A universe exists therefore G-d exists

  • Thread starter Thread starter warpspeedpetey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thank you, JDaniel for a lovely disemboweling. As soon as I finish crying, I shall collect my soiled innards and seek medical attention.

Other than that, I’m shocked, (SHOCKED!) that I failed to convince you. I congratulate you for your certainty and wish you well.

I remain, however, very

Unfaithfully,
yours truly,

MerryAtheist

PS. Oh, and feel free to ignore my drivel henceforth.
 
MerryAtheist said:
Thank you, JDaniel for a lovely disemboweling. As soon as I finish crying, I shall collect my soiled innards and seek medical attention.

Other than that, I’m shocked, (SHOCKED!) that I failed to convince you. I congratulate you for your certainty and wish you well.

I remain, however, very

Unfaithfully,
yours truly,

MerryAtheist

PS. Oh, and feel free to ignore my drivel henceforth.
Click to expand...
Merry:

My utmost apologies. I felt I was responding to you at the exact tone level of your posts to us. It was very un-Christian of me. Again, I am sorry.

Actually, you have made statements (in your posts) that I know you are holding onto quite fevently. Those statements betray a logic that preceded them. I would sincerely like to see those logical presuppositions. (You may well “teach” me.)

We are serious people here. Many of us - especially me (yikes!) - have been on the planet a long time. Many here have doubts too. You are not alone. I know you find our faith more than you can bare, and, we find yours to be disconcerting as well.

Can we dialog and, if nothing else, agree to disagree?

Respectfully,
JD
PS: “disemboweling” - I like that word, haven’t used it in a long, long time. You have a great sense of humor. I look forward to the debate.
 
It’ll probably get me into a whole world of hurt around here, but some theoreticians have a few objections to the whole idea of causality, and they aren’t idiots either. Just tossing that one out there - and good luck to those who care to tackle it!
 
Nepenthe said:
It’ll probably get me into a whole world of hurt around here, but some theoreticians have a few objections to the whole idea of causality, and they aren’t idiots either. Just tossing that one out there - and good luck to those who care to tackle it!
Click to expand...
i don’t know enough to talk about it intelligibly yet, but i have a vague uneasiness with the idea of strict causality myself,do you have a source of more information?, my vague ‘uneasiness’ wont count as an argument :confused:
 
Yeah, I can probably easily come up with some sources, but as I have said for the last week - give my wrist a little more time, since I cannot type or mouse around so well right now. Not blowing off your questioning one bit though (but yeah, you are right to be uneasy, I think - it’s not simple stuff, but oh my, it is telling and very much subject to interpretation, like so much theory)!
 
Nepenthe said:
Yeah, I can probably easily come up with some sources, but as I have said for the last week - give my wrist a little more time, since I cannot type or mouse around so well right now. Not blowing off your questioning one bit though (but yeah, you are right to be uneasy, I think - it’s not simple stuff, but oh my, it is telling and very much subject to interpretation, like so much theory)!
Click to expand...
how dare you tease me like that! if your wrist is good enough to type out an url or a book title please do so:p
 
Well, Pete-o, many of my sources are from heavyduty journals and so forth …it’d take me some googling at the very least, and possibly direct contact with serious experts. I
am healing up though, so I will do my utmost in a few days, promise! Your interest sparks mine, but while the spirit is willing, the flesh is temporarily weak, okay? 😉
 
Nepenthe said:
Well, Pete-o, many of my sources are from heavyduty journals and so forth …it’d take me some googling at the very least, and possibly direct contact with serious experts. I
am healing up though, so I will do my utmost in a few days, promise! Your interest sparks mine, but while the spirit is willing, the flesh is temporarily weak, okay? 😉
Click to expand...
Please, take this to a mo . . . oops! :clapping: :dancing: :extrahappy:

JD
 
Nepenthe said:
It’ll probably get me into a whole world of hurt around here, but some theoreticians have a few objections to the whole idea of causality, and they aren’t idiots either. Just tossing that one out there - and good luck to those who care to tackle it!
Click to expand...
Well, another good line of philosophical debate! Good. I’d love to tackle this one too, that is, with your permissions.

But, should this be taken to a new thread?

JD
 
Totally permitted by me, if not by the Powers That Be ™!

New thread though…ah, there’s the rub. I am concerned there, since there’ll be a lot of crossover in various schools of thought. I defer to your judgment for now, but may take it up even though I do wear the mark of the infidel, as it were.
 
Nepenthe said:
Totally permitted by me, if not by the Power That Be ™!

New thread though…ah, there’s the rub. I am concerned there, since there’ll be a lot of crossover in various schools of thought. I defer to your judgment for now, but may take it up even though I do wear the mark of the infidel, as it were.
Click to expand...
Well, I don’t see warpspeed around. When he replies, we’ll take it from there.

JD
 
JDaniel said:
Well, I don’t see warpspeed around. When he replies, we’ll take it from there.

JD
Click to expand...
sorry, i was busy crushing quantonics, any way we need neps sources to have a serious discussion about causality
 
JDaniel said:
No.

JD
Click to expand...
(Answered in response to “Is the requirement of a “first cause” itself a priori?”).

Since you arrive at the need for a “first cause” a posteriori, please give an example of an uncaused cause (first cause) that is a result of your experience…
 
Peregrino said:
(Answered in response to “Is the requirement of a “first cause” itself a priori?”).

Since you arrive at the need for a “first cause” a posteriori, please give an example of an uncaused cause (first cause) that is a result of your experience…
Click to expand...
Ummm . . . God.

JD
 
Peregrino said:
(Answered in response to “Is the requirement of a “first cause” itself a priori?”).

Since you arrive at the need for a “first cause” a posteriori, please give an example of an uncaused cause (first cause) that is a result of your experience…
Click to expand...
i woke up this morning…🙂

ok im just being funny, but subjectively true, i really dont know what woke me up this morning 😛
 
Swan said:
Let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that some deity (god) created the universe. It is a huge leap from their to the assumption that such deity is the Judeo/Christian God.

The Deists (some famous ones include: Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Ben Franklin) believe that there is a god based upon their observation of the universe. However, they categorically deny that this god is the J/C god, or any other “personal” god.
Click to expand...
That’s fine. We’ll deal with knowing God once we know He exists.
 
JDaniel said:
Ummm . . . God.

JD
Click to expand...
How convenient of you to assume your conclusion…

Since you have denied an a priori explanation for your “first cause” “God” , please walk me through your empirical proof for an uncaused cause…getting us back to God in your causal chain would be nice while you are at it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top