(August 13, 2009 at 3:58 pm)Jon Paul Wrote: It's not an argument; it's a comparison of different scenarios.
Well the comparison is that they are the same except one contains God and the other isn't. The burden of proof is on the God side, evidence for God is needed. Where is it?
I believe I have proof enough of a transcendent God, to at least consider his existence highly probably, based on the reasons I have given here and other reasons.
Quote:That it not necessarily so, and the doctrine of divine simplicity would wholeheartedly disagree;I strongly disagree with them then. 'Divine simplicity' is an oxymoron when you're talking of the universal scale. Divinity, if it is to come at all - has to come from mechanical ignorance that is far from divine.
Quote:it would state that the capability of the universe to contain multiplicity and complexity due to the of it's constants and physical laws and nature, mandates that there be a simpler, and ultimately singular reality (God) that transcends it.A simple mind is less simple than simplicity without a mind. Besides, minds are complex, especially if they're 'there from the beginning'. It's not simple for a mind to be there right form the start, you need an explanation for something like that. And for a mind to devise and create a universe right from the beginning with no explanation for itself whatsover - is very complex indeed!!
Quote:It doesn't; it's exactly the kind of God the argument from potentiality/actuality evidences.
I still fail to see evidence. You have to show me with evidence that God exists, that I can't simply attribute to something natural that I already know to exist seperate from God.
Quote:I demonstrate it based on empirical and rational knowledge in the argument from potentiality/actuality.Empirical? Where? Where is God, that isn't just Nature?
Quote:And the transcendental argument demonstrates it based on rational knowledge and analysis of intrinsic logical coherence.
I don't see anything that demonstrates a supernatural creator, sorry. I see a lot of suggests that are a lot more complex than the hypothesis without God, and a lack of evidence for those suggestions.
EvF