Is there any proof God exists?

Page 7 of 105 [ 1680 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 105 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

sophisticated
Deinonychus

Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 306

31 Jan 2015, 8:45 pm

Narrator wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Every event has a cause.

To quote my post in another thread:

Radioactive decay has an uncaused random quality.
Then there's the Hawking radiation and also the Casimir effect.

First cause is moot.
- If everything had to have a first cause, then so would any deity.
- If a non-eternal deity was first cause, then which deity?
- If a non-eternal deity was first cause, then why not multiple deities or even pan-dimensional beings?

Radioactive decay is not uncaused.

And the Casimir effect is not uncaused.

Last edited by sophisticated on 31 Jan 2015, 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

sophisticated
Deinonychus

Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 306

31 Jan 2015, 8:49 pm

Narrator wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Every event has a cause.

To quote my post in another thread:

1. If everything had to have a first cause, then so would any deity.
2. If a non-eternal deity was first cause, then which deity?
3. If a non-eternal deity was first cause, then why not multiple deities or even pan-dimensional beings?

1. A FIRST CAUSE cannot have a FIRST CAUSE
2. The First Cause is eternal
3.Multiple deities would be warring with each other

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

31 Jan 2015, 9:05 pm

sophisticated wrote:

Radioactive decay is not uncaused.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_first_cause
"...it is absolutely impossible to predict when a specific atom will disintegrate. The spontaneous disintegration of radioactive nuclei is truly random and uncaused..."

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/nonth ... 40042.html
"...on the subatomic level, the typical laws of cause and effect break down. For instance, "virtual particles," as they are called, randomly pop in and out of existence. The random decay of a radioactive nucleus, for example, is another commonly cited instance of quantum indeterminacy. Such indeterminacy is thought by many to be an intrinsic feature of a quantum world..."

sophisticated wrote:

And the Casimir effect is uncaused.

Well.. at least you can see that not every event has a cause.

_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.

sophisticated
Deinonychus

Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 306

31 Jan 2015, 9:10 pm

Narrator wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Radioactive decay is not uncaused.

sophisticated wrote:

And the Casimir effect is uncaused.

Well.. at least you can see that not every event has a cause.

Scientists still don't know what causes radioactive decay or the casimir effect. Just because you don't know what the cause of an event is, doesn't mean it is a self created event.

The notion that particles are popping into existence out of nothing or for no reason is pure speculation and conjecture.

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

31 Jan 2015, 9:15 pm

sophisticated wrote:

Narrator wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Every event has a cause.

1. A FIRST CAUSE cannot have a FIRST CAUSE
2. The First Cause is eternal
3.Multiple deities would be warring with each other

Why does a first cause not need a first cause? If everything is caused by something, then there really is no first cause.

Why is a supernatural being the only possible eternity? I'm sure you're familiar with "brane" theory.

Why would multiple deities be warring? That's an anthropomorphism.

You have to be consistent.

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

31 Jan 2015, 9:19 pm

sophisticated wrote:

Radioactive decay is not uncaused.

And the Casimir effect is uncaused.

sophisticated wrote:

Scientists still don't know what causes radioactive decay or the casimir effect.

Please try to be consistent.

sophisticated
Deinonychus

Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 306

31 Jan 2015, 9:25 pm

Narrator wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Narrator wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Every event has a cause.

1. A FIRST CAUSE cannot have a FIRST CAUSE
2. The First Cause is eternal
3.Multiple deities would be warring with each other

1. It's in the name .. first cause really means first cause ..
2. The first cause is eternal, and this is because it has no beginning and no end.
3. We are talking about the originator of the universe here, and it is only logical that the originator is 1 person, not a team or something like that.

Last edited by sophisticated on 31 Jan 2015, 9:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

sophisticated
Deinonychus

Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 306

31 Jan 2015, 9:27 pm

Narrator wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Radioactive decay is not uncaused.

And the Casimir effect is uncaused.

sophisticated wrote:

Scientists still don't know what causes radioactive decay or the casimir effect.

Please try to be consistent.

I corrected my post some time ago .. I obviously did not mean to say the casimir effect is uncaused. It has a cause that the scientific community don't understand, maybe they will understand in the future, maybe they won't.

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

31 Jan 2015, 9:35 pm

sophisticated wrote:

Narrator wrote:

Why is a supernatural being the only possible eternity? I'm sure you're familiar with "brane" theory.

Why would multiple deities be warring? That's an anthropomorphism.

You have to be consistent.

1. It's in the name .. first cause really means first cause ..
2. The first cause is eternal, and this is because He has no beginning and no end.
3. We are talking about the originator of the universe here, and it is only logical that the originator is 1 person, not a team or something like that.

So item 1 is something taken on faith. It can only be so, because everything is caused by something.
Item 2 must be taken on faith for the very same reason.
Item 3 is only logical as an anthropomorphic notion. Any deity could be 1 or many or a melding of many or some other humanly indefinable context. And could also be finitely one of a succession of many, or like a matter stream of byte packets or something also indefinable yet segment finite.

sophisticated
Deinonychus

Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 306

31 Jan 2015, 9:52 pm

Narrator wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Narrator wrote:

Why is a supernatural being the only possible eternity? I'm sure you're familiar with "brane" theory.

Why would multiple deities be warring? That's an anthropomorphism.

You have to be consistent.

1. Everything that has a beginning, everything that is moved, everything that is influenced.
3. By "person" I don't mean a human, what I mean is an individual. Because you don't believe in a First Cause, I think multiplee deities are irrelevant. The exact nature of the First Cause is also irrelevant.

AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

31 Jan 2015, 10:03 pm

sophisticated wrote:

Narrator wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Narrator wrote:

Why is a supernatural being the only possible eternity? I'm sure you're familiar with "brane" theory.

Why would multiple deities be warring? That's an anthropomorphism.

You have to be consistent.

Be careful here…I've gone down this road before, too.

Let's revise just a touch: You should say "Everything that begins to exist has a cause." God is eternal, that much you got right. But you need to point out that because God is eternal, i.e. no beginning nor end, then it can't be said that God ever BEGAN to exist…He always WAS. Because God has no beginning, it isn't logically necessary for the first cause to itself have been caused. It's logically possible that the first cause is an uncaused Cause.

sophisticated
Deinonychus

Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 306

31 Jan 2015, 10:11 pm

AngelRho wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Narrator wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Narrator wrote:

Why is a supernatural being the only possible eternity? I'm sure you're familiar with "brane" theory.

Why would multiple deities be warring? That's an anthropomorphism.

You have to be consistent.

I don't see any problem in what I said.

You agree that that wich begins to exist has a cause, that's good.

When I say anything that is "moved" , I mean anything that is moved by something else, God is not moved by anything, He is the unmoved mover.

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

31 Jan 2015, 10:27 pm

sophisticated wrote:

Narrator wrote:

sophisticated wrote:

Narrator wrote:

Why is a supernatural being the only possible eternity? I'm sure you're familiar with "brane" theory.

Why would multiple deities be warring? That's an anthropomorphism.

You have to be consistent.

1. So for convenience, you remove God from being moved or influenced or having a beginning. Sounds like faith to me.
3. If you don't mean human, then why anthropomorphize the nature of the deity?

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

31 Jan 2015, 10:29 pm

AngelRho wrote:

It's logically possible that the first cause is an uncaused Cause.

But isn't that what you're disagreeing with regarding big bang?

RhodyStruggle
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Nov 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 508

31 Jan 2015, 10:31 pm

Narrator wrote:

RhodyStruggle wrote:

Fnord wrote:

Faith is the belief in unprovable things.

Religion is the socio-political expression of faith.

The inductive principle is unprovable.

Every scientific conclusion is contingent upon the validity of the inductive principle.

Thus, any socio-poliical expression referencing scientific conclusion is religious.

My favourite science tid-bit is how GPS satellites work. Time theory converted to a practical use.

It's not faith or politics or religion that results in such practical devices that would fail to work without the right science.

Proof? Turn your smartphone's GPS on. Can't do that with a Bible.

The resources required to develop and deploy GPS technology couldn't have been allocated to that project absent political considerations. If it hadn't been politically possible, it wouldn't have been economically possible; hence it wouldn't have been actualized in the form of your phone.

Evidence isn't the same thing as proof.

_________________
From start to finish I've made you feel this
Uncomfort in turn with the world you've learned
To love through this hate to live with its weight
A burden discerned in the blood you taste

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

31 Jan 2015, 10:33 pm

sophisticated wrote:

When I say anything that is "moved" , I mean anything that is moved by something else, God is not moved by anything, He is the unmoved mover.

A. That's an interpretation, not a logical construct.
B. What do you mean by unmoved? There are plenty of examples in the Bible of God being "moved".

Again.. it's not logic, but circular reasoning that attempts to sound like logic.

If every event requires a cause, then every event requires a cause, period. If you're going to make exceptions, then why are yours the only exceptions that are valid?

Page 7 of 105 [ 1680 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 105 Next

Jump to:

Is there any proof God exists? Post Reply New Topic

Is there any proof God exists?