You always have the coolest replies :)
I like that. I think I may have to go back to that post and be like "BOOYAH"
Doone - Your diagrams are as always to the point. Christians do not employ logic and reason properly. They only think that they do. If they did they would be Atheists too. They always miss the paradox of these arguments until it is pointed out to them. Its always a case of "doublethink" or not thinking.
Caitlin "Ohhh well I'd rather believe in something that's not real than burn in hell forever!"
Adults still believing in a god is immaturity. Maybe that's why they get offended when we challenge them.
"Those damn Atheists are trying to take our comfort toys away and are trying to make us think for ourselves and not just accept everything we hear at face value. I'd rather believe than use energy in engaging my brain. Jesus don't like them smart people."
The galaxies expand within space, all of which is part of the universe, or the set of all universes comprising the multiverse, which is a closed system. The God of Christians that intervene would be inconsistent with God being infinitely fair. God would not violate Her own laws. If you remove all preconceived ideas about the Christian God, you can conceive of , or create, a God consistent with the axioms above. Just remove the axiom of God being all good, which is inconsistent with the others. Since all power is of this God, and since She is omnipresent, She encompasses both evil and good. If you do evil, you will not offend this God. You injure another, you disrupt the harmony of the space you are in, and more importantly you harm yourself. You stunt your progress, or evolution, by being slow to learn about fairness and love, which are Godly attributes assumed in the proposed axioms. So by inflicting harm you are denying yourself happiness.
Heaven and hell are not in the proposed axioms. However, survival of consciousness after death is subsumed. How? You can assume anything untill that assumption is found inconsistent - then, you would have to assume its negation or revision.
This will interesting so long as we do not limit ourselves to the God of theists. We just start with the few axioms and find out what God will be consistent with them. using nothing but logic.
Is this “new” god the origin or creator of this closed system? She would be a supreme being in the supernatural sense if omnipresent.
“God would not violate Her own laws” It’s a woman’s prerogative to change her mind as to whether she wants to play fair or not. Who am I to know the mind of a female god ?
I understand doing harm to others is not beneficial to me. It does not feel right to do “wrong” to others. This makes more sense when we understand the reasons why - which we learn by understanding Evolution. It has nothing to do with god. Right and wrong is instinctive and common to all men and women. However, inflicting harm on others can be rewarding and pleasing if one is psychopathic by nature. Mutated wiring shorted out the moral (dna) code.
The survival of consciousness after death or a continuity of experience after death cannot be logical in this closed system. If the system is closed my soul would always have been there – since the start of creation – unless the act of my “creation” as an embryo meant this god then said “ok there is another life created – send it a soul that will last even after he dies” What would be the point of me having this soul? Why would an omnipresent god need to give me one?
“…so long as we do not limit ourselves to the God of theists”.
That is surely what a god is – a god of theists. Your axioms imply the same thing that almost any other god is considered to be. If I “remove all preconceived ideas about the christian god” and use your axioms I end up with virtually the same thing.
Maybe we should start again with this Entity but don’t call it “god”. Do not assume the axioms in the traditional sense of what god is. This “creator” would have no concerns for the welfare or fate of mankind, no interest in good or evil, reward or punishment. It would not be bothered or offended if we dared to disturb the universe. Maybe using logic it could lead us to something that was the “First Cause”. It could be something like a very “Large Explosion”. More beer?
That is genius. Wait, that's exactly the line of reasoning I've used for years. Ha. *pats back*