Total Posts:30|Showing Posts:1-30
Jump to topic:

Step by step nonreligious argument for God.

drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.
2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.
2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.
3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence
4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.
6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.
7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.
drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:09:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
Number 5 should read:
5. Since consciousness exists as A part of all things god is conscious.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:13:49 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.
2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.
2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.
3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence
4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.
6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.
7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

Let's see, numbers 1 through 7 since the premise is unsupported. The entire chain of logic is fallacious. You have simply tried to define your god into existence, not shown any evidence that it exists.
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:22:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Okay, point-by-point:

1)I disagree that the concept of "in the beginning" necessarily makes sense. Since creation/imagination is a conscious act, you are pre-supposing that the first thing that existed (again, if that makes sense in the first place) is intelligent and possesses agency to act.
2)This is the "existence exists" tautology again. It doesn"t prove anything and all you"re doing is sticking the label "god" on existence. It still just means existence and it tells us nothing of the properties of existence.
3)What is "power" in this context? Energy? Too vague.
4)See (2)
5)You"ve already presupposed that god is conscious in (1), which is prior to the consciousness you now use to try and prove a conscious god via the circular reasoning that the consciousness god created made him conscious in the first place and therefore able to create consciousness.
6)One of the things we know is that we don"t know everything, so god isn"t omniscient.
7)Not sure how this is even relevant.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:38:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.

Pantheism via. assuming the Aristotelian notion of causality assuming idealism. Sure, I have entertained this idea before.

2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.

P1. God = sum of all things
P2. Sum of all things exist
C. God exists

The argument is logically valid, yes. But then we have just come up with another redundant label for the universe. Simply labelling the conjunct of all existant things doesn't give any information as to what 'God' is anymore than labeling all existant things as the 'universe' gives any information for what 'Universe' is.

Moreover, you are defining God in 2 ways. In your point 1, your concept of God is something that has causal agency which created something out of itself.

This concept of God is not the same as the concept of God you forward in point 2, which is simply defining God as the universe. You are equivocating between two definitions of God, which is a blatent logical fallacy.

2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.

Power is a 'thing'? You are conflating a relational attribute with a primary attribute. That is like having a bare '50 lbs', '50 lbs' is not a 'thing' it is a description, or an attribute. 50 lbs of what?. Well, yno, 50 lbs.

Fail.

3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence

You are using two definitions of omnipotence, which is yet another logical fallacy.

Simply having 'all power that is existent in the universe' doesn't mean that God then has all logically possible attributes (presumably omniscience, intelligence, etc.) those are two independant concepts.

4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.

Say what? You are advocating for panpsychism now?

6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.

Since all things that are known are known. WTF?

"Since all things that are heavy are heavy, therefore..
Since all things that are green are green, therefore.."

What the fuq? This is a statement that A=A. It doesn't entail anything?! At best you can only argue that all things that are known within God are hence also known to God since everything that knows anything in the universe is also by definition part of God.

Unless you are stretching panpsychism to it's breaking point... Or more likely, well beyond it.

7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

This argument is not logically valid. Please construct a well-formed formula if you are going to give a point by point argument for the existence of God.
drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:47:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:22:18 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
Okay, point-by-point:

1)I disagree that the concept of "in the beginning" necessarily makes sense. Since creation/imagination is a conscious act, you are pre-supposing that the first thing that existed (again, if that makes sense in the first place) is intelligent and possesses agency to act.
2)This is the "existence exists" tautology again. It doesn"t prove anything and all you"re doing is sticking the label "god" on existence. It still just means existence and it tells us nothing of the properties of existence.
3)What is "power" in this context? Energy? Too vague.
4)See (2)
5)You"ve already presupposed that god is conscious in (1), which is prior to the consciousness you now use to try and prove a conscious god via the circular reasoning that the consciousness god created made him conscious in the first place and therefore able to create consciousness.
6)One of the things we know is that we don"t know everything, so god isn"t omniscient.
7)Not sure how this is even relevant.

Number 7 shows that there really was no beginning other then every moment being the beginning of the next. Hence god has always existed so no causal event is needed other than god changing over time. Since time is nothing more than a concept in the imagination of god, god is the sum of all things that have been, are, and will be.
drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:51:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:38:18 AM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.

Pantheism via. assuming the Aristotelian notion of causality assuming idealism. Sure, I have entertained this idea before.

2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.

P1. God = sum of all things
P2. Sum of all things exist
C. God exists

The argument is logically valid, yes. But then we have just come up with another redundant label for the universe. Simply labelling the conjunct of all existant things doesn't give any information as to what 'God' is anymore than labeling all existant things as the 'universe' gives any information for what 'Universe' is.

Moreover, you are defining God in 2 ways. In your point 1, your concept of God is something that has causal agency which created something out of itself.

This concept of God is not the same as the concept of God you forward in point 2, which is simply defining God as the universe. You are equivocating between two definitions of God, which is a blatent logical fallacy.

2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.

Power is a 'thing'? You are conflating a relational attribute with a primary attribute. That is like having a bare '50 lbs', '50 lbs' is not a 'thing' it is a description, or an attribute. 50 lbs of what?. Well, yno, 50 lbs.

Fail.

3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence

You are using two definitions of omnipotence, which is yet another logical fallacy.

Simply having 'all power that is existent in the universe' doesn't mean that God then has all logically possible attributes (presumably omniscience, intelligence, etc.) those are two independant concepts.

4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.

Say what? You are advocating for panpsychism now?

6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.

Since all things that are known are known. WTF?

"Since all things that are heavy are heavy, therefore..
Since all things that are green are green, therefore.."

What the fuq? This is a statement that A=A. It doesn't entail anything?! At best you can only argue that all things that are known within God are hence also known to God since everything that knows anything in the universe is also by definition part of God.

Unless you are stretching panpsychism to it's breaking point... Or more likely, well beyond it.

7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

This argument is not logically valid. Please construct a well-formed formula if you are going to give a point by point argument for the existence of God.

Number 7 shows that there really was no beginning other then every moment being the beginning of the next. Hence god has always existed so no causal event is needed other than god changing over time. Since time is nothing more than a concept in the imagination of god, god is the sum of all things that have been, are, and will be.

A does = A and God=God. Sorry if you cannot see the simplistic aspect of existance.
drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:53:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:13:49 AM, dhardage wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.
2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.
2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.
3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence
4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.
6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.
7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

Let's see, numbers 1 through 7 since the premise is unsupported. The entire chain of logic is fallacious. You have simply tried to define your god into existence, not shown any evidence that it exists.

God is defined in existence. Yes
Sterling.Dragon
Posts: 115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:56:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.
2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.
2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.
3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence
4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.
6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.
7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

I disagree with 1: The existence of god has not been demonstrated (or even evidenced, in any way).
I disagree with 2: You adjusted your "definition" to make it true.
I disagree with 3: You're pulling everything into "god," to make it "undeniable." Unfalsifiable.
I disagree with 4: See 2 and 3.
I disagree with 5: See 4.
I disagree with 6: Circular reasoning.
I disagree with 7: All of the above, since this is a re-statement of 2-6.
SNP1
Posts: 2,407
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:57:37 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Begging the Question. You do nothing to show that god exists or has any quality attributed to him.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:58:47 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:54:42 AM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:48:03 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
Oh dear.

Oh God!

Oh existence.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:58:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:51:41 AM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:38:18 AM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.

Pantheism via. assuming the Aristotelian notion of causality assuming idealism. Sure, I have entertained this idea before.

2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.

P1. God = sum of all things
P2. Sum of all things exist
C. God exists

The argument is logically valid, yes. But then we have just come up with another redundant label for the universe. Simply labelling the conjunct of all existant things doesn't give any information as to what 'God' is anymore than labeling all existant things as the 'universe' gives any information for what 'Universe' is.

Moreover, you are defining God in 2 ways. In your point 1, your concept of God is something that has causal agency which created something out of itself.

This concept of God is not the same as the concept of God you forward in point 2, which is simply defining God as the universe. You are equivocating between two definitions of God, which is a blatent logical fallacy.

2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.

Power is a 'thing'? You are conflating a relational attribute with a primary attribute. That is like having a bare '50 lbs', '50 lbs' is not a 'thing' it is a description, or an attribute. 50 lbs of what?. Well, yno, 50 lbs.

Fail.

3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence

You are using two definitions of omnipotence, which is yet another logical fallacy.

Simply having 'all power that is existent in the universe' doesn't mean that God then has all logically possible attributes (presumably omniscience, intelligence, etc.) those are two independant concepts.

4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.

Say what? You are advocating for panpsychism now?

6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.

Since all things that are known are known. WTF?

"Since all things that are heavy are heavy, therefore..
Since all things that are green are green, therefore.."

What the fuq? This is a statement that A=A. It doesn't entail anything?! At best you can only argue that all things that are known within God are hence also known to God since everything that knows anything in the universe is also by definition part of God.

Unless you are stretching panpsychism to it's breaking point... Or more likely, well beyond it.

7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

This argument is not logically valid. Please construct a well-formed formula if you are going to give a point by point argument for the existence of God.


Number 7 shows that there really was no beginning other then every moment being the beginning of the next.

Thus presupposes presentism, or the A-series of time. I have good reasons to think that the "passing of time" is emergent and not actual.

Hence god has always existed so no causal event is needed other than god changing over time. Since time is nothing more than a concept in the imagination of god, god is the sum of all things that have been, are, and will be.

A does = A and God=God. Sorry if you cannot see the simplistic aspect of existance.

I am sorry but your argument is so incoherent, and logically invalid, that I don't see the valuer in addressing it much further. Please construct a well-formed formula and give the argument in a valid premise-conclusion format.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
Harikrish
Posts: 11,014
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 10:32:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.
2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.
2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.
3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence
4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.
6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.
7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

Rebuttal 1. God existed before everything. He was therefore separate from what he created. If god was already everything , then there would be no need to create anything because everything already existed.

Rebuttal 2. God is separate from all things because he existed before all things. So the sum of all things is the God that existed. before everything and what God created after.
Sum of all things = God + his creation. Which makes the sum of all things greater than God.

Rebuttal 3. All other attributes of God diminish God as perfect, omnipotence. There is evil in the world, suffering and contradictions. So God is not absolute, the sum of all things he created reduces his omniscience credibility such as evil, natural,disasters, suffering etc.etc.

Rebuttal 4. Because consciousness exists in humans. It creates a duality in reality. The real world with all its flaws that God created and the ideal world that we all hope and wish for. Our consciousness therefore creates both the world we wish for and the ideal God we want. Therefore God does not exist, it is our consciousness that creates God to fill the gaps in out needs and wants.

Rebuttal 5. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 6. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 7. All your points have been refuted!!!
drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 11:08:57 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:58:47 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:54:42 AM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:48:03 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
Oh dear.

Oh God!

Oh existence.

Glad you understand, see existence has consciousness
drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 11:22:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 10:32:33 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.
2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.
2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.
3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence
4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.
6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.
7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

Rebuttal 1. God existed before everything. He was therefore separate from what he created. If god was already everything , then there would be no need to create anything because everything already existed.
You existed before you grew hair, or teeth. This does not mean you are separate from your hair or teeth. You existed before your next though, this does not mean you are separate from your thoughts. There is no logic in this rebuttal.

Rebuttal 2. God is separate from all things because he existed before all things. So the sum of all things is the God that existed. before everything and what God created after.
Sum of all things = God + his creation. Which makes the sum of all things greater than God.
See my reply above, also since nothing can be greater than God, God's creation must be part of God. Otherwise as you said, the sum of God + a creation that is not of God would be greater than God. Again no logic in this rebuttal.


Rebuttal 3. All other attributes of God diminish God as perfect, omnipotence. There is evil in the world, suffering and contradictions. So God is not absolute, the sum of all things he created reduces his omniscience credibility such as evil, natural,disasters, suffering etc.etc.
Change requires the destruction of one thing for the creation of another. This is a process. Some people look at the destruction as evil. Evil only exists in the minds of people as a concept. It is not a thing or a force, just an opinion.

Rebuttal 4. Because consciousness exists in humans. It creates a duality in reality. The real world with all its flaws that God created and the ideal world that we all hope and wish for. Our consciousness therefore creates both the world we wish for and the ideal God we want. Therefore God does not exist, it is our consciousness that creates God to fill the gaps in out needs and wants.
No Gaps to be filled. You assume perfection is some unchanging perfect thing. The things you call flaws are simply attributes that you dislike.

Rebuttal 5. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 6. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 7. All your points have been refuted!!!
All your rebuttals are missing logic.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 12:53:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.
2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.
2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.
3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence
4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.
6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.
7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

God never changes His Eternal Plan but we all change according to His plan. Otherwise, you have been taught some wisdom from our Creator to know that He is the Creator of everything seen ( the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ) and unseen ( tree of life ).
Harikrish
Posts: 11,014
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 1:31:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 11:22:38 AM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 10:32:33 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.
2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.
2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.
3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence
4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.
6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.
7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

Rebuttal 1. God existed before everything. He was therefore separate from what he created. If god was already everything , then there would be no need to create anything because everything already existed.
You existed before you grew hair, or teeth. This does not mean you are separate from your hair or teeth. You existed before your next though, this does not mean you are separate from your thoughts. There is no logic in this rebuttal.

I did not exist before I was conceived. What was conceived was a human with all the physical and mental traits.. God was not created or conceived...God in turn created everything. Therefore God is separate from what he created.
Rebuttal 2. God is separate from all things because he existed before all things. So the sum of all things is the God that existed. before everything and what God created after.
Sum of all things = God + his creation. Which makes the sum of all things greater than God.
See my reply above, also since nothing can be greater than God, God's creation must be part of God. Otherwise as you said, the sum of God + a creation that is not of God would be greater than God. Again no logic in this rebuttal.


This is where your math fails. Because the whole is the sum of its parts (Euclid's axiom)
The whole = God + his creation. The part can never be greater than the whole. Therefore the whole is greater than God.

Rebuttal 3. All other attributes of God diminish God as perfect, omnipotence. There is evil in the world, suffering and contradictions. So God is not absolute, the sum of all things he created reduces his omniscience credibility such as evil, natural,disasters, suffering etc.etc.
Change requires the destruction of one thing for the creation of another. This is a process. Some people look at the destruction as evil. Evil only exists in the minds of people as a concept. It is not a thing or a force, just an opinion.

But evil exist and if God created everything , he created evil as well.
Rebuttal 4. Because consciousness exists in humans. It creates a duality in reality. The real world with all its flaws that God created and the ideal world that we all hope and wish for. Our consciousness therefore creates both the world we wish for and the ideal God we want. Therefore God does not exist, it is our consciousness that creates God to fill the gaps in out needs and wants.
No Gaps to be filled. You assume perfection is some unchanging perfect thing. The things you call flaws are simply attributes that you dislike.

But to you God is all knowing, all powerful, all present. If he was all knowing, why did he create an imperfect world full of natural,disasters, diseases, suffering etc.ect. God is not all perfect, all powerful, all present. These are not attributes that people don't like. These are imperfections that cause suffering and misery and human discord. It proves God was an incompetent creator and his incompetence shows in everything he created.

Rebuttal 5. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 6. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 7. All your points have been refuted!!!
All your rebuttals are missing logic.
Your points are full of panentheistic rubbish. Putting the word God before and after everything is not an argument for God.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,014
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 2:02:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:47:12 AM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:22:18 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
Okay, point-by-point:

1)I disagree that the concept of "in the beginning" necessarily makes sense. Since creation/imagination is a conscious act, you are pre-supposing that the first thing that existed (again, if that makes sense in the first place) is intelligent and possesses agency to act.
2)This is the "existence exists" tautology again. It doesn"t prove anything and all you"re doing is sticking the label "god" on existence. It still just means existence and it tells us nothing of the properties of existence.
3)What is "power" in this context? Energy? Too vague.
4)See (2)
5)You"ve already presupposed that god is conscious in (1), which is prior to the consciousness you now use to try and prove a conscious god via the circular reasoning that the consciousness god created made him conscious in the first place and therefore able to create consciousness.
6)One of the things we know is that we don"t know everything, so god isn"t omniscient.
7)Not sure how this is even relevant.


Number 7 shows that there really was no beginning other then every moment being the beginning of the next. Hence god has always existed so no causal event is needed other than god changing over time. Since time is nothing more than a concept in the imagination of god, god is the sum of all things that have been, are, and will be.

1. If every moment is the beginning of the next. Then the moment before the first moment was tbe beginning. So there is a beginning.
2. God changing over time is the causal effect./event.
3. Time is more than a concept , it is measurable unlike God's imagination.
The past , present and future are not concepts. They are the passage of time.
4. If God is the sum of all things then God is a quantifiable object. But the sum of all things are still just things and can be identified as just objects. Just like a pile of garbage, the sum of which still amounts to garbage. Where is the God in garbage? According to you God would be a pile of garbage.
drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 3:16:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 1:31:47 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 1/27/2015 11:22:38 AM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 10:32:33 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

Rebuttal 1. God existed before everything. He was therefore separate from what he created. If god was already everything , then there would be no need to create anything because everything already existed.
You existed before you grew hair, or teeth. This does not mean you are separate from your hair or teeth. You existed before your next though, this does not mean you are separate from your thoughts. There is no logic in this rebuttal.

I did not exist before I was conceived. What was conceived was a human with all the physical and mental traits.. God was not created or conceived...God in turn created everything. Therefore God is separate from what he created.

Are you separate from your thoughts? Or a scar that you may have in the future because you do not have them now?

Rebuttal 2. God is separate from all things because he existed before all things. So the sum of all things is the God that existed. before everything and what God created after.
Sum of all things = God + his creation. Which makes the sum of all things greater than God.
See my reply above, also since nothing can be greater than God, God's creation must be part of God. Otherwise as you said, the sum of God + a creation that is not of God would be greater than God. Again no logic in this rebuttal.



This is where your math fails. Because the whole is the sum of its parts (Euclid's axiom)
The whole = God + his creation. The part can never be greater than the whole. Therefore the whole is greater than God.

Again since nothing can be greater than God, what we call the creation must be a part of God. How do you not see logic in that?

Rebuttal 3. All other attributes of God diminish God as perfect, omnipotence. There is evil in the world, suffering and contradictions. So God is not absolute, the sum of all things he created reduces his omniscience credibility such as evil, natural,disasters, suffering etc.etc.
Change requires the destruction of one thing for the creation of another. This is a process. Some people look at the destruction as evil. Evil only exists in the minds of people as a concept. It is not a thing or a force, just an opinion.

But evil exist and if God created everything , he created evil as well.
Yes, He did.

Rebuttal 4. Because consciousness exists in humans. It creates a duality in reality. The real world with all its flaws that God created and the ideal world that we all hope and wish for. Our consciousness therefore creates both the world we wish for and the ideal God we want. Therefore God does not exist, it is our consciousness that creates God to fill the gaps in out needs and wants.
No Gaps to be filled. You assume perfection is some unchanging perfect thing. The things you call flaws are simply attributes that you dislike.

But to you God is all knowing, all powerful, all present. If he was all knowing, why did he create an imperfect world full of natural,disasters, diseases, suffering etc.ect. God is not all perfect, all powerful, all present. These are not attributes that people don't like. These are imperfections that cause suffering and misery and human discord. It proves God was an incompetent creator and his incompetence shows in everything he created.

What makes perfection? Something that only has select attributes and can never change, or something that has all attributes and continuously changes? You just need to see perfection differently.

Rebuttal 5. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 6. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 7. All your points have been refuted!!!
All your rebuttals are missing logic.
Your points are full of panentheistic rubbish. Putting the word God before and after everything is not an argument for God.
Your points are illogical, I have described the greatest being possible and shown that it exists in nature.
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 3:21:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.

I agree that that only God existed in the beginning, and I also agree that the only thing God could've created the first thing out of was out of himself. But I don't agree that means we and everything else are part of God or that we were made out of God. I believe that when God created the universe, he didn't create it out of something that already existed. Rather, he brought it into existence out of nothing.

2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.

You already presumed the existed of God in the previous premise, so this line of reasoning is circular.

2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.

If you define "omnipotence" is "having all power that happens to exist," then yes, it would follow that if God is the sum of all things, that God would be omnipotent. But most people define "omnipotence" is the ability to do all things logically possible. It would not follow that because God possessed all power that exists that he therefore has the ability to do all things logically possible, so God's omnipotence wouldn't follow from the mere fact that he possessed all existing power. After all, imagine a world in which the only thing that existed was a monkey named George. George would have unusual powers. He would be able to exist in the absence of food and air, for example. Since George is the only thing that exists, it would follow that George possesses all power that exists. But surely it wouldn't follow that George was omnipotent, at least not by the usual meaning of the word.

3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence

Assuming your previous understanding of omnipotence (possessing all power that exists), I don't think it follows that every other attribute is a factor of God's omnipotence. Suppose, for example, that God has some bit of knowledge. You might say God's knowledge is the exercise of his power to create knowledge. But there is no reason, given your definition of omnipotence, to suppose that God has any such power. Perhaps no such power exists. If so, then God's knowledge cannot be attributed to his power.

4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.

If God were all things (which you haven't shown), then yes, it would follow that God is omnipresent.

5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.

The problem here is that we each have individual consciousness. My first person awareness is not your first person awareness. We are distinct consciousnesses. It may be true that within God, there are individual instances of consciousness, but it would not follow that God as a whole had any single unified consciousness.

6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.

The fact that all things that are known are known is a tautology. But it doesn't follow that because God is the sum of all things that God is therefore all knowing. After all, I am the sum of all my parts, but it doesn't follow that I know everything there is to know about all my parts. Doctors know more about my heart than I do.

7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

Assuming God is the sum of all things (which you haven't shown), yes, it would follow that all that exists today is part of God. It also would follow that god is in a constant state of change, but it doesn't follow that he's always been changing or creating.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 3:25:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 2:02:47 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:47:12 AM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:22:18 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
Okay, point-by-point:

1)I disagree that the concept of "in the beginning" necessarily makes sense. Since creation/imagination is a conscious act, you are pre-supposing that the first thing that existed (again, if that makes sense in the first place) is intelligent and possesses agency to act.
2)This is the "existence exists" tautology again. It doesn"t prove anything and all you"re doing is sticking the label "god" on existence. It still just means existence and it tells us nothing of the properties of existence.
3)What is "power" in this context? Energy? Too vague.
4)See (2)
5)You"ve already presupposed that god is conscious in (1), which is prior to the consciousness you now use to try and prove a conscious god via the circular reasoning that the consciousness god created made him conscious in the first place and therefore able to create consciousness.
6)One of the things we know is that we don"t know everything, so god isn"t omniscient.
7)Not sure how this is even relevant.


Number 7 shows that there really was no beginning other then every moment being the beginning of the next. Hence god has always existed so no causal event is needed other than god changing over time. Since time is nothing more than a concept in the imagination of god, god is the sum of all things that have been, are, and will be.

1. If every moment is the beginning of the next. Then the moment before the first moment was tbe beginning. So there is a beginning.
Sure you could look at it that way. Infinite beginnings and endings, or just the flow of time with no beginning or end.
2. God changing over time is the causal effect./event.
3. Time is more than a concept , it is measurable unlike God's imagination.
The past , present and future are not concepts. They are the passage of time.
What time is, is still being debated. This experiment shows time may be an illusion.
http://www.newscientist.com...

Other experiments suggest time can move both forward and back, and that time passes at different speeds in different parts of the universe. Sure seems like a concept to me.

4. If God is the sum of all things then God is a quantifiable object. But the sum of all things are still just things and can be identified as just objects. Just like a pile of garbage, the sum of which still amounts to garbage. Where is the God in garbage? According to you God would be a pile of garbage.

Since all things keep changing and time and space are infinite concepts, you cannot fully quantify god. And yes, god is the matter that garbage is made of. Again only we see it as garbage. Feces from one animal is food to another.
drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 3:33:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:56:34 AM, Sterling.Dragon wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.
2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.
2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.
3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence
4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.
6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.
7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

I disagree with 1: The existence of god has not been demonstrated (or even evidenced, in any way).
I disagree with 2: You adjusted your "definition" to make it true.
I did not come up with the definition of God and i did not change it. God is the greatest of all things, There is nothing greater than the sum of all things.
I disagree with 3: You're pulling everything into "god," to make it "undeniable." Unfalsifiable.

It is undeniable, that's how it is when you think logically about it..
I disagree with 4: See 2 and 3.
I disagree with 5: See 4.
I disagree with 6: Circular reasoning.
No Circle here. It proves knowledge exists, that all knowledge exists, and since #2 is true, god has all knowledge. That is not a circle.
I disagree with 7: All of the above, since this is a re-statement of 2-6.
drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 4:00:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Thanks for the clarity and respect in the tone of your reply, At least I feel like I am speaking with a rational person.

At 1/27/2015 3:21:33 PM, philochristos wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.

I agree that that only God existed in the beginning, and I also agree that the only thing God could've created the first thing out of was out of himself. But I don't agree that means we and everything else are part of God or that we were made out of God. I believe that when God created the universe, he didn't create it out of something that already existed. Rather, he brought it into existence out of nothing.

By definition if nothing existed, then that nothing was part of God. So even if god made everything from nothing, the nothing was part of God. Otherwise God was not the only thing. Suggesting nothing existed is step one of moving away from a unified view into a duality. A Duality is two things.

2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.

You already presumed the existed of God in the previous premise, so this line of reasoning is circular.

Then make this number 1, and that number 2.

2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.

If you define "omnipotence" is "having all power that happens to exist," then yes, it would follow that if God is the sum of all things, that God would be omnipotent. But most people define "omnipotence" is the ability to do all things logically possible. It would not follow that because God possessed all power that exists that he therefore has the ability to do all things logically possible, so God's omnipotence wouldn't follow from the mere fact that he possessed all existing power. After all, imagine a world in which the only thing that existed was a monkey named George. George would have unusual powers. He would be able to exist in the absence of food and air, for example. Since George is the only thing that exists, it would follow that George possesses all power that exists. But surely it wouldn't follow that George was omnipotent, at least not by the usual meaning of the word.

If a monkey name George was all that existed, George would have all possible power in that existence and be omnipotent.

3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence

Assuming your previous understanding of omnipotence (possessing all power that exists), I don't think it follows that every other attribute is a factor of God's omnipotence. Suppose, for example, that God has some bit of knowledge. You might say God's knowledge is the exercise of his power to create knowledge. But there is no reason, given your definition of omnipotence, to suppose that God has any such power. Perhaps no such power exists. If so, then God's knowledge cannot be attributed to his power.
To possess knowledge is a power, to lick my lips is a power.

4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.

If God were all things (which you haven't shown), then yes, it would follow that God is omnipresent.
God is the greatest thing of all, by definition the greatest thing of all is the sum of all things.

5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.

The problem here is that we each have individual consciousness. My first person awareness is not your first person awareness. We are distinct consciousnesses. It may be true that within God, there are individual instances of consciousness, but it would not follow that God as a whole had any single unified consciousness.

We are distinct consciousnesses that communicate information with each other just as our neurons communicate with each other. Our communication is a huge neural network made of flesh, and technology. It is one massive consciousness that moves in ways not controlled by any one person.

6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.

The fact that all things that are known are known is a tautology. But it doesn't follow that because God is the sum of all things that God is therefore all knowing. After all, I am the sum of all my parts, but it doesn't follow that I know everything there is to know about all my parts. Doctors know more about my heart than I do.

Your heart knows how to function. Since a part of you knows how to function as a heart you can say that you contain that knowledge.


7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

Assuming God is the sum of all things (which you haven't shown), yes, it would follow that all that exists today is part of God. It also would follow that god is in a constant state of change, but it doesn't follow that he's always been changing or creating.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 4:02:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.

Only God existed ? how do you know what did or did not exist ?

2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.

If you define God as the sum of all things then yes, but that's not what most people have in mind when they talk about "God". What they have in mind is some invisible person who exists beyond this universe as a separate personal being.

2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.

Again not what most people have in mind when they talk about God.

3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence

4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.

5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious

.
6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.

7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 4:15:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 4:00:24 PM, drpiek wrote:
Thanks for the clarity and respect in the tone of your reply, At least I feel like I am speaking with a rational person.

At 1/27/2015 3:21:33 PM, philochristos wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.

I agree that that only God existed in the beginning, and I also agree that the only thing God could've created the first thing out of was out of himself. But I don't agree that means we and everything else are part of God or that we were made out of God. I believe that when God created the universe, he didn't create it out of something that already existed. Rather, he brought it into existence out of nothing.

By definition if nothing existed, then that nothing was part of God.

You're speaking of "nothing" as if it were "something." What I meant by "nothing" is "not anything." It's the exact opposite of "something." When I say God created "out of nothing," I don't mean there's this material out there called "nothing" that God made the universe out of. Rather, I mean that God brought the universe into existence without the use of any pre-existing material.

If a monkey name George was all that existed, George would have all possible power in that existence and be omnipotent.

I'm curious how you are using the word "possible." Surely, you don't mean "logically possible." Most people consider omnipotence to consist in the ability to do all things logically possible, but what reason is there to think George would have all power that it's logically possible to have just because he possess all power that happens to exist? I suspect you are using "possible" differently than I am, and what you really mean is that George has all practically possible power.

To possess knowledge is a power, to lick my lips is a power.

Why do you say that?

We are distinct consciousnesses that communicate information with each other just as our neurons communicate with each other. Our communication is a huge neural network made of flesh, and technology. It is one massive consciousness that moves in ways not controlled by any one person.

Do you believe that each of our neurons has a distinct first person awareness of its own? I see no reason to think they do, nor that our collective consciousness somehow contributes to a larger consciousness. After all, none of us communicates all of our consciousness to other people. I have first person awareness that nobody else will ever have. Even when I communicate what is going on my head using language, gestures, expressions, or whatever, nobody gains first person access to my mental states.

Your heart knows how to function. Since a part of you knows how to function as a heart you can say that you contain that knowledge.

I don't think my heart knows anything at all. It is a passive organ. It doesn't choose to beat. It is caused to beat.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
Sterling.Dragon
Posts: 115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 6:18:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 3:33:13 PM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:56:34 AM, Sterling.Dragon wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

1. Only god existed in the beginning, so the only thing god could have created everything out of is god. It is like we are the imagination of god, hence we and everything else is part of god.
2. God is the sum of all things, all things exist, so god exists.
2. All power that exists, does exist. So since god is the sum of all things including power that makes god Omnipotent.
3. All other attributes of god are a factor of gods omnipotence
4. Since god is all things that makes god omnipresent.
5. Since consciousness exists as part of all things god is conscious.
6. Since all things that are known, are known and god is the some of all things, god is all knowing.
7. Since God is the sum of all things, all that exists today is god, just like in the beginning. God has always been creating or shall we say changing and still is.

I disagree with 1: The existence of god has not been demonstrated (or even evidenced, in any way).
I disagree with 2: You adjusted your "definition" to make it true.

I did not come up with the definition of God and i did not change it. God is the greatest of all things, There is nothing greater than the sum of all things.

If you did not come up with that definition, you have plagiarized it from someone else. It is still incorrect, based on the application of my argument toward whoever "came up" with it. The idea behind #1 is incorrect, whether yours or someone else's.

I disagree with 3: You're pulling everything into "god," to make it "undeniable." Unfalsifiable.

It is undeniable, that's how it is when you think logically about it..

I deny it. That, alone negates your assertion that it is undeniable. I disagree with it. The declaration that something cannot be denied does not automatically attribute that property to it. I can deny it. I do deny it. It is not undeniable.

I disagree with 4: See 2 and 3.
I disagree with 5: See 4.
I disagree with 6: Circular reasoning.
No Circle here. It proves knowledge exists, that all knowledge exists, and since #2 is true, god has all knowledge. That is not a circle.

#2 is not true. Again, your declaration is not self-sufficient. Yes, knowledge exists, but that does not make your statement valid. I could easily declare that all existence and all knowledge combine to prove that the universe is a living entity, in and of itself. My declaration of such would not make it a reality. You have provided nothing but a list of assertions, and your assertions have neither foundation, nor evidence, nor support. That you tie them back to one another makes it circular. There is a nearly PERFECT circle, here.

I disagree with 7: All of the above, since this is a re-statement of 2-6.

Perhaps, one day, when you have replaced assertions with evidence, assertions with facts, and faith with reason, you'll understand just how vacantly your "argumentation" has presented. The fact that you are convinced does not make your arguments cogent. It only shows that you were convinced before coming up with an argument, and you reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally want it to be true. The overwhelming desire is the impetus for the way you argue; emotionally, irrationally, and without one iota of substantiation.

Quite plainly, you're wrong.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,014
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 8:19:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 3:16:57 PM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 1:31:47 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 1/27/2015 11:22:38 AM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 10:32:33 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

Rebuttal 1. God existed before everything. He was therefore separate from what he created. If god was already everything , then there would be no need to create anything because everything already existed.
You existed before you grew hair, or teeth. This does not mean you are separate from your hair or teeth. You existed before your next though, this does not mean you are separate from your thoughts. There is no logic in this rebuttal.

I did not exist before I was conceived. What was conceived was a human with all the physical and mental traits.. God was not created or conceived...God in turn created everything. Therefore God is separate from what he created.

Are you separate from your thoughts? Or a scar that you may have in the future because you do not have them now?

My thoughts are a function of my brain. A non existent scar is non existent.
Rebuttal 2. God is separate from all things because he existed before all things. So the sum of all things is the God that existed. before everything and what God created after.
Sum of all things = God + his creation. Which makes the sum of all things greater than God.
See my reply above, also since nothing can be greater than God, God's creation must be part of God. Otherwise as you said, the sum of God + a creation that is not of God would be greater than God. Again no logic in this rebuttal.


God has to be separate from his creation. The whole is a sum of its parts. Whole= God + his creation. Therefore the whole is greater than God.


This is where your math fails. Because the whole is the sum of its parts (Euclid's axiom)
The whole = God + his creation. The part can never be greater than the whole. Therefore the whole is greater than God.

Again since nothing can be greater than God, what we call the creation must be a part of God. How do you not see logic in that?

I just mathematically proved to you the whole is greater than God. Whole(sum of all things) = God + his creation. Therefore the whole is greater than God. You have not proven God is greater than everything when he is only one of the parts and the other parts are his creation.
Rebuttal 3. All other attributes of God diminish God as perfect, omnipotence. There is evil in the world, suffering and contradictions. So God is not absolute, the sum of all things he created reduces his omniscience credibility such as evil, natural,disasters, suffering etc.etc.
Change requires the destruction of one thing for the creation of another. This is a process. Some people look at the destruction as evil. Evil only exists in the minds of people as a concept. It is not a thing or a force, just an opinion.

But evil exist and if God created everything , he created evil as well.
Yes, He did.

Rebuttal 4. Because consciousness exists in humans. It creates a duality in reality. The real world with all its flaws that God created and the ideal world that we all hope and wish for. Our consciousness therefore creates both the world we wish for and the ideal God we want. Therefore God does not exist, it is our consciousness that creates God to fill the gaps in out needs and wants.
No Gaps to be filled. You assume perfection is some unchanging perfect thing. The things you call flaws are simply attributes that you dislike.

But to you God is all knowing, all powerful, all present. If he was all knowing, why did he create an imperfect world full of natural,disasters, diseases, suffering etc.ect. God is not all perfect, all powerful, all present. These are not attributes that people don't like. These are imperfections that cause suffering and misery and human discord. It proves God was an incompetent creator and his incompetence shows in everything he created.

What makes perfection? Something that only has select attributes and can never change, or something that has all attributes and continuously changes? You just need to see perfection differently.

Perfection is when things work flawlessly or the picture is without blemish. God's creation does not work flawlessly.
Rebuttal 5. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 6. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 7. All your points have been refuted!!!
All your rebuttals are missing logic.
Your points are full of panentheistic rubbish. Putting the word God before and after everything is not an argument for God.
Your points are illogical, I have described the greatest being possible and shown that it exists in nature.
You have attributed everything to God. But every religion attributes exalted qualities to God. These qualities are not based on reality and therefore not provable because God is an imaginary character.
drpiek
Posts: 589
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:28:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/27/2015 8:19:25 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 1/27/2015 3:16:57 PM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 1:31:47 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 1/27/2015 11:22:38 AM, drpiek wrote:
At 1/27/2015 10:32:33 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 1/27/2015 9:07:53 AM, drpiek wrote:
If you disagree, what number do you disagree with and why?

Rebuttal 1. God existed before everything. He was therefore separate from what he created. If god was already everything , then there would be no need to create anything because everything already existed.
You existed before you grew hair, or teeth. This does not mean you are separate from your hair or teeth. You existed before your next though, this does not mean you are separate from your thoughts. There is no logic in this rebuttal.

I did not exist before I was conceived. What was conceived was a human with all the physical and mental traits.. God was not created or conceived...God in turn created everything. Therefore God is separate from what he created.

Are you separate from your thoughts? Or a scar that you may have in the future because you do not have them now?

My thoughts are a function of my brain. A non existent scar is non existent.
Rebuttal 2. God is separate from all things because he existed before all things. So the sum of all things is the God that existed. before everything and what God created after.
Sum of all things = God + his creation. Which makes the sum of all things greater than God.
See my reply above, also since nothing can be greater than God, God's creation must be part of God. Otherwise as you said, the sum of God + a creation that is not of God would be greater than God. Again no logic in this rebuttal.


God has to be separate from his creation. The whole is a sum of its parts. Whole= God + his creation. Therefore the whole is greater than God.


This is where your math fails. Because the whole is the sum of its parts (Euclid's axiom)
The whole = God + his creation. The part can never be greater than the whole. Therefore the whole is greater than God.

Again since nothing can be greater than God, what we call the creation must be a part of God. How do you not see logic in that?

I just mathematically proved to you the whole is greater than God. Whole(sum of all things) = God + his creation. Therefore the whole is greater than God. You have not proven God is greater than everything when he is only one of the parts and the other parts are his creation.
Rebuttal 3. All other attributes of God diminish God as perfect, omnipotence. There is evil in the world, suffering and contradictions. So God is not absolute, the sum of all things he created reduces his omniscience credibility such as evil, natural,disasters, suffering etc.etc.
Change requires the destruction of one thing for the creation of another. This is a process. Some people look at the destruction as evil. Evil only exists in the minds of people as a concept. It is not a thing or a force, just an opinion.

But evil exist and if God created everything , he created evil as well.
Yes, He did.

Rebuttal 4. Because consciousness exists in humans. It creates a duality in reality. The real world with all its flaws that God created and the ideal world that we all hope and wish for. Our consciousness therefore creates both the world we wish for and the ideal God we want. Therefore God does not exist, it is our consciousness that creates God to fill the gaps in out needs and wants.
No Gaps to be filled. You assume perfection is some unchanging perfect thing. The things you call flaws are simply attributes that you dislike.

But to you God is all knowing, all powerful, all present. If he was all knowing, why did he create an imperfect world full of natural,disasters, diseases, suffering etc.ect. God is not all perfect, all powerful, all present. These are not attributes that people don't like. These are imperfections that cause suffering and misery and human discord. It proves God was an incompetent creator and his incompetence shows in everything he created.

What makes perfection? Something that only has select attributes and can never change, or something that has all attributes and continuously changes? You just need to see perfection differently.

Perfection is when things work flawlessly or the picture is without blemish. God's creation does not work flawlessly.
Rebuttal 5. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 6. You are repeating yourself.
Rebuttal 7. All your points have been refuted!!!
All your rebuttals are missing logic.
Your points are full of panentheistic rubbish. Putting the word God before and after everything is not an argument for God.
Your points are illogical, I have described the greatest being possible and shown that it exists in nature.
You have attributed everything to God. But every religion attributes exalted qualities to God. These qualities are not based on reality and therefore not provable because God is an imaginary character.

Remove religion from your argument, I have. God has no religion.