[TrisB]

Thankyou all three, I'll address you in turn.

TChris - Yes Dawkins does judge the old testament relative to the modern zeitgeist (as he wrote), and makes no illusion of it. I think he is justified to reject the, at worst, genocidal aspects of the old testament, and this is an accurate reflection of almost everyone on the planet's opinion. This is certainly not just about Dawkins' personal views. We cannot rob ourselves of the ability to make such stark moral judgments on the grounds that we don't know what god would want. Dawkings is not putting himself on a moral throne, but merely leveling the playing field saying that morality cannot objectively be derived from scripture.

Anyway, why can't we decide for ourselves collectively? Paraphrasing Galileo, why would god give us the ability to think, and then not have us not use it?

jwalsh: [Creation is not a problem for creationists ] Indeed not, but our friend tried previously to reason physically that a God must exist to solve this problem, which it doesn't.

Alamo-girl: [Again, only God can be the uncaused cause of the beginning] Not sure you have grasped the nub here. Ok clearly you are DEFINING God as something that is uncaused. How can you argue that the only thing that solves causelessness is a custom-made concept purposefully defined as being uncaused? As I said, it doesn't solve the problem - its like defining the slepojebog as something which hypothetically cures cancer, therefor the cure for cancer is slepojebog. Lets all celebrate!

But seriously, why in principle can't a physical phenomenon be uncaused if God can? Surely If God exists in a plane where causality doesn't exist, why can't a purely physical phenomena from this plane exist, and govern our universe? Why is it requisite that uncaused phenomena must be godly, being the guy you prey to etc. What is inherent to these personal-god characteristics which allow God to be uncaused? Why would God being able to read our minds and influence people etc have forbearance on whether he needed a designer? Why must you associate the two? I think you're just trying to find a logical platform to package your illogical beliefs within, which wouldn't hold up on there own.

Thankyou all for reading my musings and replying!

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your reply!

But seriously, why in principle can't a physical phenomenon be uncaused if God can?

Sigh… Once again, because any physical phenomenon is by definition in space/time.

Remember this:

Were it not for time, events would not occur.

Were it not for space, things would not exist.

It is "about" the geometry of physical reality. But evidently the geometric physics has escaped you for you also said:

Surely If God exists in a plane where causality doesn't exist, why can't a purely physical phenomena from this plane exist, and govern our universe?

Any “thing” or “event” - including a phenomenon – which exists “in a plane” or membrane (or brane) - or as a plane or membrane or brane --- is by definition “in” space/time.

Moreover, no “thing” or “event” can exist in the absence of the space/time continuum. And that therefore is the bottom line of causality in physical cosmology and why there had to have been a beginning ex nihilio.

Remember that although our vision and minds are limited to a 4 dimensional comprehension (3 of space and 1 of time) – additional spatial and temporal dimensions are both possible and necessary to explain the phenomena we observe.

Take matter for instance. Of the critical density of the universe, 5% is ordinary matter, 25 % is dark matter (high gravity like the center of galaxies) and 70% is dark energy (which has a likeness to negative gravity causing the universe to expand creating space/time as it does).

But neither Fermilab nor CERN have ever been able to make or observe ordinary matter (Higgs field/boson) – much less can dark matter and dark energy be put to empirical tests in a lab. Currently, physicists are proposing other theories to the Standard Model which will no doubt be embraced if the Higgs field/boson is not observed in the next round of tests at CERN.

Among these theories is the suggestion that matter in four dimensions is a shadow of momentum components of particles in a fifth dimension which we do not yet understand. Another theory (Wesson) is that matter in four dimension may be multiply imaged as much as 10⁸⁰ times from a single particle in the fifth time-like dimension.

And all of these physical phenomena are “in” space/time – because those additional spatial or temporal dimensions are part and parcel of the space/time continuum.

Why is it requisite that uncaused phenomena must be godly, being the guy you prey to etc. What is inherent to these personal-god characteristics which allow God to be uncaused?

Sigh … Once again, there can be no uncaused phenomena because phenomena occur “in” space/time. In the absence of space/time, they would not exist.

They are all therefore caused.

There are many universals, forms, qualia and other non-spatial, non-temporal, non-corporeal “things” which would likewise not exist in the absence of space/time. Among these are pain and pleasure, information (successful communication,) autonomy, mathematical structures, theories, intentions, physical laws, physical constants, threeness, treeness, redness and so on.

None of these things would exist in the absence of space/time - they are therefore the effect of a cause.

Moreover, causation itself is a non-corporeal, non-spatial, non-temporal phenomenon which likewise cannot exist in the absence of space/time – and is therefore the effect of a cause.

The only possible uncaused cause of causation itself must by definition be beyond the space/time continuum per se - existence itself – uncaused and singular.

Moreover, this existence, uncaused and singular must also have wanted there to be a beginning. In other words, I AM is willful, having personality.

Or to put it another way, He caused causation per se. Causation didn’t exist until He gave rise to a beginning, of space, time, energy, matter, things, events, qualia, logic, laws, etc.

Why would God being able to read our minds and influence people etc have forbearance on whether he needed a designer? Why must you associate the two?

Your above questions make no sense to me. If you’d care to rephrase, I’ll try to respond.