SISTER EVA OVERPOWERS DAWKINS IN ARGUMENT
by Hamlet



Sister Eva stood in all Her black latex glory in the Catechision Court ready
to continue in Her cross examination of the atheist Dawkins.

She was beginning with the first premise of the Cosmological Argument that
everything that exists has an explanation for its existence.

'What is your immediate reply to that Dawkins? She said towering right over
him.

'Well as I wrote in my book the God Delusion if everything that exists has an
explanation for its existence what is the explanation for God's existence?'

Sister Marissa dug Her nails again into his neck as he gave out yet another
piercing scream.

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

His neck was beginning to bleed now as She had managed to drive Her nails
right into his neck.

'What do you say at the end of each sentence arsehole?'

'.Er Sister Eva.Sister Marissa.''he wailed

'Well er Sister Eva.'

'I have already answered that Dawkins If there was anything that created God
then that being would have to be greater than God which would be logically
impossible. This is based on a misunderstanding of what Leibniz the German
philosopher mean by an explanation. In his views there are two kinds of things
that exist necessarily and things that are produced by some external cause.'

'I am sorry but I do not understand this distinction Sister Eva'.

'Well it's quite clear Dawkins that things exist necessarily by a necessity of
their own nature which means it is impossible for them not to exist. For
instance in mathematics numbers are not caused by something else they just
exist by the necessity of their own nature. '

'In contrast things are caused to exist because something else has caused them
such as people, plants and planets. You see the explanation of God lies in the
necessity of His own nature so it is impossible for God's to have a cause.'

'Yes bur Sister Eva I do not believe that the universe has to have a cause.'

Right Dawkins if you were hiking in the woods near Oxford and you came across
a large translucent ball would you naturally ask how it got there.'

'Well err Sister Eva of course I would it got there by a process of Darwinian
natural selection.'.

'So you would agree that this ball was not inexplicable.'

'Yes it's certainly Sister Eva there is an explanation'.

'Now suppose Dawkins so that it's the size a car. Would it still require an
explanation?'

'Yes of course Sister Eva.'.

'So the size of an object makes no difference to the explanation/'

'No of course it does not.'.

'Suppose we increased the size to the whole universe? It means that increasing
the size of the object makes no difference to the explanation.'

'I am sorry but I don't know how the universe began but I do not accept it was
created by some God Sister Eva.'

'So you are saying that everything is in the universe has an explanation but
the universe has no explanation.'

'Er yes Sister Eva.'

'Yet that is an example of the taxi cab fallacy'

'The what Sister Eva?'

"Science is not a taxi-cab that we can get in and out of whenever we like"
"The "Taxi-Cab Fallacy" is committed when one hops in and assumes a certain
system of thought or worldview in an attempt to make a particular point but
then jumps out of the system of thought when it suits their fancy. Such
practice lacks logical consistency and is therefore a logical fallacy. A
detractor of the Christian worldview cannot hop into the Christian system of
thought by erecting an objection grounded in the Bible and then demand an
answer be given without the use of a Bible. Again, they cannot appeal to the
Bible in raising their question and then insist we throw our Bible out of the
equation when we give an answer!"

'I have already given the illustration of the ball in the woods Just by
increasing the size of tithe object does not remove the need for an
explanation.'

'Yes but the explanation of the universe would have to be prior state of the
universe that did not exist .Yet that would be nothingness and nothingness
cannot explain anything Sister Eva.'.

'Yet this line of reasoning is fallacious Dawkins for it assumes that the
universe is the only thing that exists and there was no universe there would
be nothing. Leibniz would agree that the explanation of the universe must be a
prior state of affairs and that prior state of affairs must be God.'

'I would like to move onto the next part of the argument with Your permission
Mother Athena which would be if the universe has an explanation of its
existence that explanation is God'

'You have My full permission Sister Eva

'Well err Sister Eva I do not see that the universe needs an explanation for
its existence.'

'So what you are saying Dawkins is that the universe exists independently '

'Yes I would believe that Sister Eva.'

'I would put it to you Dawkins that if we consider the universe and all of
space time reality and all energy, it therefore follows that the cause must be
a nonphysical immaterial being beyond space and time .There are two kinds of
explanation either an abstract object like a number or an unembodied mind .Yet
abstract objects do not cause anything at all so that the number 7 cannot
cause any effects The only other alternative is a transcendent mind which is
what God is. It proves that there is a necessary, uncaused, timeless,
immaterial personal Creator of the universe which not a Flying Spaghetti
Monster as you posits in your book....'

'Yes but in believe that the universe just exists by its own nature Sister
Eva.'

'Yet we have already accepted Dawkins that the things that compose the
universe stars and planets do not exist necessarily.'

'Yes but if you look at the matters these things are made of mater and matter
exists independently. Err Sister Eva.'

'So as an atheist Dawkins you cannot say that the elementary particles of
matter are just configurations of matter which could have been different but
that the matter of which the particles exist necessarily. What is more a
different universe could exist. and no one thinks that every particle exists
by its one nature. Therefore the universe cannot exist but necessity of its
own nature.'

Sister Eva then addressed the Court after the Tongue Lashing She had just
given Dawkins.

'The conclusion ladies and gentlemen is logically inescapable .God is the
explanation for the existence of the universe and God's is an uncaused
unembodied Mind that transcends space and time and exists necessarily.'

'I will move on to the next part of the Cosmological Argument.'

WHY DID THE UNIVERSE BEGIN?/

Any comments to norselandic@hotmail.com