Christianity and World ReligionChristianity and World Religion forum gives Christians and non-Christians the opportunity to come together to better understand and learn about different religions.
Well, yes, if nothing existed nothing would exist. But I find it a bit hard to jump from "things worked out well for us" to "there must be a creator". While I believe there is a creator, I do not think positions that suggest otherwise are illogical.
I think you don't understand my topic. I said you can say we lucked out and that is fine. But I'm saying if we luck out again, and again, and again, and again, although it doesn't conclusively prove a designer, is it more logical to assume a designer is most likely?
I think you don't understand my topic. I said you can say we lucked out and that is fine. But I'm saying if we luck out again, and again, and again, and again, although it doesn't conclusively prove a designer, is it more logical to assume a designer is most likely?
We don't know how often the cycle has happened. Expand, contract, expand, contract. Perhaps this is the only cycle where life existed. Maybe it isn't so much we "lucked out" but that this was the time it worked out. Perhaps this has happened 10 billion times and it was this once that it happened. I don't know, but I find it hard to ever get to a point where a designer or not a designer is most likely.
We don't know how often the cycle has happened. Expand, contract, expand, contract. Perhaps this is the only cycle where life existed. Maybe it isn't so much we "lucked out" but that this was the time it worked out. Perhaps this has happened 10 billion times and it was this once that it happened. I don't know, but I find it hard to ever get to a point where a designer or not a designer is most likely.
Yeah I guess people can always resort to this type of logic. But I really don't see how this can be the case for everything that happens on earth.
It's like stating it's possible a person wins 7 lotteries in a row, and given there is so many times this universe has possibly contracted and retracted, there is bound to be a person that wins the lottery 7 times in a row. It doesn't really follow.
Although not impossible otherwise just based on teleological argument, it just seems a Creator is the most likely reality.
Contracting universe has it's own scientific problems btw as well as philosophical.
The big bang is up to what we can see. Its what we think is the start of our universe.
There could be something past that we have not found yet and if the universe is infinite then there is no beginning or end and if thats the case then you cannot calculate the chances of a creator existing or not.
More simple. Say there is a lotto but it goes out to an infinite amount of people even if the winning number changes you will get winners over and over and over and over to infinity. So thus you cannot ever take in all the variables(people in this case) to calculate the chance whomever won had of winning.
Bottom line is, as of now we cannot calculate it because we don't know for sure how far it goes and we won't be able to calculate it if it goes on forever.
Last edited by Lutherin; 5th June 2012 at 06:46 PM.
Just based on this, is it logical to believe a designer is most likely?
What are the chances that there is the right kind of designer? Just imagine, there could be* a designer who is incredibly fond of vanilla ice cream. Or a specific kind of rock. Or whatever. The possibilities literally are endless. Did we just get lucky in getting/having the right kind of designer? The right kind of designer with the right kind of fine-tuning? Hmmmm ... I just think any version of the FTA is bankrupt.
* Well, actually, I don't think there could be in any meaningful sense of the word. But your mileage may vary.
What are the chances that there is the right kind of designer? Just imagine, there could be* a designer who is incredibly fond of vanilla ice cream. Or a specific kind of rock. Or whatever. The possibilities literally are endless. Did we just get lucky in getting/having the right kind of designer? The right kind of designer with the right kind of fine-tuning? Hmmmm ... I just think any version of the FTA is bankrupt.
Well here is a thought.
If there is a Creator, he was reality.
Reality after him cannot be all too separate from him. Why? Because he was what defines existence. Our existence would not be the same as his, but has to have some sort of relationship to him.
If he is what defines original reality and we are created linked to that reality, is it really unlikely we can have knowledge of original reality?
The first cause argument and teleological argument go well together. They don't prove God alone....but they strengthen belief in God.
Why? Because if the Creator was real, then spiritual knowledge of God doesn't seem far off. And since it seems to many theists that they have spiritual knowledge of God, these type of arguments just show their feeling of knowledge has evidence (outside the feeling) even if not conclusive that suggests their belief is not unfounded.
So all this is pointed to likelihood that our intuition of Good Honourable Holy Creator existing is founded on reality.
To make life as we know it possible. I am always amazed at how much we look for life like us. Why could it not form completely different than we are?
Most of the “fine tuning” science talks about has to do with the development of stars. There are constants and ratios that must exist very precisely in order for a star to form. The chances of those ratios and constants just randomly happen when they could have been virtually anything is virtually impossible.
Non organic life can be considered, but the more we know about the complexity of organic life the harder it is to imagine inorganic life. Non DNA/RNA life has a possibility, but again knowing what all has to go into DNA type life makes it hard to imagine a system other than DNA life would get started.
Intelligent design is seen in everything around us, so what created all this obvious intelligence? How does randomness produce intelligence?
Linear Mode
