Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Case Against the Existence of God
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 301 (301523)
04-06-2006 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by jar
04-06-2006 11:18 AM


Or, one can accept the bible fully yet still not believe in the god you describe in the OP.
There are logical problems with the concept of a pagan-style God. They always presuppose another God behind them, or else they arose from nature. Here we have a god that is truly unnecessay, even more so than Mr. Jack claimed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by jar, posted 04-06-2006 11:18 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by jar, posted 04-06-2006 11:34 AM robinrohan has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 301 (301525)
04-06-2006 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by lfen
04-06-2006 4:07 AM


For example are you excluding Spinoza?
What did Spinoza say? Was he an atheist?

"It is very unhappy, but too late to be helped, the discovery we have made, that we exist. That discovery is called the Fall of Man."--Emerson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by lfen, posted 04-06-2006 4:07 AM lfen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by lfen, posted 04-06-2006 2:12 PM robinrohan has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 18 of 301 (301527)
04-06-2006 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by robinrohan
04-06-2006 11:30 AM


Robin, you are still just defining YOUR god.
There are logical problems with the concept of a pagan-style God.
May well be. So far you have not been able to convince many of the truth of that assertion. But I was not speaking of some pagan god but rather of what I see as the Christian GOD.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by robinrohan, posted 04-06-2006 11:30 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by robinrohan, posted 04-06-2006 11:36 AM jar has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 301 (301529)
04-06-2006 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by jar
04-06-2006 11:34 AM


Re: Robin, you are still just defining YOUR god.
But I was not speaking of some pagan god but rather of what I see as the Christian GOD.
Could you give us the attributes of this God and how He differs from the God as described in the OP?

"It is very unhappy, but too late to be helped, the discovery we have made, that we exist. That discovery is called the Fall of Man."--Emerson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by jar, posted 04-06-2006 11:34 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by jar, posted 04-06-2006 11:44 AM robinrohan has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 20 of 301 (301533)
04-06-2006 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by robinrohan
04-06-2006 11:36 AM


Re: Robin, you are still just defining YOUR god.
Ican certainly show where there are differences from the god in your OP.
In the OP you speculate
I would, for the purposes of this argument, like to concentrate on one concept of God only. This God we can call the "God of Western Tradition." This God is all-powerful, all-good, and all-knowing. He is an ideal Being, the answer to everything. This God's thoughts are always objective, never subjective. This God's thoughts about morality, for example, are as objective as His thoughts about mathematics.
The Christian GOD that I worship is
  • all powerful.
  • complete.
His thoughts about morality are subjective.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by robinrohan, posted 04-06-2006 11:36 AM robinrohan has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 301 (301535)
04-06-2006 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Dan Carroll
04-06-2006 9:53 AM


Okay.
*looks around*
*sees nothing*
That hardly seems satisfactory. There's lots of things that we can't see that are real. You must have some better reason for dismissing the idea with contempt.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-06-2006 9:53 AM Dan Carroll has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-06-2006 11:54 AM robinrohan has replied
 Message 24 by Tusko, posted 04-06-2006 11:55 AM robinrohan has replied
 Message 73 by Larni, posted 04-07-2006 4:20 AM robinrohan has replied

Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 301 (301538)
04-06-2006 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by robinrohan
04-06-2006 11:44 AM


There's lots of things that we can't see tha that are real.
But they do have something to suggest their existence.
You must have some better reason for dismissing the idea with contempt.
Contempt? I don't have contempt for God, just like I have no contempt for Green Lantern, Rhett Butler, or any number of people who aren't real.
While we're on the subject, though, do you have a case against the existence of Green Lantern?

"We had survived to turn on the History Channel
And ask our esteemed panel, Why are we alive? And here's how they replied:
You're what happens when two substances collide
And by all accounts you really should have died."
-Andrew Bird

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by robinrohan, posted 04-06-2006 11:44 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by robinrohan, posted 04-06-2006 12:01 PM Dan Carroll has not replied
 Message 26 by robinrohan, posted 04-06-2006 12:06 PM Dan Carroll has replied

Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 23 of 301 (301539)
04-06-2006 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by robinrohan
04-05-2006 8:19 AM


The futility of a case against the unfalsifiable
This God is all-powerful, all-good, and all-knowing. He is an ideal Being, the answer to everything. This God's thoughts are always objective, never subjective
Then there is no case that can be built against God. The only way to do it would be to show that it isn't
1) all-powerful
2) all-good
3) all-knowing
The first and second are not easy to do, it is possible to show that someone isn't all-powerful, but God is too elusive for that kind of testing.
In order to demonstrate that an entity is not all-good we must also be all-knowing. Moral situations can only be judged when we have all the information that is required to judge it. We can have a good idea if something is good or bad, but sometimes our perspective makes it impossible to ever know.
For example, here in Manchester a man who was defending his home against armed burglars ended up killing one of them and getting 8 years imprisonment. Given the information, a case could be made that the man was acting in a good way, self defense and all that. A little bit more information reveals that the man was a dealer, and was being robbed by rivals. As they were leaving he had a scuffle with one of them, stabbing him 4 times in the back.
It stops looking like a valiant homeowner defense situation and begins to look a bit more like a violent man seeking retribution for being screwed over by other violent men.
My point? Sometimes even a small amount of further information can radically change the morality of a situation. Since we are not all-knowing we cannot know if God is all-good. So in conclusion, this line of enquiry proves useless as a means to develop a case for the non-existence of the God you have described.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by robinrohan, posted 04-05-2006 8:19 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by robinrohan, posted 04-06-2006 12:18 PM Modulous has replied

Tusko
Member (Idle past 101 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 24 of 301 (301540)
04-06-2006 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by robinrohan
04-06-2006 11:44 AM


Maybe its OT - sorry if this is the case - but I want to plug my earlier post once more. I think the problem with your opener is your attempt to minimise the difficulties posed to any one religion by the heaps and heaps of other religions.
To me, that's one of the central foundations of my tentative atheism.
In effect, if one is attempt to find the one true religion, then one is looking for a straw in a haystack.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by robinrohan, posted 04-06-2006 11:44 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by robinrohan, posted 04-06-2006 12:13 PM Tusko has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 301 (301542)
04-06-2006 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Dan Carroll
04-06-2006 11:54 AM


While we're on the subject, though, do you have a case against the existence of Green Lantern?
I've heard this type of reasoning before, and it won't do. Green Lantern is a different type of entity than God (if we think of God as the creator of the universe). Green Lantern is by definition a totally extraneous entity, having arisen from nature. The concept of God is quite different.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-06-2006 11:54 AM Dan Carroll has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by purpledawn, posted 04-06-2006 1:08 PM robinrohan has replied
 Message 54 by lfen, posted 04-06-2006 3:33 PM robinrohan has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 301 (301544)
04-06-2006 12:06 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Dan Carroll
04-06-2006 11:54 AM


Contempt? I don't have contempt for God
I didn't mean you had a contempt for God, but rather for the concept and, by implication, for those who would believe such a thing. But I was just going by your tone.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-06-2006 11:54 AM Dan Carroll has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-06-2006 12:25 PM robinrohan has replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 27 of 301 (301548)
04-06-2006 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by robinrohan
04-06-2006 11:25 AM


robinrohan
If God does not exist, then presumably our morality is subjective. And if our morality is subjective, my judgment that life involves innocent suffering and is therefore immoral on God's part would also be subjective and therefore meaningless.
NO. You fail to complete the transition to full atheist scholarship rr.
Meaningless is a term you can only use as it pertains to your illusion that morality is objective. When you realize that morality is a construct of your own personal view augmented by interaction with other people in society as a means of benefit to yourself as well as others then you can understand that the universe does not have meaning in the sense that it has a directional purpose.
However, that said, it is nonetheless possible to give meaning to your life on a subjective level by defining to yourself a set of criteria to which you will adhere.
The tricky part of living life is to realize that other people do not necessarily hold the same criteria as you do regarding morality and this is perfectly consistent in a world where there are no set boundaries to the actions you may produce.
You are free to always do whatever you wish bounded only by the fact that your actions can affect other people and their actions toward you.So the interplay between people and each other,people and the world, cumultively produce the world you see before you.
Order springs forth because of the restraints we place upon one another not because there is a force demanding certain actions be adhered to. Thus we may have evil, we may have good ,we may have necessary evil and unneccessary good , not to mention neutrality and chaos.
Now if you will excuse me I must return to my Dungeons and Dragons game. Now where is that wizard when you need...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by robinrohan, posted 04-06-2006 11:25 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by robinrohan, posted 04-06-2006 12:23 PM sidelined has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 301 (301549)
04-06-2006 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Tusko
04-06-2006 11:55 AM


Maybe its OT - sorry if this is the case - but I want to plug my earlier post once more. I think the problem with your opener is your attempt to minimise the difficulties posed to any one religion by the heaps and heaps of other religions.
To me, that's one of the central foundations of my tentative atheism.
So the fact that there are many different religions suggests that none are true? How so?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Tusko, posted 04-06-2006 11:55 AM Tusko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Tusko, posted 04-06-2006 6:30 PM robinrohan has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 29 of 301 (301553)
04-06-2006 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Modulous
04-06-2006 11:54 AM


Re: The futility of a case against the unfalsifiable
So in conclusion, this line of enquiry proves useless as a means to develop a case for the non-existence of the God you have described.
I had already decided, for other reasons, that we could not prove that a supposed God could not be all-good.
But I was thinking of an argument we might use called the argument from the "lack of design in the universe."
Just thinking about it. Not sure yet.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Modulous, posted 04-06-2006 11:54 AM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Modulous, posted 04-06-2006 12:58 PM robinrohan has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 301 (301555)
04-06-2006 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by sidelined
04-06-2006 12:13 PM


However, that said, it is nonetheless possible to give meaning to your life on a subjective level by defining to yourself a set of criteria to which you will adhere.
The tricky part of living life is to realize that other people do not necessarily hold the same criteria as you do regarding morality and this is perfectly consistent in a world where there are no set boundaries to the actions you may produce.
You are free to always do whatever you wish bounded only by the fact that your actions can affect other people and their actions toward you.So the interplay between people and each other,people and the world, cumultively produce the world you see before you.
Translation: For practical reasons, let's pretend that life has meaning and let's pretend that our morals are real. In the short time we have on this earth, there's not a lot else we CAN do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by sidelined, posted 04-06-2006 12:13 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by sidelined, posted 04-06-2006 2:01 PM robinrohan has not replied
 Message 100 by JavaMan, posted 04-07-2006 8:07 AM robinrohan has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024