Religion General Discussion : Arguments for God

IG Promotional Podcast

or visit this rss feed.

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Chat Room

Freethought Videos

Blogs

Weblogs News

LIVE AUDIO STREAM AND CHAT
LIVE show, 8PM ET Thursdays!
Call toll free: 888-503-0802

~ Visit Our NEW IRC ChatRoom ~

Arguments for God
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

AtheistForums.com Forum Index -> Religion General Discussion

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

josephpalazzo
Illusion Master

Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 11197
Local time: 3:19 PM
Location: Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates

Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 7:38 pm Post subject:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

Mr_C wrote:

Quote:

1) A contingent being (a being that if it exists can not-exist) exists.
2) This contingent being has a cause of or explanation[1] for its existence.
3) The cause of or explanation for its existence is something other than the contingent being itself.
4) What causes or explains the existence of this contingent being must either be solely other contingent beings or include a non-contingent (necessary) being.
5) Contingent beings alone cannot provide an adequate causal account or explanation for the existence of a contingent being.
6) Therefore, what causes or explains the existence of this contingent being must include a non-contingent (necessary) being.

#4 is a false dichotomy. Sorry. You get a frowny face Sad

I stopped reading there.

What are the other options for the cause of contingent beings?

Making a statement about contingent beings does not prove that contingent beings exists because of a non-contingent being, no more than stating that God exists proves that God exists.

Philosophos
When we look at you, we see an asshole

Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Posts: 14252
Local time: 2:19 PM
Location: In heaven (everything is fine)

Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 8:10 pm Post subject:

josephpalazzo wrote:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

josephpalazzo wrote:

You arguments are defeated by your own arguments:

For example,

2.11 An actual infinite cannot exist.

Ergo, God cannot exist.

Read the definition for an actual infinite.

I did. And since it is the very first statement in the argument, by the principle of substitution, "God" can be substituted for the predicate, which I did.

QED

"God" and "actual infinite" are both (questionably) designators, not predicates.

Why are physicists so bad at logic?
_________________

r_kamikaze wrote:

Everytime I see you post I just wanna punch someone.

stromboli wrote:

As always, you make meaningful and thoughtful contributions to the forum.

moab_washpot
Intern
Intern

Joined: 09 Apr 2009
Posts: 40
Local time: 12:49 AM

Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:19 pm Post subject:

Ross Parker wrote:

1) Moral facts exist.
2) Moral facts have the properties of being objective and non-natural.
3) The best explanation of there being objective and non-natural moral facts is provided by theism.
4) Therefore the existence of moral facts provides good grounds for thinking theism is true.

All I can say is Bull Honkey

Moral "facts" exist not based on any set rules, but as a result of learning from repeated negative results of certain behaviour.
Ex: Thou shall not kill is not a result of "god loves his children and only he has the right to kill them in horrible ways" but because of the way human societies have evolved, it is detrimental to the functioning of that society.

These are inserted into "rule books" such as the bible amongst the other "morals" which are the personal prejudices of the author of said works, under the assumption that "people will do whatever I say as long as I throw in a couple of rules that benefit them too".
Ex: "Stone your disobedient kids","pay the father of the girl you raped 50 shekels", and if I were the author, "Thou shall not put pineapple on pizza under penalty of having the whole fruit shoved up your exit-passageway".

Morals are subject to revision, re-evaluation and revocation based on the needs and trends of an evolving society. They are in no way to be mistaken for preset conditions, especially if you get to pick and choose which ones benefit you personally.

Mr_C
Yoda's only begotten son

Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 8640
Local time: 11:19 AM
Location: Pale Blue Dot

Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:50 pm Post subject:

moab_washpot wrote:

Ross Parker wrote:

All I can say is Bull Honkey

pwnt

eta
Laughing

_________________

SalsaShark wrote:

I've noticed that since I quit smoking, my cum smells a lot fresher.

josephpalazzo
Illusion Master

Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 11197
Local time: 3:19 PM
Location: Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates

Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 12:26 pm Post subject:

Philosophos wrote:

josephpalazzo wrote:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

josephpalazzo wrote:

You arguments are defeated by your own arguments:

For example,

2.11 An actual infinite cannot exist.

Ergo, God cannot exist.

Read the definition for an actual infinite.

I did. And since it is the very first statement in the argument, by the principle of substitution, "God" can be substituted for the predicate, which I did.

QED

"God" and "actual infinite" are both (questionably) designators, not predicates.

Why are physicists so bad at logic?

You old fool. It wasn't a logical error. I mistook my subject for my predicates, my bad, but your worse...

OrdinaryClay
SUSPENDED - Pending Council Decision

Joined: 18 Oct 2007
Posts: 958
Local time: 2:19 PM

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 3:26 pm Post subject:

Mr_C wrote:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

Mr_C wrote:

Quote:

#4 is a false dichotomy. Sorry. You get a frowny face Sad

I stopped reading there.

What are the other options for the cause of contingent beings?

Abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis falls under one of the two choices. Read the link he provided and it will explain what a contingent and non-contingent being is in the context of the argument.

Vexing
Forum Master

Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 2559
Local time: 7:19 PM

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 3:59 pm Post subject:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

Abiogenesis falls under one of the two choices. Read the link he provided and it will explain what a contingent and non-contingent being is in the context of the argument.

Do you believe in a literal translation of the Bible creation story?
If so, how exactly did God make Adam out of dust?
What was the process? Please describe it in detail.

OrdinaryClay
SUSPENDED - Pending Council Decision

Joined: 18 Oct 2007
Posts: 958
Local time: 2:19 PM

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:04 pm Post subject:

moab_washpot wrote:

...They are in no way to be mistaken for preset conditions,....

So how many societies allow random killing of other people.

OrdinaryClay
SUSPENDED - Pending Council Decision

Joined: 18 Oct 2007
Posts: 958
Local time: 2:19 PM

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:07 pm Post subject:

Vexing wrote:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

Abiogenesis falls under one of the two choices. Read the link he provided and it will explain what a contingent and non-contingent being is in the context of the argument.

Do you believe in a literal translation of the Bible creation story?
If so, how exactly did God make Adam out of dust?
What was the process? Please describe it in detail.

I believe in an old earth, if that is what you are asking.

Smartmarzipan
All shall love me and despair.

Joined: 30 Sep 2008
Posts: 4813
Local time: 2:19 PM

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:08 pm Post subject:

Who says that moral "facts" exist at all?

Quote:

This process occurs when biology and culture collide. The resulting conflict acts as a form of "informational feedback" telling people that there are serious problems that need to be resolved. Conflict inspires human adaptation in a way that extends the survival of the species. In this sense, the evolution of ethical systems is a response to the drive of the human species to survive. Additionally, a whole array of related "rule systems" such as statutory laws, professional codes, customs, and even the rules of etiquette evolve to further human adaptation.

http://www.evolutionaryethics.com/

Humankind's morals and ethics have been evolving and changing for as long as we've been around. What was a moral "fact" a few hundred years ago is no longer a "fact".
_________________
"When they lose their sense of awe,
people turn to religion.
When they no longer trust themselves,
they begin to depend upon authority." ~Tao Te Ching

A fine quotation is a diamond on the finger of a witty person, but a pebble in the hands of a fool. ~Author Unknown

Vexing
Forum Master

Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 2559
Local time: 7:19 PM

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:09 pm Post subject:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

Vexing wrote:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

Abiogenesis falls under one of the two choices. Read the link he provided and it will explain what a contingent and non-contingent being is in the context of the argument.

Do you believe in a literal translation of the Bible creation story?
If so, how exactly did God make Adam out of dust?
What was the process? Please describe it in detail.

I believe in an old earth, if that is what you are asking.

Clearly that's not what I asked.
Let's try again:

Do you believe in a literal translation of the Bible creation story?
If so, how exactly did God make Adam out of dust?
What was the process? Please describe it in detail.

Cygnus
Moderator

Joined: 17 Jan 2009
Posts: 1704
Local time: 2:19 PM
Location: Valhalla

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:16 pm Post subject:

Ross Parker wrote:

Worst ontological argument ever!
_________________
"Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule."

-Friedrich Nietzsche

"As a general rule, people, even the wicked, are much more naive and simple-hearted than we suppose. And we ourselves are, too."

-Fyodor Dostoevsky

OrdinaryClay
SUSPENDED - Pending Council Decision

Joined: 18 Oct 2007
Posts: 958
Local time: 2:19 PM

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:43 pm Post subject:

Vexing wrote:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

Vexing wrote:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

Abiogenesis falls under one of the two choices. Read the link he provided and it will explain what a contingent and non-contingent being is in the context of the argument.

Do you believe in a literal translation of the Bible creation story?
If so, how exactly did God make Adam out of dust?
What was the process? Please describe it in detail.

I believe in an old earth, if that is what you are asking.

Clearly that's not what I asked.
Let's try again:

Do you believe in a literal translation of the Bible creation story?

Read the Bible.

Vexing
Forum Master

Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 2559
Local time: 7:19 PM

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:49 pm Post subject:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

Vexing wrote:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

Vexing wrote:

OrdinaryClay wrote:

Abiogenesis falls under one of the two choices. Read the link he provided and it will explain what a contingent and non-contingent being is in the context of the argument.

Do you believe in a literal translation of the Bible creation story?
If so, how exactly did God make Adam out of dust?
What was the process? Please describe it in detail.

I believe in an old earth, if that is what you are asking.

Clearly that's not what I asked.
Let's try again:

Do you believe in a literal translation of the Bible creation story?

Read the Bible.

I've read the Bible.
I'm not asking for MY take on the Bible.
I'm asking for YOUR take on the Bible.

Do YOU believe in a literal creation story?
Operative word here: YOU.

Here's an example answer:
"I, OrdinaryClay, do/do not believe in a literal creation story. I do/do not believe that humans were created from dust and a rib."

Smartmarzipan
All shall love me and despair.

Joined: 30 Sep 2008
Posts: 4813
Local time: 2:19 PM

Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:53 pm Post subject:

Getting this guy to answer anything in a straightforward manner in any thread is like pulling teeth..... _________________ "When they lose their sense of awe, people turn to religion. When they no longer trust themselves, they begin to depend upon authority." ~Tao Te Ching A fine quotation is a diamond on the finger of a witty person, but a pebble in the hands of a fool. ~Author Unknown

Display posts from previous:

	AtheistForums.com Forum Index -> Religion General Discussion	All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 2 of 3

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum