|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 4:52:16 PM
|
|
|
WormHeart
Posts: 280
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Denmark - pride of Scandinavia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PromiseLander
Read post #88...
Ok...
quote:
ORIGINAL: drj11
You haven't drawn out your argument to lead to god. This something that is dependent on nothing could just as well be plain matter.
Yes... but we both know this isn't so. It doesn't follow strictly from the logic that this being is Ymir, but that doesn't change the facts of it.
WormHeart
_____________________________
Praise King and Country with might
Bless every Dane at heart
For serving with no fright
The Viking kingdom for Danes is true
With fields and waving beeches
By a sea so blue
National Anthem of Denmark
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 4:56:43 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7371
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: online
|
quote:
Yes... but we both know this isn't so. It doesn't follow strictly from the logic that this being is Ymir, but that doesn't change the facts of it.
Actually, Ymir wouldn't fit the bill as an uncaused cause, as he began to exist.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 5:18:10 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 632
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PromiseLander
Just as a side note, and this is NOT meant to be mocking in any way so please don't take it that way - I am honestly curious...
What drives a self-proclaimed atheist to post on a Christian forum? Are they honestly curious about the things of God? Or are they here for mocking purposes only?
Well, religion (and Christianity in the US) specifically is kind of a hot topic these days and I somehow became enthralled with the creationist/evolution debate. Growing in a Roman Catholic family all my life, I never really saw this whole battle. Except in areas like IVF, the Catholics tend to get along and even embrace science just fine. Even when they disapprove of something scientific, its generally about ethical concerns, not a flat out denial of the evidence. I was curious, so I started posting here to get a better understanding of the literalist viewpoint. I must say, its quite disturbing.
I responded to this, but I'm not really a self proclaimed atheist. I think questioning the existence of God is intriguing to contemplate and I have no definitive answer for it, but I think its a very reasonable stance to take that one should put very little stock in organized religion.
< Message edited by drj11 -- 6/12/2008 5:28:10 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 5:21:48 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1012
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PromiseLander
quote:
My involvement here is almost exclusively in the Science & Origins forum. My interest in science and education has led me to help others come to a better understanding of science. Sadly, many here (but by no means all) are scientifically unsophisticated, and/or have been taught things that are absolutely wrong. I seek to educate and correct these errors.
What are your qualifications to do so? (honest question by the way)
I have an MS and BS in physics, and have been a TA, tutor and high school science teacher.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 5:30:10 PM
|
|
|
WormHeart
Posts: 280
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Denmark - pride of Scandinavia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
Yes... but we both know this isn't so. It doesn't follow strictly from the logic that this being is Ymir, but that doesn't change the facts of it.
Actually, Ymir wouldn't fit the bill as an uncaused cause, as he began to exist.
Nobody created Ymir - he arose from Ginnungagap - from potential. Nothing creates the potential for existence.
It was his being that led to creation as someone pointed out - The world is created from Ymir, not from nothing. Incidently Ymir means "the screaming one" in Old Norse, so the world was sounded into being.
And as Hammurabi pointed out, Ymirs act was to provide creation. From it everything arose and he "died" in the process.
The imagery is pretty clear.
WormHeart
_____________________________
Praise King and Country with might
Bless every Dane at heart
For serving with no fright
The Viking kingdom for Danes is true
With fields and waving beeches
By a sea so blue
National Anthem of Denmark
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 5:35:28 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7371
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: online
|
quote:
Nobody created Ymir - he arose from Ginnungagap - from potential. Nothing creates the potential for existence.
It was his being that led to creation as someone pointed out - The world is created from Ymir, not from nothing. Incidently Ymir means "the screaming one" in Old Norse, so the world was sounded into being.
And as Hammurabi pointed out, Ymirs act was to provide creation. From it everything arose and he "died" in the process.
The imagery is pretty clear.
I thought he originated when "the ice of Niflheim met with Muspelheim's heat and melted".
And then he died when the "The sons of Borr" killed him?
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 5:43:33 PM
|
|
|
WormHeart
Posts: 280
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Denmark - pride of Scandinavia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
Nobody created Ymir - he arose from Ginnungagap - from potential. Nothing creates the potential for existence.
It was his being that led to creation as someone pointed out - The world is created from Ymir, not from nothing. Incidently Ymir means "the screaming one" in Old Norse, so the world was sounded into being.
And as Hammurabi pointed out, Ymirs act was to provide creation. From it everything arose and he "died" in the process.
The imagery is pretty clear.
I thought he originated when "the ice of Niflheim met with Muspelheim's heat and melted".
And then he died when the "The sons of Borr" killed him?
Yes, of course. The ice of Niflheim met with Muspelheim's heat and melted is a probably as close as you can get to a void of potential if you have to use pre-science imagery. Think of the energy fluctuations in the quantum vacuum.
As you say yourself, that is not "nothing".
There never was just "nothing". Back before anything, there was the potential for something - Ginnungagap.
WormHeart
< Message edited by WormHeart -- 6/12/2008 5:49:47 PM >
_____________________________
Praise King and Country with might
Bless every Dane at heart
For serving with no fright
The Viking kingdom for Danes is true
With fields and waving beeches
By a sea so blue
National Anthem of Denmark
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 5:45:41 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7371
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: online
|
quote:
Yes, of course. The ice of Niflheim met with Muspelheim's heat and melted is a probably as close as you can get to a void of potential if you have to use pre-science imagery. Think of the energy fluctuations in the quantum vacuum.
As you say yourself, that is not "nothing".
There never was just "nothing". Back before anything, there was the potential for something.
Ah, I see, so you don't believe literally in Norse mythology..
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 5:51:10 PM
|
|
|
WormHeart
Posts: 280
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Denmark - pride of Scandinavia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
Yes, of course. The ice of Niflheim met with Muspelheim's heat and melted is a probably as close as you can get to a void of potential if you have to use pre-science imagery. Think of the energy fluctuations in the quantum vacuum.
As you say yourself, that is not "nothing".
There never was just "nothing". Back before anything, there was the potential for something.
Ah, I see, so you don't believe literally in Norse mythology..
You cant explain quantum physics to pre-science people wihtout using imagery. Do you think the angles of the bible carries actual swords or are the swords symbolic of weapons? Have they upgraded to assult rifles?
Of course you cannot explain something as complex as creation without using a lot of imagery - heck, I can hardly wrap my mind around the Big Bang theory, and I spent most of my youth in a teaching institution.
WormHeart
_____________________________
Praise King and Country with might
Bless every Dane at heart
For serving with no fright
The Viking kingdom for Danes is true
With fields and waving beeches
By a sea so blue
National Anthem of Denmark
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 5:54:06 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7371
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: online
|
quote:
You cant explain quantum physics to pre-science people wihtout using imagery. Do you think the angles of the bible carries actual swords or are the swords symbolic of weapons? Have they upgraded to assult rifles?
Of course you cannot explain something as complex as creation without using a lot of imagery - heck, I can hardly wrap my mind around the Big Bang theory, and I spent most of my youth in a teaching institution.
Well, I never claimed that you could do any of these things - I was just confirming that you don't literally believe in the Norse mythologies.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 6:12:06 PM
|
|
|
WormHeart
Posts: 280
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Denmark - pride of Scandinavia
Status: offline
|
The logic is pretty clear:
1) Nothing comes from nothing.
Agree?
Then logic dictates that no matter how far we go back, there will never be just "Nothing".
I claim the furthest back we can go is the "potential for something - Ginnungagap.
You would claim (I assume) that God was always around.
Science claims that our best observations indicate the universe arose from ultimately unknown conditions aprox. 14 billions years ago.
Science doesn't know the conditions before the beginning.
The Bible claim God is everpresent.
Voluspa claim Ginnungagap was there before anything else.
However... if the first premisis is correct - nothing can arise from nothing - then God would have to make exceptions from the very foundation of the logical steps toward him.
Ginnungagap would however never have been "nothing".
WormHeart
EDITED - missing word
< Message edited by WormHeart -- 6/12/2008 6:19:18 PM >
_____________________________
Praise King and Country with might
Bless every Dane at heart
For serving with no fright
The Viking kingdom for Danes is true
With fields and waving beeches
By a sea so blue
National Anthem of Denmark
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 8:35:50 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7371
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: online
|
quote:
You don't know the meaning of the words in the first place, so it is not really a case of being "literal" or not. Nordic skjalds (the keepers of the oral traditions) used kennings a whole lot. A kenning is a metaphor. Instead of saying teeth, you can use the kenning "the rocks of the mouth".
Sorry, it looses all beauty in translation.
The point is that the creation with Ymir tell us the important things about creation - our place in it.
That is also follows from pure logic is just a boon.
Well, neither of us knows Hebrew or Greek, and yet we can talk about whether our understanding of Scripture is literal or metaphorical.
And as you have agree the reading of your mythologies is metaphorical, you agree you don't read them as literal, thus my point.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 8:37:41 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7371
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: online
|
quote:
The logic is pretty clear:
1) Nothing comes from nothing.
Agree?
Then logic dictates that no matter how far we go back, there will never be just "Nothing".
I claim the furthest back we can go is the "potential for something - Ginnungagap.
You would claim (I assume) that God was always around.
Science claims that our best observations indicate the universe arose from ultimately unknown conditions aprox. 14 billions years ago.
Science doesn't know the conditions before the beginning.
The Bible claim God is everpresent.
Voluspa claim Ginnungagap was there before anything else.
However... if the first premisis is correct - nothing can arise from nothing - then God would have to make exceptions from the very foundation of the logical steps toward him.
Ginnungagap would however never have been "nothing".
This however is simply your applied understanding of words that were written, by your own acknowledgement, by people who knew nothing of physics or the universe.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 10:44:55 PM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 1134
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PromiseLander
There must be a cause that is outside or above our physical universe - something outside the boundaries of physics and time.
How do we determine if this cause is God?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/12/2008 10:49:55 PM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 1134
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PromiseLander
God is not a created thing.
How did you determine this?
quote:
All created things, (everything that is not God) . . .
Again, this is begging the question. Your opening post suggested that you had a proof for the existence of God. So far, all we get is the conclusion and a reassertion of the conclusion in the premises.
quote:
Therefore, any explaination that attempts to remove God from a universe of existing things, in effect, removes the fact that things do indeed exist.
Let me try your argument style out.
Fact: No deity can exist without another deity creating it. Therefore, there are an infinite number of deities. Any attempt to remove any one of those deities removes that fact that things do indeed exist.
There you go, argument by unassailable conclusion.
quote:
For if one denies the existence of a source of existence that is independant of everying for its own existence, then the existence of something would indeed HAVE to come from nothing - which is impossible, short of God's own creative ability.
Then you can't have God existing if you deny the source of existence for God. Deny the Uber-God and you deny the existend of God and the whole universe.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/13/2008 12:28:47 AM
|
|
|
WormHeart
Posts: 280
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Denmark - pride of Scandinavia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
Well, neither of us knows Hebrew or Greek, and yet we can talk about whether our understanding of Scripture is literal or metaphorical.
True, but we are still hampered by the fact that neither of us speak the original languages. There are lots of nuances we miss or don’t get, because we rely on other peoples translations.
Translating words changes them.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
And as you have agree the reading of your mythologies is metaphorical, you agree you don't read them as literal, thus my point.
Then I might have misunderstood your point.
I assume you don’t read the Bible as literal in every sense, so what are you trying to say?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
This however is simply your applied understanding of words that were written, by your own acknowledgement, by people who knew nothing of physics or the universe.
Well, that is the way to verify or reject interpretations of holy texts, no?
If you interpret the text one way, but reality (by our best understanding) say another thing, then the interpretations must be in error.
Creation is not deceitful and science is not the enemy of religion. They complement each other.
WormHeart
_____________________________
Praise King and Country with might
Bless every Dane at heart
For serving with no fright
The Viking kingdom for Danes is true
With fields and waving beeches
By a sea so blue
National Anthem of Denmark
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/13/2008 8:17:07 AM
|
|
|
PromiseLander
Posts: 358
Joined: 1/14/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Method
quote:
ORIGINAL: PromiseLander
God is not a created thing.
How did you determine this?
quote:
All created things, (everything that is not God) . . .
Again, this is begging the question. Your opening post suggested that you had a proof for the existence of God. So far, all we get is the conclusion and a reassertion of the conclusion in the premises.
quote:
Therefore, any explaination that attempts to remove God from a universe of existing things, in effect, removes the fact that things do indeed exist.
Let me try your argument style out.
Fact: No deity can exist without another deity creating it. Therefore, there are an infinite number of deities. Any attempt to remove any one of those deities removes that fact that things do indeed exist.
There you go, argument by unassailable conclusion.
quote:
For if one denies the existence of a source of existence that is independant of everying for its own existence, then the existence of something would indeed HAVE to come from nothing - which is impossible, short of God's own creative ability.
Then you can't have God existing if you deny the source of existence for God. Deny the Uber-God and you deny the existend of God and the whole universe.
I've stated the same argument a number of different ways, but I'll repeat this one...
Premise #1) Everything that exists is dependant upon something else for its existence.
Premise #2) Nothing that exists does so upon its own doing as something cannot spring into existence from nothing, and without causation.
Question: What was the cause of the first thing to exist, being that something cannot come from nothing on its own accord?
Answer: There must have been something that is dependant upon nothing to be the cause of everything that exists.
A painting is all the proof that I need to prove that there was a painter.
A building is all the proof that I need to prove that there was a builder.
Any dependant thing is all the proof that I need to prove an independant source.
This is the argument that is irrefutable. I don't care if it is stated incorrectly for you intellectual types, you get the point.
In this particular argument, I am not attempting to point to a specific source (The God of the Bible) I am merely stating that any existence cannot exist on its own and without cause - therefore something outside of our existence must have been a source. This source must therefore be dependant on nothing for it's own being.
< Message edited by PromiseLander -- 6/13/2008 8:23:56 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/13/2008 10:14:05 AM
|
|
|
Veritas
Posts: 504
Joined: 4/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PromiseLander
I've stated the same argument a number of different ways, but I'll repeat this one...
Premise #1) Everything that exists is dependant upon something else for its existence.
Premise #2) Nothing that exists does so upon its own doing as something cannot spring into existence from nothing, and without causation.
Question: What was the cause of the first thing to exist, being that something cannot come from nothing on its own accord?
Answer: There must have been something that is dependant upon nothing to be the cause of everything that exists.
You've just proved that Premise #1 is false.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/13/2008 10:52:44 AM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 1134
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PromiseLander
I've stated the same argument a number of different ways, but I'll repeat this one...
Even if we disagree on many things, I do appreciate your time and effort.
quote:
Premise #1) Everything that exists is dependant upon something else for its existence.
Premise #2) Nothing that exists does so upon its own doing as something cannot spring into existence from nothing, and without causation.
Question: What was the cause of the first thing to exist, being that something cannot come from nothing on its own accord?
According to Premises 1 and 2 there can't be a first thing. It must be infinite. For comparison, you are asking for a square circle.
quote:
Answer: There must have been something that is dependant upon nothing to be the cause of everything that exists.
That would violate Premise 1. Either Premise 1 is false or the answer is wrong.
quote:
A painting is all the proof that I need to prove that there was a painter. A building is all the proof that I need to prove that there was a builder.
Where did the painter and builder come from?
quote:
Any dependant thing is all the proof that I need to prove an independant source.
You haven't shown what the Universe is dependent on. At one time no one knew how lightning formed so they, like you, decided that lightning needed a maker. Enter Thor, Zeus, etc. I don't see how the production of the Universe is any different.
quote:
This is the argument that is irrefutable.
It's paradoxical. Your conclusion requires one of your premises to be wrong.
Let's switch to another proof.
Premise 1: There is an immovable object.
Premise 2: There is an unstoppable force.
Question: What happens when the unstoppable force hits and immovable object?
Answer: The unstoppable force moves the immovable object.
For my answer to be right my first premise has to be wrong.
quote:
I don't care if it is stated incorrectly for you intellectual types, you get the point.
If your point is that God's existence can only be propped up with bad arguments then I do get your point. Your proof is faulty despite what my IQ score may or may not be.
quote:
In this particular argument, I am not attempting to point to a specific source (The God of the Bible) I am merely stating that any existence cannot exist on its own and without cause - therefore something outside of our existence must have been a source. This source must therefore be dependant on nothing for it's own being.
Therefore, if God exists then there must be something outside of God's existence that cause God to exist. Right?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/13/2008 11:18:19 AM
|
|
|
PromiseLander
Posts: 358
Joined: 1/14/2008
Status: offline
|
Ugh... I HATE the English language. One or two words can make or break a point even if they can carry the exact same meaning...
OK, I'll try wording it another way.
(Incidentally, I keep saying the same thing, but wording the argument differently, and so far I've only been challenged on the wording of the argument.)
1) Everything that "is" exists due to a cause. It does not have the power of being within itself due to the fact that it exists because of something else.
2) If something is caused by something else, this is evidence enough that the universe is not infinate in the scope of time - if things die, they had a beginning - at all scales of existence.
3) For the first thing that came into existence, there must have been something that exists outside of the dimension of time, as even time had an origination, and outside the realm of matter and energy, as matter and energy had a beginning.
4) This original source for all being, had the power of being within itself, and was seperate from all being, as it existed before any other being as it is the source, it also never had a beginning, and will have no end.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/13/2008 12:11:51 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1012
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PromiseLander
(Incidentally, I keep saying the same thing, but wording the argument differently, and so far I've only been challenged on the wording of the argument.)
No, it's not the wording, it's the logic.
You keep saying:
A) Absolutely EVERYTHING must have a creator/be dependent on something/be caused/come into being. Absolutely everything. No exceptions at all. If there were any exceptions, then my argument would fail.
B) God is an exception to A.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Philisophical proof of God the Creator - 6/13/2008 12:35:50 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7371
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: online
|
quote:
True, but we are still hampered by the fact that neither of us speak the original languages. There are lots of nuances we miss or don’t get, because we rely on other peoples translations.
Translating words changes them.
Perhaps, but this has nothing to do with the fact that by your own acknowledgement, you regard the words metaphorically rather than literally.
quote:
Then I might have misunderstood your point.
I assume you don’t read the Bible as literal in every sense, so what are you trying to say?
I am saying you are simply ascribing to these mythologies your modern understanding, whatever the understanding of the writers.
quote:
Well, that is the way to verify or reject interpretations of holy texts, no?
If you interpret the text one way, but reality (by our best understanding) say another thing, then the interpretations must be in error.
Well, no, the writers could simply be wrong.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
| | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
