Hmm... Ive been pondering this for awhile now and realized that Its commonly thought some people use less % of their total brain capacity than others. That is why you probably cannot understand, and your own intelligence betrays you. Honestly speaking, not trying to be insulting, but I cant fathom how what Im trying to explain to you , you cant seem to grasp.
You invoke cosmological argument. I ask you to back it up. This is what I get in return.
Religion actually grounds a person in stability. Even though a religion might be wrong/false in one way or the other. Its a way of life. Religious people are less likely to fall into drugs, gangs, low self esteem, suicide, depression, violence etc. Since all religion more or less advocates teachings against that sort of hopeless lifestyle. A lifestyle devoid of hope, purpose, reason, and any meaning.
Not saying you dont agree with my point, rather you dont understand what Im trying to say. Which may be my fault in perhaps not explaining it as well.
I do understand. I watch William Lane Craig make this point in every one of his debates. I presume, since he is the one most commonly associated with this argument, that you trust him to explain it properly.
Sagan puts it more eloquently than I ever could. Basically, if you're saying that the origin of the "first cause" requires no explanation, then why not skip a step and say that the origin of the universe/big bang itself requires no explanation?
This is why the cosmological argument is wrong. It's special pleading.
79% of the US is Christian (2007). 79% of the US prison population is also Christian.
Your point is demonstrably false. Curious if you'll admit it though. I think you're immune to logic at this point.
First, according the CIA factbook (2007 estimate), only 79% of Americans are some type of Christian. 19% are unaffiliated, nonreligious or unspecified. (They don't separate Atheist vs Agnostic.)
Over represented.
You must also understand most people are religious by title only, and they dont actually practice it as they would like to think. Especially in America.
I also notice it mostly comes from `Catholics`. They are corrupt in all their teachings, and hardly deserve being called Christian.
And thats only the US. Not saying my point was a standard, but its a generalization.
Here is an actually statics on US prison inmates by religion: http://www.holysmoke.org/icr-pri.htm
However I wouldnt count much on that, in a country where you can be put in jail for years for smoking weed and has the biggest prison population per population after North Korea.
Sagan puts it more eloquently than I ever could. Basically, if you're saying that the origin of the "first cause" requires no explanation, then why not skip a step and say that the origin of the universe/big bang itself requires no explanation?
This is why the cosmological argument is wrong. It's special pleading.
"Where did God come from"
Le sigh.
"That the universe always existed"
The universe has not always existed. Its a proven point. There was a point at creation.
This is why the cosmological argument is wrong. It's special pleading.
Its the logical truth. It doesn`t require you to admit there is an intelligence behind the creation of the Universe, Even if it remains silent or hidden from your understanding. The signs of it are everywhere. Intelligent design is 100% fact if you study the data.
The link you posted only shows how little that guy knows. You dont want to acknowledge the truth, and who cares?. Mean while, Magical Galatic Branes are playing pin ball in space, creating universes. Man...that is so desperate, its not even funny.
God created the universe(100% fact). Sorry to burst your bubble or sense of ego
This is why the cosmological argument is wrong. It's special pleading.
Its the logical truth. It doesn`t require you to admit there is an intelligence behind the creation of the Universe, Even if it remains silent or hidden from your understanding.
Listen to Sagan.
What you're saying is;
-------------------------
1) Universe exists. Universe had a cause.
2) The cause requires a cause. To avoid an infinite regress, there must be an uncaused cause.
3) The uncaused cause created the universe.
Therefore an uncaused cause caused the universe. The uncaused cause always existed. -------------------------
Sagan simplifies this;
-------------------------
1) Universe exists. Universe is the uncaused cause.
Therefore the universe is the uncaused cause. -------------------------
Cosmological argument basically adds an unneeded step.
"We know the universe didn't always exist."
False. We know there was a big bang which resulted in all visible matter. Nothing more. Any extra claim on top of this requires evidence.
If the universe did not always exist and we are part of a multiverse, as brane theory suggests, replace all the above instances of "universe" with "multiverse". The same outcome can be derived.
The signs of it are everywhere. Intelligent design is 100% fact if you study the data.
Please watch this.
There are a lot of "design choices" regarding humans alone that are, frankly, stupid. No designer would give humans an appendix, for instance. It is a vestigial and harmful relic of our evolutionary past.
So let me get this straight. You 100% believe or know that there is no intelligence behind creation?. Is that your view?. Whether it is detectable or not.
So let me get this straight. You 100% believe or know that there is no intelligence behind creation?. Is that your view?. Whether it is detectable or not.
No. I never said that. I was explaining to you why the cosmological argument is not a "logical truth".
1) Universe exists. Universe is the uncaused cause.
Therefore the universe is the uncaused cause.
The universe is the uncaused cause. This requires it to have spontaneously created itself. Why would it do so?, How would it do so?, Its simply not possible and makes no sense however you look at it. From no-thing comes something.
Lets talk Multiverse. What created the Multiverse?. As I understand it, its some random mechanism thats spews forth new universes. So let me guess, this thing also created itself. As did `Branes`. I cant imagine how this would work, why, how etc, this to me is illogical.
Cosmological argument is illogical.
I dont know about that lol. But hey, anything to get rid of the God truth;p
[The universe/multiverse] is the uncaused cause. This requires it to have spontaneously created itself. Why would it do so?, How would it do so?, Its simply not possible and makes no sense however you look at it. From no-thing comes something.
Quote:
[God] is the uncaused cause. This requires it to have spontaneously created itself. Why would it do so?, How would it do so?, Its simply not possible and makes no sense however you look at it. From no-thing comes something.
Please explain why you see one of these as acceptable, and the other as unacceptable.
God is something that is outside the physical realm, or Universe.
It's like this, when you take out everything ( Universe and all) what's left, or more correctly, who's left is God. When everything is taken out, there's only God.
Look I have read pretty much all the arguments in these 944 posts, and have come to the conclusion that god is right atheism is wrong... Just based on these arguments 98% of the atheist arguments are Wheres MORE proof? but they have even less backing up their points. So therefore they are all invalid.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Good video, not comprehensive video, but good video about human evolution: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/what-makes-us-human-pro.html
You invoke cosmological argument. I ask you to back it up. This is what I get in return.
"You don't agree with my point? You're stupid."
Not saying you dont agree with my point, rather you dont understand what Im trying to say. Which may be my fault in perhaps not explaining it as well.
Wrong.
79% of the US is Christian (2007). 79% of the US prison population is also Christian.
Your point is demonstrably false. Curious if you'll admit it though. I think you're immune to logic at this point.
A little bit music for the thread:
I do understand. I watch William Lane Craig make this point in every one of his debates. I presume, since he is the one most commonly associated with this argument, that you trust him to explain it properly.
Sagan puts it more eloquently than I ever could. Basically, if you're saying that the origin of the "first cause" requires no explanation, then why not skip a step and say that the origin of the universe/big bang itself requires no explanation?
This is why the cosmological argument is wrong. It's special pleading.
First, according the CIA factbook (2007 estimate), only 79% of Americans are some type of Christian. 19% are unaffiliated, nonreligious or unspecified. (They don't separate Atheist vs Agnostic.)
Over represented.
You must also understand most people are religious by title only, and they dont actually practice it as they would like to think. Especially in America.
I also notice it mostly comes from `Catholics`. They are corrupt in all their teachings, and hardly deserve being called Christian.
And thats only the US. Not saying my point was a standard, but its a generalization.
Here is an actually statics on US prison inmates by religion: http://www.holysmoke.org/icr-pri.htm
However I wouldnt count much on that, in a country where you can be put in jail for years for smoking weed and has the biggest prison population per population after North Korea.
@Eiviyn: Go
Sagan puts it more eloquently than I ever could. Basically, if you're saying that the origin of the "first cause" requires no explanation, then why not skip a step and say that the origin of the universe/big bang itself requires no explanation?
This is why the cosmological argument is wrong. It's special pleading.
"Where did God come from"
Le sigh.
"That the universe always existed"
The universe has not always existed. Its a proven point. There was a point at creation.
This is why the cosmological argument is wrong. It's special pleading.
Its the logical truth. It doesn`t require you to admit there is an intelligence behind the creation of the Universe, Even if it remains silent or hidden from your understanding. The signs of it are everywhere. Intelligent design is 100% fact if you study the data.
The link you posted only shows how little that guy knows. You dont want to acknowledge the truth, and who cares?. Mean while, Magical Galatic Branes are playing pin ball in space, creating universes. Man...that is so desperate, its not even funny.
God created the universe(100% fact). Sorry to burst your bubble or sense of ego
@EternalWraith: Go "The universe has not always existed. Its a proven point. There was a point at creation."
Rofl, prove me.
So the creation of the universe requires an explanation, but the creation of the creator does not.
This is special pleading.
Listen to Sagan.
What you're saying is;
-------------------------1) Universe exists. Universe had a cause.
2) The cause requires a cause. To avoid an infinite regress, there must be an uncaused cause.
3) The uncaused cause created the universe.
Therefore an uncaused cause caused the universe. The uncaused cause always existed.
-------------------------Sagan simplifies this;
-------------------------1) Universe exists. Universe is the uncaused cause.
Therefore the universe is the uncaused cause.
-------------------------Cosmological argument basically adds an unneeded step.
"We know the universe didn't always exist."
False. We know there was a big bang which resulted in all visible matter. Nothing more. Any extra claim on top of this requires evidence.
If the universe did not always exist and we are part of a multiverse, as brane theory suggests, replace all the above instances of "universe" with "multiverse". The same outcome can be derived.
Cosmological argument is illogical.
Please watch this.
There are a lot of "design choices" regarding humans alone that are, frankly, stupid. No designer would give humans an appendix, for instance. It is a vestigial and harmful relic of our evolutionary past.
@EternalWraith: Go
More videos on evolution:
Some videos on physics:
Interesting video on your bible:
@ProzaicMuze: Go
Ok fair enough. Would you kindly answer the questions I asked you. Im genuinely interested on your views about this.
@Eiviyn: Go
So let me get this straight. You 100% believe or know that there is no intelligence behind creation?. Is that your view?. Whether it is detectable or not.
No. I never said that. I was explaining to you why the cosmological argument is not a "logical truth".
@Eiviyn: Go
1) Universe exists. Universe is the uncaused cause.
Therefore the universe is the uncaused cause.
The universe is the uncaused cause. This requires it to have spontaneously created itself. Why would it do so?, How would it do so?, Its simply not possible and makes no sense however you look at it. From no-thing comes something.
Lets talk Multiverse. What created the Multiverse?. As I understand it, its some random mechanism thats spews forth new universes. So let me guess, this thing also created itself. As did `Branes`. I cant imagine how this would work, why, how etc, this to me is illogical.
Cosmological argument is illogical.
I dont know about that lol. But hey, anything to get rid of the God truth;p
Please explain why you see one of these as acceptable, and the other as unacceptable.
God is something that is outside the physical realm, or Universe.
It's like this, when you take out everything ( Universe and all) what's left, or more correctly, who's left is God. When everything is taken out, there's only God.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
@GnaReffotsirk: Go
or nothing. But at least not the god, or Allah or Buddha or the flying spaggeti monster. I know the truth and its the unitology. Altman be praised :P
Look I have read pretty much all the arguments in these 944 posts, and have come to the conclusion that god is right atheism is wrong... Just based on these arguments 98% of the atheist arguments are Wheres MORE proof? but they have even less backing up their points. So therefore they are all invalid.