All #ourCOG News 5.0
Thoughts?
Discussion
19 comments
-
Solid argument, love Craig for making it big.
-
I have a problem with the first premise. We assume that everything that begins to exist has a cause because that’s how our universe operates.
Cause and effect began with nature and this is a cause outside of nature. The same rules might not apply. To assume they do is not rationally justified.
-
Both non believers and believers (most) start with a false premise.
Both have failed to identify God in the first place regardless of belief or non belief.
I really don’t understand why for thousands of years people have been slow to realise that, it’s actually not even funny and highlights mankind’s pure unadulterated ignorance.
Sure some can tell you the attributes of God, though that doesn’t identify God, that’s the difference.
For the believers they have faith, congratulations, that’s it, the believer needs nothing more.
Yeah well that’s suits your salvation and you only, none other and just to be clear, faith in context of scriptures does not mean blind faith, it actually means to trust in God, to develop your relationship with God and it is God’s will that all mankind come to the knowledge of God.
Faith people is the beginning, not the end and you first step of faith (trust) is to believe in Christ.
If you are going to believe in Christ, then you believe Christ is the Word of God.
If you believe Christ is the Word of God, then you believe every Word from Genesis to Revelation.
If you believe every word from Genesis to Revelation, then you live and breathe it so it comes alive in you and becomes a manifestation and Expression from out of you, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (as you can do nothing of yourself) in the ministry God has called you to the unsaved.Ask yourself these questions and find it is the scriptures.
Who is God?
What is God?
How is God?
Why is God?
Where is God?
To know God, to say this is or is not God, there is or there is no evidence of God, this is in He whom I worship?Failure to identify God regardless of belief or no belief, is pure unadulterated ignorance, nothing more.
For the believers, how is it even possible to be ready with an answer of the Hope that is in you, if you don’t know who or what you worship in the first place?
God is not Obvious, God is received, think about that for a minute.
When an atheist says there is no God or evidence of God, the response should be, so tell me something, exactly what did you identify God to be or not to be to come to your conclusion?
Not a single one will answer you truthfully, though most the believers couldn’t tell you either, sad, sad fact for thousands of years, terrible, yet here they are arguing if God is Trinity, oneness and all the other stupidity believers carry on with when they couldn’t identify God in the first place.
“Most” Believers slumber, time to wake up and go buy your oil before it’s to late, yes!
-
Everything that exists in the natural world has two things: an origin point and a cause. Existence is an effect. You, yourself had an origin point and a cause. Theists and non theists alike understand that there was a first cause. That’s why there is such a war to explain the why and the how. Atheists are naturalists who try to make everyone believe that nature develops on it’s own, but they themselves dont even really believe it came from nothing. Even their basic textbooks describe the BIig Bang as an unknown force acting on unknown matter, a super dense, condensed and infinitesimally small dot holding all the matter in the universe. That’s their big cop out, an unknown acts on an unknown and boom. Something still would have had to create the matter and energy.
Energy is a natural phenomenon governed by a natural law. It exists, therefore it had to begin the process of existing. Something had to cause it, a first cause. It’s a natural law that requires a supernatural cause. Energy can neither be created or destroyed. Yet it exists, and something at some origin point started it, made it exist. You need a supernatural Agent, a Creator to make it exist.
If it exists, it had to have a beginning, an origin point to mark the start of its existence. To make a universe, however, you need an uncreated God. God has to be outside of time, AKA timeless, to invent and create time. he also cannot be made of matter, or energy to invent and create matter and energy. If he is going to be the inventor and creator of anything with a unique starting point, a beginning, then he has to be Beyond whatever that is. God created time while he existed in a state of timelessness ,so he can have no beginning. You only can get a created universe, the only plausible kind of universe, from an uncreated God.
-
Feser’s aristoleian proof of God is more solid than kalaam.
Tho this is just a summary from the 5 Proof of the Existence of God.
1.) Change occurs (and this cannot be coherently denied – the denial of change is itself a form of change, for example)
2.) Material objects that change can only do so because they have potentials that have been actualized; a cup of coffee has the potential to cool down, an acorn has the potential to grow into a tree. Change is just the actualization of a potential.
3.) A potential cannot be actualized except by something already actual.
4.) Things exist in hierarchies; a cup of coffee rests on a table, which rests on the floor, which is supported by the ground, which is held together by gravity, etc. The cup of coffee cannot hold itself up – it must rest on the table. But the table cannot hold itself up either – it must rest on the ground. Each member of a hierarchical system has derivative causal power conferred on them by other things. It cannot be infinitely long.
5.) Things can only change, however, if they exist in a hierarchical system; a cup of coffee cannot grow cold unless it exists, for example.
6.) Things can only exist, however, if it has the potential to exist which is actualized.
7.) Therefore there must be a purely actual actualizer of everything that exists.
8.) There cannot be more than one purely actual actualizer, as differences between them would entail some difference in potential, which cannot be since it is actualized.
9.) Since it it pure actuality, it cannot change, so it is immutable.
10.) Since it cannot change, it does not exist in time, and is thus eternal.
11.) If it were material, it would exist in time and could change, but it does not. Thus is must be immaterial.
12.) If it was corporeal, it would be material, but since it is not material, it is not corporeal.
13.) Since it has no unactualized potentials, it must be perfect.
14.) A privation is an unactualized potential, which corresponds to evil; a fully actualized being, the purely actual actuality must not have any privations, and thus must not be at all evil, thus is must be purely good.
15.) The purely actual actualizer confers power onto the rest of the hierarchical system – i.e. every material object that has power to actualize potential derives this power from this purely actual actualizer. But to have all the power is to be omnipotent.
16.) Whatever is an effect must be in some way in its cause; since the purely actual actualizer causes everything, everything that exists must in some way be in it.
17.) The forms/patterns of material objects cannot exist in this actualizer in the concrete way they exist in the world, so they must exist as abstracta. Thus the purely actualizer is an intelligence, a mind, of sorts.
18.) There is nothing outside these abstracta, the thoughts in the mind of the purely actual actualizer – this entails it is omniscient.
19.) Thus what we have been referring to as the purely actual actualizer is unified, immutable, eternal, immaterial, incorporeal, perfect, good, omnipotent, and omniscient.
20.) But these are the characteristics of what we call God – therefore God exists. -
I would like to point out, though, that this argument leads to no specificities or insights about the nature any particular god. This argument could be used by almost all religions to back up their creation claims.
That point aside, though, the argument only holds water if point #1 is true. But it’s a bit of a misleading claim… if I said “all the cells in your body are microscopic, therefore you are microscopic,” I would be incorrect, yes? It’s true that what we we observe does seem to have a cause however that is not 100% proof that the unseen beginning of the universe also has a cause. Just because everything in the universe has a cause doesn’t mean that the universe itself has a cause.
I understand that it’s a reasonable thing to assume, and a reasonable conclusion. But that doesn’t make it airtight. And it’s not really considered “evidence” of anything, just a conjecture about the nature of the universe.
-
The universe *as we know it* began to exist. That’s about all we can say.
-
Well like Dr. Vince Vitale said from Ravi Zacharias International Ministries no matter what world view you adhere to something miraculous took place in the beginning for us to be here
-
The origins of any world view is a supernatural miracle
-
This argument presupposes that God existed when anyone can insist what caused God?
-
Sounds like of the Mormons
-
Premise 1 has its problems too. Whatever begins to exist in this universe has a cause. Perhaps things are different outside the universe. How could we know?
-
Atheists have no problem believing in an eternal universe but God.. The elephant in the room is not evidence but morality. The fear of being accountable to someone.
-
This is under the assumption that the universe exists within the human notion of time. Humanity tries to create a timeline to explain the history of something but what if it simply always existed?
-
For starters… the premise of science and faith being at odds is false. Science always validates Christianity
-
God must exists
-
Good argument
-
[…] Thoughts? […]
Comments