By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - The Abrahamic Religions make No Sense

richardhutnik on 14 May 2012

Note: I did flag this thread and asked a moderator to look at it. I welcome being called where I may be out of line here.



Around the Network
Slimebeast on 14 May 2012
bouzane said:
"Do you realize the implications? Don't you see how radically it would change an atheist if he truly started to live as if everything is pre-determined.

You would stop thinking "Dammit, Person X why did you make Y decision", because Person X could only have made that decision and not anything else.

"Maybe I shouldn't condemn that racist, rapist or murderer and make him feel bad, his opinion is just as well based as mine is"."

Dear god slimebeast, how can you be so illogical? I'm an atheist who believes that everything is per-determined and as such, realize that if I were born under the exact same circumstances as a rapist, murderer, etc... I would turn out the same. That being said, how in the hell do you jump from a Tabula Rasa view of human development to your statement above? Please think before you type in order to avoid such asinine statements.

Illogical? I am perfectly logical in that post. I don't get your criticism.



richardhutnik on 14 May 2012
Slimebeast said:
bouzane said:
"Do you realize the implications? Don't you see how radically it would change an atheist if he truly started to live as if everything is pre-determined.

You would stop thinking "Dammit, Person X why did you make Y decision", because Person X could only have made that decision and not anything else.

"Maybe I shouldn't condemn that racist, rapist or murderer and make him feel bad, his opinion is just as well based as mine is"."

Dear god slimebeast, how can you be so illogical? I'm an atheist who believes that everything is per-determined and as such, realize that if I were born under the exact same circumstances as a rapist, murderer, etc... I would turn out the same. That being said, how in the hell do you jump from a Tabula Rasa view of human development to your statement above? Please think before you type in order to avoid such asinine statements.

Illogical? I am perfectly logical in that post. I don't get your criticism.

Well, let me come back on this a second here.  The person who believes that everything is predetermined, and believes rapists and so on do it, because they were determined do so, very likely believe they are not determined to do so.  Whatever they care to think about the rapist and so on, is irrelevant in regards to how they personally act.

I am reminded of these lines from the Watchmen:

LAURIE JUSPECZYK 
Is that what you are? The most powerful thing in the universe and you're just a puppet following a script?
DOCTOR MANHATTAN 
We're all puppets, Laurie. I'm just a puppet who can see the strings.


Slimebeast on 15 May 2012
richardhutnik said:
Slimebeast said:
bouzane said:
"Do you realize the implications? Don't you see how radically it would change an atheist if he truly started to live as if everything is pre-determined.

You would stop thinking "Dammit, Person X why did you make Y decision", because Person X could only have made that decision and not anything else.

"Maybe I shouldn't condemn that racist, rapist or murderer and make him feel bad, his opinion is just as well based as mine is"."

Dear god slimebeast, how can you be so illogical? I'm an atheist who believes that everything is per-determined and as such, realize that if I were born under the exact same circumstances as a rapist, murderer, etc... I would turn out the same. That being said, how in the hell do you jump from a Tabula Rasa view of human development to your statement above? Please think before you type in order to avoid such asinine statements.

Illogical? I am perfectly logical in that post. I don't get your criticism.

Well, let me come back on this a second here.  The person who believes that everything is predetermined, and believes rapists and so on do it, because they were determined do so, very likely believe they are not determined to do so.  Whatever they care to think about the rapist and so on, is irrelevant in regards to how they personally act.

I am reminded of these lines from the Watchmen:

 

LAURIE JUSPECZYK 
Is that what you are? The most powerful thing in the universe and you're just a puppet following a script?
DOCTOR MANHATTAN 
We're all puppets, Laurie. I'm just a puppet who can see the strings.

 

Exactly.

You are approaching this thread from a different angle, but I think we both are irritated that 11111THE11111 is only tying determinism to religion to make religion look bad, but ignoring the larger (and extremely difficult) implications of determinism.



IIIIITHE1IIIII on 15 May 2012

Alright, I am hereby leaving the thread.

This discussion could go on forever, but I feel like I'm repeating myself and have nothing to say that hasn't already been said ten times.

Thanks for all interesting discussions and to everyone who participated. And feel free to discuss this further.


I have learned my lesson: Logic does not apply to religion, even if it's logic that is based on religion.


Around the Network
Jumpin on 15 May 2012
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
Jumpin said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

1. God is outside of our dimensions though. It is true that humans cannot possibly predict the future, but an omniscient being is outside of all dimensions.

2. If God has managed to create a randomness that he cannot predict, then He should also be able to create another God that is mightier than himself. We are back at the god paradox that Rath brought up.

1. That does not imply that God has the ability to time travel.

2. Randomness is logical. Having something mighter than what is almighty is logically absurd. There is no connection between the two.


1. False, as an omniscient being standing outside of time altogether, predicting one second ahead is a piece of cake. God can see everything that happens and know for what reason. He also sees the things that are currently happening (which will be "reasons" in the future) and predicts/knows therefrom.

2. False, randomness is not logical. Everything happens for a reason, and nothing happens for no reason in a (by dimensions) limited universe such as ours.

1. As I have pointed out before, this is not logically possible considering there are abstract and random factors existing in the universe. Even in the period of a second there is going to be a degree of error as a result.

2. As a simple example, take a random number which can randomly generate a number between 1 and 5; it can be therefore logically deduced that any given number in that set has a 20% chance of selection.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin on 15 May 2012
Rath said:
Jumpin said:
Rath said:
TheProphet said:
Yes, the question of omnipotence vs free will has challenged our best minds for centuries. I am sure there will be no end to this debate. And it will certainly not have an impact on whether people believe in God or not. There is far to much scientific evidence of design making the free will argument just a minor philosophical curiosity.

However, on this subject I would like to make a couple of points. God created man in His own image. That means that man has the same free will that God does. That means that man can make free decisions independent of what God may want. It is completely up to us what we decide. An almighty God can do anything. So therefore an almighty God could create beings with free will he could not predict. He would not be almighty if He couldn't make a being with free will would He.

To support this argument I would just ask you to read the story of Noah's flood. Obviously the people of earth were behaving badly and of no use to God so he started over again with His creation, taking the best of the best. This story clearly indicates the humanity has a free will to reject virtue and God, but at a price. It also shows that God does not necessarily know how things will turn out otherwise he would not have to clean the slate and start over.

Even if there was evidence that a god existed that would not mean it was the Abrahamic god. As the free will against omniscience contradiction shows that the Abrahamic god as literally described makes no sense that would imply that any creator god was not the Abrahamic god.

As for your point "He would not be almighty if He couldn't make a being with free will would He." What you're describing is the god paradox - is it possible for a god to limit itself? If god can limit his ability to see the future then he loses his omnipotence when he does so, if god cannot limit his ability to see the future then he is in not omnipotent in the first place. As such omnipotence is not logically consistent.

I went over something like this further up the post, but omnipotence or omniscience does not mean a being has been granted the ability to see the future. The ability to see the future is incoherent with the rules of logic.

In order to see the future, it would one of two things.
1. A fourth dimension that can be traveled along.
2. The ability to predict with absolute certainty all events of the Universe.

Point 1 is incoherent with what we know scientifically. Time is not a fourth dimension; it cannot be travelled back and forth along like in science fiction films such as back to the Future.
Point 2 is not possible due to the existence of random and abstract factors. There would be absolutely no way to view the future with absolute certainty. The best one could do is calculate probability.

The ability to see the future is not inconsistent with the rules of logic, you aren't even really making that claim. Your points both are that it's inconsistent with the rules of physics - something which I'd assume a God is above.

It is a logical argument, and it goes as follows:

1. In order to see the future, it requires the ability to travel along a timeline in order to view the future.
2. It is not logically possible to travel through time, as it would instantly create a time paradox.
3. Therefore time cannot be logically traveled along.
4. Therefore time cannot be logically traveled along to see the future.
5. Therefore it is logically impossible to see the future.

Unless you can prove to me that time can be traveled back and forth on, then the argument of a time traveling God is logically absurd.

1. In our Universe random and abstract factors exist.
2. In a universe where random and abstract factors exist, it is not possible to predict the future with absolute certainty.
3. Therefore it is not possible to predict the future 100%.

Unless you can come up with another way God can see the future of the Universe, then the argument that God can see the future is invalid.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin on 15 May 2012
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

Alright, I am hereby leaving the thread.

This discussion could go on forever, but I feel like I'm repeating myself and have nothing to say that hasn't already been said ten times.

Thanks for all interesting discussions and to everyone who participated. And feel free to discuss this further.


I have learned my lesson: Logic does not apply to religion, even if it's logic that is based on religion.

Your argument depends on illogical factors being true - such as predicting the future 100% in despite the presense of random and abstract factors which would make predicting the future logically impossible - and that God should be able to perform logically within these illogical parameters in order to be omniscient.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Pjams on 15 May 2012

All I know is that I was friends with a couple really hot girls that were super into Kabbalah. They killed a some chickens then one turned Hevra and then the Jewish one (with big sweet milky boobs) started bangin me. I love religion!



 

Rath on 15 May 2012
Jumpin said:

It is a logical argument, and it goes as follows:

1. In order to see the future, it requires the ability to travel along a timeline in order to view the future.
2. It is not logically possible to travel through time, as it would instantly create a time paradox.
3. Therefore time cannot be logically traveled along.
4. Therefore time cannot be logically traveled along to see the future.
5. Therefore it is logically impossible to see the future.

Unless you can prove to me that time can be traveled back and forth on, then the argument of a time traveling God is logically absurd.

1. In our Universe random and abstract factors exist.
2. In a universe where random and abstract factors exist, it is not possible to predict the future with absolute certainty.
3. Therefore it is not possible to predict the future 100%.

Unless you can come up with another way God can see the future of the Universe, then the argument that God can see the future is invalid.

Whether time can be travelled along or not is a matter of physics, not logic. The entire basis of your argument is in the wrong field. If you start with the assumption that God is bound by the laws of physics as well as the laws of logic (and also assume you are right about the unidirectionality of time) then your argument is correct, but if God is bound by the laws of physics then is God omnipotent?

 

In any case there are solutions to the time paradox problem which are quite workable, probably most notably those that involve multiple or branching universes.