Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-01-2016, 05:50 PM (This post was last modified: 23-01-2016 06:12 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(23-01-2016 04:40 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-01-2016 04:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  Affect, not effect. You are quite ignorant.

A real man takes selfies with dogs, not cats. You are quite a pansy.

Yet more Christian kindness and charity. I see religion did nothing for you, old troll. And clearly, with your ancient out-dated 19th Century attitudes, you must be very very old, and out of touch.
Did you take your apologetics 2 hour seminar in the 1930's or 1940's before Cosmology became a science ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2016, 05:55 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(23-01-2016 04:58 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-01-2016 02:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  The assertion that God is a necessary being is entirely unsupported.

It is supported based on the fact that the concept of a Supreme Being is not a illogical concept. The concept isn't self contradicting...doesn't violate any laws of logic...and it can ultimately be conceived/perceived in the mind.

These things make it POSSIBLE for God to exist...and all possible necessary truths must be...true Laugh out load

Oh, but I am sure you can demonstrate how the concept of God (as defined in the argument) is absurd. Go right ahead. I will wait.

(23-01-2016 02:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  Existence does not directly follow from possible. You are making an illogical and unsupported leap. Possibility is certain;y a necessary condition for existence, but it is not sufficient.

1. All possible necessary truths must be actually true

2. The proposition "God probably does exist" is a true proposition.

3. Therefore, God's existence is necessarily true

You have problems here, Chas. 1 and 2 are true, so the conclusion which follows in 3 is true...it just logically follows.

(23-01-2016 02:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  No; see above.

No, YOU see above.

(23-01-2016 02:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  More unsupported assertions. There is no necessity for a first cause if there has eternally been something.

You don't know that there hasn't, therefor you can't truthfully assert that there must be a first cause.

Infinite regression problem.

(23-01-2016 02:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no problem with infinite existence. That is not infinite regression.
Infinite regression is a problem only for those asserting a first cause, because it requires special pleading to terminate it.

Nonsense. If God doesn't exist, then the universe/ time is infinite. That is infinite regression, Chas. Infinite regression is demonstrably false. It is logically absurd.

The only way to get out of such an absurdity is if you posit an EXTERNAL, TIMELESS cause...hmmm Consider

See the MOA is probably the most BOLD argument for the existence of God. Why? Because the argument basically says; once you even ADMIT that the existence of God is possible, then you are automatically implying that God exists. So the only thing you can do is somehow find a logical flaw based on the concept of God alone, which no one has ever been able to do.

The laws of science and logic break down at a singularity. The logic that obtains in this universe may or may not apply to conditions apart from it. Stephen Hawking's friend, (Roger Penrose, .... infinitely smarter that you, COTW), in fact suggests that there IS an infinite string of bangs, collapses, and re-bangs. You have no evidence that is not reality. You have also never addressed the question of a "necessary" god being SUBJECT to the laws of reality, thus cannot be the creator of a system it MUST be subject to.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2016, 06:36 PM (This post was last modified: 23-01-2016 09:26 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(23-01-2016 04:40 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-01-2016 04:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  Affect, not effect. You are quite ignorant.

A real man takes selfies with dogs, not cats. You are quite a pansy.

You're a fucking pretentious ignorant pussy whose opinion is equal to exactly dick. Fucking arrogant ignorant asshole.
[Image: roy.jpg]

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2016, 08:12 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(23-01-2016 04:19 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-01-2016 12:13 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  You don't even realize what you've done by equating your God with sparky because your worldview, which is solidly premised on the primacy of existence has blinded you to the distinction between what is real and what is imaginary.

Don't you mean Primacy of Consciousness? Consider

You're so right. I can't believe I missed that. Must have been in too much of a hurry to get up to the hills for some snow biking. Thanks for catching that. If only theism were premised on the POE, it might have a chance at being true.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2016, 08:15 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(23-01-2016 05:55 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(23-01-2016 04:58 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  It is supported based on the fact that the concept of a Supreme Being is not a illogical concept. The concept isn't self contradicting...doesn't violate any laws of logic...and it can ultimately be conceived/perceived in the mind.

These things make it POSSIBLE for God to exist...and all possible necessary truths must be...true Laugh out load

Oh, but I am sure you can demonstrate how the concept of God (as defined in the argument) is absurd. Go right ahead. I will wait.


1. All possible necessary truths must be actually true

2. The proposition "God probably does exist" is a true proposition.

3. Therefore, God's existence is necessarily true

You have problems here, Chas. 1 and 2 are true, so the conclusion which follows in 3 is true...it just logically follows.


No, YOU see above.


Infinite regression problem.


Nonsense. If God doesn't exist, then the universe/ time is infinite. That is infinite regression, Chas. Infinite regression is demonstrably false. It is logically absurd.

The only way to get out of such an absurdity is if you posit an EXTERNAL, TIMELESS cause...hmmm Consider

See the MOA is probably the most BOLD argument for the existence of God. Why? Because the argument basically says; once you even ADMIT that the existence of God is possible, then you are automatically implying that God exists. So the only thing you can do is somehow find a logical flaw based on the concept of God alone, which no one has ever been able to do.

The laws of science and logic break down at a singularity. The logic that obtains in this universe may or may not apply to conditions apart from it. Stephen Hawking's friend, (Roger Penrose, .... infinitely smarter that you, COTW), in fact suggests that there IS an infinite string of bangs, collapses, and re-bangs. You have no evidence that is not reality. You have also never addressed the question of a "necessary" god being SUBJECT to the laws of reality, thus cannot be the creator of a system it MUST be subject to.

Let's not forget about loop quantum gravity either. That predicts that the universe was actually contracting before the big band and instead of a singularity, there was a big bounce instead. This hypothesis is still in the early stages but some of the math is promising and solves some of the problems with The BB theory such as entropy.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2016, 09:24 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(23-01-2016 05:16 PM)Chas Wrote:  That fails from the get-go. You can't get necessary from possible.

All cases are not equal, in this case (and any case involving necessary truths), if it is possible, it IS.

(23-01-2016 05:16 PM)Chas Wrote:  Infinite does not equal infinite regression.

In the context of this discussion it does. Infinite events in time = infinite regression.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2016, 09:25 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(23-01-2016 06:36 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  You're a fucking pretentious ignorant pussy who's opinion is equal to exactly dick. Fucking arrogant ignorant asshole.
[Image: roy.jpg]

You sure as hell went out of your way to prove that point, didn't ya? Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2016, 09:27 PM (This post was last modified: 23-01-2016 09:30 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(23-01-2016 09:25 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-01-2016 06:36 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  You're a fucking pretentious ignorant pussy who's opinion is equal to exactly dick. Fucking arrogant ignorant asshole.
[Image: roy.jpg]

You sure as hell went out of your way to prove that point, didn't ya? Laugh out load

Nah. It was just another "meet an idiot" stop along the way.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2016, 09:34 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(23-01-2016 08:15 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  Let's not forget about loop quantum gravity either. That predicts that the universe was actually contracting before the big band and instead of a singularity, there was a big bounce instead. This hypothesis is still in the early stages but some of the math is promising and solves some of the problems with The BB theory such as entropy.

First, I'd like to know how does loop quantum gravity solve the entropy / second law of thermodynamics problem. Please enlighten me on that one. Second, the problem you have with infinite regression is wholly independent of contemporary physics. Infinite regression is impossible, scotsman. It is so impossible, that even God himself can't pull it off, and if God can't do it, no one can do it.

Logical problems are independent of science. Got that? The sooner you people realize that, the better. An actual infinity is not something that can be possessed, or traversed. It cant happen.

Sheesh.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2016, 09:36 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(23-01-2016 09:24 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-01-2016 05:16 PM)Chas Wrote:  That fails from the get-go. You can't get necessary from possible.

All cases are not equal, in this case (and any case involving necessary truths), if it is possible, it IS.

You have made no substantive argument for any necessary truth.

Quote:
(23-01-2016 05:16 PM)Chas Wrote:  Infinite does not equal infinite regression.

In the context of this discussion it does. Infinite events in time = infinite regression.

No, it doesn't. Infinite time is not infinite regression.

"An infinite regress in a series of propositions arises if the truth of proposition P1 requires the support of proposition P2, the truth of proposition P2 requires the support of proposition P3, ... , and the truth of proposition Pn−1 requires the support of proposition Pn and n approaches infinity."

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: