An exellent argument

[Guest guest]

Pamho, agtSP!

 

This is from the arguments that Gauranga Premanada Prabhu presented us:

------------------

(1) Can there be subjects without a king? (Skanda purana, vaisnava-khanda

1.2.45.101)

(2)a. In this material world every soul is subjected to manifold miseries:

janma (birth), mrtyu (death), jara (old age) and vyadhi (disease), kala

(time), karma (activities), guna's (the influence of the three modes or

ropes of nature), three klesa's (miseries due to mind and body, demigods,

other living entities).

(2)b. We are maintained with food, water, light and heat, air.

(3) Beyond the prison or the houses of the subjects or citizens is the

palace of the king.

(4) Hence, heaven and the Supreme Ruler exist.

----------------------

 

I think this is a very good argument. I would like to try to put it up in a

different way:

 

A. First of all all arguments should be based on our experience or logic.

 

B. Our experience tells us that we have absolutely no observation of a being

that's controlled by something impersonal. Some might say that we are all

controlled by the whether, which is controlled by some impersonal laws. But

since we can't see the end of the causal chain, then we can't say that

there's no person behind the whether - or anything else for that matter.

Consequently we have no certain experience of any impersonal laws

controlling anyone.

 

C. However, we have experience of living beings controlling other living

beings.

 

D. When we try to understand that which is not within our experience, we

should at least try to understand it by extrapolating from our exprience

(use what we know to tell about what we don't know.)

 

E. So when we try to understand where the laws of the universe - that are

controlling all beings within the universe - is comming from we can't say

it's an impersonal cause, since we don't have any experience of impersonal

causes controlling anyone.

 

F. Instead we must conclude that the cause is personal, because we have a

lot of experience with living beings controlling other living beings.

 

So the argument goes likes this

 

Our experience tells us:

 

1. Personal beings can control other personal beings

2. Impersonal things don't control personal beings or anything else

3. All living beings in the universe are controlled

4. They must be controlled by a personal being.

 

- we call Him God!

 

That being might again be controlled by someone else, but in the end there

will have to be a being which is not controlled by anyone, because we can't

accept an infinite regress.

 

This is a very good argument isn't it? It's simple and every fool can

understand it. Exept an atheist of course.

 

Ys, AKD