Proof that the Christian god cannot exist

[Cris]

BVS,

Hi and welcome to sciforums.

Firstly I say that I disapprove of forums like this, and that we should be respecting all opinoins,

Why? Why respect someone’s opinion if you believe it to be wrong. One can still have respect for the person and at the same time prove their opinions to be nonsense.

not using it as an online battle ground.

If religion is fundamentally dangerous to the future of humanity, as many of us believe, and religionists say otherwise, then we have a battle – online and offline, whether you think it good or not.

I am a firm believer in God by the way,

Then I would recommend you take a course on logic so that you might be able to think more clearly.

and your paradoxal arguement regarding His omniscience and free will works only in our present level of consciousness.

It is simple logic applied to current Christian mythology. You will need to change the myth if you want it to be logically consistent.

God is obviously beyond the physical plane,

What does that mean and why is it obvious?

and will never ever leave physical evidence as to His existence

Why not? Why would something apparently all-powerful want to hide?

you or anyone else as long as they live will never be able to prove or disprove God's existence.

The logic speaks for itself. Do you want to redefine your god so that it becomes a logical possibility but with reduced abilities then?

Is it so difficult that He is just beyond our comprehension?

That is the agnostic position. Theists claim otherwise. Or rather when faced with very awkward questions they claim their god is so mysterious that it cannot be understood – basic cop-out. That’s the problem with fantasies with no empirical basis; they fall apart when examined closely – which happens with every known major religion.

If you think of us now as the peak of humanity and its intelligence you are very mistaken.

Umm, our current state is the peak of humanity and human intelligence. Prior to us in the evolutionary chain were our primate ancestors who had less complex brains. In the future as we develop better skills with genetic engineering we are quite likely to intelligently direct our future evolution and dramatically increase our current level of intelligence. But for now we are the most intelligent species on this planet.

To think that "God does not work in terms I understand, therefore He must not exist" is exactly what makes us human.

Can you demonstrate my proof to be wrong then?

His consciousness is infinite, and the dwarfed vision of men cannot even begin to perceive His divine state.

Yet he cannot escape simple logic though. He is constrained by the same rules as are we, e.g. he cannot make a square circle and neither can we. And in this case we cannot have free will if he is omniscient.

Humans have free will, and God is omniscient.

Which we have shown is impossible. You can choose one or the other but not both. They are mutually exclusive.

It is the task given to us to overcome our state of existence through choice to find God again.

According to Christian mythology, but unfortunately the tenets of Christianity described in this thread are paradoxical – i.e. the basis of Christianity is nonsense.

 

[Cris]

Paraclete,

Cris, you claim, that the Christian God do not exist !!

Not quite. Only as defined within the claims of Christianity. If they were to amend their mythology to avoid the paradox then they can still claim a god of some type.

Conclusion 1: The first part is OK - you actually proves that God has no benevolence if he is omniscient - but then you jump to the conclusion that he is not worth our attention , I disagree : not all christians believe, that God is good

Why then worship a malignant god? But does my opinion alter the prior logic?

Why do you think that God has benevolence - he loves to punish people :……..…This only proofs that God does what HE likes, and may not have the same ethics about good and evil as humans have ..

And parents punish their children and we put people in prison, all in the hope that they will learn. You are confusing a mechanism with an ultimate result. One could argue that he would punish millions so that a greater good would be served ultimately. But that wasn’t my point. If omniscient and the creator then he would have designed every instant from the beginning of time to the end. Why then choose some to be eternal and some to perish where they could have no say in their ultimate fate? This is basic injustice and could not be seen as being in accord with omni-benevolence, which is part of the definition of the Christian god. See the Catholic Encyclopedia for this.

If Philosopher´s Stone is right about souls not feeling pain but just feel a little different when burning in fire - then actually God has benevolence because it is then NOT evil to let humans go to Hell

According to the bible hell means permanent death – it is not a place where people suffer eternally, their souls simple cease to exist, consumed by the lake of fire. The apparent selection by God is that some will live eternally and another group will cease to exist – decided at the beginning of time before we had a chance to have any say in the matter.

.. IF there are Christians that might accept God like that (God does what he wants and has no benevolence as you understand it ) ,then the choice is NOT nonsense, and after all they do not have any choice but accepting it, if it is Gods will , since in this case they do NOT have free will - do you see the logic ....

I think you would need to give an example of any Christain who would accept that their god is not omni-benelovent and even then this would have to be a minor cult. If we take the generally accepted perspectve that the Christian god is all-good then you have no case.

And then your proof has failed - then God DO indeed exist, omniscient, omnipotent and with benevolence ..... !!!!!

Cris - I think your proof is in dire strait !!!!!!!

LOL – dream on. Ultimately good must mean life and evil must mean permanent non existence. If he is omni-benevolent then no one can be terminated, at least not without being given a choice, and that cannot occur if he is omniscient and created everything.

 

[Cris]

philo,

But I actually think Paraclete did the impossible - he trumped it !!!!!!!!!!!!

Umm - I don't think so.

 

[Cris]

Marlin,

Yes, that's it. So the Genesis account doesn't necessarily limit the Creation to 7 "24-hour days," but instead could be 7 "ages" of unknown amounts of time (millions of years, perhaps?).

The bible says days and we have no evidence it meant anything other than what we know as a day.

Attempts to rationalise this so that it fits the known facts of evolution are signs of desperate theologians trying to deal with the imposibility of the A&E story yet still trying to claim it as true somehow.

 

[TrueCreation]

Cris, im curious to see what your thoughts are in this thread, this one is somewhat old and is getting very long: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=50075

 

[Marlin]

Marlin,

The bible says days and we have no evidence it meant anything other than what we know as a day.

Attempts to rationalise this so that it fits the known facts of evolution are signs of desperate theologians trying to deal with the imposibility of the A&E story yet still trying to claim it as true somehow.

The Hebrew word for "day" in Genesis 1:

Genesis 40:4 Translates as "a season"
Judges 11:4 Translates as "in the process of time"

And in LDS scripture (Pearl of Great Price):
Abraham 4:5,8 The Gods called the creation periods "days"

 

[Paraclete]

Cris ,
your headline is :" Proof that the Christian God can not exist " so that MUST be your main claim !!!!
Perhaps you should start with defining what you think is the " Christian " God , because there are really a lot of different so called christian churches where God is perceived different - incredible but true . If you mean the catholic perception of God then say so !!

By the way you are absolutely right in your paradox, so of course you can not have human free will and a omniscient God at the same time. I understand that very well - but your issue was : to proof that the christian God can not exist.

You claim that according to the bible hell means permanent death, where the souls cease to exist - please inform me where in the bible is that written !!!!!!!!!
And in your answer to philosopher´s stone about souls feeling pain - you claim that going to heaven means coming back to the earth again - that sounds not like the bible to me.
It sounds like reincarnation !!!
And before you edited your posting again ,then you claimed that you did not even understand my logic in conclusion 3 -
I am not surprised Cris , I am not surprised !!!!!!!!!

 

[Marlin]

And in your answer to philosopher´s stone about souls feeling pain - you claim that going to heaven means coming back to the earth again - that sounds not like the bible to me.
It sounds like reincarnation !!!

Matt. 5:5
Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

Have the meek inherited the earth yet? I don't think so. This verse obviously refers to a time in the future, and that time hasn't come yet. Sounds like the earth will be heaven if the meek inherit it in the end.

 

[Cris]

Marlin,

The Hebrew word for "day" in Genesis 1:

Genesis 40:4 Translates as "a season"

That ref gives no definition of a day. Do you have the correct ref?

Judges 11:4 Translates as "in the process of time"

Also does not appear to define a day.

And in LDS scripture (Pearl of Great Price):
Abraham 4:5,8 The Gods called the creation periods "days"

LDS scriptures are not bible references.

 

[Cris]

Truecreation - yes, I've seen your post and read it - thinking of a suitable reply. I have something slightly differnt and trying to think how it would fit.

Your'e right this is a very old thread.

 

[Marlin]

The Hebrew word for "day" in Genesis 1:

“ Genesis 40:4 Translates as "a season"

That ref gives no definition of a day. Do you have the correct ref?

No, no, no. It doesn't define a day--rather, the Hebrew word used in Genesis 1 for "day" is translated by the King James Version people as "a season" in Genesis 40:4. And the same word appears in the KJV as "in the process of time" rather than as "day" in Judges.

 

[Paraclete]

Cris your conclusion 1 in your first post in this thread , is ONLY valid if christians agree that it is an evil act of God to send people to hell (you define under "question" in your first point : hell as ethernal damnation since it is the opposite of heaven - in your question) )
If Christians do not find it evil of God to send humans to Hell - then Conclusion 1 and 3 are both wrong !!!

You can not run away from that one ................

 

[Cris]

Marlin - using my RSV I cannot see that either of those references have any relevance. I.e. "some time", "after a time". Are you saying those references to time and the references to "day" in Genesis all mean "season"?

 

[Cris]

Paraclete,

your headline is :" Proof that the Christian God can not exist " so that MUST be your main claim !!!!

Attention grabber. Read the Proposal at the beginning of the thread -

Proposal:

Christianity cannot claim that God is omniscient and also claim that humans have free will. The claims form a paradox, a falsehood.

there are really a lot of different so called christian churches where God is perceived different - incredible but true . If you mean the catholic perception of God then say so !!

I believe all main sects of Christianity share the same basic definitions of their God – i.e. omniscient, omnipotent, omni-benevolent. They have taken these early assumptions and definition from early Catholic records. Now I’d be interested if you can show any main sect has different definitions or does not agree with these rather basic ideas.

You claim that according to the bible hell means permanent death, where the souls cease to exist - please inform me where in the bible is that written !!!!!!!!!

’fraid you’d ask – came out of a long debate here on the issue – all centered around what Revelations meant. I’ll have to dig again.

And in your answer to philosopher´s stone about souls feeling pain - you claim that going to heaven means coming back to the earth again - that sounds not like the bible to me.

Not the layman’s perspective, but Revelations has it. It was very controversial when we discussed it and I didn’t agree with it until a bit later.

And before you edited your posting again ,then you claimed that you did not even understand my logic in conclusion 3 - I am not surprised Cris , I am not surprised !!!!!!!!!

That window was but a few seconds. Not quote sure what you are surprised by though. Your logic or my initial non-understanding.

 

[Marlin]

Marlin - using my RSV I cannot see that either of those references have any relevance. I.e. "some time", "after a time". Are you saying those references to time and the references to "day" in Genesis all mean "season"?

The question we are discussing is, does the word "day" in Genesis chapter 1 have alternate meanings besides "one 24-hour period of time"? Or does it just have one meaning?

The answer is, the word for "day" in Hebrew has several meanings, and thus, the Genesis creation account can be interpreted as having seven "periods of time" wherein God created the world, rather than seven 24-hour days. This is to prove that an old-earth creation story may be supported by the Genesis account.

Here is what Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible has to say about the definition of the Hebrew word for day:

"day (24 hours); daytime (in contrast to night); by extension: an indefinite period of time; an era with a certain characteristic, such as "the day of the Lord" and the prophetic "on that day";" etc.

 

[philosopher´s stone]

Cris - I think you fail to see the gravity of your situation.

It clearly follows both logical and philosophical from the whole construction of your very first post on this thread - that your first and third conclusion will be wrong if
God is not perceived as "unjust, evil , perverted " for sending "individuals " to hell .....

Try to to read your first post very carefully - cris .....

 

[philosopher´s stone]

I only mean it logically and philosphically - If Paraclete finds any kind of "ammo" in finding some "christians " who do not perceive God being evil for sending individuals
to hell - then your first and third conclusion is flawed !!!!!!!!!

 

[philosopher´s stone]

Your paradox is still good though - cris !!!!!!!
It is a Paradox !!!

 

[Cris]

Paraclete,

Cris your conclusion 1 in your first post in this thread , is ONLY valid if christians agree that it is an evil act of God to send people to hell (you define under "question" in your first point : hell as ethernal damnation since it is the opposite of heaven - in your question) )

If Christians do not find it evil of God to send humans to Hell - then Conclusion 1 and 3 are both wrong !!!

You can not run away from that one ................

I don’t see that it is important or necessary for Christians to agree on what is evil or not. For the sake of this argument the position must be independent of their opinions. If you have a point then it hinges on what is meant by omni-benevolence which I have taken to mean “all-good”, i.e. cannot do harm - and causing billions of people to cease to exist is the worst harm possible, surely, i.e. evil. As for “eternal damnation”, read “permanent death”. But either works well as a suitable example of evil and doesn’t change the logic of the argument. Heaven means life and hell means death – those are the opposites.

 

[Cris]

philo,

that your first and third conclusion will be wrong if
God is not perceived as "unjust, evil , perverted " for sending "individuals " to hell .....

The argument doesn't rest on Christian opinions, but should specifically exclude them. In absolute terms, and the key to the argument, is the apparent arbitrary choice by the god of letting some to live and the others to die without giving them any chocie of their destinies.

Would you not consider the action of anything that arbitrarily causes the existence of billions or trillions of people to cease as evil?