The Case for God

UnDisfellowshipped

The Case for God:

The "Big Bang" Argument for God:

1:) Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

2:) The Universe began to exist (at the Big Bang).

3:) Therefore, the Universe has a Cause that is timeless, spaceless, and non-physical (because time, space, and matter came into existence at the Big Bang).

(Nothing cannot create or cause something to exist)

____________________________________________________

The Moral Argument:

1:) Every human has a built-in "moral code" (the conscience).

2:) A built-in "moral code" points to the existence of a Moral Law-Giver, Someone (or something) that placed within each of us, a moral compass.

____________________________________________________

The Argument from Reason:

1:) Every human uses rational inference (reaching conclusions based on the premises of an argument).

2:) If only the physical Universe exists, there would have to be a physical explanation for rational inference.

3:) There are no physical explanations for rational inference.

4:) Therefore, there must be a non-physical Cause for the existence of rational inference within the human mind.

____________________________________________________

The Argument from Design:

1:) The Universe and the things in it show an incredible level of design and purpose.

2:) The Universe appears to be extremely fine-tuned. If things in the Universe were slightly different, life wouldn't exist, and humans wouldn't exist.

3:) Therefore, if the Universe is designed and fine-tuned, there must be an Intelligent Designer.

____________________________________________________

The Argument from Need:

1:) Everything physical that the human craves actually exists (for example, humans get hungry, so we seek for food, and food actually exists; humans get thirsty, so we seek for water, and water actually exists, etc.)

2:) Humans crave a Supernatural Supreme Being.

3:) Therefore, if every physical thing that humans crave actually exists, then this would point to towards the actual existence of the Supernatural Being that is craved by humans as well.

____________________________________________________

The Argument FOR God from evil:

1:) Humans recognize that there is good and evil in the world -- we know the difference.

2:) If the physical Universe is all that exists, there is no real good or evil. Things just happen.

3:) However, the fact that we can measure whether something is evil, points to the fact that there is a Perfect Standard of Goodness that we use to compare everything to.
____________________________________________________

There are more arguments, but this is the main "Case for God."

jwfacts

Interesting arguments, but each is flawed so not really a proof for God.

Big Bang - Everything that begins to exist has a cause

This is not strictly correct, everything did not begin at the big bang, the theory is that there was already a point mass that exploded at the big bang. If you remove the word "begins" it is still falls apart in this theory that states that God exists but without a cause.

The Moral Argument: 1:) Every human has a built-in "moral code" (the conscience).

Humans may have a moral code, but it varies greatly between humans, so it cannot be said to have been implanted by God. Furtermore, evolution says the moral code evolved as a necessary part of survival.

The Argument from Design: 1:) The Universe and the things in it show an incredible level of design and purpose.

This falls over because the designer must have an even greater level of design and purpose. Therefore the argument for God in this case just compounds the issue.

The Argument from Need: 1:) Everything physical that the human craves actually exists

People crave things that are not physical, such as love. Imaginative people crave things that dont exist, such as imaginary friends, it does not make them real.

The Argument FOR God from evil: 1:) Humans recognize that there is good and evil in the world -- we know the difference.

This is the most illogical of all the arguments. The existence of evil is the number one argument against a loving God.

In any culture, there are always a number of humans that do not recognise evil as commonly defined and cause all sorts of shocking acts, such as people on death row. Also what is considered evil varies between people and cultures. Some cultures feel canabalism is acceptable, others define this as evil. Many people feel abortion is acceptable, others define this as evil. Certain cultures feel marrying a 12 year old is acceptable, others define this as evil. We don't all know the difference.

Witness 007

No real proof! Darwin had a theory over a hundred years ago which scientists have been finding evidence for ever since! TONNES OF EVIDENCE including the human genetic code.

nicolaou

Just taking your first argument (the Kalam);

1:) Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

It's counter intuitive I know, but that statement seems no longer to be valid. Quantum theory has shown that cause and effect appears to break down at the quantum level. In fact this may very well explain why the Universe had a beginning!

Nic'

BurnTheShips

Quantum theory has shown that cause and effect appears to break down at the quantum level.

Actually, I believe that it does not. I presume you are speaking about virtual particles. What happens is that these things become non-deterministic, from a human observer's vantage. Determinism and causality are not the same thing.

BTS

nicolaou

It's a fascinating subject Burn but I'm still learning! Any small word, big picture explanations of quantum theory gratefully received!

BurnTheShips

There is so much to learn. Last week I stumbled on plasmons.

Never heard of them. Fascinating field. Plasmonics.

BTS

OnTheWayOut

As far as "the big bang" goes, science is still learning. But as mentioned by jwfacts, whatever you can insist upon for the need of a God, others can insist that the same applies to the existence of God. If the universe needed a God, then what started God? He was always there? Then the matter/energy was always there. It's a circle of argument.

The Moral argument: Evolution can show why many creatures learn to "get along" with each other for survival and perpetuation of the species. If terrible atrocities were committed by men despite their moral code, would you be able to put God aside. I mean, if mass murder of innocents were to have taken place, if children were captured in war and raped by the victors that killed their parents, if scientists deliberately introduced radioactive elements into the diet of mentally challenged children- then would you say that maybe God is not the source of our moral code?
(Oh, wait... all those things did occur.)

There are no physical explanations for rational inference.

So now you are a brain expert? Rational inference is in the brain. Let me know when they prove that things in the brain must have been planted by either aliens or God, then we'll talk about it.

If things in the Universe were slightly different, life wouldn't exist, and humans wouldn't exist.

I say that "life as we know it wouldn't exist." Who knows what would be here? Whatever it is, it would present the same tired arguments that only a god could provide just the right circumstances for silicon-based or energy-based life to exist.

We say that life on earth needed just the right conditions. Yeah, the existing life needed the existing conditions. Change the existing conditions and the existing life could have been completely different. I say to design what they said in the Sarah Marshall movie- Why did the engineer put a playground right next to a sewage system?

BurnTheShips

So now you are a brain expert? Rational inference is in the brain. Let me know when they prove that things in the brain must have been planted by either aliens or God, then we'll talk about it.

A purely naturalistic explanation for our faculties is self-defeating. How can you trust that purely naturalistic evolution has enabled you to reason correctly or reliably? Evolution "cares" nothing about correctness. It only "cares" about outcome.

BTS

Perry

This is not strictly correct, everything did not begin at the big bang, the theory is that there was already a point mass that exploded at the big bang. If you remove the word "begins"....

JWfacts,

I have heard this counter argument before. If you remove the word "begin" then you are outside our time/space dimension. But, there must still be is a cause at the moment of time/space/matter.

The way I see it is that at some point there was no "before" even though there was a "beginning". Even in the absence of a beginning, it would have no effect on an uncaused Cause.

Some of the titles of God present this very idea. Alpha/Omega, Beginning/End, First/Last

The Case for God

Share this