Jump to content

OneLastPost

Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

OneLastPost's Achievements

Hammerhead

Hammerhead (1/8)

  • First Post
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In
  • Five Years In

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. Wow! ive never heard it explained like this.the idea of intelligent design and an uncaused 1st cause make sense and prove pretty definitively that there is a God. this isnt the cliche you have to have faith response Thank you and I hope that you and others can derive some sort of truth from my humble opinion, even though I believe the implications of it are grand. however the idea of a perfectly designed universe begs the question why is there evil. why did God allow free will knowing that people would sin and create evil. Evil is an imperfection Let me try to answer this question to the best of my ability. The problem of evil makes one central presupposition: that the very essence and reason for existance revolves around soley humans in particular, thus bringing with it the moral implications of mortal judgement. This viewpoint is flawed because it has no basis in fact. Arbitrary amounts of goodness and badness and moralness and evilness by no means implicate the creator of a perfectly ordered existance if such arbitrary amounts of such things are a logical result. Seemingly, I am talking myself into a circle, but if we can agree that the degree of evilness is rather arbitrary and not set in stone, we can agree that among creatures of value judgements percieve the existance of these things. However, as being mere parts of existance, it is rather arrogant to make a value judgement on the whole of creation because how it particularly implicates us and us alone. I assert that our judgement of evil is meaningless because it relies upon the presupposition that humans are the measuring stick of goodness and perfectness. As long as "good things" are gauged by mortal standards of good and evil, then the supposed intelligent design of the universe and its purpose must apply to humans. This anthropomorphizes God into our image and is more an illusion of our belief of humanity's superiority than any substsantiation in fact. Existence is not good or evil, good and evil is a value judgement that humans alone assign and a perfectly ordered existance is not at all implicated by rather superficial and meaningless judgements. Sure, existance can be concievably better for humans. Heck, what if twinkies grew off trees? However, the best existance possible is not at all implicated by what we want existance to be for us, because existance does not revolve around us, we are merely part of it. If this is so, evil is not an issue. The problem of evil is only a problem if evil itself had true substance and truth. If it is a mere perception and not measurable, then it is more a problem of creatures of free will than that of the Divine.
  2. If this is indeed Sorianofan, I as a new member would like to say that your presence would be appreciated on the forum again. (I've read some of your old posts). 903119[/snapback] I do not think anyone would want to claim to be me, but my time here will be short because I am a banned member. I just want people to know that I am sincerely sorry about how I hurt others. I would undo it if I could.
  3. I skipped to the end, and found out very quickly that you judge people that you don't even know. The end. PS- Friend, sorry if you expected a more significant and competent response--but this 'God' talk follows me everywhere. I'm tired of God.... god.. sacrilege. I am unsure how many posts I can write before I am banned again, but let me tell you this: I am not sure what you mean by quickly judge people I do not know. The statement might not be false as it pertains to my character, but I am unaware how it applies to my post. Being that my mother is Jewish and I have Jewish friends, I am not sure how I negatively judged anyone. However, I would be lying if I said I did not believe repentance is important. Repenting is no believing Jesus died on the cross, it is a more complicat process of the changing of personal orientation. Repenting is useful to anyone and I am not here to reject the validity or usefulness of any religion. However, even an atheist can turn away from sin without following any religion. Apparently, your tiredness of God talk prevented you from seeing the great substance of my post. I believe it is one thing to truthfully not believe in God, but yet another to purposely close oneself off for other reasons; unless you are a buddhist where the none existance of God is a central belief.
  4. First, let me apologize for my arrogance and pride, which is due to many members of this board. I was absolutely comsumed with hatred, selfishness, and foolishness. We all have these problems, but it does not justify my obsession with them. I hope to God that you can forgive me, I sincerely hope so. It is possible to love one's enemy. Yes, this is indeed Sorianofan, and I notice this board's undying obsession with God and the belief of many that God has no basis in fact, that the veracity of Its existance is a matter of faith. It requires inspiration for people to repent and improve their lives, and I come to offer you the example of a hardened and devout agnostic who has indeed seen the light. To me, what I will say is totally true and logical. I am a mere mortal and prone to error, so do not take my words as true without contemplating them. However, I am totally convinced God's existance is absolutely necessar and real. Because it is 2:30 AM and I cannot sleep after a very important day in my life, I am going to present my argument from that of my past writing. The absolute necessity of a primary cause: The universe seems to need an origin; creation seems to be necessary. Why? I believe the mass historical record reveals outcomes have reasons for existance, thus an origin. Let us think of qn example. If Xavier is a nice guy and nice people return lost items and Susie loses her watch and Xavier not only finds the watch, he knows Susie, it is only logical to assume the watch being returned is a guarenteed outcome assuming the qualities of Xavier and the description of the situation are absolutely true. We know existence is absolutely true. The here and now is true. We know there was a past. However, for a result, the here and now, it appears only logical that there must be reason for it, just as there is reason that we exist, because we have parents. There is two ways to approach this. There is either a first cause or an infinte regress of causes, meaning that, because there is one cause for another cause infinitely back in time, there would be no reason for a first one. Every single cause would essentially have a cause of its own and no problem is posed. Furthermore, to essentially just throw in a first cause amongst these causes ontologically assumes there is a God in this place, because if the other causes adequately explain themselves, then God is not necessary and thus to make it one part of the mix would invokes the impossible ontological argument. However, I believe that an infinite regress of causes does not adequately explain existance, a logical result of creation. Let me put forward that is a negative infinity is impossible when speaking of a regress of causation. Think of a stack of books. There is an infinite amount of books, thus every single book is held up by another. However, what is the result we are speaking of? The result is that the books are held up. It is generally understood that when speaking of a pile of books, if there is an infinite amount, it is a positive infinity. The books keep climing skyward forever, but that makes me ask this: Where does the first book lay? Logically, if the resulting action is that the books are standing, there must be a cause for their standing and let me say they are on a table. You can have an infinite amount of books falling at once and logically there would have to be a cause for the fall. Being infinite does not mean you can explain the result. An infinite pile of books cannot stand unless there is a cause for its standing. This is much like existence. It is not merely enough to assume that as long as the present has a cause that an infinite causal series adequately explains the current being of things. The current being of things needs reason. A result needs cause and if there is an infinite amount of causes there must be a reason for that being so. To explain existence this way, you would need a negative infinity. In order to believe this is so requires an act of faith. The historical record leads us to believe that a result needs a logical cause, thus a series of causes needs a reason for being. A pile of books supporting itself makes us ask why they are supporting themself. Why are they in that place and how? The reason why inherently must be that something primarily supports them. Such an explanation is absolutely essential for the reason for existence. I do not believe the Principal of Sufficient Reason can be adequately explained by an infinite regress of causes, because it is contrary to the mass historical record and it appears to be not possible for something infinite to support itself, creation is necessary logically. The present logically cannot be explained by an infinite past for the past would lack any true support. Implications of a necessary first cause and the order of the universe: Concerning the teological argument (the universe shows evidence of intelligent design,) if the universe was not designed perfectly, we would live in udder chaos. I used to believe that chaos was a relative term, where one can see chaos the other can see stability. However, concerning the make up of matter, how it relates to energy, the laws of nature and how they work...if any piece of all of existence was not stable, making existence as a whole imperfect, would nothing exist as result? The order of the universe, being that it is governed by predictable laws and does not contradict itself is absolutely perfect. Nothing breaks the laws of nature, because everything works perfectly. Then, is the universe as perfect as can be by design? One can argue, "I can fathom a better universe," but this is not true. We can fathom universes that suit humans better, but we cannot possibly fathom a better design. That being said, the design is perfect, and therefore is evidence of intelligent design. To be designed, something must be made. However, for reasons I have already stated, I do think the universe was made somehow. I do not believe in an infinite causal series sustaining the universe. The universe can only exist with an initial, uncaused cause. So whatever created the universe created it perfectly, assuming both the cosmological and teological arguments are correct. So it all comes down to whether or not science can ever explain the creation of the universe. Is the uncaused first cause, the essential reason everything is, mere scientific law/formulae? For this to be so, science must be the uncaused first cause. This is what hit me. Science is not uncaused, it would have to result from an infinite causal series, and I believe an infinite causal series is impossible. Science cannot create itself, science is simply the truth of the inner workings of everything. A law of science is eternal, true forever. However, science (the laws of nature), cannot exist in their own right without logical errors. Merely being true is not a source of action or power, thus creation. Therefore, there must indeed be an uncaused first cause that is not science, that can create a perfection, thus this uncaused first cause is infinitely great at the power of creation. People will call this uncaused first cause God, and I would be stupid not to as well. So: 1. The universe shows intelligent design and 2. The universe was at one point created because an inifnite causal series is illogical, therefore: 3. There is an uncaused first cause that is the reason there is a perfectly designed existence. 4. This uncaused first cause is eternal, and the highest of all truths, because from it came existence which permits every other form of truth to exist, and 5. Science, the laws of nature, cannot exist in an infinite causal series, because such a series is illogical, and 6. Some uncaused cause caused science, therefore 7. There is a supreme uncaused first cause which created existence and the workings of it (the laws of nature). To me, the above proves the existence of God, because I as an individual have come to agree with both the cosmological and teological arguments. I cannot fathom why anyone would believe in an infinite causal series (it is illogical), or that the universe is not perfect (because if it was flawed, this would go against the mass historical record of uniforimity in the laws of nature). I am totally serious about what I just wrote. I am sure some people will call me arrogant, stupid, or anything else concerning a supposed reversal of my position. However, by being an agnostic, I never took a position; I took the position that you cannot take one. Being that two premises of my initial beliefs failed, the conclusion was faulty, so I have improved it. If there is a logical flaw in the above, bring it to my attention. I apologize to all who I have angered, but that was never my wish. My wish was truth, and the more we know of truth, the less we are the slave to lies. The necessary existance of God appears to me to be intellectually defensible. For reasons that were not totally related to such a relevation, I finally started to read a Bible carefully. Yes, much of the Bible is beyond a shadow of a doubt fairy tales, heck, there are 2 different creation stories. However, we all know the importance of ethics set forth by many sources such as religion. Christianity, unlike Judaism, stresses the idea of repentance and going beyond the literalism of law and instead following it in spirit. A life of sin is seemingly more fun and happy than that of righteousness, but one need not look no farther than the fact that one's desire to sin is never satisfied by more sin. Sin is a viscious cycle that is enslaving. I can attest to the fact that intent to follow one's conscience (and invoke the "holy spirit") is liberating and the most satisfying feeling I have had in 20 years. I am not asking you to pick up a bible, cross yourself, and put money in the collection plate. Your life will pass you by if you never reflect, humble yourself, and realize that you cannot forge your own salvation. Quite possibly the only person who read this far is shamrock and I rember his genuine desire for truth. I hope that some truth in what I have wrote has been helpful. Otherwise, I can only beg for forgiveness and wish you the best.
×
×
  • Create New...