RE: Arguments for God's Existence from Contingency
November 28, 2017 at 2:08 pm
(This post was last modified: November 28, 2017 at 2:09 pm by Catholic_Lady.)
(November 28, 2017 at 2:05 pm)Hammy Wrote:(November 28, 2017 at 1:58 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: What they mean is it takes a force that is not bound by the laws of physics or time to have started all this, hence the "this chain cannot be infinitely long." We call this force, this supreme being, "God". But if the word is your hang up, I suppose you can call it something else.
It doesn't take that though because the laws of physics themselves could be the first cause. You could say that those laws themselves are Godly and they are embedded in God just as much as you could say that God created them.
And yes, the first force is merely called "God" but doing that is no different to labeling the universe or anything else with the word "God". God has not been demonstrated, a first cause has been demonstrated, and that first cause need not be God.
The word is only my hangup because it seems utterly pointless to call something non-intelligent and without a mind "God." There's no reason to think that the first cause is anything like God and calling something that isn't like God "God" is the confusion here.
That first force needs to be something that is not bound by the same laws as everything else in the natural, physical world/universe. Which is why we say it was a supernatural force.
(November 28, 2017 at 2:06 pm)Tizheruk Wrote:(November 28, 2017 at 2:05 pm)Hammy Wrote: It doesn't take that though because the laws of physics themselves could be the first cause. You could say that those laws themselves are Godly and they are embedded in God just as much as you could say that God created them.
And yes, the first force is merely called "God" but doing that is no different to labeling the universe or anything else with the word "God". God has not been demonstrated, a first cause has been demonstrated, and that first cause need not be God.
The word is only my hangup because it seems utterly pointless to call something non-intelligent and without a mind "God." There's no reason to think that the first cause is anything like God and calling something that isn't like God "God" is the confusion here.
Indeed why call it god ? Why not just call it physics?
Lol, because it is specifically NOT physics. The laws of physics don't allow that something be infinite or that it materialize from nothing. That's the whole point.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
