The Reason I am an Agnostic - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Crack · 12-13-2003, 02:34 PM

I don't believe in the current view of most all gods by most all religions, because of the one simple rule most all religions share; god is all powerful. There is nothing beyond the scope of god, there is nothing he cannot do. Except.

When you add the word "except" in to the theory you take away the power of god, if he cannot do this or that, then there must be other things that he cannot do, hence removing all precepts of etheralness or whatever you want to call it that makes god worth worshiping in, or even believing in. What is the thing god cannot do? God cannot build a wall so high that he cannot jump over it. You can also postulate that god cannot perform an act because he makes it impossible to do. (If god says that it can never be so, can he still do it, or perform the action?)

This is the best argument that I have ever heard for the argument that god either is not real, or not real in the way we believe he/she/it exists.. Questions, Comments?
~Crack

wilbjammin · 12-13-2003, 02:52 PM

Sounds like you're arguing for atheism.

My agnostic stance is that the existence or non-existence of god is based on information I have no access to. Generally, this feels like atheism. In any event, I find it absurd to live in terms of whether or not god exists. If there is an afterlife, I have no access to it now, what matters is my life now and the choices I make. Living towards an afterlife is absurd on multiple levels - the idea of heaven and hell and living for god's love is absurd (so why did god create us to love him, why does he punish people?). What is the meaning of living in an afterlife - eternal happiness does not have meaning inherent in itself, it is just hedonism. Living in hell is just as meaningless as living in heaven, they're both termed as affective experiences only (love and pain). Not that living alone in the face of a vast universe isn't absurd, but it doesn't include a leap of faith and the negation of the present life for a second one that may or may not exist and still doesn't really grant meaning to life. And the absurdity of infinity...

I could go on and on. I'm an agnostic because the question of the existence of god is a moot question for me.

Crack · 12-13-2003, 02:59 PM

Just the oposite, I live in no term of the existence of God, but in the terms that the view that we have on god is so out of proportion, that I find no basis in the belief structure that has been dulled out for the masses, and in the arguement I make above basically says that we can in no way know with the information that we are given produce a working theroy.

wilbjammin · 12-13-2003, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by crackprogram
Just the oposite, I live in no term of the existence of God, but in the terms that the view that we have on god is so out of proportion, that I find no basis in the belief structure that has been dulled out for the masses, and in the arguement I make above basically says that we can in no way know with the information that we are given produce a working theroy.

This in no way prevents you from finding some workable idea of what God is for you and to say, "What God is to me is ____ "

You can believe in a God that isn't all-powerful.

The argument against God not being all-powerful tends to say that God chooses to not do certain things, not that God can't do them. I never have been able to buy into that argument, it just seems like a cop-out. As though someone asked me why I failed on something and I said "I could have aced it, I just didn't want to."

I agree that the mainstream ideas on God are lacking in respect to what you are saying, though.

Crack · 12-13-2003, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wilbjammin

I agree that the mainstream ideas on God are lacking in respect to what you are saying, though.

Thanks.

CSflim · 12-13-2003, 03:25 PM

How about we postulate a god, not of omnipotence, but simply of unimaginably awsesome power...he can create a rock of any arbitary mass...even infinitely heavy, but he will always be able to lift it.

Think of God as being a leet programmer at his computer. The universe is his computer running a program he designed. He knows it inside out. He can do anything to it, modify anything, change the rules...whatever. He could make an infinitly heavy rock appear out of thin air...but obviously he would still be able to move it...it's just "data in a computer".

Now (as most you you know all to well) I am an atheist. However I don't think that God not being able to do impossible things is a good reason for disbelief.

By impossible I mean things that are logically impossible.
Tommatoes growing legs and running around the streets tormenting cats is highly unlikely...but not impossible in the logical sense of things.
A rock so heavy that an omnipotent being cannot lift it is logicically impossible, as is drawing a square circle.

So God's omnipotence could mean "having the ability to do all things which are logically possible".

Perhaps even more to the point, is omnipotence really absolutely necessary to the definition of God? Could we just define a God as a conscious, loving, intelligent creator and designer of the universe. and leave the level of his power as unknown?

To reiterate:
Don't believe in God, but come up with a better reason that that not to!

papermachesatan · 12-26-2003, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wilbjammin
My agnostic stance is that the existence or non-existence of god is based on information I have no access to. Generally, this feels like atheism. In any event, I find it absurd to live in terms of whether or not god exists.

It's because of those reasons that I do not believe in God. There is no evidence; at least none that any of have access to. I find it as absurd to believe in God as it is to believe in the pink intangiable, invisible, soundless elephant that hides underneath my bed.

hiredgun · 01-05-2004, 12:03 AM

Though I'm still a theist (I think...), Csflim said it better than I can. You're trying to say you don't believe in God because omnipotence can't exist, but your definition of omnipotence is absurd. It's similar to saying that God doesn't exist because God cannot perform an action A and also not perform A at the same time.

high_way · 01-07-2004, 05:17 AM

i believe in the here and now. i dont know if god and the devil do or dont exist and the same with heaven and hell. i do believe that there is an after life, sorta like another plane of existance... another earth so to speak.

all that said and done, i do find different religions and gods interesting, just dont believe it all.

Inexistance · 01-07-2004, 10:02 AM

I love these conversations!

Mantus · 01-07-2004, 11:37 AM

Nice argument Csfilm. Infinity seems to create nothing but paradoxes when one begins to use it to quantify human attributes. I believe that if there could be a god the best possible way looks at such a being would be as the greatest being in existence. Which means that god has limits but is still the Supreme Being in reality.

The problem arises when we realize that if god is X powerful then it is possible that there is another being, which is X+1 powerful. Of course if we do determine god to be X powerful and also determine that god is the Supreme Being then we can safely say that X+1 is just a contingent non-existent. Just because we can imagine something, doesn’t mean it exists.

12-13-2003, 02:34 PM	#1 (permalink)
Crack Misanthropic Location: Ohio! yay!	The Reason I am an Agnostic I don't believe in the current view of most all gods by most all religions, because of the one simple rule most all religions share; god is all powerful. There is nothing beyond the scope of god, there is nothing he cannot do. Except. When you add the word "except" in to the theory you take away the power of god, if he cannot do this or that, then there must be other things that he cannot do, hence removing all precepts of etheralness or whatever you want to call it that makes god worth worshiping in, or even believing in. What is the thing god cannot do? God cannot build a wall so high that he cannot jump over it. You can also postulate that god cannot perform an act because he makes it impossible to do. (If god says that it can never be so, can he still do it, or perform the action?) This is the best argument that I have ever heard for the argument that god either is not real, or not real in the way we believe he/she/it exists.. Questions, Comments? ~Crack __________________ Crack, you and I are long overdue for a vicious bout of mansex. ~Halx

12-13-2003, 02:52 PM	#2 (permalink)
wilbjammin * * *	Sounds like you're arguing for atheism. My agnostic stance is that the existence or non-existence of god is based on information I have no access to. Generally, this feels like atheism. In any event, I find it absurd to live in terms of whether or not god exists. If there is an afterlife, I have no access to it now, what matters is my life now and the choices I make. Living towards an afterlife is absurd on multiple levels - the idea of heaven and hell and living for god's love is absurd (so why did god create us to love him, why does he punish people?). What is the meaning of living in an afterlife - eternal happiness does not have meaning inherent in itself, it is just hedonism. Living in hell is just as meaningless as living in heaven, they're both termed as affective experiences only (love and pain). Not that living alone in the face of a vast universe isn't absurd, but it doesn't include a leap of faith and the negation of the present life for a second one that may or may not exist and still doesn't really grant meaning to life. And the absurdity of infinity... I could go on and on. I'm an agnostic because the question of the existence of god is a moot question for me. __________________ Innominate.

12-13-2003, 02:59 PM	#3 (permalink)
Crack Misanthropic Location: Ohio! yay!	Just the oposite, I live in no term of the existence of God, but in the terms that the view that we have on god is so out of proportion, that I find no basis in the belief structure that has been dulled out for the masses, and in the arguement I make above basically says that we can in no way know with the information that we are given produce a working theroy. __________________ Crack, you and I are long overdue for a vicious bout of mansex. ~Halx

12-13-2003, 03:25 PM	#6 (permalink)
CSflim Sky Piercer Location: Ireland	How about we postulate a god, not of omnipotence, but simply of unimaginably awsesome power...he can create a rock of any arbitary mass...even infinitely heavy, but he will always be able to lift it. Think of God as being a leet programmer at his computer. The universe is his computer running a program he designed. He knows it inside out. He can do anything to it, modify anything, change the rules...whatever. He could make an infinitly heavy rock appear out of thin air...but obviously he would still be able to move it...it's just "data in a computer". Now (as most you you know all to well) I am an atheist. However I don't think that God not being able to do impossible things is a good reason for disbelief. By impossible I mean things that are logically impossible. Tommatoes growing legs and running around the streets tormenting cats is highly unlikely...but not impossible in the logical sense of things. A rock so heavy that an omnipotent being cannot lift it is logicically impossible, as is drawing a square circle. So God's omnipotence could mean "having the ability to do all things which are logically possible". Perhaps even more to the point, is omnipotence really absolutely necessary to the definition of God? Could we just define a God as a conscious, loving, intelligent creator and designer of the universe. and leave the level of his power as unknown? To reiterate: Don't believe in God, but come up with a better reason that that not to! __________________

01-07-2004, 05:17 AM	#9 (permalink)
high_way Addict Location: Australia	i believe in the here and now. i dont know if god and the devil do or dont exist and the same with heaven and hell. i do believe that there is an after life, sorta like another plane of existance... another earth so to speak. all that said and done, i do find different religions and gods interesting, just dont believe it all. __________________ A stranger is just a friend you havent met yet. Impostor of the imposturous

01-05-2004, 12:03 AM	#8 (permalink)
hiredgun Addict	Though I'm still a theist (I think...), Csflim said it better than I can. You're trying to say you don't believe in God because omnipotence can't exist, but your definition of omnipotence is absurd. It's similar to saying that God doesn't exist because God cannot perform an action A and also not perform A at the same time.

01-07-2004, 10:02 AM	#10 (permalink)
Inexistance Tilted Location: Rochester, NY	I love these conversations!

01-07-2004, 11:37 AM	#11 (permalink)
Mantus lascivious	Nice argument Csfilm. Infinity seems to create nothing but paradoxes when one begins to use it to quantify human attributes. I believe that if there could be a god the best possible way looks at such a being would be as the greatest being in existence. Which means that god has limits but is still the Supreme Being in reality. The problem arises when we realize that if god is X powerful then it is possible that there is another being, which is X+1 powerful. Of course if we do determine god to be X powerful and also determine that god is the Supreme Being then we can safely say that X+1 is just a contingent non-existent. Just because we can imagine something, doesn’t mean it exists.