Posted on 04/28/2005 6:33:39 PM PDT by conservative_crusader
I'm looking for some good discussion this time.
Stop right there. There can be only one.
I agree, but this is only for the sake of discussing whether a god exists or not.
I have to run out- but this is from my profile.
Hey and I'm 18 too.
Proof of God
___Let's say you were out for a walk and you happened upon a cave. Upon venturing in that cave, you see pictures of human forms and what appears to be bison very primitively drawn. Would you infer that a higher intelligence, say a man drew those pictures?
Or would you just assume that some red and brown paint was blowing with the wind and just happened to make those pictures?
Now, think of the most beautiful artwork you've ever seen. The painter had to be talented to create such a thing.
Well, the universe is much more complicated than the Mona Lisa or the Sistine Chapel.
And The sheer complexity is beyond our human understanding. Everything comes from something. But at some point something came from nothing. The Golden ratio of phi and the mathamatical organisation of our world, the symmetry of a flowers petals, the spirals in a seashell, the magnitude of it all. Something created this.
There are ten trillion cells in your brain, as many stars as there are in the sky. What is a thought? How do you scientifically define a thought? You can define it a very small particle of a chemical that goes through the neuron synapse as jumps from neuron to the other. But can you hold a thought in your hand?
We as men, we know the formula to procreate. But can we create. Can you create a child from thin air? Can you create a single celled molecule from thin air.
I do not know whether God is omnipresent or not. I do not know whether God is dead or not, but God was here. He left his imprint, it's the entire world.
BUT-
As long as life lives- I believe that God lives.
Also will say- I am not a Christian or adhere to any organised religion.
Since you and I both agree on premise number one...I doubt there is much opportunity for discussion with me.
Regards...
I like answers in genesis website. Otherwise, I'm reviewing my stack of biology notes and want to know which biology homeschool curriculum is reliable in teaching facts.
If you really want the answers, fine. I'll give them to you as I understand them.
I'll rely on the Bible first, Science second and my age/wisdom third... Be warned, my major was Physics.
Ask away, one at a time, please. Your spam-like rants give me a headache.
This may take some time.
That's just an attention-getter.
"Stop right there. There can be only one."
You're thinking of Highlander.
Proof that God does not exist.
(1) Assume God exists
(2) By definition, God is omnipotent, omniscient, & morally perfect.
(3) Suffering exists
(4) If God is omnipotent, God can end suffering
(5) If God is omniscient, God knows about suffering
(6) If God is morally perfect, God will stop suffering.
(7) Since God is omniscient and omnipotent, God knows about suffering and can stop it.
(8) Since God knows about suffering, can stop suffering, and is morally perfect, there is no suffering.
(9) But there is suffering
(10) There is no God
[Hint: Your best hope is to attack (3) or (6)]
"(2) By definition, God is omnipotent, omniscient, & morally perfect."
Yes, but can you define perfect? After all, if you know exactly what perfect is, I would love to know.
"(3) Suffering exists"
Yes, the Bible even says that there is suffering. Most religions acknowledge suffering as a given part of life. Personally I believe that bad things happen because we need to become more useful to God.
"(4) If God is omnipotent, God can end suffering"
Of course, but what kind of people would we be if there were no perseverance? I can't imagine that there would be any reason to live if there wasn't a challenge to life to begin with.
"(5) If God is omniscient, God knows about suffering"
Of course, I would think that even if God wasn't omniscient that he would know about suffering.
"(6) If God is morally perfect, God will stop suffering."
No, your definition of "Morally Perfect" is wrong. You cannot define what Moral Perfection is because you yourself are not perfect.
"(7) Since God is omniscient and omnipotent, God knows about suffering and can stop it."
I would think that God might could even stop it if he weren't omnipotent. However, this really doesn't do a lot to your argument.
"(8) Since God knows about suffering, can stop suffering, and is morally perfect, there is no suffering."
Once again, your definition of moral perfection is bad. We can't accept your definition of absolute moral perfection because we do not know what moral perfection is. Certainly we have some slight idea, however, God created the universe, and is entitled to allow what he wants to, and entitled to define what is moral and what is not.
"(9) But there is suffering"
I agree.
"(10) There is no God"
That is quite a jump there. While I do believe that the Christian god is God, not all religions teach the doctrine that God is morally perfect, omnipotent, or omniscient. A creator can still exist entirely independently of whether or not your logic is true.
Mmmm, essentially an attack on (6) in two parts:
"Of course, but what kind of people would we be if there were no perseverance? I can't imagine that there would be any reason to live if there wasn't a challenge to life to begin with."
Attacks (6) by saying suffering is consistent (or entailed) by moral perfection. My respose is that God being all powerful could have created humans in such a fashion to have perseverance (or any other characteristic) built-in without the need to develop that trait by suffering. If you are saying that God could not create a person who can, without suffering, achieve whatever God wants us to achieve by suffering, then you are denying God's omnipotence. That is, there is no need for suffering because God could "factory install" whatever we are supposed to achieve by suffering.
"No, your definition of "Morally Perfect" is wrong. You cannot define what Moral Perfection is because you yourself are not perfect."
Attacks (6) by arsuing that moral perfection entails suffering. But see above, if God created the universe, then God built-in the possibility of suffering. Thus God would be the ultimate cause of suffering. If God is the ultimate cause of suffering, then suffering must exist to bring about a greater good. But since God is also omnipotent, then God could "factory install" whatever this good is and avoid the suffering. Thus moral perfection and omnipotence are inconsistent if the universe has suffering.
BTW, you also commit a logical fallacy. I'm not a computer, but I know what one is. Likewise, not being perfect does not entail that I do not know what perfection is.
I thought Ned Flanders burned that.
Untrue. You meant to say, "I believe there is only one."
So your defense of a divine creator is that the universe is too impossibly complicated and beautiful to be the product of chance? of evolution?
I can not disprove the existence of a divine creator, or "god," but you can hardly call the absence of a suitable explanation for the creation of the universe as proof of one.
yes.
It's just too complex. There is a higher force. The Universe could be that force itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.