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

With regard to "warping" the language to make a point about God: one doesn't have to involve "God" to highlight the limits of language or our inability to resolve some apparent contradictions. Quantum mechanics does a nice job of it on the physical-sensory level (Level 1); and (eg) the Omnipotence Paradox does so on the mental-symbolic level (Level 2).

When encountering an apparent contradiction, you can come to one of two conclusions. Either you accept it as being "only apparent," as well as accepting our limits to adequately resolve it (as on Level 1); or you regard the contradiction as genuine, one which proves that the phenomenon in question ("omnipotence"😉 doesn't exist.

As for defining "God" or "proof": any substantial philosophical discussion dictates that terms be agreed upon beforehand, otherwise you and the other guy could be talking about (if on a very subtle level) 2 different things.

Thats where I think the problem is. It is not really a warping of the language, but we must define the terms first. The only motive that made the contradictions possible was choosing a convenient definition for "proof". When you choose a definition for "proof", you must remember that was only a choice. You don´t proved it, but you choose to believe in that definition. Exactly the same people who believe in God do, they belief in God.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
well i wrote this out in another thread n thought it was worthy of its own. here are some of the BASIC reasons why any relegion with an omnipotent god can not be right and are flawed at the very bases{the moral wrongs in the lesser details are not even important}. this is not anti relegious bashing, just the truth from my prespective which can not be denied, and has not been denied yet, i have listened to many arguments against my argument but none have been able to convince me that mine has any flaws or is not true{n im bein totally unbiased here} im just posting this so that every1 who follows organised relegion can see this and if possible give LOGICAL counterarguments{which i dont think its possible to give but i might be wrong}.

there are many problems with the very CONCEPTS of omnipotence/omniscience. if god is omnipotent than he is self sustaining, he neither needs nor wants. but then why would an omnipotent god need OR want to create the world/satan/angels or anythin let alone want people to pray to him. all will is in one way or another related to desire, if u will sumthing to happen or make it happen, its because u either WANT or NEED that thing to happen for whatever reason, but if god was all that there was omnipotent, he would not desire anything else and there would be no reason to create anythin else, even if sum1 does sumthin just for the heck of it, theres still desire behond it n and omnipotent god SHOULD be beyond any desire because there is nuthin MORE than himself, he is all. also the concept of omnipotence is flawed, if a god is all powerful that means that he can do ANYTHING, but anything also includes him being able to create another omnipotent god{for he can do ANYTHING} but if another omnipotent god exists, the very concept of all powerful omnipotence goes down the drain as it is only for ONE not two, secondly an omnipotent god COULD create an even more powerful being than himself{as he is omnipotent} and that also destroyes the concept. another thing an omnipotent god cud also kill himself if he wanted {as he is all powerful} but that too would destroy the concept and above all if he CANT or wont do these things than THAT TOO denies the concept of omnipotence as he would then not be ALL POWERFUL.
theres also a problem with omniscience{the ability to see and know all, past/present/future ad anythin and everythin else, material/spiritual and beyond. an omniscient god would KNOW what lied in his future n what actions he WOULD take but if that was true than the omniscient god would be RESTRICTED to doing only those things which would deny the concept of omnipotence of god. also people say that god has a choice to do whatever he wants n he is not limited{to say that his omniscince is like the thoughts of a human who knows what he is gonna do in the future ashe KNOWS himself, this argument is given to truy n validate god's omnipotence with his omniscience} but if that were true than the prospect of god NOT being SURE about the future would come up as he COULD do anything he wanted, but THAT defies his other aspect OMNISCIENCE, god WOULD know what decisions he was going to make if he truly was omniscient and therefore put limits upon himself which would destroy his omnipotence in any way.

lastly if god is omniscient than man does not have a free will as god knows the path he will choose even IF any choice to the human is given, god KNOWS what the human will do and the human wont do anything other than what god knows, this means that the human is not in control of himself even if he thinks he is and his every single actions is predestined, why ten would god punish any1 n why then is it in almost every relegion that free will exists? lastly if god is all powerful than the world is ALSO a part of god with everythin in it, because nuthing OTHER than god can exist because even though it might be much weaker, anythin OTHER than god would nullify his omnipotence.

these {yea i know they are borin n sumwhat cumbersome to go through} are some of the main reasons i dont believe in ANY relegion with an omnipotent god in it n im 100% sure that no OMNIPOTENT/OMNISCIENT god exists. just hope it opens the eyes of others. the other issues dont even matter when the basic concept behind god is 100% false.

yup ive gone on for too long, hope sum1 goes to the trouble of readin this.

man can only comprehend so much and so we may not understand many of these things. He knows EVERYthing we know nothing practically compared to God. so maybe you should just accept the fact that there may just be a God.

if we cant comprehend it all how is it that you faithfull comprehend this gods way to understand it all, I mean you demand this being to comprehend what you yourself cant understand................. what an easy way out of it all.........just as it is with all of the christian belief................dont think of it cause its all answered in the unanswered

Originally posted by finti
what an easy way out of it all.........just as it is with all of the christian belief................dont think of it cause its all answered in the unanswered

Its harder to have blind faith then not to.

Originally posted by finti
if we cant comprehend it all how is it that you faithfull comprehend this gods way to understand it all, I mean you demand this being to comprehend what you yourself cant understand................. what an easy way out of it all.........just as it is with all of the christian belief................dont think of it cause its all answered in the unanswered

doesnt mean i'm wrong...

oh really, we dont struggle to achieve like our opposite so how is it harder?

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Its harder to have blind faith then not to.

God is the easiest answer to how the universe was created because,Matter can't be created or destroyed so how was the universe made?

easiest way doesnt mean it is the right way...................it would be the same to say the reason why apples are red are cause the are embarrassed cause they aint oranges

Originally posted by finti
easiest way doesnt mean it is the right way...................it would be the same to say the reason why apples are red are cause the are embarrassed cause they aint oranges

Originally posted by Blue nocturne
God is the easiest answer to how the universe was created because,Matter can't be created or destroyed so how was the universe made?

well Im called so many things so

Originally posted by finti
well Im called so many things so

Antichrist>>> 😱

yeah that too

OHhhhhhhhh..there just must be something about you.... 😂 😛

indeed...................never trust a guy with icy blue eyes.........that has a hint of Arkansas accent when he speaks...... 😈 😈

Can a cell of your body grasp the consciousness of your entire being? Can a character you are talking to in your dream understand the whole of the dreamer?
How can a finite human being understand Infinity?
IMO, it is arrogance to assume an infinitesimal part can grasp the Whole.
Reality is way bigger than Reason. Reason's "advantage" is that it can fool itself into thinking otherwise.

Originally posted by Mindship
Can a cell of your body grasp the consciousness of your entire being? Can a character you are talking to in your dream understand the whole of the dreamer?
How can a finite human being understand Infinity?
IMO, it is arrogance to assume an infinitesimal part can grasp the Whole.
Reality is way bigger than Reason. Reason's "advantage" is that it can fool itself into thinking otherwise.

A cell of the human body does not have conciousness. A character in a dream does not have conciousness. A so-called "finite" human being does.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
A cell of the human body does not have conciousness. A character in a dream does not have conciousness. A so-called "finite" human being does.

By consciousness I mean awareness in the broadest sense, not the "self consciousness" we normally attribute exclusively to human beings. A cell has a very simple, primitive level of awareness. A character in a dream has awareness in that it is part of the dreamer's awareness, representing some aspect of the overall psyche. By finite human being, I mean the physical body and symbolic-reasoning mind: that which is used in science and gets stumped when pondering (eg) the omnipotence paradox.

As an aside, there is a school of thought which sees the relationship between complexity and consciousness like that of density and gravity. Eg, a mote of dust has a gravitational field (according to theory), but we don't notice it because the density/mass of the mote is way too small. We notice gravitational fields only when we encounter substantial masses/densities.

Accordingly, a dust mote has a "field of consciousness," but again we can't detect it because the mote is way too simple. We notice consciousness (again, awareness in the broadest sense) only when we encounter substantial levels of complexity (a cell, a lizard, a person).

Interesting that you indicated "so-called 'finite' human being". I infer from this that you feel there is some aspect of a person which is infinite? If so, on this we may be in agreement.