-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Origin of god.
- Thread starter yashua
- Start date
- Status
ScottBot
Revolutionary
- May 2, 2005
- 50,468
- 1,441
- 58
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
God is the first cause, the Great Uncaused Cause that causes everything else. If every effect has a cause, which in turn causes a chain effect, than there has to be a cause that was not caused by anything else. That uncaused cause is God.yashua said:
Upvote
0
E
eoe
Guest
God is the source of life. Just like a lamp needs to be plugged in to give off light - we need to be plugged in to God. When we by our sins pull the plug out of the wall we grow cold and dark. The incarnation of the Logos gives us the opportunity to be plugged in again.
Death is not a punishment - it is the result of mankind removing himself from the source of life.
God is not bound by necessity. He does not "need" anything.
Upvote
0
I agree with eoe.
God said let it be done and it was.
Its that simple, man had nothing to do with it. We need God not the other way around.
God said let it be done and it was.
Its that simple, man had nothing to do with it. We need God not the other way around.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2005
- 769
- 20
- 54
- Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Others
Dean.
you will have no argument that the Universe had a beginning.
Just as you know that everything has a beginning at some point whether inside or outside of time, it is illogical to say that a personal God, is the uncaused cause of all things that are caused. If a Personal God were to be Uncaused, your answer that "That is the truth" has no grounds for a fact to be proved. Just as I cannot prove to you (because you believe) that God as you call it does not exist in a personal way, you likwise cannot prove to me that he does exist in a personal way.
I have been a Christian for many years, and the questions that I have asked others have never had a rock to be built on, they have always given sand for the foundation.
You cannot refute what I ask. It is an impossibility for any scholar, or theologion to answer the simple question of "What is the origin of God" it is that simple.
I believe that we all have come from something greater than ourselves. I myself have believed the bible, gone to church, done all of the religious things that you and millions of others do every week. but as for myself it is a matter of seeking the truth, not being bound to religious creeds and formula's. The word re-ligion itself means a "Return to bondage" To be able to seek the truth is to not be a slave of anything, including Religion.
You Quote:
Because we live in the dimension of time, it is impossible for us to fully understand anything that does not have a beginning and an end. Simply accept that fact, and believe the concept of God's eternal nature the same way you believe the concept of space having no beginning and end -- by faith -- even though such thoughts put a strain on our distinctly insufficient cerebrum.
That is religions answer to their problem of "Does God Exist"
People have been tortured, and burned at stakes because Christians believed "By Faith" in a god who was a God of war.
Anyone can give me that simple answer.
"I don't know, just believe it by faith"
That, Dean does not require anything but Blind-Faith.
I believe that science has alot more weight to hold than does Christianity's "Personal God"
Christianity itself deems God as "Father" a man, where do you think this idea comes from Dean? Where's the Mother that produces a son in the plan of God? Is God racist?
Bible believers forget that "The bible" taught a Flat earth
Read the book of Enoch. The Four winds, the four corners. The Idea of creation goes as far back to Egypt with the same ideas found in genisis, but Christians are taught not to go "Outside" of their orthodox beliefs, because that's not in line within their ideology about God, and so they are forced to explain something that really is illogical, but yet when one of the "Sheep" has a question they are told "God's a mystery brother, you just have to accept it, and believe"
In other words "I don't know"
You Quote from a paste:
But God by definition is the uncreated creator of the universe, so the question Who created God? is illogical,
See dean this is exactly the kind of "illogical" answer that is given to the question of "Who created God" because theology's definition is "God is the uncreated creator of the universe" yet "Who created God" to theology is "illogical", and why is that Dean?
Does an illogical question deserve an illogical answer?
Again Dean it goes back to "For every effect their is a cause" "For every cause their is an effect" you can't have it another way.
you will have no argument that the Universe had a beginning.
Just as you know that everything has a beginning at some point whether inside or outside of time, it is illogical to say that a personal God, is the uncaused cause of all things that are caused. If a Personal God were to be Uncaused, your answer that "That is the truth" has no grounds for a fact to be proved. Just as I cannot prove to you (because you believe) that God as you call it does not exist in a personal way, you likwise cannot prove to me that he does exist in a personal way.
I have been a Christian for many years, and the questions that I have asked others have never had a rock to be built on, they have always given sand for the foundation.
You cannot refute what I ask. It is an impossibility for any scholar, or theologion to answer the simple question of "What is the origin of God" it is that simple.
I believe that we all have come from something greater than ourselves. I myself have believed the bible, gone to church, done all of the religious things that you and millions of others do every week. but as for myself it is a matter of seeking the truth, not being bound to religious creeds and formula's. The word re-ligion itself means a "Return to bondage" To be able to seek the truth is to not be a slave of anything, including Religion.
You Quote:
Because we live in the dimension of time, it is impossible for us to fully understand anything that does not have a beginning and an end. Simply accept that fact, and believe the concept of God's eternal nature the same way you believe the concept of space having no beginning and end -- by faith -- even though such thoughts put a strain on our distinctly insufficient cerebrum.
That is religions answer to their problem of "Does God Exist"
People have been tortured, and burned at stakes because Christians believed "By Faith" in a god who was a God of war.
Anyone can give me that simple answer.
"I don't know, just believe it by faith"
That, Dean does not require anything but Blind-Faith.
I believe that science has alot more weight to hold than does Christianity's "Personal God"
Christianity itself deems God as "Father" a man, where do you think this idea comes from Dean? Where's the Mother that produces a son in the plan of God? Is God racist?
Bible believers forget that "The bible" taught a Flat earth
Read the book of Enoch. The Four winds, the four corners. The Idea of creation goes as far back to Egypt with the same ideas found in genisis, but Christians are taught not to go "Outside" of their orthodox beliefs, because that's not in line within their ideology about God, and so they are forced to explain something that really is illogical, but yet when one of the "Sheep" has a question they are told "God's a mystery brother, you just have to accept it, and believe"
In other words "I don't know"
You Quote from a paste:
But God by definition is the uncreated creator of the universe, so the question Who created God? is illogical,
See dean this is exactly the kind of "illogical" answer that is given to the question of "Who created God" because theology's definition is "God is the uncreated creator of the universe" yet "Who created God" to theology is "illogical", and why is that Dean?
Does an illogical question deserve an illogical answer?
Again Dean it goes back to "For every effect their is a cause" "For every cause their is an effect" you can't have it another way.
Upvote
0
DeaconDean
γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
- Jul 19, 2005
- 22,188
- 2,677
- 63
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Friend let me answer this way and I'll not bother trying anymore. You remind me of the type of person who has to have everything proven to them before they accept it. "Blind faith" is what it is about. You remind me of the disciple Thomas.
" But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe." -John 20:24-25
Why must the pre-existance of God be proven? We can't see God yet we know He is there. The whole of nature screams of the unseen Creator.
" For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead;" -Rom. 1:20
Why did God create this universe?
"Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:" -Eph 1:9
Because it was His own good pleasure to do so.
"For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him?" -1 Cor. 2:16
Do we know the mind of God? Can we say I have enough knowledge that I can question Him?
God asked Job:
"Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding...Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?...Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou knowest it all...Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof,..Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of dew?... Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it." -Job 38:4,8,18-19,28; 40:2
Can you put God in a box and say here He is? Can you define who and what God is by reducing Him to a mathmatical equation like E=mc2? What did God tell Moses to tell the Hebrews whom it was who sent him to them?
"And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you." -Ex. 3:14
Who is God? What is God? God said: "I AM THAT I AM." He is what He is. Eternal! He always was, always is, and will always be.
Let me ask you a question: You say your a Christian, yet you question where did God come from. When you accepted Christ as your Savior, did you ask for proof that Jesus died on the cross for your sin? Did you ask for proof that God actually raised Jesus from the dead? If your seeking to find God through science, then I'm afriad your going to very disappointed. Blind faith is what Christianity is all about. Are we not told that:
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." -Heb. 11:1
"For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him?" -1 Cor. 2:16
" For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." -Isa. 55:8-9
"...from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God." -Psa. 90:2
"In the beginning God," -Gen. 1:1
The beginning of what? Time! Whenever time started to be recorded, God was already there!
"For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;" -John 5:26
God is self-existent. God has life in Himself. God not only exists from eternity, but also exists from Himself. 'Self-existent' means no one created Him. This is the opposite of 'cause and effect'.
And what would you do if someone put God in a box, or reduced Him down to a mathmatical equation, would believe then? I don't think so personally.
Let me leave you with some words of wisdom from the Psalmist and Solomon:
"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." -Psa.14:1
"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction." -Prov. 1:7
"Go from the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge...The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going." Prov. 14:7,15
"Wisdom is before him that hath understanding; but the eyes of a fool are in the ends of the earth." -Prov. 17:24
"A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself." Prov. 18:2
"As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly. Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him." -Prov. 26:11-12
"The words of a wise man's mouth are gracious; but the lips of a fool will swallow up himself." -Eccl. 10:12
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last." -Rev. 22:13
Like I said before, God is the Alpha, the beginning, the first. To know that He was, and that He is. He is the Omega, the end, the last, to know that He will be, He always will be. To know that when time began to be recorded, He was already there, and that when time is no more, He'll still be there is sufficent for me. I urge you to re-read the Bible and to pray and ask God to open your mind and heart in regards to what the Bible has to say about him.
Blind faith is what it is all about!
"But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." -Heb. 11:6
God Bless you and your search for Him.
(BTW, if you respond and it is after 5 am, I will not be able to see it until 3/22/06, because as of Thur. morn (3/16/06) starting at 6 am, my weekend starts and I'm taking vacation Saturday night and Sunday night from work because I'm having a minor operation on 3/17/06. So I will not be able to respond to you until next week.)
" But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe." -John 20:24-25
Why must the pre-existance of God be proven? We can't see God yet we know He is there. The whole of nature screams of the unseen Creator.
" For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead;" -Rom. 1:20
Why did God create this universe?
"Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:" -Eph 1:9
Because it was His own good pleasure to do so.
"For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him?" -1 Cor. 2:16
Do we know the mind of God? Can we say I have enough knowledge that I can question Him?
God asked Job:
"Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding...Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?...Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou knowest it all...Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof,..Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of dew?... Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it." -Job 38:4,8,18-19,28; 40:2
Can you put God in a box and say here He is? Can you define who and what God is by reducing Him to a mathmatical equation like E=mc2? What did God tell Moses to tell the Hebrews whom it was who sent him to them?
"And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you." -Ex. 3:14
Who is God? What is God? God said: "I AM THAT I AM." He is what He is. Eternal! He always was, always is, and will always be.
Let me ask you a question: You say your a Christian, yet you question where did God come from. When you accepted Christ as your Savior, did you ask for proof that Jesus died on the cross for your sin? Did you ask for proof that God actually raised Jesus from the dead? If your seeking to find God through science, then I'm afriad your going to very disappointed. Blind faith is what Christianity is all about. Are we not told that:
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." -Heb. 11:1
"For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him?" -1 Cor. 2:16
" For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." -Isa. 55:8-9
"...from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God." -Psa. 90:2
"In the beginning God," -Gen. 1:1
The beginning of what? Time! Whenever time started to be recorded, God was already there!
"For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;" -John 5:26
God is self-existent. God has life in Himself. God not only exists from eternity, but also exists from Himself. 'Self-existent' means no one created Him. This is the opposite of 'cause and effect'.
And what would you do if someone put God in a box, or reduced Him down to a mathmatical equation, would believe then? I don't think so personally.
Let me leave you with some words of wisdom from the Psalmist and Solomon:
"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." -Psa.14:1
"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction." -Prov. 1:7
"Go from the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge...The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going." Prov. 14:7,15
"Wisdom is before him that hath understanding; but the eyes of a fool are in the ends of the earth." -Prov. 17:24
"A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself." Prov. 18:2
"As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly. Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him." -Prov. 26:11-12
"The words of a wise man's mouth are gracious; but the lips of a fool will swallow up himself." -Eccl. 10:12
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last." -Rev. 22:13
Like I said before, God is the Alpha, the beginning, the first. To know that He was, and that He is. He is the Omega, the end, the last, to know that He will be, He always will be. To know that when time began to be recorded, He was already there, and that when time is no more, He'll still be there is sufficent for me. I urge you to re-read the Bible and to pray and ask God to open your mind and heart in regards to what the Bible has to say about him.
Blind faith is what it is all about!
"But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." -Heb. 11:6
God Bless you and your search for Him.
(BTW, if you respond and it is after 5 am, I will not be able to see it until 3/22/06, because as of Thur. morn (3/16/06) starting at 6 am, my weekend starts and I'm taking vacation Saturday night and Sunday night from work because I'm having a minor operation on 3/17/06. So I will not be able to respond to you until next week.)
Upvote
0
joelbarrutia
BMW Master Technician
yashua said:
You ask a question here, but refuse that there could be an answer!
To ask the questions of who or what made this or that is a very logical question because we can see plainly that "this or that" do in fact exist. We can see that you and this earth do in fact exist there for it must have a maker. We can not follow an endless series of makers back in time forever because this would be a logical absurdity! There would have had to be an infinite number of makers who made, in order to get to who made you. We both know that you can not traverse through a series that is infinite, there for there must have been a beginning at some point. A start for all other makers to make below them.
It might be easier to think of this in terms of time.
We can see that time is now ticking along, and its possible for it to go on for eternity. However it is NOT possible that time has already gone on for an infinite length before us. We would have had to have gone through an infinite number of seconds to reach today. You CANNOT traverse an infinite amount of time, yet we see that we exist and live in time today. There must have been a start where we could have gone through to reach today.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2005
- 769
- 20
- 54
- Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Others
DeaconDean said:
Dean
I have heard every bit of what you say.
But that proves nothing to me.
I can believe that the "Easter bunny exist" and you will say "Show me the proof" And I can say "I believe it by faith" And that is exactly the same as what you yourself are saying of God.
Everthing that we do in life requires us to have tangible proof. You can believe all you want in anything you want, but the bottom line is for you and all is "Show me the money"
You can put an application in for getting a job, but until you actually get the job you have no proof that you will get the job, correct?
And so it is with God. people condemn others for saying what I am saying because it does not line up with their mode of thinking, because they are closed minded, and not open for something else.
I do not need to believe in anything that requires me to have a blind faith about it.
You Quote:
Can you put God in a box and say here He is?
Dean this is exactly what Christianity has done.
They have put God where they believe he is.
You Quote:
Do we know the mind of God? Can we say I have enough knowledge that I can question Him?
Christianity screams a resounding "YES"
Thats the whole point I am making about God, and christianity say's 'Well we know who,and what god is"
You Quote;
"But without faith it is impossible to please him
Actually it is "Without belief it is immpossible to be in aggrement with him"
God does not need to be pleased If he is all knowing.
God does not need our Faith If he has life in Himself. Or exists from Himself.
God is in no need at all. He is not personal by what you have stated.
Mankind has made him personal by their "Human way of speaking of the deity"
Upvote
0
joelbarrutia
BMW Master Technician
yashua said:
Yashua, we do not have to come to an understanding of who God is, or that he exists totally on faith. However it is the last step we have to take in a lot road of evidence.
I believe the laws of logic correspond to reality. If you give a list of all possible options, and are able to eliminate all but one, the final answer must be the correct one.
Concerning the creation of the universe, its always existed or it was created, we can tell this because we currently live in the universe, and we know that it exists today. In my post # 29 I gave you what I like to call the problem with infinities. If you really examine this argument you will find that it forces the universe to have been created at some point due to the fact that there would have had to have been an infinite amount of time traversed, or an infinite number of creations happening before reaching the present and both of those options are impossible. Because there are only two options in this question, that of creation or an eternal past existence, and the eternal past existence is illogical, we find that the creation of the universe must in fact correspond with reality. The only way around this argument is to say that a third option exists, however this does not cause the question to loose creditability unless another option is actually stated.
MAJOR PROOF 1:
There is an uncaused cause, may I call it a "Necessary" being. As a Christian I believe there is more we can find out about this "being" and later we will actually be able to call this "being" the God of the Bible.
You claimed to have problems with Christians understanding the nature of God, or his attributes, however I do not think that a basic understanding is illogical. We operate here on earth with a series of laws. There are scientific and logical laws. Each one of these laws are named such, because they seem to correspond with reality in a very actual physical way. We find a few interesting things when observing these laws, first of which is their origin, natural science cannot even try to explain where these laws come from, because with out them, there is no coherent ground to stand on. If there must be a necessary being in order to create this universe, it seems logical that this same being created these laws, and a further step, I believe its logical to assume that these laws reflect aspects of his nature. (it would be ludicrous for a being to create something that was counter his own logical or scientific nature. Imagine making something your self that is counter logical, would there be a point? Now at this stage we are only guessing that this necessary being would mirror these qualities. Later we can know for sure)
MAJOR PROOF 2:
There are various laws which we have grouped into the laws of science and logic. These laws are transcendental by nature meaning they are not governed by our universe in any way, they must come from beyond our universe and they rule over everything in our universe. These laws cannot rule over a necessary being by definition however they likely mirror their creator's qualities. If you try to give counter argumentation to the existence of the laws of logic your argument is incoherent.
( I dont have time to finish going through these proofs with you, I have to leave for work shortly However I will tell you briefly where I was going with these ideas)
You said you needed proof that God exists.
Just from that statement above we can prove that a Necessary being does exist (which we later find out to be the Christian God) and, in that statement we see that the laws of logic exist.
YOU EXIST. You would not have been able to make a statement if you did not exist. Because you exist, going back to major proof 1, you must have been created by a necessary being, or also called, an uncaused cause.
YOU ARE LOGICAL You would not be not be able to deny the existence of God if he did not exist, you would have no laws of logic by which to accuse him!
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2005
- 769
- 20
- 54
- Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Others
joelbarrutia said:
You Quote;
(which we later find out to be the Christian God)
This is what I mean by "Christians have put God in their box and call it their own"
You say that I would have no laws of logic in which to accuse him.
I wonder who made God out to be of the male gender?
Is god a man? Where does the female aspect of God come in? Or is that too Polytheistic for those that believe God is a male. Does god ever say he is a male or does the bible say "God is Spirit"
The old cosmological argument claimed that since everything has a cause, there must be a first cause, an "unmoved first mover." Today no theistic philosophers defend that primitive line because if everything needs a cause, so does God. The only way they can deal with my kindergartener's question is if they can first get God "off the hook."
One approach has been to claim that only effects need a cause: since a first cause is not an effect, it is exempt from causation. Another attempt conceives of a contingent cause of the universe, resting at the top of a pyramid of relationships rather than at the beginning of a chain of temporal events. But this a priori tactic of exempting the conclusion (Creator) from the causality required of everything else--with no evidence that any special "causeless" or "noncontingent" objects actually exist--makes the Creator a part of the definition of the premise, which is circular reasoning. These versions fail to get God off the hook.
The Kalam Argument
Today a more sophisticated version of the cosmological argument is being propounded that connects early Islamic theology with current Big Bang cosmology. According to Kalam reasoning, infinity is just a concept: an actual infinity does not exist in reality. If the series of temporal events is infinite, we never could have traversed it to arrive at the current moment. Yet we have reached this moment; therefore, the series of events must have had a beginning. Today, cosmologists almost universally confirm that our observable universe began at a Big Bang, a singularity that brought into existence not only matter and energy, but space and time as well.
Building on this, Christian philosophers such as William Lane Craig are promoting an up-to-date version of the cosmological argument that they think avoids the problems of earlier attempts:
- Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
- The universe began to exist.
- Therefore, the universe has a cause.
The curious clause "everything that begins to exist" implies that reality can be divided into two sets: items that begin to exist (BE), and those that do not (NBE). In order for this cosmological argument to work, NBE (if such a set is meaningful) cannot be emptybut more important, it must accommodate more than one item to avoid being simply a synonym for God. If God is the only object allowed in NBE, then BE is merely a mask for the Creator, and the premise "everything that begins to exist has a cause" is equivalent to "everything except God has a cause." As with the earlier failures, this puts God into the definition of the premise of the argument that is supposed to prove God's existence, and we are back to begging the question.
Where do theists obtain the idea in the first place that there is such a set as NBE? By what observations or arguments is the possibility of beginningless objects warranted? Certainly not via the cosmological argument, which simply assumes NBE; nor from science, which observes nothing of the sort. If they get their initial idea from a religious document or from "inner experience," their argument may be more presuppositionalist than evidentialist.
To say that NBE must accommodate more than one item is not to say that it must contain more than one item. The set might actually contain only one of the eligible candidates. The cosmological argument could be made successful if it could be shown that NBE contains exactly one item from a plural set of possibilities, and if the winning candidate turns out to be a personal creator. The question of accommodation is not whether the set does not contain more or less than one item; it's whether it can not contain other than one. If it can not, then the argument is circular. It would be like a dictator staging an election that permits no other candidates but himself: it's rigged from the start. (I am indebted to Michael Martin for insights on this matter via personal email correspondence.)
Additionally, if the only candidate for NBE is God, then the second premise, "The universe began to exist," would reduce to "The universe is not God," again assuming what the argument is trying to prove. If NBE is synonymous with God, the argument looks like this:
- Everything except God has a cause.
- The universe is not God.
- Therefore, the universe has a cause.
"We know that this first event must have been caused. The question is: How can a first event come to exist if the cause of that event exists changelessly and eternally? Why isn't the effect as co-eternal as the cause?
"It seems that there is only one way out of this dilemma, and that is to infer that the cause of the universe is a personal agent who chooses to create a universe in time. Philosophers call this type of causation 'agent causation,' and because the agent is free, he can initiate new effects by freely bringing about conditions which were not previously present."
This appeal to a personal creator depends on the premise that "we know this first event must have been caused." However, if God is the only item allowed in NBE, the argument effectively (if not intentionally) begs the question. In order to avoid begging the question, theists must produce one or more real or hypothetical candidates other than God for NBE."It seems that there is only one way out of this dilemma, and that is to infer that the cause of the universe is a personal agent who chooses to create a universe in time. Philosophers call this type of causation 'agent causation,' and because the agent is free, he can initiate new effects by freely bringing about conditions which were not previously present."
We have no experience of any NBE objects in the natural universe (how could we?), nor can we propose anything hypothetical that does not begin to exist as a real item in the natural universe. We can't have such a thing within the natural universe if "begin" means "begin in time" because time itself is a result of the Big Bang. No item in the natural universe transcends time, so it cannot "not" begin to exist. Assuming that current Big Bang cosmology is correct, it would be incoherent to say that something happened "before" time began.
But perhaps there could be something outside the natural universe that would be accommodated by NBE, besides God. (Craig seems to allow this ontological possibility when he "infers" that the external cause of the universe is an "agent causation," implying that it might be otherwise.) Since most theists' definition of God includes personality, NBE might be open to an impersonal force as well as a personal force--or a number of impersonal and personal forces. This would not necessarily lead to polytheism, deism, or violate the principle of economy--it might be true that only the personal agency actually exists from the set of possibilities.
However, if theists allow the theoretical possibility of an impersonal transcendent object in NBE--and it seems they must allow this, or some other nontheistic hypothesis--and if they have not convincingly eliminated it (or them) from the set of actual items in NBE, then they must remain open to the possibility that the origin of the universe could be explained in a purely naturalistic manner.
Transcendent does not equal supernatural.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
