Proof of God's existence

[TravisT]

Ever heard somebody say, “You can’t prove God?” Turns out, that’s not true. You can. Here’s how.
Head over to geekychristin.com to read the blog post. http://geekychristian.com/proof-for-god/

Do you agree or disagree with this argument. I for one believe it absolutely.

 

[Dan57]

I don't think it proves that God exist, its just circular reasoning geared towards concluding that a God must exist. The summation is essentially; Since nothing can come from nothing, everything had to have a cause, and that uncaused cause had to be God? To non-believers, that's just a manufactured answer to an unanswerable question.

 

[TravisT]

I don't think it proves that God exist, its just circular reasoning geared towards concluding that a God must exist. The summation is essentially; Since nothing can come from nothing, everything had to have a cause, and that uncaused cause had to be God? To non-believers, that's just a manufactured answer to an unanswerable question.

Dan,
Are you saying that it begs the question in favor of God's existence? if so then that argument is philosophically naive. If such an objection implies intuitively that if something exists then God must exist, and some person recognizes the soundness of the proof, this would be a quick short-cut through the argument. Such an intuition would make the point of the argument without going through the sequence of each premise.

But if you mean that the argument cannot be made unless the natural theologian was already convinced in her mind that there is a God before she even sits down to lay out the premises of the argument, then we must admit that this is psychologically true, but it is nevertheless a trivial objection. Nobody formulates an argument unless they intend to demonstrate the likelihood of a conclusion. But this should not be considered a case of circular reasoning because the major premise does not state that God exists.

taken form Retrieving Apologetic - Glenn B. Siniscalchi

 

[TravisT]

If you take the time to go through each step and see that each step is undeniable and the philosophically Actuality and potentiality exhaust all options of being and there is no third category of being then to object would be irrational. But of course Irrationality run strong through our postmodern world.

 

[River Jordan]

I agree with Dan; that's not going to be at all persuasive to those who don't believe in God. The same logic path can be used to "prove" that God deliberately and intentionally created the ebola virus, smallpox, the malaria parasite, every birth defect, and every other terrible nasty thing that has caused immeasurable death and suffering of countless people. After all, those things are "contingent beings" as well, right? So if contingent beings can only come from a necessary being, and that necessary being is God, then God is a basically a bio-terrorist.

These sorts of things always sound nice when you put them in context of puppies, daisies, and little babies. But throw in infectious bacteria, viruses, and pests and suddenly it doesn't sound so good, does it? <_<

 

[TravisT]

I agree with Dan; that's not going to be at all persuasive to those who don't believe in God. The same logic path can be used to "prove" that God deliberately and intentionally created the ebola virus, smallpox, the malaria parasite, every birth defect, and every other terrible nasty thing that has caused immeasurable death and suffering of countless people. After all, those things are "contingent beings" as well, right? So if contingent beings can only come from a necessary being, and that necessary being is God, then God is a basically a bio-terrorist.

These sorts of things always sound nice when you put them in context of puppies, daisies, and little babies. But throw in infectious bacteria, viruses, and pests and suddenly it doesn't sound so good, does it? <_<

Do you know of another way a Contingent being can come into existence?

 

[River Jordan]

Well yeah....given the definition of "contingent being", we see them come into existence every second of every day. I can go to a farm and watch all sorts of "contingent beings" come into existence merely by being born, all fully explainable by natural causes. Go to any hospital's birthing center and you'll see the same thing.

 

[TravisT]

Well yeah....given the definition of "contingent being", we see them come into existence every second of every day. I can go to a farm and watch all sorts of "contingent beings" come into existence merely by being born, all fully explainable by natural causes. Go to any hospital's birthing center and you'll see the same thing.

This proves you do not understand the argument nor did you take the time to really read it.

 

[TravisT]

A contingent being cannot be the efficient cause of another contingent being. Only a necessary being can be the cause of a contingent being.

So you are saying that nothing can produce something. You cannot have an infinite regress of Contingent beings.

 

[River Jordan]

A contingent being cannot be the efficient cause of another contingent being.

Why not? That's a really odd assertion given that we see it happen every second of every day.

Only a necessary being can be the cause of a contingent being.

By that logic, God deliberately creates viruses, infectious bacteria, pests, birth defects, and every other terrible "contingent being" that's ever existed. Is that really the conclusion you want, and the sort of God you believe in?

So you are saying that nothing can produce something. You cannot have an infinite regress of Contingent beings.

Quantum mechanics shows that things pop into and out of existence, out of nothing.

 

[TravisT]

RJ stated :By that logic, God deliberately creates viruses, infectious bacteria, pests, birth defects, and every other terrible "contingent being" that's ever existed. Is that really the conclusion you want, and the sort of God you believe in?

This logic is based on undeniable first principles of being. I do not have an answer yet to your objection here but I also know that this also proves that God is Infinity Good. I just know that if we do away with these first principles then we do away with Logic and become irrational in our thinking.


RJ Stated: Quantum mechanics shows that things pop into and out of existence, out of nothing.

Quantum Mechanics shows no such thing. Quantum mechanics shows things that we cannot currently see to explain the cause for but saying that Quantum Mechanics shows things that pop into existence from nothing is illogical. From nothing nothing comes.

 

[River Jordan]

This logic is based on undeniable first principles of being. I do not have an answer yet to your objection here but I also know that this also proves that God is Infinity Good. I just know that if we do away with these first principles then we do away with Logic and become irrational in our thinking.

Sorry, but I don't buy conceding that God deliberately creates pathogens and birth defects and then simply saying "it shows God is Infinity Good". All you're doing is covering up an obvious and serious problem with an empty platitude. Remember, this is supposed to be a convincing "proof of God". If that "proof" leads to God deliberately creating the zika virus and giving newborn babies microcephaly, then I'd suggest dropping it because it's probably going to lead more people away from God than anything else.

Quantum Mechanics shows no such thing.

Yes it does. It's even mathematically supported (in the context of the origin of the universe).

saying that Quantum Mechanics shows things that pop into existence from nothing is illogical. From nothing nothing comes.

That may be what you want to be true, but you're just plain wrong.

 

[TravisT]

If something can come from nothing do we even need God? c Could another God pop into existence that will be stronger and better then the God of Christianity? If nothing can create something from nothing then Nothing is a God.

 

[TravisT]

So you would rather say that something can pop into existence from nothing like pathogens and birth defects? If that is possible then Our God is not powerful enough to prevent this because Something could come into existence without his knowledge or Power?

 

[TravisT]

Lets just take the statement "Every effect must have a cause"

So if the world can come from nothing then The world would not be an effect because it does not have a cause. But the bible clearly says that God Created the world so God is the cause of the world so the world must be an effect. Your scientific theories are not in line with Biblical truth and I for one am going to always side with Biblical truth.

 

[River Jordan]

If something can come from nothing do we even need God?

I don't know about you, but I certainly do. You seem to be arguing that God's only purpose is to supernaturally create universes. Why?

Could another God pop into existence that will be stronger and better then the God of Christianity?

Why do you think God is natural entity, like a photon?

If nothing can create something from nothing then Nothing is a God.

Only if you think the sole role of God is to supernaturally create universes and nothing else. But that seems really odd to hear come from a Christian.

So you would rather say that something can pop into existence from nothing like pathogens and birth defects?

They come from natural processes we see happen every second of every day. It's not a mystery. I mean....where do you think they come from?

If that is possible then Our God is not powerful enough to prevent this because Something could come into existence without his knowledge or Power?

I don't know where you got that from. I mean, we know such terrible things exist, so according to what you're saying it's either God deliberately creating them or being too impotent to do anything about it.

Lets just take the statement "Every effect must have a cause"

Again, quantum mechanics does away with that.

So if the world can come from nothing then The world would not be an effect because it does not have a cause. But the bible clearly says that God Created the world so God is the cause of the world so the world must be an effect. Your scientific theories are not in line with Biblical truth and I for one am going to always side with Biblical truth.

Yeah, I figured this is where the conversation would end up. "You have to choose between God or science, and I choose God", and once again conservative Christianity finds itself denying reality. FYI, not everyone thinks in such black/white terms.

 

[TravisT]

Yes biblical truth is black and white. I do Choose God and I do not think True Science contradicts the biblical God. You are taken theories. You do realize they are just theories right? As absolute truth. Quantum Mechanics does not do away with the statement that "Every effect must have a Cause" That is a Analytical statement. It is true by definition. If you find an effect it must have a cause. You are saying the world is not an effect and you try to show that based on your theories and want to throw out Biblical teaching along with it. If you are a Christian you cannot pick and choose what you believe based on current theories of man. Gen 1:1 in the beginning God Created...... Therefore everything that exists is an effect. God is the only being that is not an effect therefore he is the uncaused cause of everything.

 

[TravisT]

conservative Christianity is not denying reality just your theory of reality.

 

[River Jordan]

Yes biblical truth is black and white.

I understand that's what you believe. Other Christians believe differently.

I do not think True Science contradicts the biblical God.

Sure, as long as you get to decide what "True Science" is, correct? And if I'm to guess, I'd say you define "True Science" as "that which agrees with my beliefs", which makes the whole thing entirely circular.

You are taken theories. You do realize they are just theories right? As absolute truth.

FYI, "theory" in science doesn't mean "hunch" like in lay terms. In science "theory" means an explanation that has been substantiated through repeated experimentation or testing.

Quantum Mechanics does not do away with the statement that "Every effect must have a Cause"

Yes it does. You just saying "No it doesn't" doesn't change reality.

You are saying the world is not an effect and you try to show that based on your theories and want to throw out Biblical teaching along with it.

I've not said one bit of that. So either you've not been paying attention or you're deliberately attributing things to me that I didn't say.

If you are a Christian you cannot pick and choose what you believe based on current theories of man.

No one is picking and choosing, except you when it comes to science and reality.

Gen 1:1 in the beginning God Created...... Therefore everything that exists is an effect. God is the only being that is not an effect therefore he is the uncaused cause of everything.

You know, I asked you several questions and raised some points in my last post to you, but you ignored every single one and just restated your assertions and beliefs.

That's not a conversation; it's just you preaching at me and not listening to or caring what I have to say in response. If that's how you plan on continuing, I'll just thank you for your time.

 

[TravisT]

This is how all conversations go with you in every debate I have read of yours. You are being illogical by saying there can be an effect without a cause. That is like saying there can be a triangle with 4 sides. An effect by definition has a cause. There is no way around this. You are saying that something can come from nothing. Nothing is noting and from nothing nothing comes. By agreeing with Biblical truth that God created the world (effect) and everything in it (effects) is not circular reasoning it is faith. I believe the bible is inspired from God and God does not contradict himself. This is called Faith. So to answer your question yes I am preaching to you and not interested in having a debate as if you can prove your point I believe this is false and a very unchristian view that you are promoting and I do not want to give you a forum for promoting it.