Using all the rational and logical means at my disposal I consider the Question of "Is there a God?" "What evidence exists to support the existence of a God?"
God = The infinite and absolute supernatural source .... that which has always been and always will be.... that which exists outside the confines and boundaries of time and space.
From my rational and logical mind I want to know about the source of the Universe and all matter and energy.
We know that everything must have a cause and a source. We know that it is impossible to get "something" from "nothing".
To believe that something came from absolutely nothing requires much more faith than i can muster and is not logically and rationally supported by all the evidence of the known universe and all science ever conducted. If anyone knows of any study showing otherwise i would love to go over it.
If Any person will grant these 2 postulates then they must also admit the need for a supernatural (infinite) source(God).
1. All natural (Finite) things must have a Beginning.
2. Something cannot come from Nothing.
(The ultimate Magic Trick like a magician pulling a rabbit from a top hat, except there is no top hat, and no
magician. Now that would be a very amazing trick indeed.)
Therefore.....
3. Logically and Rationally a Supernatural (Infinite and Timeless) Force must exist.
In order for me to rationally and logically believe that there are not supernatural forces/beings in play, then i must have some very good evidence showing that either #1 or #2 is false, Otherwise i am just operating from a blind faith and/or irrational(magical) thinking.
So from my viewpoint all this debate about "God" is truly more adequately described as a debate about the "Nature of God", and revolves around objecting and refuting another persons belief about the "Nature of God" and not about existence or absence of God.
Debating the "Nature of God" is much more of a debate.
I am honestly looking forward to anyone pointing out any constructive criticisms or where my logical and rational is faulty, other than just my definition of God = infinite and supernatural, otherwise at that point we are just arguing semantics. ;-)
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
From my perspective most modern Atheist belief hinges on the fact that historically humans have used belief in God to gain advantage of power, wealth, control over other humans and therefore sees that belief in god is evil. In my estimation that does not show that belief in God is evil or even untrue but that humans are such. Personally I believe many things about the nature of God and none of them allow another human more control over me; but, ironically less control. One must be careful because it is not only "belief in God" that can be used to create so much evil, injustice, and maleficence, but any belief at all..... belief in ones Race, ones gender, ones Nation, ones political party, ones socioeconomic class, and even sadly enough ones Disbelief also when it does not line up with the belief of another Human being.
"Belief in ones (sic) race, ones (sic) gender, ones (sic) Nation, (sic) ones (sic) political party, ones (sic) socioeconomic class, and even (sic) sadly enough (sic) ones (sic) Disbelief (sic)..."
*Belief*? Really? Just how does one believe in one's gender or race? How does one believe in a nation or a political party? Does one actually have the option to believe in one's socioeconomic class?
In the brilliant words of Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Thanks so much for the reply CyberLN!!! And very good call on your part.... I did not choose my words very carefully and it did not effectively communicate the idea i was trying to transmit, so i will do my best to clarify. I was using the word belief in the broadest sense of the word rather than just say the narrowest context of " I believe my race etc... etc.... exists." In my observation it all starts with an individuals belief about themselves and how they define themselves and how strongly they identify with that aspect. If someone were to state to me that they are a white middle-class American christian republican woman then that gives me a fairly good idea of some of the things they believe and more importantly which things they value about themselves and what other groups they may identify with. There are so many beliefs out there that have a name it is virtually limitless... here are just a few ....
Ecocentrism - Ecumenism - Egalitarianism - Egocentrism - Eliminative materialism - Emotionalism - Empiricism - Environmentalism - Epiphenomenalism - Epistemological nihilism - Epistemology - Erudition - Eschatology - Ethical Egoism - Eudaimonism - Evangelism - Existentialism - Externalism - Extremism
It is my whole assertion that when someone identifies with a certain belief or aspect of themselves more than they identify with the fact that ultimately they are human then that allows the possibility of treating another human unjustly if they do not belong to that same group. In the case of Gender this gives rise to Sexism.... with Race to Racism..... with Nation to Nationialism.....
I hope that clears things up... hope to see you around.... matthjar....
If I describe myself in a certain way, you make assumptions about who I am. Ok, we all do that. We do it when we look at people walking down the street. It is an evolutionary behavior, developed when creatures had to make blink decisions in order to survive...Is that creature over there moving in the tall grass food or does it think I am food? This survival mechanism does *not* spell, with the big brains we now have, bigotry. Is there potential for bigotry? Sure. Idiots exist. Many, many people, however, celebrate differences, like to learn about them, find them interesting and colorful.
I can identify with all sorts of things, and I do, indeed, identify with all sorts of things. If I mentioned some of them to you, you would still know relatively little about who I am...unless you spent the time and had the openness to learn who I am. Just hearing a few of the many things a person identifies with does not define them.
1) Depends on your understanding of the concept of nothing." Something cannot come from Nothing."
2) "1. All natural (Finite) things must have a Beginning." Theist will simply say god is not natural since he created nature and time.
3) It's all a claim, so until credible info to back up the claim is provided, I see no need to go to far beyond the statement of "prove that rubbish!"
Hiya Ellie!!! Nice to make your acquaintance......
1). By nothing I would mean the absence of any matter or energy.
2). Yes I suppose the Theist would just say that..... In my estimation there is no need to even go that far for this proof, but would just say that God is not Finite because he existed outside of time and space..... Surely anything that is Infinite cannot be Finite.
3) This is not an claim but a proof that intends to show that everything Finite requires a Infinite source through rational deductive logic.
This Proof shows that IF
Anyone that claims "I don't believe in anything Supernatural (Infinite)."
Then must by definition also take issue with either #1 or #2 or both.
1. All natural (Finite) things must have a Beginning.
2. Something cannot come from Nothing.
It is not possible to believe #1 and #2 and not believe #3.
If anyone can show me where my logic is Wrong, misguided or misplaced then i would very much appreciate the see it. Also i am showing why i believe in something supernatural (Infinite) based on the whole of the evidence that i have experienced and observed or have studied.
I don't see how it is possible to refute #1 or #2 without some seriously delusional thinking.
I may be Wrong; however, as i have been Wrong about MANY things in the past. I just want to see if anyone can raise and valid reasons as too why conditions 1 and 2 don't require number 3.
This does not NOT prove the Supernatural in any way shape or form but states that in order to reject the Supernatural then one must believe that Something CAN come from nothing OR that Natural things don't have to have a beginning.
Really Step #1 is not really even required because by Definition it is True ..... If something did not have a beginning then it is not Natural anyway but Supernatural which is the whole intended premise.
Put in even simpler terms that in order to explain Anything and Everything one must concede either A or B.
A. There was a Supernatural (Infinite) source that caused the Finite.
B. The Finite was not and then was with no Source or cause whatsoever.
One might be willing to choose A over B and deny the existence of God, at which point the argument becomes a debate about how to label or name the Supernatural rather than whether it exists or not.
I would much rather choose to believe in a Supernatural cause than no cause because i have not observed anything that did not have a cause.
Our very existence and the existence of everything is "Magical" in one way or another. One way is just MUCH more magical then the other.
Thanks for your Ear and looking forward to talking with you more in the future. Matthjar....
P.S. ... I apologize in advance for my excessive and incorrect punctuation, I know it is horrendous. ;-).
Us Theists believe that God is all NATURAL
Matthjar has made a good point, something has to come from something, it cannot come from nothing but it still doesn't make me think that there must have been a supreme being that made the something in the first place.
Yes in a way it is quite hilarious to see all the mental gymnastics all the thinkers and religions have gone through to try and explain the origin of everything. The above proof does not show that Jehovah or Allah or Yaweh or any other God or God(s) are right or wrong or that belief in such is right or wrong, but only that ??????Something ???????? not natural is required. One theory i have heard about is some kind of non-intelligent particle that had supernatural properties that was quite interesting. Also scientists are making some headway with the Dark Matter and Dark Energy theories that answer some questions even if they create 2 more in the process. Here is the link if interested http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy/ . It seems to work well with the Big Bang and helps to explain why the rate of expansion of the Universe is speeding up rather than slowing down as was expected.
I see what you're trying to do, but remember that "natural" is a matter of perspective. Just because we don't know the root cause does not necessarily label it as supernatural. Our understanding of the natural laws is constantly growing to accommodate new circumstances, many of which as of yet are not in our scope of knowledge. What might seem unnatural to us here on earth would of course seem natural if we were able to observe the "natural" patterns of the universe as a whole.
So the jury's still out on exactly what's out there, though odds are some things out there will tell us more about the things that we came from.
It could be the best definition for natural would be "Finite" and the best definition for supernatural is "Infinite". At least that is how i was using those 2 terms.... In hindsight It could be that i showed of used those terms instead of natural and supernatural to provide more clarity to my assertion and argument. All i am trying to point out is that in order to have anything which has a beginning it must have a cause.... if that cause had a beginning then it too must have a cause.....etc etc..... following this simple logic "Something must exist that had no beginning and is infinite to give cause to to all finite." One could easily say that the singularity of the Big Bang had no beginning and was infinite,,,,, which makes it supernatural.... and makes it the the creator of everything.
I can logically understand the position someone may take to say i have not proof for or against such Infinity therefore i choose not to believe or disbelief in its existence, or will suspend judgement until more data is collected on the subject.
In order to believe that nothing infinite exists then it MUST by definition preclude a belief that something did come from nothing. Personally I choose to believe the opposite based on all the evidence that i have observed to date. If at some point I do observe or find some reliable information to the contrary then i may stop believing in the infinite, but I would probably not believe that it is impossible for the infinite to exist. I am not sure how i could ever prove that premise.
I'm not quite sure if I'm missing your point or if you're missing mine, honestly.
Things that may appear infinite to us, based on our perspective, are actually quite finite. The current thinking surrounding the Big Bang, which so many people, even those who consider themselves to be rational and intelligent, regard as the mysterious "beginning of everything" is quite possibly (according to the latest theories in cosmology) only one event in a cluster of similar such Big Bangs that go on and off at different times. The universe, as we have grown so comfortable calling it, is actually a Multiverse. The "nothing" that our Big Bang came from, therefore, was not really nothing at all.
All I'm saying is, while we humans have spent quite a while with our minds boggled over what caused the big bang, we have been oblivious to the similar such situations that have gone on around us, with Big Bangs before and after ours. I doubt, at this time, that we will be able to see our *entire* situation with a wide enough perspective to truly gauge what the actual beginning of existence was. Every time we think we've found it, we only find that it goes back further.
But, we've taken it back *pretty* far at this point, and no one's seen God there. Just saying.
Nice reply
Was just gonna point out just that.
Currently we are simply too small to perceive things that happened so far in the past so far away but there is evidence of prior big bang activity.
Eg:
Universe "13.8 billion years old"
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/21mar_cmb/
"An analysis of 13.5 thousand million-year-old X-rays, captured by ESA's XMM-Newton satellite, has shown that either the Universe may be older than astronomers had thought or that mysterious, undiscovered 'iron factories' litter the early Universe."
http://sci.esa.int/xmm-newton/30255-is-the-universe-older-than-expected/
They really do not know the age of the universe but the age of the last big bang.
First thing, something Unnatural does not exist and will never exist.
Because the moment you will provide evidence of its existence it will be considered part of the natural things.
"The above proof does not show"
I saw no proof of anything, it was a claim, an unsupported claim that is.
"but only that ??????Something ???????? not natural is required."
It did not, you assumed that scientists claim that the universe is finite, which they didn't.
It is a misinterpretation that some people do.
No decent scientist I read about claimed anything about the finite nature of the universe as far as I know.
Why can you imagine an infinite god and cannot even consider an infinite universe?
We say that we don't know yet because we truly do not know.
You on the other hand are claiming that god exists and that he is infinite, both claims are unsupported in anyway thus far.
Dark Matter and Dark Energy theories are guesses that the scientific community came up with.
There is no evidence for dark matter or dark energy just evidence that einstein formulas miss something, that is all.
They call that something "Dark Matter and Dark Energy", it may be not even a new energy but an old energy that we miscalculated.
For example einstein equations do not count for torque(the power of spin), thus the strength that is making the sun spin and all the planets spin. Missing that energy may result in a huge discrepancy at the end of a huge formula.
The truth is that we do not know what is making the sun spin, there was a physicist that suggested that a Black Hole is at the center of the sun and the planets.
"rate of expansion of the Universe is speeding up rather than slowing down"
We do not know if this was always like this or if it will slow down eventually. If we knew the real shape of the universe we could make some estimates though.(what he have is models on current motion)
Currently it is speeding up.
BTW
The space around us is not Nothing, it is infinity full of energy density.
Yes your body is 99.99999999% space but it is not really empty, it is infinity full of energy.
ok then think about this... Where did humans come from? and dont say "we came from apes" because that would be false, if we came from apes our butts would be red, and we would be completely hairy all over our bodies but we arent, we have short, tall, skinny, chubby, different colored people, if we came from apes dont you think we would all look the same in some sort of way as in skin color and size wise. God made us in His image that is why we are all unique not because of DNA, well yeah because of it but God makes "DNA" to tell us and remind us that no one else is like us, that we are made in His image, we are perfect in His eyes. think about that
Pardon me, but we didn't just come from apes, we are stil apes. You mean we would look the same like all apes look the same? Because Orangutans and gorillas and chimps don't all look the same. Also, mentioning DNA, it is one of the major supporters of evolution, because so much of our DNA is completely useless junk DNA left over form ancestors, and the same DNA sequences are seen in other species.
but see you an "ex-Christian" which means you of all people should know and understand what i mean. if we decended from the ape population like our "ancestors" did, then we would be hairy as well but seeing that we are not science is a lie, it in itself is a myth like ateists say that God is a myth. They try to come up with "explainations" on how things came to be, but it says everything in the Bible, where we came from, what to expect in life, how to live, what to do if we start doubting God like you clearly have (no offense), things like that. Science doesnt say anything about where EXACTLY we came from, what to do in life, how to live, what to expect, etc.
Oh, CoG, you should really give education a try.
Arguing that humans having less body hair than other modern primates means we do not have a common ancestor is ignorant at best. Try reading what anthropologists have to say about this.
Arguing that because your book gives all sorts of explanations does mean that they are correct explanations. You've made one heck of an assumption there.
i believe that we DO have a common ancestor(s) and they are Adam and Eve. ok answer me this, if we have a "common" ancestor thats not who i believ it is, then how do animals give birth to their youngs without the imbilical cord attached but us humans do? i would love to know the answer
I can't decide if you really are as ignorant as your posts indicate or you are a troll.
neither... if i was ignorant then i wouldnt know anything, i would have the lack of knowledge or understanding. if you believe in God you are not ignorant
Oh yes you are ignorant. I told you before and I'll tell you again:The Bible is a perverted book of lies that would forgive Hitler for genocide if he recanted on his death-bed but consign a young child that was born in a country that never heard of the Judea/Christian religion to eternal torture. That is your moral standard....pathetic and sick.
But see everything Atheists think they have on us Theists is in the Old Testament not the New one
Then why is the old testament included in your bible?
Without the Old Testament, Atheists would have more of a reason to make Theists doubt how the world came to be, how we ended up here, ets. It was also made to point out the profecies of the Messiah coming. So its the story before Jesus' birth and the New Testament is what to expect later on in life, it was made after his birth
(Shaking my head at how puerile that comment is)
but its true. Without it Christians would ask "then how did the world come to be?" we would believe in the big bang and then we would be ignorant. So without it we would know nothing and we would might as well become ateists but we have it and it answers every one of our questions
(Still shaking my head)
You do realized the reason the jews deny jeasus was the messiah was he didnt fufil the prophesis. The writers fudged stuff to make prophesis come true, the fake census forcing josephe to go to bethlem was done to fufil a prophecy, had there been a census it would not have required people to return to their birth places that would have caused chaos so census's have never required that.
Wrong....rather than admit your wrong, my guess is you will rationalize in some way.
One would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show.
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)
Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)
In the following perversion, Jesus clearly approves of beating slaves even if they didn't know they were doing anything wrong.
The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)
Pages