God caused or uncaused?

Of course you could, however since I included a direct quote from the message before you edited it, I imagine you would have as hard a time supporting that as all the other points including the revised message.You now say: That is simply another example of attempted misdirection while you palm the pea.Let's parse the statements."Reality is absolute, logical, and uncaused."That might well be true."And the defintion of God is 'reality'."As pointed out above, that is irrelevant and just an attempt to insert an unimportant and irrelevant assertion in the hopes that the audience does not notice. All that shows is that in the past people have used that as a definition. It certainly provides no support for either the existence of God or in particular a Judaic, Christian or Biblical God."Reality does cause the physical world, though it is itself uncaused and unchanging."No, another silly and false assertion. Reality IS the physical world.BUT, the topic happens to be "God caused or uncaused?" Do you have any plans to address that question?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

mark24: Logic / reality?Could have doesn't cut it emperically mark.mark24: It's just the nature of logic mark. It's self affirming. It never came to be, it simply is. Without it, nothing orderly can be. And all of our inferences fall to pieces.Everything is dependent upon it...I like the way John put it. You may not buy it personally, but see if you follow:

jar: Do you know what the physical world is made of jar?Are you familliar with the quantum dimension?Did you know that an atom is ninety percent empty space?Did you know that all matter is made of energy?Is energy a particle or a wave?You worship the creation, I understand. I worship the creator. If you want to preach the creation, then start a thread on the absoluteness of materialism. YOu'll find Lewontin's quotes quite helpful. Perhaps I will stop by and ask you some questions.But I won't stop by and say, 'No your wrong' without actually explaining myself. That would not be a debate, it would simply be a fight.

Rob, Exactly. Merely stating the existence of logic doesn't mean it was created by god, it could have been created by god, but as you seem to agree, could have doesn't cut it. 1/ Logic isn't self affirming, it can get it wrong, I've already furnished you with a logically valid argument that is wrong, & an invalid one that is correct.2/ Logic exists because we made it, it is merely the minimum level of consistency required for propositions to even be considered. If you want to claim that god made logic, then you need evidence. Except you, it seems.Your evidence of god is the baseless assumption that logic always existed ("it never came to be, it simply is"). Let me dispense with the obvious logical flaw here, if logic always existed, then it didn't need to be created & therefore isn't evidence of god. Clearly you meant god created it, but since I can state with equal veracity that it is human made or even that it actually did always exist. In other words, the existence of logic isn't evidence of god.Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

No, not yet. We are still learning. LOL, No. Quantum Dimension? LOL Perhaps even more depending on the element. Yes, likely. But who knows, one day we may well know even more. Yet another unsupported assertion and an attempt at misdirection while you palm the pea. You have no idea what I worship and even if you did, it is irrelevant to the topic or the thread. Sorry but I have actually worked very hard to present the reasoning behind all of my posts.BUT, the topic in case you had not noticed is "God caused or uncaused?" Do you plan on addressing that question at anytime in this thread?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

mark24: You're missing the point mark... Logic wasn't created by God. Logic is God. Reality (God) is logical.mark24: And that is why we have to cohere it with the physical world. I never suggested otherwise.mark24: I never said logic was made. I am saying that it is uncaused (ie. not made).And as I showed in post 155 (need I post it again)... the physical world is the confirmation that our logic is valid. The coherence of the two is the proof. But the physical world preceded us, so how did we create it?It's like I said before... "I have a friend. His name is reality. He loves His son. The son's name is logic. and logic never lies".Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

You said yourself that 'reality IS the physical world'. I therfore presume you believe in the physical world (the creation).You believe in the creation. I believe in God.What you believe is what you worship jar. It is the idea you serve and defend.You servant of materialism you.

That has nothing to do with worship.I can test reality. I do not believe in it, I have a very high confidence level that the universe is somewhat like what I can see. Again, as I pointed out before, I have a very high confidence level in the world and universe. That is not just a matter of belief, it is the result of testing and experience.You also try yet another Three Card Monte by inferring that I do not believe in God. It is a misdirection, trying to say that having confidence in reality excludes a belief in God. Sorry but that is just yet another example of you attempting to misdirect the audience's attention while you palm the pea. You drop in a totally unrelated and unsupported assertion (that what I believe is what I worship) in the hopes that the audience will not notice you tried to change the topic yet again.And, just in case you have not noticed, the topic is "God caused or uncaused?" Do you have any intention of ever addressing that question?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Is there anything that I can say that you will agree with?Because it very much seems to me that you get off on denying any and every argument.You're an inconquerable and contrarian beast.Good for you. Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

I don't know. I'm still waiting for you to address the topic, and until you do so, it is impossible to say how well you will be able to support your position.The topic, in case you have forgotten, is "God caused or uncaused?"My personal belief is that GOD is uncaused, but I also realize that is simply a personal opinion and unsupportable. I also think it is pretty unimportant and irrelevant whether or not GOD is caused or uncaused.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

jar: That's all I've been doing except for your distractions. You may want to re-read the thread. Especially the last dozen posts.Personally, I don't think you have the mental capacity to comprehend the issues being discussed here.

Yet another attempt to misdirect attention in the hope the audience will not see you palming the pea and a comment unrelated to any of my posts in the thread as well as a personal attack on the individual as opposed to the message.As I said in Message 190That directly addresses the topic. It should be relatively clear to the audience. And it is an attempt to move the thread along.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

It's not a personal attack jar. It's just the only conclusion I can reach, since you think I have not addressed the topic.It's just beyond you jar. it's no big deal... we all have our limitations.You have no interest in moving the thread along, because you are opposed to the whole thing. You're not fooling anyone.The only one palming the pea is you.I am not asserting that God is logical and that logic is uncaused as a belief. I am actually explaining why that is so. And I have gone to great lengths to do so.I cannot decide if your participation here is for the amusement of 'qualified members' of EVC, or just a lack of intellectual capacity. But it's one or the other. That's how I see it.Either way, I ask that you please no longer participate in this thread. Thank you in advance.Edited by Rob, : No reason given.Edited by Rob, : No reason given.Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

Unlike a Great Debate, where participation is by invitation only, threads in the General Forums are open to participation by all members. For that reason, and to try to maintain some relevance, I will continue to participate.As I pointed out in Message 190... The next question might be "Why is the question irrelevant and unimportant?"A basic assumption necessary to addressing the topic of this thread is that God exists. Like many things, the existence of God is unsupportable and must either be accepted or rejected on faith, however to move the discussion forward, we must create an axiom that states "God exists."In doing that, we are using the mathematical definition of axiom, "a proposition that is assumed without proof for the sake of studying the consequences that follow from it."A proposition that is assumed without proof for the sake of studying the consequences that follow from it.There is a second assumption being made that can also be stated as an axiom, "That GOD is the Creator of the Universe."Again, that cannot be supported but for the sake of the thread can be accepted as axiomatic.So we now have two Axioms, That GOD exists and that GOD is the Creator of the Universe.Next, what are the consequences of those two axioms?First If GOD is the creator of the Universe, then GOD must have existed before the Universe.However, we are part of the Universe and cannot see anything that existed before the Universe. Since GOD existed before the Universe, we cannot know whether GOD was caused or uncaused, we cannot even speculate with any logic on the issue. We cannot see whether God caused the Universe or whether it is uncaused.Since the question is beyond the capabilities of observation, reason or logic, it is both an irrelevant question and unimportant. Whether God is caused or uncaused or the Universe is caused or uncaused is irrelevant. The Universe exists and we exist within it.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Now that was a response!Now I have something from you to think about and reply to.Though many of the issues you raised were already addressed in this thread, you have repositioned the concept in a way that may be extremely beneficial to the discussion.Thank you jar. My response will be forthcoming.