Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 8:10 am
It's not that simple, is it?If the universe if infinite, then God must exist. If there are infinite possibilities of things then one of those possibilities involves the existence of God.
Page 1 of 3
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 8:25 am
No. Because another 'infinite possibility' is that God doesn't exist. So by their reasoning, those two 'possibilities' cancel each other out.
Another thing is. The argument jumps from 'the universe infinite' to there are 'infinite possibilities'. But it's not originally explained what aspect of the universe is infinite. It's sort of like saying "if the swimming pool is wet, it must be filled with coca-cola'. And it's not even proved THAT anything in the universe is 'infinite' in the quote. Nor did they define 'universe'.
Another thing is. The argument jumps from 'the universe infinite' to there are 'infinite possibilities'. But it's not originally explained what aspect of the universe is infinite. It's sort of like saying "if the swimming pool is wet, it must be filled with coca-cola'. And it's not even proved THAT anything in the universe is 'infinite' in the quote. Nor did they define 'universe'.
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 8:52 am
A near-impossible succession of coincidences gave birth to the universe, planet earth, life and mankind. Some people like to call it god, others like to call it chance. Matter of opinion IMO. (this is my view on the subject because it's simple enough for me and I can't be hassled to think on a question nobody's ever gonna be able to answer anyway.)
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 8:54 am
well in that case how about we add zeus, poseidon, krishna, the flying spaghetti monster, etc, etc all to the list
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 8:56 am
The original quote didn't define what form God takes.Phigure wrote:well in that case how about we add zeus, poseidon, krishna.[..]to the list
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 8:57 am
well no matter how you define it, going by that logic, some other definition will also exist among "infinite possibilities"wub wrote:The original quote didn't define what form God takes.Phigure wrote:well in that case how about we add zeus, poseidon, krishna.[..]to the list
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:20 am
Right, but it's way more fun to disprove God on the basis of that argument then it is to accept trillions of Gods >.>Phigure wrote:well no matter how you define it, going by that logic, some other definition will also exist among "infinite possibilities"wub wrote:The original quote didn't define what form God takes.Phigure wrote:well in that case how about we add zeus, poseidon, krishna.[..]to the list
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:20 am
Wasteman quote but at least we can all agree that Heaven exists.
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:26 am
possibilities, however infinite,
don't necessarily manifest
and an infinite universe
doesn't necessarily contain everything possible
but the God conceived as transcendent,
greater than everything including possibilities,
would exist beyond infinity.
don't necessarily manifest
and an infinite universe
doesn't necessarily contain everything possible
but the God conceived as transcendent,
greater than everything including possibilities,
would exist beyond infinity.
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:48 am
So this seems a reduction of the ontological case for God stated initially about 1100;
Our understanding of God is a being than which no greater can be conceived.
The idea of God exists in the mind.
A being which exists both in the mind and in reality is greater than a being that exists only in the mind.
If God only exists in the mind, then we can conceive of a greater being—that which exists in reality.
We cannot be imagining something that is greater than God.
Therefore, God exists.
There are other formulations that are closer about being exists in all possible universes and this specific universe. In any case I'm not a massive fan of these kinds of logical arguments for God, they seem more a criticism of language than proof of God.
Our understanding of God is a being than which no greater can be conceived.
The idea of God exists in the mind.
A being which exists both in the mind and in reality is greater than a being that exists only in the mind.
If God only exists in the mind, then we can conceive of a greater being—that which exists in reality.
We cannot be imagining something that is greater than God.
Therefore, God exists.
There are other formulations that are closer about being exists in all possible universes and this specific universe. In any case I'm not a massive fan of these kinds of logical arguments for God, they seem more a criticism of language than proof of God.
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:56 am
sd5 wrote: and an infinite universe
doesn't necessarily contain everything possible
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:00 am
Wubs fedora finally came out.
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:04 am
only to prove that Jah is real thokidshuffle wrote:Wubs fedora finally came out.
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:05 am
I'll post a quick addendum;
Multiverses as the set of all possible universes exist
Each universe is different in the arrangement of space and time
In the list of all possible universes there exists a god
that god is omnipotent, omnipotence allows god to operate distinct from time and space
if an omnipotent god exists in any possible universe he exists in all possible universes
god exists
Multiverses as the set of all possible universes exist
Each universe is different in the arrangement of space and time
In the list of all possible universes there exists a god
that god is omnipotent, omnipotence allows god to operate distinct from time and space
if an omnipotent god exists in any possible universe he exists in all possible universes
god exists
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:11 am
It's only saying that God exists because it exists, doesn't it?scspkr99 wrote:I'll post a quick addendum;
Multiverses as the set of all possible universes exist
Each universe is different in the arrangement of space and time
In the list of all possible universes there exists a god
that god is omnipotent, omnipotence allows god to operate distinct from time and space
if an omnipotent god exists in any possible universe he exists in all possible universes
god exists
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:15 am
Yeah kind of, it's to do with the fact infinities seem to fuck everything up allowing for infinite possibilities.
It's the kind of question some pose, like if we have a finite number of arrangements elementary particles in an infinite space they must repeat infinitely. So that there are other people that resemble me in every imaginable way. I don't find those arguments compelling tbh
It's the kind of question some pose, like if we have a finite number of arrangements elementary particles in an infinite space they must repeat infinitely. So that there are other people that resemble me in every imaginable way. I don't find those arguments compelling tbh
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:19 am
infinity defies any logic reasoning though. you could argue that in one of the infinite amount of multiverses I'm impotent. also, you owe me a blowjob, because the sun is clearly a black hole.
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:26 am
Why is that? What about the monkeys and typewriters?flint33 wrote:sd5 wrote: and an infinite universe
doesn't necessarily contain everything possible
And to the OP i'd say no. Infinite possibilities of the natural, yes. Supernatural, no.
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:36 am
There's a whole class of presuppositional apologetic arguments that aren't compelling either, the stuff gets posedGenevieve wrote: It's only saying that God exists because it exists, doesn't it?
P1 Morals are only possible if God
P2 Morals are possible
C God
Like the arguments is logically sound the conclusion can naturally be drawn from the premises but the premise presupposes god, it's cheating.
Re: Existence of God
Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:44 am
Yeah exactly. They're clever in the way they're mindgames. Like the one you posted earlier, it flings unrelated concepts around that confuse the reader, followed by an absolute claim of God that completely throws the reader off while they're still trying to process the idea of a multiverse.scspkr99 wrote:There's a whole class of presuppositional apologetic arguments that aren't compelling either, the stuff gets posedGenevieve wrote: It's only saying that God exists because it exists, doesn't it?
P1 Morals are only possible if God
P2 Morals are possible
C God
Like the arguments is logically sound the conclusion can naturally be drawn from the premises but the premise presupposes god, it's cheating.
The point seems to be that, because you can't piece together logically what's being said, you don't understand the logic behind it and therefore you're wrong.
It's a trick often used by those really clever Youtube philosophers/debaters.