Believing that science can prove that the universe is created by an infinite number of finite causes is completely irrational since science by nature can only measure the finite, and can never approach measuring or demonstrating an infinite number of finite causes. It is more rational therefor to believe in an infinite cause simply because science by nature can not demonstrate or prove infinity. And to have faith in believing in an infinity that cant be measured, is much more rational then believing in infinity that can.

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7

What the fuck is a "finite cause"?

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

Wow.

Is that supposed to be an argument?

Just wow.

On the other hand, that Knights of the Temple avatar is rather cool. Are you sure that's kosher for Christians since that organization was officially denounced as demonic in the 13th century.

Hold on, guys, I'm going to run this through Google Translator.

__________________
“Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people.” -Dr. Carl Sagan

www.myspace.com/BusinessSocksBand
www.moresay.com

As best I can tell, the "point" involves shifting whimsically and nonsensically between three different connotations of finite/infinite - mathematical, scientific, and spiritual. That is, I think in order for the OP not to be complete gibberish, "infinite" must be a synonym for "God" (and "finite" for non-God), in addition to the standard scientific definition of an endless amount or the mathematical definitions based on set description or limits. If you do that, it ascends from gibberish to the level of inane.

I believe the distilled translation would be "It is irrational not to believe in God because we can only measure things that aren't God", which, of course, is inane.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

I asked an athiest "prove to me that the big bang could exist without cause." and he said the big bang has a cause. So then I surmise that athiests believe that the universe is created by an infinite number of ordinary, explainable essentially accidents....if they did not then they believe that something is infinite.. matter..and that Either one way or another, that can all be explained someday by science.

So the argument appears to me, either we exist by an infinite cause.. or an infinite number of accidents.

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7

Dude, "infinite" doesn't mean "divine". The phrase "infinite cause" is nonsensical.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

only the divine can have the quality of infinity. Science can not measure infinity and therfore can not prove infinity.

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7

That's asinine. Tell me how many numbers there are between one and two. Are you going to tell me that's God in there?

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

lol yes that is true we have a good measuring system.

But that does not apply here. you may believe we are from an infinite number of mundane accidents that made us exist....But if you believe that then your belief is no different then believing we come from an Infinite cause... Since everything in our universe has a beginning a middle and an end..the divine is used as an explanation to where the chain of supposedly mundane accidents of which it all began.

If you believe that science can demonstrate an infinite number of causes this is more irrational then believing in an infinite cause since man can not prove an infinite number of causes. just like no man can solve an infinite number of math problems.

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7

First of all, I strongly suggest that you do some research on the concept of infinity. But, I can pick this apart, if you'd like, for clarity.

Infinity is irrelevant to the false dilemma you're working on. You're (in kingdaddy-esque fashion) stating that the universe/existence either has purpose or it doesn't. In either case, the number of causes is unimportant, infinite or otherwise. You're ignoring the possibility that there is no purpose, but the universe was caused by a finite number of "accidents" - say, 12. This is the problem with conflating "infinite" as deity and "infinite" as a numerical descriptor.

Again, this is nonsense, but I think I understand what you're trying to express. And, my previous example of "12 accidents" pokes a hole in the false dilemma. I understand the nature of the rabbit you're trying to pull from your rhetorical hat, but it doesn't hold up to even the most casual scrutiny.

With this a priori declaration, you just neatly refuted your own description of God. There is no "infinity", ergo, there is no "Infinity" (i.e. God).
If you're going to pontificate on what's rational, I'd advise avoiding premises that refute your conclusions.

What "chain of supposedly mundane accidents"? What the hell are you talking about?

This is nonsense. "Science" isn't in the business of justifying nonsense.

So what? Does the fact that I can't add single digit numbers for all of eternity mean that single digit numbers can't be added?

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

so you believe that science can justify a begining to the universe....without a cause to begin it all?

Infinity is something in my view only held by the divine, it appears that what you hold as divine, indestructable, the begining and the end, the cause of all things to be is matter itself, that exists without cause or reason to exist.

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7

"Justify"? I don't understand. (As an aside, the anthropomorphizing of "science" annoys me - it isn't some kind of megalithic, sentient entity). All that scientists can do is posit hypotheses as to the cause of the beginning of the universe. And, there's nothing inherently magical about the beginning of the universe. It might simply have been a macroscopic state transition from something else.

Personally, I believe in God. That doesn't stop me from criticizing silly arguments made by either the atheist or the believer.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

and of course this transition from something else must come from something else.. which of course must come from something else.. and hence the infinite number of finite causes. that can not be proven.

And my argument is simply that this is no different from a rational standpoint then believing in a single infinite divine cause to start the reaction.

But if you believe that man can ever prove we are from an infinite number of ordinary causes then this is the more irrational position of them all in my oppinion.

so therefor science and divine can never truly disprove the other, and the belief in a divine being and purpose is certainly not any less rational then nonthiesm.

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7

You're going too fast here. Why must the previous state have "come from something else"? What's to say that a singularity didn't always exist up until a few billion years ago?

That's probably true. Although, "I don't know" (the correct answer) covers a lot of ground, and making assertions from ignorance is irrational either way.

That's silly. First of all, you have not established any credible reason that there must be an "infinite number of causes". Secondly, a lack of infinite time does not preclude us from proving things about infinite sets. In fact, I could prove in about five minutes why there is an infinite amount of numbers between one and two.

This is a non sequitur. You've based your conclusion on questionable assertions and illogical leaps.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson