We naturalists find that order and regularity and natural laws inhere in Nature herself. Tis therefore’ to beg the question to ask for what causes them.Ah, but supernaturalists use the pareidolias of intent and design rather than accept the fact that rather ti’s teleonomy-causalism- mechanism- that rules. Teleonomy accounts for apparent intent and patters for apparent design per Lamberth’s the argument from pareidolia.
Scientists are inquring why and how people see patterns and also how they see real patterns as designs.
Per his teleonomic argument, teleonomy does indeed rule as the evidence so portrays.To postulate then divine intent behind natural causes then, not only violates the Ockham with ad hoc,convoluted presuppostitions, but also contradicts science finding that very teleonomy as self-suficient.
Theistic evolution therefore obfuscates, being nothng more than an oxymoron. Therefore, supernaturalists cannot justly claim that He is behnd natural forces.
This lack of diivine intent also eviscerates all other arguments with intent such that without having intent for creation, miracle mongering and so forth, God cannot have those referents and therefore cannot exist!
And as He has incoherent,contradictory attributes, He cannot exist as we ignostics ever note.
The atelic arguments notes that supernaturalists beg the question of planned outcomes.
Besides these two pareidolias, supernaturalists ever use the arguments from personal incredulity and from ignorance. Rather than noting that very teleonomy, they ask what other than God can account for design increduously and follow up that argument from ignorance-God.
This isn’t necessarily the god of the scientific gap but rather the one of the explanatory gap. They increduously cannot fathom that natuaral explanations suffice whilst the God-explanation is no more than the tautology that God wills what He wills: God did it, no more works than the scientific god of the gaps!
Gottfried Wilhem Leibniz makes the colossal blunder in asking why does anything exist rather than nothing/ How could nothing mean anything as the ancient Greek philosophers so note.Nay, the Cosmos exists as the quantum fields exist eternally in accordance with the law of conservation of energy*
His other blunder posits Him as the Ulyimate Explanation just as Aquinas errs in positing Him as that Pirmary Cause [ explanation rather than regreesin in time].
Supernaturalists must first overcome the presumption of naturalism.
Scientists are inquring why and how people see patterns and also how they see real patterns as designs.
Per his teleonomic argument, teleonomy does indeed rule as the evidence so portrays.To postulate then divine intent behind natural causes then, not only violates the Ockham with ad hoc,convoluted presuppostitions, but also contradicts science finding that very teleonomy as self-suficient.
Theistic evolution therefore obfuscates, being nothng more than an oxymoron. Therefore, supernaturalists cannot justly claim that He is behnd natural forces.
This lack of diivine intent also eviscerates all other arguments with intent such that without having intent for creation, miracle mongering and so forth, God cannot have those referents and therefore cannot exist!
And as He has incoherent,contradictory attributes, He cannot exist as we ignostics ever note.
The atelic arguments notes that supernaturalists beg the question of planned outcomes.
Besides these two pareidolias, supernaturalists ever use the arguments from personal incredulity and from ignorance. Rather than noting that very teleonomy, they ask what other than God can account for design increduously and follow up that argument from ignorance-God.
This isn’t necessarily the god of the scientific gap but rather the one of the explanatory gap. They increduously cannot fathom that natuaral explanations suffice whilst the God-explanation is no more than the tautology that God wills what He wills: God did it, no more works than the scientific god of the gaps!
Gottfried Wilhem Leibniz makes the colossal blunder in asking why does anything exist rather than nothing/ How could nothing mean anything as the ancient Greek philosophers so note.Nay, the Cosmos exists as the quantum fields exist eternally in accordance with the law of conservation of energy*
His other blunder posits Him as the Ulyimate Explanation just as Aquinas errs in positing Him as that Pirmary Cause [ explanation rather than regreesin in time].
Supernaturalists must first overcome the presumption of naturalism.
Fr. Griggs 