"proof that the christian god can't exist, debunked"

[Jean-PierreChatelain]

Hey we don't need to debate the eternal question of whether there is a god or not. Christians ... born again or otherwise believe that there is a god and that there was this guy jesus ... others like moi believe that this is a myth .. Will we ever reach consensus? Noooooooooooooooooo ...

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
It was God who intentionaly created the scenerio which woud inevitably lead to Jesus bein naled up... so how is God not responsible for Jesus bein killed.???

My inturpatation of the Holey-Bible is irrelevent... i dont have beleifs that its true.!!!

You hent that the Christan God ant you'r God... so what are you'r beleifs that relate to the issue of this thred an we can discuss that.??? ”

Actually your interpretation is relevant, if you are sincere about the question
you are asking, otherwise you can draw your own conclusion, which defeats the objective.
I refer to the "god of the Christians" on the basis of your specific enquirey with Doreen.

My interpretation of the Holey-Bible is... its hogwash... my objective in this thred is to discuss the lack of logic in the mane-stream Christan beleifs as it applies to this thred... or discuss non-mane-stream beleifs as it applies to this thred... if somone is willin to state what ther non mane-stream beleifs are.!!!

I am not a "Christian" but I believe in God, whether it is the God
of Islam, Christian, Judea, or Vishnu. They are different aspects of the same one God, IMHO.

Are you willin to state you'r beleifs as they apply to this thred... if so... im willin to discuss it... if not... what is you'r objective in this thred.???

 

[Doreen]

Origionaly posted by cluelusshusbund
Yeah... i have a feelin that a God woud create thangs the way he wanted 'em to be... well... unless hes som sort of flunky God.!!! ”



So mayb God did create thangs the way he didnt want 'em to be... lol... im basin my arguments on mane-stream Christan beleifs... if sombody wants to argue based on what i consider non-mane-stream beleifs im mor than hapy to escept an discuss ther particular inturpitaton of the Holey-Bible... so you'r above argument is mute.!!! ]

Well, you're not quite basing them on mainstream C beliefs because it is pretty clear God left open the possibility of being disappointed or even getting pissed off at the choices humans made - in mainstream C, that is. IOW he allowed free will - for reasons known best to himself - and this allows things to unfold locally that he does not like. But, it seems fair to interpret, the overall gain is good.

Im speekin for me... its the Christans who have beleifs in... an clame to have knowledge of God... i dont have such beleifs or make such clames... an as far as "proof" goes... i dont thank anythang can be "proven"... my arguments in this thred are about the logic of som particular beleifs.!!!

Sure, but once you get in there and start saying this or that is not logical, you are making assertions yourself about, in this case, God. Or what a God must be. Or what must be good.

Sure, christians claim to have beliefs and they can be called on to substantiate them, if they are trying to get you, in this case, to believe these things also. But once you step in and say this or that global concept about God is illogical, you are sticking your own neck out. Your arguments are not immaculate conceptions free of beliefs. You have joined the fray and are making metaphysical claims yourself.

Sure atheists likely use mane-stream beleifs to discuss... thousands of beleifs cant be discussed all at the sam time... an It woud require diferent threds... but i (an prolly mos atheists) woud discuss the logic of any God beleifs/clames... so that makes you'r above argument a bit lame.!!!

There are a number of mainstreams. But really this stuff is not mainstream. I mean most arguments focus on the beliefs of theologians. Most Christians don't give a hoot about absolute omniscience, for example. In the Middle Ages a bunch of theologians sat around and started thinking about God in very abstract, absolute terms. Regular people had a more story based and personal relationship with God or with ideas of God. It was these heady types with no sex lives and a lot of time on their hands - intellectual Christians, pros, that is - and sure, these guys - they were all guys - deserve to be mocked. But really they are a subset of only a few strands of one of the three main monotheisms.

yes, Christians and other theists often seem to feel obligated to defend these mental-wank ideas of this small subset of theists, but no one should confuse these discussions with refuting God or refuting refutations.

 

[Jan Ardena]

cluelusshusbund,

My interpretation of the Holey-Bible is... its hogwash...

That may or may not be the case, but your understanding
of the bible will decide how you participate in this thread.

my objective in this thred is to discuss the lack of logic in the mane-stream Christan beleifs as it applies to this thred... or discuss non-mane-stream beleifs as it applies to this thred... if somone is willin to state what ther non mane-stream beleifs are.!!!

This has been discussed, and you have been a part in this discussion.
What more is there to be said?

Are you willin to state you'r beleifs as they apply to this thred... if so... im willin to discuss it... if not... what is you'r objective in this thred.???

The question this thread poses cannot be successfully answered on
the strength of belief, as knowledge or understanding of God's omniscience
is not a required pre-requisite for belief.

jan.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Well, you're not quite basing them on mainstream C beliefs...

I will discuss the issue of this thred wit anybody... an based on any beleifs they want to discuss... ie... however they want to inturpit the Holey-Bible... whether i thank its mane-stream beleifs or not... i cant do any mor to defuse this non-issue you have.!!!

I will pont out what-an-why i thank som beleif pertanin to this thred is illogical... people can discuss it or not.!!!

There are a number of mainstreams.

So pick 1 an lets discuss it.!!!

yes, Christians and other theists often seem to feel obligated to defend these mental-wank ideas of this small subset of theists, but no one should confuse these discussions with refuting God or refuting refutations.

LOL... i coudnt have been mor clear... i dont request that people discuss beleifs they dont have... i want to discuss the beleifs they do have pertanin to this thred.!!!

 

[cluelusshusbund]

The question this thread poses cannot be successfully answered on the strength of belief, as knowledge or understanding of God's omniscience is not a required pre-requisite for belief.

Well thanks for you'r prior partisipaton.!!!

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

Unless, of course, God purposefully created a reality within which He could not predict the future.

Beautiful. I don't know how long I have waited to hear that.

it is pretty clear God left open the possibility of being disappointed or even getting pissed off at the choices humans made -

I can't believe what I'm seeing

knowledge or understanding of God's omniscience
is not a required pre-requisite for belief.

Bingo! Take it outta here!

Wow!!! Three wonderful quotes any atheist would love to see. I feel good. As He slips farther and farther away from man, God's unknown realms, His incomprehensible divine logic and His now convenient or part time omniscience further corrodes the shackles of belief. Wonderful stuff! If I had a cigar I would light it.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Hey we don't need to debate the eternal question of whether there is a god or not. Christians ... born again or otherwise believe that there is a god and that there was this guy jesus ... others like moi believe that this is a myth .. Will we ever reach consensus? Noooooooooooooooooo ...

*************
M*W: I agree, it's a myth, and I believe christianity is on the way out, slowly but surely.

 

[Doreen]

I will discuss the issue of this thred wit anybody... an based on any beleifs they want to discuss... ie... however they want to inturpit the Holey-Bible... whether i thank its mane-stream beleifs or not... i cant do any mor to defuse this non-issue you have.!!!

I didn't realize I had defused the issue. That might be a good thing. I will have to mull that over.

I will pont out what-an-why i thank som beleif pertanin to this thred is illogical... people can discuss it or not.!!!

Yah, yah. I am not saying you are not within your rights or something along those lines.

So pick 1 an lets discuss it.!!!

Nah, I ain't in the mainstream, so it doesn't fit with what you are seeking, as per below.

LOL... i coudnt have been mor clear... i dont request that people discuss beleifs they dont have... i want to discuss the beleifs they do have pertanin to this thred.!!!

Sure, but just this same if you end up discussing whether God can lift a stone too big, etc. or the number angels who can fit on the head of a pin, let's not confuse this with mainstream beliefs either. I won't report you, however, if someone comes along and want to defend theist positions on those - also.

You know your avatar creates a kind of attitude coming off your posts. I wish I was not so easily affected by such things, but some people's avatars affect the way I 'hear' them.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

...just this same if you end up discussing whether God can lift a stone too big, etc. or the number angels who can fit on the head of a pin, let's not confuse this with mainstream beliefs either. I won't report you, however, if someone comes along and want to defend theist positions on those - also.

Thanks... a report is prolly all a certan mod needs to get me perma-axed :-(

You know your avatar creates a kind of attitude coming off your posts. I wish I was not so easily affected by such things, but some people's avatars affect the way I 'hear' them.

My avitar adds a bit mor chalenge to my existence in discuss groops... i supose you coud rack it up to preformance art... eh

 

[Rav]

Unless, of course, God purposefully created a reality within which He could not predict the future.

Beautiful. I don't know how long I have waited to hear that.

First of all, I do not speak for all theists, so it's probably not fair to them for you to treat my comments as if they were made by their official spokesperson. Second, I don't know why my assertion is such a surprise as it is after all the only logical way to reconcile omnipotence and free will. Third, it's a shame that you haven't tried to dissect the argument that I have put forth to try to resolve the paradox as I was really looking forward to being challenged on that one. You'll get reasoned debate rather than cheap and unsatisfying fall back positions from me. I don't have a religious agenda here. I'm not trying to save anyone's soul or defend my faith as I don't believe in any particular God, and I'm certainly not a religious person. To me this is simply about whether an idea is logically consistent or not. Atheism is not an inevitable consequence of superior intelligence or intellectual prowess, as evidenced by the fact that I've never seen a single argument that has been compelling enough to settle the matter.

I'm not asking anyone to prove that God doesn't exist. That's a ridiculous demand. I'm challenging people to either demonstrate that the idea is logically inconsistent, or do away with the smug condescending tone. I honestly believe that us agnostics are the only truly enlightened ones because most of you atheists spend all of your time laughing at what has been constructed by idiots instead of actually getting properly invested in exploring some of the deeper philosophical considerations to the extend that would be necessary to gain any real appreciation for just how intriguing some of these considerations actually are.

 

[Jan Ardena]

PsychoticEpisode,

Wow!!! Three wonderful quotes any atheist would love to see. I feel good. As He slips farther and farther away from man, God's unknown realms, His incomprehensible divine logic and His now convenient or part time omniscience further corrodes the shackles of belief. Wonderful stuff! If I had a cigar I would light it.

Great!
Now you don't have to believe in God.

jan.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

...it's a shame that you haven't tried to dissect the argument that I have put forth to try to resolve the paradox as I was really looking forward to being challenged on that one.

oK... grate... im on bord wit that (aparently we got off on a bad start) an i woud like to start my dissection wit this:::

...God purposefully created a reality within which He could not predict the future. ”

Did God not know the out-com of that reality befor he created it.???

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

First of all, I do not speak for all theists, so it's probably not fair to them for you to treat my comments as if they were made by their official spokesperson. Second, I don't know why my assertion is such a surprise as it is after all the only logical way to reconcile omnipotence and free will.

Relax, I wasn't knocking it. I think it's great that somebody finally said it. Theists avoid that bit of logic like the plague. Of course it's the only way, meaning God isn't omniscient as theists claim.

 

[Doreen]

Relax, I wasn't knocking it. I think it's great that somebody finally said it. Theists avoid that bit of logic like the plague. Of course it's the only way, meaning God isn't omniscient as theists claim.

As some theists claim. Most don't walk around making claims about God's omniscience even if some theologians got off on that abstract crap and it somehow nosed its way into a stance for some other theists. And then there are religions where God or the gods are not omniscient and are even fallible.

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

As some theists claim. Most don't walk around making claims about God's omniscience even if some theologians got off on that abstract crap and it somehow nosed its way into a stance for some other theists. And then there are religions where God or the gods are not omniscient and are even fallible.

I am aware of that but the thread title specifically refers to the Christian God.

 

[Rav]

oK... grate... im on bord wit that (aparently we got off on a bad start) an i woud like to start my dissection wit this:::



Did God not know the out-com of that reality befor he created it.???

You're demanding that I reduce my answer to a simple yes or no because you have a response tucked up your sleeve, so there's two things I can do. I can provide you with the answer you're looking for, wait to hear what your response is going to be and then spend a bunch of time explaining to you that it's more complicated than that. Or, I can just leave you with the more comprehensive answer that I've already given. Wow, what a decision.

When we're talking about complex philosophical considerations, yes or no answers just don't cut it because it's often critical that you consider an idea within a particular context or as part of a larger framework of reasoning which is impossible to present with a single word.

With that in mind, I shall reiterate a little. God had a plan, and there were certain things that needed to happen in order for it to be realized. But because this plan included the creation of a universe within which some or all events were not predictable with 100% accuracy, God needed to intercede at certain critical points throughout history to keep things on track. So did God know how things were going to turn out? No, not exactly. But He was in a position to ensure that the overall outcome was what He wanted it to be. So the answer is yes and no, depending upon the kind of question you're asking, which whether you realize it or not, isn't clear.

Did God not know the out-com of that reality befor he created it.???

Yes, He knew how His overall relationship with man was going to turn out both because He understood man and because He interceded at critical points to keep things heading in the desired direction. Remember, we're not talking about quantum mechanical principles* here where a single interaction on God's part would collapse the wave function* of free will. He can intercede without compromising the fundamental nature of the reality that He created.

Did God not know the out-com of that reality befor he created it.???

No. God could not be certain what any individual in particular would choose to do, and if the universe is fundamentally probabilistic in nature, even if the classically deterministic world that we seem to live in is only jolted occasionally by a random quantum event (some neuroscientists have suggested that you might be able to reconcile free will with what appears to be a classically deterministic brain by considering this idea) then neither did God know precisely how the physical universe was going to unfold. Certainly not every detail, anyway. In case it occurs to you however, the free will of a human being has nothing to do with, for example, God interceding to prevent a huge asteroid destroying the planet and subsequently ruining His plans.

*Please forgive my borrowing of terms here. It's just an analogy. I'm not a quantum quack, I promise you

 

[cluelusshusbund]

God had a plan...

He was in a position to ensure that the overall outcome was what He wanted it to be.

...He knew how His overall relationship with man was going to turn out...
both because He understood man and because He interceded at critical points to keep things heading in the desired direction.

Did God know how his relatonship woud turn out wit individuals or jus "man" in general.???

 

[Doreen]

You're demanding that I reduce my answer to a simple yes or no because you have a response tucked up your sleeve, so there's two things I can do. I can provide you with the answer you're looking for, wait to hear what your response is going to be and then spend a bunch of time explaining to you that it's more complicated than that. Or, I can just leave you with the more comprehensive answer that I've already given. Wow, what a decision.

When we're talking about complex philosophical considerations, yes or no answers just don't cut it because it's often critical that you consider an idea within a particular context or as part of a larger framework of reasoning which is impossible to present with a single word.

With that in mind, I shall reiterate a little. God had a plan, and there were certain things that needed to happen in order for it to be realized. But because this plan included the creation of a universe within which some or all events were not predictable with 100% accuracy, God needed to intercede at certain critical points throughout history to keep things on track. So did God know how things were going to turn out? No, not exactly. But He was in a position to ensure that the overall outcome was what He wanted it to be. So the answer is yes and no, depending upon the kind of question you're asking, which whether you realize it or not, isn't clear.



Yes, He knew how His overall relationship with man was going to turn out both because He understood man and because He interceded at critical points to keep things heading in the desired direction. Remember, we're not talking about quantum mechanical principles* here where a single interaction on God's part would collapse the wave function* of free will. He can intercede without compromising the fundamental nature of the reality that He created.



No. God could not be certain what any individual in particular would choose to do, and if the universe is fundamentally probabilistic in nature, even if the classically deterministic world that we seem to live in is only jolted occasionally by a random quantum event (some neuroscientists have suggested that you might be able to reconcile free will with what appears to be a classically deterministic brain by considering this idea) then neither did God know precisely how the physical universe was going to unfold. Certainly not every detail, anyway. In case it occurs to you however, the free will of a human being has nothing to do with, for example, God interceding to prevent a huge asteroid destroying the planet and subsequently ruining His plans.

*Please forgive my borrowing of terms here. It's just an analogy. I'm not a quantum quack, I promise you

Rav,
look at the work you did here. You spent time and energy, thought something out.

Notice his response.

One little potshot.

When I see dynamics like this, I wonder if the two people have different conceptions about what is happening. Different goals. Of course he should be free to pursue his goals for conversation, but they should not be confused with yours or the level of respect yours deserve.

 

[Rav]

Relax

Enthusiastic and energetic debate is the natural state of affairs within my circle of real life friends. Getting a little worked up is part of the fun. But as is often the case on forums, your post simply served as a catalyst which set me off on a little rant that wasn't necessarily directed at you in particular.

God isn't omniscient as theists claim.

If you define omniscience as the capacity to know anything and everything, I don't think it means that God isn't omniscient. There are two important considerations here that add some weight to my argument. The first is the simple fact that exercising power is not a prerequisite for wielding it. Just because you prevent yourself from doing something doesn't mean that you can't. The second flows naturally from what I consider to be a more accurate and logical definition of omnipotence. God can only do things that are consistent with His nature.

Some people insist that an omnipotent being, by definition, should be able to do absolutely anything, even logically inconsistent things. If this is not possible then there must be some greater reality that is imposing this restriction. But God is not a developer who has to follow a syntax. He is the programming language itself. He is reality. If God is logical, then reality is logical. Illogic is simply an error. A square circle is one such example. God can't create a square circle not because His power is limited, but because a square circle is an error. You might as well argue that his inability to spit out nonsensical values like some poorly written piece of software means that He's flawed.

So what does this have to do with omnipotence and free will? Well, trying to force them to fit together is futile, until you realize that the problem is not that they are incompatible, it's that the idea of omnipotence that you're working with is flawed. God can indeed create a rock that He can't lift (the size is actually completely irrelevant), just as He can indeed create a universe within which He can not know everything. But God can lift that rock any time He chooses by removing the conditions that He had set which prevented it, just as He can know everything about the universe by removing the conditions that He had set which had prevented that. But a rock that God can lift and can't simultaneously is just another square circle. It's either one or the other, but that hardly represents a limitation of God's power. He doesn't have to be able to do logically inconsistent things, because that isn't part of His nature. God is reality.

I don't expect to convince everyone with this argument. To be perfectly honest I haven't even convinced myself. There are other fundamentally different possibilities that I also consider from time to time and might actually end up favouring one day. What I want to demonstrate however is that theists don't have to concede that there are no logical and consistent arguments to support their position.