Argument for God's existence.

[gaara4158]

so let me put it this way. Your universe (which does not have attributes of God, or at least has not evidence of attributes), behaves like God in that it can create other multi universes? And you claim this is not evidence of God? If not, then simply answer where did the universe come from.

Lack of an answer for something is not evidence for God. What you’re committing here is the logical fallacy called argument from ignorance. You need evidence for God, not lack of evidence for anything else.

 

[createdtoworship]

If I can interpolate - and gaara, forgive me if I'm mistaken in your views - but gaara doesn't need to answer where the Universe came from. I don't know where it came from. I'm not sure if anybody does. And although I'm sure we'd all very much like to know, there's no justification for saying "You don't know, therefore it must have been God". You need to provide your evidence for your theory, same as everyone else.

Lack of an answer for something is not evidence for God. What you’re committing here is the logical fallacy called argument from ignorance. You need evidence for God, not lack of evidence for anything else.

so let me post my OP again at this point, as we are recovering some of the topics we already addressed. So you don't know where the universe came from and I do. If you have a painting how do you prove there was a painter? It's inherent. If you see something made how do you prove there was a maker that made it? It's inherent. We don't even need to go into intelligence or creationism. I am simply talking about cause and effect. If you see something made, it had a maker, if you see something painted it had a painter. The universe is here. So it boils down to the fact that it made itself from nothing, or something made it. Period. The maker on the other hand would be supernatural, and prexisted time and space. So there was no beginning to the maker. Time is a physical property that requires mass to operate according to Einsteins theory of relativity. If a maker was supernatural (beyond the physical universe), then it would naturally follow that He was beyond time as well. Because of the fact He superseded the physical universe.

When it comes to the origin of life there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation. There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved one hundred years ago, but that leads us to only one other conclusion, that of supernatural creation.

 

[Moral Orel]

The maker on the other hand would be supernatural, and prexisted time and space. So there was no beginning to the maker. Time is a physical property that requires mass to operate according to Einsteins theory of relativity. If a maker was supernatural (beyond the physical universe), then it would naturally follow that He was beyond time as well. Because of the fact He superseded the physical universe.

This is exactly why the multiverse is eternal. You've supplied the reasoning for us to show that a universe-generator doesn't need a cause. You even asserted the plausibility of a multiverse to try and catch @gaara4158 moving goalposts, so you've already made our argument for us.

When it comes to the origin of life there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation. There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved one hundred years ago, but that leads us to only one other conclusion, that of supernatural creation.

Spontaneous Generation isn't the same thing as abiogenesis. I know they feel similar, but they're different. Spontaneous Generation is about fully formed lifeforms appearing out of nowhere, like maggots in rotten meat. Abiogenesis is about existing matter configuring itself into lifeforms. Completely separate topics.

I don't know how I ended up on your ignore list, honestly. So I guess my refutations of your claims will go unchallenged. Works for me, how about you? Oh wait...

 

[ToddNotTodd]

I don't know how I ended up on your ignore list, honestly. So I guess my refutations of your claims will go unchallenged. Works for me, how about you? Oh wait...

I once heard a radio preacher say that Christians were to "run away from worldly knowledge". So maybe take his blocking of you as a compliment...

 

[gaara4158]

so let me post my OP again at this point, as we are recovering some of the topics we already addressed. So you don't know where the universe came from and I do. If you have a painting how do you prove there was a painter? It's inherent. If you see something made how do you prove there was a maker that made it? It's inherent. We don't even need to go into intelligence or creationism. I am simply talking about cause and effect. If you see something made, it had a maker, if you see something painted it had a painter. The universe is here. So it boils down to the fact that it made itself from nothing, or something made it. Period. The maker on the other hand would be supernatural, and prexisted time and space. So there was no beginning to the maker. Time is a physical property that requires mass to operate according to Einsteins theory of relativity. If a maker was supernatural (beyond the physical universe), then it would naturally follow that He was beyond time as well. Because of the fact He superseded the physical universe.

When it comes to the origin of life there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation. There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved one hundred years ago, but that leads us to only one other conclusion, that of supernatural creation.

Alright, it looks like you’ve failed to learn anything here. Good luck.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Alright, it looks like you’ve failed to learn anything here. Good luck.

I wonder if he feels like he’s doing something constructive here. I mean, if I were on the fence about religion, the way he’s arguing would definitely send me closer to the side of non belief...

 

[gaara4158]

I wonder if he feels like he’s doing something constructive here. I mean, if I were on the fence about religion, the way he’s arguing would definitely send me closer to the side of non belief...

It’s probably a self-gratification thing. Can’t say I haven’t been there myself. But yeah, it’s not constructive in the way of winning people to his side. Quite the opposite.

 

[createdtoworship]

It’s probably a self-gratification thing. Can’t say I haven’t been there myself. But yeah, it’s not constructive in the way of winning people to his side. Quite the opposite.

I appreciate your activity in the thread, take care. (I assume because you cannot find a definition for universe that matches your personal definition that we are done).

"Finally, what Tegmark describes as the “Level IV” multiverse contains completely disconnected
universes, governed by different laws or mathematical structures. The assumption here is
that any mathematically possible universe must exist somewhere"

peer review:
Universe or multiverse?

In conclusion, there is no reason for the universe to exist because it does not have a cause according to your view, so it doesn't work.

 

[bhsmte]

It’s probably a self-gratification thing. Can’t say I haven’t been there myself. But yeah, it’s not constructive in the way of winning people to his side. Quite the opposite.

Nailed it!

Trying to convince ones self, can be self preservation.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

In conclusion, there is no reason for the universe to exist because it does not have a cause according to your view, so it doesn't work.

If ever I come up with a conclusion this bad, someone please tell me...

 

[createdtoworship]

If ever I come up with a conclusion this bad, someone please tell me...

so everything in the universe has causation but not the universe? So gravity applies to all my organs but not to my body as a whole? Is this really the most honest viewpoint to have?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

so everything in the universe has causation but not the universe?

You're the one proposing that the universe has to have a cause because things within the universe seemingly all need causes. I'm saying that there's no reason to believe this has to be the case.

So gravity applies to all my organs but not to my body as a whole?

Coming up with an example that supports your point doesn't prove your point, in the same way that showing me a white swan doesn't prove that all swans are white. You have to show that it has to be the case that the universe/multiverse/whatever has a cause.

Is this really the most honest viewpoint to have?

Only if you find logic honest...

P.S. This is a public forum. If you've double checked that I'm in your ignore list, you probably won't even see this. But it's useful for other people to see.

 

[gaara4158]

If ever I come up with a conclusion this bad, someone please tell me...

Lack of self-awareness is a mercy sometimes.

 

[createdtoworship]

Lack of self-awareness is a mercy sometimes.

if you wish to make final remarks to this post, feel free...

Argument for God's existence.

 

[gaara4158]

if you wish to make final remarks to this post, feel free...

Argument for God's existence.

I think I’d better not “throw pearls before swine.”

 

[createdtoworship]

I think I’d better not “throw pearls before swine.”

usually at the end of debates, when one side's arguments start to slip, they start to insult and belittle in order to save face. It is much easier to have a view that an all powerful God created everything. And from my perspective one does not need to go through all that mental gymnastics to defend a defenseless position, that a universe spontaneously created itself, and/or has not beginning, and/or is all powerful (at that point it becomes very similar to theism anyway). So I understand that your frustrated, and some of the later comments reveal this. I appreciate your comments here, and look forward to further debates with you. Also, if you start a thread, of whatever topic you wish, let me know and I will see if I can comment some on it.

 

[gaara4158]

usually at the end of debates, when one side's arguments start to slip, they start to insult and belittle in order to save face. It is much easier to have a view that an all powerful God created everything. And from my perspective one does not need to go through all that mental gymnastics to defend a defenseless position, that a universe spontaneously created itself, and/or has not beginning, and/or is all powerful (at that point it becomes very similar to theism anyway). So I understand that your frustrated, and some of the later comments reveal this. I appreciate your comments here, and look forward to further debates with you. Also, if you start a thread, of whatever topic you wish, let me know and I will see if I can comment some on it.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

I should elaborate. I have stopped responding seriously to you because my serious answers were not being understood and dealt with properly by you. The moment you restated your original post, all purpose to the conversation was lost. As with previous threads, I encourage you to re-read all of our objections to your argument instead of asking us to provide them for you again. I will not go around in circles with you.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

so let me post my OP again at this point, as we are recovering some of the topics we already addressed. So you don't know where the universe came from and I do.

When I saw that, I went back to your OP to refresh my knowledge. I was reminded that as soon as you made your first post a number of people came along and pointed out all of the mistakes in it. Fortunately, that saves me from having to do it again.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

usually at the end of debates, when one side's arguments start to slip, they start to insult and belittle in order to save face.

I have noticed many Christians doing that. Not many atheists, though, because they tend to win the debates.

 

[createdtoworship]

When I saw that, I went back to your OP to refresh my knowledge. I was reminded that as soon as you made your first post a number of people came along and pointed out all of the mistakes in it. Fortunately, that saves me from having to do it again.

I didn't see any refutation, but you can remind me. I really honestly didn't. As far as I know the only refutation was that a multiverse created the known universe, but the same problem exists: where did the multiverse come from? God however is beyond the dimension of time, and therefore does not have a beginning.