“The concept of god is an obvious fallacy. If god is the creator then from whence came god?”
Chris Newell
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, May 5th, 2009 at 1:00 and is filed under QOTD.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
That is because the current philosophies adopted by most monothiestic religions derives from that of Aristotle. According to him, the universe had to have some sort of “first cause” or “prime mover” I think it is an interesting question further complicated by the modern theories of time in relation to space.
Does anyone know where I could find a rebuttal for Aristotlean arguement for theism? I am only just becoming agnostic, and as such I do not have any knowledge of their literature
Isn’t the “concept” of The Universe, given this criteria, also an “obvious fallacy?” Hasn’t it (in whatever form) simply “always been here?” Isn’t the ultimate source of everything that exists essentially unkowable according to science? That is, the answer to such a question is “speculative” though based on evidence – I am thinking here of “string theory,” which some physicists think is more philosophy than science (I offer this comment with tongue somewhat firmly in cheek; feel free to correct me if I’m wrong!).
At the moment of the big bang, time began. Where is there any evidence at all, other than the musings of long dead desert dwellers, that anything can exist outside of time? For anything to move, isn’t time required? If God exists outside of time, then what does the word “exist” mean when not anchored by a time and a place. And where was God before there was anything else? To have a location is to have a where but where is where when there is no where? And while I’m on this train, why make the universe so staggeringly big? Seems a bit extravagant to do for a single species of evolved primate lost in the spiral arm of an unremarkable galaxy.
May 5th, 2009 at 15:59
The answer I always receive is that god has ALWAYS been here.
May 5th, 2009 at 16:21
That is because the current philosophies adopted by most monothiestic religions derives from that of Aristotle. According to him, the universe had to have some sort of “first cause” or “prime mover” I think it is an interesting question further complicated by the modern theories of time in relation to space.
Does anyone know where I could find a rebuttal for Aristotlean arguement for theism? I am only just becoming agnostic, and as such I do not have any knowledge of their literature
May 5th, 2009 at 20:29
Isn’t the “concept” of The Universe, given this criteria, also an “obvious fallacy?” Hasn’t it (in whatever form) simply “always been here?” Isn’t the ultimate source of everything that exists essentially unkowable according to science? That is, the answer to such a question is “speculative” though based on evidence – I am thinking here of “string theory,” which some physicists think is more philosophy than science (I offer this comment with tongue somewhat firmly in cheek; feel free to correct me if I’m wrong!).
May 5th, 2009 at 22:59
At the moment of the big bang, time began. Where is there any evidence at all, other than the musings of long dead desert dwellers, that anything can exist outside of time? For anything to move, isn’t time required? If God exists outside of time, then what does the word “exist” mean when not anchored by a time and a place. And where was God before there was anything else? To have a location is to have a where but where is where when there is no where? And while I’m on this train, why make the universe so staggeringly big? Seems a bit extravagant to do for a single species of evolved primate lost in the spiral arm of an unremarkable galaxy.
May 6th, 2009 at 14:25
aliens?