(1) If I say something must have a cause, it has a cause.
(2) I say the universe must have a cause.
(3) Therefore, the universe has a cause.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
Needless to say, I haven't re-converted. The argument displayed above is meant to be funny to demonstrate just how empty the argument for labeling a first cause "God". Here's another one:
ARGUMENT FROM INFINITE REGRESS, a.k.a. FIRST CAUSE ARGUMENT (II)
(1) Ask atheists what caused the Big Bang.
(2) Regardless of their answer, ask how they know this.
(3) Continue process until the atheist admits he doesn't know the answer to one of your questions.
(4) You win!
(5) Therefore, God exists.
Before the argument shows up in a comment, evolution does not concern itself with the origin of life. Evolution has to do with what happened next, after life became a unique, living organism.
When Christians describe God as always existing and say that God invoked the universe into existence, they do not settle the matter. Instead, they compound the problem by causing the next question which is, "If God caused everything to exist, then where did God come from?" Christians then answer you with a "I guess you'll have to ask him when you meet him" or "he just always existed" answer, which really isn't an answer at all. Instead, what they have just done is shrugged their shoulders and then fed you a pre-recorded message meant to settle the matter.
This is where science and religion split yet again. Science is actively searching for the origins of the universe. True, science hasn't found it yet, but that doesn't mean humans shouldn't continue to push the boundaries of our intellect. Science doesn't shrug it's shoulders and explain-away unknowns with superstition. It really is too bad that Christianity doesn't do the same. I do understand why, though. If Christians actually thought about their religion critically, there would be no Christians.
No comments:
Post a Comment