If the universe had a cause then why pick on Christianity as the answer ? That is irrational . You looked for the religion that made you feel good about yourself. That's society for ya.
Huh. If the best theist argument is the Kalam Cosmological, then I'd say the best atheist argument would be the fact that it only posits the existence of a universe generator, not anything we think of as a "God" or "gods". The cosmological argument is completely irrelevant to actual religious belief - or should be.
So noted, but I still don't buy it. The emergence (what could be called "creation" if we indulge in wordplay) of space, time, matter, and energy does not necessarily require consciousness, let alone intelligence. The Kalam Cosmological argument makes a case for a supernatural machine that mindlessly creates infinite new universes just as much as it makes a theistic case. Almost all the properties of the "creator" come from outside the argument.
actually part of the argument does indeed suggest that the 'machine' as you call it must be conscious due to the fact that a non conscious object existing outside of time could not cause anything to happen, because it requires something that only consciousness could provide in that circumstance, an arbitrary choice to create.
I'm not seeing that implication. Non conscious entities inside of time cause things to happen, why would an entity outside of time be limited by its lack of consciousness? What requires creation to be a choice?
Speaking of which, I also have a problem with the premise that we know anything about the requirement(s) for coming into existence. Nothing since the beginning of the universe has begun to exist as far as we know, so how is premise 1 testable, let alone provable?
I made it so far, and I like this vid. thumbs up.
grom64pl 11 months ago
If the universe had a cause then why pick on Christianity as the answer ? That is irrational . You looked for the religion that made you feel good about yourself. That's society for ya.
holdontoyourwig 2 years ago
Huh. If the best theist argument is the Kalam Cosmological, then I'd say the best atheist argument would be the fact that it only posits the existence of a universe generator, not anything we think of as a "God" or "gods". The cosmological argument is completely irrelevant to actual religious belief - or should be.
echthroi9 2 years ago
Keep in mind I said that was the best theist argument, not the best Christian specific argument.
RationalRoundtable 2 years ago
So noted, but I still don't buy it. The emergence (what could be called "creation" if we indulge in wordplay) of space, time, matter, and energy does not necessarily require consciousness, let alone intelligence. The Kalam Cosmological argument makes a case for a supernatural machine that mindlessly creates infinite new universes just as much as it makes a theistic case. Almost all the properties of the "creator" come from outside the argument.
echthroi9 2 years ago
actually part of the argument does indeed suggest that the 'machine' as you call it must be conscious due to the fact that a non conscious object existing outside of time could not cause anything to happen, because it requires something that only consciousness could provide in that circumstance, an arbitrary choice to create.
RationalRoundtable 2 years ago
I'm not seeing that implication. Non conscious entities inside of time cause things to happen, why would an entity outside of time be limited by its lack of consciousness? What requires creation to be a choice?
Speaking of which, I also have a problem with the premise that we know anything about the requirement(s) for coming into existence. Nothing since the beginning of the universe has begun to exist as far as we know, so how is premise 1 testable, let alone provable?
echthroi9 2 years ago