Necessity of God (Non-supernatural entities though)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sorry!
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of a necessary entity, referred to as "god," which is defined as the "G-function" that brings the universe into existence. The original poster argues that since the universe exists, there must be something that fulfilled this G-function, although they do not imply the existence of a supernatural being. Critics challenge this reasoning, pointing out that it relies on circular logic and assumptions about the need for the universe to be created. The conversation also touches on the implications of infinite regress and the philosophical definitions of existence, suggesting that the term "god" may carry misleading connotations. Ultimately, the debate raises questions about causation, existence, and the appropriateness of the terminology used to describe these concepts.
  • #61
Apparently Cyrus has been watching too much Wayne Dyer. :biggrin:
 

Similar threads

Could the Laws of Physics Be Proportional to Entropy?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
359
Is pantheism compatible with an anthropomorphic view of God?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Bach, Bach, and more Bach please
  • · Replies 119 ·
4
Replies
119
Views
11K
Uncovering the Supernatural: Examining God and Nature
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
Are the premises of the Kalam cosmological argument correct?
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
8K
Proofs of a God or no God is pretty much useless?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Temporal Relation Between Cause and Effect
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Conclusion: God Not Needed for TOE
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
Scientific method versus belief systems
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
Is Existence the Ultimate Power Over God?
  • · Replies 99 ·
4
Replies
99
Views
12K