Thread: Proof for an Intelligent Creator and His purpose

Precisely. It's nothing but a snow-job of latin phrases and incoherent arguments.

Fact: The universe exists

Speculation: The universe had a first cause (alternative; it always existed)
Speculation: This cause was a being of some kind (alternative: it was some other unknown process or means that was not a being)
Speculation: This cause was intentional
Speculation: This being has complete control over this universe
Speculation: This being has complete knowledge of this universe, or otherwise knows about Earth/Humanity
Speculation: This being cares about Humanity
Speculation: This being is perfect
Speculation: [one of the millions of proposed characteristics goes here]
Speculation: This being decided to create lots of contradictory evidence and a very badly written book to demonstrate it's existence to humanity, and one specific book is true but all others are false out of a long list of choices, and this choice has a 90% correlation with the choice of the person's parents.

Fact: No thing nor event in the known universe or laws of physics lacks a cause.

Key word: known. There is a lot we don't know

Assume: There is no Prime Cause (Creator / Singularity).
Ergo: There is no universe.

Assumes universe did not always exist.
Assumes everything about the Universe is known

Your false dichotomy is highly obvious.

Therefore: the statement that was assumed is proven to be a false statement by reduction ad absurdum (proof by disproof).
(Since "There is no Creator" is proven false, the opposite is true: There is a Creator.)

Except you go from any prime cause to automatically assuming it's a creator of some kind. A non sequitur if we're going to use the proper language.

You didn't prove anything with your shitty logic.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

You didn't prove anything with your shitty logic.

You're a far more generous person than I am is all I'm going to say to that.

In the words of Pauli, It's not even wrong.

Wat. The universe is not an event, why does it need a cause? That is like saying Evolution requires a cause. Evolution being an intangible idea, not an action which requires a cause and consequences. The fact that you are assuming that there once was nothing at all is enough to throw your whole argument out with the bathwater, but I'll continue regardless.

What if evolution was a stage for conscious progression and expansion?

Better yet, if the universe doesn't have a cause, how did it begin, why did it begin, and why even have it at all if we're suppose to just rot in the ground when we're dead and cease to be? It's just a pointless endeavor. If the finality is the same for everything, there's no point for any of it to continue at all.

If you could, would you explain your paradigm to me, please? You're very argumentative on this topic, especially full with anger in a lot of your posts. PM me even. I'm quite interested in what you perceive to be reality.

Originally Posted by Absolute

Better yet, if the universe doesn't have a cause, how did it begin, why did it begin, and why even have it at all if we're suppose to just rot in the ground when we're dead and cease to be? It's just a pointless endeavor. If the finality is the same for everything, there's no point for any of it to continue at all.

For all we know the universe could be growing an shrinking and the Big Bang is just one of many begginings, which aren't really begginings at all. So saying that it began is an assumption.

I was dead before I was born, since death is the absence of my neural activity. Nobody can comprehend death, since it is nothing at all for the one experiencing it, like deep sleep. You go to bed and a second later your alarm clock goes of. If you realize what death really is and how many times you've "died" since you were born, it pretty much loses meaning. So it doesn't mean that much to me. So I personally see a declaration of death as pointless, pointless.

An atom can't help it but follow the universal laws to bind into a molecule, but we've been given awareness and the perception of choice. Some choose to reproduce, some are scientists and some are artists. The only reason we're here is because of lifes specifical chamical makeup which makes it reproduce and grow. As all animals we're programmed to do the same, survive and reproduce. It's your choice to either be happy or sad with your life. The specific characteristic of the more advanced species is to accumulate information for survival. We've brought it to this point where we get to disect the universe and experience self-awareness. Objectively it seems that humans have gotten to a point where information isn't only passed through the genome or simple social interactions but we externalized it in the form of computers etc. If you just look at some sci-fi movies you can see what we expect ourselves to become. So if you consider your subjective existence important in the larger scope of things, then I see why your life would seem pointless.

Personally I think that the chances of finding out what's going on are just about infinitely remote. But who knows, perhaps we could get this perpetual growth of information and computation which "started" with the first biomolecules to a point which now seems impossible or even godlike as well. Now you can either say that in the light of all this information the universe has purpose or you could just say that the universe exists and it is as it is. Personally, I'd go with the second choice since I see the first option clearly as a projection of human subjective experience unto the universe. I'd rather be agnostic on the subject and be amazed than make up answers form the extremely limited human experience.

Better yet, if the universe doesn't have a cause, how did it begin, why did it begin

Why do people insist on asking this question

"We can't possibly explain this (at least at the moment)"

"Okay ... so give me an explanation"

why even have it at all if we're suppose to just rot in the ground

"Why is that rock on the ground if it has no purpose? Therefore it must be there for a reason!"

"Dude, it's just a fucking rock, it doesn't have a fucking purpose"

As for this question, "why should the universe exist if we'll just rot in the ground" is an unbelievably self-centred question. As if the entire cosmos revolves around humanity.

there's no point for any of it to continue at all.

So, who says there is a point? Is there a point for the existence of the rock I mentioned? No!

You guys are still trying to prove a God objectively..it's not about focusing outside of ourselves looking for the answers to the universe, or God. It's about focusing INwards.

We are a part of a universal mind that can't even be put into words. Where everything is interconnected and permeates all of space and time. Ask anyone who has experienced "being at one with the universe" and you will understand what we are..we are individualized portions of God/The divine( everything in existence ) This is the highest level of awareness you can obtain. And when you are in this state, you pretty much don't care to do anything else except just.......exist...it's like a constant infinite dose of Percocet or Heroin. Better than any drug you can possibly imagine. EVERYTHING is one.

Like I said in another post:

there is no such thing as one of a pair of opposites without the other of the pair. So there is no such thing as objectivity without subjectivity that is equally real and irreducible. And scientists want to reduce the entire universe to objective matter or processes; through its history science has assumed that subjectivity is not real. Just considering it in this very simple light we can see that cannot possibly be true.

The Western world is stuck in this perspective, that the mind isn't really real. And that is because the Western mind has become split in two--the left-brain, objective, rational, logical side, and the right-brain, subjective, feeling, intuitive side. And we are stuck in the left-brain side, so we can only really experience the objective aspect of ourselves and the world. And thus scientists, who are for the most part even more left-brained then the average person, start with the assumption that the mind, the subjective aspect of life, is not real. And it IS an assumption--even though science is supposed to be assumptionless.

SCIENCE is objective, and focuses on the outside world...SPIRITUALITY is subjective and focuses on the inside of your mind.

One is nothing without the other.

All of you skeptics, why not try practicing spirituality. IN turn you'll find out everything you want to know. Spirituality is finding out about the inner workings of your mind/Psyche and in turn a lot of other things.

An interesting book to check out is, "The Self-Aware Universe " by Amit Goswami. You can't prove God, you have to experience it.