Thought experiment. What if it was one day proven 200% there’s no God?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Curious11
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You would survive I’m sure. Give yourself some credit. Neurologists and psychologists know a lot about the brain nowadays, they can help anyone cope.
 
“So there is at least one reality that is causeless – a reality that is not contingent but instead exists by its own nature.”
Yes. Aristotle figured that out some 24 centuries ago. Aquinas further refined the arguments and show how they apply to Catholic apologetics over eight centuries.
And the atheist response is that “well, it’s circular.” Or that something is eternal…but it’s not God. Anything but God, lol!

Still no response to the witness of the Apostles and Martyrs. All those who, according to atheists, must have willingly sacrificed their lives for what they knew, with certainty, was a lie.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, those are models. In reality, time is not discreet, it’s continuous. Just because you measure GDP on a yearly basis doesn’t mean it doesn’t change continuous. You can always split time into smaller units ad infinitum
 
Last edited:
Curious11 said:
You would survive I’m sure. Give yourself some credit. Neurologists and psychologists know a lot about the brain nowadays, they can help anyone cope.
Click to expand...
Whats the point? A sense of biologically induced happiness? I would have to view reality in a certain way to find that appealing. It would have to be meaningful to me and that meaning would have to be true. I couldn’t stand living in a genetic fantasy. Your ideological point of view sustains you. I don’t share your point of view. I’m a realest. We are all going to die and be nothing anyway.What would i be waiting around for exactly? The next Joke?
 
Last edited:
Yes, as a matter of fact. Humor is a powerful coping mechanism. It increases hardiness and psychological resilience
 
Dan123 said:
They may have a physical manifestation, just as Jesus was the human embodiment of God, that doesn’t mean it’s their entire nature.
Click to expand...
And you’re positing a supernatural / non-physical nature based on exactly what, again? Or just because it’s fun to throw out there as a technical possibility? 😉

At least Christians say that God’s nature is what it is, based on His self-revelation in Scripture and through Jesus!

p.s., Jesus is not “the human embodiment of God.” He is one of the three ‘persons’ of the Godhead, and He is Incarnate. (Technical quibble, but an important one, from the perspective of Christian theology.)
laylow said:
Science was just an example. The same structure could be used, it would just have to be referred to theological, so replace knowledge with belief and there you go.
Click to expand...
Nope. I would challenge that take on things. Theology doesn’t operate purely on ‘belief’. That’s a red herring that the non-believer / humanist / rationalist crowd likes to throw out there. John Paul II said it best when he explained that faith and reason operate hand-in-hand (or, to use his metaphor, as the “two wings”) through which theology operate.
laylow said:
I see proving the attributes given to him problematic in part to the reality that these claims are based on the empirical.
Click to expand...
To the extent that they’re empirical or have touched on empirically-measurable phenomena? How do you see those examples as problematic?
Sophia said:
Ah, the usual attempt to wiggle out.
Click to expand...
Nah. Just not letting you get away with a claim that empirical measurements are the only reasonable standard. 😉
Sophia said:
As they say: “asserted without evidence, rejected without evidence”. That pretty much sums up everything about you.
Click to expand...
So… when I ask “what type of evidence?”, your reply is “rejected without evidence”??? Yeah… that’s pretty par for the course. :roll_eyes:
 
We have already shown that this cannot be the case.

Perhaps you are confusing “cause” with “explanation.” Everything has the latter, but not everything has the former. A cause is always extrinsic to the reality. So Ultimate Reality (that which is not contingent, i.e., God) does not have a cause, but the reason or explanation for His existence is to be found in his own nature. God is existence. So to say something does not have a cause does not mean it does not have an explanation.

Nothing can cause itself.
It is not tantamount to saying that at all
Click to expand...
That is a mere assertion.
 
Last edited:
Again, the seeking of pleasure merely for the sake of that alone is not my idea of a meaningful existence. That is merely a functionalist point of view of life. Press that button i feel good, press that button i feel sad. Like i said, some people are okay with with just having a user-experience, some people are happy with that. And that’s fine. It’s just not enough for me, it’s not enough to justify my existence in this world…

If the physical world alone could fulfill me i would not be on this forum…
 
Last edited:
Everything has cause. Nothing happens that hasn’t been caused by an external factir
 
You are merely asserting this to be true.

That not everything has a cause can be demonstrated through reason.

If everything had a cause or condition for its existence outside of itself, then that would mean every reality must receive its existence from something outside of itself. The cat receives existence from its formal principles, DNA, the Oxygen it breathes, the food it comes, the molecules and atoms that make it up; in time, too, the cat is dependent on a number of factors – its parents, the evolution of mammals, and so forth. But all these conditions are also caused. The series doesn’t stop there.

But can all causes themselves require other causes? If that were so, the cat could never exist, because the fulfillment of conditions needed for that cat to exist in the here and now would be unattainable. If there is no ultimate reality or condition that is itself not conditioned, then that means everything is merely receiving existence. But nothing could receive existence if there were not some reality that had existence in itself.

If everything has a cause, then nothing is explained. Nothing could exist.
 
Reality has a cause. The Big Bang, caused by the laws of physics. This isn’t news
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top