Page 82 of 105 [ 1680 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85 ... 105  Next

AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

27 Mar 2015, 9:47 pm

Lintar wrote:
I need to go to work now, but I'll be back, you can count on it :mrgreen:

Can't wait! I'll be sure to have popcorn next time. :twisted:



Canadian1911
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 227
Location: Getting ready to attack Fort Niagara!

27 Mar 2015, 9:57 pm

I actually have popcorn



Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

27 Mar 2015, 10:25 pm

sophisticated wrote:
If I prove that an infinite chain of causes is impossible, will you openly acknowledge God ?
Let me help you. I've already done it in slightly abbreviated form (for all the use it was). It's a simple argument that doesn't require any fantastic speculations and is easily grasped by anyone with the use of reason.

Premise #1. A thing that does not exist cannot cause itself to exist. (Self evident. The only possible alternative is self-contradictory and thus absurd.)
Premise#2. An effect cannot be greater than its cause(s). (An extension of #1. For an effect to be greater than its cause requires the spontaneous addition of something that was not in the cause(s). i.e. the extra something that didn't exist suddenly came to exist without a cause).

Therefore, an infinite regression of causes (with each preceding being greater that its successor) will inevitably regress by an infinite number of steps to an infinite cause. An infinite succession of anything will take an infinite time so however far back you go it hasn't begun yet and however far forward from the (infinitely wayback) beginning you haven't got here yet.

In a nutshell, that's why an infinite regression of causes is impossible.

I will also contend that an infinite First Cause will not need an infinite succession of sub-causes to be the cause of anything that is not self-contradictory.



Iamaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Mar 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,196
Location: Irrelevant

27 Mar 2015, 10:40 pm

Oldavid wrote:
sophisticated wrote:
If I prove that an infinite chain of causes is impossible, will you openly acknowledge God ?
Let me help you. I've already done it in slightly abbreviated form (for all the use it was). It's a simple argument that doesn't require any fantastic speculations and is easily grasped by anyone with the use of reason.

Premise #1. A thing that does not exist cannot cause itself to exist. (Self evident. The only possible alternative is self-contradictory and thus absurd.)
Premise#2. An effect cannot be greater than its cause(s). (An extension of #1. For an effect to be greater than its cause requires the spontaneous addition of something that was not in the cause(s). i.e. the extra something that didn't exist suddenly came to exist without a cause).

Therefore, an infinite regression of causes (with each preceding being greater that its successor) will inevitably regress by an infinite number of steps to an infinite cause. An infinite succession of anything will take an infinite time so however far back you go it hasn't begun yet and however far forward from the (infinitely wayback) beginning you haven't got here yet.

In a nutshell, that's why an infinite regression of causes is impossible.

I will also contend that an infinite First Cause will not need an infinite succession of sub-causes to be the cause of anything that is not self-contradictory.


As far as ontological-ish arguments go, that's actually fairly good.


_________________
I'm an author: https://www.amazon.com/author/benfournier
Sub to my YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/Iamnotaparakeet
"In the kingdom of hope, there is no winter."


Iamaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Mar 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,196
Location: Irrelevant

27 Mar 2015, 10:41 pm

Canadian1911 wrote:
I actually have popcorn


Share the popcorn! You need to invent the transporter! :P


_________________
I'm an author: https://www.amazon.com/author/benfournier
Sub to my YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/Iamnotaparakeet
"In the kingdom of hope, there is no winter."


appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

27 Mar 2015, 10:53 pm

AngelRho wrote:
appletheclown wrote:
Still a thread representing the dichotomy of 'true atheism' vs 'agnosticism'.
I'm beginning to think the non-religious are making stuff up.


And you don't tell people about your religion when they are telling you why your wrong, you tell people who want to listen.
That way you won't waste your time trying to swim up a tree.

"Cast not pearls…"

Matthew 7:6
"Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces."

In other words, if they hate religion, there is no point telling them the good news.
Ahh, this is certainly has to be a wake up call of some sort...

Pray that I find someone in my life who wants to listen to what its like to be me.


_________________
comedic burp


envirozentinel
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 16 Sep 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,026
Location: Keshron, Super-Zakhyria

28 Mar 2015, 12:17 am

@Lintar: You and I think a lot alike! I could never figure out the idea why the ministers always intoned the spiel about blood sacrifices and now that I moved past all the nice little Sunday School stories of my childhood and inspected the "dark side" of the OT, began to realize it was not for me. Some of the tales are the stuff of nightmares worse than any horror story by Lovecraft!

However, just because people were so prone to violence, bigotry and cruelty at that time and used religious books as an excuse (and their mantle has been taken over first by the Christian Crusaders and today by ISIS) doesn't mean there isn't a Prime Cause.

Going for a jog soon but will check in later to see if any popcorn has materialized here! :mrgreen:


_________________
Why is a trailer behind a car but ahead of a movie?


my blog:
https://sentinel63.wordpress.com/


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,647

28 Mar 2015, 12:20 am

Hmm..
It is a very
interesting day..
in now..
but in still the spirit of
'stealing' evidence for the
higher power of GOD..
here is a 7542 word
PLUS multi-media
presentation of 'my' evolving
PROOF, FOR THOSE WHO HAVE EYES
AND EARS THAT SEE AND HEAR
A 'LITTLE' FURTHER..

than most if not all...;)

But it's just 'a day in the life for me'...

Dam.. i'm looking more like 'that statue' in

the front row all the time it seems like now..;)

But anyway.. sometimes life is just one big DOUBLE

ENTENDRE..;)

Yes.. at one point.. a rather cold-hearted dude.. named me as the 7000 word man..

from this website..

i guess he was/is a 'prophet' of sorts..;)

http://katiemiafrederick.com/2015/03/28/gods-higher-power-in-one-body-blood-and-words/


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Canadian1911
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 227
Location: Getting ready to attack Fort Niagara!

28 Mar 2015, 1:31 am

I have never yet, found a reasonable argument in favour of "god"....



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,647

28 Mar 2015, 1:51 am

Canadian1911 wrote:
I have never yet, found a reasonable argument in favour of "god"....


Quote:

"Never yet, found a reasonable argument in favor of 'god.''

More than likely that is because silly humans make the reasons and the rules.

God is not ruled by either humans or human reason.

One must 'get out' a 'little bit' to come to understand THAT

AND GOD TOO...

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR GOD BUT

'Stepping out of the silly illusions of human reason'.

That goes beyond

ALL HUMAN CONSTRUCTED WORDS, MATH, SCIENCE AND THE WHOLE GAME
OF HUMAN "CULTURE PRESCRIBED LIFE"

CULTURE IS THE 'RED AND BLUE PILL'.

GOD IS THE GREEN PILL FOR JUST DOING LIFE AS IS.

SO YEAH, YNOT; GOD IS A GREEN

PILL;

YES, THE GREEN PILL; LIVE IT FREE

OR NOT, FOR 'REAL FOOLS' WHO DO
NOT BELIEVE THEY EVEN HAVE THE
POTENTIAL FOR RELATIVE FREE WILL;

OR THE HUMAN EMOTING EMOTIONS
OF FAITH, HOPE, AND BELIEF THAT MAKES
STUFF HAPPEN, NEGATIVE OR POSITIVE DEPENDING
ON THE IMAGINATION AND CREATIVITY THAT MAY OR
NOT POWER UP THOSE REAL HUMAN EMOTIONS FOR ACTION!


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Booyakasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Oct 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,898

28 Mar 2015, 2:50 am

AngelRho wrote:
Canadian1911 wrote:
I don't even read that guy's responses lol first it's too long, second it doesn't make sense. I don't think he's sane, is he in an institution?

Did you seriously just post this on an autistic spectrum forum? Go ahead and report me to the mods, but I'm wondering if you're an NT and/or a troll. It's one thing to debate ideas and hold the views of others as ridiculous. It's entirely something else to attack someone outright with that level of insensitivity.


People, let's play nicely please.



Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

28 Mar 2015, 3:23 am

Canadian1911 wrote:
I have never yet, found a reasonable argument in favour of "god"....
Hmmm. Neither did many who saw lepers healed, the lame walking, the blind seeing........

I'm tired of this merry-go-round of nonsense.

Look here if you dare.

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/lib ... orrupt.htm

Last time I got a count there were 135 of these inexplicable preservations recorded... some of which were chopped up for souvenirs for various dignitaries.

And if you are exceptionally brave;

http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_app ... cles1.html

I'm not presenting this as "proof" of anything but the arrogance and ignorance of the perverse. In about the last 200 years no "miracle" has been accepted as such unless it has been acknowledged by secular authorities as "inexplicable" according to the best science available.

Compare that scrupulousness to the credulity of Materialists who blithely accept fairy tales of "Singularities", Black Holes, Worm Holes, Multiverses and so on... none of which can be justified or verified by observation or experiment.



starfox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Mar 2015
Posts: 1,012
Location: United states of Eurasia

28 Mar 2015, 4:18 am

I kinda believe; but I don't follow any religion because I think religions are a way if controlling people and it's just dogma.


_________________
We become what we think about; since everything in the beginning is just an idea.

Destruction and creation are 2 sides of the same coin.


trollcatman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,919

28 Mar 2015, 5:23 am

Iamaparakeet wrote:
Oldavid wrote:
sophisticated wrote:
If I prove that an infinite chain of causes is impossible, will you openly acknowledge God ?
Let me help you. I've already done it in slightly abbreviated form (for all the use it was). It's a simple argument that doesn't require any fantastic speculations and is easily grasped by anyone with the use of reason.

Premise #1. A thing that does not exist cannot cause itself to exist. (Self evident. The only possible alternative is self-contradictory and thus absurd.)
Premise#2. An effect cannot be greater than its cause(s). (An extension of #1. For an effect to be greater than its cause requires the spontaneous addition of something that was not in the cause(s). i.e. the extra something that didn't exist suddenly came to exist without a cause).

Therefore, an infinite regression of causes (with each preceding being greater that its successor) will inevitably regress by an infinite number of steps to an infinite cause. An infinite succession of anything will take an infinite time so however far back you go it hasn't begun yet and however far forward from the (infinitely wayback) beginning you haven't got here yet.

In a nutshell, that's why an infinite regression of causes is impossible.

I will also contend that an infinite First Cause will not need an infinite succession of sub-causes to be the cause of anything that is not self-contradictory.


As far as ontological-ish arguments go, that's actually fairly good.


Except that before the creation of time there is no causality at all, since you need time for that.



Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

28 Mar 2015, 6:15 am

trollcatman wrote:
Iamaparakeet wrote:
Oldavid wrote:
sophisticated wrote:
If I prove that an infinite chain of causes is impossible, will you openly acknowledge God ?
Let me help you. I've already done it in slightly abbreviated form (for all the use it was). It's a simple argument that doesn't require any fantastic speculations and is easily grasped by anyone with the use of reason.

Premise #1. A thing that does not exist cannot cause itself to exist. (Self evident. The only possible alternative is self-contradictory and thus absurd.)
Premise#2. An effect cannot be greater than its cause(s). (An extension of #1. For an effect to be greater than its cause requires the spontaneous addition of something that was not in the cause(s). i.e. the extra something that didn't exist suddenly came to exist without a cause).

Therefore, an infinite regression of causes (with each preceding being greater that its successor) will inevitably regress by an infinite number of steps to an infinite cause. An infinite succession of anything will take an infinite time so however far back you go it hasn't begun yet and however far forward from the (infinitely wayback) beginning you haven't got here yet.

In a nutshell, that's why an infinite regression of causes is impossible.

I will also contend that an infinite First Cause will not need an infinite succession of sub-causes to be the cause of anything that is not self-contradictory.


As far as ontological-ish arguments go, that's actually fairly good.


Except that before the creation of time there is no causality at all, since you need time for that.
Oh? How do you know that? Who says that time was created and why? What is time anyway?

Obviously I expect an empirical answer complete with all the relevant data.



trollcatman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,919

28 Mar 2015, 6:35 am

Oldavid wrote:
trollcatman wrote:
Iamaparakeet wrote:
Oldavid wrote:
sophisticated wrote:
If I prove that an infinite chain of causes is impossible, will you openly acknowledge God ?
Let me help you. I've already done it in slightly abbreviated form (for all the use it was). It's a simple argument that doesn't require any fantastic speculations and is easily grasped by anyone with the use of reason.

Premise #1. A thing that does not exist cannot cause itself to exist. (Self evident. The only possible alternative is self-contradictory and thus absurd.)
Premise#2. An effect cannot be greater than its cause(s). (An extension of #1. For an effect to be greater than its cause requires the spontaneous addition of something that was not in the cause(s). i.e. the extra something that didn't exist suddenly came to exist without a cause).

Therefore, an infinite regression of causes (with each preceding being greater that its successor) will inevitably regress by an infinite number of steps to an infinite cause. An infinite succession of anything will take an infinite time so however far back you go it hasn't begun yet and however far forward from the (infinitely wayback) beginning you haven't got here yet.

In a nutshell, that's why an infinite regression of causes is impossible.

I will also contend that an infinite First Cause will not need an infinite succession of sub-causes to be the cause of anything that is not self-contradictory.


As far as ontological-ish arguments go, that's actually fairly good.


Except that before the creation of time there is no causality at all, since you need time for that.
Oh? How do you know that? Who says that time was created and why? What is time anyway?

Obviously I expect an empirical answer complete with all the relevant data.


Didn't the Big Bang create spacetime? Without that there wouldn't be much causality. And we both know that even if I came up with a scientific article it is unlikely that either of us could interpret the data and the mathematics, unless you happen to be a theoretical physicist.