philosophy about god

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by cinch
The way I look at it is this:

If there is a "being" outside of our existence, outside of our universe... it ain't bound by the laws of said universe. It is, by definition, everything one has ever seen and nothing one could ever imagine at the same time, because these concepts of 'everything' and 'nothing' are simply states of being, or conceiving, in our universe.

Good, evil, happy sad... none of that factors into it. Anything outside of our existence is unknowable. If you follow most religions to their "end", if you will, that's usually what the message is.

So why alter your life in an uncomfortable way to attempt to please a "being" that no one can even conceive of, or know? That's just silly talk!

Well, given the definition of universe (the set of all that exists), if God isn't within the universe, then God doesn't exist and wrt the "laws" of said universe, one of those "laws" would be that God was omnipotent.

Plus, I'm not assuming outside our universe. I'm really talking about the philosophical implications of omnipotence.

[Kuciwalker]

I think I need to clarify something: the first part of my proof (or random musing), which is the important part, is NOT TALKING ABOUT GOD. I am merely referring to an omnipotent being. It could be you, me, or for that matter Michael Jackson - so no religious dogma about "God" applies. Only in the second part do I apply these conclusions to the christian God.

[Ben Kenobi]

Skywalker:

do not have any reference points to compare,

Any way around this point?

[Ben Kenobi]

So why do I need to wait for His return? He's already here.

Now we are back to the Trinity again.

God, in the person of the Holy Spirit is here right now on Earth. God, in the person of Jesus Christ, is not. When Christ returns, we will be taken up to heaven to be with God the Father, not just in spirit, but in a very real physical sense.

We will no longer have our corruptible, sinful flesh after the resurrection.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Skywalker:

do not have any reference points to compare,

Any way around this point?

What do you mean by a "reference point"? Is there some way that my definition of omnipotence (defining reality) is insufficient? In fact, "all-powerful" pretty much covers it.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
All we can say is that an essential quality of God must be omnipotence.

Why? I cannot recall anywhere in the bible that hints about this.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Another quality of God is sufficiency, as he is totally self-sufficient.

Again, this is unsupported by the bible IIRC.

[Snowflake]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Interesting. So do we need God in our lives at all?

Well the truth is that we might not need him in our lives at all, but it is better for the peace of mind to believe in him anyway, for this way we could be a little bit more sure about that unpredicatable fate.

Well, given the definition of universe (the set of all that exists), if God isn't within the universe, then God doesn't exist and wrt the "laws" of said universe, one of those "laws" would be that God was omnipotent.

Plus, I'm not assuming outside our universe. I'm really talking about the philosophical implications of omnipotence.

You know the fact that we are not aware of something "exist" within the "universe" that are defined by our own awareness doesn't mean that something doesn't exist at all. We all know that there had been a time when people thought that the earth was the center of the "universe" and that they didn't know that Mars exist but we all know that Mars did exist at that time don't we.

Think about ants. They kind of live in a two dimentional world. They eat, sleep, work, fight, and play. There might be one ant that is very intelligent and he found out if he travels toward one direction he would eventually come back to his starting point. He even realized that their universe (the surface of earth) is without border but still limited. Another ants had attempted to climb up to a tree and looked at their world from an entirely different perspective.

However, there are things that they cannot understand. When a two year old accidently stepped on their nest they didn't know what had caused that disaster. When he saw the ants and picked up an ant and study it for a while, the ants didn't know how could one ant mysteriously disappear and reappear. They attibute all these to be miracles. Some ants had seen one of the child's foot, others had seen one of his fingers. They believed that they had seen god. They belived that he is omnipotent.

Later, the child grew up and lost his interest in ants. The ants were lost. They started to debate whether the god really exist and what would happen when he returns. But within their limited universe that is defined by their own awareness, how could even the smartest ant understand what is happening in the three-dimentional world?

Human beings are like ants that are living in a three-dimentional world. How could even the most intelligent of us understand what could be happening in a higher dimentional world? How could we ever find the conclusion about whether a god exist or not in an universe that is greater than our own awareness?

[Kuciwalker]

You know the fact that we are not aware of something "exist" within the "universe" that are defined by our own awareness doesn't mean that something doesn't exist at all. We all know that there had been a time when people thought that the earth was the center of the "universe" and that they didn't know that Mars exist but we all know that Mars did exist at that time don't we.
Think about ants. They kind of live in a two dimentional world. They eat, sleep, work, fight, and play. There might be one ant that is very intelligent and he found out if he travels toward one direction he would eventually come back to his starting point. He even realized that their universe (the surface of earth) is without border but still limited. Another ants had attempted to climb up to a tree and looked at their world from an entirely different perspective.
However, there are things that they cannot understand. When a two year old accidently stepped on their nest they didn't know what had caused that disaster. When he saw the ants and picked up an ant and study it for a while, the ants didn't know how could one ant mysteriously disappear and reappear. They attibute all these to be miracles. Some ants had seen one of the child's foot, others had seen one of his fingers. They believed that they had seen god. They belived that he is omnipotent.
Later, the child grew up and lost his interest in ants. The ants were lost. They started to debate whether the god really exist and what would happen when he returns. But within their limited universe that is defined by their own awareness, how could even the smartest ant understand what is happening in the three-dimentional world?
Human beings are like ants that are living in a three-dimentional world. How could even the most intelligent of us understand what could be happening in a higher dimentional world? How could we ever find the conclusion about whether a god exist or not in an universe that is greater than our own awareness?

What's your point? I'm not talking about our understanding of the specifics of the universe, I'm talking about the general definition of the universe - the set of all that exists. Anything outside that set, by definition, does not exist. However, I never said god was outside that set (even though I believe him to be, that isn't the point of this thread). "Universe" here doesn't mean "contiguous region of spacetime".

[Kuciwalker]

(getting OT)

Well the truth is that we might not need him in our lives at all, but it is better for the peace of mind to believe in him anyway, for this way we could be a little bit more sure about that unpredicatable fate.

However, the fact that it would be personally beneficial to believe in god (not that I agree with that, but I won't dispute it here) does not mean that belief in god is actually correct.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by HongHu
You know the fact that we are not aware of something "exist" within the "universe" that are defined by our own awareness doesn't mean that something doesn't exist at all.

Sure, though cinch started with the assumption that this god is outside of our universe...

Originally posted by HongHu
We all know that there had been a time when people thought that the earth was the center of the "universe" and that they didn't know that Mars exist but we all know that Mars did exist at that time don't we.

Hm, even the ancient Greeks had their own heliocentric theory, which was also inaccurate, but was more accurate than Ptolemy's geocentric system. Ptolemy's system was propped up by the Church for obvious reasons.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Agathon
When I've had ten pints, I'm omniimpotent.

[monkspider]

When you realize the implications of omnipotence, you will find the answer to your own question, Sky.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by monkspider
When you realize the implications of omnipotence, you will find the answer to your own question, Sky.

Omnipotence is self-contradictory.

Simplest argument: can an omnipotent being make a rock so heavy that even it can't lift?

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by HongHu
Human beings are like ants that are living in a three-dimentional world. How could even the most intelligent of us understand what could be happening in a higher dimentional world? How could we ever find the conclusion about whether a god exist or not in an universe that is greater than our own awareness?

Then we evolve and extend our awareness.
Sometimes I wonder if we really understand, or if we only beleive we understand. Knowledge and Beliefs are, in working, almost the same (save for certainty).
Likewise, with perception, is there a way to know what crosses our mind's eye isn't a symptom of a mental disorder rather than reality?
How is it that we are certain of our emotions; chemically influenced as they are we may merely be being fed these emotions by implants.
And as for Logic? What causes us to be sure of causation, and implies that implications hold? A part of understanding as it is, Aristotle's Axioms are merely well-working beliefs.

Perhaps on a greater scale, How can we be sure of the sense of self, or the sense of existence? How can we know... at all?
The fact is, we can't. The Self, and indeed every concept we have, is a presumption and an approximation.
Thought in itself may be a fudge factor!
Now, to confuse it even more, attach an awareness to Reality (i.e. presume it is self-aware) and these confusions extend within it as well.

Now, with these flaws in knowledge, What if something were outside the confusions mentioned (i.e. it transcends awareness)?
For the life of me, I don't have a bloody clue what such a thing would be like!

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by HongHu
Human beings are like ants that are living in a three-dimentional world.

That remains to be seen...

Originally posted by HongHu
How could even the most intelligent of us understand what could be happening in a higher dimentional world? How could we ever find the conclusion about whether a god exist or not in an universe that is greater than our own awareness?

There are several problems with your argument. First and foremost, you are making an a posteriori counter to an a priori argument. Secondly, your argument looks depressingly like the "God of the Gaps" argument, which is generally not taken seriously. Thirdly, you are making several assumptions for your argument, which you have not provided any separate arguments for.