Reasons Why God "can" Not Exist And Why All Relegions Are Inherently Flawed

Started by Shakyamunison7 pages
Originally posted by leonheartmm
ans: a living universe with an alien conciousness 😄

That would be correct from the outside looking at the universe. But if you were inside the universe, like we are, you would be part of that alien consciousness.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
ans: a living universe with an alien conciousness 😄

Which is also part of what we could call god... 😛

Originally posted by debbiejo
Which is also part of what we could call god... 😛

but then this god would neither be omnipotent nor be omniscient.

True, and I don't have a problem with that.......It would be omni present in all things.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
but then this god would neither be omnipotent nor be omniscient.

Why is that required? That also means that God would be both good and evil sense good and evil exist in the universe.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Why is that required? That also means that God would be both good and evil sense good and evil exist in the universe.

its not regquired, not really, but then the god wouldnt be GOD at all. just sumthin with things higher than it is.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
its not regquired, not really, but then the god wouldnt be GOD at all. .
Why?

Originally posted by debbiejo
Why?

because it defeats the very purpose of what we attribute to GOD, all powerful, all knowing, all seeing. it then just becomes sumthin highre than YOU, not THE highest. im not sayin it cant happen, just sayin that we shudnt call it GOD then.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
im not sayin it cant happen, just sayin that we shudnt call it GOD then.
Why?

Originally posted by leonheartmm
because it defeats the very purpose of what we attribute to GOD, all powerful, all knowing, all seeing. it then just becomes sumthin highre than YOU, not THE highest. im not sayin it cant happen, just sayin that we shudnt call it GOD then.

True, but if there was nothing higher and you were connected to this entity, then it would be responsible for your existence.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
True, but if there was nothing higher and you were connected to this entity, then it would be responsible for your existence.

the very fact that your brain allows for the possibility{mine anyway} of there existing sumthing higher than such an entity is reason enough to believe that its not the highest{this is gettin phylosophical}

Originally posted by leonheartmm
the very fact that your brain allows for the possibility{mine anyway} of there existing sumthing higher than such an entity is reason enough to believe that its not the highest{this is gettin phylosophical}

That is why I call God the universe +. 😄

Religions are flawed, though god is not. It just is what it is. People have put restrains and inconsistence on IT.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Religions are flawed, though god is not. It just is what it is. People have put restrains and inconsistence on IT.

All religions are made by humans.

Really? 😑 ........Ohhhhhhhhh..LOL

Originally posted by debbiejo
Really? 😑 ........Ohhhhhhhhh..LOL

I was translating. Some people can't understand you. 😆 jk

Reasons Why Using Logic to Prove/Disprove God's Existence is Flawed

1. I disagree with the basic (unspoken) premise that the existence/nonexistence of God is something which can be resolved through reasoning. IMO, since our Minds are not omnipotent, how can human reasoning possibly come to some definitive conclusion regarding omnipotence? What one ends up with is paradox.

2. Mind (logical/symbolic reasoning) can not prove/disprove the existence of spirit, anymore than the physical senses can prove/disprove the existence of logical/symbolic reasoning.

For example: both a person and a mouse can see the mathematical symbols in a calculus text, but only the person can mentally "see" the higher level of meaning behind the symbols. The mouse will never "see" that higher level.

If it helps, use neutral terms: As Level I can not grasp Level II, Level II can not grasp Level III.

3. Something of 2-dimensions can not adequately describe a 3 (or higher)-dimensional entity. If you see a circular shadow, how do you know if it represents a sphere, a cone or a cylinder? The only way to know is to directly perceive the 3-dimentional entity.

Mind is 2D trying to resolve a 3D entity when all it sees is the shadow.

I'm fresh outta fresh wording jerry

Re: Reasons Why Using Logic to Prove/Disprove God's Existence is Flawed

Originally posted by Mindship
1. I disagree with the basic (unspoken) premise that the existence/nonexistence of God is something which can be resolved through reasoning. IMO, since our Minds are not omnipotent, how can human reasoning possibly come to some definitive conclusion regarding omnipotence? What one ends up with is paradox.

2. Mind (logical/symbolic reasoning) can not prove/disprove the existence of spirit, anymore than the physical senses can prove/disprove the existence of logical/symbolic reasoning.

For example: both a person and a mouse can see the mathematical symbols in a calculus text, but only the person can mentally "see" the higher level of meaning behind the symbols. The mouse will never "see" that higher level.

If it helps, use neutral terms: As Level I can not grasp Level II, Level II can not grasp Level III.

3. Something of 2-dimensions can not adequately describe a 3 (or higher)-dimensional entity. If you see a circular shadow, how do you know if it represents a sphere, a cone or a cylinder? The only way to know is to directly perceive the 3-dimentional entity.

Mind is 2D trying to resolve a 3D entity when all it sees is the shadow.

I'm fresh outta fresh wording jerry

There is one thing that over comes all of this, a leap of faith. A two dimensional being can believe there is a three dimensional being, and understand that entity as best as they can. However, they can never truly understand. This only becomes a problem when they begin to believe their inferior understanding and draw conclusions that are paradoxal. Up this by a couple of dimensions and you can see how we get to were we are today.

Probably God cant be solved thorugh reasoning, as it is beyond logic, but note that every paradox have self references in it, like : "Could God lift a stone that even he cannot lift it?", "Can God kill himself?", "Can God create another omnipotent God?". Also note that the last paradox is not really a self reference but it makes reference to a "God" being.

Now if you say that God omnipotence/omniscience exist only relatively to us, all contradictions will be eliminated as every paradox have self references to God in it, or references to a God being. What am I saying is that the concept of omnipotence/omniscience is only valid below the level of God, so it cannot be applied to God himself, or any other hyphotethical God.

God is only omnipotent in this physical reality which he created. Omnipotence would be a consequence of being greater than this physical reality where we exist in. Omnipotence is only real to those inside that reality. The situation is analogous to an history that you imagine in your head. For the characters of your history, your imagination is omnipotent as you can imagine whatever you want to, and you are omniscient since all events must be imagined by you. But outside your imagination you are not omnipotent. What means that no paradoxes can be made from that, and what was to be expected since the situation used in the analogy is real, and it would be weird to see paradoxes in a real situation.