Take 2: The universe is the evidence for God's existence.

[Susma]

In the predecessor thread to the present one, Janx and I were talking about his comment that my argument is into circular reasoning, and I was telling him to start from the beginning again on my step by step presentation of my proof that the universe is the evidence for God's existence.

So I will just reproduce here two posts from the predecessor thread:

• ref: The universe is the evidence for God's existence.

(2) A. Universe = the totality of existence where man lives in and is part and parcel of, as also everything else that exists or at least can be the subject of man's imagination and discourse.

The point here is simply to introduce the existence of "god" as a human construct? I don't think anyone disputes the existence of concepts for what they are, so it doesn't serve the point you seek.

[...]

Read again the title of the thread.


And read the following two posts and be guided accordingly, otherwise you are out of context.

• Attention, newcomers and returnees, please also read these two posts, in particular Composer.

• ref:The universe is the evidence for God's existence.

We can call God by other names like nature and evolution, but these names only indicate ultimately that God is the maker of everything in the universe that is not Himself.

Would you atheists not want to also call God, the randomness?

You can also if you also explain the origination and annihilation on the one hand and on the other the order and the stability in the universe, by your own peculiar concept of randomness, by which you will slip in order and stability on the sly; just as you want to insist on your own peculiar concept of nothingness, by which you always slip in on the sly something to represent the nothing.

-------------------


Now, if you have been following my posts from the very first initiating message from me, here are my step by step presentation of the argument for God's existence with the universe as the evidence.

• Step 1. Set forth the concepts of universe, evidence, and God:
  
  • A. Universe = the totality of existence where man lives in and is part and parcel of, as also everything else that exists or at least can be the subject of man's imagination and discourse.
    
    B. Evidence = a fact known by man by which he comes to know another fact.
    
    C. God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself.
  
  Step 2. Enumerate the kinds of actual and imaginable components of the universe:
  
  • A. Things which are subject to origination and annihilation.
    
    B. The imaginable thing that is the maker of A., Whom Christians call God.
  
  Step 3. Present the evidence:
  
  • A. In the universe there is the fact that the nose of man as man himself is subject to origination and annihilation,
    
    B. Therefore it is the fact that he cannot be his own maker, and also everything else in the universe that is subject to origination and annihilation cannot be their own maker,
    
    C. Wherefore, all these things with an origination and an annihilation witness to the
    fact of the actual existence of the imaginable being Whom Christian call God, as the maker of everything in the universe that is not Himself.

You still ask, Where is the evidence there?

Okay, again but concisely:

• In the universe:
  
  • 1. The evidence is the fact that there are beings in the universe which are subject to origination and annihilation,
    
    B. Therefore it is the fact that they cannot be their own maker,
    
    C. Wherefore it is the fact that the imaginable being maker of everything in the universe that is not himself is the being that is the maker of all these beings subject to origination and annihilation, Whom Christians call God.

Since atheists maintain that there is no God Whom Christians call in His fundamental relation to the universe as maker of everything that is not Himself, then they must present objections: to the demonstration above for the existence of God from the fact of the existence of the universe, where there is the fact that there are beings subject to origination and annihilation.

Now, let me see rational objections, not mockery and parody of God, and not misdirection or evasions of the issue.



Susma

---------------------

• ref: The universe is the evidence for God's existence.

Here are the statements in my entire argument, enumerated consecutively:

• (1) Step 1. Set forth the concepts of universe, evidence, and God:
  
  (2) A. Universe = the totality of existence where man lives in and is part and parcel of, as also everything else that exists or at least can be the subject of man's imagination and discourse.
  
  (3) B. Evidence = a fact known by man by which he comes to know another fact.
  
  (4) C. God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself.
  
  
  
  (5) Step 2. Enumerate the kinds of actual and imaginable components of the universe:
  
  (6) A. Things which are subject to origination and annihilation.
  
  (7) B. The imaginable thing that is the maker of A., Whom Christians call God.
  
  
  
  (8) Step 3. Present the evidence:
  
  
  (9) A. In the universe there is the fact that the nose of man as man himself is subject to origination and annihilation,
  
  (10) B. Therefore it is the fact that he cannot be his own maker, and also everything else in the universe that is subject to origination and annihilation cannot be their own maker,
  
  (11) C. Wherefore, all these things with an origination and an annihilation witness to the fact of the actual existence of the imaginable being Whom Christian call God, as the maker of everything in the universe that is not Himself.

Now, Janx, point out which statements above are not acceptable to you and why.




Susma

I shall be referring people who are out of context to these two posts for them to locate themselves in the proper context and act accordingly.



Susma

So, dear Janx and everyone else who had posted in the predecessor thread to the present one, I invite you and everyone else to exchange thoughts on the topic the universe as the evidence for God's existence.



Susma

[Susma]

How about the universe is proof that the universe exists?

Refresh my memory. Is the universe evidence that God does in fact exist or are we just talking about the universe being presented as evidence to confirm or discredit the notion that Bible-God exists? Can we glean the attributes of of said God through the evidence gleaned from our observation of the universe?

What say you. Is matter a distortion of energy or is energy a distortion of matter?

Before anything else keep the Bible out of this thread.

Tell me now, according to your reading comprehension, what do you understand of this sentence as follows:

• The universe is the evidence for God's existence.

Susma

Sure why not. If the Bible and all divine revelation are discredited then all we have left is the universe as evidence to prove God's existence.

What does the evidence show?

Glad you are still around!


What does the evidence show?


That is precisely my argument here, that the universe is the evidence for God's existence, wherefore if you know the fact of the existence of the universe, then you come to the fact of the existence of God as conceived to be the maker of everyting in the universe that is not Himself.

And what is evidence?

Statement no. (3):

• Evidence = a fact known by man by which he comes to know another fact.

Here read and think freely but with focus on the statements of my argument for the universe as the evidence for the existence of God.

• ref: The universe is the evidence for God's existence.

Here are the statements in my entire argument, enumerated consecutively:

• (1) Step 1. Set forth the concepts of universe, evidence, and God:
  
  (2) A. Universe = the totality of existence where man lives in and is part and parcel of, as also everything else that exists or at least can be the subject of man's imagination and discourse.
  
  (3) B. Evidence = a fact known by man by which he comes to know another fact.
  
  (4) C. God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself.
  
  (5) Step 2. Enumerate the kinds of actual and imaginable components of the universe:
  
  (6) A. Things which are subject to origination and annihilation.
  
  (7) B. The imaginable thing that is the maker of A., Whom Christians call God.
  
  (8) Step 3. Present the evidence:
  
  (9) A. In the universe there is the fact that the nose of man as man himself is subject to origination and annihilation,
  
  (10) B. Therefore it is the fact that he cannot be his own maker, and also everything else in the universe that is subject to origination and annihilation cannot be their own maker,
  
  (11) C. Wherefore, all these things with an origination and an annihilation witness to the fact of the actual existence of the imaginable being Whom Christians call God, as the maker of everything in the universe that is not Himself.

Happy reading with concentration!



Susma

[Susma]

Paging Adamoriens:


Please just come out clearly with the charge that my concept of God is an invalid concept, it cannot have any correspondence to any object in the realm of possibilities, much less in the realm of realities.


Don't go into theolog-ese, no need at all.



Okay?



Susma

I've never denied that "God" is an invalid concept, merely that it is only one among many. This is all set out in detail in earlier posts if you care to read them.

What exactly do you want to do here?

To show how you are so terribly convinced from your reason, logic, and intelligence and a lot of theolog-ese and philosoph-ese that there is no God maker of everything in the universe that is not Himself?

And you are succeeding so terribly and most satisfactorily with yourself, and can't see how terribly deluded you are: because you are ruled by a self-imposed tunnel-vision in your heart and mind, similar to the blinders horse owners put before the eyes of their horses, so that these otherwise noble animals don't see nothing but what is directly infront of their eyes?


See this post which I call my haha gotcha post from me in reply to one of your previous posts [ read the line in big bolded font at the end ]:

We are now into statement no. 2, do you have any objections against my concept of the universe?

Or you prefer to start with my statement no. 1:

• Set forth the concepts of universe, evidence, and God.

My purpose is to first work out with you people here atheists on common agreed on concepts involved in the proposition or thesis of this thread:

• The universe is the evidence for God's existence.

It is logical that contenders on both side of a question first agree on concepts, otherwise they will be wasting their time and labor talking past each other's head.


Now, will you just give me your objections if any to my proposed concept of the universe, and wait for no. (4) on God, after we have reached agreement on a common concurring concept of the universe and also concept of evidence [ statement no. (3) ].

Cosmological arguments like yours usually begin with the contingency of the universe, the idea that the universe exists but might not have. From here they reason that, since all contingent things presumably depend on something else for their existence, the contingent universe points to a necessary ground of existence, which they call God.

I do see this strategy in your argument, though you describe contingency as that which is "subject to origination and annihilation." Accordingly, your step 2 divides the universe (here defined as everything which exists, not just contingent things) into necessary beings (the imaginable thing Christians call God) and contingent beings (things which are subject to origination and annihilation). Finally, in step 3 you deduce that one is evidence for the other; there being contingent things is evidence for a necessary thing.

You describe the universe as constituted by contingent things and the imaginable thing which Christians call God. But why limit the imaginable things which might've created the universe to the Christian God? Your argument so far seems to rely on God being the only imaginable necessary being, and thus that every contingent being obviously depends on this one imaginable being for their origination. But suppose that I think of other imaginable beings which could create/cause contingent beings, or suppose I have no reason to think that God would create contingent beings? We need to eliminate other imaginable beings and/or provide evidence that God is the sort of being who would create contingent things.

For example, suppose I think that God would not create contingent beings, and also that I didn't exclude other possible causes of contingent beings. The existence of contingent beings in the universe, subject to origination and annihilation, would in that case be evidence that God does not exist! I don't personally go that far, but we ought to exclude this possibility if we are to move forward.

To sum up, so as to avoid charges of irrelevance or illogical haste:

I'm in agreement with the definitions of evidence and the universe. I see the definition of God us unsubstantiated; why should we think he is the maker of everything that is not himself? Step 2 fails to to exclude other imaginable beings which caused/created contingent things, and also suffers from the weakness of the definition of God in Step 1. Therefore, Step 3 fails, specifically because the challenges to Step 1 & 2 have not been met, and thus the move from premise B to C is unsubstantiated.

Hopefully this gives you a sufficiently detailed rubric of why your argument is not compelling.

Before anything else, use simple plain clear everyday language.


You say [ bolding from Susma ]:

• You describe the universe as constituted by contingent things and the imaginable thing which Christians call God. But why limit the imaginable things which might've created the universe to the Christian God? Your argument so far seems to rely on God being the only imaginable necessary being, and thus that every contingent being obviously depends on this one imaginable being for their origination. But suppose that I think of other imaginable beings which could create/cause contingent beings, or suppose I have no reason to think that God would create contingent beings? We need to eliminate other imaginable beings and/or provide evidence that God is the sort of being who would create contingent things.

Suppose you use your imagination to come up with some other being(s) that will do the work of creation.

Then I will get to know how your mind works or does not work.




Susma

Haha gotcha!


And here is a fellow atheist with tunnel-vision: read this post from me directed to him, ref: Take 2: The universe is the evidence for God's existence.

You say:

I have read your definition of the universe very carefully and find that you define the universe not only as everything that exists, but also as everything that can be imagined! Surely your are not presuming to suggest that your own rather primitive Christian concept of God is the only god that can be imagined?

Bitte sehr:

You think up other less primitive Gods to do the work of creation.

Haha gotcha both!


Here we have an example of two atheists with a most vacuous imagination.


They ask me to suppose that there are other beings that can bring about the universe of beings subject to origination and annihilation (contingent beings).

But they don't read at all that I have been saying all the time that I have in fact already supposed a being which Christians call God, and in His fundamental relation to the universe He is the maker of everything in the universe that is subject to origination and annihilation.

So, I ask them, you yourselves suppose or imagine some other beings that will do the work of creation.


Okay, let us all sit back and hear them tell us what other beings from their supposition or imagination will do the work of creation aside from the one I have a concept of, namely (statement no. (4):

• God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself.

Someone is asking me why I am here engaged in this forum.

My answer: It is very enjoyable, like an adventure but very safe, very thrifty, very exciting, and yes very very very engrossing, and no need to brave the traffic and the pollution outside my home.




Susma

[Adamoriens]

So, I ask them, you yourselves suppose or imagine some other beings that will do the work of creation.


Okay, let us all sit back and hear them tell us what other beings from their supposition or imagination will do the work of creation aside from the one I have a concept of, namely (statement no. (4):

• God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself.

Already did that three pages ago.

[JohnPaul]

[They ask me to suppose that there are other beings that can bring about the universe of beings subject to origination and annihilation (contingent beings).

But they don't read at all that I have been saying all the time that I have in fact already supposed a being which Christians call God, and in His fundamental relation to the universe He is the maker of everything in the universe that is subject to origination and annihilation.

So, I ask them, you yourselves suppose or imagine some other beings that will do the work of creation.

Okay, let us all sit back and hear them tell us what other beings from their supposition or imagination will do the work of creation aside from the one I have a concept of, namely (statement no. (4):

• God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself.

Susma

Aha! Now I understand! The subject for debate in this thread is not the real existence of God, but the existence of the supposition or imagination of God!

Now I fully agree with your thesis that the supposition or imagination of God or gods exists in the universe! Thanks for clearing that up!

John

[arian]

[They ask me to suppose that there are other beings that can bring about the universe of beings subject to origination and annihilation (contingent beings).

But they don't read at all that I have been saying all the time that I have in fact already supposed a being which Christians call God, and in His fundamental relation to the universe He is the maker of everything in the universe that is subject to origination and annihilation.

So, I ask them, you yourselves suppose or imagine some other beings that will do the work of creation.

Okay, let us all sit back and hear them tell us what other beings from their supposition or imagination will do the work of creation aside from the one I have a concept of, namely (statement no. (4):

• God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself.

Susma

Aha! Now I understand! The subject for debate in this thread is not the real existence of God, but the existence of the supposition or imagination of God!

Now I fully agree with your thesis that the supposition or imagination of God or gods exists in the universe! Thanks for clearing that up!

John

Close, but no dice. It's about the 'creation of the universe', ... another words, is the universe evidence in itself of a Creator God, .. the God of Christianity for instance. This God can manifest Himself in our minds, driving us to believe He created the universe.

The 'imagination' part is a valid proof of God, for it is also part of this physical creation, just as it is said to be a part of evolution, .. as part of our brain function. Right?

God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself

(Boy, I sure hope I didn't mess this up for you Susma?)

[JohnPaul]

[They ask me to suppose that there are other beings that can bring about the universe of beings subject to origination and annihilation (contingent beings).

But they don't read at all that I have been saying all the time that I have in fact already supposed a being which Christians call God, and in His fundamental relation to the universe He is the maker of everything in the universe that is subject to origination and annihilation.

So, I ask them, you yourselves suppose or imagine some other beings that will do the work of creation.

Okay, let us all sit back and hear them tell us what other beings from their supposition or imagination will do the work of creation aside from the one I have a concept of, namely (statement no. (4):

• God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself.

Susma

Aha! Now I understand! The subject for debate in this thread is not the real existence of God, but the existence of the supposition or imagination of God!

Now I fully agree with your thesis that the supposition or imagination of God or gods exists in the universe! Thanks for clearing that up!

John

Close, but no dice. It's about the 'creation of the universe', ... another words, is the universe evidence in itself of a Creator God, .. the God of Christianity for instance. This God can manifest Himself in our minds, driving us to believe He created the universe.

The 'imagination' part is a valid proof of God, for it is also part of this physical creation, just as it is said to be a part of evolution, .. as part of our brain function. Right?

God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself

(Boy, I sure hope I didn't mess this up for you Susma?)

I was being sarcastic in my last post, but thanks for trying. Incidentally, if imagination is a valid proof of God, is it not equally a valid proof of the Great Pumpkin? Excuse me now, while I go to the supermarket to worship at the shrine of the Great Pumpkin erected there.

John

[Susma]

So, I ask them, you yourselves suppose or imagine some other beings that will do the work of creation.


Okay, let us all sit back and hear them tell us what other beings from their supposition or imagination will do the work of creation aside from the one I have a concept of, namely (statement no. (4):

• God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself.

Already did that three pages ago.

Okay, produce your texts in the next post from you, that should be no trouble, I do that all the time.



I shall not give any further attention to JohnPaul because the man is to any person with a working sharp mind, into playing dummy.




Susma

[Adamoriens]

Okay, produce your texts in the next post from you, that should be no trouble, I do that all the time.

[An aside to the readers]

Those who have a natural talent for manipulation tend to be pretty good at debating. To succeed against an opponent in the eyes of one's peers, one can, if one is unscrupulous, work diligently to manipulate the context of the whole discussion, thereby influencing the perception of peers such that one appears to be victorious whatever the intellectual merits of one's arguments. An example of this strategy would be to narrowly define how one's opponents can respond, even such that one's opponents are unable to respond in any manner whatsoever without being labelled irrelevant or troublesome. This sort of belligerence (coupled with extreme verbosity) can weary one's opponents, leaving one alone on the field in apparent victory. Vapid condescension, endless accusations of foul-play, refusal to elaborate, demands for one's opponents to elaborate...the tactics are various but their purpose the same. This can continue until one is finally exposed, nakedly making pointless demands for the sadistic joy it brings.

[To Susma]

The above is theologese. I'm sorry.

[Susma]

Dear Adamoriens:


Please just attend to my post and abstain from spending time and labor wastefully.

So, I ask them, you yourselves suppose or imagine some other beings that will do the work of creation.


Okay, let us all sit back and hear them tell us what other beings from their supposition or imagination will do the work of creation aside from the one I have a concept of, namely (statement no. (4):

• God = in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, maker of everything that is not Himself.

Already did that three pages ago.

Okay, produce your texts in the next post from you, that should be no trouble, I do that all the time.



I shall not give any further attention to JohnPaul because the man is to any person with a working sharp mind, into playing dummy.




Susma

Take 2:

Okay, produce your texts in the next post from you, that should be no trouble, I do that all the time.



Best regards,


Susma

[JohnPaul]

Susma wrote:

I shall not give any further attention to JohnPaul because the man is to any person with a working sharp mind, into playing dummy.

Awww, look there! Susma is throwing a hissy-fit! Ordinarily this would not count as a debate point, but since Susma has so far not allowed any debate in "his" thread, who knows?

Anyway, the Devil made me do it! Boo!

John