Existence of God

[IAM]

Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT - "However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way."

God is Love!

 

[Leoreth]

Well, the same could be said for nonbelievers. Both groups have a vocal minority who won't shut up.

Fair enough, I despise both of them.

It should be okay to point out factual errors when religious topics tangle science, though, just as I'd like to be corrected when I get a religious or theological concept wrong.

Come on. You may think that substituting one name for another is cute, but it is actually pretty insulting. The post was made in good faith. If you disagree, I suggest that you lay out exactly why you disagree in some logical way.

I was pointing out a fallacy, and a more direct example is more likely to get attention and intuitiously be understood then plain text.

I think someone who makes such post should be willing to face such answers. I didn't mean to insult anyone and if that's the case, I apologize.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

SiLL: Okay, since evidently I can't disprove the existance of god using logic, why don't you try. Prove God exists using logic.

I can't.

If we can't define God that means God is incomprehensible to us and that we cannot recognize God. Hence, anything can be God. The keyboard I'm typing on could be God because it may still have motives, but I can't recognize them.

Absolutely! And this mere fact - that there is just as much reason to believe that your keyboard is divine as to believe that the Christian god exists does not prove either wrong, but as I see it it proves that it is baseless to concern ourself with wisdom claimed to have a divine source.
That is why I said one can only try to point out why there is no reason to believe God exists.

If for instances Birdjaguar says that logic can not claim to be the key to all wisdom, I can not refute him. He is right. All I can do now is to argue why I prefer logic over other approaches to gain wisdom and try to substantiate it. But also this I can not prove. I can only explain why I think so.
I am convinced that logic has the best talking points on its side, but that would not prove it's superiority or its universal validity either. It would only prove its likeness to be closer to those ideals as other sources of wisdom.

Does that make any sense to you? ^^

 

[Ajidica]

I conceed to your point.
However, I do not believe that any sort of religous texts are the literal word of the divine. I couldn't quite tell if that was an intent with your statement that is is pointless to concern ourselves with divine wisdom.

 

[Birdjaguar]

What would you say the assumptions about God are? Based on my knowledge of the Monothiestic faiths (and to a lesser extent Hinduism) they agree that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent.

What I meant by incomphrehensible was that SiLL had said we can't understand God due to our limited perception. Hence, God is incomprehensbible to us. I believe personaly that although we may never completly understand God, we can at least understand parts of God.

"omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent" may be good starting places, but other characteristics may be important too. BTW, what does "omnipresent" mean?

By understand do you mean intellectually understand?

I was pointing out a fallacy, and a more direct example is more likely to get attention and intuitiously be understood then plain text.

I think someone who makes such post should be willing to face such answers. I didn't mean to insult anyone and if that's the case, I apologize.

Ask your questions in a clear way and hope for an answer.

Direct examples are fine if you accompany them with what your point is and the issues you are raising.

"See, when I substitute Zeus for God it becomes evident that blah blah blah...."

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Omnipresent means at all places simultaneously.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Does that include in bones and blood?

In cells? In atoms and molecules?

In quarks and gluons?

Does that mean that there is no place in the universe that god is not?

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I guess so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipresence


Link to video.

 

[warpus]

Does that mean that there is no place in the universe that god is not?

Isn't that what "in all places, at all times" means?

 

[Birdjaguar]

Isn't that what "in all places, at all times" means?

I'm just checking so everyone knows the implications of "omnipresent". I can't see many Christians subscribing to such an idea. At a minimum god and the universe would be one and the same.


ParadigmShifter that video was hilarious.

 

[Ahovking]

i see no one has read the first post and are just taking one look at the title and posting "God God bah" look try to read the first post and talk about whats on the post you making me laugh just read the post

 

[emzie]

i see no one has read the first post and are just taking one look at the title and posting "God God bah" look try to read the first post and talk about whats on the post you making me laugh just read the post

I did and it's nonsense. Like I summarized for you, you're only saying "I can't comprehend how all these things could be without God"

The best you can hope for from your OP is that it means a supernatural entity exists. But to associate that supernatural entity with God is as valid as associating it with Zeus.

 

[Moss]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjJAWuzno9Y

(sorry, it's long)

Much better scientific reasoning for the belief in God to be found in that video, and even then, it's NOT proof. However, it's not unreasonable to deduce that God exists.

 

[SpiritWolf]

Weak Anthropic Principle:
Conditions that are observed in the universe must allow the observer to exist.

The "coincidence" of conditions that allow life to exist on Earth must occur, or we wouldn't be here talking about it.

 

[Birdjaguar]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjJAWuzno9Y

(sorry, it's long)

Much better scientific reasoning for the belief in God to be found in that video, and even then, it's NOT proof. However, it's not unreasonable to deduce that God exists.

Thanks for that link the talk was very interesting.

 

[cardgame]

@ OP: I'll just respond to your first one for now.

Yes. We are at the perfect conditions for human life.

Guess What?

If we weren't, we'd be dead... and therefore not around to philosophize like this...

your 'point' is meaningless and implies nothing about anything towards what you are trying to say.






and now I'll just say this: Omnipotence is a paradox

 

[sophie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjJAWuzno9Y

(sorry, it's long)

Much better scientific reasoning for the belief in God to be found in that video, and even then, it's NOT proof. However, it's not unreasonable to deduce that God exists.

Watched the whole thing. Very interesting talk, and, while I still don't agree with him, and am still an atheist, I liked how reasonable he was, and he was a very entertaining speaker. I wish every religious person talking about evolution and creationism could be this reasonable.

 

[Ayn Rand]

God's cool designs and the falsehood of evolution explained fully here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lcrq5OOkQdk

and God's design for the World proved here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P591Yt6dIHY

 

[Glassfan]

Animals, as opposed to plants, evolved a nervous system to control and regulate their mobile bodies. As animals got larger and more complex, nodes formed along the nervous system for higher functions (such as sensory apparatus). Typically, one dominant node enlarged into a central ballistics computer we call a brain. Human intelligence works off the excess of that brain not used to run the body. Intelligence is widely regarded as the highest evolutionary characteristic known thus far. Intelligence is the point at which matter can contemplate itself. One supposes, however, that as evolution continues, other, higher traits will be selected for...

When considering the "mind" of God, keep in mind that it may not be a matter of intelligence at all, but rather some more advanced characteristic that we can only dimly comprehend, if at all.

The Superman characteristics we attribute to God should not be taken literally. We cannot pretend to imagine His true nature.

 

[Lord Gay]

1: Things are very complex and I can't fathom how they would get that way. QED. God.

Nailed it.

Reality is not limited to our own limited understanding of it.