A question for theists and atheists alike.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-05-2014, 01:27 PM
RE: A question for theists and atheists alike.
(23-05-2014 10:40 AM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  This is not a theory; please stop misusing that word.

This is a thought exercise. This is a hypothesis. This is speculation. This is mental gymnastics. This is a logical conundrum.

This is not a theory.

ZOMG YOU ARE BACK!!!!!!!

[Image: tumblr_inline_mxeweqQhOJ1rr5slc.jpg]

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tartarus Sauce's post
23-05-2014, 01:40 PM
RE: A question for theists and atheists alike.
(23-05-2014 12:41 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  Do you think its more possible that god created something that would just create itself rather than some perfect pre determined design.

I'm still standing by the statement that an omniscient deity who exists outside of time would instantly know everything.

Instantly.

Everything.

This means that everything this deity does is pre-planned, instantly, and this deity knows, instantly, exactly how his plan, and his action, will turn out. No matter how big that action is (e.g. creating a universe), the deity would instantly know everything that will ever happen in that universe for all time.

And if said deity is also omnipotent, he can and will be perfectly flawless in everything he does. Everything. No matter how big that thing is (e.g. creating a universe), the deity would automatically do it perfectly with zero chance of failure.

Which makes it impossible for such a deity to NOT have a perfect predetermined plan and impossible for such a deity to NOT carry out that plan according to his plan.

So even before he said "Let there be light.", this deity would have known the entirety of existence for every particle, every soul, every thought, every action, every reaction, everything, that would ever take place in the universe he was going to create, and when he created it, he did so according to this knowledge, flawlessly, perfectly, and without chance of failure.

The only way this would not be true is if said deity were, in fact, not omniscient (in which case he would probably have been unable to know the outcome of his actions) or not omnipotent (in which case it's possible that he had a flawless omniscient plan but failed to create the universe according to it)...

...or if there were no such deity in the first place (in which case there is no plan and there is no flawless creation).

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Aseptic Skeptic's post
23-05-2014, 03:05 PM
RE: A question for theists and atheists alike.
(23-05-2014 01:05 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  Interesting.

My post above in which I clearly state "Deities don't exist" received a *Like* from Jeremy E. Walker.

Jeremy, does this mean you're coming around to atheism? If so, welcome to the dark side, how do you like your babies? Rare, medium, or well done?

Or does it just mean you didn't really read what I wrote?

I read everything you wrote and liked the manner in which you attempted to clearly, concisely, and logically deal with his statements.

I may not agree with everything, but your style is a breath of fresh air. I was losing hope.... Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2014, 03:06 PM
RE: A question for theists and atheists alike.
(23-05-2014 01:40 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  
(23-05-2014 12:41 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  Do you think its more possible that god created something that would just create itself rather than some perfect pre determined design.

I'm still standing by the statement that an omniscient deity who exists outside of time would instantly know everything.

Instantly.

Everything.

This means that everything this deity does is pre-planned, instantly, and this deity knows, instantly, exactly how his plan, and his action, will turn out. No matter how big that action is (e.g. creating a universe), the deity would instantly know everything that will ever happen in that universe for all time.

And if said deity is also omnipotent, he can and will be perfectly flawless in everything he does. Everything. No matter how big that thing is (e.g. creating a universe), the deity would automatically do it perfectly with zero chance of failure.

Which makes it impossible for such a deity to NOT have a perfect predetermined plan and impossible for such a deity to NOT carry out that plan according to his plan.

So even before he said "Let there be light.", this deity would have known the entirety of existence for every particle, every soul, every thought, every action, every reaction, everything, that would ever take place in the universe he was going to create, and when he created it, he did so according to this knowledge, flawlessly, perfectly, and without chance of failure.

The only way this would not be true is if said deity were, in fact, not omniscient (in which case he would probably have been unable to know the outcome of his actions) or not omnipotent (in which case it's possible that he had a flawless omniscient plan but failed to create the universe according to it)...

...or if there were no such deity in the first place (in which case there is no plan and there is no flawless creation).

Bravo!!!!Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2014, 03:20 PM
RE: A question for theists and atheists alike.
(23-05-2014 01:40 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  I'm still standing by the statement that an omniscient deity who exists outside of time would instantly know everything.

Instantly.

Everything.

I'm going to stand on "exists outside of time" is incoherent, undefined, and meaningless. Yes

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
23-05-2014, 03:37 PM
RE: A question for theists and atheists alike.
(23-05-2014 03:20 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-05-2014 01:40 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  I'm still standing by the statement that an omniscient deity who exists outside of time would instantly know everything.

Instantly.

Everything.

I'm going to stand on "exists outside of time" is incoherent, undefined, and meaningless. Yes

Of course. I totally agree.

Somehow, there is a being who knows everything, even though this being exists in a void where there is NOTHING to know. Somehow, there is a being that is all-powerful even though it has never, ever, not even once, used any of that power in this empty void it calls home.

How did this being acquire this knowledge (that doesn't exist yet)? How did this being develop all this power without ever using it, ever practicing it? Why did this being even need or want this power when it never used it? And, ultimately, where did it come from and why did it exist, when it had no place to exist, no time to exist, and no reason to exist?

Nonsense and poppycock.

The whole "outside of space and time" BS is simply an apologetic to remove god from all hope of falsifiability - it's the last recourse of the indefensible position that god exists.

The sad thing is that the apologists aren't retreating god to this undefined, undefinable nonsense of existing outside of space and time to convince atheists that god exists. They're doing it because they need to convince themselves. The know, KNOW, that if god must exist INSIDE this universe and WITHIN time itself, that the idea of god is indefensible - and that would force them to examine their own belief and ultimately dispense with imaginary friends in favor of embracing reality.

But they're too afraid or just too stubbornly set in their delusional ways to give up their indefensible beliefs, so they retreat god to this meaningless state where they can no longer falsify him, and by doing so, they reassure themselves that all is well with their delusion. Now that they have banished their doubts to a place that logic cannot go, they can go on with their lives secure that their sky-daddy is safe from all attacks by logic and reason.

In short, it's the apologetic equivalent of burying one's head in the sand. Heck, even ostriches actually know better...

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Aseptic Skeptic's post
23-05-2014, 05:29 PM
RE: A question for theists and atheists alike.
(23-05-2014 03:37 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  Somehow, there is a being who knows everything, even though this being exists in a void where there is NOTHING to know. Somehow, there is a being that is all-powerful even though it has never, ever, not even once, used any of that power in this empty void it calls home.

I do not agree with labeling this concept of locale a "void". For such a being there are no voids.

In fact, I do not think the concept of locale is even applicable, in a strict sense.

In fact your usage of the phrase "this being exists in a void" and "empty void it calls home", is something we conceptualize because we exist in time and in reference to other things existing in time.

I wager that for this Being, there is no such thing as a "place" where it exists. For in this, we speak of omnipresence. The pure essence of such a Being can not be said to be either here nor there. In fact, this Being's essence, it seems to me, would have to encompass all of reality itself for in this Being's essence, reality eternally is.

(23-05-2014 03:37 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  How did this being acquire this knowledge (that doesn't exist yet)?

There is no acquiring of knowledge for such a Being. For this would mean that it both had to endure through time and gain something it at some point lacked (knowledge). For such a Being, this simply is false. Such a Being acquires no knowledge for this Being knows all possible states of affairs eternally.


(23-05-2014 03:37 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  How did this being develop all this power without ever using it, ever practicing it?

There is no "development" for such a Being. The idea carries with it the idea of learning and growing. For such a Being this is not applicable. Nor does it need to practice. This Being could create the universe with but a Word. This Being would not even have to speak. It could just by an exercise of will, will the universe into being, effortlessly.


(23-05-2014 03:37 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  Why did this being even need or want this power when it never used it? And, ultimately, where did it come from and why did it exist, when it had no place to exist, no time to exist, and no reason to exist?

This Being does not "need" the power it has by virtue of Who this Being is. Who is to say this Being has not created worlds unfathomable in eternity past?

This Being eternally "is". God spoke to Moses in the burning bush and stated that His name was: I AM THAT I AM.

This Being would have to exist necessarily. It is not possible that such a Being could not exist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2014, 05:50 PM
RE: A question for theists and atheists alike.
(23-05-2014 05:29 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  It is not possible that such a Being could not exist.

Sure it is. Thumbsup

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like evenheathen's post
23-05-2014, 06:03 PM
A question for theists and atheists alike.
I'm so tired of the bullshit that is the "necessary being" argument. It's just the paste-eating cousin of the argument from ignorance Aquinas dressed up in a 3-piece suit and shoved onstage.

β€œIt is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like rampant.a.i.'s post
24-05-2014, 01:34 AM
RE: A question for theists and atheists alike.
(23-05-2014 05:29 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(23-05-2014 03:37 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  Somehow, there is a being who knows everything, even though this being exists in a void where there is NOTHING to know. Somehow, there is a being that is all-powerful even though it has never, ever, not even once, used any of that power in this empty void it calls home.

I do not agree with labeling this concept of locale a "void". For such a being there are no voids.

In fact, I do not think the concept of locale is even applicable, in a strict sense.

In fact your usage of the phrase "this being exists in a void" and "empty void it calls home", is something we conceptualize because we exist in time and in reference to other things existing in time.

How could it be anything but a void. There was no heaven and no earth:
1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

There were no sun, moon, nor stars:
1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

And since many stars are actually distant galaxies, that means there were no galaxies.

What else is there?

Nothing.

Before Genesis, before god said "Let there be light", there was nothing. NOTHING.

Sounds like a void to me.

(23-05-2014 05:29 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  I wager that for this Being, there is no such thing as a "place" where it exists. For in this, we speak of omnipresence. The pure essence of such a Being can not be said to be either here nor there. In fact, this Being's essence, it seems to me, would have to encompass all of reality itself for in this Being's essence, reality eternally is.

Now you're just making stuff up. Not just you, because you're just quoting what others have told you, but rather, all the apologists who spout this drivel about god.

You say god's omnipresence means he cannot be said to be either here nor there. But, before creation, there was no here, no there, no anywhere. NOTHING. How can omnipresence even exist, how can it be an attribute of any being, when the concept is meaningless in a place that isn't a place?

How can a place not be a place? Hell if I know, but you seem to think it can, and whatever that is, it's population is one. One impossible being who has paradoxical properties (e.g. omnipresence in a non-existence that has nothing to be omnipresent in) that are meaningless.

(1) How can that possibly make any sense?

(23-05-2014 05:29 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(23-05-2014 03:37 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  How did this being acquire this knowledge (that doesn't exist yet)?

There is no acquiring of knowledge for such a Being. For this would mean that it both had to endure through time and gain something it at some point lacked (knowledge). For such a Being, this simply is false. Such a Being acquires no knowledge for this Being knows all possible states of affairs eternally.

You (and the apologists you love to quote) are making up more stuff.

So, in a non-place that doesn't exist, population one, the one being who paradoxically exists in this non-existence has infinite knowledge of all the things that don't exist.

(2) How can that possibly make any sense?

(23-05-2014 05:29 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(23-05-2014 03:37 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  How did this being develop all this power without ever using it, ever practicing it?

There is no "development" for such a Being. The idea carries with it the idea of learning and growing. For such a Being this is not applicable. Nor does it need to practice. This Being could create the universe with but a Word. This Being would not even have to speak. It could just by an exercise of will, will the universe into being, effortlessly.

Making up even more stuff.

So this paradoxical being who exists in non-existence and knows all non-things that don't exist, is also infinitely powerful in void in which infinite power is meaningless and has never been applied, by him (population one) or otherwise.

(3) How can this possibly make any sense?

(23-05-2014 05:29 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(23-05-2014 03:37 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  Why did this being even need or want this power when it never used it? And, ultimately, where did it come from and why did it exist, when it had no place to exist, no time to exist, and no reason to exist?

This Being does not "need" the power it has by virtue of Who this Being is. Who is to say this Being has not created worlds unfathomable in eternity past?

Infinite regress?

YOU say this being always existed, that it never began to exist because it just always was. If this is not the first universe, then that means it made a universe before this one. Was that the first one?

Yes? Then apply my question to that - before making THAT universe this being had never used its power for anything, so why did it need/want/have the power it wasn't using?

No? Then there was a previous universe before the previous universe, and was there a universe before that one too? Before that one, and before that one? Etc. Ad infinitum?

Surely it's not turtles ALL the way down? Surely there was a FIRST universe?

(23-05-2014 05:29 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  This Being eternally "is". God spoke to Moses in the burning bush and stated that His name was: I AM THAT I AM.

Yeah, I've noticed that your god likes circular reasoning.

I think the bible misquoted him. He really said "I am Sam I am", and our universe was created by Dr. Seuss.

OK, so what if god said this circular reference. He wouldn't be the first god to be deliberately cryptic in his weird ramblings. Heck, it wouldn't even be the first time Yahweh was cryptic in the bible.

Being cryptic doesn't mean he was explaining the mysteries of meaningless and paradoxical attributes that would make him impossibly impossible.

(23-05-2014 05:29 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  This Being would have to exist necessarily.

Why?

I personally find it more likely (Occam's Razor) that a bunch of inert particles could exist necessarily than that a omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient being made up entirely of impossible paradoxes could exist necessarily.

(23-05-2014 05:29 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  It is not possible that such a Being could not exist.

Doublespeak aside, this is just your own wishful thinking. You have no proof, no evidence, no reason to believe it beyond the ramblings of gullible iron age con men and the centuries of gullible followers who blindly passed their ramblings down through the ages.

(1) - it doesn't make sense, it cannot make sense, because it is a logical paradox
(2) - it doesn't make sense, it cannot make sense, because it is a logical paradox
(3) - it doesn't make sense, it cannot make sense, because it is a logical paradox

That's three strikes. Your god is out.

So why do you continue to ignore the paradoxes? Because once you recognize that they are, in fact, paradoxes, then you must admit that your version of god cannot exist the way you think he does. Your mind rebels at the notion, because confronting this head on means losing your security blanket, pulling your head out of the sand, and starting to envision a world without a god. This terrifies you, so you ignore the obvious paradoxes and charge straight ahead, secure in your own delusions, blinded by your refusal to examine the flaws in your own belief system.

You know if you slow down, if you stop, if you look around, if you start asking the hard questions, then all your bubbles will pop and you'll be left to face the world alone, and you cannot bear that thought.

So here you are, running from the truth, running from yourself, because you know, you KNOW, deep down inside, that the bullshit you believe just doesn't add up, but your subconscious cannot stand the thought of it so you're driven to confront your external demons, us, in the hopes that turning the fight outward will spare your last vestiges of faith from losing your internal fight.

It won't work.

It's already not working.

Pop that bubble, look around, face the real world without sky-daddy delusions. Or don't.

But for god's sake, stop defending his existence with paradoxes that cannot possibly make any sense - it's not convincing anyone but the people who are already wearing the same blinders as yours.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Aseptic Skeptic's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: