johnydon22:


You have not really given an answer that is reconcilable with the question.

The question is; why do you say this designer must be nuts?

What points to this?

They say it has a sane mind,yet Nature acts like a lunatic.

vaxx:
is there a formless, characterless source anywhere? If so let me know.

You mentioned the 'source' without describing its features.

LordReed:


Why does the god not have characteristics consistent with reality? What persistent, repeatable demonstration of unexplainable event are you referring to?

Actually, a transcendent being cannot be consistent with the reality which it transcends. This is a scientific idea.

That's like asking why a coke doesn't taste like fanta.

johnydon22:


You have not really given an answer that is reconcilable with the question.

The question is; why do you say this designer must be nuts?

What points to this?

Do you think what Man is going through is normal ?
It is actually absurd.

HellVictorinho:

They say it has a sane mind,yet Nature acts like a lunatic.

so, you get to decide whether nature is lunatic or sane? Makes sense.

HellVictorinho:

Do you think what Man is going through is normal ?
It is actually absurd.

No. I think it is necessary

johnydon22:


Actually, a transcendent being cannot be consistent with the reality which it transcends. This is a scientific idea.

That's like asking why a coke doesn't taste like fanta.

What is the being doing now?

johnydon22:
so, you get to decide whether nature is lunatic or sane? Makes sense.

If you can personify the so-called mastermind, why can't I tell you how it behaves?

johnydon22:
No. I think it is necessary

So it is necessary for people to be deformed?

LordReed:


Well that's their cup of tea, I will ignore it.

What do you think about my topic :'Timing of Existence'?

johnydon22:


Actually, a transcendent being cannot be consistent with the reality which it transcends. This is a scientific idea.

That's like asking why a coke doesn't taste like fanta.

Maybe I worded that improperly but the idea is if a transcendental being interacts with this universe then its interactions will necessarily be consistent with reality or else its indistinguishable from a nonexistent god.

HellVictorinho:

What is the being doing now?

I don't know and i don't know if there is one. What sort of question is this?

LordReed:


Maybe I worded that improperly but the idea is if a transcendental being interacts with this universe then its interactions will necessarily be consistent with reality or else its indistinguishable from a nonexistent god.

Actually No. It still won't be. A 4dimensional being interacting in our 3D realm would be so inconsistent with our reality that we won't even be able describe it. no transcendent being can be consistent with the reality of a dimension it transcends.

HellVictorinho:

So it is necessary for people to be deformed?

Yes.

HellVictorinho:

If you can personify the so-called mastermind, why can't I tell you how it behaves?

Have i? And No. You still can't.

johnydon22:
Actually No. It still won't be. A 4dimensional being interacting in our 3D realm would be so inconsistent with our reality that we won't even be able describe it. no transcendent being can be consistent with the reality of a dimension it transcends.

Even then its operations will be detectable which is what I mean by consistent with reality. Again I am probably wording it wrong.

That 4dimensional beings actions must have 3dimensional properties even if those properties will not completely describe what we are experiencing.

johnydon22:
Yes.

Why?

LordReed:


Even then its operations will be detectable which is what I mean by consistent with reality. Again I am probably wording it wrong.

That 4dimensional beings actions must have 3dimensional properties even if those properties will not completely describe what we are experiencing.

How about 5dimensional beings?

johnydon22:
Have i? And No. You still can't.

Yes,you did.
And don't even try to assume you have the facts.
You are talking about beings somewhere else,yet their activities can't be described by you.
Awesome.

johnydon22:


I don't know and i don't know if there is one. What sort of question is this?

Your 4D beings

johnydon22:
I have asked similar question regarding the atheistic position HERE

I am raising similar issue on the opposite side of the spectrum.

There are reasons that inform our opinions and our stance regarding certain issues. Surely, none of our answers are absolutely foolproof, we can always find problems we can say challenges the validity of our opinions.

This is a thread to discuss issues or problems philosophically consequential to the atheist position.

What, in your opinion, are the problems of theistic position?

Well, these are my problems with the theistic position and why I find the concept of "God" illogical.
* Something being allpowerful can't exist as it leads to contradictions. Eg. can this being create something that violates the laws of logic, can it kill itself, can it create something more powerful than himself, can it create something so heavy he can't lift himself, ... ?
* Allknowing & free will can't exist together, because if this god already knows everything then it logically follows one can't actually choose anything anymore to change this plan. The max you'd get is the illusion of free will.
* I also never understood how one can think an all-loving god and satan can exist at the same time either. Is this god not powerful enough to stop satan or if he is and won't do it, then clearly he isn't all-loving? Am I missing something here?
* More often than not, people use god to "explain" the origin of the universe because their objection is something can't come from nothing and / or something must have had a beginning. However this same logic doesn't apply to god because it's outside of time. But "cause and effect" only make sense when you have time, so I don't get how a god solves this whatsoever. It's like the number 5 also exists outside of space and time as a concept, yet that can't cause anything either...
* Also things like the speed of light being the max speed is only correct INSIDE our universe, the expansion of the universe itself is faster than this speed, so where I'm getting at here is it's not because things follow the laws of physics inside our universe that the universe itself is bound by those laws. Eg. Just because in our universe we see everything having a beginning that therefore this logic also applies to the universe itself, as we only have a sample size of 1 universe and moreover we don't even know if this always existed in some form.
* Last thing: the argument from fine-tuning I either don't understand or I find it the worst possible argument ever. What would be a miracle is if we'd find ourselfs in a universe that ISN'T able for life to be formed. How is it a shock to find ourselfs in a universe where life can form?? And maybe there were / are loads of universes out there where life isn't able to be formed, and thus we aren't "insanely lucky" as there are plenty of other possibilities. Also nearly all of the universe seems hostile to life, so how can one possibly think it's created FOR life when even on earth most places are insanely hostile. A universe created for life would be one where life can exist almost everywhere and for a really long time, yet that's exactly what we don't see.

HellVictorinho:

Your 4D beings

what

HellVictorinho:

Yes,you did.
And don't even try to assume you have the facts.
You are talking about beings somewhere else,yet their activities can't be described by you.
Awesome.

how did i?

johnydon22:
what

Stop pretending.
You have mentioned something related to transcending beings.

johnydon22:
how did i?

You called the theist/deist gods transcendent beings or something similar to that

HellVictorinho:

You called the theist/deist gods transcendent beings or something similar to that

Do you know what that means?

XxSabrinaxX:

Well, these are my problems with the theistic position and why I find the concept of "God" illogical.
* Something being allpowerful can't exist as it leads to contradictions. Eg. can this being create something that violates the laws of logic, can it kill itself, can it create something more powerful than himself, can it create something so heavy he can't lift himself, ... ?
* Allknowing & free will can't exist together, because if this god already knows everything then it logically follows one can't actually choose anything anymore to change this plan. The max you'd get is the illusion of free will.
* I also never understood how one can think an all-loving god and satan can exist at the same time either. Is this god not powerful enough to stop satan or if he is and won't do it, then clearly he isn't all-loving? Am I missing something here?
* More often than not, people use god to "explain" the origin of the universe because their objection is something can't come from nothing and / or something must have had a beginning. However this same logic doesn't apply to god because it's outside of time. But "cause and effect" only make sense when you have time, so I don't get how a god solves this whatsoever. It's like the number 5 also exists outside of space and time as a concept, yet that can't cause anything either...
* Also things like the speed of light being the max speed is only correct INSIDE our universe, the expansion of the universe itself is faster than this speed, so where I'm getting at here is it's not because things follow the laws of physics inside our universe that the universe itself is bound by those laws. Eg. Just because in our universe we see everything having a beginning that therefore this logic also applies to the universe itself, as we only have a sample size of 1 universe and moreover we don't even know if this always existed in some form.
* Last thing: the argument from fine-tuning I either don't understand or I find it the worst possible argument ever. What would be a miracle is if we'd find ourselfs in a universe that ISN'T able for life to be formed. How is it a shock to find ourselfs in a universe where life can form?? And maybe there were / are loads of universes out there where life isn't able to be formed, and thus we aren't "insanely lucky" as there are plenty of other possibilities. Also nearly all of the universe seems hostile to life, so how can one possibly think it's created FOR life when even on earth most places are insanely hostile. A universe created for life would be one where life can exist almost everywhere and for a really long time, yet that's exactly what we don't see.

Please check out the 'Timing of Existence',a topic
I created.

HellVictorinho:

Stop pretending.
You have mentioned something related to transcending beings.

so? Pretend over what? What the heck are you talking about?

johnydon22:
Do you know what that means?

Having read my post about the Timing of Existence, you shouldn't assume that the other Forms of Existence are beings.
They are actually nothing but matter.

johnydon22:
so? Pretend over what? What the heck are you talking about?

Look, the cosmos is not a miracle.
It is actually a Form of Existence.

HellVictorinho:

Look, the cosmos is not a miracle.
It is actually a Form of Existence.

ok

HellVictorinho:

Having read my post about the Timing of Existence, you shouldn't assume that the other Forms of Existence are beings.
They are actually nothing but matter.

I didn't assume anything