A universe without God.

[lifegazer]

Your argument (which has been debunked on this board countless times) is irrellevant to theism.

My argument hasn't been debunked before. Tell me where somebody has presented a proof for the existence of will within a primal-cause. Tell me where somebody has shown that QM could have been predicted by philosophy thousands of years before science discovered it, since the essence of matter emanates from an indeterminate source (a source with free-will and free energy).

If there has to be a "primal cause", as you call it, there is no reason that that cause had to be a deity.

It does if you've read my argument, since I argue that the primal-cause exists at singularity, without definite form, possessing will and intelligence and purpose.

In addition, God cannot be a "primal cause" since he is a concsious being and therefore his actions must be sequential. Creating the universe is an action which neccessitates a prior action ad infinitum until you reach some sort of origin.

The origin of this universe began with a desire. The desire to be.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

LG,

Can your omnipotent and omniscient God create something that is not a part of itself? Does it even know how to do it?

If it cannot, what is restraining it?

 

[Beleth]

Effort/force without an origin... an enforcer? Impossible.
Attainment from infinite effort, with no origin of effort? Impossible.

Wait a sec.
Isn't that the entire premise of your argument? That an originless (acausal, primal, whatever) effort/force is not only not impossible, but required?

Clarify, please.

 

[Zero]

http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/sho...&threadid=30781

"Behold, your God.
Not just any ol' God. The God. The daddy of all Gods. The unsurpassable God of Gods...

Omnipotent. God has all power. God effects all force... all creation.
Omniscient. God knows how to do anything.
Omnipresent. God is everywhere and nowhere, everytime and no-time. God, therefore, by default, is expressing itself as all things.
Good & evil are potentials existing within God itself.
God is a singularity of being - without beginning or end. Without position or momentum, until God creates it so, through perception of space & time.
You name it, God creates it for ya. Roll up roll up and meet the God of Gods. On your knees heathens."

God becomes everything because God is [existence].

I'll let you decide which religions this definition applies to.

Oh, and your definition contradicts itself, and reality.

 

[lifegazer]

No, um, you missed it. But, you know, it doesn't surprise me that you would get that... I think that's what you get from every post made. Like only you can help us overcome our fear. It might be noble if it weren't so incorrect.

Try being so brave when death comes to take you.

Most of these guys think science is an agent of change. They appreciate the electric light and computers and stuff. I'm sure that, like QM, you would have eventually deduced these things from the existence of God, but several thousand years of religion and God didn't. Can you see why the skeptic harbors an element of mistrust?

Yes. But it's so frustrating when that base-mistrust prevents that skeptic from even addressing the arguments one presents to him/her. Hint hint.

You are like the priest standing uncomfortably close behind us promising to guide us toward the light. But your whispers sound like, "Wanna see my rudder? I can show you GAAaad."

I can show you that God exists and that God is everything = God is you. But if you won't shut up bickering and belittling me, overlooking what I say in the process, then you lose what I offer you.

Here again, and I don't doubt you believe this, but you are naked with only a mask of nobility. You describe a utopian Pangea that will exist if only we realize that we are the master race, godmen. Don't you see, even if you are Karl Marx in angel garb, and you succeed, it will be Stalin in a Taliban robe who inherits your world. I know you believe this time it will be different, but you're the only one.

Those that are first shall be last and those that are last shall be first.
A great and significant line from the bible, speaking of utopia at the end of days. The leaders (those that are first) shall be last as those that are last (those that are led) shall be the first to benefit from their leadership.

The unkind but apt description... RAVINGS! Twisting, convoluted, ravings. "God only saves man if man saves man...because God is being man" Its a wonderful catch-22. "I'm here to tell you all that you are God, not man." That's perfect. I am a teacup of Omnipotence in a teacup. Or vice versa - I'm not sure.

It was simple stuff to follow. Man needs to save himself instead of awaiting global miracles, because God can only give to man what man gives unto himself.
In future, don't bother responding unless you have something substantial to post. Jeering becomes very boring in a very short time. As a new hero of the skeptics, you'll have to do a bit more than this. Sneering eloquently does not suffice to destroy my philosophy.

That is true. I am sorry about that. In the future I'll try to be more subtle.

And smartasses are ten-a-penny in here. It's boring pal. Get a new act and do it quickly.

 

[RussDill]

My argument hasn't been debunked before. Tell me where somebody has presented a proof for the existence of will within a primal-cause. Tell me where somebody has shown that QM could have been predicted by philosophy thousands of years before science discovered it, since the essence of matter emanates from an indeterminate source (a source with free-will and free energy).

Sorry lifegazer, the ice cream example clearly shows this as total BS.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by lifegazer
And smartasses are ten-a-penny in here. It's boring pal. Get a new act and do it quickly.

I might remind you we smartasses are God. Better watch how you talk to us.

 

[lifegazer]

"Effort/force without an origin... an enforcer? Impossible.
Attainment from infinite effort, with no origin of effort? Impossible."

Wait a sec.
Isn't that the entire premise of your argument? That an originless (acausal, primal, whatever) effort/force is not only not impossible, but required?

Clarify, please.

God is the origin... the primal-cause. God is the origin of effort/force.
So, God is without origin, but is the origin of everything else.

 

[lifegazer]

Sorry lifegazer, the ice cream example clearly shows this as total BS.

Okay Russ, I'll give you another shot. Explain (again please, because I've forgotten) how an ice-cream debunks my philosophy.

 

[Upchurch]

Re: Re: Re: Meet your God.

First-cause, primal-cause, whatever. How do you show that such a thing is singular? It is just as possible that there are multiple acausal events/sources/whatever that started the universe as it is that a single acausal event/source/whatever did. How can we know which is actually the case?

(for simplicities sake, I'm going to shorten "event/source/whatever" to "event", but I mean the long version)

Further, how do we know that there wasn't a succession of acausal events that contributed to the formation of the universe? Events that are completely non-dependent on previous events, even though they occur chronologically later?

Again, the rest of your argument assumes the uniqueness of the primal-cause, so I'll wait to address it until after you've shown uniqueness.

Was this ever addressed, or are we just assuming that the primal/first-cause is singular?

 

[lifegazer]

LG,

Can your omnipotent and omniscient God create something that is not a part of itself? Does it even know how to do it?

If it cannot, what is restraining it?

God can create the perception of things separate from itself. God has fooled everyone here for thousands of years.

 

[Upchurch]

God can create the perception of things separate from itself. God has fooled everyone here for thousands of years.

But God can't actually create something seperate from itself? What about omnipotency?

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by lifegazer
God can create the perception of things separate from itself. God has fooled everyone here for thousands of years.

By which you mean, God has fooled itself for thousands of years. Go God! Anyway, answer the question. Can he create something that is not a part of itself?

 

[Jet Grind]

Originally posted
It does if you've read my argument, since I argue that the primal-cause exists at singularity, without definite form, possessing will and intelligence and purpose.

Why does it have to? I've already explained the problems with exactly what you are asserting.

Originally posted by lifegazer
The origin of this universe began with a desire. The desire to be.

I don't know why I'm even bothering to respond to this, but desire necessitates a prior cause as well.

 

[Beleth]

There cannot be two entities claiming to be boundless and residing at singularity.

Well of course not. But your reasoning is circular.

An entity claiming to be boundless and residing at singularity is not a requirement for the universe to exist. As Upchurch mentioned, there is just as much reason to postulate that there were two or more acausal events that created the universe as there is to postulate that there was only one.

I'd really like to see you reply to this with as much rigor as you did when you presented your argument for the necessity of an acausal event. You have shown its necessity; can you show its uniqueness?

 

[lifegazer]

But God can't actually create something seperate from itself? What about omnipotency?

God is omnipotent because only God possesses any power. God is all-powerful because only God has power.
God is omnipresent because God is all existence.

Now, God can create any perception that God wants to create, but God cannot undo the truth that only God exists.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by lifegazer
Now, God can create any perception that God wants to create, but God cannot undo the truth that only God exists.

Then this truth is not dependent upon God, but rather God is dependent upon it?

 

[Jet Grind]

Contradiction meter going haywire!

Originally posted by lifegazer
God is omnipotent.....
........but God cannot undo the truth that only God exists.

 

[Upchurch]

God is omnipotent because only God possesses any power. God is all-powerful because only God has power.

These are two very different statements. The first one says that God can do anything. The second says that God is just the one with the most power, not necessarily all-powerful.

Now, God can create any perception that God wants to create, but God cannot undo the truth that only God exists.

This statement is consistant with your second statement above, but not with your first. If God possesses any power, God possesses the power to undo the truth that only God exists.


edited to add: whoops, looks like a lot of people picked up on the inconsistancy right away. Sorry for the redundancy.

 

[Dancing David]

Imo, your post basically amounted to: "okay, your argument might seduce us into actually believing that there might be a God, although we're still not sure and would like to see some miracles please. Also, what does it mean to humanity anyway, unless an awful big miracle occurs and saves our butts?"

I think that your cynicism makes it hard for you to appreciate sincerity.

Atlas raises a point worth exploring.

Truth with a capital 't' is something that seems to motivate change in human societies, the earnestness of the believer is almost more important than the message that they carry. And this is not meant as a slam to you Lifegazer. Just a comment on how social change works, the eanerst effort of the leader and the belief of the leader may be more crucial than swaying the minds of the followeres.

And while I fing your goal to be very similar to those that i would like to see, i am not sure that a belief in the unifing principle of god is needed to create a better world.

carry on.