Prove that God doesn't exist.

[Dawkinsrocks]

I think Numinus fails to understand that the laws of logic will guarantee a true conclusion only from true premisses.

 

[top gun]

It was a miracle in that there was a radical 'change of heart' among jesus' listeners at that particular time.

And what exactly do you suppose is christianity trying to do except initiate a radical 'change of heart' among the peoples of the world, hmmm?

OMG (no pun intended)... the wheels of logic are really completely off your cart.

If all Jesus did was to get people to "share some food they already had" while that is a very nice thing it is certainly no miracle.

You actually prove MY point. That there have been many good men over history. Whether exceptional strong or smart or good at peace making. Jesus no doubt was one of these men.

And we see this even today in religion. Mother Teresa was no doubt a wonderful, unbelievably giving person... now though she's been risen to Saint.

When in reality she was a wonderful person who's now deceased... period.

 

[Agnapostate]

So have we covered all the standard fare in this thread?

The Paradox of Omnipotence

1. Either God can create a stone that he cannot lift, or he cannot create a stone that he cannot lift.

2. If God can create a stone that he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent.

3. If God cannot create a stone that he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent.

4. Therefore, God is not omnipotent.

A Perfect Creator Cannot Exist

1. If God exists, then he is perfect.

2. If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.

3. If a being is perfect, then whatever he creates must be perfect.

4. But the universe is not perfect.

5. Therefore, it is impossible for a perfect being to be the creator of the universe.

6. Hence, it is impossible for God to exist.

The Problem of Evil

1. If God exits, then the attributes of God are consistent with the attributes of evil.

2. The attributes of God are not consistent with the existence of evil.

3. Therefore, God does not and cannot exist.

 

[9sublime]

If a being is perfect, it does not guarantee his creation is perfect. If God is perfect, and he wishes to perfect the art of making something imperfect, he could surely do it?

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

And if God knows the future he cannot be omnipotent.

To be knowable the future must be fixed and therefore unchangeable.

So omnisceinece and omnipotence are mutually exclusive.

Also, knowledge of the future rules out free will because all actions are fixed

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Poor Nums, the question I asked was, "Or are you saying that God wrote the Bible to manipulate people and thus circumvent their God-given free-will?" It was a question, hence the question mark at the end. Even when I try to understand the stuff you post, you are snide.

Your snide response to my question above suggests that you and I agree on something: the Bible is not the Word of God, written by Him or His proxy. See what one can achieve with a bit of effort, an agreement. I'm glad you weren't taken in with the morons.

 

[Agnapostate]

If a being is perfect, it does not guarantee his creation is perfect. If God is perfect, and he wishes to perfect the art of making something imperfect, he could surely do it?

Then the definition of perfection appears to be rather arbitrary, in that case. When can you differentiate perfection and imperfection if you can simply fall back on the claim that any imperfection is a perfection of imperfection?

 

[Dr.Who]

If a being is perfect, it does not guarantee his creation is perfect. If God is perfect, and he wishes to perfect the art of making something imperfect, he could surely do it?

More likely He wanted to create something perfect and He wanted to do it through a process that involved imperfection as an intermediary step.

We learn and benefit from our imperfect life here on earth.

 

[Dr.Who]

And if God knows the future he cannot be omnipotent.

To be knowable the future must be fixed and therefore unchangeable.

Not at all. There could be multiple possible futures and god could know virtually all of them. Or even after all the changed and unfixed events take place God could just know which one the future gets changed to.

 

[Dr.Who]

You keep heaping scorn on my intellect don't you.

It is the last resort of the desperate christian who has no legitmimate response to the points I raise but who isn't smart enough to ditch their half baked superstitious views and get some coherent ones.

Or the frustrated response of a Christian who has met a person who defies logical discourse.

 

[Agnapostate]

More likely He wanted to create something perfect and He wanted to do it through a process that involved imperfection as an intermediary step.

We learn and benefit from our imperfect life here on earth.

If he had to resort to such a process, he is imperfect himself.

 

[Lagboltz]

Prove that God doesn't exist -- 760 posts so far. I love the armchair logic. Here is my contribution:

(See Wikipedia) Gödel's second incompleteness theorem can be stated as follows:
For any formal recursively enumerable (i.e., effectively generated) theory T including basic arithmetical truths and also certain truths about formal provability, T includes a statement of its own consistency if and only if T is inconsistent.

Since the universe has at least an arithmetic complexity, then we can't say s**t about the universe nor God.

 

[numinus]

So have we covered all the standard fare in this thread?

The Paradox of Omnipotence

1. Either God can create a stone that he cannot lift, or he cannot create a stone that he cannot lift.

2. If God can create a stone that he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent.

3. If God cannot create a stone that he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent.

4. Therefore, God is not omnipotent.

I do hate repeating myself.

As I said so many times before, the solution of the omnipotence paradox lies in AXIOMATIC SET THEORY.

The formal solution may be presented as follows:

Let O be the set of things god can do.

1. O is a universal set
Proof: Definition of 'omnipotent' as naively stated.

2. O complement is the set of things god cannot do
Proof: Definition of the set complement - for any set S, its complement, S complement, is the set whose members are not members of S.

3. O complement is an empty set
Proof: Complement laws - the complement of a universal set is an empty set
Principle of extensionality - two sets are equal if they have the same elements

4. O complement is a subset of O
Proof: Properties of empty set - for any set X, the empty set is a subset of X.

Conclusion: The set of things god cannot do is an element of the the set of things god can do -- hence god is omnipotent.

In ontological terms, the problem arises with the dishonest definition of omnipotent (the ability to do anything and everything) and 'create a rock he cannot lift'. These definition intuitively holds if and only if the logic does not involve an empty set. Otherwise, some set operations are 'restricted'. This is analogous to the set of real numbers in mathematics where division by 0 is not permissible.

By the definition of subset, the empty set is a subset of any set A, as every element x of {} belongs to A. If it is not true that every element of {} is in A, there must be at least one element of {} that is not present in A. Since there are no elements of {} at all, there is no element of {} that is not in A. Hence every element of {} is in A, and {} is a subset of A. Any statement that begins "for every element of {}" is not making any substantive claim; it is a vacuous truth. This is often paraphrased as "everything is true of the elements of the empty set."

Which confirms what thomas aquainas had said all along -- that the definition of omnipotence must be logically qualified to make any sense.

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

Understand? I sincerely hope so.

 

[numinus]

A Perfect Creator Cannot Exist

1. If God exists, then he is perfect.

2. If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.

3. If a being is perfect, then whatever he creates must be perfect.

4. But the universe is not perfect.

5. Therefore, it is impossible for a perfect being to be the creator of the universe.

6. Hence, it is impossible for God to exist.

This is a sloppy criticism of teleology.

We all know that 'perfection' exists in nature IN DEGREES. It is reasonable enough to think that something is less or more perfect than another, while still remaining perfect IN ITSELF.

Either way, teleology addresses a certain aspect or nature of god, not his existence.

 

[numinus]

The Problem of Evil

1. If God exits, then the attributes of God are consistent with the attributes of evil.

2. The attributes of God are not consistent with the existence of evil.

3. Therefore, God does not and cannot exist.

Lastly, and I suppose the easiest to understand.

There is no problem of evil because evil does not have an objective existence independent of good.

What we see as good and evil is in fact, a necessary and naturally occuring inclination in the human condition. As I have said, the seven deadly sins are actually flipsides of the same inclinations necessary for a moral good -- self-esteem on the one hand and pride in another, appetite and glutonny, love and hate, etc.

What separates good and evil is the adherence/rejection of divine imperatives. Choice is the fundamental element of free will and is inseperable from ALL HUMAN ACTIONS.