| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"david ford" |
| Date: |
13 Nov 2003 11:37:58 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Well what then caused God? |
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, gen2rev wrote:
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:08:39 +0000 (UTC), david ford
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, gen2rev wrote:
david ford:
I leave it to greater minds to develop a [LF]"scientific theory of
creation." Besides, I'm having to much fun shredding the theory
of NS. By the way, have you read my
Essay on Problems with Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Pine.LNX.4.10A.B3.10005310900310.17702-100000%40jabba.gl.umbc.edu
A major problem with this essay is that you seem to have confused two of
Darwin's claims. One is that evolution happened, and the second is that
Natural Selection is a mechanism of that evolution.
I don't quite understand what you're saying. Is the following
reconstruction accurate?
david confuses these 2 claims of Darwin:
1) biology is the product of non-intelligence-directed processes, and
2) the creative, not-intelligent process of natural selection is the major
mechanism responsible for the arrival of the biological world's organisms.
No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that you're confusing:
1) Evolution, whether directed or non-directed, occurred.
2) Natural Selection one of the mechanisms of that evolution.
In what you just wrote, what definition or definitions of the word
"evolution" are you using?
Assuming the reconstruction is accurate,
It's not.
I disagree. The essay trashes the theory of natural selection.
It hardly touches on it. It trashes a straw-man of Natural Selection.
From this trashing of the theory of natural selection/ claim 2), I
don't conclude in the essay that claim 1) is wrong.
I never said you did.
[snip]
.
|
|
| User: "gen2rev" |
|
| Title: Re: Well what then caused God? |
14 Nov 2003 08:41:41 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, gen2rev wrote:
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:08:39 +0000 (UTC), david ford
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, gen2rev wrote:
david ford:
I leave it to greater minds to develop a [LF]"scientific theory of
creation." Besides, I'm having to much fun shredding the theory
of NS. By the way, have you read my
Essay on Problems with Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Pine.LNX.4.10A.B3.10005310900310.17702-100000%40jabba.gl.umbc.edu
A major problem with this essay is that you seem to have confused two of
Darwin's claims. One is that evolution happened, and the second is that
Natural Selection is a mechanism of that evolution.
I don't quite understand what you're saying. Is the following
reconstruction accurate?
david confuses these 2 claims of Darwin:
1) biology is the product of non-intelligence-directed processes, and
2) the creative, not-intelligent process of natural selection is the major
mechanism responsible for the arrival of the biological world's organisms.
No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that you're confusing:
1) Evolution, whether directed or non-directed, occurred.
2) Natural Selection one of the mechanisms of that evolution.
In what you just wrote, what definition or definitions of the word
"evolution" are you using?
Change in allele frequencies over time.
Assuming the reconstruction is accurate,
It's not.
I disagree. The essay trashes the theory of natural selection.
It hardly touches on it. It trashes a straw-man of Natural Selection.
From this trashing of the theory of natural selection/ claim 2), I
don't conclude in the essay that claim 1) is wrong.
I never said you did.
[snip]
.
|
|
|
| User: "gabby" |
|
| Title: Why Must God be Caused? |
15 Nov 2003 10:40:32 AM |
|
|
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But according
to
modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, gen2rev wrote:
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:08:39 +0000 (UTC), david ford
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, gen2rev wrote:
david ford:
I leave it to greater minds to develop a [LF]"scientific theory
of
creation." Besides, I'm having to much fun shredding the theory
of NS. By the way, have you read my
Essay on Problems with Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Pine.LNX.4.10A.B3.10005310900310.17702-100000%40jabba.gl.umbc.edu
A major problem with this essay is that you seem to have confused
two of
Darwin's claims. One is that evolution happened, and the second is
that
Natural Selection is a mechanism of that evolution.
I don't quite understand what you're saying. Is the following
reconstruction accurate?
david confuses these 2 claims of Darwin:
1) biology is the product of non-intelligence-directed processes,
and
2) the creative, not-intelligent process of natural selection is the
major
mechanism responsible for the arrival of the biological world's
organisms.
No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that you're confusing:
1) Evolution, whether directed or non-directed, occurred.
2) Natural Selection one of the mechanisms of that evolution.
In what you just wrote, what definition or definitions of the word
"evolution" are you using?
Change in allele frequencies over time.
Assuming the reconstruction is accurate,
It's not.
I disagree. The essay trashes the theory of natural selection.
It hardly touches on it. It trashes a straw-man of Natural Selection.
From this trashing of the theory of natural selection/ claim 2), I
don't conclude in the essay that claim 1) is wrong.
I never said you did.
[snip]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
15 Nov 2003 11:10:14 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 16:40:32 +0000 (UTC) in alt.atheism, gabby
("gabby" <gab@icm.world.net>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But according
to
modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
Generally speaking, I don't think "I can't think of anything else so
this must be the answer" is a terribly sound or satisfying answer.
Does for instance, a beginning to the universe necessarily imply a
cause? Is causality a property of the universe, in the same way time
and space are thought to be, or do you hold it to be pre-existent? If
you hold that causality is pre-existent, then what place for God?
If causality is a property of the universe (and perhaps the acausality
observed at a atomic level suggests that it might be) then talking
about causes of the universe may well be meaningless.
[snip]
--
"Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You."
- Attrib: Pauline Reage.
Inexpensive VHS & other video to CD/DVD conversion?
See: <http://www.Video2CD.com>. 35.00 gets your video on DVD.
all posts to this email address are automatically deleted without being read.
** atheist poster child #1 ** #442.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 05:19:41 PM |
|
|
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> writes:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there
is no other alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is
eternal. But according to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning
some 12 bilion years ago. So that leaves only God as the eternal
cause.
That's called the fallacy of the excluded middle. It's also a
misrepresentation of what "science" knows. What we know is that 12
billion years ago *something* happened, and that after that event we
have reasonable and mchanistic explanations for everything that's
happened since them. That doesn't mean that there is no explanation, or
that whatever occurred before then requires the intervention of a
conscious being, or any such nonsense. It simply means "we don't know,"
and throwing some deity into the mix simply makes the matter less, not
more, understandable.
Elf
--
Elf M. Sternberg, Proud to be an Extinctionist
http://www.drizzle.com/~elf/
With the advance of biogenetics, it is not so much that we are losing
our dignity and freedom but that we realise we never had them in the
first place. - Slavoj Zizek
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mitch Alsup" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
15 Nov 2003 07:19:11 PM |
|
|
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote in message news:<kFstb.20866$Mm.832@bignews6.bellsouth.net>...
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
<snip> How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? <snip>
OK, try this analogy:
Lets say we have a jar of nitroglycern sitting in a
tollerably safe location. No one is around, neither
man, nor animal of any kind whatsoever. Yet, on that
fateful day, the nitroglycern decides to explode all
by itself.
What is the cause of the explosion?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Dean" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
15 Nov 2003 11:43:13 PM |
|
|
"Mitch Alsup" <MitchAlsup@aol.com> wrote in message
news:e90782f7.0311151719.70da2c55@posting.google.com...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote in message
news:<kFstb.20866$Mm.832@bignews6.bellsouth.net>...
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
<snip> How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? <snip>
OK, try this analogy:
Lets say we have a jar of nitroglycern sitting in a
tollerably safe location. No one is around, neither
man, nor animal of any kind whatsoever. Yet, on that
fateful day, the nitroglycern decides to explode all
by itself.
What is the cause of the explosion?
It could've been any number of things, given the _extreme_
unstable nature of nitroblycern.
It could have been a sudden temperature change
causing condensation a drop of water to run inside the
container striking the nitro., or a low level earthquake,
or wind shook the table, someone slammed the door
or a bird flew into the bottle. It could be a condition
similar to hay in a barn which can *spontaneously*
burst into flame. Any number of small effects could
have caused this.
But the greater question is: where did nitro come from
and why was it there in the first place. This is analogous
to the Universe at p - ^43 sec. = t+0.
where p. = plank time
\
Bobby
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "dave e" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
16 Nov 2003 12:39:45 PM |
|
|
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote in message news:<kFstb.20866$Mm.832@bignews6.bellsouth.net>...
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But according
to
modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
"Cause" and "effect" are terms used in science to describe a
time/space relationship between observable events, which is implied
(but never proven) by experimentation and/or carefully analyzed
empirical evidence.
I do not think you are using these terms in a very scientific way.
Dave
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
15 Nov 2003 01:43:50 PM |
|
|
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
It's all a matter of how far up you want to scale things. Perhaps the
Universe is little more than a highschool science project that belongs
to some kid that belongs to a race of unimaginably advanced beings. We
call that kid God, but he's got parents and acne and gets grounded and
is shy around girls.
.
|
|
|
| User: "gabby" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 09:51:30 AM |
|
|
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
God was uncaused! God created the Universe, therefore he is
separate from and not a part of his own creation. Ours is a
cause and effect universe. However, since God is neither part
of, nor contained within this universe, the cause and effect
law of our universe does not apply to him.
Since God is eternal - always was and always will be! There was
nothing before him. Indeed there was no *before*, since before
is a element of time. Time began with the beginning of the
universe as did space, matter and the laws of physics all began
with the Big Bang.
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 12:39:09 PM |
|
|
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote in message news:<0crub.963$wp3.189@bignews5.bellsouth.net>...
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
God was uncaused! God created the Universe, therefore he is
separate from and not a part of his own creation. Ours is a
cause and effect universe. However, since God is neither part
of, nor contained within this universe, the cause and effect
law of our universe does not apply to him.
Since God is eternal - always was and always will be! There was
nothing before him. Indeed there was no *before*, since before
is a element of time. Time began with the beginning of the
universe as did space, matter and the laws of physics all began
with the Big Bang.
<snip>
You still haven't addressed why God doesn't need to be caused, you've
just really emphatically said "Because he doesn't have to be!" You
assume god can be eternal, but nothing else can be; why is that?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AC" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 11:21:36 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:51:30 +0000 (UTC),
gabby <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
God was uncaused! God created the Universe, therefore he is
separate from and not a part of his own creation.
If God requires no cause then why does the Universe?
Ours is a
cause and effect universe.
Not familiar with virtual particles, eh?
However, since God is neither part
of, nor contained within this universe, the cause and effect
law of our universe does not apply to him.
Sure doesn't sound very logical to me. Sounds more like handwaving any
attempt to apply *your* logic to God.
Since God is eternal - always was and always will be! There was
nothing before him. Indeed there was no *before*, since before
is a element of time. Time began with the beginning of the
universe as did space, matter and the laws of physics all began
with the Big Bang.
The only thing the Big Bang theory states is that the universe was once very
hot, very small and very dense. It does not say where it came from.
Perhaps if you could understand what the theory stated, as opposed to what
your strawman stated, we might be able to get somewhere. Phrases like "Time
began" are usually fairly good indicators that you don't quite get what the
Big Bang. The Universe *is* space-time, so trying to figure out what came
before is like trying to determine what is north of the north pole.
--
Aaron Clausen
tao_of_cow/\alberni.net (replace /\ with @) or
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "robpar" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 03:02:27 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:51:30 +0000 (UTC), "gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
God was uncaused! God created the Universe, therefore he is
separate from and not a part of his own creation. Ours is a
cause and effect universe. However, since God is neither part
of, nor contained within this universe, the cause and effect
law of our universe does not apply to him.
Since God is eternal - always was and always will be! There was
nothing before him. Indeed there was no *before*, since before
is a element of time. Time began with the beginning of the
universe as did space, matter and the laws of physics all began
with the Big Bang.
And your proof of this outlandish story is?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "gabby" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 09:35:25 AM |
|
|
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
Logic would dictate that since the universe had a beginning, there must
have been a beginner, except in fairy tales.
It's all a matter of how far up you want to scale things. Perhaps the
Universe is little more than a highschool science project that belongs
to some kid that belongs to a race of unimaginably advanced beings. We
call that kid God, but he's got parents and acne and gets grounded and
is shy around girls.
And what is your evidence for this. It's only a outlandish story.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 12:31:07 PM |
|
|
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote in message news:<GYqub.879$wp3.131@bignews5.bellsouth.net>...
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
Logic would dictate that since the universe had a beginning, there must
have been a beginner, except in fairy tales.
Like the bible?
Why do you assume that nothing existed before the big bang?
It's all a matter of how far up you want to scale things. Perhaps the
Universe is little more than a highschool science project that belongs
to some kid that belongs to a race of unimaginably advanced beings. We
call that kid God, but he's got parents and acne and gets grounded and
is shy around girls.
And what is your evidence for this. It's only a outlandish story.
What is your evidence supporting your fairy tale?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "robpar" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 03:00:54 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:35:25 +0000 (UTC), "gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
Logic would dictate that since the universe had a beginning, there must
have been a beginner, except in fairy tales.
It's all a matter of how far up you want to scale things. Perhaps the
Universe is little more than a highschool science project that belongs
to some kid that belongs to a race of unimaginably advanced beings. We
call that kid God, but he's got parents and acne and gets grounded and
is shy around girls.
And what is your evidence for this. It's only a outlandish story.
No more so than the creationist myth in genesis. And exactly the same amount of
evidence. I see the two as equal in probability.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Charles & Mambo" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 02:34:19 PM |
|
|
gabby wrote:
Logic would dictate that since the universe had a beginning, there must
have been a beginner, except in fairy tales.
Why does Mr.Logic stop dictating as soon as God is introduced?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Dean" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
15 Nov 2003 05:20:20 PM |
|
|
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
Y'all have a Mexican stand off!
Bob
It's all a matter of how far up you want to scale things. Perhaps the
Universe is little more than a highschool science project that belongs
to some kid that belongs to a race of unimaginably advanced beings. We
call that kid God, but he's got parents and acne and gets grounded and
is shy around girls.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Goodrich" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
15 Nov 2003 05:46:04 PM |
|
|
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message news:<lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com>...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
THe answer is simple - *something* must not be caused.
-mg
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Dean" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
15 Nov 2003 06:05:50 PM |
|
|
"Mike Goodrich" <goodrich_ms@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d92ac81f.0311151545.31b0af38@posting.google.com...
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:<lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com>...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no
other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years
ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
THe answer is simple - *something* must not be caused.
This gives you a choice as to which is uncaused.
Bobby
-mg
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Goodrich" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
16 Nov 2003 07:49:47 AM |
|
|
"Robert Dean" <robd@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<Naztb.23043$Mm.22361@bignews6.bellsouth.net>...
"Mike Goodrich" <goodrich_ms@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d92ac81f.0311151545.31b0af38@posting.google.com...
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:<lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com>...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no
other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years
ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
THe answer is simple - *something* must not be caused.
This gives you a choice as to which is uncaused.
Bobby
I agree, and that choice extends to scientific and public policy
venues of all kinds!
regards,
-mg
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Dean" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 11:27:48 AM |
|
|
"Mike Goodrich" <goodrich_ms@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d92ac81f.0311160550.70e1c037@posting.google.com...
"Robert Dean" <robd@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:<Naztb.23043$Mm.22361@bignews6.bellsouth.net>...
"Mike Goodrich" <goodrich_ms@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d92ac81f.0311151545.31b0af38@posting.google.com...
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:<lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com>...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to
existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no
other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion
years
ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
THe answer is simple - *something* must not be caused.
This gives you a choice as to which is uncaused.
Bobby
I agree, and that choice extends to scientific and public policy
venues of all kinds!
True!
regards,
-mg
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "eyelessgame" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
16 Nov 2003 09:42:50 AM |
|
|
(Mike Goodrich) wrote in message news:<d92ac81f.0311151545.31b0af38@posting.google.com>...
THe answer is simple - *something* must not be caused.
-mg
Like quantum events.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Barry OGrady" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
17 Nov 2003 08:28:39 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 15:42:50 +0000 (UTC), (eyelessgame) wrote:
goodrich_ms@yahoo.com (Mike Goodrich) wrote in message news:<d92ac81f.0311151545.31b0af38@posting.google.com>...
THe answer is simple - *something* must not be caused.
-mg
Like quantum events.
God is uncaused because things that don't exist can't be caused.
Are you saying that quantum events don't exist?
-Barry
========
Web page: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~barry.og
Atheist, radio scanner, LIPD information.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "H,R.Gruemm" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
16 Nov 2003 02:10:08 AM |
|
|
(Mike Goodrich) wrote in message news:<d92ac81f.0311151545.31b0af38@posting.google.com>...
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message news:<lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com>...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
THe answer is simple - *something* must not be caused.
-mg
A2 caused A1, A3 caused A2, A4 caused A3 etc. Anything wrong with such
a situation ? The limited conceptual ability of earlier philosophers,
specifically their ignorance of the negative integers, cannot restrict
reality.
Regards,
HRG.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Dean" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 11:26:04 AM |
|
|
"H,R.Gruemm" <psychotech@xpoint.at> wrote in message
news:5662bb3.0311160009.a6d33b3@posting.google.com...
goodrich_ms@yahoo.com (Mike Goodrich) wrote in message
news:<d92ac81f.0311151545.31b0af38@posting.google.com>...
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:<lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com>...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no
other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years
ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
THe answer is simple - *something* must not be caused.
-mg
A2 caused A1, A3 caused A2, A4 caused A3 etc. Anything wrong with such
a situation ? The limited conceptual ability of earlier philosophers,
specifically their ignorance of the negative integers, cannot restrict
reality.
Cause and effect are time related. Cause must preceed effect in the time
continium.
Regards,
HRG.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Orhan Orgun" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
15 Nov 2003 11:23:06 PM |
|
|
(Mike Goodrich) wrote in message news:<d92ac81f.0311151545.31b0af38@posting.google.com>...
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message news:<lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com>...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
THe answer is simple - *something* must not be caused.
But, for some reason, that something must not be the universe!
.
|
|
|
| User: "gabby" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 10:02:22 AM |
|
|
"Orhan Orgun" <orhanorgun@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:10376a31.0311152123.1d3e6c5c@posting.google.com...
goodrich_ms@yahoo.com (Mike Goodrich) wrote in message
news:<d92ac81f.0311151545.31b0af38@posting.google.com>...
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:<lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com>...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no
other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years
ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
THe answer is simple - *something* must not be caused.
But, for some reason, that something must not be the universe!
Since the universe had a beginning. Something must have caused
it? Was the universe needed? Why does the universe exist at all?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Orhan Orgun" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 09:41:20 PM |
|
|
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote in message news:<mmrub.1017$wp3.456@bignews5.bellsouth.net>...
"Orhan Orgun" <orhanorgun@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:10376a31.0311152123.1d3e6c5c@posting.google.com...
goodrich_ms@yahoo.com (Mike Goodrich) wrote in message
news:<d92ac81f.0311151545.31b0af38@posting.google.com>...
"trebor@sirius.com.no.more" <user@example.com> wrote in message
news:<lc0drvo4bgekc8c948i6dfvsi1vf4894dq@news.supernews.com>...
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
"gen2rev" <gen2rev@crosswinds.net> wrote in message
news:p4q9rvsem9p9j3g0tf578f5v57b8qaff68@4ax.com...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:37:58 +0000 (UTC), david ford
<dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in
<Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0311140032580.21825-100000@linux2.gl.umbc.edu>:
Why must God be *caused*? How could the Universe come in to existance
without being caused? Only if the Universe is eternal, uncaused and
without
a beginning can we eliminate it's cause. So as I see it there is no
other
alternative: either God is eternal or the universe is eternal. But
according
to modern physics, the Universe had a beginning some 12 bilion years
ago.
So that leaves only God as the eternal cause.
But you don't address why must God NOT be caused.
THe answer is simple - *something* must not be caused.
But, for some reason, that something must not be the universe!
Since the universe had a beginning. Something must have caused
it?
Had a beginning != something caused it
Furthermore, you can't even jump from "had a beginning" to "first
didn't exist, later came to exist", as explained elsewhere.
And, Something caused it != God created it
Was the universe needed? Why does the universe exist at all?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
18 Nov 2003 02:46:25 PM |
|
|
In article <mmrub.1017$wp3.456@bignews5.bellsouth.net>,
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
Since the universe had a beginning. Something must have caused
it? Was the universe needed? Why does the universe exist at all?
What is your evidence that the universe had a beginning? Big Bang is
only a tentative theory and there is contrary evidence and a lot of
cosmologists who do not accept it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Must God be Caused? |
19 Nov 2003 01:13:19 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 20:46:25 +0000 (UTC) in alt.atheism, Virgil
(Virgil <vmhjr2@comcast.net>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
In article <mmrub.1017$wp3.456@bignews5.bellsouth.net>,
"gabby" <gab@icm.world.net> wrote:
Since the universe had a beginning. Something must have caused
it? Was the universe needed? Why does the universe exist at all?
What is your evidence that the universe had a beginning? Big Bang is
only a tentative theory and there is contrary evidence and a lot of
cosmologists who do not accept it.
Really? Got a "for instance"?
--
"Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You."
- Attrib: Pauline Reage.
Inexpensive VHS & other video to CD/DVD conversion?
See: <http://www.Video2CD.com>. 35.00 gets your video on DVD.
all posts to this email address are automatically deleted without being read.
** atheist poster child #1 ** #442.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
