> I am in an argument on Atheism. There I encountered the
> following facts.
> 1)That the universe is finite and it has boundary although
> there is no outside or nothing outside.
> 2) That something can come out of nothing although there
> was no absolute nothing. absolute nothing is physical
> impossibility. But particles come out of nothing.
> 3) That indeterminacy is necessary to accept.
> So could anyone elaborate on these things? How can
> Spinoza's worldview be still tenable?
You say that these three statements are facts. Do you mean that they
refer to some truth or reality which your own mind affirms, either directly
or through some other truths, or do you mean that some particular person or
group of people have made such statements and you accept that they must
refer to some absolute truth regardless of whether your own mind affirms or
negates anything they might refer to?
If the former, then perhaps you might express the meaning of each
statement a little more clearly by reasoning from the simple clear ideas
upon which they must rest. For instance, what do you mean by "the universe"
or by "particles", etc.? And also, what mental tool are you using to examine
such things, your Imagination or your Understanding (taking these two terms
in the way Spinoza uses and thoroughly explains them)?
If the latter, then I don't know how to help you. :-)