An honest answer for a newbie, please.

quote:

---

Originally posted by JJboy:

The BB obviously had to have a cause.

---

I think a quote will explain this better than I could:Within the universe, the emergence of new entities can be explained in terms of the actions of entities that already exist. All actions presuppose the existence of entities that caused their emergence. All causality presupposes the existence of something that acts as a cause. To demand a cause for all of existence is to demand a contradiction: if the cause exists, it is part of existence; if it does not exist, it cannot be a cause. Causality presupposes existence, existence does not presuppose causality. Existence-not "God"-is the First Cause.
- Dr. Nathaniel Branden (http://www.positiveatheism.com)------------------
compmage

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

(i) that which begins to exist has a cause

​

(ii) john (he of the non-answers to whom i write) began to exist

​

therefore, john had a cause

---

I think what John is getting at is that in order for A to have a cause, that cause needs to exist BEFORE A in time. When we get to extremes, such as the beginning of the universe, time does not exist therefore there is no BEFORE for the cause to exist in. That is why when is important; it is tied into the cause/effect question no matter how it is phrazed. Cause/effect can't exists (or happen) without a when.------------------
compmage[This message has been edited by compmage, 11-14-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quetzal:
Hi forgiven,

​

Just a note on what might be the problem here (I could be wrong). It appears you have constructed an unsound argument. Consider the following:

​

1. All dogs have fleas.
2. Rover has fleas.
3. Therefore Rover is a dog.

​

The above is quite obviously unsound because premise one is false - not all dogs have fleas. The same applies to your syllogism: P1: "That which begins to exist has a cause" is false - you are assuming the consequent. The premise has NOT been shown to be true in all cases. Therefore your question is invalid. Hope that clarifies things.

---

Quetzal, I think you are correct. However, in your example, even assuming premise 1 and 2, your conclusion is unsupported. Premise 1 should read "All and only dogs have fleas." ------------------
compmage

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

hmmm... ok... but those sciences, is the problem of repeatability the only thing they have in common with macroevolution? iow, are they observeable? falsifiable?

---

What would this matter? Evolution is both observable and falsifiable.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

ok, let me ask you a serious question here... can i use the above paragraph for my worldview, and if i can will it be accepted the way you want yours accepted? for example, can i reword your paragraph to read:

​

"The most common argument that is levied ~~my edit~~ against the creation of the universe by God ~~end edit~~ is that not enough ~~my edit~~ proofs of his existence ~~end edit~~ are being found. That's just a very blunt way of saying not all the data is in yet, hardly a serious challenge to the predominant ~~my edit~~ worldview held by most people ~~end edit~~."

​

if your paragraph is acceptable, it seems to me mine is also... yet, i doubt it will be

---

From where I stand your paragraph is not acceptable mostly because it isn't accurate. It isn't that not enought evidence for your god is being found. It is that NO evidence for your god (or any other) is being found. Perhaps if we had some evidence that there was a a god-like being out there that was interfering in the way the universe operates. That would still leave us with questions as to its nature. It could be any number of gods (Christ, Zeus, Thor, etc) or it could be some god that we have never considered, or it might just be extremely powerful but not a god at all.------------------
compmage

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

so my question to you is, is it enough to show that something (anything) has always existed and that this always-existing thing isn't the universe? would such a reasonable conclusion, arrived at in a reasonable manner, cause you to at least entertain the notion that this always-existent "thing" is God?

---

Speaking for myself, this would not be nearly enough. It is like telling me about a shirt you own, giving evidence that it is coloured but that it is not red and asking me entertain the notion that it is a colour I have never hear of or see before. It could be green, blue, yellow or any number of other colours.If you want to show that god exists and that he/she/it has always existed, a good place to start would be to show that he/she/it actually exists.------------------
compmage

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

i can't help you there, compmage... if it isn't enough to show that something has always existed, and this something isn't the universe, that it's eternal, and have you entertain even a notion that it's God,

---

So, assuming you can show that there is something that always existed and that something isn't the universe, you want me to consider the notion of god. Which god would that be and why would it have to be a god?And when you say you can't help me, do you mean that you have no evidence that this something actually is god but you want me to assume it is anyway?The problem with this is that someone from any religion could do exactly the same and claim that this something is their god and not yours. Their case would be just as strong (weak) as yours.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

and then you look at creation and examine your own heart and see the order and beauty around you...

---

I see plenty of beauty, some order and some chaos. My 'heart' rejoices in my existance. How exactly does this show that god exists and is eternal?

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

if this isn't enough for you, nobody can help you... but God, and he doesn't need my help

---

Appartly he does since het hasn't even bothered to put in an appearence. If god exists, he is either incapable of convincing me or doesn't want to try (for whatever reason).

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

my job isn't to prove to you God exists... my job is to show those who want to know what his plan for them is...

---

It is gods job then to convince me? Why hasn't he even tried?

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

thanks for your post, compmage... God bless you

---

Thank you for being polite, but you shouldn't give up so easily. I am not asking for something that an omnipotent god would not be able to provide. If he realy loves me and has a plan for me why do I still not believe?------------------
compmage

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

have you asked him to? it seems irrational to say he's incapable of something or that he hasn't tried when he's as close to you as a thought... if you call upon the Lord you will be saved... but you must want it to be so... do you?

---

Have I asked? Many times. Did he answer? Not once.You see, many people assume that since I am an atheist it must mean that I have never tried to 'let God in' or some such and if only I woull do that then I would become a believer.I used to be a Christian and wanted to become a youth leader. To do that I needed to know the bible and god better so I started reading and praying. You know what happened? I became convinced that the whole shabang was a myth, a fairytale.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

he has, comp... why haven't you listened? why haven't you opened your heart?

---

Don't make assumptions about what I have or haven't done.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:
why don't people believe? why indeed... all i can do is what i can, all i can say is what i've heard... i won't beg you to listen for God's still, small voice... but i can and will beg him to speak louder... when he does, are you willing to listen? these are the facts, and i know they are true because i have a personal relationship with the one who wrote them in my heart

---

I am always 'listening'. Why do you think I asked you to provide evidence that god exists? If I am wrong I want to know it. Where is the evidence, where is god. Nobody seems to be able to show me and god isn't helping either.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

can i make you believe? no...

---

Yes you can, just show me the evidence.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

will God make you believe? no...

---

He doesn't have to make me believe. If he existed and I saw the evidence I would believe.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

will he come to you if you call to him? most assuredly... he won't call for you, i can't call for you... but he listens for you... and you have my word i'll do what i can... i'll do all i can, and i'll do it right now

---

Then why didn't he? It isn't hard. Surely if he is almighty he would have been able to answer?Maybe he just isn't there? Seems like the most reasonable explanation.------------------
compmage

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:
now what you're really saying is, you reject those evidences, prefering something more, some evidence of your choosing...

---

No, what I am saying is there is NO evidence.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

you have the same evidences i had, comp..

---

You mean you believe based on nothing?

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

you simply freely choose to reject those evidences...

---

There is nothing to reject.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

perhaps i'm just a simple man who thinks simple thoughts and is convinced by simple things... then again, perhaps i simply find creation itself to be overpowering evidence of a Creator

---

Firstly, how do you know 'creation' was created?
Secondly, how do you know that, assuming it was created, your version of god did the creating?

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

we're all free to choose this day whom to trust, whom to believe, and whom to serve... i'd not want to deny you that freedom if i could... i have chosen... you have chosen

---

I can't trust, believe or server someone, if I don't even know if they exist. Then ofcourse, if I did know they existed I would have to decide if they are worthy of trust or service.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

i won't argue with you nor will i attempt to prove to you that God exists... he's already done that...

---

If he had already done that I would be a believer. I am not, ergo he hasn't done anything.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

and i've already done what i'm called to do... someone else in your life planted... i tried to water... if there's to be any increase, it will come from God

---

Translation: I don't have any evidence to show you.------------------
compmage

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chara:

Compmage,

​

Funk posted something very interesting in another thread that I think would be beneficial for you to read. Sometimes I think we ask God to talk to us and then get so busy looking for what we think is going to be the way, that we miss Him altogether.

---

There is only on way that I can trust and that is evidence. Evidence that I can show to other people so that they can examine it also. After which we can compare our observations and conclussions.

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:

Don't you think that the reason forgiven is here talking to you about the Lord might be God reaching out to you.

---

That is always a possibility, unfortunately it is very far down the list. It is best to always examine your options from the most to the least likely and given that I have just as much evidence of god's existance as I have for an invisible pink unicorn (none), you will understand if I don't hold my breath.------------------
compmage

quote:

---

Originally posted by gene90:

You are free to believe or not to believe. If there were "evidence" like that that was non-subjective you would not be free to disbelieve.

---

True, but I would be free to worship or not. As it stands, I can't bring myself to think that god exists without evidence and I can't
worship or reject a being that I don't think exists.------------------
compmage