Fundy argument! Can someone help?

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2003-01-09 08:07am

Ok, I recently had a fundy try to tell me about the principle of causation. Because of this, she said, the universe must have been created. I naturally asked who created god, and she said that since he exists outside of time... blah blah blah

My question is this: Can someone explain to me a)what causation actually is and b) how it applies to the origins of the universe? I have a rematch scheduled and any help would be appreciated.

Thanks people!

Mr Flibble · Post by **Mr Flibble** » 2003-01-09 08:21am

Superman wrote:Ok, I recently had a fundy try to tell me about the principle of causation. Because of this, she said, the universe must have been created. I naturally asked who created god, and she said that since he exists outside of time... blah blah blah

My question is this: Can someone explain to me a)what causation actually is and b) how it applies to the origins of the universe? I have a rematch scheduled and any help would be appreciated.

Thanks people!

I think she measn causality. Essential she is saying that event b happened something must have caused that to happen, lets call it event A. Your response is perfectly valid, if everything has to have a 'cause' what caused god? The God exists out of time response is a cop out, just ask what caused God to exist out of time If she sees he always existed, i.e he didn't need something to cause his existence, she is therefore contradicting herself and hence her argument is invalid. You could simply take God out of the picture and say that the universe always existed. Since IIRC time was created in the big bang,that is actually arguably the case. What happened before the big bang? The answer nothing as there was no time before the big bang.

Hope that helps.

Sir Sirius · Post by **Sir Sirius** » 2003-01-09 08:32am

This link might help.
http://www.positiveatheism.org/faq/firstcause.htm

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2003-01-10 05:31pm

Mr Flibble wrote:
Superman wrote:Ok, I recently had a fundy try to tell me about the principle of causation. Because of this, she said, the universe must have been created. I naturally asked who created god, and she said that since he exists outside of time... blah blah blah

My question is this: Can someone explain to me a)what causation actually is and b) how it applies to the origins of the universe? I have a rematch scheduled and any help would be appreciated.

Thanks people!
I think she measn causality. Essential she is saying that event b happened something must have caused that to happen, lets call it event A. Your response is perfectly valid, if everything has to have a 'cause' what caused god? The God exists out of time response is a cop out, just ask what caused God to exist out of time If she sees he always existed, i.e he didn't need something to cause his existence, she is therefore contradicting herself and hence her argument is invalid.

Not quite. I don't agree with the argument, but it says that everything within nature has a cause. Since God (by this argument) is both within nature and outside of nature, God could exist without the universe.

You could simply take God out of the picture and say that the universe always existed.

Well, except for the fact that the night sky would be as bright as the day sky if light had infinitely long to travel to the Earth, but I digress.

Since IIRC time was created in the big bang,that is actually arguably the case. What happened before the big bang? The answer nothing as there was no time before the big bang.

Nothing within the universe. IIRC, Multiverse Theory doesn't say whether all universes were created at the same time or if they can be created at different times. There may well be an infinitely long universe somewhere.

The argument's still stupid, though, since it relies on a belief in an uncaused cause, with philsophical and theological connotations that even most scholars will stay away from (it leads to the "unmoved mover" idea, which is anti-Christian, since it denies the possibility of a caring, loving (moved) God.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2003-01-10 09:30pm

If time didn't exist then how could it move forward in order to allow the chain events to happen (ie: the big bang) to create the universe?

Argggg.. it makes a person's head spin any way you look at it!

Still, I was certain the theory that the universe was "always here" was discredited? I mean, maybe there was another universe that lead to this one, but the big bang itself shows that it had a beginning.

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2003-01-10 09:31pm

Before the Big Bang, there is no space, time, energy, or matter. If they demand a cause for it, just answer quantum physics which usually shuts them up. Explains how you can get something from nothing.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2003-01-10 09:59pm

But don't you need time for anything to happen? That's the part that gets me.

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » 2003-01-10 11:02pm

Maybe the 'big bang' was just God creating the universe...

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2003-01-10 11:23pm

Falcon wrote:Maybe the 'big bang' was just God creating the universe...

Maybe the Big Bang was just the universe creating God

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2003-01-11 12:21am

Superman wrote: My question is this: Can someone explain to me a)what causation actually is and b) how it applies to the origins of the universe? I have a rematch scheduled and any help would be appreciated.

There are numerous theories that try and answer the question of universal causality. One that is Bangs and Crunches happen in cycles, Bang!!, expand, expand, diminish, diminish CRUNCH!!, Bang!!.
We are 15 billion years after the last Bang. Though recently I've been hearing that the universe's expansion is accelerating, is there an explanation for this other than entropy or negative matter?

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2003-01-11 02:40am

SyntaxVorlon wrote:
Superman wrote: My question is this: Can someone explain to me a)what causation actually is and b) how it applies to the origins of the universe? I have a rematch scheduled and any help would be appreciated.
There are numerous theories that try and answer the question of universal causality. One that is Bangs and Crunches happen in cycles, Bang!!, expand, expand, diminish, diminish CRUNCH!!, Bang!!.
We are 15 billion years after the last Bang. Though recently I've been hearing that the universe's expansion is accelerating, is there an explanation for this other than entropy or negative matter?

IIRC, physicists have traced the lines of expansion and how the matter would theoretically fall back into itself, and it won't return to a single point, which would seem to disprove the Big Crunch theory. I'll have to see if I can find something on this later, since I have to be up in 4 hours to work on a construction job.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-01-11 02:44am

Falcon wrote:Maybe the 'big bang' was just God creating the universe...

This requires that the universe did not exist at some point prior to its "creation". Justify that claim. Keep in mind that time itself is a property of the universe, and does not exist independently of the universe, so there is no such thing as "before" the universe.

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » 2003-01-11 10:37am

Darth Wong wrote:
Falcon wrote:Maybe the 'big bang' was just God creating the universe...
This requires that the universe did not exist at some point prior to its "creation". Justify that claim. Keep in mind that time itself is a property of the universe, and does not exist independently of the universe, so there is no such thing as "before" the universe.

Maybe not by our narrow defination, but since neither of us were around back then we can either a) guess, wax poetic with our own narrow defination of time and existance or b) believe in what God told us

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-01-11 10:40am

Falcon wrote: b) believe in what God told us

Ok what the fuck .... believe what God told us? What exactly did God tell us? Wouldn't happen to be a thousand year old tome of superstitious nonsense, would it?

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-11 10:40am

Given that we have no proof whatsoever about God, and you're making some evasive statement towards "Well we don't know everything(I have already friends who do this, and it's a cop out...)"

You care to bring proof towards this thought, or are we just twiddling our thumbs here?

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » 2003-01-11 10:46am

Ghost Rider wrote:Given that we have no proof whatsoever about God, and you're making some evasive statement towards "Well we don't know everything(I have already friends who do this, and it's a cop out...)"

You care to bring proof towards this thought, or are we just twiddling our thumbs here?

Faith isn't about proof, its about believing without proof. My point is that nothing science proves will ever deny God, but it will never prove God either. If God could be proven then faith wouldn't be required and you wouldn't have the choice to believe or not.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-01-11 10:46am

Ghost Rider wrote:Given that we have no proof whatsoever about God, and you're making some evasive statement towards "Well we don't know everything(I have already friends who do this, and it's a cop out...)"

You care to bring proof towards this thought, or are we just twiddling our thumbs here?

I don't know what Falcon's trying to do. He basically came up with his own definition of time on the spot.

The fact remains, you cannot argue that God caused the universe and then deny your original premise and say that God is uncaused.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-01-11 10:48am

Falcon wrote:
Faith isn't about proof, its about believing without proof. My point is that nothing science proves will ever deny God, but it will never prove God either. If God could be proven then faith wouldn't be required and you wouldn't have the choice to believe or not.

Nonsense. The Bible's claims are bullshit and science has shown them to be so, therfore Judeo-Christian God=bullshit.

The original thread topic was about a fundy trying to prove God. She failed.

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » 2003-01-11 10:51am

Vympel wrote:
Falcon wrote:
Faith isn't about proof, its about believing without proof. My point is that nothing science proves will ever deny God, but it will never prove God either. If God could be proven then faith wouldn't be required and you wouldn't have the choice to believe or not.
Nonsense. The Bible's claims are bullshit and science has shown them to be so, therfore Judeo-Christian God=bullshit.

The original thread topic was about a fundy trying to prove God. She failed.

No one can prove or disprove God, such is the nature of the Bible. You have the choice to believe or not.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-01-11 10:59am

Falcon wrote:
No one can prove or disprove God, such is the nature of the Bible. You have the choice to believe or not.

It's not up to me or any other atheist to disprove God- the theist must prove his existence. They offer up the Bible, we shoot that silly little tract down in flames. Easy.

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » 2003-01-11 11:01am

Vympel wrote:
Falcon wrote:
No one can prove or disprove God, such is the nature of the Bible. You have the choice to believe or not.
It's not up to me or any other atheist to disprove God- the theist must prove his existence. They offer up the Bible, we shoot that silly little tract down in flames. Easy.

It isn't up to anyone to prove that God exists, it is only up to us to try to convince others that they should have faith.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-01-11 11:03am

Falcon wrote:
It isn't up to anyone to prove that God exists, it is only up to us to try to convince others that they should have faith.

Sophistry.

Sir Sirius · Post by **Sir Sirius** » 2003-01-11 11:04am

It isn't up to anyone to prove that God exists, it is only up to us to try to convince others that they should have faith.

Why sould we have faith?
What would I gain by having faith in something that does not exist?

There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths. Almost inevitably some part of him is aware that they are myths and that he believes them only because they are comforting. But he dares not face this thought! Moreover, since he is aware, however dimly, that his opinions are not rational, he becomes furious when they are disputed.
-- Bertrand Russell

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » 2003-01-11 11:17am

Sir Sirius wrote:
It isn't up to anyone to prove that God exists, it is only up to us to try to convince others that they should have faith.
Why sould we have faith?
What would I gain by having faith in something that does not exist?

There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths. Almost inevitably some part of him is aware that they are myths and that he believes them only because they are comforting. But he dares not face this thought! Moreover, since he is aware, however dimly, that his opinions are not rational, he becomes furious when they are disputed.
-- Bertrand Russell

You should have faith because of the rich rewards and personal satisfaction to be gained by living a moral life.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-01-11 11:23am

Falcon wrote:
You should have faith because of the rich rewards and personal satisfaction to be gained by living a moral life.

You know, coherent responses would be great at this point.

Regardless, I don't think I'll be taking any moral lessons from the genocidal narcisstic war-god of a bunch of barbarians from several thousand years ago.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Fundy argument! Can someone help?

Fundy argument! Can someone help?

Re: Fundy argument! Can someone help?

Re: Fundy argument! Can someone help?

Re: Fundy argument! Can someone help?

Re: Fundy argument! Can someone help?