Evidence for God from Science

Every now and then i play devils advocate and try to create a logical argument for atheism and I think i have a tenable one that i'll present to you guys to destroy. Oh and hey guys, i haven't been here in forever. I read the topics as a guest but haven't had anything to say for a while


WLC's argument would be

-Everything that has a beginning has a purpose
-The universe began to exist therefore it had a purpose
-That purpose comes from God

here's one i thought of in my head

-Some things exist and don't have a purpose, like male nipples or the hairs on our arms; they stand up in defense once we are scared but they have no purpose. The same with our nipples (for all the guys in here, ha). Nipples and the hair on our arms had a beginning.
-The same can be said about the universe, it could have a beginning but have no purpose
-You could either plug in a deistic God in here, or just the universe coming into existence by chance for no good reason at all with no God behind it. Just blind mechanisms...


I don't know if i did a good job, probably not , i kinda suck at syllogisms, but whatever.

Just food for thought

Hi spartan

Hair on our arms does serve a purpose it acts as an insulator trapping warm air near our skin, we actually have hair on most parts of our bodies but we just can't see it as it is so fine.
Male nipples i am not so sure, will have to look into it but i am sure they have a purpose, i will get back to you.


Daniel

spartanII wrote:Every now and then i play devils advocate and try to create a logical argument for atheism and I think i have a tenable one that i'll present to you guys to destroy. Oh and hey guys, i haven't been here in forever. I read the topics as a guest but haven't had anything to say for a while


WLC's argument would be

-Everything that has a beginning has a purpose
-The universe began to exist therefore it had a purpose
-That purpose comes from God

here's one i thought of in my head

-Some things exist and don't have a purpose, like male nipples or the hairs on our arms; they stand up in defense once we are scared but they have no purpose. The same with our nipples (for all the guys in here, ha). Nipples and the hair on our arms had a beginning.
-The same can be said about the universe, it could have a beginning but have no purpose
-You could either plug in a deistic God in here, or just the universe coming into existence by chance for no good reason at all with no God behind it. Just blind mechanisms...


I don't know if i did a good job, probably not , i kinda suck at syllogisms, but whatever.

Just food for thought

Also Dr Craig did not say that everything that begins to exist has a purpose - he said everything that begins to exist has a cause - whether through an external cause or by necessity of its own being - big difference.

If I remember correctly males have nipples because nipples begin to develop in a fetus before gender is assigned.

If things (like the universe) could exist without a cause, why don't things happen without a cause on a regular basis? Nothing has no boundaries. Like in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqfoiL9_deU&noredirect=1
I love that video...

This isn't Craig's argument, but just to clarify- Even if it was and your devil's advocate argument was proven to be correct, it would only prove that particular argument to be false, it wouldn't prove there is no God.

narnia4 wrote:This isn't Craig's argument, but just to clarify- Even if it was and your devil's advocate argument was proven to be correct, it would only prove that particular argument to be false, it wouldn't prove there is no God.

yeah, i think i made a mistake, but either way, i'm not supporting the argument i gave, i believe in God--i was just playing devils advocate

Another thing guys, are certain moral things subjective? Like lying, under certain cases is it okay to lie and support this Biblically, or eating certain animals? Is it okay for me to eat a cow with my American family but not if i were in India around Hindus? If i remember WLC's argument was "and some things are objectively wrong," ---so that means some things are subjective? because that's what i thought...

Gen. 5:1~This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, "IN THE LIKENESS OF GOD made he him; 2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.


Science only PROVE'S the Bible and more scientist than ever have converted to Christianity because of it. But what people need to understand is Christianity is NOT a Religion but rather a Reality and anyone can take a "sentence" out of any book and make it what they choose, it's when they read from beginning to end and usually more than once that things finally start making sense.
The "Holy Book" was obviously written wayyyyyyyyy before our time and why people can't make it possible to understand what "thee or thy or ye" means but yet can make sense of "Thats Phatt man" or "420" or "sup" means just shows their mentality~

So here's what "GOD" ~ Matt. 7:6~Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

Wendi wrote:Gen. 5:1~This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, "IN THE LIKENESS OF GOD made he him; 2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.


Science only PROVE'S the Bible and more scientist than ever have converted to Christianity because of it. But what people need to understand is Christianity is NOT a Religion but rather a Reality and anyone can take a "sentence" out of any book and make it what they choose, it's when they read from beginning to end and usually more than once that things finally start making sense.
The "Holy Book" was obviously written wayyyyyyyyy before our time and why people can't make it possible to understand what "thee or thy or ye" means but yet can make sense of "Thats Phatt man" or "420" or "sup" means just shows their mentality~

So here's what "GOD" ~ Matt. 7:6~Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

Love that Wendi, right on! Especially love this part: "But what people need to understand is Christianity is NOT a Religion but rather a Reality".

Male nipples keep us from looking weird at the beach. I'm sure we can think of a purpose for hairy arms as well.

BTW: I'm not a big fan of the teleological arguments, though John Frame uses them quite effectively.

I've heard that nipples may just have an aesthetic value, yeah like for going to the beach. Just saw some study that said hair on your arms helps you detect lice. Purpose or not I pretty much agree with what everybody else wrote.

Dr Shoe wrote:I've heard that nipples may just have an aesthetic value, yeah like for going to the beach. Just saw some study that said hair on your arms helps you detect lice. Purpose or not I pretty much agree with what everybody else wrote.

Whether they have aesthetic value or not, maybe some things that have purposes never serve those purpose. I buy a doorbell. What's the purpose of the doorbell? To tell me that someone is or was at my door. I install the doorbell, but nobody uses it. I left it unplugged, covered the button you ring it with, and put a knocker on the door. The doorbell and the knocker have the same purpose. But at my home, only the knocker serves that purpose. Like the doorbell, a man's nipples have a purpose that they don't serve.

Dare I ask what may the male equivalent of your door knocker may be, something that if it fails the nipples could conveniently replace?

Proinsias wrote:Dare I ask what may the male equivalent of your door knocker may be, something that if it fails the nipples could conveniently replace?

Who's assuming that teleology always implies that every object with a purpose needs to another object to substitute for it if it fails? St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that each has a unique immortal soul that belongs only to the one for whom God created it. I die, my body decays fully, after my soul leaves it, and then I live again when Christ resurrects our bodies. The catch is, for St. Thomas, that my body is any body that God ensouls with my soul. I'm a body-soul composite. My body and my soul are parts of me. I'm neither of them. Again, they're mine and mine alone. Although each human soul serves the same general purposes, nobody's soul can replace anyone else's soul. If my soul ensouled you body, your body would become my body. I would still be the person I am now. I wouldn't change into someone else. But I'd have a part that used to be yours. In the post you've just answered, I was trying to make a general point about purposes. I was saying that some objects never serve at least some purposes they have. The doorbell and the door knocker serve the same purpose. But I should have told you that I didn't assume that every object that has a purpose has or even can have a equivalent object to replace it if it fails.