Thursday, May 7, 2009

Need say no more

We know there is no God in the same way that we know there are no square triangles.

Assume: the definition of God is an intelligent being who decides to begin the universe, including time.

A decision is a transition from indifference to will. Such transition may only take place within time. Thus, we ask the question when did God make the decision to begin time, before, after or during the actual commencement of time:

1. Since all decisions require time to already be in effect, God cannot make the decision until time has already commenced in operation and accordingly, he cannot make the decision before or during the actual commencement of time;

2. Since time was already in existence after time commenced, God cannot be said to create it.

Thus, the definition of God as presented CANNOT exist because, like the square triangle, the definition CANNOT be show to exist in reality and thus, there CANNOT be a God.

However, this proof only shows that an intelligent being could not create the universe. It does not prevent the universe being the result of natural causes, something without decision making ability or chosen will. Accordingly, as far as I see it and to the extent of the validity of the argument, which I cannot flaw myself, the argument about the existence of God is now over.


Jake Elwood XVI said...

sometimes I find your logic quite base.

One might simply ask why must a decision succeed time? I think this is the weakest part of your argument.

You have not argued strongly enough to prohibit that when a decision to create occurs, that time can't exist only at or after the occurrence of that decision.
You will need to argue that it is inappropriate to view time's creation as not being the object of the decision to create but because of this decision.

You make a considerable leap from what is 3. Even if we gave you 1 and 2 and your assumptions, to say that no other kind of god exists has not been proven, just a god creating time. However I can't see how argument 1 is proven.

I continue to be bewildered by your highly inflated assessment of your own arguments and opinions. Does not occurrences like desmond tutu and the condoms and pythagoras' fishy story cause you to contemplate your great assuredness. But then again maybe faith is blind?


Anonymous said...

In that case, can you please explain a decision outside of time. That is, please explain how some entity can proceed from a point of indifference to a point of difference (choice) without time? There is no such possibility and thus a being cannot make such a transfer, thus, the "God" as defined cannot exist.

This isn't even my argument. It comes from a long line of though commencing with Parminides.


David Gee said...

Jake is right about the weakness of your argument regarding the leap between 2 & 3 but there is a greater leap you make I think.

You have in 1 made the assumption that before this universe existed then the rules for operation were as they are now. I've said it before Alex, you are being inconsistent. If you can argue that the laws of physics were suspended during the expansion of the big bang and came into effect only after a period then it is irrational to bring this argument.

Not only that but also Alex you have forgotten that the one who makes something is greater than it! God made time is the first assumption in this senario, therefore being greater than it He is able to operate independent of it!

Just because you are ignorant of how it is possible does not make it impossible. You and I cannot fathom how light can be a wave/particle duality simultaneously but it is, there is a limit to our knowledge. That is being human. You've over-reached yourself again....

CASE - now with holiness said...

Actually David, you have misunderstood the argument. The argument proceeds from the basis taht intelligent decision making beings exist within this universe, it accepts that an initial point would be based on a different set of circumstances and concludes that such other set of circumstances does not provide the neccesary quality (ie time) in order to allow for an intelligent being.

The ultimate irony of your point is that you are insisting that the universe conform to something that is within human knowledge (ie an intelligent being "must have done it") when something outside that possibility (ie natural result from nothingness) is impossible. Your objection is thus, self-refuting.

I would love to discuss these issues with you, but it is clear that you just want an argument and do not wish to come to the truth - there is no god ;)

David Gee said...

I would love to discuss these issues with you, but it is clear that you just want an argument and do not wish to come to the truth - there is no god ;)

Its ok Alex, I understand that you are afraid the implications of what you see around you... Christian faith still in existance long after the atheists of old said it would be gone and growing. Atheism being challenged not just by Christians but other religions too. Science becoming increasingly a poor ally for your blind faith. Its ok, I can understand your worry.

I do want to discuss with you and if you look through our many corespondences you will find that is what I have tried to do, civilly and courteously discuss with you. Admittedly I have gotten frustrated occationally but I do what to discuss with you, why else would I seek out your own website when you refused to interact with me on the OP513 site?

As for the truth... I'm not the one positing an absolute negative and thus requiring absolute knowledge to confirm my position. :)

I guess I'll keep on praying for you to repent and trust in Jesus Christ then. God Bless.

CASE - now with holiness said...


I think that deserves some kind of response.

I have never been religious and I have always believed in the rights of people to believe in what they want to believe.

I began this little streak of atheistic activism because I was worried that this was a dire issue, that the religious would try and take over. The fact is that I was wrong, the human race is not dumb enough to succumb to the evils of religion while science and rationalism remains in our society. Those two things are pillars of our modern community, as much as the rule of law and democracy. The more I consider these issues, the more I realise that we, the atheists, have already won this battle. We did not need to raise a single sword or use any of the vile tactics that the religious have done. All we have to do is ensure that information is available to our citizens. Its that simple.

1500 years ago, the christian emperor Justinian outlawed the schools of philosophy and ordered the burning of great libraries such as the Library of Antioch. This resulted in the dark ages because so much knowledge was lost. Yet, those philosophers such as Socrates and Aristotle have been resurrected and their ideas more relevant to our world than Jesus Christ's or Mohammed's will ever be. So to, in the age of the internet and our focus on learning and knowledge, I cannot see such evils as those perpetrated by the religious against rationalist ever being repeated.

Rest assured though, I remain a co-ordinator of the Brisbane Atheist Group and my people will be ever vigilant if the religious do attempt once more to take humanity into the darkness of ignorance. However, I do not think that it will ever be necessary in my life time.

Yet, think on this, the only reason that the religious can continue to worship is simply that we would not limit any persons freedom. In this regard, we separate ourselves from the religious. So, although there may be some among you that still believe in religious fantasy, your numbers will dwindle (though your conviction will become more radical) and you will become more irrelevant to society than you are now. You will be laughed at, just as people laugh at Ted Haggard, the Pope, Ayatollahs or Westboro Baptist Church. Though you may think this makes your community stronger, it will only result in you seperating yourselves further from the rest of humanity, and that is a fate that I do not wish on you or any person.

Accept the truth that this is your only life, celebrate those around you and do not restrict any person from their right to believe as they will. Only then will you enjoy this one opportunity to be alive and breathing.

Alex Stewart, 12 June 2009 - Sydney, Australia.