What would count as proof of God

[Atheos]

but omnipotent, as a word, does not merely mean the most powerful being in the room.
It means all-powerful. Limiting infinite power when it's inconvenient is cheating.

Why is it not unlimited and all-powerful? Wouldn't God be able to do everything and anything, anywhich how even beyond our understanding?

(It is beyond me at the moment goodnight)

I think that's sort of the point. We can understand that we're talking about limited power. Nothing about this discussion is beyond our understanding. But that is a place apologists like to go when they can no longer deal with simple logic that demonstrates the absurdity of certain god-myths. "Mysterious ways. Oooooooh."

Power is not unlimited if we (mere mortals) can define the limits of it. Any god who knows less than everything knowable could be defeated by a god has all the other powers of the first god but also knows everything. Knowledge is power.

Another limit: Any god who must use a means to achieve an end is not as powerful as a god who can simply cut straight to the end without the drama. Such a god is "subject" to certain laws of nature or the universe (or whatever) and must operate within those constraints. Many attempts to resolve the Problem of Evil hinge around the idea that god cannot achieve some undefined "greater good" without allowing evil to co-exist. This god has only limited power. A more powerful god would be able to achieve whatever "greater good" it wanted without requiring innocent creatures to experience suffering.

 

[Keith&Co.]

but omnipotent, as a word, does not merely mean the most powerful being in the room.
It means all-powerful. Limiting infinite power when it's inconvenient is cheating.

Why is it not unlimited and all-powerful?

because limiting it, pretty much by definition means it is not unlimited.
Words. Not just for English Teachers.

 

[Keith&Co.]

but omnipotent, as a word, does not merely mean the most powerful being in the room.
It means all-powerful. Limiting infinite power when it's inconvenient is cheating.

Why is it not unlimited and all-powerful? Wouldn't God be able to do everything and anything, anywhich how even beyond our understanding?

(It is beyond me at the moment goodnight)

I think that's sort of the point. We can understand that we're talking about limited power. Nothing about this discussion is beyond our understanding. But that is a place apologists like to go when they can no longer deal with simple logic that demonstrates the absurdity of certain god-myths. "Mysterious ways. Oooooooh."

Power is not unlimited if we (mere mortals) can define the limits of it. Any god who knows less than everything knowable could be defeated by a god has all the other powers of the first god but also knows everything. Knowledge is power.

Another limit: Any god who must use a means to achieve an end is not as powerful as a god who can simply cut straight to the end without the drama. Such a god is "subject" to certain laws of nature or the universe (or whatever) and must operate within those constraints. Many attempts to resolve the Problem of Evil hinge around the idea that god cannot achieve some undefined "greater good" without allowing evil to co-exist. This god has only limited power. A more powerful god would be able to achieve whatever "greater good" it wanted without requiring innocent creatures to experience suffering.

It's kinda how you can tell it's fiction. If Star Trek were real, half their plots could be resolved almost instantly by tech they have displsyed in other episodes. They just have to come up with a technobabnle reason sshy they cannot use the transporter, or the interstellar instantaneous communications, or miraculous medical tech. Technobabble, or an ion storm.
Drags out the drama, for no other reason than to preserve the drama.

A truly omnipotent being can do anything, and there literally cannot be any cvonsequences besides what he desires, and no reason at all that an infinitely loving being would put up with any suffering.
But such a creature is incompatible with the worldcwe see around us, thus we get religiobabnle rationlizations, excuses, and special case redefinitions of simple words.

 

[Poppa Popobawa]

but omnipotent, as a word, does not merely mean the most powerful being in the room.
It means all-powerful. Limiting infinite power when it's inconvenient is cheating.

Why is it not unlimited and all-powerful?

because limiting it, pretty much by definition means it is not unlimited.
Words. Not just for English Teachers.

Of course, if this god is unlimited, it would have unlimited knowledge, such that it would know what would be evidence,
sufficient to convince any particular individual of its existence. Since some of us are not convinced, that god must knowingly
NOT have provided evidence which is convincing, (I stress convincing to any one particular individual person, or to any
person in general).

If I, for instance, am unconvinced of the existence of any particular god, or all of them, then that god, (or those gods),
either have provided insufficiently convincing evidence, or perhaps no evidence for their existence, or perhaps is (are),
not all knowing and all powerful.

 

[Learner]

I think that's sort of the point. We can understand that we're talking about limited power. Nothing about this discussion is beyond our understanding. But that is a place apologists like to go when they can no longer deal with simple logic that demonstrates the absurdity of certain god-myths. "Mysterious ways. Oooooooh."

Sure we understand limited power and does your point mean God is restrained to the natural world to clarify? Other than that, these few words doesn't describe or explain WHY certain actions (By God) should or should not be done this way.

Creating life that can't be replicated or produced in a lab is quite a mysterious thing.

Power is not unlimited if we (mere mortals) can define the limits of it. Any god who knows less than everything knowable could be defeated by a god has all the other powers of the first god but also knows everything. Knowledge is power.

Well in the scene in this theology where there is only one Creator who has MORE knowledge than HIS creation. God IS the most powerful.

Possibly a new topic for discussion, "Would a "second god" pop into existence or would this "second god" be created as the angels were created?"

Another limit: Any god who must use a means to achieve an end is not as powerful as a god who can simply cut straight to the end without the drama. Such a god is "subject" to certain laws of nature or the universe (or whatever) and must operate within those constraints.

Perhaps the makings of an individual or the spirit of character in someones heart is NOW most important ... especially with the drama, as it's often indicated in the bible. Who would want to live in Gods Kingdom? Some wouldn't want to. Besides.... just because its not "simply cut straight" the way YOU would think it should be from your experience of the material world .. the physical and logical constraints, doesn't mean God should be also. I mean really .. a Creator of the physical laws?

Many attempts to resolve the Problem of Evil hinge around the idea that god cannot achieve some undefined "greater good" without allowing evil to co-exist. This god has only limited power. A more powerful god would be able to achieve whatever "greater good" it wanted without requiring innocent creatures to experience suffering.

To fix potential evil, now that Adam and Eve was shown things (you know the story) God will have to take away those nerve endings which God gave to you as a gift - you know, experiencing the physical world, feel the sun on ones face, breathing in the air and marvel at Gods Glory. Unfortunately Satan knows our anatomy very well.

 

[Learner]

but omnipotent, as a word, does not merely mean the most powerful being in the room.
It means all-powerful. Limiting infinite power when it's inconvenient is cheating.

Why is it not unlimited and all-powerful?

because limiting it, pretty much by definition means it is not unlimited.
Words. Not just for English Teachers.

I'll accept that a god would be limted by the definition in the physical world. This is not the same non physical Creator outside logical (human) and physical constraints.

 

[Keith&Co.]

because limiting it, pretty much by definition means it is not unlimited.
Words. Not just for English Teachers.

I'll accept that a god would be limted by the definition in the physical world. This is not the same non physical Creator outside logical (human) and physical constraints.

The physical constraints HE created when HE created the physical world?
So, you still worship an unlimited god, but with necessary limits where the plot requires it.

Which do you prefer, religiobabble or theolobabble?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Simplicity of God. An ancient dogma. God is simple, not made of parts. His essences and substance are one. Why. A sustance has essences that make it what it is. A hamster has essences that make it a hamster, and not a table. hamsters, tables, man, God. That is a problem for God. If God is a sustance and has essences, how did those essences become part of God? This implies there is something outside and beyond god that create God as a substance that had the essences we think of as being God's essences. So by making God dismple, these metaphysical outside forces are banished as far as theology is concerned.

Thus logic, math and other metaphysical necessities are either part of God or created by God. Logic is a creation of God. And God's perfect goodness is part of God's essential nature, a simple nature. Along with his essential omnipotence, omniscience et al.

Rene Descartes in his letters to Marin Mersenne in 1640 makes that explicit as a theological claim. Morals and mathematics are God's creation.

Now the problem, why is there moral evil in this world? God could have created man to have free will like God enjoys, and good moral nature as God enjoys so moral evil would not exist. man would by his free will follow his good nature and do no moral evil. Since God creates all logical rules, the core reality of existence, God can do this. This eliminates all theological attempts at theodicy, explaining away evil and God's omnipotence. God can have any state of affairs God wants. Nothing can thwart him, there can be no hidden reasons god cannot do this.

Moral evil exists. The doctrine of the simplicity of God fails. Logic trumps God, naturalism is supreme. God is either not good, or not all powerful. And then we must ask, where does logic, math, the metaphysical necessities come from? Not God.

And we have then, the moral nature of man argument. Our creation by God means god must design us, including our moral nature. Bad, indifferent or good. Why would a morally good God not choose creating us with a good moral nature? God, being omniscient would know, our moral nature relies on his design choice, and moral evil will result in he chooses bad or indifferent moral nature for his creations.

In the end, God does not seem to be a viable hypothesis. We start with Descartes maximal God, derived from the ancient dogma of a simple God and God, examined logically collapses to a not very impressive God when we start asking careful questions about God's purported nature and the nature of the world we find ourselves in.

 

[bilby]

...
Creating life that can't be replicated or produced in a lab is quite a mysterious thing.
...

Then it's a shame for your god of the gaps that that gap is rapidly closing.

There are no components of the minimum genome cell that we haven't successfully made in the lab. As far as I am aware, nobody has gone to the trouble of making an entire living cell from only artificial components; But it's only a matter of time. The main reason it's not been done yet (as far as I know, and I am no longer up to date in the field, so it may have been), is that researchers tend to focus on one bit, and just use existing bacteria to provide the rest.

That's because only theists think life is somehow different and important. It's not; life is just our name for sufficiently complex cyclic chemistry.

There's literally zero difference between DNA from a living cell, and the same DNA sequence pulled out of a DNA sequencing machine.

 

[skepticalbip]

Sure we understand limited power and does your point mean God is restrained to the natural world to clarify? Other than that, these few words doesn't describe or explain WHY certain actions (By God) should or should not be done this way.

Creating life that can't be replicated or produced in a lab is quite a mysterious thing.

That is a rather odd criteria. Anything that someone doesn't understand is a mysterious thing for them. I would assume that how a television was designed and built would be a mystery to you and that you wouldn't be able to make one. This, however, shouldn't make you consider those those who do to be gods... but maybe it does.

As for science creating critters, an understanding of DNA and the ability to design is fairly well along. In fact, design errors (made by god?) are already being corrected for fetuses in utero.

 

[Learner]

Hmm natural selection not as effective as it seems.

(I'd love to spend a lot more time to discuss with posters. I will have take a Christmas break soon! )

 

[skepticalbip]

Hmm natural selection not as effective as it seems.

(I'd love to spend a lot more time to discuss with posters. I will have take a Christmas break soon! )

?

Evolution doesn't yield perfection. It only yields good enough for a species to survive sufficiently long enough to procreate. Religion tells us that perfection is god's bailiwick. Only one seems to fit observations.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Hmm natural selection not as effective as it seems.

In comparison to what...?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Hmm natural selection not as effective as it seems.

In comparison to what...?

Creation magic. Everything was created perfect. It's broken now because of snakes, apples, disobedience, etc. Creation magic doesn't have anything to do with unhappy things.

 

[Atheos]

To fix potential evil, now that Adam and Eve was shown things (you know the story) God will have to take away those nerve endings which God gave to you as a gift - you know, experiencing the physical world, feel the sun on ones face, breathing in the air and marvel at Gods Glory. Unfortunately Satan knows our anatomy very well.

Did/does god have nerve endings? Can this god of yours experience what it's like to be deprived of food or water to the point of starvation? Can this god of yours be suffocated if one puts a bag over its head? Can someone cut off its hand, pull out its fingernails or sexually abuse it?

One of the problems I see with religious apology such as this is it doesn't tend to think the whole thing through to its conclusion. "All Things Bright and Beautiful." But Monty Python addressed that with "All Things Dull and Ugly."

From what I understand of the Yahweh-derived religions there was an eternity before Yahweh intentionally chose to fabricate creatures capable of starving, feeling pain or having limbs amputated. Did that somehow make the world a better place? Nothing about that makes sense to me, but of course ... woo... here come those mysterious ways.

 

[steve_bank]

A properly notarized birth certificate. Plus references and a work history.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

From what I understand of the Yahweh-derived religions there was an eternity before Yahweh intentionally chose to fabricate creatures capable of starving, feeling pain or having limbs amputated. Did that somehow make the world a better place? Nothing about that makes sense to me, but of course ... woo... here come those mysterious ways.

That makes sense. Abrahamic religions are nothing without sin. One might say that they are built on a foundation which is sin, and such a god would make sense.

 

[aupmanyav]

Any god who is not omniscient is not omnipotent. Omniscience is a subset of omnipotence. Strike two....

Not sure about that myself ... I see it as:

IF God is the one and only CREATOR and HE is ultimately more powerful than all HIS creations then GOD...IS the Gold-Bar-Standard for Omnipotent. If God knows more than HIS most intelligent creations about everything in the universe then God IS the Gold-Bar-Standard for Ominscience verses the mere words that wise-professing men as mere mortals create, to define how God should be.

There you are. God is omnipotent but not omniscient. His left hand does not know what his right hand is doing. That is why he does not do anything about injustice in the world. He simply does not know what is happening in the world. But that is what God we have. Satisfied with that?

From what I understand of the Yahweh-derived religions there was an eternity before Yahweh intentionally chose to fabricate creatures capable of starving, feeling pain or having limbs amputated. Did that somehow make the world a better place? Nothing about that makes sense to me, but of course ... woo... here come those mysterious ways.

There again. Because God did not know what his creations will be like. Just went on creating things that he later regretted. He is not omniscient.
@T.G.G.Moogly, that makes your concept incorrect.

 

[bilby]

“But you . . . you’re omnicognisant,” said Brutha.

“That doesn’t mean I know everything.”

Brutha bit his lip. “Um. Yes. It does.”

- Conversation between the Great God Om, and his believer, Brother Brutha. Small Gods, by Terry Pratchett.

 

[Learner]

There you are. God is omnipotent but not omniscient. His left hand does not know what his right hand is doing. That is why he does not do anything about injustice in the world. He simply does not know what is happening in the world. But that is what God we have. Satisfied with that?

Not quite the God of the bible as I see it obviously to your view. The future IS already set out in Revelation therefore God is omniscient. Likewise, with the regrets (after death came into the world), God knows and sees both or vatious (potential) destiny outcomes. Man by his own accord, by his own will, has to choose his own fate from one of them - the requirement to continue on, in the after-life.

You (plural) are proof that humans (can do it) understand and feel compasionately about injustice in the world. All individuals should be doing like-wise by their own will.

And...as its written... this is now Satan's world.



Curiously: Lets say there is such a thing of a new world and new heaven. Would you or anyone here want to live there ... with God?