Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Nobody Dies for a Lie

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    There is no logically coherent alternative to a material universe.
    That's a pretty strong claim. In order to support it you'd have to show not only that the material was the only thing that existed, but that the material was the only thing that could possibly exist. Because that's what being the only logically coherent alternative would mean.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
      That's a pretty strong claim. In order to support it you'd have to show not only that the material was the only thing that existed, but that the material was the only thing that could possibly exist. Because that's what being the only logically coherent alternative would mean.
      I don’t have to show that the material is the only thing that could possibly exist. Anything, no matter how improbable, is possible. If you think more than the material exists, feel free to show what it is and how it can coherently relate to the material.
      “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
        I don’t have to show that the material is the only thing that could possibly exist. Anything, no matter how improbable, is possible. If you think more than the material exists, feel free to show what it is and how it can coherently relate to the material.
        You said "There is no logically coherent alternative to a material universe". For something to be logically coherent the only thing it needs is to not contain any logical contradictions. So yes, you need to show that the material universe is the only thing that could possibly exist, or else rephrase your statement to something you can actually support.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
          You said "There is no logically coherent alternative to a material universe". For something to be logically coherent the only thing it needs is to not contain any logical contradictions. So yes, you need to show that the material universe is the only thing that could possibly exist, or else rephrase your statement to something you can actually support.
          For a logically coherent alternative to a material universe to exist you need to be able to show that it can actually exist and how it can coherently relate to the material universe.
          Last edited by Tassman; 08-12-2018, 04:58 AM.
          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
            For a logically coherent alternative to a material universe to exist you need to be able to show that it can actually exist and how it can coherently relate to the material universe.
            No I don't. You made the claim that no logically coherent alternative exists, you're the one who should shoulder the burden of proof.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
              No I don't. You made the claim that no logically coherent alternative exists, you're the one who should shoulder the burden of proof.
              If you disagree with the claim that there is no logically coherent alternative to a material universe, then refute it.
              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                Why would one rule it in?
                For one, intelligence being in evidence.


                No one can irrefutably "rule out" gods, it's just highly improbable that they exist, given the lack of evidence. They belong to an earlier, pre-scientific era when there was no other means of explaining what was otherwise inexplicable.
                The known universe is in evidence. Evidence requires existence. Uncaused existence is the only thing which can be truly self existent, and it happens to be who the God of Israel claims to be, and commands to be Israel's God, 1st Commandment of the 10. And the 2nd commandment, not to have any other.


                Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                But we don’t need a god, as you’ve pointed out above.
                No. I pointed out uncaused Existence does not need any god. God does not need any god.


                This is incoherent. There is no logically coherent alternative to a material universe.
                An uncaused cause is incoherent? In order for there to be an uncaused Cause, there has to be an uncaused Existence. You cannot have cause without existence. Existence and cause are two. Uncaused existence is one and needs nothing else. Cause though needs existence. Can you argue this any other way?
                . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                Comment


                • Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                  For one, intelligence being in evidence.


                  The known universe is in evidence. Evidence requires existence. Uncaused existence is the only thing which can be truly self existent, and it happens to be who the God of Israel claims to be, and commands to be Israel's God, 1st Commandment of the 10. And the 2nd commandment, not to have any other.


                  No. I pointed out uncaused Existence does not need any god. God does not need any god.


                  An uncaused cause is incoherent? In order for there to be an uncaused Cause, there has to be an uncaused Existence. You cannot have cause without existence. Existence and cause are two. Uncaused existence is one and needs nothing else. Cause though needs existence. Can you argue this any other way?
                  The Cosmological Argument, which is all you’re arguing here, is based upon the assumption that the existence of a unique being, such as the creator god which you’re positing, can be inferred from alleged facts of causation regarding the universe. In short, it’s an unverified assumption based upon an Argument from Ignorance...i.e. a ‘god of the gaps’ argument, if you will.
                  “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                    The Cosmological Argument, which is all you’re arguing here, is based upon the assumption that the existence of a unique being, such as the creator god which you’re positing, can be inferred from alleged facts of causation regarding the universe. In short, it’s an unverified assumption based upon an Argument from Ignorance...i.e. a ‘god of the gaps’ argument, if you will.
                    The cosmological argument disallows not having a first cause. Uncaused existence is not the cosmological argument. Now the uncaused cause is a conclusion of the cosmological argument. And the assertion then is made that the uncaused Cause that must exist is to be God. Existence is presumed in the argument. In order for there be an uncaused Cause, be it God or not, there must be uncaused existence. Uncaused Existence precedes uncaused Cause co-eternally.

                    Now never being any first cause is not part of the cosmological argument. And there never being a first cause would still be continent on there being uncaused Existence. Uncaused Existence is not part of the cosmological argument. Understand?
                    . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                    . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                    Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                      The cosmological argument disallows not having a first cause. Uncaused existence is not the cosmological argument. Now the uncaused cause is a conclusion of the cosmological argument. And the assertion then is made that the uncaused Cause that must exist is to be God. Existence is presumed in the argument. In order for there be an uncaused Cause, be it God or not, there must be uncaused existence. Uncaused Existence precedes uncaused Cause co-eternally.

                      Now never being any first cause is not part of the cosmological argument. And there never being a first cause would still be continent on there being uncaused Existence. Uncaused Existence is not part of the cosmological argument. Understand?
                      Your argument is, as usual, circular: If “the uncaused cause is “a conclusion of your argument”, then what’s the premise. Your answer is God. You’re begging the question; your premise is assumed in your conclusion.
                      “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        Your argument is, as usual, circular: If “the uncaused cause is “a conclusion of your argument”, then what’s the premise. Your answer is God. You’re begging the question; your premise is assumed in your conclusion.
                        Existence and cause are not the same thing. What ever is uncaused is contingent on uncaused existence in order to be uncased anything. Now how is that circular?
                        Now the God argument must be founded on being uncaused existence or is not God. Now please explain what is circular in that.

                        None of that is the cosmological argument. If you think so present it.
                        . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                        . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                        Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                          Existence and cause are not the same thing. What ever is uncaused is contingent on uncaused existence in order to be uncased anything.
                          An infinite, eternal universe needs no cause; it is not contingent on anything, it just "is"....just like you claim god to be.

                          Now the God argument must be founded on being uncaused existence or is not God. Now please explain what is circular in that.
                          Your “god argument” is founded on a bald assertion and your conclusion is dependent upon this “assertion” being true.
                          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                            An infinite, eternal universe needs no cause; it is not contingent on anything, it just "is"....just like you claim god to be.
                            Again, such a universe would include uncaused existence as part of it. And causes, there would always have been causes, no one first cause. Uncaused existence stands unique in such an eternal universe in order for it to be eternal.


                            Your “god argument” is founded on a bald assertion and your conclusion is dependent upon this “assertion” being true.
                            Repeat to me my God argument. And identify its assertion.
                            . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                            . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                            Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                              Again, such a universe would include uncaused existence as part of it. And causes, there would always have been causes, no one first cause. Uncaused existence stands unique in such an eternal universe in order for it to be eternal.
                              No, such a universe would be an uncaused existence, just like you claim god to be. Except that for the former there is theoretical evidence supporting the concept but for the latter there is only Bronze Age theology.

                              Repeat to me my God argument. And identify its assertion.
                              Your argument is based upon a conditional assertion, i.e. IF there is an uncaused existence, which you assume to be the case, and then it must be god.
                              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                                Again, such a universe would include uncaused existence as part of it. And causes, there would always have been causes, no one first cause. Uncaused existence stands unique in such an eternal universe in order for it to be eternal.
                                How do you know that? Perhaps the material Cosmos, like your god, just sat there for an eternity causing nothing when all of a sudden it bore a material world.
                                Repeat to me my God argument. And identify its assertion.
                                There had to be a first cause, therefore god did it.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                21 responses
                                82 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                78 responses
                                415 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X