Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The cosmological argument isn't the slam dunk you think it is. One flaw is that we don't know that there cannot be spontaneous generation of matter. Various hypothetical scenarios abound, with matter and anti-matter universes being created in a cosmic hiccup. It also appears that matter can spring into existence on a subatomic level. If this is the case, why not on a cosmic level?
Add to that the problem of what caused god? The cosmological argument claims that the universe needs a cause, but god doesn't. That is inconsistent.
I am not saying that I know how the universe came into existence, I am saying that the cosmological argument is flawed and doesn't really answer anything.
That's been explained to Vizio dozens of times by several forum members. Don't expect him to stop using it though.
Nothing is "chosen in place of" God. "God" is not necessarily a specific entity or Being...it can be...but doesn't have to be.
"God" is a title...like "hero" or "friend"...that can be assigned to anything one may perceive as such.
Definitively, "God" is not limited to just Religious Deities. Though it seems some are so mentally entrenched in that idea, they can't conceive bestowing the title "God" to anything but.
Maybe God doesn't pre-date the BB. Maybe God is the sum total of the consciousness which has evolved since the BB...a cosmic mind-sponge.
I know that probably isn't a particularly novel thought. But what if God doesn't know that's what s/he/it is? What if "God" is just an ever-burgeoning, ever blossoming, ever expanding sensingof everything?
...
Did I mention it's the weekend...?
Trout buddy, are you going soft on me?
Your musings don't work though. Since I was addressing the flaws of the cosmological argument, I will respond to your thoughts in that vein.
Let's say you are correct. Some sort of godness arouse contemporaneously with the BB. That still leaves the cosmological argument with an uncaused cause. Actually, maybe two uncaused causes, if god is exactly contemporary with the BB, as opposed to being an emergent property of the Big Bang.
Nothing is "chosen in place of" God. "God" is not necessarily a specific entity or Being...it can be...but doesn't have to be.
"God" is a title...like "hero" or "friend"...that can be assigned to anything one may perceive as such.
Definitively, "God" is not limited to just Religious Deities. Though it seems some are so mentally entrenched in that idea, they can't conceive bestowing the title "God" to anything but.
So why use the word God then? You are making the word to be so expansive and all encompassing as to be meaningless. Visio and Eusebius are going to use the term to mean a conscious, powerful, creative agent interested in humanity, Patrick is going to think of something similar, but with IMPORTANT differences, mystic is going to envision a universal force, and you are saying it is all of those, plus a god cup of hot chocolate on a rainy day.
Why don't you use a different word, like "stuff" or "warm fuzzy-wuzzy" which would avoid confusion with the more traditional god-concepts?
Of course...all have their own perception.
But, from a general definitive standpoint..."G-O-D" is not limited to just Religious Deities...but is much broader.
The problem stems from the prolific use of just the title "God" to refer to the two main Deities (Jehovah and Allah) in the two most common Religious texts (The Bible and The Quran)...so much so, that many can no longer separate the title from the names.
It would be like the people in the U.S. thinking that "President" can only be Barack Obama and no one else.
"God" is actually a very general descriptive term...much like "hero"...and can be properly assigned to anything or anyone perceived to be such. Those who feel that is somehow disrespectful to the specific Deity they worship and perceive as God to them, notwithstanding.
So why use the word God then? You are making the word to be so expansive and all encompassing as to be meaningless. Visio and Eusebius are going to use the term to mean a conscious, powerful, creative agent interested in humanity, Patrick is going to think of something similar, but with IMPORTANT differences, mystic is going to envision a universal force, and you are saying it is all of those, plus a god cup of hot chocolate on a rainy day.
Why don't you use a different word, like "stuff" or "warm fuzzy-wuzzy" which would avoid confusion with the more traditional god-concepts?
So what? I say it is...because, it is. Based upon the definition, anyway.
Is there some authority you know of that one could claim to insist it is objectively wrong not to limit the definition of God to some narrow set?
If people are confused, even after a explanation of my perception or what I know to be the full definition of God...that is on them.
Your musings don't work though. Since I was addressing the flaws of the cosmological argument, I will respond to your thoughts in that vein.
Let's say you are correct. Some sort of godness arouse contemporaneously with the BB. That still leaves the cosmological argument with an uncaused cause. Actually, maybe two uncaused causes, if god is exactly contemporary with the BB, as opposed to being an emergent property of the Big Bang.
I care little for whys and hows and whens.
I'm bright, but struggled with math and physics. My teachers in those disciplines, bless their hearts, recognized that my passions and abilities were in other areas and gave me a minimum passing grade at the end of each year.
I got enough on my plate trying to understand what is/can/might be let alone howcum.
So what? I say it is...because, it is. Based upon the definition, anyway.
Is there some authority you know of that one could claim to insist it is objectively wrong not to limit the definition of God to some narrow set?
If people are confused, even after a explanation of my perception or what I know to be the full definition of God...that is on them.
I don't know where you are getting your definition from. I have never seen anything that expansive, but I don't doubt you can cite something.
That doesn't matter though. I am not interested in a battle of semantics. I am going to appeal to common sense and general usage. The fact is that the vast majority of people use the term God to mean a conscious, omnimax being of some sort. Your usage is, by your own admission, confusing. Why would you insist on being unclear in your speech/writing, when you know that it will be misconstrued?
I don't know where you are getting your definition from. I have never seen anything that expansive, but I don't doubt you can cite something.
That doesn't matter though. I am not interested in a battle of semantics. I am going to appeal to common sense and general usage. The fact is that the vast majority of people use the term God to mean a conscious, omnimax being of some sort. Your usage is, by your own admission, confusing. Why would you insist on being unclear in your speech/writing, when you know that it will be misconstrued?
It is not "my" definition...the definition comes from the full and complete definition supplied by Merriam-Webster...a top expert for defining words.
I always find it amusing watching the very people that would never consider an argument based on popularity to logically support anything...typically resort to it when they have no other way to force a limit on the definition of God.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
