Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

God exists

Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 12:21:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
God exists because:

(1) the universe had a beginning that was necessarily spaceless, timeless, and immaterial.

(2) objective morality exists as an innate moral code in all human beings and only logically exists by a divine, purposeful authority.

(3) the origin of intelligent information has shown relentlessly to only originate from pre-existing intelligence. Would we assume that specified-complex information, such as "hello" written in the sand was due to erosion? Of course not. So why would we assume the specified-complex information that is far superior to that in nature is due to random chance? It's absurd.

(4) the Interdependency of the universe shows the impossible odds of the universe arising by chance. The evidence is staggering. You'd be more likely to choose the same marked grain of sand three times in a row in the Sahara desert blindfolded than to allow even the necessary conditions for life.

(5) the purpose of life is best described by God's will rather than naturalistic reasons to populate. If "God is love" then our purpose is to do God's will, to love one another. If our purpose is purely naturalistic then it is our purpose to sustain our genetic information. Our moral code is determined by acts of love. Is rape, incest, sacrifice to take the place of another's life moral or immoral actions? There is no "moral" or "immoral" benchmark to judge our behavior unless an absolute moral authority exists, but evidently it does.
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 12:52:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 12:21:22 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
God exists because:

(1) the universe had a beginning that was necessarily spaceless, timeless, and immaterial.


Why must the universe have had a beginning?

(2) objective morality exists as an innate moral code in all human beings and only logically exists by a divine, purposeful authority.


Define objective morality.

(3) the origin of intelligent information has shown relentlessly to only originate from pre-existing intelligence. Would we assume that specified-complex information, such as "hello" written in the sand was due to erosion? Of course not. So why would we assume the specified-complex information that is far superior to that in nature is due to random chance? It's absurd.


False equivalency, and I'm sure that this has been explained to you ad nauseam.

The best explanation for "hello" in the sand is that a human put it there. The best explanation for the order of life (in the eyes of science) is the process of evolution.

Further, it is not the case that intelligent information is the result of prior intelligence (though I do wonder how you define "intelligent information"). The building blocks of the entire universe are mindless particles, and yet we see the order and structure and consistency of chemistry. No intelligence is responsible for the order of chemistry.

(4) the Interdependency of the universe shows the impossible odds of the universe arising by chance. The evidence is staggering. You'd be more likely to choose the same marked grain of sand three times in a row in the Sahara desert blindfolded than to allow even the necessary conditions for life.


http://en.wikipedia.org...

(5) the purpose of life is best described by God's will rather than naturalistic reasons to populate. If "God is love" then our purpose is to do God's will, to love one another. If our purpose is purely naturalistic then it is our purpose to sustain our genetic information. Our moral code is determined by acts of love. Is rape, incest, sacrifice to take the place of another's life moral or immoral actions? There is no "moral" or "immoral" benchmark to judge our behavior unless an absolute moral authority exists, but evidently it does.

Your statement that the purpose of life is best described by God's will implies that we already know what the purpose of life is, and that it even exists. Prove the purpose of life first.

You appear to be drifting back to the moral argument, as well. Define morality. What does it mean that we "should" do something? It has no basis in reality, regardless of whether or not God exists.
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 1:08:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 12:52:08 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/4/2014 12:21:22 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
God exists because:

(1) the universe had a beginning that was necessarily spaceless, timeless, and immaterial.


Why must the universe have had a beginning?

Because all evidence points to a beginning. The universe is expanding and has been calculated back to a "zero point" in which everything began. What is your evidence that the universe *didn't* have a beginning?

(2) objective morality exists as an innate moral code in all human beings and only logically exists by a divine, purposeful authority.


Define objective morality.

A moral that is true regardless of interpretation.

(3) the origin of intelligent information has shown relentlessly to only originate from pre-existing intelligence. Would we assume that specified-complex information, such as "hello" written in the sand was due to erosion? Of course not. So why would we assume the specified-complex information that is far superior to that in nature is due to random chance? It's absurd.


False equivalency, and I'm sure that this has been explained to you ad nauseam.

Is this supposed to be a rebuttal? An assumed prior explanation?

The best explanation for "hello" in the sand is that a human put it there. The best explanation for the order of life (in the eyes of science) is the process of evolution.

Further, it is not the case that intelligent information is the result of prior intelligence (though I do wonder how you define "intelligent information"). The building blocks of the entire universe are mindless particles, and yet we see the order and structure and consistency of chemistry. No intelligence is responsible for the order of chemistry.

Intelligence denied as "specified-complex" information. Or in other words, information that is complex and specified is only known to be caused by intelligent agents. Give an example of something that is intelligent that was caused by something non-intelligent and back it up with objective evidence.

(4) the Interdependency of the universe shows the impossible odds of the universe arising by chance. The evidence is staggering. You'd be more likely to choose the same marked grain of sand three times in a row in the Sahara desert blindfolded than to allow even the necessary conditions for life.


http://en.wikipedia.org...

Non-rebuttal.

(5) the purpose of life is best described by God's will rather than naturalistic reasons to populate. If "God is love" then our purpose is to do God's will, to love one another. If our purpose is purely naturalistic then it is our purpose to sustain our genetic information. Our moral code is determined by acts of love. Is rape, incest, sacrifice to take the place of another's life moral or immoral actions? There is no "moral" or "immoral" benchmark to judge our behavior unless an absolute moral authority exists, but evidently it does.

Your statement that the purpose of life is best described by God's will implies that we already know what the purpose of life is, and that it even exists. Prove the purpose of life first.

Whatever is good gives our life meaning. Pure love is an absolute good. Absolute good maximizes well-being of ourselves and others. Therefore, the meaning of life is pure love. Can you explain logically why the reason of life is to procreate while taking into account rape and incest?

You appear to be drifting back to the moral argument, as well. Define morality. What does it mean that we "should" do something? It has no basis in reality, regardless of whether or not God exists.

Morality is our innate sense of what is right and wrong. Our conscience determines what we "should" do and derives from our innate sense of morality.
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 3:51:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 1:08:44 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 8/4/2014 12:52:08 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/4/2014 12:21:22 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
God exists because:

(1) the universe had a beginning that was necessarily spaceless, timeless, and immaterial.


Why must the universe have had a beginning?

Because all evidence points to a beginning. The universe is expanding and has been calculated back to a "zero point" in which everything began. What is your evidence that the universe *didn't* have a beginning?

Please research something before you make claims about "all evidence".

Every model of the big bang has a singularity-like ultra-compacted ball of energy. The Big Bang is not a beginning.

And I know you're being willfully ignorant, because I know you've had this explained to you multiple times on this forum.


(2) objective morality exists as an innate moral code in all human beings and only logically exists by a divine, purposeful authority.


Define objective morality.

A moral that is true regardless of interpretation.

What is a "moral", and what does it mean for it to be true?


(3) the origin of intelligent information has shown relentlessly to only originate from pre-existing intelligence. Would we assume that specified-complex information, such as "hello" written in the sand was due to erosion? Of course not. So why would we assume the specified-complex information that is far superior to that in nature is due to random chance? It's absurd.


False equivalency, and I'm sure that this has been explained to you ad nauseam.

Is this supposed to be a rebuttal? An assumed prior explanation?

I did explain it, if you read on.


The best explanation for "hello" in the sand is that a human put it there. The best explanation for the order of life (in the eyes of science) is the process of evolution.

Further, it is not the case that intelligent information is the result of prior intelligence (though I do wonder how you define "intelligent information"). The building blocks of the entire universe are mindless particles, and yet we see the order and structure and consistency of chemistry. No intelligence is responsible for the order of chemistry.

Intelligence denied as "specified-complex" information. Or in other words, information that is complex and specified is only known to be caused by intelligent agents. Give an example of something that is intelligent that was caused by something non-intelligent and back it up with objective evidence.

Chemistry. Why did you ignore that part of my post?


(4) the Interdependency of the universe shows the impossible odds of the universe arising by chance. The evidence is staggering. You'd be more likely to choose the same marked grain of sand three times in a row in the Sahara desert blindfolded than to allow even the necessary conditions for life.


http://en.wikipedia.org...

Non-rebuttal.

It is if you understand what the Anthropic principle is.

Or perhaps you think that the Anthropic principle does not refute your argument, in which case I would like you to explain why you deny the Anthropic Principle.


(5) the purpose of life is best described by God's will rather than naturalistic reasons to populate. If "God is love" then our purpose is to do God's will, to love one another. If our purpose is purely naturalistic then it is our purpose to sustain our genetic information. Our moral code is determined by acts of love. Is rape, incest, sacrifice to take the place of another's life moral or immoral actions? There is no "moral" or "immoral" benchmark to judge our behavior unless an absolute moral authority exists, but evidently it does.

Your statement that the purpose of life is best described by God's will implies that we already know what the purpose of life is, and that it even exists. Prove the purpose of life first.

Whatever is good gives our life meaning. Pure love is an absolute good. Absolute good maximizes well-being of ourselves and others. Therefore, the meaning of life is pure love. Can you explain logically why the reason of life is to procreate while taking into account rape and incest?

Prove your statements, all of them were bare assertions.

As for the "meaning of life", biology makes no claim on the "reason of life", as you say.

Further, although this isn't really essential, I feel it important to mention, that organisms are not designed for maximal reproduction. They are designed for optimal reproduction. Among other things.


You appear to be drifting back to the moral argument, as well. Define morality. What does it mean that we "should" do something? It has no basis in reality, regardless of whether or not God exists.

Morality is our innate sense of what is right and wrong. Our conscience determines what we "should" do and derives from our innate sense of morality.

If that is how you define it, then your God is certainly not necessary for morality. Morality, if it is merely a conscience, is satisfactorily explained by evolution. See altruism, for example. Pick up any high school biology textbook. We don't need to posit a supernatural entity for that.
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 4:18:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 3:51:15 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/4/2014 1:08:44 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 8/4/2014 12:52:08 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/4/2014 12:21:22 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
God exists because:

(1) the universe had a beginning that was necessarily spaceless, timeless, and immaterial.


Why must the universe have had a beginning?

Because all evidence points to a beginning. The universe is expanding and has been calculated back to a "zero point" in which everything began. What is your evidence that the universe *didn't* have a beginning?

Please research something before you make claims about "all evidence".

Every model of the big bang has a singularity-like ultra-compacted ball of energy. The Big Bang is not a beginning.

And I know you're being willfully ignorant, because I know you've had this explained to you multiple times on this forum.

"The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model for the early development of the universe.[1] The key idea is that the universe is expanding. Consequently, the universe was denser and hotter in the past. Moreover, the Big Bang model suggests that at some moment all matter in the universe was contained in a single point, which is considered the beginning of the universe."
http://en.m.wikipedia.org...

Now, do me a favor and direct me to a source that doesn't state that the Big Bang was the beginning of the universe.


(2) objective morality exists as an innate moral code in all human beings and only logically exists by a divine, purposeful authority.


Define objective morality.

A moral that is true regardless of interpretation.

What is a "moral", and what does it mean for it to be true?

An innate sense of what is good and evil. If an objective moral is true, it means that our innate sense of good and evil is true indefinitely given a certain circumstance.


(3) the origin of intelligent information has shown relentlessly to only originate from pre-existing intelligence. Would we assume that specified-complex information, such as "hello" written in the sand was due to erosion? Of course not. So why would we assume the specified-complex information that is far superior to that in nature is due to random chance? It's absurd.


False equivalency, and I'm sure that this has been explained to you ad nauseam.

Is this supposed to be a rebuttal? An assumed prior explanation?

I did explain it, if you read on.


The best explanation for "hello" in the sand is that a human put it there. The best explanation for the order of life (in the eyes of science) is the process of evolution.

Further, it is not the case that intelligent information is the result of prior intelligence (though I do wonder how you define "intelligent information"). The building blocks of the entire universe are mindless particles, and yet we see the order and structure and consistency of chemistry. No intelligence is responsible for the order of chemistry.

Name *one* example of something intelligent that arose from non-intelligence. Theory doesn't count as evidence. It doesn't look like you understand the argument of specified-complexity either.

Intelligence denied as "specified-complex" information. Or in other words, information that is complex and specified is only known to be caused by intelligent agents. Give an example of something that is intelligent that was caused by something non-intelligent and back it up with objective evidence.

Chemistry. Why did you ignore that part of my post?

Chemistry? So you're saying that this natural process is intelligent?


(4) the Interdependency of the universe shows the impossible odds of the universe arising by chance. The evidence is staggering. You'd be more likely to choose the same marked grain of sand three times in a row in the Sahara desert blindfolded than to allow even the necessary conditions for life.


http://en.wikipedia.org...

Non-rebuttal.

It is if you understand what the Anthropic principle is.

Or perhaps you think that the Anthropic principle does not refute your argument, in which case I would like you to explain why you deny the Anthropic Principle.

The anthropic principle basically states that since we exist, it was bound to happen. The odds can be 99^1000000000 power but if existence is actualized it was just bound to happen. It's a silly argument.



(5) the purpose of life is best described by God's will rather than naturalistic reasons to populate. If "God is love" then our purpose is to do God's will, to love one another. If our purpose is purely naturalistic then it is our purpose to sustain our genetic information. Our moral code is determined by acts of love. Is rape, incest, sacrifice to take the place of another's life moral or immoral actions? There is no "moral" or "immoral" benchmark to judge our behavior unless an absolute moral authority exists, but evidently it does.

Your statement that the purpose of life is best described by God's will implies that we already know what the purpose of life is, and that it even exists. Prove the purpose of life first.

Whatever is good gives our life meaning. Pure love is an absolute good. Absolute good maximizes well-being of ourselves and others. Therefore, the meaning of life is pure love. Can you explain logically why the reason of life is to procreate while taking into account rape and incest?

Prove your statements, all of them were bare assertions.

I made the claim, now rebut the argument I made.

As for the "meaning of life", biology makes no claim on the "reason of life", as you say.

Further, although this isn't really essential, I feel it important to mention, that organisms are not designed for maximal reproduction. They are designed for optimal reproduction. Among other things.

"designed for optimal reproduction"? Wow well that's a pretty intelligent mindless process going on to calculate optimal odds of reproduction.


You appear to be drifting back to the moral argument, as well. Define morality. What does it mean that we "should" do something? It has no basis in reality, regardless of whether or not God exists.

Morality is our innate sense of what is right and wrong. Our conscience determines what we "should" do and derives from our innate sense of morality.

If that is how you define it, then your God is certainly not necessary for morality. Morality, if it is merely a conscience, is satisfactorily explained by evolution. See altruism, for example. Pick up any high school biology textbook. We don't need to posit a supernatural entity for that.

How in any way, shape, or form does evolution satisfactorily explain altruism?
NathanDuclos
Posts: 51
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 5:13:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Sorry to intrude. . . BUT. . .

If everything needs a beginning, so does god.
If god have has a beginning hes not god.
If the universe is self creating, you don't need a god.

however, even if I grant you that something created god, you still have to prove God did it. Other wise I can say universal creating gay pixies did it and both of our answer are equally (in)valid.

Also asking what happened before the big bang is possibly like asking whats north of the north pole. It may not be something that equates to time. Try looking up plank time.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 8:45:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 12:21:22 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
God exists because:

(1) the universe had a beginning that was necessarily spaceless, timeless, and immaterial.

(2) objective morality exists as an innate moral code in all human beings and only logically exists by a divine, purposeful authority.

(3) the origin of intelligent information has shown relentlessly to only originate from pre-existing intelligence. Would we assume that specified-complex information, such as "hello" written in the sand was due to erosion? Of course not. So why would we assume the specified-complex information that is far superior to that in nature is due to random chance? It's absurd.

(4) the Interdependency of the universe shows the impossible odds of the universe arising by chance. The evidence is staggering. You'd be more likely to choose the same marked grain of sand three times in a row in the Sahara desert blindfolded than to allow even the necessary conditions for life.

(5) the purpose of life is best described by God's will rather than naturalistic reasons to populate. If "God is love" then our purpose is to do God's will, to love one another. If our purpose is purely naturalistic then it is our purpose to sustain our genetic information. Our moral code is determined by acts of love. Is rape, incest, sacrifice to take the place of another's life moral or immoral actions? There is no "moral" or "immoral" benchmark to judge our behavior unless an absolute moral authority exists, but evidently it does.

The universe doesn't exist. It's only an illusion that is processed from invisible vibrations in the mind of God. Vibrations do NOT take up space and doesn't contain matter. There's no time in vibrations so even time is an illusion as we perceive life pictures being processes for us to experience.