Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Almost everyone is aware of a popular quarrel between theist and atheist concerning existence of God.
Atheist: Prove there is God
Theist: Prove there is no God
As being a theist, I have rather different approach to the question of atheist.
I say ok I agree with Mr. Atheist. I say there is no God. Nevertheless, is that the end of the story? I do not think so. If we say God does not exist then we are left with two options:
a. Nothingness or
b. Alternate of God
Nothingness:
Nothingness can only produce non-existence, and so it cannot be the foundation of any ideology. The universe can only function because it is not nothingness. Logically, nothingness cannot be expressed in any logical form because there is no way in which nothingness can be expressed in terms of being. Nothingness cannot be a subject for investigation in science. Since pure nothingness is an impossibility, there never was a time when Being did not exist. In short, Being is eternal. Thus, Being possesses the divine attributes of necessity, eternity, omnipresence, and infinity. Consequently, Being is God Himself.
Alternate of God:
If God has not created universe then there are three possible assumptions about the existence of Universe:
a. Universe is eternal
b. Universe popped out of nothingness
c. Universe created itself
a. The astronomical phenomenon Redshift negates the idea that universe has eternal past or eternal future.
b. If I say, X creates Y I am assuming the existence of X to explain the existence of Y but if I say X creates X (the universe creates itself) I am assuming the existence of universe to explain its existence, which is utterly absurd.
c. Nothingness means “not anything.” “Not anything” cannot produce something.
Conclusion: Universe is a created finite being
Al-Ghazali proposed:
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
Any power that is capable to create and sustain universe is God.
Logically, Nothingness does not exist and there is no alternate of God. Alternate of God is God.
“But those in whose hearts is a disease,- it will add doubt to their doubt, and they will die in a state of Unbelief.”
At Taubah (9)
-Verse 125-
“O mankind! there hath come to you a direction from your Lord and a healing for the (diseases) in your hearts,- and for those who believe, a guidance and a Mercy.”
Yunus (10)
-Verse 57-
The First Cause (AKA Kallam Cosmological) Argument has made a bit of resurgence on the board over the past couple of weeks. What's happened? Has a WLC vid been doing the rounds?
Harris, it's a nonsense argument because:
1. it ignores the fact that there are states of the universe (other than the one we currently inhabit) where causality, as we experience it, may not exist
2. There's no such thing as 'Nothing'
3. The most you can get from this is a deistic, impersonal, distant god, far removed from the theistic definitions of god
4. It fails to tell us where god comes from so it just pushes the answer back a step: it only pretends to be an answer but really leaves us with more questions than we had before
Have a look around the board, you'll see plenty of other recent rebuttals to your argument.
(February 27, 2015 at 1:57 am)Harris Wrote: Almost everyone is aware of a popular quarrel between theist and atheist concerning existence of God.
Atheist: Prove there is God
Theist: Prove there is no God
As being a theist, I have rather different approach to the question of atheist.
I say ok I agree with Mr. Atheist. I say there is no God. Nevertheless, is that the end of the story? I do not think so. If we say God does not exist then we are left with two options:
a. Nothingness or
b. Alternate of God
Nothingness:
Nothingness can only produce non-existence, and so it cannot be the foundation of any ideology. The universe can only function because it is not nothingness. Logically, nothingness cannot be expressed in any logical form because there is no way in which nothingness can be expressed in terms of being. Nothingness cannot be a subject for investigation in science. Since pure nothingness is an impossibility, there never was a time when Being did not exist. In short, Being is eternal. Thus, Being possesses the divine attributes of necessity, eternity, omnipresence, and infinity. Consequently, Being is God Himself.
Alternate of God:
If God has not created universe then there are three possible assumptions about the existence of Universe:
a. Universe is eternal
b. Universe popped out of nothingness
c. Universe created itself
a. The astronomical phenomenon Redshift negates the idea that universe has eternal past or eternal future.
b. If I say, X creates Y I am assuming the existence of X to explain the existence of Y but if I say X creates X (the universe creates itself) I am assuming the existence of universe to explain its existence, which is utterly absurd.
c. Nothingness means “not anything.” “Not anything” cannot produce something.
Conclusion: Universe is a created finite being
Al-Ghazali proposed:
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
Any power that is capable to create and sustain universe is God.
Logically, Nothingness does not exist and there is no alternate of God. Alternate of God is God.
“But those in whose hearts is a disease,- it will add doubt to their doubt, and they will die in a state of Unbelief.”
At Taubah (9)
-Verse 125-
“O mankind! there hath come to you a direction from your Lord and a healing for the (diseases) in your hearts,- and for those who believe, a guidance and a Mercy.”
Yunus (10)
-Verse 57-
I say there are no invisible pink unicorns. End of story? No, because humans like clinging to superstition. Bad claims persist because fear and ego allow people to cling to the past. This is no "philosophy" anymore than debating Scientology knowing a si fi writer started it.
There is no debate. There are simply humans who refuse to get with the times because warm fuzzies and the idea of a cosmic security guard gives them a false sense of comfort.
I can only say it still needs to be addressed because humans interject their superstitions into politics globally and also control weapons. But as far as neutral evidence that is falsified and peer reviewed they have nothing.
Oh look, another proof of god that is only negative, boiling down to "you don't know, but I'm going to claim I know the only possibility is god, therefore god."
Harris, you do know that claims require positive evidence to be true, right? You can't just poke holes in what everyone else thinks and assume that makes what you think true; subtracting from zero will never give you a positive number.
Oh, who am I kidding? You don't know anything.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
(February 27, 2015 at 11:05 am)Esquilax Wrote: Oh look, another proof of god that is only negative, boiling down to "you don't know, but I'm going to claim I know the only possibility is god, therefore god."
(February 27, 2015 at 11:05 am)Esquilax Wrote: Oh look, another proof of god that is only negative, boiling down to "you don't know, but I'm going to claim I know the only possibility is god, therefore god."
Always setting up the same straw man, I see.
Seems like a fair claim for Esquilax to make given the OP lacks arguments for the "God of Abraham" and givens only arguments for the the abstract God of the philosophers and scientists.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
(February 27, 2015 at 11:05 am)Esquilax Wrote: Oh look, another proof of god that is only negative, boiling down to "you don't know, but I'm going to claim I know the only possibility is god, therefore god."
Always setting up the same straw man, I see.
Oh, you didn't read Harris' conclusion, then?
Harris Wrote:Logically, Nothingness does not exist and there is no alternate of God. Alternate of God is God.
I repeat: "You don't know, but I'm going to claim I know the only possibility is god, therefore god."
You're just embarrassing yourself, Chad.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
(February 27, 2015 at 1:57 am)Harris Wrote: [...]
Atheist: Prove there is God
Theist: Prove there is no God
[...]
Wrong. It goes more like this:
Atheist: Good Morning! A lovely day we're having.
Theist: You can't disprove existence of a god, therefore the one true God is the one that loves me and wants me to live forever!
Atheist: Uh... A-what, now?
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw
