154
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 45:
Line 45: + + +
Debate:Who created God? (view source)
Revision as of 12:06, October 1, 2008
, 12:06, October 1, 2008no edit summary
:: Your "satisfaction" in not assuming a supernatural terminator seems mere wishful thinking, given that you've found a ''different'' infinite regress case that didn't need one. That's not a solid argument at all.
:: Your "satisfaction" in not assuming a supernatural terminator seems mere wishful thinking, given that you've found a ''different'' infinite regress case that didn't need one. That's not a solid argument at all.
:: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:25, 30 September 2008 (EDT)
:: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:25, 30 September 2008 (EDT)
:::I do not find that rationale convincing at all, and I still feel that it has little substance. From what I can understand, you outline the reasons why people like me think that God must be complex and they seem to me to be fairly convincing. In return you seem to say "how do you know that he cannot be complex?". Which is true, i don't 'know' that, however it is no real argument, simply a statement.
:::It's not wishful thinking to posit a natural terminator when there are situations in which a former infite regress is shown to have a natural terminator. I agree that it is not a perfect analogy, and certainly not 'proof'. But I would argue that it is a lot more simple and more likely considering that the evidence for any form of supernatural activity, being or event seems to be very limited. So while we 'know' that natural things can exist, we cannot have the same certainty about anything supernatural. I apologise if my argument is not concise but I think you can understand where I am coming from. [[User:Bolly|Bolly]] 22:06, 1 October 2008 (AEST)