God Created The World

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 12 here:

God created the world.

For debate:

I challenge folks to show the above claim is true.

[EduChris]

...we can't know the truth while we're alive?...

We can't know truth at all if non-theism is true.

...Does that apply to everyone, including you?...

Everyone of average intelligence can find the God of the philosophers. And for the rest, they have intuitions to guide them. Theism seems to be hardwired into humans. People have to fight against it, which probably explains the virulent behavior of many non-theists on this forum--it's hard to kick against the goads, as they say.

[Autodidact]

...Why?? Because you say so??...

Because he simply presents an opinion without ever providing any logical basis for connecting size with efficiency. If given a choice between living in a crackerbox or a castle, which would you prefer?

...I would say that comparing the size of the universe to our solar system, and look at it from a percentage of efficiency is making it substantiated/. Can you show why the analogy is not substantiating the opinion?...

You would need to provide some logical basis for assuming that size is necessarily related to efficiency, given possible ulterior motives such as beauty, grandeur, lebensraum, discovery, travel, etc.

...Can you show that would be needed and necessary in a rational and valid design ???...

What's wrong with a little extra flourish, a little extra grandeur? Why limit ourselves to some bland rationality? Who wants to live in a crackerbox?

...Why not just limit ourselves to something like our galaxy,.. with the limitation of light, that would last us a few billion years.

What's a billion years, give or take an eternity? God (as defined by contemporary theists) isn't bound by any arbitrary limitation of light.

And here you come back to the basic problem with assertions about God as creator; they're unfalsifiable. If we have a single flat planet with lights that spin above it, it's evidence of God and His nature. If, on the other hand, we turn out to have an unimaginably enormous and empty universe, trillions of miles across, sprinkled with trillions of trillions of stars, of which we are but a rock revolving around a single one, well, that's evidence of the same God and His nature. A single planet, three planets, trillions of trillions of planets--all serve as evidence for the same thing. In the end, God explains every possibility, and therefore nothing.

But Chris, are you with a straight face taking issue with someone for failing to substantiate his assertions? Seriously?

[Autodidact]

We can't know truth at all if non-theism is true.

And going for the record in consecutive unsupported statements...EduChris

We can't know truth at all if theism is true.

...Does that apply to everyone, including you?...

Everyone of average intelligence can find the God of the philosophers. And for the rest, they have intuitions to guide them. Theism seems to be hardwired into humans. People have to fight against it, which probably explains the virulent behavior of many non-theists on this forum--it's hard to kick against the goads, as they say.[/quote]

You realize this has nothing to do with what I asked, right? The poster asserts that truth cannot be known while we are alive. I want to know whether that includes him or not. Do you agree with the posted opinion that we cannot know truth while we are alive?

As for this purported "virulent behavior," this is one of the most tightly moderated forums on the internet. If you think someone is breaking the rules, report them. If you don't like the rules, this may not be the right forum for you. If you have a problem with people disagreeing with you, then you might want to choose another way to spend your time.

[EduChris]

...assertions about God...they're unfalsifiable...

Some assertions about God are falsifiable, which is why I defined God as I did (incorporating the common core of all of today's major world theisms). But scientifically, God is unfalsifiable because science chooses to deal strictly with contingent physical reality.

...In the end, God explains every possibility, and therefore nothing...

A volitional God is really the only possible epistemically justified explanation for human consciousness, reason, and volition. The only possible causal mechanisms are chance (which is a lack of explanation) or necessity (which eliminates volition) or volition (which entails theism).

...are you with a straight face taking issue with someone for failing to substantiate his assertions?...

I provided you with a link to my argument. I can't reinvent the wheel on every thread, and I don't really care whether or not you choose to investigate the link I provided.

[Goat]

...Why?? Because you say so??...

Because he simply presents an opinion without ever providing any logical basis for connecting size with efficiency. If given a choice between living in a crackerbox or a castle, which would you prefer?

And, in return, you give weak analogy. Pardon me, but size does matter. Things can be as big or as small as need be. let's see, they estimate that the universe is 157 billion light years across. Our galaxy is 100,000 light years across . Let's go with that scale in comparison. That's a miniscule percentage of the whole.. I would say that , well, yes, at this scale, that is a logical basis for connecting size with efficiency. The scale of your analogy is off by several billion percent.

...I would say that comparing the size of the universe to our solar system, and look at it from a percentage of efficiency is making it substantiated/. Can you show why the analogy is not substantiating the opinion?...

You would need to provide some logical basis for assuming that size is necessarily related to efficiency, given possible ulterior motives such as beauty, grandeur, lebensraum, discovery, travel, etc.

I would love to see evidence that 'Beauty, grandeur lebensraum , discovery travel etc' are motivations. Please provide evidence for that. And please describe why the local galaxy would not be large enough for that?

...Can you show that would be needed and necessary in a rational and valid design ???...

What's wrong with a little extra flourish, a little extra grandeur? Why limit ourselves to some bland rationality? Who wants to live in a crackerbox?

Weak analogy, with factoring the difference in size by several billion percent (at least).

...Why not just limit ourselves to something like our galaxy,.. with the limitation of light, that would last us a few billion years.

What's a billion years, give or take an eternity? God (as defined by contemporary theists) isn't bound by any arbitrary limitation of light.

Really?? Can you show that 'contemporary theists' are being true and accurate, and aren't just doing this little thing known as 'making things up as they go along'?

[EduChris]

...Pardon me, but size does matter...

If you can't provide any justification for your claim--given that we are not logically constrained to think in terms of bland, dreary minimalism--then all you have is an unsubstantiated opinion.

[Goat]

...Pardon me, but size does matter...

If you can't provide any justification for your claim--given that we are not logically constrained to think in terms of bland, dreary minimalism--then all you have is an unsubstantiated opinion.

I noticed that you did the technique known as 'quote mining'. You used a snippet of 4 words, and cut out the supporting argument.

Would you care to actually respond to what I said, rather than hand wave the issue?

[EduChris]

...You used a snippet of 4 words, and cut out the supporting argument...

You offered no supporting argument, which is why I asked for one. Please tell me why God must be constrained by a bland, dreary minimalism? If God likes to "go big," what's to stop him?

[Goat]

...You used a snippet of 4 words, and cut out the supporting argument...

You offered no supporting argument, which is why I asked for one. Please tell me why God must be constrained by a bland, dreary minimalism? If God likes to "go big," what's to stop him?

Not a damn thing. However, 'going big' is just showing that it is unlikely that humans are the focus of his intentions. It could be that black holes are, since there are a heck of a lot more black holes in the universe than there has ever been humans.

[EduChris]

...'going big' is just showing that it is unlikely that humans are the focus of his intentions...

Another unsubstantiated opinion.

...more black holes...than...humans

What's more precious: gold (which is rare) or sand (which is common)? Now, reverse the situation and suppose that gold was common and sand was rare. Which would become more precious in that situation?