If God is the Universe - are you still an Athiest?

[Berzerker]

there is no evidence that he does exist

Actually there is but you have to look.

[Kuciwalker]

As in the Bible?

[Sava]

I don't believe in God as described in any human religious scripture or religion. Nobody knows who or what God is, or if there is such a thing. Anyone who claims to know is wrong... or crazy... or both...

that's my position...

we don't know there is a god... it's not right to say there is one, and not right to say there isn't.

[Agathon]

An easy question to answer.

If pantheism is true but I have no evidence that it is true, then yes.

If pantheism is true and I have sufficient evidence that it's true, then no.

But it's a moot point: pantheism is ridiculous.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Sava
I don't believe in God as described in any human religious scripture or religion. Nobody knows who or what God is, or if there is such a thing. Anyone who claims to know is wrong... or crazy... or both...

that's my position...

we don't know there is a god... it's not right to say there is one, and not right to say there isn't.

Actually, in the absence of evidence, the negative would generally be held to be correct (hey, we don't know there aren't any elves living on the surface of electrons, so we can't tell you they aren't ).

[Agathon]

It's simply impossible, on the traditional understanding of God as an infinite being, for finite beings such as ourselves to be able to investigate reality to prove or disprove the existence of such a being.

Agnosticism is the rational response.

In any case, if God really existed, it would be appalling if he said the things that the fundies say.

[Verto]

Originally posted by skywalker


Actually, in the absence of evidence, the negative would generally be held to be correct (hey, we don't know there aren't any elves living on the surface of electrons, so we can't tell you they aren't ).

Yeah, actually we do.

The last of the Elves died in the Great Battle of the Mammoth Unicorns.

[Kuciwalker]

If we have no way to prove or disprove his existance, doesn't Occam's razor say we should assume he doesn't exist? Again, just because I can't prove little green elves don't live on the surface of electrons doesn't mean I shouldn't assume they don't.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by skywalker
If we have no way to prove or disprove his existance, doesn't Occam's razor say we should assume he doesn't exist? Again, just because I can't prove little green elves don't live on the surface of electrons doesn't mean I shouldn't assume they don't.

Ockham's razor is a methological principle (although I'm a pragmatist, so it goes further than that for me) not necessarily an indicator of the truth.

There's a disanalogy between the cases. We have good reasons to believe that there are no little elves on the surfaces of electrons because it doesn't cohere with the rest of scientific theory.

God is different. God is supposed to transcend the physical universe so scientific laws do not apply in his/her/its case.

[Kuciwalker]

There's a disanalogy between the cases. We have good reasons to believe that there are no little elves on the surfaces of electrons because it doesn't cohere with the rest of scientific theory.

What if the good little elves don't affect the electron and we can't detect them

[Agathon]

Originally posted by skywalker

There's a disanalogy between the cases. We have good reasons to believe that there are no little elves on the surfaces of electrons because it doesn't cohere with the rest of scientific theory.

What if the good little elves don't affect the electron and we can't detect them

But we know what elves are and what sorts of things minds are and what is required biologically for something to be a mind, and it just doesn't follow that elves could be that small and still have minds. Are we going to say they have hands and feet? What are those made out of? Then it just gets ridiculous.

[Kuciwalker]

Then it just gets ridiculous.

Kinda like god

[Agathon]

Originally posted by skywalker

Then it just gets ridiculous.

Kinda like god

No, because by hypothesis God transcends the universe. Therefore he is not subject to its laws. Saying that elves exist within the universe requires that they exist in accordance with scientific laws.

It's appropriate to make scientific objections to claims made about entities within the physical universe, but not about things that people think of as transcendent.

Look, I'm not one for believing in God, but we have to be fair. There's no point in accusing theists of being irrational if our side is going to cheat (not that we really need to).

[Kuciwalker]

No, because by hypothesis God transcends the universe. Therefore he is not subject to its laws.

Wait - how does he "transcend" the universe? As I stated before, the universe is the set of all that exists. Therefore, if god is not an element in that set, he does not exist.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by skywalker

No, because by hypothesis God transcends the universe. Therefore he is not subject to its laws.

Wait - how does he "transcend" the universe? As I stated before, the universe is the set of all that exists. Therefore, if god is not an element in that set, he does not exist.

That's a sophistical argument. Most theists would not agree with your premise that the universe comprises all existents. When they talk about the universe they mean the universe as understood by the physical sciences. They don't believe that this is everything that exists, because they believe that a Deity created it and its laws.

Presumably, if God had absolute freedom in creating it, he could have made physical laws whatever he liked. The existence of miracles requires the suspension of physical laws and thus outside interference.

Most theists conceive of God as a transcendent being - i.e. not limited by the laws of the physical universe, nor being located anywhere in it. You can't just beg the question against them.