God: begotten not created.

[NavyGuy7]

That's right.

God was begotten not created, is eternal, and the ever-lasting creator of the universe and humankind.


So, obviously, although this question may seem fairly irrelevant (trust me it's relevant) and naïve, I want to stress the fact that it's a legitimate question - and shouldn't be given a quick dismissal:



I want to know how God CAN exist.
The explanation's already been given "begotten, not created" - but this means that God exists JUST BECAUSE HE DOES.



If you can't accept the universe "just existing" and have to have some form of first cause - then surely God is open to the same criticism?


Please help me on this issue.
Thanks,
phsyxx

Actually.... you can't compare the Universe and God in the same way. God is, was, and always will be. The universe was created by God. Thus, they cannot both be compared under the same thing. The universe is a creation, not an eternal being/thing.

 

[NavyGuy7]

And the key word there is if.

Being unable to explain the origins of the universe does not give one logical reason to assume a creator by divine decree who created it all and is not subject to all criticism applied to everything else because he is beyond it.

Ah, but who said I (or anyone else) was jumping to conclusions? I have reason to believe God created the universe. And it's my reason. So you'd only dismiss it as a matter of opinion, lol.

 

[NavyGuy7]

I agree. This thread, however, is more about the nature of god, not whether one exists or not.

I don't believe in gods, but I'm discussing the concept from a point of view of it existing.

I don't believe in gods either. I believe in ONE God. The ONLY God. As in the singular form, not the plural, lol.

 

[NavyGuy7]

Right. Same here, but I'm also arguing that the properties attributd to God are seemingly impossible - and also do not fit logically when looked at.
Plus, I wanted to explore the idea of the use of God as an explanation, and how this fails in principle, for the existence of the Universe.

Then, taking what people have given me, I am trying to demonstrate in a kind of Basil Mitchell kind of way, that what the religious believer purports and claims of God - are not actually anything more than nothingy guesses.

And I don't think you're doing too good a job, then. You can't really apply science to God and expect him to fit into your hypothesis. And nothing is impossible with God. It is only impossible for us. And where is your logic based? Is it based in the finite mind of a human being? In the world? Of course some of the attributes of God would be "seemingly" impossible to us.

 

[Skavau]

Ah, but who said I (or anyone else) was jumping to conclusions? I have reason to believe God created the universe. And it's my reason. So you'd only dismiss it as a matter of opinion, lol.

Probably. But go on.

And I don't think you're doing too good a job, then. You can't really apply science to God and expect him to fit into your hypothesis. And nothing is impossible with God. It is only impossible for us. And where is your logic based? Is it based in the finite mind of a human being? In the world? Of course some of the attributes of God would be "seemingly" impossible to us.

So what if our logic is based in a finite mind of a human being? This type of response often given by Theists is baffling. It becomes a meaningless discussion if responses given are dismissed or ignored because the person who gave the response is not infallible.

 

[phsyxx]

Actually.... you can't compare the Universe and God in the same way. God is, was, and always will be. The universe was created by God. Thus, they cannot both be compared under the same thing. The universe is a creation, not an eternal being/thing.

I know the two are different - God is not contingent.

But that's the point I'm making - the state of the universe is contingent, as explained by Aquinas:
"All beings are contingent, and have at some point not existed. All beings will cease to exist at some point or another - so it stands that all things must have not existed at one point, therefore there must have been nothing at one point.

Therefore, God is necessary in a contingent universe."


But this argument essentially boils down to "God is eternal and therefore always was, is, and will be."

Which is another way of saying "you don't need to explain God - coz he just is."

Which for me is not good enough. There has to be an explanation for such a powerful and complex being - you can't just say "he just is" otherwise what's the point?
Why not just stick with "the universe just is" and not have to go one stage further, and then have to explain all the imperfections in the world?

 

[phsyxx]

And nothing is impossible with God.

Oh? so you've just claimed that God's omnipotent then?

No wait. That doesn't even matter.

If nothing's impossible with God - why does evil exist?

 

[phsyxx]

Probably. But go on.


So what if our logic is based in a finite mind of a human being? This type of response often given by Theists is baffling. It becomes a meaningless discussion if responses given are dismissed or ignored because the person who gave the response is not infallible.

AH! But that's the fallible reasoning of a fallible person!
If you were truly wise, the mistakes you see in the world about you would not be mistakes at all, NO! Indeed, the mysteries of God would become clear to you...so clear indeed, that they'd become rather transparent!

 

[DailyBlessings]

If nothing's impossible with God - why does evil exist?

Does it? Can you prove it?

 

[phsyxx]

Does it? Can you prove it?

If you're going to take that attitude with one aspect of life - then I'll do the same with your God, thanks.
Get back to me when you have sound theological proof of God's existence.

 

[DailyBlessings]

If you're going to take that attitude with one aspect of life - then I'll do the same with your God, thanks.
Get back to me when you have sound theological proof of God's existence.

That was the inconsistency with your argument that I was pointing out- you demand certain kinds of proof for God, yet tried to disprove a proposed quality of God with a concept similarly unprovable. Pick a means of validation and stick with it, at least.

 

[phsyxx]

That was the inconsistency with your argument that I was pointing out- you demand certain kinds of proof for God, yet tried to disprove a proposed quality of God with a concept similarly unprovable. Pick a means of validation and stick with it, at least.

Unprovable?

Ok - so why does AIDS exist?
Why are there starving children in Africa, one dying every 3 seconds?
Why does Cancer exist?
Why does suffering occur?

What is the need for Volcanic eruptions?
What is the need for Hurricanes?
For Earthquakes?
Tsunamis?
Forest Fires?
Severe Thunderstorms?
Monsoons?
Flooding?


Are you simply going to explain all this away with you "Nothing is impossible for God" claim?

We simply 'tag' all of this under one four-letter word to make it simpler to say, rather than listing all of the needless suffering that takes place in the world - and that is, "evil".
Whether man-made or natural, or completely out of human controls - "evil" (these things which cause suffering) DOES exist. And its effects are undeniable.


So, "nothing is impossible for God."

Why doesn't he stop it?

 

[DailyBlessings]

Unprovable?

Ok - so why does AIDS exist?
Why are there starving children in Africa, one dying every 3 seconds?
Why does Cancer exist?
Why does suffering occur?

What is the need for Volcanic eruptions?
What is the need for Hurricanes?
For Earthquakes?
Tsunamis?
Forest Fires?
Severe Thunderstorms?
Monsoons?
Flooding?


Are you simply going to explain all this away with you "Nothing is impossible for God" claim?

We simply 'tag' all of this under one four-letter word to make it simpler to say, rather than listing all of the needless suffering that takes place in the world - and that is, "evil".
Whether man-made or natural, or completely out of human controls - "evil" (these things which cause suffering) DOES exist. And its effects are undeniable.


So, "nothing is impossible for God."

Why doesn't he stop it?

How can any of those things exist, if nothing created them? Your argument is no more grounded in physical evidence than any other religious claim. Try as you might, there's no way you can come up with even an objective definition of evil much less prove that it exists.

 

[NavyGuy7]

How can any of those things exist, if nothing created them? Your argument is no more grounded in physical evidence than any other religious claim. Try as you might, there's no way you can come up with even an objective definition of evil much less prove that it exists.

I'm with him on this.

 

[Skavau]

How can any of those things exist, if nothing created them? Your argument is no more grounded in physical evidence than any other religious claim. Try as you might, there's no way you can come up with even an objective definition of evil much less prove that it exists.

Can you assert an objective definition of evil? If so, what is this definition and what makes it morally evil?

Are you denying your own world view (I assume your view encompasses moral standpoints) or are you asserting there is no evidence for moral evil according to your world view (and indeed other world views)?

 

[elman]

Can you assert an objective definition of evil? If so, what is this definition and what makes it morally evil?

Are you denying your own world view (I assume your view encompasses moral standpoints) or are you asserting there is no evidence for moral evil according to your world view (and indeed other world views)?

Men can hurt other men and that is evil. Nature is not evil. It is simply nature. We are all created mortal and therefore dying is part of the way we were created. We all die. That is not evil. When we cause other men to die or suffer, that is evil.

 

[DailyBlessings]

Can you assert an objective definition of evil?

No, of course not. Evil is a paradigm that people use to look at the world around them, not a substance whose existence or nature can be established through objective proofs.

 

[phsyxx]

How can any of those things exist, if nothing created them? Your argument is no more grounded in physical evidence than any other religious claim. Try as you might, there's no way you can come up with even an objective definition of evil much less prove that it exists.

SO you're saying the whole of the world has to suffer this kind of abomination whilst you propose that "nothing is impossible for God"?

I don't get why you worship this creature that you propose can take away all suffering - or make some kind of utopian world for everyone to live in - where everyone can keep their freedom because "nothing is impossible for God" - yet refrains from doing so -

for what reason exactly?

 

[phsyxx]

How can any of those things exist, if nothing created them? Your argument is no more grounded in physical evidence than any other religious claim. Try as you might, there's no way you can come up with even an objective definition of evil much less prove that it exists.

Wait wait wait.... hold on, hold on....


You're telling me that these things HAD to be created by something?

And, if I'm not mistaken, Satan cannot be responsible, otherwise this would create a theological problem as Satan would be a secondary creative being ( ...and if that were the case, God would not be omnipotent) -
so God MUST have created the world with these things in.

Right?

And therefore - you still ... after all this.... worship Him?

 

[Wr4ith]

Wait wait wait.... hold on, hold on....


You're telling me that these things HAD to be created by something?

And, if I'm not mistaken, Satan cannot be responsible, otherwise this would create a theological problem as Satan would be a secondary creative being ( ...and if that were the case, God would not be omnipotent) -
so God MUST have created the world with these things in.

Right?

And therefore - you still ... after all this.... worship Him?

In all honesty. Assuming god exists worshipping him despite all that isn't that absurd as he'd be the creator of everything. Good AND bad. Calling him benevolent despite all that makes no sense though. Say that his sense of morality is much too complex to understand for us or whatever you want. But don't tell me he's benevolent.

So anyway, in the defense of the theists it does not make god(ASSUMING he exists) any less real.