The Anti-theist Thread

[Wayfarer]

It has come to my attention that I left some posts of anduril's unanswered... allow me to rectify that situation.

Omniscience and Free-will
Argument (1)

(1) An omniscient being is all-knowledgeable and there is nothing that this being does not know.
(2) An omniscient being knows the future with perfect accuracy [from 1].
(3) If there is perfectly accurate knowledge of the future, it is impossible to change the future [see Explanations]
(4) Choice is the ability to select one or more alternatives.
(5) A being with free will has the ability to exercise choice.
(6) A being with free-will cannot exist in a situation where choice cannot be exercised [from 5].
(7) There is a situation where choice cannot be exercised [see Explanations].
(8) An omniscient being with free-will cannot exist [from 6 and 7]

As I said earlier, if God exists outside of time, then he can both know everything that happens and have a choice in everything

Omnibenevolent, Omniscient and Creator
Argument (2)

(1) An omnibenevolent being cannot perform an evil act.
(2) An omniscient being would know whether good, evil or neutrality would result from any act.
(3) An omniscient being would therefore know whether the existence of at least one being would bring about evil implications [from 2].
(4) The wilful act of the creation of at least one evil being was evil [from 3].
(5) A creator that is omnibenevolent and omniscient cannot exist [from 1, 2 and 4].

Of course, there is the Illuvatar principle. God allows evil to exist, because in the end everything will turn to his will.

Secondly, there is he definiton of 'good'. While I myself do not subscribe to this belief, there are many who say that god s above good and evil (I.E Cancer is 'bad' because it kills people, but a surgeon can be called 'bad' because he kills cancer). I find this to be almost as ridicluous as you will, but it merits soem consideration.

And, if god is the creator of the universe, he is not subject to any defitnition of 'good' but his own.

Lastly (and most importantly), there is the issue of free will. If god created a universe in which evil is impossible, then he would be be excluding free will. Conversely, since god created a universe with free will, he logicaly allowed the possibility that humans would turn away from him, and behave in an evil fashion.

Omnipotent and Omnibenevolent
(1) An omnipotent being can perform any logical action.
(2) An omnipotent being can intentionally perform evil actions.
(2) An omnibenevolent being cannot intentionally perform evil actions.
(3) A being cannot exist if it can intentionally perform evil actions and also cannot intentionally perform evil actions.
(4) A being that is both omnipotent and omnibenevolent cannot exist.

is there any reason to think that merely because god does not do something, that he cannot?

God does not perform evil actions because it is agains his character to do so. It is certainly within his power.

Omnipotent and Perfect

A being cannot be all-powerful and perfect at the same time. It is logically impossible for a being to exist when that being has the ability to perform any logical action, and at the same time is complete, faultless, absolutely precise, and unequalled.

Argument (4)

(1) An omnipotent being can perform any logical action.
(2) An omnipotent being can intentionally perform imperfect actions.
(3) A perfect being can perform only perfect actions.
(4) A perfect being that can perform only perfect actions cannot be an omnipotent being that can perform imperfect actions.
(5) A perfect being that is omnipotent cannot exist.

Once again, you confuse cannot and does not.

Just because one does not get 100% on a test does not mean that one could not (through studying harder, etc). And just because one gets 100% does not mean one could not have done less.

God is perfect because he does not make mistakes. THis does not mean he could not do so if he desired.

Omnibenevolent, Omnipotent and Creator

Argument (5)

(1) An omnibenevolent being has only good motivations and intentions, and cannot perform evil acts.
(2) An omnibenevolent being does not want unnecessary harm to befall humans [from 1].
(3) An omnipotent being can perform any logical action.
(4) A being cannot exist if that being had the ability to create Earth in such a way that unnecessary harm does not befall humans, and also desires it, and the Earth has been created in such a way that unnecessary harm does befall humans [from 2 and 3].
(5) Earth has been created in such a way that unnecessary harm befall humans.
(6) A being that is omnibenevolent, omnipotent and creator cannot exist [from 4 and 5].

Christians hold that the earth has become imperfect as a result of man's choices. God created the possibility of free will, and this includes the possibility that unesscesary harm will result.

One could also say that, since god is also omniscient, he knows what is and is not nescessary, and thus you cannot say taht X was not.

The universe was created in such a way that humans (and other sentient creatures) can choose right or wrong. But if we chose wrong, we harm ourselves. God does not wish us to do so, but he allows it in order to give use free will.

Omnipotent and desires communion with all humans

(1) An omnipotent being is all-powerful.
(2) An omnipotent being, therefore, has the ability to achieve communion with humans [from 1].
(3) A divine being that desires communion with humans, might not have the ability to achieve this communion.
(4) If all humans do not experience communion with a certain divine being, that being is either not omnipotent, in that it does not have the ability to achieve this communion, or does not desire this communion, or both.
(5) All humans do not experience communion with a divine being.
(6) A being that is omnipotent and has the desire for communion with all humans cannot exist [from 4 and 5].

God desires that humans, through the excersise of free will, should be in communion with him. As you pointed out, free will cannot be excersised in situations where there is no choice, and thus if god were to force all humans to be in communion with him he would not be getting what he wanted.

He has allowed all humans that wish to be in communion with him, but he will nopt overwrite our fre will. That would negate the point.

All in all, I found this very interesting. I shall have to give more attention to numbers four and five, but the rest seem to be based on a poor understanding of what God is claimed to be. Please, as I said, do not base your arguments on assumptions about what you're discussing

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by mirrille

To Cirdan, I hope your mother is doing alright now. I think if I was in your situation, I would have held hands in the little circle, but only to save face for susan. Sort of to accomodate her as this might be the only way she knows to "connect" with everyone. But it sounds to me that this is a pattern for her. If she was taking advantage of your mother's condition to draw you into her little cult, then shame on her!

Well. she already scored pretty big in the re-writing of the will. Apparently mother perchased four billets in the wall at the church for our ashes. You can bet they weren't cheap. They like the older parrish members with money. Buying a stairway to heaven?

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Of course, not being an american, ("I'm afraid of americans" - David Bowie), I'm not used to this almost military mindset, so if I've gone off on a completely wrong tangent, then feel free to edify me.

If we don't follow our leaderss blindly we could lose our freedom

almost used all the faces

And then Wayfarer said " I believe in god and he's omniscient, omnipresent, and exists beyond all reason". And it took almost an entire page to do it. Not counting the usual depricating remark about someone's intellect and awareness.

[Rána Eressëa]

Originally posted by Eärniel
You actually have to stand up and say the pledge? I thought they did that only in movies. Pretty bizarre. Glad my school is only catholic in name.

Well, yes, you pretty much have to stand up and say the pledge. They've outlawed the pledge in Michigan, though, I believe it was. But, you see, I live in Georgia which is part of the south and these people down here scare the crap outta me. If you walk into the library, just look straight ahead at the card catalog and on top of it you'll see the Ten Commandments in a large navy blue picture frame.

If you don't stand up and say the pledge, most teachers usually don't care or won't say anything. But some of them get real snotty. One kid last year got sent to the office for not doing the pledge three days in a row. Of course, they found out the kid was atheist and one of the rules is "no discrimination against religion (or lack thereof)" and they left it alone, but word spread and the kid got beat up during P.E. on the baseball field. Bloody nose, few broken ribs, but nothing "serious" enough for someone to want to do anything about it.

That's the number one reason why I wish to escape this place. It's just too frightening on a day to day basis. I'm better off keeping to myself then talking to people, because once someone named Patrick asked me if I was Gothic (why? he thinks I look Gothic). I told him no, then he asked me if I believed in God. I told him no again, and he starts asking me why and then his friend Lindsey walks up and suddenly she starts doing the same. We were in the library with our class and another one, and it's real quiet, but then they raise their voices so everyone in the library can hear what the conversation is about. I just grabbed up my bags and left. I was really shaken for a while because I caught some of the people staring at me.

Around here, it's not a good thing to announce your an atheist, but most of my friends know. Not all of them do because they haven't all asked, and I think it's best to stay quiet unless they do.

[BeardofPants]

That's freaking scary, R.E! I'm so glad I come from a small place, where everyone is too apathetic to care or not, whether you believe spotty pink unicorns. If you join my Darth Tater religion, you won't be pursecuted, promise! Oh course, if you don't.... *eyes R.E aggressively* ...


Oh, I need some sleep, precioussss sleep....

[afro-elf]

People said that for years about things like bacteria and radiation

It was a VERY short time to prove those things. I can see direct tangle evidence.

I see the natural world. No direct tangible evidence for the preternatural.


the invisible, transcendant, etc and the non-existant look kinda similar

I'm working up to that point. After all, would you wish that I try and convince you that the christian god is the real one when you disbelieve in the existence of any God at all?

Please show me where I said I don't believe in any

Theism in philosophy is more than the simply belief in a god it is

Belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world.

I have no belief in the later part of the above statement


POSSIBLY I might be a pantheist with the COSMOTHEIST lean as opposed to the polytheist lean

; the doctrine that there is no God but the combined force and laws which are manifested in the existing universe;

I've no belief in an anthropomorphic or anthrop-pathic deity

What arrogance of mankind to presume itself worthy of a creator



when you say the christian god fit your belief system

hell I could say BOP is god made manifest is you can't disprove it
I could reply to whatever you said with BoP is just causing doing that for her own divine reasons

[afro-elf]

PS

I'm affecting your typing your typo's are increasing


Alas entropy

[BeardofPants]

*Box scrambles onscreen*

I AM God of cardboard boxes.

*Exits abruptly, with a muffled reminder to...*

Kiss my cardboard a$$.

___________

[afro-elf]

Is your fleshy one open for kissing also?

[BeardofPants]

*BoP strides on screen, pulls out box.*

WHACK!

[Rána Eressëa]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
That's freaking scary, R.E! I'm so glad I come from a small place, where everyone is too apathetic to care or not, whether you believe spotty pink unicorns.

Hey, I come from a small place, too. Look on a large state map and you won't find it. You'd have to get a map focusing on the southeastern part of GA in order for it to be listed.

The thing is, since it is such a small place, it's secluded from all the different things that go on day to day basis in bigger cities and such, so if someone comes here proclaiming they're atheist or homosexual, you won't be welcomed by most of the occupants. Hell, if you come here baring a neon green mohawk on your head you'll be suspended from school for "disturbing the peace". That's how outrageous it is here.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Rána Eressëa
The thing is, since it is such a small place, it's secluded from all the different things that go on day to day basis in bigger cities and such, so if someone comes here proclaiming they're atheist or homosexual, you won't be welcomed by most of the occupants. Hell, if you come here baring a neon green mohawk on your head you'll be suspended from school for "disturbing the peace". That's how outrageous it is here. [/B]

Well, I live in the City of Sails, so it's probably not a true reflection of bigotry, per se, but we *do* have farmers, remember? They still have pubs where women aren't allowed in, and have that 'hausfrau' ideal thing going on.

However, the bigotry isn't just limited to the country regions. In NZ there is a strong Samoan, and Pacific Island community, and one of the male coming of age rituals, is to grown a small rat-tail (plaited), until you "come of age." Anyway, there was a HUGE controversy a couple of years ago, because some pakeha (white) dumba$$ of a headmaster made him cut it off, ignoring the cultural sensitivity of the rat tail in the first place. (This headmaster used to be our assistant principal, before he went to wreak havoc elsewhere). Furthermore, one guy came to my school one day, with a mohawk, and my HomeGroup teacher made him shave it off....

[FrodoFriend]

Really? When I said that, you disagreed with me. ]: ) In any case, this is probobly a better understanding of the theology than most christians have.

Did I say that? Hmmm . . . I was just trying to make the point that the God scenario has no advantage over the nature/science scenario in that case.

Within a closed system, the amount of usable energy decreases.

Correct me if I'm wrong . . . but I was under the distinct impression that the Law of Conservation of Matter states that neither energy nor matter is ever created or destroyed, only converted - hence, the amount of matter and energy can not decrease. As the universe continues to expand, the average amount of energy per unit of area decreases, but not the total amount of energy. So, if the Big Crunch theory is correct, the same amount of energy will be present then as at the Big Bang.

There is indeed usable energy in the universe, but no indication that it is decreasing. In fact, a "closed" system implies that it could not decrease, since nothing can get out of the system.

And if the amount of energy is not decreasing, it can indeed have been there forever.

[BeardofPants]

Yes, what FF said.

Energy is not lost, it is re-routed, and dispersed, and converted.

[Andúril]

Omniscience vs Free-will

As I said earlier, if God exists outside of time, then he can both know everything that happens and have a choice in everything

How can an entity that is outside of time, exercise choice? To choose is to be part of the realm of cause and effect, unless the entity is in an eternal or constant state of "choosing", which is totally incoherent, and incompatible with biblical scriptures.

Even if your claims of God being transcendant (through space and time dimensions...) have any validity, as soon as an entity enters the realm of cause and effect (as is shown in the bible), it enters time. The bible clearly shows God interacting with his universe, in sequences of actions, orderly events, in a timely fashion.

Therefore, your refutation lies on your assumption that God is somehow outside of time. If something exists outside of time, then we have not observed it.

[Andúril]

Omniscient, Omnibenevolent and Creator

Of course, there is the Illuvatar principle. God allows evil to exist, because in the end everything will turn to his will.

Do you have any scripture to back that theory?

Secondly, there is he definiton of 'good'. While I myself do not subscribe to this belief, there are many who say that god s above good and evil (I.E Cancer is 'bad' because it kills people, but a surgeon can be called 'bad' because he kills cancer). I find this to be almost as ridicluous as you will, but it merits soem consideration.

I don't find it any more ridiculous than other religous doctrine. Besides, the bible clearly proclaims that God is good.

And, if god is the creator of the universe, he is not subject to any defitnition of 'good' but his own.

Well, I doubt that any Christians would take the meaning ascribed to "good" in the bible as being errant.

Lastly (and most importantly), there is the issue of free will. If god created a universe in which evil is impossible, then he would be be excluding free will. Conversely, since god created a universe with free will, he logicaly allowed the possibility that humans would turn away from him, and behave in an evil fashion.

Why did God create a universe in which evil was possible? Why was it necessary for evil to be included in the very nature of existence? The bible says that God created evil. Not a very benevolent action, is it?

He would only be hindering free-will if it was in our nature to be evil. You are implying that God has create inherently evil beings, who must somehow disgard their natural tendency to "sin", to be worthy of him. To be allowed into Heaven would then require a hindered will, wouldn't it? Assuming more people will go to the christian hell than the christian heaven, why did God create a race that more than likely would not follow him? Not very clever, was he?

[Andúril]

Omnipotent and Omnibenevolent

is there any reason to think that merely because god does not do something, that he cannot?

Does an omnibenevolent entity even have the ability to do evil? Being omnibenevolent and not merely benevolent, if a being does one evil act and also 99 good acts (out of 100), that being is not omnibenevolent (by definition). Also, because the entity is labeled as omnibenevolent, and a benevolent entity can perform both good and non-good acts, it is the definition of the entity which hinders it. A benevolent being might perform only good acts, but it can also perform evil acts, while an omnibenevolent being performs onlt good acts (if not, then non-omni-)

God does not perform evil actions because it is agains his character to do so. It is certainly within his power.

Any logical action is within the power of an omnipotent being. But, if that being has omnibenvolence as an additional defining attribute, then that being cannot and also does not (happy?) perform non-benevolent acts. And seeing as this type of act is logically sound, and it cannot perform it, then either: 1) It is not omnipotent and/or 2) it is not omnibenevolent, and it follows that a being that has both of these attributes is not possible.

[Andúril]

Omnipotent and Perfect

Once again, you confuse cannot and does not.

Just because one does not get 100% on a test does not mean that one could not (through studying harder, etc). And just because one gets 100% does not mean one could not have done less.

How can a perfect being perform an imperfect action? Everything that a perfect being does is perfect. Less than 100% is an imperfect score, is it not?

An omnipotent being, on the other hand, can do anything: make mistakes, get less-than-perfect test scores, if the desire is there. But, if the being is perfect as well, the desire for imperfection is negated - no imperfections are allowed.

God is perfect because he does not make mistakes. THis does not mean he could not do so if he desired.

A perfect being only has perfect desires, doesn't it? Out of two possible desires, one being to get 90% on a test, and the other being 100%, which desire would a perfect being hold? The desire to get 100%, because it is the "more-perfect" of the two. A perfect being can't want to do anything less than perfect. An omnipotent being, on the other hand, can.

[Andúril]

Omnibenevolent, Omnipotent and Creator

Christians hold that the earth has become imperfect as a result of man's choices. God created the possibility of free will, and this includes the possibility that unesscesary harm will result.

Regarding the world's imperfections, how does an incorrect decision in one part of the world (regarding an apple) result in a volcano killing hundreds of innocent people in another region? Free will has nothing to do with natural disasters.

One could also say that, since god is also omniscient, he knows what is and is not nescessary, and thus you cannot say taht X was not.

If we don't have sufficient knowledge of the neccesity of an event, or if our knowledge is inadequate, how are we justified in believing that these events are indeed neccesary (or unnecesary). Just because an omniscient being knows whether something is necessary or not, it doesn't imply that what we think is unneccesary is in fact neccesary. Again, how can you be confident that all events are necessary, without just assuming after the fact.

The universe was created in such a way that humans (and other sentient creatures) can choose right or wrong. But if we chose wrong, we harm ourselves. God does not wish us to do so, but he allows it in order to give use free will.

I could do wrong my entire life, and some suddenly, at the age of 92 decide to join the flock - therefore, I did wrong, but I did not harm myself. Also, harm comes to animals, but according to you, God left them out when dishing out the free will, didn't he?

Interestingly, there is a passage in the bible where someone says "One cannot know the mind of God" (more or less). But you continually show your knowledge of his desires and intentions...

[Andúril]

Omnipotent and desires communion with all humans

God desires that humans, through the excersise of free will, should be in communion with him. As you pointed out, free will cannot be excersised in situations where there is no choice, and thus if god were to force all humans to be in communion with him he would not be getting what he wanted.

He shouldn't have to force anything. He could have given the universe some evidence of his existence at least; that would help increase the numbers of his flock, wouldn't it?

He has allowed all humans that wish to be in communion with him, but he will nopt overwrite our fre will. That would negate the point.

When Christians claim they have felt God, what does that do to their free will? Exactly. And the prophets? The authors of the bible who claim divine inspiration? Were they given a choice? Exactly. God's chosen ones? They certainly didn't choose themselves.