2005

vexen

Vexen Crabtree's Live Journal

Sociology, Theology, Anti-Religion and Exploration: Forcing Humanity Forwards


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
2005
vexen

Adam and Eve

Adam and Eve, by Vexen Crabtree

Re: Hello

(Anonymous)

2004-07-14 09:38 pm (UTC)

imagin, if you will, a Newton's Cradle. you see one and as you look, it suddenly starts to move. it continues to move so you can not assume it is the wind. you are not telekenetic and you do not believe in ghosts, how did it move? the only answer is that someone is causing it to move by rocking the table or something of the like. it did not just decide that it wanted to start moving. something was there to convert the potential energy to kinetic energy or give it any energy at all. it can not create it by itself, can it. and also about evolution, if we have evolved and it took so long, each stage of evolution must take a while. if we had to adapt to our environment, then what happened while we adapted, did we just hold our breath until we grew what we needed, or did we have to wait and grow lungs first?

Your logic is: Things require a cause.

The ONLY logical conclusion is that there is one thing that has no cause.

I believe you. There is ONE anamoly by this logic, the first cause.

But I do not think it is a conscious being because that is pure assumption.

From http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/universe.html#Cause
"This statement is sometimes used as argument that there must be a god. But, it doesn't work. Because if god was not created by something, then god exists without a cause. And therefore the argument is "Everything except god must have a cause". If this argument is valid then it must also be valid to say "Everything except the Universe must have a cause".

Employing Occam's Razor we see that as a general rule of thumb, by this argument, the Universe is more likely to exist without a Creator than with one, as in both cases there is a single "uncaused cause" but without a god there is a lesser degree of complexity. Another reason for it being more likely that the uncaused cause is the Universe is that God requires many properties and complexities such as thought, logic, consciousness: All of them must have been derived from somewhere. There are fewer unanswered questions if we discard the idea of God. "

See the list of extra assumptions you are making that I am not:
"Theists make many assumptions about the force that causes the Universe to exist. Whether this force or not is God is unprovable, hence we have theism being based on faith. In addition to the basic assumption that God exists[1], theists make many additional leaps of faith, such as God being all-powerful, emotional, benevolent, that God wants to be worshipped and omniscience along with other particulars of various monotheistic religions. This essay highlights those assumptions and reminds us that the existence of God does not mean that we can arbitrarily make these assumptions about God."
on http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/assumptions.html

You have to justify these assumptions if you are to be a logical theist, not a deluded one.

You are viewing vexen