Does a natural "god" maybe exist?
November 20, 2022 at 3:01 am
(This post was last modified: November 20, 2022 at 4:21 am by BrianSoddingBoru4.)
Hello!
I must start of by recognizing that I am a skeptic, and DO NOT believe in the type of "GOD" that apologists such as Dr. William Lane Craig espouses.
There is a reason Atheists are not buying his arguments. Why?
In summary, Craig asserts that infinity cannot really exist (i.e. you can't ever really reach an infinite number of baseballs - which seems true), and therefore, and along with support from the Boarde Guth Vilenkin Theorem, that our Universe (or Multiverse - all of physical reality) cannot be eternal -or infinite - to the past.
Therefore, as all things to our knowledge that begin to exist must have had a cause, something "a-physical" must have been that cause (as physical reality is that which is being created or started), and that is consistent with a spiritual entity which serves as a prime moving factor.
Moreover, since this moment of "creation" would have occurred at a "select" moment, this implies a choosing rather than a random act (i.e. why not earlier etc.), which implies a creative mind.
Why isn't this good enough to a skeptic?
Three deal breakers:
1) Once the mechanism of action by which the asserted"a-physical" prime mover is understood to have performed its creative task, the entity and action could/would be redefined as an entirely natural, new form or branch of physics.
2) It is fundamentally irrational to assert that an all powerful, all knowing sentient being of any type (spiritual or natural) simply exists from eternity, without a prior phase or explanation as to its development. To our knowledge, all things which have intelligence (let alone maximally obtainable intelligence) must have gone through a learning, or programming phase.
3) Most importantly, most Cosmologists such as Sir Roger Penrose, Carroll, Guth and others assert that physical reality may indeed be infinite (in fact infinite in many multidimensional layers)!
So for a skeptic to take seriously an argument for a "God" or "gods" existence, those three caveats must be addressed.
Well I think I"ve found such a solution. Please
Warm Regards
Happy philosophizing!
I must start of by recognizing that I am a skeptic, and DO NOT believe in the type of "GOD" that apologists such as Dr. William Lane Craig espouses.
There is a reason Atheists are not buying his arguments. Why?
In summary, Craig asserts that infinity cannot really exist (i.e. you can't ever really reach an infinite number of baseballs - which seems true), and therefore, and along with support from the Boarde Guth Vilenkin Theorem, that our Universe (or Multiverse - all of physical reality) cannot be eternal -or infinite - to the past.
Therefore, as all things to our knowledge that begin to exist must have had a cause, something "a-physical" must have been that cause (as physical reality is that which is being created or started), and that is consistent with a spiritual entity which serves as a prime moving factor.
Moreover, since this moment of "creation" would have occurred at a "select" moment, this implies a choosing rather than a random act (i.e. why not earlier etc.), which implies a creative mind.
Why isn't this good enough to a skeptic?
Three deal breakers:
1) Once the mechanism of action by which the asserted"a-physical" prime mover is understood to have performed its creative task, the entity and action could/would be redefined as an entirely natural, new form or branch of physics.
2) It is fundamentally irrational to assert that an all powerful, all knowing sentient being of any type (spiritual or natural) simply exists from eternity, without a prior phase or explanation as to its development. To our knowledge, all things which have intelligence (let alone maximally obtainable intelligence) must have gone through a learning, or programming phase.
3) Most importantly, most Cosmologists such as Sir Roger Penrose, Carroll, Guth and others assert that physical reality may indeed be infinite (in fact infinite in many multidimensional layers)!
So for a skeptic to take seriously an argument for a "God" or "gods" existence, those three caveats must be addressed.
Well I think I"ve found such a solution. Please
Administrator Notice
Link removed for advertising and 30/30 violation
Link removed for advertising and 30/30 violation
Warm Regards
Happy philosophizing!
