|
| quote: | Originally posted by Zombie0915 lol sorry about the hijackery, I know I'm bringing this really old thread back from the dead but I said I would come back with some literature that explains the rationale for why people believe in God, and I found this today then remembered this thred, so have a look eh?
http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/rr1995/r&r9505a.htm
So if you buy the arguments here, then you agree that there is a god, somebody replied to me earlier asking what makes me think that this god is the same one that the bible talks about, to that I say:
I have no friggin clue, all I know is that it isn't me! To tell you the truth I've been pretty confused as to what I believe lately, but I do know that I believe something, weather it is part of an established religion or not is something I will find out later. |
Most of the article is composed of fallacious red herrings and arguments from ignorance. Therefore I'll only bother addressing the conclusion unless clarification is needed later:
| quote: |
The law of cause and effect, and the cosmological argument based upon that law, have serious implications in every field of human endeavor. The Universe is here, and must have an adequate antecedent cause. In addressing this problem, R.L. Wysong commented:
Everyone concludes naturally and comfortably that highly ordered and designed items (machines, houses, etc.) owe existence to a designer. It is unnatural to conclude otherwise. But evolution asks us to break stride from what is natural to believe and then believe in that which is unnatural, unreasonable, and...unbelievable.... The basis for this departure from what is natural and reasonable to believe is not fact, observation, or experience but rather unreasonable extrapolations from abstract probabilities, mathematics, and philosophy (1976, p. 412, first ellipsis in orig.).
Dr. Wysong then presented an interesting historical case to illustrate his point. Some years ago, scientists were called to Great Britain to study orderly patterns of concentric rocks and holes—a find designated as Stonehenge. As studies progressed, it became apparent that these patterns had been designed specifically to allow certain astronomical predictions. Many questions (e.g., how ancient peoples were able to construct an astronomical observatory, how the data derived from their studies were used, etc.) remain unsolved. But one thing is known—the cause of Stonehenge was intelligent design.
Now, suggested Dr. Wysong, compare Stonehenge to the situation paralleling the origin of the Universe, and of life itself. We study life, observe its functions, contemplate its complexity (which defies duplication even by intelligent men with the most advanced methodology and technology), and what are we to conclude? Stonehenge might have been produced by the erosion of a mountain, or by catastrophic natural forces working in conjunction with meteorites to produce rock formations and concentric holes. But what scientist or philosopher ever would suggest such an idea? |
This is a recycled old I.D. argument which is prima facie false because it rests solely upon a false premise: namely, that the universe is a highly ordered item. This is probably because it is dated (1976) and contemporary mathematical and scientific theories refuting the inherent complexity and/or structured order of the universe were then poorly developed (if at all).
| quote: | | No one ever could be convinced that Stonehenge “just happened” by accident, yet atheists and agnostics expect us to believe that this highly ordered, well-designed Universe, and the complicated life it contains, “just happened.” To accept such an idea is, to use Dr. Wysong’s words, “to break stride from what is natural to believe” because the conclusion is unreasonable, unwarranted, and unsupported by the facts at hand. The cause simply is not adequate to produce the effect. |
Once again, the argument fails to justify the assertion that the Universe is "highly ordered" or "well-designed." Even if it were, it fails to demonstrate that it requires a creator. How "well designed" is our Universe anyway? If you were designing a Universe, would you create ten billion light years in every direction of empty and pointless space? No, you wouldn't. No intelligent designer would do that. The hallmark of good design isn't complexity, it is simplicity. The universe is more like an ink-blot than a realist painting. We only see organization because our minds create order out of chaos.
Finally, I'd like to address the stonehenge analogy. It is a fallacious false analogy. It is not the inherent order or complexity of stonehenge which makes it reasonable to conclude it was the result of design, but rather the smiliarity of stonehenge to known designed objects. No one has seen a universe or anything like it designed, hence the analogy is false and a poor attempt (at best) to obscure the inherent weaknesses in the I.D. argument.
| quote: | The central message of the Cosmological Argument, and the law of cause and effect upon which it is based, is this: Every material effect must have an adequate antecedent cause. The Universe is here; intelligent life is here; morality is here; love is here. What is their adequate antecedent cause? Since the effect never can precede, or be greater than the cause, it stands to reason that the Cause of life must be a living Intelligence that Itself is both moral and loving. When the Bible records, “In the beginning, God...,” it makes known to us just such a First Cause.
|
Only two brief points to be made about this:
1. The "law" of cause and effect is an unsupported prima facie assumption, and
2. Effects can in fact be greater than a cause as is clearly demonstrated by Cellular Automata Theory (not to mention everyday human life  ).
| quote: | Originally posted by Zombie0915
Now if you want to go back to the topic. I am also one of the many people who are disobeying the christian teaching about abstinence and whatnot, there are a bunch of christian ideas that don't sit too well with me but I'm still not so sure if I should abandon the religion alltogether because of them just yet. I love my gf very much and we have sex whenever we feel the urge to do so. I believe I have been "born again" but am no longer seeking forgiveness for what I have been doing with her because I don't think that it is wrong. Some people say that once yer saved thats it and everything is forgiven, others think that if you sin and time and time again and continue to ask forgiveness, eventualy God knows that you aren't being sincere about it and he sends you to hell. Weather or not im going to hell for this(if it exists) is completely beyond me, but while I'm still here I'm going to do lotsa fucking! |
Just abandon the stupid religion altogether. What are you clinging on to? Do you want to be a hapless pawn in a struggle between forces which you can only pretend to comprehend?
There is not enough evidence of the validity of Christian dogma for a sane, rational person to believe that it can be logically established as true.
Furthermore, the Christian theology and lifestyle are so despicably at odds with the nature of man that a sane, rational person would never voluntarily choose to have faith in them.
You can be your own God, or you can be the worthless puppet of an imaginary one. I believe the choice is obvious.
|
