/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14607985]

How would anything exist without a transcendental Creator? "Nothing" can not beget everything that is in existence. You can produce nothing out of voidness. Yet here we are.

[Anonymous No.14608006]

it was just happenstance duh

[Anonymous No.14608012]

>>14608006
But there needed to be something that defined the happenstance. Void is absolutely nothing, and it's difficult to understand how time and being could come into existence out of uncomprehensible void.

[Anonymous No.14608013]

How can a trascendental creator exist? It's the same fucking shit, thousands of years and retards still insist on arguing one way or another.

We'll never know.

[Anonymous No.14608015]

>back to big brain again.
a) you cannot create nothing out of nothing
b) something exists
c) ergo, something must have always existed, or a is wrong (since b cannot be overturned)

[Anonymous No.14608022]

Logic is self-creating. The absence of the law of non-contradiction allows its own existence, creating a space in which the law holds. God is this Logos, since God could not create logic, since God’s existence could not be logical, and God could not be separate from logic while having a logical existence, or logic would seem to be the cause of God’s existence. God is that Truth which sees itself as such, the great I AM.

[Anonymous No.14608024]

>>14608015
In theory, the Christian God is responsible for absolutely everything other than Him. That's what Genesis means when it says God's creation was good, by the way.

[Ricky Gervais No.14608031]

>>14608015
What makes you think that was a "creator"?

[Anonymous No.14608065]

>uselessly masturbating over linguistic paradoxes
who cares? If all you can say about god is that he exists, then you do nothing but worship your little logical proof. After that, he is completely silent. what good is a silent god?

[Anonymous No.14608066]

>>14608031
read it as the same way RNA creates DNA

[Anonymous No.14608079]

>>14608024
The fallacy here is believing in a God as a real, existing entity with human characteristics, although I do think that the psychological and social utilities of religion, especially Christianity, are quite profound. If anything is "God" in a sense, it might be infinity, or a thing that can be defined as the sum total of all existence. Maybe similar to the concept of Tao or Einstein's Spinozist metaphysical opinions, as he purportedly said; "God is both the garden and the gardener."

[Anonymous No.14608120]

>>14608015
What you actually arrive at is a paradox. If what-is is eternal, then you deny change, because change is the coming-into-being of something that was not. God can't have created the world, because he would have to always be creating the world, but the world isn't like that, the world is not itself eternal.
On the other hand, the fact that there is a world refutes all these arguments, and all we're really left with is that we're fundamentally wrong about everything.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.14608139]

>>14607985
>How would anything exist
Easily.
It all exists in its great nowness.
That is it always has been and always will be. Obeying the laws of physics and keeping in it cycles without little frightened superstitious creatures.

[Anonymous No.14608145]

>>14608120
> If what-is is eternal, then you deny change
it's always with these weird ad hoc oughts
No, to what you arrive is that existence was created in this existence, in way human understanding cannot reach.

[Urantia reader No.14608153]

>>14608139
195:6.8.Materialism reduces man to a soulless automaton and constitutes him merely an arithmetical symbol finding a helpless place in the mathematical formula of an unromantic and mechanistic universe. But whence comes all this vast universe of mathematics without a Master Mathematician? Science may expatiate on the conservation of matter, but religion validates the conservation of men's souls—it concerns their experience with spiritual realities and eternal values.

195:6.9.The materialistic sociologist of today surveys a community, makes a report thereon, and leaves the people as he found them. Nineteen hundred years ago, unlearned Galileans surveyed Jesus giving his life as a spiritual contribution to man's inner experience and then went out and turned the whole Roman Empire upside down.

[Anonymous No.14608175]

>>14607985
>How would anything exist without a transcendental Creator?
Then how would a transcendental creator exist without another transcendental creator?

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.14608190]

>>14608153
>Sky daddy not real?
>All is pointless and SOULLESS
Oh give me a fucking break

[Anonymous No.14608216]

>>14608190
Based butterfly

[Anonymous No.14608240]

read Spinoza’s ethics and shut the fuck up.

the universe is infinite, meaning there is nothing outside it, if there was something outside the universe causing it, then something would have to cause the thing outside it, and so on. therefore the universe is the cause of itself and all the things that play out upon it. if there was a god with rules for us, then how could we break rules? the only rules are rules of ‘nature’, physical limits in space and time, and maybe psychological ones: try keeping a person in solitary confinement and you’ll find a law of nature. but the 10 commandments aren’t rules, as is evident by the fact they can easily be broken

[Urantia reader No.14608265]

>>14608190
If there is no God then there is no inherent meaning to life, its just a magical accident. Any meaning you give life is ultimately meaningless.
God IS meaning.

[Anonymous No.14608283]

>>14608265
this is your own problem, dude. do you see fish and chimps crying about a crisis of meaning? no, its only because you’ve been promised transcendental truths and utopian fantasies that you can’t deal with the reality that life is what you make it, according to the hand you are dealt

[Anonymous No.14608318]

>>14608283
Utterly retarded. Why are fish and chimps the standard?

[Anonymous No.14608336]

>>14607985
Being is cyclical or time just slowly developed somehow

[Anonymous No.14608380]

>>14608190
>>14608190
>give me a fucking break
Give me a reason to do so.
Pro-tip: without God, you can't

[Anonymous No.14608383]

>>14608283
>this is your own problem
Thats where you're wrong bucko.

[Anonymous No.14608391]

>>14608318
>>14608383
oh look at that, i could have sworn you didnt come up with an argument!

[Anonymous No.14608394]

>>14607985
Two problems with this:
a) Who created the Creator, then? "The Creator is transcendental" isn't an answer to this, it's basically just "it's fucking magic I ain't gotta explain shit" dressed up.
b) This is the problem with every ontological argument type of "logic proof of god", including slightly fancier ones like Averroes. I'm willing to grant that this is roughly sound, but the leap from "there must be something which encompasses everything" to "... so therefore there is a particular God who has the features MY (particular sect of my particular) religion ascribes to him and you must do exactly as my particular holy book/religious authority sez OR ELSE" is a shit jump and it's intellectually dishonest. Why bother even putting all the effort into making a rigorous proof of God from concrete world to abstract Absolute God if you then skip the effort of building down from the Absolute to the concrete world again?

[Anonymous No.14608402]

>>14608391
>if I just say meaningless shit I can pretend to win an argument

[Anonymous No.14608407]

>>14608402
>if i just say meaning only comes from god, i’ve won the argument

[Anonymous No.14608469]

>>14608145
based retard

[Anonymous No.14608577]

>>14607985
>nothing cannot beget everything
Read Hegel

[Anonymous No.14608721]

God has fallen so lowly, that the only given reason for his existence is logical necessity and nothing more

[Anonymous No.14608734]

>>14608066
RNA requires nucleotides and energy to make DNA, though.

[Anonymous No.14608741]

>>14607985
And we are nothing.

[Anonymous No.14608755]

>>14607985
>"Nothing" can not beget everything that is in existence.

[Anonymous No.14608766]

There are people working right now to try to solve this question:

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141106-why-does-anything-exist-at-all

[Anonymous No.14608978]

>>14607985
Pretty girl has pretty boobies in her pretty dress!

When I see a pretty girl like her, I like to tell them that cosmological necessity demands an Absolute reality; however, the nature of this reality can still vary heavily. The materialist view simply believes in matter as substance; whereas countering philosophies argue for a rationalistic or idealistic epistemology with a cosmology suited for their epistemic methods, such as Being and Noumenon for Plato and Kant. An easy way to describe this is that everyone believes in something that matches a lot of the traits of a "God;" however, the consciousness, body, and anthropomorphism of that "God" are what are being debated. For example, some religions do not believe in a conscious God, or they view the conscious personal God as something created by the unconscious Absolute. Some have a pantheistic view where we are essentially living inside of God, and made of him, because the material world is the Absolute. This is why a lot of materialists tend to respect Spinoza.

Pretty girls love it when you tell them that. I think there's something about having cute boobies that makes women interested in philosophy.

[Anonymous No.14609478]

>>14608022
*crickets*

[Anonymous No.14609486]

>>14607985
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.14609494]

Reminder to read Whitehead to stop being retarded

[Anonymous No.14609543]

Why did you also post this is a Sleep Facebook group?

[Anonymous No.14609614]

>>14607985
>How to destroy Buddhism with one simple trick...
>>14608013
>How can a trascendental creator exist?
Do you have any arguments against the notion other than that we can't directly perceive one with our eyes?
>>14608015
but c) doesn't automatically mean that the material world or the universe has always existed, because the world doesn't have to be produced out of nothing but can be a emanations from, modification of or and appearance of the eternal transcendental creator
>>14608120
>God can't have created the world, because he would have to always be creating the world,
But the eternal God can always be emanating and sustaining the non-eternal appearance/existence of the universe like the sun always emitting light, in which case there wouldn't be a paradox. It's only if you consider creation as a concrete and completely real created product that emerges into existence ex-nihilio that there starts to be major contradictions
>>14608175
By existing eternally, which is automatically implied by it being a transcendental being, but which is not automatically implied of matter and the universe

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.14609821]

>>14608383
>wrong bucko.
No, really. We don’t feel your pain. We’ve moved beyond it. The problem is yours and your camp.

>>14608318
Fish and chimps sounds funny. Fish, chimps and those of us who have moved beyond it are the standard. The retarded ones are you and yours. You still want the fantasy. Peter/Pan land
Grow up. Like Pippi.

[Anonymous No.14609995]

>>14609614
you having a laugh bud?

[Anonymous No.14610383]

>>14607985
>"Nothing" can not beget everything that is in existence.
Metaphysical assertion. Not a necessary truth.

[Anonymous No.14610722]

>>14608265
>God IS meaning.
why?

[Anonymous No.14611075]

>>14610383
found the retard

[Anonymous No.14611087]

All things we can positively think of is posterior to the cause of everything.

[Anonymous No.14611105]

>>14607985
I wish Tay was my wife

[Anonymous No.14611215]

>>14608265
Yes and?

[Urantia reader No.14611225]

>>14609821
Its hypocritical to have such strong faith in the unproven theory of atheism and then act as if your position is based on scientific certainty.

[Anonymous No.14611257]

>>14611225

[Urantia reader No.14611286]

>>14611257
>the arrogance of scientism

Science is neither atheistic nor theistic; atheists can be irrational too.

[Anonymous No.14611403]

>>14607985

You are assuming that existence requires a beginning. Why are you imposing your own biases on existence itself?

[Anonymous No.14611406]

>>14611257

>that distinct reddit artstyle
>muh science

[Anonymous No.14611410]

>>14607985
>"Nothing" can not beget everything that is in existence.
fallacy of composition. not sure why so many theists can't grasp it

[Urantia reader No.14611485]

>>14609821
>>14608283
>do you see fish and chimps crying about a crisis of meaning?

160:1.5.Animals respond nobly to the urge of life, but only man can attain the art of living, albeit the majority of mankind only experience the animal urge to live. Animals know only this blind and instinctive urge; man is capable of transcending this urge to natural function. Man may elect to live upon the high plane of intelligent art, even that of celestial joy and spiritual ecstasy. Animals make no inquiry into the purposes of life; therefore they never worry, neither do they commit suicide. Suicide among men testifies that such beings have emerged from the purely animal stage of existence, and to the further fact that the exploratory efforts of such human beings have failed to attain the artistic levels of mortal experience. Animals know not the meaning of life; man not only possesses capacity for the recognition of values and the comprehension of meanings, but he also is conscious of the meaning of meanings—he is self-conscious of insight.

[Anonymous No.14611516]

>>14607985
Your argument is paradoxical, as such a creator must necessarily have come from nothing.

[Anonymous No.14611544]

Modern atheism is just psuedo-intellectuals pretending that they're the first people to question God and meaning, and conveniently ignoring the centuries of christian canon struggling with those same questions.
Modern Christianity is non-intellectuals LARPing as paleo-traditionalists, or rats thinking that following a predetermined set of instructions will make them feel comfortable with the paradox of living in the modern age and believing in a god.

[Anonymous No.14611620]

>>14611485
Grow up, Pippi.

[Anonymous No.14611636]

>>14607985
>implying anything "exists"

[Urantia reader No.14611659]

>>14611620
<in case of nothing to say, insert buzzphrase here>

[Anonymous No.14611702]

>>14611659
Your floridly insane copypasta is not worth posting.

[Anonymous No.14611844]

>>14611485
lol this is the dumbest shit i think i’ve ever read.

so mankind killing themselves is proof we have transcended mere nature? keep your god, senpai, i’m living with the fish

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.14611853]

>>14611225
But it’s alright for the religious to be hypocritical. ? Pff
>Unproven
The extreme odds are in the favor of their being no god and the rest of it. Odds that wont magically rebound. Ever.

>>14611620
Pippi is the grown up though

[Anonymous No.14611997]

>>14611544
how do we all become as based and redpilled as you?

[Anonymous No.14612396]

You don't get a divine creator out of nothing or a universe without a creator from nothing. What did it? It's a question, which at present, has no objective answer. It is a chicken with no egg, and an egg with no chicken.

[The Prophet !!lwPyLS41HmK No.14612404]

>>14607985
I'd sell my soul to blow a few loads unprotected in Taylor Swift.

[Anonymous No.14612491]

>>14612404
The modern Faust, though I’m not sure Spengler would be proud

[Anonymous No.14612515]

>>14607985
Because time doesn't flow in one direction

[Anonymous No.14612521]

>>14607985
>Anonymous 01/26/20(Sun)08:42:10 No.14
The universe has always existed. That's how.

[Anonymous No.14612565]

>>14608577
this

[Anonymous No.14612574]

>>14608766
people have been working on it, pleb.
cf. Hegel

[Anonymous No.14612575]

>>14612521
At least you're intelligent enough to see the utility of an eternal universe in countering cosmological arguments.

[Anonymous No.14612609]

>>14612575
Thanks?

[Anonymous No.14613864]

>>14608978
This but unironically.

God is self-evident as a concept because all human groups independent of each other have been demonstrated to form that concept. The exact definition of that God is a more complicated question, but as far as a conceptual truism that is proved by our collective agreement on its existence (like numbers or nations or capital), God is absolutely real.

[Anonymous No.14613879]

>>14611257
>holding God accountable for human idiocy
Not gonna fly, pal.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.14613986]

>>14613879
>Parents should never be held accountable for raising idiot children.
Wat¿

[Anonymous No.14614089]

>god doesn't exis-

[Anonymous No.14614108]

>>14613864
>x is real because lots of people think it’s real
the absolute state of Christian apologetics. You guys have come a long way since aquinas

[Anonymous No.14614127]

todd howard did a better description of creation than thomas aquinas prove me wrong