Atheists are raising all kinds of interesting questions these days, and I'm glad to see those being debated in the public square. After a while it is tiresome to debate politics, politics, politics. We could use a broadening of the national agenda.
One question raised by the neo-atheists like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris is: who made God? After all, one of the traditional arguments for God is that the chain of causation in the universe points to a first or ultimate cause. This argument was given its most clear expression by Aquinas.
Dawkins and Harris raise the problem of infinite regress. Why can't the chain of causation stretch back infinitely? Or if God made the universe, then who made Him? The neo-atheists think they have scored a very clever point. Take that, Aquinas!
In my Townhall column this week, I explore whether this critique of Aquinas works. Actually it does not. But to assess all this fairly you have to consider the arguments with an open mind. You can read more about the Aquinas-Dawkins showdown here. Hint: Aquinas retains the title.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 8)
1. Dinesh is getting the intellectual snot beaten out of him.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DineshDSouza/2007/06/11/an_athiest_conundrum_who_made_god?page=full&comments=true
Knight_of_BAAWA at 10:44AM on Jun 12th 2007
2. On the contrary, I think D'Souza is correct in that old Thomas Aquinas can rest easy.
Ken Berg at 11:12AM on Jun 12th 2007
3. You can believe that all you want, Ken: that won't make it so. Aquinas didn't know calculus.
Knight_of_BAAWA at 11:28AM on Jun 12th 2007
4. I'm beginning to think that D'nesh is a parody like Stephen Colbert who absolutely hates complexity. That being said...
Logically there can be no effect without a cause. To state that a God exists outside of causation ia a ridiculous argument because it stands outside the logics of the argument he cites in the first place. It obviously will need a whole new set of logics and an argument based on that. Good luck with all that, D'nesh.
tom at 12:10PM on Jun 12th 2007
5. Oh, but gawd is magical, don'chaknow. Gawd can do anything because gawd makes up the rules, don'chaknow.
It's unfortunate that the above is the only answer the theists can come up with. That answer, of course, admits the defeat of the theist by disclosing that the argument is based not on facts or evidence, but on the desire to annihilate reality and supplant it with wishes.
Knight_of_BAAWA at 12:45PM on Jun 12th 2007
6. I like how Chesterton put it; "If there was not God, there would be no atheists."
I was taught that God is the Alpha and the Omega, and that we created the universe, set it in motion, and in due course created earth, the animals, and man.
Sounds reasonable enough to me, as do the following excerpts from the Roman Catholic Catechism (Baltimore version):
LESSON 2 -- God and His Perfections
"I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth ..."
8. What do we mean when we say that God is the Supreme Being? When we say that God is the Supreme Being we mean that He is above all creatures, the self-existing and infinitely perfect Spirit....
10. What do we mean when we say that God is self-existing?
When we say that God is self-existing we mean that He does not owe His existence to any other being.
I am who am. (Exodus 3:14)
11. What do we mean when we say that God is infinitely perfect?
When we say that God is infinitely perfect we mean that He has all perfections without limit. ...
12. What are some of the perfections of God?
Some of the perfections of God are: God is eternal, all-good, all-knowing, all-present, and almighty. ...
13. What do we mean when we say that God is eternal?
When we say that God is eternal we mean that He always was and always will be, and always remains the same. " I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end," says the Lord God. (Apocalypse 1:8)
14. What do we mean when we say that God is all-good? When we say that God is all-good we mean that He is infinitely lovable in Himself, and that from His fatherly love every good comes to us.
etc. . . . .
Also, from the same Baltimore version of the Roman Catechism:
LESSON 1 -- The Purpose of Man's Existence
1. Who made us? God made us. 'In the beginning, God created heaven and earth.' (Genesis 1:1)
2. Who is God? God is the Supreme Being, infinitely perfect, who made all things and keeps them in existence. 'In him we live and move and have our being.' (Acts 17:28)
3. Why did God make us? God made us to show forth His goodness and to share with us His everlasting happiness in heaven. 'Eye has not seen nor ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man, what things God has prepared for those who love him.' (I Corinthians 2:9)
4. What must we do to gain the happiness of heaven? To gain the happiness of heaven we must know, love, and serve God in this world. 'Lay not up to yourselves treasures on earth; where the rust and moth consume and where thieves break through and steal. But lay up to yourselves treasures in heaven; where neither the rust nor moth doth consume, and where thieves do not break through nor steal.' (Matthew 6:19-20)
5. From whom do we learn to know, love, and serve God? We learn to know, love, and serve God from Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who teaches us through the Catholic Church. 'I have come a light into the world that whoever believes in Me may not remain in darkness.' (John 12:46)
6. Where do we find the chief truths taught by Jesus Christ through the Catholic Church?
We find the chief truths taught by Jesus Christ through the Catholic Church in the Apostles' Creed. 'He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.' (Luke 10:16)
7. Say the Apostles' Creed. 'I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, Our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried. He descended into hell; the third day He arose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of Saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting. Amen.'
Ken Berg at 1:41PM on Jun 12th 2007
7. On looking for that other information, I thought this interesting as well. For the life of me I do not understand why teachings like these are so despised by some atheists and some secularists.
From the Roman Catholic Catechism;
...
188. Besides believing what God has revealed, what else must we do to be saved? Besides believing what God has revealed, we must keep His law.
'If you love me, keep my commandments.' (John 14:15)
189. Which are the two great commandments that contain the whole law of God? The two great commandments that contain the whole law of God are: first, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind, and with thy whole strength;
second, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 'And one of them, a doctor of the Law, putting him to the test, asked him, "Master, which is the great commandment in the Law?" Jesus said to him, "'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind.' This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like it, 'Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.' On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."' (Matthew 22:35-40)
190. What must we do to love God, our neighbor, and ourselves? To love God, our neighbor, and ourselves we must keep the commandments of God and of the Church, and perform the spiritual and corporal works of mercy. 'My dear children, let us not love in word, neither with the tongue, but in deed and in truth.' (I John 3:18)
191. Which are the chief corporal works of mercy?
The chief corporal works of mercy are seven:
1. To feed the hungry.
2. To give drink to the thirsty.
3. To clothe the naked.
4. To visit the imprisoned.
5. To shelter the homeless.
6. To visit the sick.
7. To bury the dead.
192. Which are the chief spiritual works of mercy?
The chief spiritual works of mercy are seven:
1. To admonish the sinner.
2. To instruct the ignorant.
3. To counsel the doubtful.
4. To comfort the sorrowful.
5. To bear wrongs patiently.
6. To forgive all injuries.
7. To pray for the living and the dead.
193. Is everyone obliged to perform the works of mercy? Everyone is obliged to perform the works of mercy, according to his own ability and the need of his neighbor. 'For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in; naked, and you covered me; sick, and you visited me; I was in prison, and you came to me.' (Matthew 25:35-36)
Etc. ...
I like the teaching method; Ask the question, and repeat the question in the answer, and give the supporting proof along with the answer. It is very nice, succinct, and easy to follow.
Ken Berg at 1:49PM on Jun 12th 2007
8. The idiot douchebag snot nose prick speaks again
jeff wismer at 2:05PM on Jun 12th 2007
9. Ken: "I was taught that God is the Alpha and the Omega, and that we created the universe, set it in motion, and in due course created earth, the animals, and man."
You were taught incorrectly.
I refer you to a passage in George H. Smith's _Atheism: The Case Against God_
"If we wish to discover the nature of the Christian God, the National Catholic Almanac offers us a generous assortment of attributes from which to choose. According to this source, God is “almighty, eternal, holy, immortal, immense, immutable, incomprehensible, ineffable, infinite, invisible, just, loving, merciful, most high, most wise, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, patient, perfect, provident, supreme, true.”
This is certainly an impressive list, but one problem immediately becomes apparent: included in this catalogue of characteristics is “incomprehensible.” One must wonder how it is possible to declare God’s incomprehensibility and simultaneously list twenty-two additional attributes. If God cannot be comprehended, how can the Christian offer us a string of attributes whose function, presumably, is to enable us to understand the nature of God?"
Thus, we see the self-contradictory nature of god.
Knight_of_BAAWA at 2:25PM on Jun 12th 2007
10. Knight, you seem to prefer to maintain a literal, narrow, and simplistic view of things.
There is no short answer to your point, and since I am short on time, will have to get back to you later.
Ken Berg at 3:08PM on Jun 12th 2007
11. @ Ken Berg (comment 6 & 7)
Well, Ken, you can cut and paste this stuff all you want, but it seems to me that you are just trying to swamp out these comments... which would just be the equivalent of shouting over someone during a debate.
I think that you, along with all other 'Goddies' are stuck looking at this from Aquinas' POV saying essentially that, "God must exist because we believe that HE does."
You believe because you were taught to believe.
You must look at it from a 'you up' point of view.
You must think, as everyone must think...from a 'situation-as-is' position and extrapolate from there.
Religious logic is forced to be circular.
Let me show you why Ken.
1) God is, we assume*, perfect.
2) God can use logic better than you, me, Dawkins, D'Souza, Aquinas... anybody and everybody... right?
3) All our souls were with God from the start(assuming a start) or God could just create our souls 'with him'.
4) To begin the heavens and earth is unnecessary because.. 1,2 and 3
5) People feel that there ought to be a purpose for their existence... but it cannot be a test of faith because.. 1,2 and 3
6) If God illogically went ahead and made reality, the only objective is to get back to God... which is circular.
In other words God pushed us out into the 'tide of the sea of reality' hoping that we would swim back to him, but already knowing which of us would.
* for the sake of argument
pboyfloyd at 3:13PM on Jun 12th 2007
12. "Knight, you seem to prefer to maintain a literal, narrow, and simplistic view of things."
IOW: Ken has realized the self-contradictory nature of god, and wants to cover for it.
I guess that "ineffable" doesn't really mean "ineffable" when Ken doesn't want it to. How interesting. Ken is in a Humpty-Dumpty land, where words mean what he wants, no more, no less.
Knight_of_BAAWA at 3:16PM on Jun 12th 2007
13. from Knight's post#9; "One must wonder how it is possible to declare God’s incomprehensibility and simultaneously list twenty-two additional attributes. If God cannot be comprehended, how can the Christian offer us a string of attributes whose function, presumably, is to enable us to understand the nature of God?" "
------------
Keep in mind that the fact that one does not understand something completely, does not mean that it does not exist.
A simple example is how many people do not understand just how electricity works, but it is very real nonetheless. Another example is how earthquakes or storms happen. Most people do not understand or comprehend how these things work, but these things are very real. It is not necessary to understand how an airplane works in order to believe that it exists, or to ride in one.
As for Smith's quote from Catholic Almanac describing God as "incomprehensible", the listing I pasted from the Roman Catechism is in post #6 simply does not use that word. Still, it is very possble for something to be beyond our comprehension while at the same time we are able to describe it in accurately. Again take taking the example of electricity, one can accurately describe the attributes of electricity without having an exact knowledge of what it is and how it works.
Somewhere it says in the Bible that (paraphrasing) the mind and ways of God are as far above those of Man as the sky is above the earth. This would seem then that in the main, of course God is incomprehensible. None of knows or understands how He created the universe out of nothing, nor what makes a human or other animals spring to life. These are some of the many mysteries of life and this universe that for their existence, do not rely on our understanding of them. One can accurately describe something with fully understanding it.
Gravity, light, color, and all of the other things in this world existed for eons before we were here, and were incomprehensible to most men until the last 5 thousand years or so. It did not matter that these things were incomprehensible to early Man; they existed regardless of his understanding of them, and he was able to describe gravity and light and color without understanding them.
In fact there is much about this world and this universe than most people do not yet understand, but that does not mean that scientists cannot accurate describe the attributes of the various phenomenon of nature.
Ken Berg at 5:42PM on Jun 12th 2007
14. I like how Albert Einstien put it;
"The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible."
What do you suppose he meant by that Knight?
------------------
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source
in·com·pre·hen·si·ble /ˌɪnkɒmprɪˈhɛnsəbəl, ɪnˌkɒm-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-kom-pri-hen-suh-buhl, in-kom-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. impossible to understand or comprehend; unintelligible.
2. Archaic. limitless; not limited or capable of being limited.
--------------------------------------------------
[Origin: 1300–50; ME < L incomprehénsibilis. See in-3, comprehensible]
—Related forms
in·com·pre·hen·si·bil·i·ty, in·com·pre·hen·si·ble·ness, noun
in·com·pre·hen·si·bly, adverb
—Synonyms 1. baffling, bewildering, obscure.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source in·com·pre·hen·si·ble (ĭn'kŏm-prĭ-hěn'sə-bəl, ĭn-kŏm'-) Pronunciation Key
adj.
1. Difficult or impossible to understand or comprehend; unintelligible: incomprehensible jargon.
2. Impossible to know or fathom: incomprehensible mysteries.
3. Archaic Having no limits; boundless.
in'com·pre·hen'si·bil'i·ty, in'com·pre·hen'si·ble·ness n., in'com·pre·hen'si·bly adv.
(Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Online Etymology Dictionary - Cite This Source
incomprehensible
c.1340, from L. incomprehensibilis, from in- "not" + comprehensibilis (see comprehend).
Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2001 Douglas Harper
WordNet - Cite This Source incomprehensible
adjective
1. incapable of being explained or accounted for; "inexplicable errors"; "left the house at three in the morning for inexplicable reasons" [syn: inexplicable] [ant: explicable]
2. difficult to understand; "the most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible"- A. Einstein
Ken Berg at 5:56PM on Jun 12th 2007
15. The funny thing is, religion and atheism will always have something in common: both require belief.
Nothing illustrates this argument better than these very energetic posts.
eM at 6:22PM on Jun 12th 2007