rossum
Well-known member
I am Buddhist, not atheist; look at my avatar picture as a reminder. Buddhism has a great many gods, but they are not important and can be ignored.You say "There is no God, the material world is all there is." The Theist asks for an explanation of the universe. You say "The universe requires no explanation. It just exists." When the theist claims that "God does not need an explanation, God just is." the atheist becomes indignant.
The universe exists, both material and immaterial components. All components are temporary, they start and end. However, there has always been at least one component in existence, so the universe is eternal. No god is eternal. Yes, my scriptures are not the same as yours.
Everything is contingent, including the immaterial components and gods. All gods are mortal, though long lived, and their current lives are contingent on the karma from their previous lives, just like us.Here is why the theist maintains that God requires no explanation: God, unlike the universe, is not contingent. The universe requires an explanation becasue it and everything in it is contingent.
Then Jesus is not God. Jesus existed inside the universe, in Bethlehem, Jerusalem etc. God/Jesus in Bethlehem is inside the universe, not outside it.The problem with that is that God sits outside of the universe.
God as Creator is contingent on there being a created universe. God was not a creator 200 billion years ago, before the origin of the current material universe.Put another way: everything that exists is contingent. God on the hand is not contingent.
God exists, therefore God is part of "All That Exists". I am talking about a philosophical definition here, not a physical/material definition. Only a non-existent God can be outside the ATE universe.That begs the question. First, you want to take God and make Him part of the universe, when God is NOT part of the universe.
God is incapable of writing an autobiography? Really. Obviously not omnipotent then.God's relationship to the universe is analogous to the relationship between an author and their book.
The Bible is words in a human language and is part of the universe. If God is as disconnected from the universe as you say, then the Bible cannot be a correct description of God. The only correct description would be Zen-like, as in the eighth ox-herding picture.Second, you assume that God is LIKE everything else IN the universe; that is, you make God contingent, when in fact, God is not contingent, and therefore cannot be like everything else in the universe.
The Bible God is not changeless, as Genesis confirms. Does Genesis say:Eternal means changless, limitless, as well as not contingent.
On the first day the changeless God said, "Let there be light." And on the second day the changeless God said, "Let there be light." And on the third day the changeless God said, "Let there be light." And on the fourth day the changeless God said, "Let there be light." And on the fifth day...
Being changeless is very restricting. You cannot stop anything you are already doing and you can never start anything new. Both starting and stopping are changes. The Bible God is not changeless.
Buddhism emphasises change. Everything changes, so nothing is eternal.
Radioactive beta decay is just one example of an uncaused quantum event. All science can do is measure probabilities -- the half-life -- there is no cause why one atom of uranium decays while another one does not, though each has the same half life.That there are "uncaused" events at the quantum level is an illusion. Quantum mechanics follows defined set of rules and laws. If it didn't, how could scientists study it, mathematically model it, make predictions with it, and even create computers by using the principles of quantum mechanics?
Quantum mechanics is very very strange. Many assumptions that work on a macroscopic level do not work on the quantum level.If stuff just happened at the quantum level for no reason at all, it would be impossible to study scientifically.