Sounds like a grand statement – yes?
It isn't really. Not if you want to adhere to logic, rational thinking and scientific evidence.
Here's all three in a small package:
. Either matter is eternal, OR
. The Creator of matter is eternal
There it is. Logic and rational thinking backed up by scientific evidence.
Why would I travel down this road yet again? After all these years, why would I bother presenting this truth one more time? Well, I was at an atheist blog yesterday and the writer presented what he considers to be an “ingenious plan” to prove to anyone “with the courage to try,” that God does not exist.
His plan runs as such:
Take every question that you have about Christianity, questions like:
. Why doesn't God heal amputees?
. Why didn't the Christian kids always come first in track and field?
. Why doesn't God do what I tell Him to do when I pray?
And consider – just consider as a possible answer – Because God doesn't exist.
Do this for thirty days, says the atheist writer of this blog, and he practically guarantees that you will become an atheist.
If this kind of non sequitur, illogical, irrational thinking embarrasses you as a human being, trust me, I understand. I've heard it countless times down through the years. It's a sad and pitiful example of the depths to which we humans will allow ourselves to sink in an effort to deny the existence of our Creator.
The facts of our situation are as follows:
(1) Disappointing situations in life are not proof that our Creator does not exist, and
(2) A Creator does exist and this Creator exists necessarily
(Necessary = It can't not exist).
You see, if a Creator did not exist, we would not exist, life itself would not exist, our universe would not exist.
Why?
Because nothing (material) does not have the ability to bring into existence everything (material). Unless you have an atheist world-view bias to protect and maintain, that is not a difficult concept to understand.
Until our Creator brought the universe into existence, nothing, absolutely nothing material existed.
Not matter.
Not energy.
Not space.
Not time.
The “infinite” exists only as an abstract mathematical concept.
The material infinite does not and cannot exist.
That is a scientific, mathematical and philosophical fact. The Steady State Model of the universe (that it has always existed) has been refuted and thoroughly discredited by science. Science has shown and shown absolutely that the material universe had a beginning from literally nothing material.
The obvious conclusion is that it doesn't matter how much disappointment you've experienced in life. It doesn't matter if God doesn't behave the way you demand that He must behave. The obvious conclusion is that if we're here to talk about it, then Creator God exists. The proof of His existence is the existence of a life-supporting, mathematically precise, moral universe.
Creator God exists and He exists necessarily.
Would knowing this reality phase the atheist in question? Sadly, no. He is committed to a world-view that entails a universe that came from nothing by nothing, and once committed to that belief, well, that's it. End of the line.
Either matter is eternal, OR
ReplyDelete. The Creator of matter is eternal
...but...
The “infinite” exists only as an abstract mathematical concept.
therefore God is an abstract concept that exists in the minds of humans only.
Great! I am glad that we can agree on that now.
Hugo let me ask the same question a couple different ways:
ReplyDelete. Why isn't the existence of the universe evidence for the existence of a Creator?
. Is the existence of the universe evidence for the absence of a Creator?
Hugo let me ask the same question a couple different ways:
ReplyDelete(...but let's not forget that you don't care, at all, about the answers...)
. Why isn't the existence of the universe evidence for the existence of a Creator?
This is the same as asking why this is invalid:
- The universe exists
- Therefore Creator God exists
If you cannot tell yourself why this is invalid, then it's futile to discuss the truth value of any statement. You need to review how we can determine if a statement is 'true' or 'not true' AND how we can determine if a 'not true' statement is 'false' or 'not false'.
Is the existence of the universe evidence for the absence of a Creator?
No. The 'existence of the universe' is NOT 'evidence for the absence of a Creator'. What we do have however is evidence that the Creator is a concept invented by humans that fail to match observations. The hypothesis was put forward a long time ago and keeps failing.
You've given some pretty sad responses in the past, Hugo, but this is perhaps the most pitiful.
ReplyDeleteEither matter is eternal, OR
. The Creator of matter is eternal
Which is it Hugo? Are you a believer in the Steady State Model? That the universe has always existed? Why won't you answer? Most other atheists aren't afraid to go against scientific evidence to maintain their atheist bias. Why do you hesitate?
You've given some pretty sad responses in the past, Hugo, but this is perhaps the most pitiful.
ReplyDeleteExplain why, if you can, instead of just insulting.
Either matter is eternal, OR
. The Creator of matter is eternal
Which is it Hugo?
That's invalid.
The 1st statement is:
'Matter is eternal', which can be true or not, regardless of statement 2.
The 2nd statement is:
'The Creator of matter is eternal', which can be true or not, regardless of statement 1.
Therefore, regardless of the truth value of the 2 statements, your argument that 1 of the 2 has to be true is wrong. Your argument fails.
Moreover, it can be demonstrated that the two statements are 'not true' for exactly the same reason: 'eternal' is an abstract concept. Therefore, 'real' matter cannot be eternal and a 'real' Creator cannot be eternal. A 'non-real' eternal Creator makes perfect sense though, but I don't think that this is what you believe in.
Are you a believer in the Steady State Model? That the universe has always existed? Why won't you answer?
Haha, very funny. More insults please!
Most other atheists aren't afraid to go against scientific evidence to maintain their atheist bias. Why do you hesitate?
Why should I care about 'other' atheists? You are afraid to have a 1-on-1 conversation? Even if it's online behind a veil of semi-anonymity? Very strange...
Hesitation? Where? You lie again...
'Matter is eternal', which can be true or not,
ReplyDeleteOn what ground, scientific or philosophical do you make that claim?
=====
"Are you a believer in the Steady State Model? That the universe has always existed? Why won't you answer? Haha, very funny."
That was most certainly not intended as a joke. Has the material universe always existed, Hugo?
Is that what you believe?
Is the Steady State Model of the universe a valid concept?
Because either matter has never NOT existed, and we know from both science and philosophy that's not possible,
OR
The Creator of matter has never NOT existed.
It's one or the other Hugo, and you know it.
Or perhaps you have some alternative in mind? Something you just invented this afternoon?
Now would be the time to explain it. Or you can just resort to the typical atheist, “I don't know how everything could come from nothing but I sure as heck know it wasn't from a supernatural Creator.
"'Matter is eternal', which can be true or not"
ReplyDeleteOn what ground, scientific or philosophical do you make that claim?
Philosophical; but it is not a claim. All I meant is that the statement 'Matter is eternal' can either be true or not, just like ANY statement.
Let me give you a more obvious example. The statement 'Water freezes at 0 degree' can be true or not. Obviously we will agree that the statement is true, but philosophically speaking, any statement can be 'true' or 'not true'.
There was nothing more to it. Now go back to the comment and read the rest; perhaps it will make more sense and you will be able to articulate a reply that actually addresses the issue.
Let's move on to the rest of the comment anyway, but it will not make sense since you misunderstood the beginning...
====
...Has the material universe always existed, Hugo? Is that what you believe? Is the Steady State Model of the universe a valid concept?
You toss words around that have different meanings in different context. For instance, The Steady State Model refers to a specific and obsolete theory that was disproved by the discovery of the expansion of the universe...
So of course I don't believe that.
Next, does disproving the Steady State Model leads to a conclusion that the material universe always existed? Again, tossing words around makes it complicated to have meaningful arguments in place; because 'always existed' is ill defined.
From our perspective, the material universe we observe around us clearly did not always exist the way it is. The Big Bang Theory gives us a very accurate model of what happened for the past 14 billion years.
So, again, of course I don't believe that.
Because either matter has never NOT existed, and we know from both science and philosophy that's not possible
OR
The Creator of matter has never NOT existed.
It's one or the other Hugo, and you know it.
What I know is that it does NOT have to be one or the other. That's philosophy 101. Basic logic.
Or perhaps you have some alternative in mind? Something you just invented this afternoon?
Now would be the time to explain it. Or you can just resort to the typical atheist, “I don't know how everything could come from nothing but I sure as heck know it wasn't from a supernatural Creator.
This is NOT the typical atheist reply and certainly NOT mine. Perhaps some atheists would reply something like that but I would argue that they are wrong, just as much as you are.
Your biggest problem for this particular topic is that you see the universe as some sort of simple timeline, from time 0 to today, where 0 is currently the Big Bang, and you say: that's when everything that's material was created; there was nothing that was matter/energy before that, therefore only God existed before that and he created everything that's material.
It's called an argument from ignorance. It's invalid.
Nothing new here though. I wonder how many pages you put in your book on this fallacy.
You're pathetic Hugo. You talk simply to hear yourself talk while presenting 0 information - just noise
ReplyDeleteOh that's so cute... I was actually trying to engage you in a rational intelligent discussion but it does not work because you are an emotional person who does not understand how logical statements work.
ReplyDeleteYou should visit the channel philosophyfreak on YouTube; it provides interesting lectures on basic philosophy principles that you dismissed here.
Sorry to have tried to play with your toys, I won't do it again, promised.
Bye bye, keep trolling atheists; it's very entertaining!
Hugo you are the most anti rational, anti intellectual, anti science atheist I have ever encountered.
ReplyDeleteYou aren't even an atheist. Not in any meaningful sense.
Or sure you've adopted the title but you call yourself an atheist while completely ignoring the implications of being an atheist. You are functionally illiterate as an atheist.
And when you you encounter scientific facts that you don't like you collapse back into some kind of fantasy land where random thoughts turn into reality for you.
It's a waste of my time to respond to such garbled nonsense.