Evidence for God

[Francis Xavier]

Based God, Switch God, Lemmy is God

[Simon Woodstock]

questions from an agnostic bored to death by obnoxious atheism and obnoxious monotheism:

if one god can bring itself into existence/have always existed, what precludes that possibility for a 2nd 3rd or 4th god, (etc.)?
couldn't an infinite number of gods have come up into existence at the same moment?
using the argument from the first video, why does each mind have to be made in the image of the same god? couldn't each mind be an image of a different god? couldn't parts of minds come from different sources?

why do people do people involved in organized religion make assumptions about things they know they cannot possibly comprehend?

In my understanding, as far as the multiple gods question goes, it has to do with the characteristics of of God not being caused and God's attribute of infinity. That is, an uncaused, infinite cause, cannot cause another uncaused, infinite cause, because by the very facts that the caused entity would have a) not always existed, and b) needed to be caused to exist, it would by default be a lesser being than the cause, and thus could not be God (if that makes sense). In other words, as far as my understanding of God goes, such an ultimate being would have to have always existed, and, therefore, a second or third etc. caused being would be less than ultimate, and thus not God.

Also, there are mathematical problems with an actual infinite number of things. While one non-complex being that is infinite is not contradictory, an actual infinite sequence (of individual gods or whatever) is impossible because you cannot add to or subtract from an infinite sequence. If you add two gods to an infinite number of gods, then you still have an infinite number of gods, if you add three gods, same thing.

I would say, following this logic out, the best conclusion is to state that there is one, uncaused God that exists.

Thus, I think the One God conclusion also answers (at least to some extent) your second inquiry about individual minds.

As far as assumptions, I think people in disorganized religion do such things more often.

[snickers]

Expand Quote

questions from an agnostic bored to death by obnoxious atheism and obnoxious monotheism:

if one god can bring itself into existence/have always existed, what precludes that possibility for a 2nd 3rd or 4th god, (etc.)?
couldn't an infinite number of gods have come up into existence at the same moment?
using the argument from the first video, why does each mind have to be made in the image of the same god? couldn't each mind be an image of a different god? couldn't parts of minds come from different sources?

why do people do people involved in organized religion make assumptions about things they know they cannot possibly comprehend?

[close]

In my understanding, as far as the multiple gods question goes, it has to do with the characteristics of of God not being caused and God's attribute of infinity. That is, an uncaused, infinite cause, cannot cause another uncaused, infinite cause, because by the very facts that the caused entity would have a) not always existed, and b) needed to be caused to exist, it would by default be a lesser being than the cause, and thus could not be God (if that makes sense). In other words, as far as my understanding of God goes, such an ultimate being would have to have always existed, and, therefore, a second or third etc. caused being would be less than ultimate, and thus not God.

Also, there are mathematical problems with an actual infinite number of things. While one non-complex being that is infinite is not contradictory, an actual infinite sequence (of individual gods or whatever) is impossible because you cannot add to or subtract from an infinite sequence. If you add two gods to an infinite number of gods, then you still have an infinite number of gods, if you add three gods, same thing.

I would say, following this logic out, the best conclusion is to state that there is one, uncaused God that exists.

Thus, I think the One God conclusion also answers (at least to some extent) your second inquiry about individual minds.

As far as assumptions, I think people in disorganized religion do such things more often.

fuck off

[Simon Woodstock]

guess computers have souls and also prove the existence of god

disabled comments because that guys a pussy

Computers are programmed, which proves they have a programer.  This has illustrative purposes in that just as the complex information in computers has been programmed, so has the complex DNA in biological life been programmed by an intelligent programmer.

Also, minds (such as in humans) would necessarily come to be (that is, have been caused to exist) by an uncaused Mind, that is God.

[Simon Woodstock]

Expand Quote

questions from an agnostic bored to death by obnoxious atheism and obnoxious monotheism:

if one god can bring itself into existence/have always existed, what precludes that possibility for a 2nd 3rd or 4th god, (etc.)?
couldn't an infinite number of gods have come up into existence at the same moment?
using the argument from the first video, why does each mind have to be made in the image of the same god? couldn't each mind be an image of a different god? couldn't parts of minds come from different sources?

why do people do people involved in organized religion make assumptions about things they know they cannot possibly comprehend?

[close]

hume covered that in dialogs concerning natural religion

David Hume: Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion - Summary and Analysis

Time permitting, I would be open to dialoging about Hume. If you present a specific reference (as to provide a particular context of discussion) I would be up for it.

[Simon Woodstock]

I don't think you could make any assumptions about the morality of multiple gods who may be in conflict with each other. That video only addresses my last question and only from a monotheistic standpoint, which is exactly the hang-up I was talking about.

Understandable, but Monotheism would have to be refuted then. There are sufficient arguments for Monotheism. Causality, design, moral argument, etc. they are a cumulative case.

[Simon Woodstock]

Dear religious people who want to argue,

You believe that a creator exists because the universe is too complex to have just happened by itself. Your creator must then be more complex than the universe, or at the very least no less complex, but you believe this creator just happened/always existed. So, by your own reasoning it makes more sense to believe the universe came into existence by itself or always existed.
The whole creationism idea is actually circular and false logic.

Game, set and match.

Not so fast, I don't believe God is a complex being. He is simple (in the sense of not consisting as parts). This is an important aspect of the debate. A lot of atheists assume that theists hold that God is an eternal bundle of parts. I myself would argue against a complex God.

[snickers]

Expand Quote

Dear religious people who want to argue,

You believe that a creator exists because the universe is too complex to have just happened by itself. Your creator must then be more complex than the universe, or at the very least no less complex, but you believe this creator just happened/always existed. So, by your own reasoning it makes more sense to believe the universe came into existence by itself or always existed.
The whole creationism idea is actually circular and false logic.

Game, set and match.

[close]

Not so fast, I don't believe God is a complex being. He is simple (in the sense of not consisting as parts). This is an important aspect of the debate. A lot of atheists assume that theists hold that God is an eternal bundle of parts. I myself would argue against a complex God.

fuck off.

[doublesteveburger]

God damnit, Simon. Go away.

[Gorgeous]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Dear religious people who want to argue,

You believe that a creator exists because the universe is too complex to have just happened by itself. Your creator must then be more complex than the universe, or at the very least no less complex, but you believe this creator just happened/always existed. So, by your own reasoning it makes more sense to believe the universe came into existence by itself or always existed.
The whole creationism idea is actually circular and false logic.

Game, set and match.

[close]

fuck off
Not so fast, I don't believe God is a complex being. He is simple (in the sense of not consisting as parts). This is an important aspect of the debate. A lot of atheists assume that theists hold that God is an eternal bundle of parts. I myself would argue against a complex God.

[close]

Hahahaha so how is he an intelligent designer then???  How does he do anything you religious nutjobs think he does? Your argument makes no logical sense whatsoever.
Look, if you believe that things must have been created, it doesn't matter what the creator is, if the creator exists then he must have been created as well. It is simpler to believe that the universe just happened (or just is) than God AND the universe.

[snickers]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

questions from an agnostic bored to death by obnoxious atheism and obnoxious monotheism:

if one god can bring itself into existence/have always existed, what precludes that possibility for a 2nd 3rd or 4th god, (etc.)?
couldn't an infinite number of gods have come up into existence at the same moment?
using the argument from the first video, why does each mind have to be made in the image of the same god? couldn't each mind be an image of a different god? couldn't parts of minds come from different sources?

why do people do people involved in organized religion make assumptions about things they know they cannot possibly comprehend?

[close]

hume covered that in dialogs concerning natural religion

David Hume: Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion - Summary and Analysis

[close]

Time permitting, I would be open to dialoging about Hume. If you present a specific reference (as to provide a particular context of discussion) I would be up for it.

fuck off.

[Pigeon]

Expand Quote

I can suck my own dick. Therefore, God exists.

[close]

Like just the tip? Or all the way down?

I actually can't. If there was a god, I would be able to, though.

[Gray Imp Sausage Metal]

you're honestly going to try and convince slap that god exists? I think you and user: qew0 would get on well
how's your veganism going by the way Simon?

[SodaJerk]

you're honestly going to try and convince slap that god exists? I think you and user: qew0 would get on well
how's your veganism going by the way Simon?

Religious and a vegan?! You can hear the sound of panties dropping all over the world for this guy.

[Sleazy]

for fucks sake, stop trying to prove faith based beliefs. the whole point is that you have faith and don't have to burden yourself with logic and rational thought.

[grimcity]

Expand Quote

questions from an agnostic bored to death by obnoxious atheism and obnoxious monotheism:

if one god can bring itself into existence/have always existed, what precludes that possibility for a 2nd 3rd or 4th god, (etc.)?
couldn't an infinite number of gods have come up into existence at the same moment?
using the argument from the first video, why does each mind have to be made in the image of the same god? couldn't each mind be an image of a different god? couldn't parts of minds come from different sources?

why do people do people involved in organized religion make assumptions about things they know they cannot possibly comprehend?

[close]

In my understanding, as far as the multiple gods question goes, it has to do with the characteristics of of God not being caused and God's attribute of infinity. That is, an uncaused, infinite cause, cannot cause another uncaused, infinite cause, because by the very facts that the caused entity would have a) not always existed, and b) needed to be caused to exist, it would by default be a lesser being than the cause, and thus could not be God (if that makes sense). In other words, as far as my understanding of God goes, such an ultimate being would have to have always existed, and, therefore, a second or third etc. caused being would be less than ultimate, and thus not God.

Also, there are mathematical problems with an actual infinite number of things. While one non-complex being that is infinite is not contradictory, an actual infinite sequence (of individual gods or whatever) is impossible because you cannot add to or subtract from an infinite sequence. If you add two gods to an infinite number of gods, then you still have an infinite number of gods, if you add three gods, same thing.

I would say, following this logic out, the best conclusion is to state that there is one, uncaused God that exists.

Thus, I think the One God conclusion also answers (at least to some extent) your second inquiry about individual minds.

As far as assumptions, I think people in disorganized religion do such things more often.

All you're saying is that "God" cannot be defined.

Having said, we can trace the stories of the Christian god back to cultures that predate Christianity by thousands of years, from the Epic of Gilgamesh to the story of Odin. Not to say it's faith-based plagiarism, but when ancient civilizations didn't understand things they imposed supernatural attributes to things they couldn't explain (much like the video about consciousness you posted at the beginning of this thread). Your own religion was modified greatly by Constantine based off of the beliefs of ancient pagan Saxons, not to mention the selective use of what was and what wasn't included in the scriptures you read via smashing together the Tanakh and certain 1st century pieces rewritten by the Greeks, as well as additional insertions/omissions by the Catholic church.

While that may or may not fall on deaf ears, if it gives you comfort, by all means roll with it... but it's no more valid than any other mono/polytheistic religion out there.

I'd also like to add that higher maths have absolutely no issue with the concepts of infinity, whether you're talking about it on a grand scale or infinite decimals in between whole numbers.

Also, while your comment about adding to an infinite sequence still equals infinity is correct, you're still adding to it, but the total is infinity (∞), not one (1). I can easily add odd numbers to a sequence of infinite even numbers in a sequence.



 

[grimcity]

...I'm also really curious about your definition of consciousness. Self awareness? Situational awareness?

I mean, even the simplest photoreceptive cells are aware of light sources, and there are plenty of critters that have demonstrated self awareness. What are you referring to when you use the word?

[fulltechnicalskizzy]

Life, uh, finds a way.

[Pigeon]

Life, uh, finds a way.

Like...yeah, bro.

[the snake]

flat earth, what else ?

[Pigeon]

http://www.newsweek.com/trumps-religious-adviser-says-god-has-given-president-authority-take-north-648974

[CRAILFISH TO REVERT]

Expand Quote

guess computers have souls and also prove the existence of god

disabled comments because that guys a pussy

[close]

Computers are programmed, which proves they have a programer.  This has illustrative purposes in that just as the complex information in computers has been programmed, so has the complex DNA in biological life been programmed by an intelligent programmer.

Also, minds (such as in humans) would necessarily come to be (that is, have been caused to exist) by an uncaused Mind, that is God.

By your own logic, why don't you just believe that the whole universe (that is everything you believe to exist) isn't just a complex simulation/program? Wouldn't that make more logical sense than some fairy tale/santa claus shit?

[Level 60 Dwarf Paladin]

Expand Quote

Life, uh, finds a way.

[close]

Like...yeah, bro.

[straight]

for fucks sake, stop trying to prove faith based beliefs. the whole point is that you have faith and don't have to burden yourself with logic and rational thought.

this is great

[Gray Imp Sausage Metal]

Expand Quote

you're honestly going to try and convince slap that god exists? I think you and user: qew0 would get on well
how's your veganism going by the way Simon?

[close]

Religious and a vegan?! You can hear the sound of panties dropping all over the world for this guy.

Shhhh, I'm trying to trap him

[ChuckRamone]

"Proving" that god exists with philosophical proofs always struck me as funny. "Look, I proved god exists with these mental acrobatics." Some people reading that shit might get mesmerized by the big words, logic, and articulate writing but how is that evidence for anything? It's like proving the existence of bigfoot with a long philosophical treatise and saying, "See, I told you so." But that's how religious people function. They convert weak-minded and cowardly people with the threat of hell, and they convert intellectually challenged people with big words that "prove" god is real, basically by confusing the fuck out of them and convincing them with smart-sounding verbosity.

[SodaJerk]

[Pigeon]

In 4th grade, some kid found a potato chip that kind of looked like Jesus, so I ate it. Sorry for eating the only evidence of God.

[Francis Xavier]

https://youtu.be/Y_HOYk9ED9Q

[GAY]

What did the five heavenly fingers say to the face?