-->
@MAV99
OK! So quantum foam is the cause of its effects... what causes the quantum foam?
nobody claims "it causes itself"
because nobody claims to know exactly how it works
the description is based on observation
What's the strongest argument for atheism?
Posts
Total:
459
-->
@MAV99
to exist or to be is not a univocal term.A thing can exist as something individual and by itself. Like you and me.A thing can exist only as "in another" like the color blue.A thing can exist as becoming into existence or going out of existence. We call this changecertain things can only exist in the mind, like numbers or negatives.With this understanding of what it means to exist (an analogous term) and the understanding of cause and effect, I think Spinosa missed alot and was oversimplifying.That division above btw comes from Aristotle initially but explained in detail by Thomas Aquinas. They call it the division of being.
are you suggesting that YHWH has no physical capability or component ?
-->
@MAV99
but you believe that this omnipotent god was the very first cause, right ?Yes... well I know He is because I have reasoned to it. Not strictly speaking belief.
ok, so, logically speaking
(IFF) OOC is the first cause (THEN) every conceivable event is caused by OOC
unless you're proposing that something else, NOT caused by OOC ALSO generated some sort of competing FIRST CAUSE
are you suggesting that some things are NOT caused by OOC ?
-->
@MAV99
(1) would you say that OOC was reduced or diminished in some way after this exercise ?(2) or would you say that OOC was exactly the same as they were before the first creation event ?1. No I would not.2. He has to be unchanging, at least intrinsically to Himself. So He would be the same as before.
right, same as before
which means that all of creation is not "in addition to OOC"
all of creation is imbued with some amount of the omnipotent
-->
@MAV99
The answer is that He is infinite. No matter how much or what you take away there is no difference in relation to Him. That is what infinite means.
that's not what "infinite" means
AND "infinite" is not part of this equation
because "infinite" obviously and literally means "without limit"
which means it cannot be contained by anything anywhere, not by a word, or a physical barrier or any conceivable or inconceivable conceptional barrier
anything that is truly "infinite" is NECESSARILY in all places at all times in every possible sense
it would penetrate and completely obliterate all distinctions ideas and things
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
The only thing we know for certain issssss.The Real Gods brute.Like i mean the actual really real gods, do like a little a book book thing.Its just,Well , its commensense.Straight up .
bingo
-->
@3RU7AL
So the idea of "elephant" is still in all those different functions.
Once again showing function is not the same as whatness.
-->
@3RU7AL
are you suggesting that YHWH has no physical capability or component ?
I am not saying he does not have the capability.
Of himself he is not physical. He cannot be. That would contradict Him being infinite and uncaused.
-->
@3RU7AL
(IFF) OOC is the first cause (THEN) every conceivable event is caused by OOC
That is getting much closer, but not quite yet.
I called Him the first cause. He is th cause of the existence of something, but not immediately the cause of a happening as there can be other causes involved. He is remotely a cause to all happenings.
-->
@3RU7AL
all of creation is imbued with some amount of the omnipotent
This implies that sameness, or existence, is only one thing in one way. I have already said no to that and explained why I think that.
-->
@3RU7AL
AND "infinite" is not part of this equation
It most definitely is if you want to talk about cause and effect.
which means it cannot be contained by anything anywhere, not by a word, or a physical barrier or any conceivable or inconceivable conceptional barrier
That is why it is a negation word in our language.
anything that is truly "infinite" is NECESSARILY in all places at all times in every possible sense
Why? You have to prove that. Until you do, I am disregarding it since all you have done is assert it. and by prove I mean you have to prove the "in every possible sense" part. Because right now it is a contradiction.
it would penetrate and completely obliterate all distinctions ideas and things
What does that even mean??? This entire conversation you have been implying a univocal meaning of what it means to be and here you are trying to say there is a distinction in what it means to be. Can you make up your mind?
Have you studied logic before? It really does not seem to me that you have.
-->
@MAV99
So the idea of "elephant" is still in all those different functions.Once again showing function is not the same as whatness.
the idea-of-an-elephant is not the same as an actual elephant
-->
@MAV99
are you suggesting that YHWH has no physical capability or component ?I am not saying he does not have the capability.Of himself he is not physical. He cannot be. That would contradict Him being infinite and uncaused.
if YHWH has physical capability then some part of YHWH is physical
the capability to impregnate women is one example
-->
@MAV99
(IFF) OOC is the first cause (THEN) every conceivable event is caused by OOCThat is getting much closer, but not quite yet.I called Him the first cause. He is th cause of the existence of something, but not immediately the cause of a happening as there can be other causes involved. He is remotely a cause to all happenings.
it doesn't matter how "remote" the cause is
if it is the ONLY cause
and there is no OTHER CAUSE
then it is still the one and only cause causing every conceivable event
-->
@MAV99
all of creation is imbued with some amount of the omnipotentThis implies that sameness, or existence, is only one thing in one way. I have already said no to that and explained why I think that.
did YHWH design electrons ?
did YHWH design cotton ?
what about microbes ?
did YHWH cause the causes that caused electrons ?
did YHWH cause the causes that caused cotton ?
did YHWH cause the causes that caused microbes ?
if they are designed by YHWH and caused by YHWH then they are obviously reflections of (at minimum the minifest will of) YHWH if not obviously and necessarily wholly composed of the energy of YHWH
-->
@MAV99
anything that is truly "infinite" is NECESSARILY in all places at all times in every possible senseWhy? You have to prove that. Until you do, I am disregarding it since all you have done is assert it. and by prove I mean you have to prove the "in every possible sense" part. Because right now it is a contradiction.
i don't need to "prove it"
it's tautological
"infinite" literally means without limit
not limited by time
not limited by space
not limited by physical or spiritual or metaphysical or emotional or conceptual boundaries of any kind, known or unknown or unknowable
NOthing can "co-exist" with the "infinite"
it obliterates all boundaries
because it doesn't have any
-->
@3RU7AL
the idea-of-an-elephant is not the same as an actual elephant
There still has to be a whatness between the actual elephant and the idea of elephant or we cannot say elephant of both in any way whatsoever.
-->
@3RU7AL
if YHWH has physical capability then some part of YHWH is physicalthe capability to impregnate women is one example
Why?
-->
@3RU7AL
if they are designed by YHWH and caused by YHWH then they are obviously reflections of (at minimum the minifest will of) YHWH if not obviously and necessarily wholly composed of the energy of YHWH
This is implying that only Matter exists and nothing else. Once again showing a univocal idea of being.
There are more ways to exist than by matter alone. Any solid philosophy says that.
-->
@3RU7AL
it's tautological
Then show me why it is tautological.
NOthing can "co-exist" with the "infinite"
Only if the "infinite" was only material. There is more than just matter in the universe. Any solid philosophy says that.
Once again showing a univocal idea of being....
I would say the Atheists strongest argument is that no one can physically produce god for them to study and interrogate. But with that said the amount of faith required to believe that everything came from a singularity of nothing is equal to the amount of faith required to believe that a supreme being created it all. I've listened to and considered a lot of theories about the universe and everything in it. All make plausible arguments for the material. But only one makes a plausible argument for sentience.
How many Gods has Man made up? At least 18,000 different gods, goddesses and various animals or objects have been worshiped by humans.
-->
@MAV99
This is implying that only Matter exists and nothing else. Once again showing a univocal idea of being.
no, no it does not
there are trillions of dimensions and zillions of different ways of manifesting "existence"
nobody is suggesting that "matter" is the ONLY one
-->
@MAV99
if YHWH has physical capability then some part of YHWH is physicalthe capability to impregnate women is one exampleWhy?
in order to interact with the physical
it must have some physical capability or component
-->
@MAV99
NOthing can "co-exist" with the "infinite"Only if the "infinite" was only material. There is more than just matter in the universe. Any solid philosophy says that.Once again showing a univocal idea of being....
without limit
means without limit
which means anything "infinite" would instantly penetrate all possible realms
-->
@sadolite
But only one makes a plausible argument for sentience.
which one ?
-->
@3RU7AL
All you have done is repeat what you said before. For Example:
in order to interact with the physicalit must have some physical capability or component
No proofs, no explanation. This does not answer my question I asked. This conversation is going nowhere.
Do have anything you want to say to me?
-->
@MAV99
All you have done is repeat what you said before. For Example:in order to interact with the physicalit must have some physical capability or componentNo proofs, no explanation. This does not answer my question I asked. This conversation is going nowhere.Do have anything you want to say to me?
it's pure logic
in order to interact with something
there must be a fundamental similarity
if your OOC has no physical capability or component
then it is unable to interact with and or even detect physical objects
-->
@3RU7AL
there must be a fundamental similarity
Is Physicality the only fundamental similiarity? If so how do you prove that?
Because I think there are other fundamental similarities by which to interact that affect something physical.
-->
@MAV99
Is Physicality the only fundamental similiarity? If so how do you prove that?Because I think there are other fundamental similarities by which to interact that affect something physical.
matter is composed of energy
therefore
matter can interact with energy
it's really extremely simple
are you suggesting that "spirit" is composed of energy ?
or perhaps energy is composed of "spirit" ?