| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Mekkala" |
| Date: |
12 Dec 2003 10:00:06 AM |
| Object: |
Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
I'm sure many of you remember Douglas Adams' proof of the nonexistence
of God from the existance of the Babel fish. For those who have never
read the "increasing inaccurately named Hitchhiker trilogy"... to
paraphrase:
The Babel fish is a fish that you put in your ear and allows you to
understand anything that's said to you, in any language. The Babel fish
feeds on the thought waves of the person speaking, and its bodily waste
is thought waves understandable by your own brain.
Something so undeniably useful and perfectly designed as the Babel fish
*couldn't* have come about by chance, thereby proving that God exists.
But God cannot prove his existence, for proof denies faith, and without
faith, God is nothing -- and thus the Babel fish proves God nonexistant,
and God vanishes in a *poof* of illogic.
That's Doug Adams' proof. It relies, more or less, on the idea that God
is created and sustained by faith.
Now... if God is created and sustained by faith, he cannot prove he
exists, or else he will die, since there will be no more faith to
sustain him. However, doesn't that make Armageddon impossible? Well,
not necessarily. Armageddon could be the work of men, in which case God
might never need to reveal himself.
However, after Armageddon comes Judgement Day, at which time *everyone*
will know God exists, and without faith, God will die, Heaven, Hell, and
the Judgement Seat will disappear, and we'll all vanish into oblivion,
which is what the atheists have been saying all along, making atheism
right even if God *does* exist! :D
....
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really good answer by
a friend of mine to the question of whether free will and omniscience
are compatible. He said that God could be omniscient is a sense by
knowing every possibility and knowing what will happen in any case --
but not knowing which possibility will happen until it does. I suspect
not many theists would agree with this, but when did theists ever agree
with each other anyway? :)
I disagree, obviously, since I don't believe God exists, but you have to
admit it solves a whole lot of thorny problems if you're really that
determined to believe in God.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 10:56:35 AM |
|
|
"Mekkala" <joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really
good answer by a friend of mine to the question of
whether free will and omniscience are compatible.
He said that God could be omniscient is a sense by
knowing every possibility and knowing what will
happen in any case -- but not knowing which possibility
will happen until it does.
Unimaginative, at best.
Step outside of time and everything happens at once. There
is no "future" and no "past." The results of every action
occur with the action, no matter if the "time" span between
the two is so great that a mere mortal could never glimpse
the connection.
Yes, it's difficult for us to imagine such an existence, such
a perspective, but we're not supreme beings. The fact is,
time & space are part of our universe, subjects of natural
law, and to step outside of our natural universe is to step
outside of (beyond) both.
It is only our perception of linear time that allows us to
experience a gap between our birth and our death. Escape
the limits of our linear time -- limits never imposed on
this "God" -- and we are long dead even as we are yet to
be born.
It is impossible for a supernatural God -- not restricted by
our universe -- to not see *Exactly* how you spent your
life, your every action & how those actions impacted upon
others even centuries after your death. What's more, all of
this would have been laid out before the supreme being at
the moment of creation. This is an inescapable fact of existing
outside the natural universe.
.
|
|
|
| User: "William Barwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 05:54:10 PM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
"Mekkala" <joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really
good answer by a friend of mine to the question of
whether free will and omniscience are compatible.
He said that God could be omniscient is a sense by
knowing every possibility and knowing what will
happen in any case -- but not knowing which possibility
will happen until it does.
Unimaginative, at best.
Step outside of time and everything happens at once. There
is no "future" and no "past." The results of every action
occur with the action, no matter if the "time" span between
the two is so great that a mere mortal could never glimpse
the connection.
Yes, it's difficult for us to imagine such an existence, such
a perspective, but we're not supreme beings. The fact is,
time & space are part of our universe, subjects of natural
law, and to step outside of our natural universe is to step
outside of (beyond) both.
It is only our perception of linear time that allows us to
experience a gap between our birth and our death. Escape
the limits of our linear time -- limits never imposed on
this "God" -- and we are long dead even as we are yet to
be born.
It is impossible for a supernatural God -- not restricted by
our universe -- to not see *Exactly* how you spent your
life, your every action & how those actions impacted upon
others even centuries after your death. What's more, all of
this would have been laid out before the supreme being at
the moment of creation. This is an inescapable fact of existing
outside the natural universe.
It gets worse.
A Universe where everything is now, means everything, including all
of god's interactions at all parts of the Universe exist now.
Since eveything thus exists, there is no free will.
Free will implies ability to make choice, that is cause changes, and a
Universe where all was is and will be is at once removes all
free will from the Universe.
The facts god's inteactions with the whole Universe are,
means he cannot be said to be beyond and outside the Universe.
And since all is at once, always was and is and will be, there cannot be a
begining to such a Universe, any claims god created such a Universe fail
too. Such a Universe must have always been as it is.
--
Bush! Chimp or chump?
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 07:43:32 PM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
"Mekkala" <joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really
good answer by a friend of mine to the question of
whether free will and omniscience are compatible.
He said that God could be omniscient is a sense by
knowing every possibility and knowing what will
happen in any case -- but not knowing which possibility
will happen until it does.
Unimaginative, at best.
Step outside of time and everything happens at once. There
is no "future" and no "past." The results of every action
occur with the action, no matter if the "time" span between
the two is so great that a mere mortal could never glimpse
the connection.
"Step outside onf time?" What exactly does that mean? Where would you
"step" too? How could you "do" anything without time to do it in?
Yes, it's difficult for us to imagine such an existence, such
a perspective, but we're not supreme beings. The fact is,
time & space are part of our universe, subjects of natural
law, and to step outside of our natural universe is to step
outside of (beyond) both.
It's difficult for us to imagine, because we have no experience with such a
realm, no evidence that such exists, no reason to believe such a realm
exists except the desire of a few theists who can't find anywhere in the
universe to put god.
It is only our perception of linear time that allows us to
experience a gap between our birth and our death. Escape
the limits of our linear time -- limits never imposed on
this "God" -- and we are long dead even as we are yet to
be born.
Do you have _any reason_ beyond your own hope that somewhere, somehow,
despite all the best evidence, that there's a corner for God to hide in?
It is impossible for a supernatural God -- not restricted by
our universe -- to not see *Exactly* how you spent your
life, your every action & how those actions impacted upon
others even centuries after your death. What's more, all of
this would have been laid out before the supreme being at
the moment of creation. This is an inescapable fact of existing
outside the natural universe.
Existence is a concept that only applies in the natural universe. The
natural universe is by definition all that is. If god is, he is a subset of
{all that is}. There is no "outside", only those things that exist and
those things that do not.
You are making up nonsense in the hope that God will come out of it, but
there is no evidence, no reason to believe in any of your contradictory
constructs.
--
Enkidu
hhe1mxo02@sneakemail.com
PGP KeyID 0xC5FEABDF
-----
Of all things, good sense is the most fairly distributed: everyone
thinks he is so well supplied with it that even those who are the
hardest to satisfy in every other respect never desire more of it than
they already have.
René Descartes, Discours de la Méthode. 1637.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 11:59:39 PM |
|
|
"Enkidu" <hhe1mxo02@sneakemail.com> wrote
"Step outside onf time?" What exactly does that mean?
I was speaking figuratively. If somewhere in our definition of
God we find room for "Supreme, all powerfull supernatural
being" than "He" isn't confined to linear time the way us
products of the natural universe are.
Where would you "step" too?
I made no suggestion, but "Heaven" is what the Christians usually
suggests.
How could you "do" anything without time to do it in?
How would I know? I'm a mortal myself...
Yes, it's difficult for us to imagine such an existence, such
a perspective, but we're not supreme beings. The fact is,
time & space are part of our universe, subjects of natural
law, and to step outside of our natural universe is to step
outside of (beyond) both.
It's difficult for us to imagine, because we have no experience
with such a realm, no evidence that such exists, no reason to
believe such a realm exists except the desire of a few theists
who can't find anywhere in the universe to put god.
Did you miss something, or what?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "JPG" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 03:14:01 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 11:56:35 -0500, "JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Mekkala" <joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really
good answer by a friend of mine to the question of
whether free will and omniscience are compatible.
He said that God could be omniscient is a sense by
knowing every possibility and knowing what will
happen in any case -- but not knowing which possibility
will happen until it does.
Unimaginative, at best.
Step outside of time and everything happens at once.
That is effectively what happens at the event horizon of a black hole,
all of time outside the horizon is squashed into an infinitesimal.
JPG
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 11:36:44 AM |
|
|
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach JTEM:
It is impossible for a supernatural God -- not restricted by
our universe -- to not see *Exactly* how you spent your
life, your every action & how those actions impacted upon
others even centuries after your death. What's more, all of
this would have been laid out before the supreme being at
the moment of creation. This is an inescapable fact of existing
outside the natural universe.
Which, of course, debunks the need for a "Judgement Day".
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
______________
The fool says in his heart "there is no God".
The wise man says it to the world.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nakas" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 12:21:32 PM |
|
|
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really good answer by
a friend of mine to the question of whether free will and omniscience
are compatible. He said that God could be omniscient is a sense by
knowing every possibility and knowing what will happen in any case --
but not knowing which possibility will happen until it does. I suspect
not many theists would agree with this, but when did theists ever agree
with each other anyway? :)
So if I flip a coin, then this all-knowing God can tell me it will land on
either heads or tails, but he can't tell me which one? Boy, paint me
unimpressed. God of the obvious is more like it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 12:26:38 PM |
|
|
On 12 Dec 2003, "Nakas" <nakas@comcast.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:MGnCb.374655$275.1215754@attbi_s53:
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really good answer
by a friend of mine to the question of whether free will and
omniscience are compatible. He said that God could be omniscient is
a sense by knowing every possibility and knowing what will happen in
any case -- but not knowing which possibility will happen until it
does. I suspect not many theists would agree with this, but when did
theists ever agree with each other anyway? :)
So if I flip a coin, then this all-knowing God can tell me it will
land on either heads or tails, but he can't tell me which one? Boy,
paint me unimpressed. God of the obvious is more like it.
Yes, that's a simplistic summary of it... but more specifically, God can
tell you what are all the possible future states of the universe if it
ends up heads, and which are the possible future states of the universe
if it ends up tails. In other words, it's not just God knowing that it
could be either one, but he also knows what all possible results of
either possibility are.
Granted, that greatly waters down the omniscience thing, but it's the
only way I can see that omniscience, in any form, and free will could be
compatible.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 12:52:45 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns944F7EB90D8FEMekkala@199.45.49.11>,
joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com says...
On 12 Dec 2003, "Nakas" <nakas@comcast.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:MGnCb.374655$275.1215754@attbi_s53:
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really good answer
by a friend of mine to the question of whether free will and
omniscience are compatible. He said that God could be omniscient is
a sense by knowing every possibility and knowing what will happen in
any case -- but not knowing which possibility will happen until it
does. I suspect not many theists would agree with this, but when did
theists ever agree with each other anyway? :)
So if I flip a coin, then this all-knowing God can tell me it will
land on either heads or tails, but he can't tell me which one? Boy,
paint me unimpressed. God of the obvious is more like it.
Yes, that's a simplistic summary of it... but more specifically, God can
tell you what are all the possible future states of the universe if it
ends up heads,
Yes, for example, he can tell you that if it came up heads then when you
flip it again it will come up, "heads or tails" :). Seriously though, I
see what you're saying. But this is not omniscience. It is something
far less. True omniscience is incompatible with freewill, as this sort
of approach tends to concede. They are only still calling it
"omniscience" because that's one of the properties that their god is
supposed to have, even though it is strictly impossible, given other
assumptions.
--
____________________________________________________
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 01:02:23 PM |
|
|
On 12 Dec 2003, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:MPG.1a43bc6a36b17dc3989759@news.cis.dfn.de:
In article <Xns944F7EB90D8FEMekkala@199.45.49.11>,
joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com says...
On 12 Dec 2003, "Nakas" <nakas@comcast.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:MGnCb.374655$275.1215754@attbi_s53:
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really good
answer by a friend of mine to the question of whether free will
and omniscience are compatible. He said that God could be
omniscient is a sense by knowing every possibility and knowing
what will happen in any case -- but not knowing which possibility
will happen until it does. I suspect not many theists would agree
with this, but when did theists ever agree with each other anyway?
:)
So if I flip a coin, then this all-knowing God can tell me it will
land on either heads or tails, but he can't tell me which one?
Boy, paint me unimpressed. God of the obvious is more like it.
Yes, that's a simplistic summary of it... but more specifically, God
can tell you what are all the possible future states of the universe
if it ends up heads,
Yes, for example, he can tell you that if it came up heads then when
you flip it again it will come up, "heads or tails" :). Seriously
though, I see what you're saying. But this is not omniscience. It is
something far less. True omniscience is incompatible with freewill,
as this sort of approach tends to concede. They are only still
calling it "omniscience" because that's one of the properties that
their god is supposed to have, even though it is strictly impossible,
given other assumptions.
Also, this is why I said that most theists would probably object, since
it means their God doesn't have true free will, which is something they
don't want to admit.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 01:01:27 PM |
|
|
On 12 Dec 2003, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:MPG.1a43bc6a36b17dc3989759@news.cis.dfn.de:
In article <Xns944F7EB90D8FEMekkala@199.45.49.11>,
joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com says...
On 12 Dec 2003, "Nakas" <nakas@comcast.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:MGnCb.374655$275.1215754@attbi_s53:
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really good
answer by a friend of mine to the question of whether free will
and omniscience are compatible. He said that God could be
omniscient is a sense by knowing every possibility and knowing
what will happen in any case -- but not knowing which possibility
will happen until it does. I suspect not many theists would agree
with this, but when did theists ever agree with each other anyway?
:)
So if I flip a coin, then this all-knowing God can tell me it will
land on either heads or tails, but he can't tell me which one?
Boy, paint me unimpressed. God of the obvious is more like it.
Yes, that's a simplistic summary of it... but more specifically, God
can tell you what are all the possible future states of the universe
if it ends up heads,
Yes, for example, he can tell you that if it came up heads then when
you flip it again it will come up, "heads or tails" :). Seriously
though, I see what you're saying. But this is not omniscience. It is
something far less. True omniscience is incompatible with freewill,
as this sort of approach tends to concede. They are only still
calling it "omniscience" because that's one of the properties that
their god is supposed to have, even though it is strictly impossible,
given other assumptions.
Well, yes, obviously. But from the standpoint of this theist friend of
mine, it's better than conceding that we have no free will at all, or
that God doesn't know anything more than we do. This way, God still
gets to have "special" knowledge while allowing us free will. It's kind
of a compromise.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Makohin" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
13 Dec 2003 08:22:01 AM |
|
|
In article <Xns944F65E17261BMekkala@199.45.49.11>,
Mekkala <joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
[...]
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really good answer by
a friend of mine to the question of whether free will and omniscience
are compatible. He said that God could be omniscient is a sense by
knowing every possibility and knowing what will happen in any case --
but not knowing which possibility will happen until it does. I suspect
not many theists would agree with this, but when did theists ever agree
with each other anyway? :)
[...]
The Judeo-Christian god is the ultimate deity by defintion, and there
is nothing that can override him. And that's the rub, because it
appears that if a petty mortal can know something that a god does not,
such as which decision will be made, then that trumps the god on some
level, which cannot be.
This sort of form-fitting has been going on for ages, trying to
reconcile logic with ones' belief in deities. The same line of
thinking had Christians opposing the theory of continental drift when
it was first proposed, because if it was true, then that would mean
nature has the ability to change what god had created independently of
god's will, and that would mean there is force that can ovverride god,
and that cannot possibly be because god is the ultimate decision-maker
and the ultimate definer of reality.
At some point, Occam's Razor should kick in and make the simplest case
obvious. Imagine the world as you know it, and imagine that a god does
not exist. How would it be different? The answer is that it wouldn't.
Prayers would sometimes be "granted", with the same probability of
random chance. "Miracles" would still happen, with the same
probability of random chance (e.g., survivign a horrific auto accident
that "should" have been fatal). Highschool physics would still be
beyond the grasp of many, and the not understood would still be
chalked up to magic by some, and gods would be invented all over again
in the minds of those who cannot accept that some things can be beyond
their understanding without magic making them so.
-Steve Makohin | Reply to
| (hotmail acct is spam catcher)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 12:48:44 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns944F65E17261BMekkala@199.45.49.11>,
joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com says...
I disagree, obviously, since I don't believe God exists, but you have to
admit it solves a whole lot of thorny problems if you're really that
determined to believe in God.
I don't think that it solves the problem. I know that the numbers one
through six will come up when I roll a die. IOW, I know all the
possibilities. But without knowing which one will come up, that
knowledge is effectively useless. If all their "omniscient" god knows is
all the possibilities and not which ones are actual, then he would hardly
be in any better position than we are.
--
____________________________________________________
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 01:00:13 PM |
|
|
On 12 Dec 2003, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:MPG.1a43bb78d7fa25ad989758@news.cis.dfn.de:
In article <Xns944F65E17261BMekkala@199.45.49.11>,
joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com says...
I disagree, obviously, since I don't believe God exists, but you have
to admit it solves a whole lot of thorny problems if you're really
that determined to believe in God.
I don't think that it solves the problem. I know that the numbers one
through six will come up when I roll a die. IOW, I know all the
possibilities. But without knowing which one will come up, that
knowledge is effectively useless. If all their "omniscient" god knows
is all the possibilities and not which ones are actual, then he would
hardly be in any better position than we are.
The knowledge isn't necessarily useless... If you know what
possibilities are most likely to bring about a desired result, you can
try to influence the possibilities so as to increase the chance of
acheiving the result.
But it's not *true* omnipotence, it's a rather watered-down form.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
| User: "ArWeGod" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 09:06:16 PM |
|
|
"Mekkala" <joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:Xns944F846B28493Mekkala@199.45.49.11...
On 12 Dec 2003, quibbler <quibbler247@yahoo.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:MPG.1a43bb78d7fa25ad989758@news.cis.dfn.de:
In article <Xns944F65E17261BMekkala@199.45.49.11>,
joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com says...
I disagree, obviously, since I don't believe God exists, but you have
to admit it solves a whole lot of thorny problems if you're really
that determined to believe in God.
I don't think that it solves the problem. I know that the numbers one
through six will come up when I roll a die. IOW, I know all the
possibilities. But without knowing which one will come up, that
knowledge is effectively useless. If all their "omniscient" god knows
is all the possibilities and not which ones are actual, then he would
hardly be in any better position than we are.
The knowledge isn't necessarily useless... If you know what
possibilities are most likely to bring about a desired result, you can
try to influence the possibilities so as to increase the chance of
acheiving the result.
But it's not *true* omnipotence, it's a rather watered-down form.
Essentially, that's like saying there are infinite Universes and that
Reality splits into different timelines every time you make a decision. Like
the TV show "Sliders".
So, does God just sit at the end of the best one? Or are there infinite
Gods, one for every time I pick chicken over fish, or steak over swordfish.
Wait, I'll take the swordfish! <Pop!> No, the Mahi-Mahi. <Pop!>
--
ArWePowerful
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 11:58:17 PM |
|
|
"ArWeGod" <ArWeGod?@sbcglobal.net> wrote
Essentially, that's like saying there are infinite Universes
and that Reality splits into different timelines every time
you make a decision. Like the TV show "Sliders".
I picked up on that as well. I have to wonder if it was a
deliberate attempt to fuse religion with theoretical physics,
or if it was an interesting coincidence.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "386sx" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
12 Dec 2003 10:23:05 PM |
|
|
ArWeGod writes:
Mekkala wrote:
quibbler wrote:
joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com says...
I disagree, obviously, since I don't believe God exists, but you have
to admit it solves a whole lot of thorny problems if you're really
that determined to believe in God.
I don't think that it solves the problem. I know that the numbers one
through six will come up when I roll a die. IOW, I know all the
possibilities. But without knowing which one will come up, that
knowledge is effectively useless. If all their "omniscient" god knows
is all the possibilities and not which ones are actual, then he would
hardly be in any better position than we are.
The knowledge isn't necessarily useless... If you know what possibilities
are most likely to bring about a desired result, you can try to influence
the possibilities so as to increase the chance of acheiving the result.
But it's not *true* omnipotence, it's a rather watered-down form.
Essentially, that's like saying there are infinite Universes and that
Reality splits into different timelines every time you make a
decision. Like the TV show "Sliders".
So, does God just sit at the end of the best one? Or are there infinite
Gods, one for every time I pick chicken over fish, or steak over
swordfish. Wait, I'll take the swordfish! <Pop!> No, the
Mahi-Mahi. <Pop!>
Or, one God watching over infinite histories with no particular reason for
any sentiment as to which timeline is the "best one." From his perspective
(the sum of all timelines) he knows, as we do, all the possibilities before
quibbler rolls the die. For God all the sides of the die turn up on each
roll, but from each of our respective limited vantage points, five out of
six quibblers go bust.
--
"If you believe what you like in the Gospel, and reject what you like - it
is not the Gospel you believe, but yourselves." - St. Agustine
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
13 Dec 2003 12:24:26 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:00:06 GMT, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> posted in alt.atheism:
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really good answer by
a friend of mine to the question of whether free will and omniscience
are compatible. He said that God could be omniscient is a sense by
knowing every possibility and knowing what will happen in any case --
but not knowing which possibility will happen until it does. I suspect
not many theists would agree with this, but when did theists ever agree
with each other anyway? :)
I disagree, obviously, since I don't believe God exists, but you have to
admit it solves a whole lot of thorny problems if you're really that
determined to believe in God.
The only thing it doesn't solve is omniscience, since that particular
god is missing certain knowledge - to wit, WHICH possibility is going
to happen.
--
"To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains
premature today."
- Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "386sx" |
|
| Title: Re: Proof of atheism! (Facetious) |
13 Dec 2003 01:14:07 AM |
|
|
Al Klein writes:
Mekkala wrote:
On a rather more serious note, I recently heard a really good answer by a
friend of mine to the question of whether free will and omniscience are
compatible. He said that God could be omniscient is a sense by knowing
every possibility and knowing what will happen in any case -- but not
knowing which possibility will happen until it does. I suspect not many
theists would agree with this, but when did theists ever agree with each
other anyway? :)
I disagree, obviously, since I don't believe God exists, but you have to
admit it solves a whole lot of thorny problems if you're really that
determined to believe in God.
The only thing it doesn't solve is omniscience, since that particular
god is missing certain knowledge - to wit, WHICH possibility is going
to happen.
All of them happen!
--
"If you believe what you like in the Gospel, and reject what you like - it
is not the Gospel you believe, but yourselves." - St. Agustine
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
