Its a lose-lose argument for a athiest?

Discussion about scientific issues as they relate to God and Christianity including archaeology, origins of life, the universe, intelligent design, evolution, etc.
Post Reply
Swimmy
Established Member
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:42 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Its a lose-lose argument for a athiest?

#1

Post by Swimmy » Wed Oct 21, 2009 5:10 am

A atheist(particularly strong atheist) will Inadvertently admit that god is totally feasible and the more viable cause through this explanation? Or contradict his own rational beliefs. Therefore making him a "irrational" person compromising his own beliefs in the process.

To make this short

Cause and effect, thermo dynamics. These are laws firmly established by the scientific community. Hence any theory or observation should be based around these laws. With this in mind we pretty much can say the universe could not create itself through a naturalistic cause since it violates all those laws. And We know the universe had a beginning is finite and not infinite therefore there was a beginning. However, they will say that matter and such as always existed. Which would mean its always been. (infinite). Something we like to call "infinite regression". The thing atheist like to use to argue god. Ironically they fall into their own trap on this one. We can easily say god is above "infinite regression" since he is outside the box of cause and effect and time. However, for them to claim that such and such as always existed falls into infinite regression in a universe bound by cause and effect, and time. But Infinity cannot exist here. Since infinity would continuously lack cause and effect. Therefore by our own understanding through science nothing in this universe has always been.


Are you with me so far? Now the argument is reduced(I've heard it before. Multiple times)

"we don't know if the laws that are in place today have always been, they could have been totally different at some point"

Now this statement lacks observational evidence of any sort and is a huge leap by any atheist to make.


So basically in the end by accepting the science that governs our universe they inadvertently agree that god is the more feasible explanation than a naturalistic cause..Then there are those who compromise there own beliefs when science tells them otherwise.


Either way its a lose-lose. Accept science and become a agnostic, or compromise your own beliefs that logically don't work and live with them knowing full well.

DannyM
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3301
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:31 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: A little corner of England
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 1 time

Re: Its a lose-lose argument for a athiest?

#2

Post by DannyM » Wed Oct 21, 2009 6:27 am

Swimmy wrote:A atheist(particularly strong atheist) will Inadvertently admit that god is totally feasible and the more viable cause through this explanation? Or contradict his own rational beliefs. Therefore making him a "irrational" person compromising his own beliefs in the process.

To make this short

Cause and effect, thermo dynamics. These are laws firmly established by the scientific community. Hence any theory or observation should be based around these laws. With this in mind we pretty much can say the universe could not create itself through a naturalistic cause since it violates all those laws. And We know the universe had a beginning is finite and not infinite therefore there was a beginning. However, they will say that matter and such as always existed. Which would mean its always been. (infinite). Something we like to call "infinite regression". The thing atheist like to use to argue god. Ironically they fall into their own trap on this one. We can easily say god is above "infinite regression" since he is outside the box of cause and effect and time. However, for them to claim that such and such as always existed falls into infinite regression in a universe bound by cause and effect, and time. But Infinity cannot exist here. Since infinity would continuously lack cause and effect. Therefore by our own understanding through science nothing in this universe has always been.


Are you with me so far? Now the argument is reduced(I've heard it before. Multiple times)

"we don't know if the laws that are in place today have always been, they could have been totally different at some point"

Now this statement lacks observational evidence of any sort and is a huge leap by any atheist to make.


So basically in the end by accepting the science that governs our universe they inadvertently agree that god is the more feasible explanation than a naturalistic cause..Then there are those who compromise there own beliefs when science tells them otherwise.


Either way its a lose-lose. Accept science and become a agnostic, or compromise your own beliefs that logically don't work and live with them knowing full well.
There is also no contradiction in saying God caused the world to exist and saying the world has always existed. Time outsde our comprehension should play no part in our thinking. Therefore time as we know it does not come into play before all matter and with it time came into existence. God is the first cause on which all created causes depend. Secondary causality produces effects that are themselves dependent on God's primary causality.

Science leads to agnosticism; Darwinism leads to agnosticism. If a scientist wants to claim that either leads to atheism, then they are telling a fundamental, scientific untruth.
credo ut intelligam

dei gratia

Post Reply