Well, out of thirty replies, this is the only one that isn't either grossly insulting, or diversionary.
Yes. I would say that is true
Simple logic disproves the cosmological argument? Why is it still around then?
I know. I just finished reading a book of cosmological speculation called, "A Universe from Nothing" by Lawrence Krauss. It is, and there's no other way to put this, silly. Atheists must have the universe come from nothing or they must have the material universe always existing; both positions being impossible. Therefore, impossible, magical cosmological theories are put forth by highly credentialed atheist scientists, and that appeal to authority is then what passes for truth. But the evidence leads an open-minded individual to postulate the existence of a Divine intelligence.
But that's just it, we don't end up with a regress. The term God implies an eternal being. So why couldn't the universe be eternal? Because everything in it is contingent. There has to be a cause of the universe outside of the universe. It may be a stretch to call it a Christian version of God, but this first cause, must be intelligent and willful and capable of design. We therefore assume it to be conscious. That's why we assume it to be God.
In other words, your atheist response is this: "Things just are." But you do realize that is more a crucifixion of the intellect than faith is. That's just ignoring the hard questions.
And the idea of God is not just something someone just made up. There seems to be no time in human history when God wasn't assumed to exist. I admit, there are many questions about the nature of God. Why does God exist at all? How does he create things? Can he create a truly freewill creature, etc. But all of these types of questions can only be answered after we assume the existence of God.
(March 17, 2012 at 5:37 pm)mediamogul Wrote: In terms of the philosophy behind these arguments they are basically the First Cause argument and the teleological argument or argument from design.
Yes. I would say that is true
Quote:Simple logic disproves the first one.
Simple logic disproves the cosmological argument? Why is it still around then?
Quote:You state the universe must have a cause because it cannot come from nothing (which is not what modern physics neccessarily states but I'll play along)
I know. I just finished reading a book of cosmological speculation called, "A Universe from Nothing" by Lawrence Krauss. It is, and there's no other way to put this, silly. Atheists must have the universe come from nothing or they must have the material universe always existing; both positions being impossible. Therefore, impossible, magical cosmological theories are put forth by highly credentialed atheist scientists, and that appeal to authority is then what passes for truth. But the evidence leads an open-minded individual to postulate the existence of a Divine intelligence.
Quote:and therefore there must exist an uncaused cause which created the universe. You then call this thing that caused the universe "god". Surely God would be more complex than the universe and demands a cause himself. What caused god to come into existence? Then what caused god's cause? So on and so forth. We end up with an infinite regress.
But that's just it, we don't end up with a regress. The term God implies an eternal being. So why couldn't the universe be eternal? Because everything in it is contingent. There has to be a cause of the universe outside of the universe. It may be a stretch to call it a Christian version of God, but this first cause, must be intelligent and willful and capable of design. We therefore assume it to be conscious. That's why we assume it to be God.
Quote:The "laws" of physics are more just descriptions of the way that matter behaves. Quantum physics demonstrates how those once deemed immutable laws don't apply on a sub-atomic level. We simply refer to them as "laws" because it makes more sense to our human brains. The "laws" of physics most likely came into existence with the universe and there could foreseeably exist other universes in which the "laws" of physics do not behave in the way that we understand them to. None of it implies intelligence.
In other words, your atheist response is this: "Things just are." But you do realize that is more a crucifixion of the intellect than faith is. That's just ignoring the hard questions.
And the idea of God is not just something someone just made up. There seems to be no time in human history when God wasn't assumed to exist. I admit, there are many questions about the nature of God. Why does God exist at all? How does he create things? Can he create a truly freewill creature, etc. But all of these types of questions can only be answered after we assume the existence of God.
