Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8897 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-19-2019 9:29 PM
143 online now:
AZPaul3, dwise1, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), Tanypteryx (4 members, 139 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,461 Year: 3,498/19,786 Month: 493/1,087 Week: 83/212 Day: 13/31 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
3456Next
Author Topic:   Uncreated Creator Argument
X86ChipSet
Junior Member (Idle past 3556 days)
Posts: 2
From: UK
Joined: 03-24-2009


Message 16 of 80 (504255)
03-25-2009 7:52 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Taz
03-25-2009 3:06 PM


you are limiting the possibilities that are not contradicted by evidence with no reason other than that you find them illogical
This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Taz, posted 03-25-2009 3:06 PM Taz has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by subbie, posted 03-25-2009 8:10 PM X86ChipSet has not yet responded

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 34 days)
Posts: 3508
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 17 of 80 (504256)
03-25-2009 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by X86ChipSet
03-25-2009 7:52 PM


How about because there's no evidence in support of the eliminated possibilities, and they aren't necessary to explain what's observed? That seems like a good reason to me.


For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by X86ChipSet, posted 03-25-2009 7:52 PM X86ChipSet has not yet responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 18 of 80 (504263)
03-25-2009 11:49 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Straggler
03-24-2009 7:39 PM


Re: Albino Gods
Hi Straggler,

Straggler writes:

But Rahvin nothing is eternal!

Except God ;)

But God and everything you see has always existed.

It may not have always been in the form you see it now.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Straggler, posted 03-24-2009 7:39 PM Straggler has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by onifre, posted 03-27-2009 11:16 AM ICANT has not yet responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 12159
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 19 of 80 (504285)
03-26-2009 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Taz
03-25-2009 3:06 PM


The source of wisdom and logic
Taz writes:

The universe -| was created by god.
God |- just exists.

And voila we have...

The universe just exists.

Or we also have "God was created by God." Which sounds curiously human to me. :)

The key idea here, in my mind at least, is the source of the conclusion. Basically we have a universe that, as far as we know, started from four basic nonliving elements. Now, billions of years on down the road, we have one of the lifeforms, namely us, explaining how the origin came to be. We have successfully stripped the origin of any human or intellectual capabilities and are refining our argument as we speak.

Who invented logic?

Does the inventor benefit from being the source of the logic?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Taz, posted 03-25-2009 3:06 PM Taz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Taz, posted 03-26-2009 4:26 PM Phat has responded
 Message 23 by Phage0070, posted 03-30-2009 4:13 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 20 of 80 (504303)
03-26-2009 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Phat
03-26-2009 10:53 AM


Re: The source of wisdom and logic
Phat writes:

Who invented logic?


Socrates

Does the inventor benefit from being the source of the logic?

Apparently not.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Phat, posted 03-26-2009 10:53 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Phat, posted 03-30-2009 1:53 PM Taz has responded

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 1025 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 21 of 80 (504345)
03-27-2009 11:16 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by ICANT
03-25-2009 11:49 PM


Re: Albino Gods
Hi ICANT,

But God and everything you see has always existed.

I can see how we could justify the latter - (everything we see has always existed) - using observable evidence and mathematics. I think we could all agree that the universe has always existed in some form; we are simply talking about matter being reduced to sub-atomic scales.

It could then be established as fact, for sake of delving deeper into theoretical phisics, that the universe has always existed in some form.

The former, however, -(God has always existed) - has no observable evidence to support it, neither for Gods existance nor his eternal characteristics. So how can God is eternal be stated as factual other than by applying faith in the God and his eternal existance?

I can see how the universe could be evidenced as being always existant, but how did God (1) Get shown to actually exist, and (2) How does he get the always existant characteristic flung on him?


"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks

"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by ICANT, posted 03-25-2009 11:49 PM ICANT has not yet responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 12159
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 22 of 80 (504535)
03-30-2009 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Taz
03-26-2009 4:26 PM


Re: The source of wisdom and logic
The point i am getting at is the fact that we humans, by attempting to theorize a universe without a Creator, in effect become the source of the explanation for something that occurred before we were even around to begin with!!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Taz, posted 03-26-2009 4:26 PM Taz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Taz, posted 03-30-2009 4:19 PM Phat has responded

  
Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 80 (504540)
03-30-2009 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Phat
03-26-2009 10:53 AM


Re: The source of wisdom and logic
Basically we have a universe that, as far as we know, started from four basic nonliving elements.

Like what, air, fire, earth and water? I think you are probably a little behind the times in your scientific knowledge, did you get all your book-learning from the ancient Greeks?

The point i am getting at is the fact that we humans, by attempting to theorize a universe without a Creator, in effect become the source of the explanation for something that occurred before we were even around to begin with!!

I don't see how that is any point at all. Just because humans are the source of the explanation does not connect them to the source of the event. A human can come across a rockslide that happened many years before they were born, and through study of the evidence explain that it occurred due to the weathering of a stream. Does that human's explanation of the event mean that they somehow caused the rockslide? Of course not! The rockslide happened regardless of the existence or eventual existence of the human; the explanation is simply a human mental invention to bring sense to reality.

Logic is simply a method of thinking which yields proper results. It derives its validity not from opinion but from the very fabric of reality; it is as much a description of how things work as it is a discipline. That being said, logic is shaped by observation and if the observations do not match what logic would suggest, then logic is altered to match.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Phat, posted 03-26-2009 10:53 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 24 of 80 (504542)
03-30-2009 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Phat
03-30-2009 1:53 PM


Re: The source of wisdom and logic
Phat writes:

The point i am getting at is the fact that we humans, by attempting to theorize a universe without a Creator, in effect become the source of the explanation for something that occurred before we were even around to begin with!!


In other news, the pope is catholic.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Phat, posted 03-30-2009 1:53 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Phat, posted 04-22-2009 6:29 PM Taz has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 12159
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 25 of 80 (506119)
04-22-2009 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Taz
03-30-2009 4:19 PM


Re: The source of wisdom and logic
The point I am asserting is that He imagined us first, before we even had the brain cells to imagine Him.

Yes, it is unprovable.

Is it simple minded to imagine that a Creator foreknows us and has everything under comprehension, if not control?

Sometimes, it is better to talk of our ideas of God from a philosophical hypothetical, rather than Theological position.

Seems to me the main reason you gave up on Him is because you saw Christians behaving badly and figured He did NOT have things under control, IF He existed. ;)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Taz, posted 03-30-2009 4:19 PM Taz has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Theodoric, posted 04-22-2009 8:47 PM Phat has responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5953
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 26 of 80 (506131)
04-22-2009 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Phat
04-22-2009 6:29 PM


Re: The source of wisdom and logic
Seems to me the main reason you gave up on Him is because you saw Christians behaving badly and figured He did NOT have things under control, IF He existed.

Why do you christians always assume you know what makes an atheist an atheist? You expect us to just believe things on faith, because it is what you believe, but you refuse to even figure out what makes us tick.

I am an atheist but it has nothing to do with the behavior of christians, or for that matter, the behavior of any religious person.

Simply put, I do not believe in the supernatural, mythological tales, or any other type of mumbo-jumbo. There is absolutely no evidence for a "God" and plenty of evidence that shows it is very unlikely.

So get over yourself. Christians and their behaviors have nothing to do with my atheism and I venture to guess probably has little to do with any atheists atheism.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Phat, posted 04-22-2009 6:29 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Phat, posted 04-23-2009 4:24 AM Theodoric has not yet responded

    
Cedre
Member
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 27 of 80 (506142)
04-23-2009 4:22 AM


something has to be the uncaused cause.
The key here is to understand that God is outside of space-time, and is therefore not necessarily influenced by the physical laws he set in motion for the effective running of the universe as AIG has suggested. But as I understand it something that will at some point conk out or cease to exist could not have always existed. This is only logical, to propose that the universe has always existed is to connote that it is eternal, but we know that the universe isn't eternal because it will someday run down, my question here is when did the universe stop being eternal if it previously existed eternally.

A second point is time time is involved in the conception of something, thus the phrase zero hour, to prove my point without time earth wouldn't have had a history, and history is a record of everything that came into existence and went out of existence and all of this happened with time. Things also run down with time or improve with time. Time is one piece of the puzzle.

Question is will the physical laws still operate if time were to stop suddenly, would gravity still function, or will it pause for a while, will energy laws take a break or continue functioning? What we can expect if time suddenly stops is there won't be any more changing until it resumes, everything will remain in the state it was when time stopped, so in a sense the laws will also stop working temporarily, because the laws are linked up with change.

Now according to the bible there is no time in heaven, no night or day, so it is not reasonable to say that God is a slave to gravity as we are or that he can age? Without time the physical laws cannot function. Also time-keeping suggest that there had to be a zero hour for time itself, time had to start somewhere; there must have been point when time was 0. I cannot imagine an infinite time i.e. time that never had a start.

Another key factor for something to start to exist is a cause, the launcher, or the starter. AiG declares that God is the uncaused caused who caused everything, is this claim reasonable though? Let’s compare it against its counterargument that states that God was caused by another God that was himself caused by an earlier God and so on giving us an infinite string of gods coming and going out of existence. If this is the reasoning then it means that Yahweh the current God will at some point in the future also go out of existence, but not before he creates another Yahweh who will take over from him.

But hold on this sort of reasoning causes a great deal of difficulty, in keeping with the bible’s testimony of God God is outside of Space-time, making him eternal, eternal means continuing forever or indefinitely. In this case God is never going to cease existing, making it impossible for the next God to take over from him. The previous god’s in this case may also have been eternal, why must we reason that they were subject to extinction, when the current god isn’t. All in all the first position that God is uncreated makes more sense and is much more believable than the counter position which holds that God is only one in a long chain of gods leading up to him.

Now I have pointed out that if not a cause both time and cause are necessary for something to begin existing, God has to be the uncaused cause this makes good sense as infinite regress of Gods cannot be accommodated for the mere reason that we are simply taking the problem one step backwards, the question then has to be asked and answered, how did the very first God come into existence, the very very first one , which appears at the beginning of the god chain, who or what made him or it. We can’t escape this dilemma; we will have to agree to an uncaused cause at some point. The universe cannot be this uncaused cause, because the universe is physical for starters and matter cannot just start to exits by itself. Energy cannot be created or destroyed and energy=matter.


Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Larni, posted 04-23-2009 8:32 AM Cedre has not yet responded
 Message 30 by Phage0070, posted 04-23-2009 9:50 AM Cedre has responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 12159
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 28 of 80 (506143)
04-23-2009 4:24 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Theodoric
04-22-2009 8:47 PM


Re: The source of wisdom and logic
First of all, I was talking to Taz and not to atheists in general, or to you. So step off the soapbox and quit labeling all Christians together! ;) As long as you brought the issue up, however, I will give you my two cents.

Some of us do have an unsupportable faith. It is illogical, given that there is no replicable experiment to prove its validity. Many of us patiently endure the endless comments about "magical Sky Daddies" or "fairy tales for grownups" that we often hear. Speaking for myself, however, I believe in God. I believe that He imagined/created me (either directly or indirectly) long before I or you or any of humanity even had the capability to imagine Him or to make Him up in some legendary myth.

Theodoric writes:

There is absolutely no evidence for a "God" and plenty of evidence that shows it is very unlikely.

I do not rely on evidence for every single situation in my life. Faith is faith precisely because of the absence of evidence. I don't worry about you or Taz or anyone else losing their soul because they do not believe as I do. I am a religious volunteer for the State of Colorado, however, and have been given permission to share my faith with various inmates around the system and consider that a cherished freedom and responsibility on my part. If you or anyone else attempted to take that away from me, I would only then have an issue with you. I never push my religion on anyone, but only share if given the opportunity. Among Christians, I am more open minded than most. Concerning the existence of God, I realize that I could be wrong in my belief, but maintain that there is at least an equal chance that you could be also. IF such an entity as a Spirit exists, no current scientific method exists to measure, prove, or disprove such an entity. Thus, we have forums that are labeled Faith and Beliefwhere we can discuss such possibilities. :)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Theodoric, posted 04-22-2009 8:47 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Phage0070, posted 04-23-2009 11:50 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3975
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 29 of 80 (506149)
04-23-2009 8:32 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Cedre
04-23-2009 4:22 AM


Re: something has to be the uncaused cause.
The problem that you still have is that you assume your god is real.

You can't do that in this instance.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Cedre, posted 04-23-2009 4:22 AM Cedre has not yet responded

    
Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 80 (506152)
04-23-2009 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Cedre
04-23-2009 4:22 AM


Re: something has to be the uncaused cause.
Cedre writes:

But as I understand it something that will at some point conk out or cease to exist could not have always existed. This is only logical, to propose that the universe has always existed is to connote that it is eternal, but we know that the universe isn't eternal because it will someday run down, my question here is when did the universe stop being eternal if it previously existed eternally.


Your train of thought is flawed. It is not logical to conclude that something which has an end cannot always have existed. The only thing you can logically conclude is that it will, at some point, have an end and that that end has not yet occurred. Deciding that because it has an end it cannot always have existed is yet another example of you pulling an idea out of your butt and claiming/treating it as the truth.

Furthermore, if we are using the Big Bang theory then the universe does have a finite beginning point. The key is that space-time is an integral part of the universe itself and so its origin coincides with the origin of the universe, thus it “always existed”. Any point at which the universe did not exist would imply the lack of a time frame in which to measure said point.

Cedre writes:

A second point is time time is involved in the conception of something, thus the phrase zero hour, to prove my point without time earth wouldn't have had a history, and history is a record of everything that came into existence and went out of existence and all of this happened with time. Things also run down with time or improve with time. Time is one piece of the puzzle.


You seem very confused here, I am wondering if you have a lucid and coherent point on this subject.

Cedre writes:

Question is will the physical laws still operate if time were to stop suddenly, would gravity still function, or will it pause for a while, will energy laws take a break or continue functioning? What we can expect if time suddenly stops is there won't be any more changing until it resumes, everything will remain in the state it was when time stopped, so in a sense the laws will also stop working temporarily, because the laws are linked up with change.


This is a completely subjective decision on your part. The “laws” do not stop functioning, they are simply never applied. Nothing about time stopping makes gravity stop working, it just means that there is no other time frame in which to see how it alters processes. Gravitational lensing and spatial distortion would still be in effect when viewing a static system.

Cedre writes:

Now according to the bible there is no time in heaven, no night or day, so it is not reasonable to say that God is a slave to gravity as we are or that he can age? Without time the physical laws cannot function. Also time-keeping suggest that there had to be a zero hour for time itself, time had to start somewhere; there must have been point when time was 0. I cannot imagine an infinite time i.e. time that never had a start.


Ok, there are a TON of problems here which you have managed to cram into a very concise package. Let’s go through some of them:

1: “Now according to the bible…” – It would really help if you backed this sort of crazy stuff up with citations. Faiths, being created by imagination and preference, vary wildly in both interpretation and source material. Not everyone shares your particular views, especially where they deviate wildly from reality.

2: “Without time the physical laws cannot function.” We already went over this above, but stopping time also leads to other issues. For instance, you would not be able to do anything in heaven. This prevents angles from singing, God from talking, being kind, etc.. and you from thinking or perceiving anything at all. Other critical plot points become impossible, such as how do you explain Lucifer being cast out of a place that is incompatible with action or history?

3: “Also time-keeping suggest that there had to be a zero hour for time itself.” Time-keeping is a human invention, and it implies nothing about the fundamental nature of time other than that it passes. The time scale that humans use is completely subjective; I can spin the face of a clock to read any time and it does not alter the reality of time passing. This should be fairly obvious.

4: “I cannot imagine an infinite time i.e. time that never had a start.” Once again I must spell this out for you Cedre: Just because you don’t understand something does not mean it does not exist, or work that way. The universe does not care how stupid you are, it worked before you were born and will work after you die, regardless of your ability to understand why.

That last point is what concerns me the most. I may not share his viewpoints in other areas but this particular failing leads me to believe Cedre is dangerously insane. Such is my concern about religion; there is nothing wrong about the practice itself, but it indicates a deep mental malformation which concerns me from a societal standpoint.

Cedre writes:

Another key factor for something to start to exist is a cause, the launcher, or the starter. AiG declares that God is the uncaused caused who caused everything, is this claim reasonable though? Let’s compare it against its counterargument that states that God was caused by another God that was himself caused by an earlier God and so on giving us an infinite string of gods coming and going out of existence. If this is the reasoning then it means that Yahweh the current God will at some point in the future also go out of existence, but not before he creates another Yahweh who will take over from him.


This reminds me of the story about the Flat-Earth believer who explained that the Earth was on the back of a giant tortoise. When asked what the tortoise was standing on, she replied “It is tortoises all the way down!”

The point is that such an explanation is not an explanation at all; instead of a god that always existed you substitute a string of gods with no end. You never addressed the issue of where the first god came from! An eternal god and an eternal string of finite-lived gods are interchangeable for the purposes of that discussion.

Cedre writes:

All in all the first position that God is uncreated makes more sense and is much more believable than the counter position which holds that God is only one in a long chain of gods leading up to him.


Actually, the position that makes the most sense is that you are a loony which is why neither of your ideas make any sense. This isn’t an either-or choice as you make it out to be, both of your ideas could be wrong.

Cedre writes:

The universe cannot be this uncaused cause, because the universe is physical for starters and matter cannot just start to exits by itself. Energy cannot be created or destroyed and energy=matter.


Who says, you and your ancient book? Besides if you are willing to accept something always existing then why not accept that matter and energy always existed? That way you get around the whole conservation law, and you don’t need to make up magic sky wizards.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Cedre, posted 04-23-2009 4:22 AM Cedre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Cedre, posted 04-23-2009 11:22 AM Phage0070 has responded

  
Prev1
2
3456Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019