding. We can tell this because of the “redshift” glow from distant stars and galaxies. Basically anything moving away from an observer glows red. However it is not that the galaxies are moving away from each other but that the space between them is growing (filling with dark matter?) and that is what moves them further apart. We can also observe that the speed of this movement is increasing. Therefore as it is increasing it must have had a starting point.

Time is important but only relatively so. In modern cosmology time and space are not distinct. They are relative to each other in what Einstein called SpaceTime.

Because of Entropy we know that the arrow of time only moves in one direction. A video by Brain Cox is easier than trying to work out the mechanics of quantum entanglement!

So (as I leap to a deduction!!) if the Universe is expanding at a faster speed it must have had a starting point when the rate of expansion was zero. That is, there was no “Space”. As Space and Time are the dancing partners of “Space-Time” then there must have been a Time = zero.

When both Space and Time equalled “zero” there was “Nothing”. Then the Big Bang happened (eventually) all of a sudden when some quantum particle popped into existence of Energy and gained Mass and 10~36 seconds later the early universe was born.

So before the Big Bang means before Space and Time came into existence. As Space-Time did not exist then Time on its own did not exist. That is where God exists.

Ok I am not considering String Theory or Multiverses only the Universe as we have observed it.

Ok I am not considering String Theory or Multiverses only the Universe as we have observed it.

As we have OBSERVED it?

No, Reg, but as some theorists deduced it from reversing the expansion, which they deduced from the red shift glow. Other theorists are filling the gaps with what they are deducing.

What I mean is I am only considering our Universe as it is the only which we have been able to observe. We could be part of an infinite “Bang/Crunch” cycle and then Time would have existed before this current Bang that we exist in but that is “turtles all the way down”.

Reg, key parts of BB cosmology were deduced, not observed. Among them are the singularity, the sudden expansion, the sudden appearance of space and time, inflation, dark matter, and dark energy. These too closely resemble the "goddidits" we hear from creationists.

More in my reply to Galllup below.

Observation supports deduction.

An unobserved singularity supports deducing it?

An unobserved sudden expansion supports deducing it?

Ditto for the remaining items in my list above.

To astronomy, add metaphysics and get cosmology.

There's too much of religion in cosmology.

Gallup, you have made potent cases for your views here. Please don't resort to name-calling; you weaken your case.

Am I wrong to assume that you know enough of the history of science to be aware of the many centuries of conflict between those who draw conclusions from experiment and those who draw conclusions from thought.

Each has advantages; each has limitations.

If you are among the many who are protecting the taxpayer subsidies now enjoyed by BB theorists, I understand your enthusiasm. You owe it to people to acknowledge the effects of those subsidies on your objectivity.

I'm receiving no subsidy. I never have and never will. I've met people who receive them; they fight hard, loud and long to keep them.

Oh, I'm not a creationist nutjob; I just sound like one. Thanks.

There may an exaggeration fallacy where you found the ad hominem and anecdotal fallacies. Or is your equating the BB community with the scientific community an identification fallacy?

Gallup, your easy dismissals reveal your ignorance of politics.

That's okay; I too was ignorant of it before I started my 42 years in it.

Therefore as it is increasing it must have had a starting point.

So (as I leap to a deduction!!) if the Universe is expanding at a faster speed it must have had a starting point when the rate of expansion was zero.

Both of these conclusions seem to contradict what (little) I know about asymptotes.

We can also observe that the speed of this movement is increasing. Therefore as it is increasing it must have had a starting point.

The deduction I would make is not that "it must have had a starting point" (see asymptote) but that there must be some force (anti-gravity) which is being applied. Shit don't accelerate on its own.

Take temperature (another asymptote). Just as you can never reach absolute zero, I contend that you can never reach the Big Bang.

RSS

Events

Services we love!

© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service