God is a rational and scientific deduction!

[Opriyanand]

I am the author of "Against Atheism and its scientific and rational pretensions" and would like to state that God is a rational and scientific deduction - here is why...
Note : The definition of God used below is from Oxford Dictionary : A Creator.

I think, therefore I exist.
I exist, but I did not create myself.
Therefore there exists an entity that created me.

Science has discovered that we live in a causal universe therefore we have been caused to exist.
If one is a strict materialist, then he/she should admit that matter and the laws that govern it have made us - that is by definition Pantheism.
Scientists therefore have inadvertently become high priests of Pantheism.

Now that we know that the universe began in the Big Bang, some have become Deists noting that the cause has to be transcendent to space and time (since they were themselves created at the Big Bang.

Unfortunately, both Pantheism and Deism do not allow Free Will. That would nullify every discussion we are having here. We would be just robots chattering what we are programmed to. Theism which believes in Free Will is the only rational conclusion and also the central assumption to take this discussion forward.

More importantly, notice that Atheism is not even an option since we did not create ourselves. We don't need sophisticated arguments to prove God exists but a humble realization that we did not create ourselves. Of course, what the nature of our Creator is, is a separate discussion but we cannot reject the noun just because we don't agree on the adjectives.

Science cannot bail us out here since science is merely discovering how the universe works and not inventing it. The equations of Physics are not some abracadabra spells which pop a universe out of nothing. And because our universe is causal in nature, science becomes a reductio-ad-absurdum ad infinitum. Who or what created the universe is the central question. Reason why scientific explanations do not make God redundant in the same way explaining an automobile engine does not make Ford redundant.

This is a powerful argument for the existence of God which is beyond refutation. All it needs is widespread awareness - one reason I posted in this forum - please feel free to comment but also to read my book which is available on Amazon - Thank you - Oscar Priyanand (Author)

[Dontaskme]

Reason why scientific explanations do not make God redundant in the same way explaining an automobile engine does not make Ford redundant.

The one claiming the idea of redundancy is redundant, it's a superfluous artificial conceptual add-on to what is already what IS without doubt or error. No need to TRY to explain what is always blindingly self-evident.

One is God. God is One, there is no room in One for Two. Niether can One deduce to zero, since zero does not exist.

How can ONE know ONE is. One cannot, except in this CONception. A con cannot con a con...for one very good reason.

Nice try though, God loves a trier.

[Harbal]

This is a powerful argument for the existence of God which is beyond refutation.

Which makes it all the more puzzling why it sounds like a load of rubbish.

[Sculptor]

I am the author of "Against Atheism and its scientific and rational pretensions" and would like to state that God is a rational and scientific deduction - here is why...
Note : The definition of God used below is from Oxford Dictionary : A Creator.

I think, therefore I exist.
I exist, but I did not create myself.
Therefore there exists an entity that created me.

Science has discovered that we live in a causal universe therefore we have been caused to exist.
If one is a strict materialist, then he/she should admit that matter and the laws that govern it have made us - that is by definition Pantheism.
Scientists therefore have inadvertently become high priests of Pantheism.

Now that we know that the universe began in the Big Bang, some have become Deists noting that the cause has to be transcendent to space and time (since they were themselves created at the Big Bang.

Unfortunately, both Pantheism and Deism do not allow Free Will. That would nullify every discussion we are having here. We would be just robots chattering what we are programmed to. Theism which believes in Free Will is the only rational conclusion and also the central assumption to take this discussion forward.

More importantly, notice that Atheism is not even an option since we did not create ourselves. We don't need sophisticated arguments to prove God exists but a humble realization that we did not create ourselves. Of course, what the nature of our Creator is, is a separate discussion but we cannot reject the noun just because we don't agree on the adjectives.

Science cannot bail us out here since science is merely discovering how the universe works and not inventing it. The equations of Physics are not some abracadabra spells which pop a universe out of nothing. And because our universe is causal in nature, science becomes a reductio-ad-absurdum ad infinitum. Who or what created the universe is the central question. Reason why scientific explanations do not make God redundant in the same way explaining an automobile engine does not make Ford redundant.

This is a powerful argument for the existence of God which is beyond refutation. All it needs is widespread awareness - one reason I posted in this forum - please feel free to comment but also to read my book which is available on Amazon - Thank you - Oscar Priyanand (Author)

Complete rubbish.
You ought to be ashamed.
If there was a creator he/she/it would be ashamed of your (ahem!) "thinking", for which there is little evidence.
It looks more like a few undigested out-of-date themes.

10 I think, therefore I exist.
20 God exists, but did not create itself.
30 Therefore there exists an entity that created god.
40 Goto 20

Gibber Gibber Gibber

[Skepdick]

God is a recursive (self-referential) human construct/idea.

We are god. You are god.

Once you master the power of thought and use it to create things that didn’t exist before (concepts, words, ideas, technology, science, knowledge, communities, cities, nations, societies, laws etc.). Once you internalize the idea that you are god you become a Philosopher. You become a disciple of The Truth. All of that's covered in John 1:1-30.

When we talk about god, we are talking about humans and humanity (of past generations) in a general, abstract and idealized sense.
The people who created the societies we live in today. The very people who created the idea of god.

So in so far as I am concerned it is a perfectly rational thing to believe in god (in the sense that I am using it).
But if you don’t like the sense in which I am using it… I can always externalize god with a metaphysical argument: We live in a computer simulation! God is the programmer!

And if that is going too far for your liking, go for the Pantheistic argument: God is the universe and the universe created us.

Either way the idea of a creator is perfectly reasonable. As long as you understand what it means.

God is a powerful idea. God is the idea of the power of creation itself. That's all.

[uwot]

I am the author of "Against Atheism and its scientific and rational pretensions" and would like to state that God is a rational and scientific deduction - here is why...
Note : The definition of God used below is from Oxford Dictionary : A Creator.

Oh goody! Another creationist.

I think, therefore I exist.
I exist, but I did not create myself.
Therefore there exists an entity that created me.

Did you not have a mother?

Science has discovered that we live in a causal universe...

Wait, wait, wait. What do you mean?

...therefore we have been caused to exist.

There's no therefore until you establish your premises. Scientists look for patterns and sometimes find them. It is woeful logic to conclude that therefore the universe is causal.

If one is a strict materialist, then he/she should admit that matter and the laws that govern it have made us - that is by definition Pantheism.
Scientists therefore have inadvertently become high priests of Pantheism.

Oh blimey. It doesn't get any better.

[henry quirk]

Unfortunately, both Pantheism and Deism do not allow Free Will.

Oh noes! You mean I can't be a deist and a free will at the same time? That's damned odd cuz I am.

It was bein' free will that led me to bein' a deist, by the way. The recognition of one led to the acceptin' of the other.

[Harbal]

Mmmm.....the jury still seems to be out on this one.

[Skepdick]

I guess I should add... The god idea seems to trigger A LOT of scientists/philosophers into irrational hysteria.

So what better reason to advocate for it, if not to piss them off?

[bahman]

I think, therefore I exist.
I exist, but I did not create myself.
Therefore there exists an entity that created me.

Oh well. Mind is needed for change (I have an argument for that). Mind cannot change since otherwise, we are dealing with a regress. Mind exists. Mind exists and does not change. Therefore mind is immortal. It can be shown that something that cannot be destroyed cannot be created either (I have an argument for that). So your mind does not have a creator. That is lots of stuff to cover though.

[Opriyanand]

Most of the objections below are either Ad-hominem, irrelevant or mere opinions without substantial counters - I will ignore those
Answers to comments from Sculptor below....

10 I think, therefore I exist.
20 God exists, but did not create itself.
30 Therefore there exists an entity that created god.
40 Goto 20

I should have anticipated this - who created God? - question.
Answer: Honestly, this question is irrelevant. Yes, it is a good question by itself and if you want a scientific/pantheistic answer then there are only two options. Either the Universe (Which created us) created itself OR it had existed eternally.
The important point to note here is that we neither created ourselves NOR did we exist eternally. We began to exist and came into existence because of the universe which is our Creator (Pantheism). Goto END.

Answers to Henry Quirk below...
1) Did you have a mother?
Answer : Of course I did but who created my mother? and so on...it's a reductio-ad-absurdum. Ultimately we will have to admit "The first cause made me" if the universe began to exist OR "An eternal entity created me" if we live in an eternal universe = Pantheism.

2) Establish my "Causal" premise?
Causation is an empirical deduction, I should quote my other adversary You are caused to exist because of your parents! Science is on my side here.

[Dontaskme]

Causation is an empirical deduction, I should quote my other adversary You are caused to exist because of your parents! Science is on my side here.

Causation is relative to the observer. Causation is a concept known only in it's effect....there are only effects known, never their cause. Reality can be nothing more than Acausal.

'Cause and Effect' is a phenomena known as conceptual appearance within the mental sphere of knowledge of opposites, which are one and the same thing that can only exist as a word. the word ''cause'' is meaningless without it's counterpart ''effect'', and vice versa. Neither can exist without the other, but they only exist as language, aka conceptual knowledge.

knowledge in and of itself can only point to the illusory nature of existence.

In reality, no conceptually known thing can know itself, except in the artificial concept. Einstein was right. Life is an illusion albeit a persistent one.

How can ONE have ever had a cause? ... the answer would imply two which does not exist separate from the ONE

FIRST causes and their effects, only exist within the dream of separation, within duality, which is illusory...because a 'concept' has no concept of itself, in and of itself, it simply does not exist. It exists purely as an idea, so existence is both real and unreal, and yet neither within the mental sphere of knowledge.

In other WORDS....nothing is God and everything is God..because only concepts are known.

[henry quirk]

I'm not sure what...

Answers to Henry Quirk below...
1) Did you have a mother?
Answer : Of course I did but who created my mother? and so on...it's a reductio-ad-absurdum. Ultimately we will have to admit "The first cause made me" if the universe began to exist OR "An eternal entity created me" if we live in an eternal universe = Pantheism.

...has to do with...

You mean I can't be a deist and a free will at the same time? That's damned odd cuz I am.

[Opriyanand]

"I'm not sure what...
Answers to Henry Quirk below...
1) Did you have a mother?
Answer : Of course I did but who created my mother? and so on...it's a reductio-ad-absurdum. Ultimately we will have to admit "The first cause made me" if the universe began to exist OR "An eternal entity created me" if we live in an eternal universe = Pantheism.
...has to do with...
You mean I can't be a deist and a free will at the same time? That's damned odd cuz I am."

Sorry that was meant for uwot.
Coming to your question of whether there can be free-willed entities in a Deistic universe is a tricky one.
Both Pantheism and Deism are essentially materialistic and therefore cannot have free will.
If God cannot intervene in the universe, neither can you - your free will is an illusion and so is our freedom, liberty and justice!
You were programmed to be deluded that you chose to be a deist!
But in a Theistic world, both God and Humans can intervene in the workings of the universe and change its course.
Hence, if you think you had the free will to be Deist then you are actually admitting that Theism is true.

[henry quirk]

Both Pantheism and Deism are essentially materialistic and therefore cannot have free will.

Well, as I leaf thru the blank pages of The Big Book of Deism I can't find nuthin' at all on the subject of free will or materialism.

*

If God cannot intervene in the universe, neither can you - your free will is an illusion and so is our freedom, liberty and justice!

Who sez He cannot? All I say is He does not.