El blog d'En Joan Quetgles

Un bloc de filosofia i societat. Recomano la lectura del meu llibre titulat La filosofia i la religió sense caretes, editat a la Xarxa com a post.

God does not exist,

quetgles | 16 Juny, 2009 04:17

            

       od no existeix. 16 proves.


  Els de la Cúria romana i els protestants ianquis estan fent campanya per a la propaganda permanent per difondre el concepte de "disseny intel·ligent", que es diu del dogma de la creació divina de l'Univers. Les esglésies estan en guerra ideològica permanent. Les seves grans campanyes tenen com a objectiu influir en les grans masses, persones de les classes populars.

   Aquesta redacció és una modesta contribució d'arguments per mostrar la inconsistència de la suposada evidència de l'existència de Déu.

    Classical evidence to show the existence of God remained invalidated from In Hume and In Kant. Conservatives in Hume called "Mr. Hume, the atheist. "But it was not possible to put this qualifier to Kant, who was a fervent Christian believer: he reintroduced the concept of God in the name of a supposed practical reason.

   With empiricism as hegemonic thinking, it was established that metaphysics was not possible as a science, and therefore, the existence of God could not be demonstrated. Positivism did nothing but reaffirm the presuppositions of empiricism, and metaphysics was definitely marginalized in the world of modern science.

    But the Catholic Church never admits, in any case, its errors, those related to philosophy and morality, especially. The dogma of the infallibility of the Pope is valid in terms of faith and morality. The Roman Curia continues to maintain Tomàs de Aquino as the maximum doctor of the Church. "Philosophia perennis" is the denomination that they give to the philosophy of N'Aquino. In theological training seminars, Aristotle-Thomist doctrines continue to be taught and affirming that the existence of God can be demonstrated by using reason.

  In this preamble, I present a list of arguments that reinforce the idea that God's existence is impossible.

Against the idea of ​​Creating the Universe. Assuming that God created the Universe implies the following contradiction: one should accept that an immaterial thing - God - would have existed eternally as an unique substance, and that "after" from that eternity, he would have created a second substance, the matter. That is, the spirit creates matter. That perfect, God, - according to the aristotelian idea of ​​perfection - would have produced that imperfect, the matter.
Against the idea of ​​the order of the Universe. Where it supposes that in the Universe there is an order and that God is the computer of the Universe. But modern physics introduced the concept of uncertainty. And N'Ilya Prigogine (Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 1977) went further and exposed the concept of the Universe as Chaos and as an irreversible process; That is, not only would the "Big Bang" - the initial chaos -, but the current Universe is a moment of the initial explosion, an explosion that continues its expansive wave to this day. Therefore, if there is no supposed order, there must be no computer God.
Against the idea of ​​perfection. The so-called degrees of perfection of nature are aporias that deny the principles of empirical sciences. Almost 2000 years later, in Tomàs and the Catholic Church they still insist on the idea of ​​the general staggering of all beings according to this supposed degree of perfection. Tomism unfolded to system so that all things were to follow a hierarchical order to unheard-levels, as in the case of angelic hierarchies. The positive sciences definitively broke the world of Aristotelian-Thomistic hierarchies. Then, the idea of ​​a supremely perfect being is pure fallout.
Against the idea of ​​the first engine. Contrary to what textbooks and encyclopedias say, Nostristótil was not a scientist, nor did he have the least interest in nature research. It can be affirmed, emphatically, that the "Physics" of Aristotle is but a cluster of nonsense about physics. In physics Aristotle there were several physical worlds with different physical laws. In modern physics, there is no "first engine".
Similarly, physics makes no distinction between contingent beings and necessary beings.
In all times, people have believed in gods, spirits and malignant forces. Today, thanks to the advances of ethnology studies, we know what social function was fulfilled by religions; We know that they served to establish the system of prescriptions and bans that governed the life of primitive human communities. But, at present, democratic societies, prescriptions and prohibitions are established according to the will of the majority of citizens; that is, in accordance with moral emotivism and contractualism. If democratic societies dispense with "the will of God", we can conclude that, in practice, these societies work as if they were atheists.
There is no available or a way or a method to experiment on supposed supernatural phenomena such as physical sciences can not detect the phenomenon of so-called "transubstantiation." Similarly, the supposed "paranormal" phenomena do not withstand the analysis of experimental science.
8. There are stories of antiquity where prodigies and miracles are constantly happening, in an almost familiar way. They show societies accustomed to prodigious phenomena related to their beliefs. Indeed, in the stories of the Christians, in the books of the NT, it reaches moments of such intensity of miraculous facts as no other story, which I know. To give an example: In "The acts of the apostles", 5, 12, concerning the apostle Peter, the narrator tells us that "In the hands of the apostles many miracles and wonders werefall the people ... And the believers in the Lord grew more and more ... to the point that they brought the sick to the streets and put them in bunks and bells because, when passing En Pere, at least their shadow fell on some of them. He also made a gernation of the cities around Jerusalem, bringing sick and tormented by impure spirits, which, all, were cured. " As you can see, Pere Pere made miracles in series, like undoing shoes; It was enough that he went through the street and his shadow was enough to unleash a thrill of miracles. I am of the opinion that the "sacred books" themselves offer the best material to demonstrate the inconsistency of religious dogmas. From the inconsistency of "sacred books", we can deduce the inconsistency of the belief in a certain God (On this subject you can see my website The Gospels, impossible stories).
9. The argument of common sense: How is it possible to think that the greatest being in the World can not be known? It would be that the omnipotent being is not accessible through the sciences. And it turns out that administrators of religion do not offer paths of knowledge either. They offer only "their sacred books" and equally unbelievable stories as the only "proof" of the existence of their god.

10. In Achiquin and the 40,000 theologians speak of the "path of faith" as different from that of reason, but what faith and reason, ultimately, must coincide. But they are not able to explain how they should work to follow the path of faith. In Pascal, he proposes that one who has to do is behave as if he had faith, as if he believed in God, and that, thus, at a certain time he will have true faith. But what does not happen in Pascal is in which God and in what "sacred books" must deposit the initial faith who is in the test period.

11. Epicurus did not deny the existence of the gods, but said that the gods did not deal with men, since they considered them insignificant beasts; I understood that a sensible man must order his life as if the gods did not exist.

12. But the approach of N'Epicur is only appropriate to the Greek world. From the God of monotheistic religions, according to his "sacred books", one can not say that he does not take care of men. On the contrary, the God of the Bible shows himself as a very jealous God, who wants men to worship and love him. But besides the God of the Jews and Christians, there are the Gods of the Mohammedans; And, further on, the God of Hinduism, that of Buddhism, Shintoism, Jainism and others. It must be unacceptable for a modern mind the existence of a God that intervenes in history and at the same time abstains from giving the marks of his identity.

13. The fact of the existence of so many people who do not believe in God is proof of their non-existence. On this, the evil theologians advance to say that "God punishes with his silence the sin of pride of those who declare atheists." But what can they say about children who were officially educated in atheism, as was done in the Marxist republics?

14. It is unacceptable for a mind formed in modernity the existence of God and at the same time the existence of the so-called "sacred books". That is, according to my reasoning, of the impossible stories that the books "sacred books" narrate, we must conclude that God does not exist.

15. Or, at least, that the god of the Jews and Christians does not exist. According to the Bible, the main commandment of God would be to love him over all things. According to the Bible of the Catalan Biblical Foundation, in "Exodus", 20, 6 says: "... I, Jahveh, your God, I am a jealous God, who punishes the iniquity of parents in their children until the third And the fourth generation of those who love me, but I make mercy up to thousands for those who love me and observe my precepts. " Contrary to the suppositions of the writers of the "sacred texts", the feelings of the people sprout their interiors spontaneously. It is known that the will does not dominate feelings, but, conversely, it is the feelings that determine the will. To understand: if necessary, the biblical text should say something like "you will do as if you love me."

1
16. L, les suposades declaracions formals del Déu dels textos bíblics que greument afecten la sensibilitat moderna han de ser considerades com una prova que Déu no existeix. Per donar un exemple particularment notable, "Èxode", 22, 19: "Qui n'ofereix sacrificis als déus, fora de Jahveh, serà exterminat". Segons aquest text, al peu de la lletra, tots els musulmans i hindús haurien de ser exterminats. També podem veure el text que diu: "... Però si el criat declara: m'encanta el meu amo, la meva dona i els meus fills; no vull deixar-me lliurement, el seu amo ... perfora l'orella amb un punxegut i servirà per sempre "," Èxode ", 21.5-6. O, també, aquest altre text: "Si algú ven la seva filla per a l'esclau ...", "Èxode", 21, 7. (He d'admetre que, de moltes maneres, l'Alcorà és més proper a la sensibilitat moral moderna, especialment en relació amb l'esclavitud i els problemes socials. L'Alcorà declara que un musulmà no pot tenir un altre musulmà en l'esclavitud).


   Davant l'existència d'un "geni malvat" o d'un Déu que cruelment va jugar amb els humans, he de confessar que no tinc arguments tan forts, sinó que també sembla una idea inconsistent.
 

Comentaris

Afegeix un comentari
 
Accessible and Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict and CSS
Powered by LifeType - Design by BalearWeb