Proof that the Christian god cannot exist

[Enmos]

I'd call into question your assumptions of what "zero" and "infinity" are - i.e. can you really classify a position and time as a number and expect it to follow mathematical rules?

I could define "zero = a chair", "infinity = a table".
Infinity + zero = infinity, but if you add a chair to a table... you get a bench

This one is easy to dismiss...

How can you have a negative number of gods?
You either have a positive number... or none.
You can't have a negative number of something, except in maths.

So your analysis fails.

Furthermore - your (flawed) analysis that "the most reasonable number of gods in existence is 0" is purely probabilistic... and will be unlikely to reflect reality.

Your analysis would assume that people not of average height can't reasonably exist.

The analysis obviously fails lol
But when you say "and will be unlikely to reflect reality" you mean following from the formula i presume ?

 

[Sarkus]

But when you say "and will be unlikely to reflect reality" you mean following from the formula i presume ?

Yes - in that he assumes because the probabilistic outcome is zero that this equates to a proof that God does not exist.

But if you follow that logic then people of non-average height would not exist.

The mean / average / medium of probabilities rarely reflects reality.


Or am I over analysing this

 

[Hapsburg]

You're probably over-analyzing it.

Height can't be negative. But there can be negative deities, theoretically.
So, what I said doesn't apply to height. Just to things that can go both positive and negative.

I think.
I dunno. My friend, Trevor, was the guy who thought of it.
He's, like, a fucking math genius, so I assumed he knew what the fuck he was talking about.

 

[Enmos]

You're probably over-analyzing it.

Height can't be negative. But there can be negative deities, theoretically.
So, what I said doesn't apply to height. Just to things that can go both positive and negative.

I think.
I dunno. My friend, Trevor, was the guy who thought of it.
He's, like, a fucking math genius, so I assumed he knew what the fuck he was talking about.

What about depth ?

 

[Hapsburg]

Hmmm. If you consider depth an aspect of heighth, maybe.

I dunno. I always that one was kinda loopy.

But the first one was at least somewhat reasonable.

 

[Enmos]

Hmmm. If you consider depth an aspect of heighth, maybe.

I dunno. I always that one was kinda loopy.

But the first one was at least somewhat reasonable.

I get the idea youre trying to get across, but the analysis actually has to hold up for it to mean anything. Otherwise, whats the point ?

Maybe you should refine it.

 

[cole grey]

Infinity x zero = undefined.

no. anything times zero = zero. Unless you are talking about some uncommon theoretized version of "zero" and not the normal one.
All your mathematical mapping is arbitrary.

Anyway, any pixies fan knows that man is 5, and the devil is 6. So we can't be at zero.

The number of gods possible is infinite; infinitely positive and infinitely negative. The most reasonable and rational number that will exist from any given number line in the mean, or average, of the line. The mean of all numbers positive and negative is 0. Thus, the most reasonable number of gods in existence is 0.

Then the following makes sense too - the number of people possible is infinite, and the mean of all possible numbers of people is zero - therefore the most reasonable # of people in existence is zero. Uh, no.

The equations your friend came up with are like tv - it is a fun something to occupy your mind with that is devoid of content.

 

[Journey0820]

This thread has me convinced. As I understand the argument of fulfilled infinities, no deity could have existed for an infinite length of time before it eventually created the universe.

Good enough for me. The Abrahamic god is disproved.

 

[cole grey]

Good enough for me. The Abrahamic god is disproved.

Yes, not being able to comprehend something obviously means it CANNOT exist.

I am confused as to why people use a mathematical analysis to "disprove" something like this, although any mathematician can tell you that proving something requires completeness - in other words, you can't just say there are no square roots of numbers over eight hundred billion just because you dont have the time to write out all the answers, and you haven't found any over a hundred and forty four - that is not a proof.

Let's just leave it at this - there is no proof that God exists, and there is no proof God doesn't exist. Fact.
There is no compelling reason beyond personal experience either of the universe, or of God itself, to believe in God. There is also no compelling reason not to believe in a God of some kind, even if there are acceptable reasons to disbelieve certain fantastic renditions which people have put forward.

The abrahamic God may have been misunderstood and misrepresented, or perhaps He is right and we are wrong as certain people believe, or perhaps it doesn't exist - but there is no proof. Period.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

This thread has me convinced. As I understand the argument of fulfilled infinities, no deity could have existed for an infinite length of time before it eventually created the universe.

Good enough for me. The Abrahamic god is disproved.

*************
M*W: Why is it that some people think that Abraham was a monotheist? Abraham was a pantheist who believed in the many gods of Egypt and Canaan which included moon worship. Abraham's father was also a pantheist. The god that told Abraham to sacrifice his own son was not the same god of monotheism but a pagan god that was worshipped even before sun worship came about. Monotheism started with Egyptian sun worship, or the worship of Aten Ra, and that was a couple of thousand years after Abraham's time. But in any event, all the gods people have worshipped through the ages didn't really exist.

 

[Muslim]

Proof that the Christian god cannot exist.

This is a revision and refinement of a post I made over a year ago but there are so many new members now that I felt it worth a revisit.

Omniscience vs. Human Free will. A Paradox.

Omniscience: Perfect knowledge of past and future events.
Free will: Freedom to choose between alternatives without external coercion.
Paradox: Statements or events that have contradictory and inconsistent properties.

Proposal:

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

Reasoning:

If God is omniscient then even before we are born God will have complete knowledge of every decision we are going to make.

Any apparent choice we make regarding the acceptance or denial of Jesus as a savior is predetermined. This must be true to satisfy the assertion that God is omniscient. Effectively we have no choice in the matter. What we think is free will is an illusion. Our choices have been coerced since we exist and act according to the will of God.

Alternatively if human free will is valid, meaning that the outcome of our decisions is not pre-determined or coerced, then God cannot be omniscient, since he would not know in advance our decisions.

Question:

If God knows the decision of every individual, before they are born, regarding the acceptance or denial of Jesus as a savior, then why does he create one set of individuals destined for heaven and another set destined for eternal damnation? This seems unjust, perverse and particularly evil.

Conclusions:

If God is omniscient then humans do not have free will (see argument above) and the apparent arbitrary choice of God to condemn many individuals to eternal damnation is evil. I.e. God does not possess the property of omni benevolence and is therefore not worth our attention.

If humans have true free will then God cannot be omniscient (see argument above). If he is not omniscient then he also cannot be omnipotent since knowledge of the future is a prerequisite for total action. Without these abilities God can no longer be deemed a god – i.e. God does not exist.

If humans do not have free will then the choice of whether to choose Jesus as a savior or not makes total nonsense of Christianity since the choice is pre-determined and we are merely puppets at the hands of an evil monster.

Cris

Its called a test theory. When you go for a test, the examiners don't give you the answers before the test has been concluded.

SEE THIS:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOJ3FKXmrVY

 

[Cris]

That didn't seem to address the issue.

 

[Mattpaul]

A question

Hi All,

very intersting debate. Is it possible that "predeterminism" and "omniscience" are not mutually exclusive. I.e could God "know" what is going to happen, without "making" it happen?

Matt

 

[LovesHumanity]

Thank "God" you provided the proof else "Godmen" would have continued with their perpetualization of ignorance of the masses. Now, people have an option and a way to disseminate fact from fiction.
However, the article is not limited in application to Christian God alone.. the God of any and every faith cannot stands up to rationality.
God stuff is quite handy when it comes to keeping minds of the masses off the real issues! For example, one may rule, justify murders, rapes and atrocities on "infidels" and yet make the best of life for himself/herself -- all in the name of GOD!

 

[answers]

This really isn't some new revelation, Christians have been saying since the beginning that God is in control. You just uncovered a few implications of that teaching.

These points of 'how much' God controls is up for debate hugely in Christian circles. This debate centers around the doctrine of God's providence.


But I do think its plain to see through the bible that God chooses who will be saved, giving rise to the teaching that salvation is all of God and none of us. Doctrine of regeneration.

We have all done things which separate us from God, in doing that we become slaves to sin. So a non-Christian by biblical teaching would not have free will at all (Calvinistic view point ). A saved person has a change of nature, desiring the things of God when before the old nature didn't desire God (Depravity of man). In this the Christian becomes truly free, free to choose Godly things when before their nature inhibited such choices.

I'm not saying that a person with a sinful nature cannot do good, because there is such thing as common grace. The rain falls on the just and the unjust. But you've got to realize that good things are Godly things, if God is good. And any choice to follow God or do good must first be initiated either by His common grace or His saving work on the cross.

So a few questions arise out of all this:

How are people still held accountable when God is responsible for someones salvation?

If God is in total control then he must control evil and therefore be evil?

I'll leave those questions to you, can't give you all the answers or else things wouldn't be interesting, and besides you may come to totally different conclusions to me. But just remember in seeking answers about God you have to realize that you can't answer these questions fully because, let's face it when it comes to God human logic fails miserably. Which can be put in a negative way, that belief in God is illogical. But even so...it all makes sense to God.

 

[SkywalkerJedi]

it is logical god is real

 

[Cris]

SkyWalkerJedi,

it is logical god is real

An assertion bereft of meaningful support and hence worthless.

 

[wesmorris]

I think god is as real as pi.

 

[rjr6]

Proof that the Christian god cannot exist.

This is a revision and refinement of a post I made over a year ago but there are so many new members now that I felt it worth a revisit.

Omniscience vs. Human Free will. A Paradox.

Omniscience: Perfect knowledge of past and future events.
Free will: Freedom to choose between alternatives without external coercion.
Paradox: Statements or events that have contradictory and inconsistent properties.

Proposal:

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

Reasoning:

If God is omniscient then even before we are born God will have complete knowledge of every decision we are going to make.

Any apparent choice we make regarding the acceptance or denial of Jesus as a savior is predetermined. This must be true to satisfy the assertion that God is omniscient. Effectively we have no choice in the matter. What we think is free will is an illusion. Our choices have been coerced since we exist and act according to the will of God.

Alternatively if human free will is valid, meaning that the outcome of our decisions is not pre-determined or coerced, then God cannot be omniscient, since he would not know in advance our decisions.

Question:

If God knows the decision of every individual, before they are born, regarding the acceptance or denial of Jesus as a savior, then why does he create one set of individuals destined for heaven and another set destined for eternal damnation? This seems unjust, perverse and particularly evil.

Conclusions:

If God is omniscient then humans do not have free will (see argument above) and the apparent arbitrary choice of God to condemn many individuals to eternal damnation is evil. I.e. God does not possess the property of omni benevolence and is therefore not worth our attention.

If humans have true free will then God cannot be omniscient (see argument above). If he is not omniscient then he also cannot be omnipotent since knowledge of the future is a prerequisite for total action. Without these abilities God can no longer be deemed a god – i.e. God does not exist.

If humans do not have free will then the choice of whether to choose Jesus as a savior or not makes total nonsense of Christianity since the choice is pre-determined and we are merely puppets at the hands of an evil monster.

Cris

I will assume you base your beliefs of the universe in science, correct? Ok, science tells that a table 1" thick made from an Oak tree 100 yrs old today is actually mostly comprised of empty space. When I set my whiskey glass down on it, it does not fall through- and it is mostly comprised of empty space as well.

Through the works of others and lessons I have been taught I understand that Atoms are mostly comprised of empty space and are held together by a "strong" and "weak" force, nuclear if I remember correctly. Scientists have no idea what causes these forces to exists, and state their observed existence as "fundamental laws". Gravity, the most basic force known to us and what holds the universe together at a larger level is a complete mystery as well. So the forces that hold the universe together at an atomic level and planetary level are completely unknown, just observed and measured. Correct?
So with this understanding you state your understanding of God's knowledge as a falsehood?? Maybe everything that is ever going to happen has already happened. And maybe free will is unaffected by this. Maybe future events affect past events. Why is that harder for your mind to grasp or accept? Let us just call Gods knowledge a "Fundamental Omniscientifical Paradoxial Law" and we will go from there.
Scientific endeavors should be explored unexhaustively by those so inclined. The beauty of scientific exploration is that it reveals the nature of the universe, and those that use it for their own ends to shirk their responsibilities are adding to the confusion.

 

[Cris]

Rjr6,

I will assume you base your beliefs of the universe in science, correct? Ok, science tells that a table 1" thick made from an Oak tree 100 yrs old today is actually mostly comprised of empty space. When I set my whiskey glass down on it, it does not fall through- and it is mostly comprised of empty space as well.

Through the works of others and lessons I have been taught I understand that Atoms are mostly comprised of empty space and are held together by a "strong" and "weak" force, nuclear if I remember correctly. Scientists have no idea what causes these forces to exists, and state their observed existence as "fundamental laws". Gravity, the most basic force known to us and what holds the universe together at a larger level is a complete mystery as well. So the forces that hold the universe together at an atomic level and planetary level are completely unknown, just observed and measured. Correct?

So with this understanding you state your understanding of God's knowledge as a falsehood??

No. The nature of science and what I might believe is irrelevant to the topic. The issue is entirely one of logical reasoning.

Maybe everything that is ever going to happen has already happened. And maybe free will is unaffected by this.

All you have done is re-state the paradox. If everything has already happened then what you might claim is free will is an illusion since you would now be powerless to alter anything that has already happened. If everything is pre-destined or has already happened then free will cannot exist.

Maybe future events affect past events.

If that were possible then the entire foundation of everything we observe in terms of cause and effect would be nonsense. What does it mean to have an effect occur before its cause? What would it mean if you were born before your parents conceived you?

Why is that harder for your mind to grasp or accept?

Why imply that I am not equally capable of grasping nonsense fantasies as well as you are capable of suggesting them?

Let us just call Gods knowledge a "Fundamental Omniscientifical Paradoxial Law" and we will go from there.

You mean a law that proves such a god cannot exist? There is nowhere to go with that.

Scientific endeavors should be explored unexhaustively by those so inclined.

I think you mean exhaustively.

The beauty of scientific exploration is that it reveals the nature of the universe,

OK.

and those that use it for their own ends to shirk their responsibilities are adding to the confusion.

Huh? Don’t really know what you are on about here and I don’t see what relevance it is to the topic?