(March 26, 2020 at 1:48 pm)Klorophyll Wrote: Now, the existence of physical laws clearly warrant a lawgiver, this is the prima facie explanation that an honest person should go with. Is it wise to suspend judgement? Not at all. The prima facie explanation for the broken window was, recall, the existence of a burglar. No sane person would suspend taking action until he reaches some utopian epistemological certainty about his existence. If you react differently with regards to the god question, then you are, simply put, being fundamentally dishonest.
1. If we assume the Abrahamic God exists (for the sake of this argument) we also must accept that God has his own nature. Otherwise he is a cruel and unjust god punishing people arbitrarily because they go against his wishes (which themselves are arbitrary)
2. If God does not have his own nature, his rules are entirely arbitrary and meaningless. If God DOES have his own nature, he must have his own natural laws. This clearly warrants its own lawgiver.
3. Ergo, God also has a law giver who created his nature.
4. So who's God's lawgiver? Does he not know? Or does he simply believe he does not have one?
The whole tone of Church teaching in regard to woman is, to the last degree, contemptuous and degrading. - Elizabeth Cady Stanton
