Theological discusssion

[Free Thinker]

Quote from morganist:

I don't think you can really answer that question and I have seen people saying that there is missing point.

Thomas Aquinas theory of the reason for efficient cause is the closest thing to explain what I am trying to say. There has to be something to kick start any kind of development.

why does it have to be a god? you are trying to put your belief in a god in a gap in our knowledge:


A.The Argument from Efficient Cause:
1.There is an efficient cause for everything; nothing can be the efficient cause of itself.
2.It is not possible to regress to infinity in efficient causes.
3.To take away the cause is to take away the effect.
4.If there be no first cause then there will be no others.
5.Therefore, a First Cause exists (and this is God).

“If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God, so that there cannot be any validity in that argument. It is exactly of the same nature as the Hindu's view, that the world rested upon an elephant and the elephant rested upon a tortoise; and when they said, ‘How about the tortoise?’ the Indian said, ’Suppose we change the subject.’ Bertrand Russell,

 

[Yannis]

The basis of most great religions (eg, Christianity, Judaism, Hiduism) is that God created everything. This includes the Earth, the whole Universe, time, the laws of nature, the laws of mathematics and probability, the whole framework that we call reason or logic. Plus a myriad other things we are not aware of.

The ways we have been given to interact with God are basically intuitive, beyond mere logic and science. He created those too.

We can look and think, see some things, experience many more. But, how can one use part of creation to explain God?

 

[Free Thinker]

Quote from Yannis:

The basis of most great religions (eg, Christianity, Judaism, Hiduism) is that God created everything. This includes the Earth, the whole Universe, time, the laws of nature, the laws of mathematics and probability, the whole framework that we call reason or logic. Plus a myriad other things we are not aware of.

The ways we have been given to interact with God are basically intuitive, beyond mere logic and science. He created those too.

We can look and think, see some things, experience many more. But, how can one use part of creation to explain God?

of course there is another explaination that fits perfectly. there is nothing up there.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from Free Thinker:

of course there is another explaination that fits perfectly. there is nothing up there.

And yet (I've asked you this before iirc), that doesn't satisfy, does it?

 

[morganist]

Quote from Free Thinker:

why does it have to be a god? you are trying to put your belief in a god in a gap in our knowledge:


A.The Argument from Efficient Cause:
1.There is an efficient cause for everything; nothing can be the efficient cause of itself.
2.It is not possible to regress to infinity in efficient causes.
3.To take away the cause is to take away the effect.
4.If there be no first cause then there will be no others.
5.Therefore, a First Cause exists (and this is God).

“If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God, so that there cannot be any validity in that argument. It is exactly of the same nature as the Hindu's view, that the world rested upon an elephant and the elephant rested upon a tortoise; and when they said, ‘How about the tortoise?’ the Indian said, ’Suppose we change the subject.’ Bertrand Russell,

Actually I never attribute it to a god. If you read the OP you see I state a consciousness not a god. I even challenge the general Christian understanding of God and question there understanding of the holy ghost as a ever present consciousness to a set of general rules that show consideration to others.

Please read the OP I think you might gain a deeper appreciation to my argument if you do.

 

[Yannis]

Quote from Free Thinker:of course there is another explaination that fits perfectly. there is nothing up there.

I'm not sure where's "up there" but, then again, where did "nothing" come from? It was either totally fundamental, outside space and time and logic, in which case that's your perception of God, or it was created somehow by God, the source of everything. Atheism is another religion, while Agnosticism is a state of mind, right?

And if you say that "nothing" doesn't exist, think whether one of the bases of our modern math and science, the zero, exists...

Remember Odysseus who convinced the Cyclop to yell that "No-one" blinded him? Funny about that

 

[Free Thinker]

Quote from Ricter:

And yet (I've asked you this before iirc), that doesn't satisfy, does it?

no it doesnt. not to those indoctrinated to believe in a supernatural deity

 

[Free Thinker]

Quote from Yannis:

Atheism is another religion,

is apolitical political?

 

[Yannis]

Quote from Free Thinker:no it doesnt. not to those indoctrinated to believe in a supernatural deity

Are you implying that there's no such thing "supernatural?" In that case, define your sense of "nature"... What does it contain? Its own source, perhaps?

 

[Yannis]

Quote from Free Thinker:

is apolitical political?

Apolitical = The state or quality of being apolitical can be the apathy and/or the antipathy towards all political affiliations. Being apolitical can also refer to situations in which people take an unbiased position in regard to political matters.

Yes, being apolitical is another way of being political, like being political-light.

Don't forget that if you either pull or push something, you are still attached, related, to that thing.