|
Bangs like bikini attol
|
IP:
Ontological argument = Mindless babbel... Their saying that god must exist because the definition of god is perfection? What does that prove?
First cause argument = No shit... No big breakthrough here.... But it also has un-nessecary babbel and un-needed restrictions in the argument... The currant universal model can be seen to bounce from being constricted into the tinyest amount of space, then exploding into a big bang before applying the rule of what goes up must come down and ending in a crunch and bounce once again going through the cycles of existance.
Argument from Design = This is the better one.. However one could just as easily say that in a reality of an infinite sprawl of universes, there will always be one that contains the correct parametres for our existance. The universe does not nessecarily have to be designed. More likly out of an infinite range of chance equasions, we are living in the one that did support life.
Meaning the argument from design doesent prove jack shit except to the simple minded...
And finally...
The morality one.. Lmfao..
In a reality of free will. This argument holds absolutly no clout...
--------
My belief is that god is infact the universe we live in. I believe not that god has a beginning and an end, but god goes through cycles just as we do. Death becomes life, life becomes death.
The universe I see is a mind or spirit. And we the inhabitants. Everything we do and experience is dictated by the internal experience of god himself.
Sure you might say that this is simply deductive logic, but it creates an argument far more solid than the educated speculation your link provided.
|