Does God Exist? - Debate on Another Forum

[Prodigal_Son]

If the universe cannot not come from nothing, then neither can God. Any attribute or property that can get around this problem can be given to God OR A METAVERSE.

The concept of God is the concept of a necessary being. A necessary being cannot not be. In order for there to be anything, there must be this being first. God never came from nothing, nor is it really meaningful to say that God always was (because this implies being-in-time). God just is.

 

[Spock]

The concept of God is the concept of a necessary being. A necessary being cannot not be. In order for there to be anything, there must be this being first. God never came from nothing, nor is it really meaningful to say that God always was (because this implies being-in-time). God just is.

Plantinga uses the same concept when he tries to give an abstract proof for God’s existence. Too bad that it is fallacious. The concept of “necessary” vs. “contingent” beings is an invalid dichotomy. As before - it can be proven mathematically (sorry, my friend ) that there is no necessary being.

 

[Ed_CA]

Most atheists whom I have met have axes to grind against religon, and justify their unbelief in that manner. St Thomas Aquinas does not have “proofs”, rather the are compelling arguments. A proof in a mathematical sense requires that you must agree with the conclusion or proof, in violation of free will. In addition to St Thomas’ arguments, one can ask the question why are the four fundemental forces of nature (gravity, electromagnetism, strong nuclear and weak nuclear forces) so finely tuned to allow our universe hospitable for life. Why are the properties of carbon such that it allows the formation of extremely complex molecules (DNA, RNA, etc)? Why do so many stars have planets (maybe earths)?
In my opinion, God’s acts analogously to a magnet arranging iron filings in a pattern, that is, using His creation and natural force to produce humans and maybe Vulcans, Romulans, etc.
Another argument atheists use to proclaim God does not exist is the problem of an ALL-GOOD God permitting evil and suffering in the world, The message of Jesus is that He expects us to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, cloth the naked, visit the imprisoned. Jesus, who is the new Adam, has shown us how to evolve the fulfillment of the Kingdom on earth. Rather than waiting for God to do everything for us, we are expected to heed His commandments. As Chesterson wrote, the problem with Christianity is that it has not really been practiced. By practicing Christianity, we can really overcome, by example, the objections that atheists to evil in the world.
Ed_CA

 

[Charlemagne_II]

EGGSBENEDICT

If the universe cannot not come from nothing, then neither can God.

Why? That would only be true If God was equal to the universe, which God obviously is not by definition.

How can the Creator be inferior to a principle of His own creation … causality itself?

 

[eggsbenedict]

The concept of God is the concept of a necessary being. A necessary being cannot not be. In order for there to be anything, there must be this being first. God never came from nothing, nor is it really meaningful to say that God always was (because this implies being-in-time). God just is.

The concept of a metaverse is the concept of a necessary thing. In order for there to be a universe, there must be this thing first.

Maybe the metaverse just is.

 

[eggsbenedict]

Most atheists whom I have met have axes to grind against religon, and justify their unbelief in that manner.

I’ve met some theists who have an axe to grind against non-thiests and other religions.

A proof in a mathematical sense requires that you must agree with the conclusion or proof, in violation of free will.

Not true. You can:

• find a problem with the proof.
• you might not understand the proof
• you might understand the proof, but choose to ignore it.

Saying that mathematical proofs violate your free will is like saying that facts violate your free will.

In addition to St Thomas’ arguments, one can ask the question why are the four fundemental forces of nature (gravity, electromagnetism, strong nuclear and weak nuclear forces) so finely tuned to allow our universe hospitable for life.

Or perhaps life has developed the way it has because of the forces it was subjected to.

Why do so many stars have planets (maybe earths)?

Look to astronomy to find the answer.

 

[eggsbenedict]

EGGSBENEDICT

If the universe cannot not come from nothing, then neither can God.

Why? That would only be true If God was equal to the universe, which God obviously is not by definition.

How can the Creator be inferior to a principle of His own creation … causality itself?

I thought that it was a theist argument that the universe cannot come from nothing? Why does my statement imply that God has to be equal to the universe?

Your using your definition of God before you can prove that it is true.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

The concept of a metaverse is the concept of a necessary thing. In order for there to be a universe, there must be this thing first.

Maybe the metaverse just is.

Alright, then, I will provisionally agree to the proposition the metaverse just is. But as yet, the metaverse is undefined, so we have to figure out what it is and why it is a necessary thing. What, pray tell, are the characteristics of a metaverse?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

eggsbenedict

*Your using your definition of God before you can prove that it is true. *

How can we prove anything to be true without first defining it?

Rather, you are changing our definition of God in order to prove Him unnecessary.

God would only be subject to the principle of causality if God were in the Universe, rather than the Creator of it and all the principles in it.

That the universe was created even science admits with the Big Bang. The universe did not always exist. If that doesn’t point to Creator, what does it point to? That the universe created itself?

 

[eggsbenedict]

Alright, then, I will provisionally agree to the proposition the metaverse just is. But as yet, the metaverse is undefined, so we have to figure out what it is and why it is a necessary thing. What, pray tell, are the characteristics of a metaverse?

DefinitionMetaverse: that which spawned the universe. It is outside the common understanding of space time.

Until we have further knowledge, we don’t make any claims other than “the metaverse is what spawned the universe”.

You will note that theists make the same claim: God is that which created the universe. I would be fine with that definition if it stopped there. Theists, however, add claims such as “God is sentient.”, “God is Good” (good being a relative term meaning that he acts in OUR best interest), “God answers prayers.”, “God answers prayers” and “God judges us”.

The metaverse simply is a name for something that created the universe. We don’t presuppose anything about it. I could be wrong, maybe the universe spawned out of nothing (but I don’t think that’s a point of contention here).

 

[eggsbenedict]

eggsbenedict

*Your using your definition of God before you can prove that it is true. *

How can we prove anything to be true without first defining it?

Rather, you are changing our definition of God in order to prove Him unnecessary.

God would only be subject to the principle of causality if God were in the Universe, rather than the Creator of it and all the principles in it.

You can define anything. You can define a purple poke-a-dotted monster that eats unicorns. Then when I point out that unicorns don’t exist, you say that they must, since a purple poke-a-dotted monster that eats unicorns exists.

I never changed your definition of God, although I do agree that He is unnecessary.

What caused God? You can’t get around the problem of initial causation by presuming it was intelligent and sentient.

That the universe was created even science admits with the Big Bang. The universe did not always exist. If that doesn’t point to Creator, what does it point to? That the universe created itself?

Maybe something created the universe. Nothing implies that it would be sentient or intelligent. On what fundamentals would such a being maintain it’s existence?

 

[Prodigal_Son]

DefinitionMetaverse: that which spawned the universe. It is outside the common understanding of space time.

Until we have further knowledge, we don’t make any claims other than “the metaverse is what spawned the universe”.

You will note that theists make the same claim: God is that which created the universe. I would be fine with that definition if it stopped there. Theists, however, add claims such as “God is sentient.”, “God is Good” (good being a relative term meaning that he acts in OUR best interest), “God answers prayers.”, “God answers prayers” and “God judges us”.

The metaverse simply is a name for something that created the universe. We don’t presuppose anything about it. I could be wrong, maybe the universe spawned out of nothing (but I don’t think that’s a point of contention here).

Are you familiar with language theory? A word is what it denotes. That is, every noun refers to some entity that either a) exists, or b) doesn’t exist. We may have many different words that refer to the same person. For example, the reference of the terms “President Barack Obama” and the “Commander in Chief of the USA” are precisely the same. Someone could know he was president without knowing he was commander in chief, but the object pointed to by the terms is the same object.

I told you that I believe in a metaverse. I will accept your definition that a metaverse is what spawned the universe. I am willing to concede everything that you have possibly asked me to concede.

The reference of the terms “what spawned the universe” and “metaverse” and “God” are precisely the same. God is the metaverse. If you are willing to concede that *something *spawned the universe, then let us simply call that “God” and be done with it.

We are left, then, with the question of the nature of God – you rightly inferred that this is the question. He is a necessary being: whereas all other beings might not have been, God must be in order for anything else to be. (You may continue to pronounce God “metaverse”, if you like, but I’m gonna stick with the big G-O-D spelling.)

Most people agree that human beings have an inherent idea of goodness within us. In fact, we can imagine (or nearly imagine) something perfectly good. We cannot derive this idea from the natural world, because we see nothing perfectly good in the natural world. But we do see some goodness in the natural world, and it stands to reason that finite goodness must be derived from some greater goodness. Hence, we infer that our Source must have goodness.

There are other derivations for the other characteristics of God, and I will admit that some derivations have a stronger epistemological basis than others. These are not presuppositions, but logical inferences. I myself am convinced that God has written His nature onto our minds, and that this nature (for the most part) is perfectly obvious to us – the question is, do we decide to believe in Him.

I have faith in the Metaverse, myself. (I hope that doesn’t make me a heretic!)

 

[eggsbenedict]

Are you familiar with language theory? A word is what it denotes. That is, every noun refers to some entity that either a) exists, or b) doesn’t exist. We may have many different words that refer to the same person. For example, the reference of the terms “President Barack Obama” and the “Commander in Chief of the USA” are precisely the same. Someone could know he was president without knowing he was commander in chief, but the object pointed to by the terms is the same object.

The word “animal” can refer to a blue jay or a monkey. The word “animal” can also refer to a primate. The word “primate” can refer to a monkey, but not a blue jay.

The term metaverse does not generality refer to an entity that cares weather or not you believe in it.

The reference of the terms “what spawned the universe” and “metaverse” and “God” are precisely the same. God is the metaverse. If you are willing to concede that *something *spawned the universe, then let us simply call that “God” and be done with it.

Why don’t we just stick with metaverse. Calling it God would just confuse people.

We are left, then, with the question of the nature of God – you rightly inferred that this is the question. He is a necessary being: whereas all other beings might not have been, God must be in order for anything else to be. (You may continue to pronounce God “metaverse”, if you like, but I’m gonna stick with the big G-O-D spelling.)

You just broke with our common understanding of the definition of metaverse be using the word “He”.

Most people agree that human beings have an inherent idea of goodness within us. In fact, we can imagine (or nearly imagine) something perfectly good. We cannot derive this idea from the natural world, because we see nothing perfectly good in the natural world.

I can imagine a lot of things, but they certainly don’t exist.

But we do see some goodness in the natural world, and it stands to reason that finite goodness must be derived from some greater goodness. Hence, we infer that our Source must have goodness.

We see a lot of badness in the world. Does that not infer that the Source has badness?

the question is, do we decide to believe in Him.

Which version of Him should we believe in? Would a good God punish us for believing in the wrong one?

I don’t have faith in the metaverse, but it may be a plausible idea.